Dear William,

Every time I have looked into the real surface of a real bathroom mirror, I have seen a real reflection of part of my real front surface seamlessly enmeshed into partial real surfaces of the walls and knock-knacks in the real bathroom. It is physically impossible to gaze into an imaginary mirror.

Joe Fisher, Realist

No, its not impossible, just close your eyes... which is typically what we do when we imagine things... or you can stare off into space and forget the image in the mirror... See, it's called consciousness. Which is the only thing that makes anything real. Even your one dimensional surface that you are trying so desperately to convince every person that submitted a paper in this contest to believe in by sending them basically the same carbon copy message...

can you see the light?

Good luck in the contest

WW... aka consciousness

    Gene,

    Don't be harsh on Joe... he's a little arrogant with how he's politicking the contest... but show him a little love ;);), he is partially right in my opinion... that one dimension of surface light is an all encompassing mirror that causes light to basically freak out trying to get out of that sliver like tube (wormhole - string - hologram) using imagination...causing it to vibrate... when it vibrates past a certain frequency it actually starts to escape / emit into the space God created when she put darkness into the light (so he could see again)... Now my theory is music is the darkness and light that fuels the strings...

    Now the contest does call for simplicity but maybe he was trying to make it too easy to understand... don't make your essay too complex... it should be made understandable to those with some advanced education, but not like the likes of Steven Hawking...

    Hey Joe,

    I would like to say one more thing to you...

    I think your essay (and your ideas) are quite brilliant after reading it one more time...

    Just don't try to hard to get it to win... politicking will only turn people off... have faith that your ideas are brilliant and will stand up on their own merits against other brilliant ideas... from the papers I have read, there are some incredibly smart people in this contest and to force your ideas down their throat using a disguise of being humble is easy to see through... your surface right now is pretty transparent and it is one that is condescending if you really look at the way you approach people with your carbon copy post...

    Take care - good luck - and God Bless :)

    Honorable Gentlemen,

    Thank you for reading my essay, and for commenting on it. William, when one closes one's eyes, one sees only a black surface. That is why I mentioned in my essay, the need one has for rapid eye movement when one sees surface in one's dreams.

    I know my essay will not win any prizes in this contest and it does not matter. The Indian Institute of Science Journal of Current Science is reviewing my essay, THE SIMPLEST UNIVERSE. I am hoping with all of my heart that it am published. I am probably the only member of ORCID who has never had a single paper published in any reputable science journal. I regret appearing to be arrogant and groveling for attention for that is not how I wish to be castigated for. I am an old lonely frightened man.

    Joe Fisher, Realist

    Hey Joe,

    I am definitely a fan of yours now... because you see that you are the same as everyone else... frightened and lonely... and why we try so desperately to get acceptance in this world... so don't feel bad... you are just like me and everyone else that was separated from the 0neness of God...

    I really believe your ideas are brilliant and I believe you will get published... and don't sell yourself short on this contest... have a little faith and maybe your dream will manifest itself in the real world... ;)

    and thanks for the revelation... when we close our eyes to use imagination... we see darkness... and why the strings are invisible to us... the light disappears... because the strings are transparent (clear)... they are hidden to the 5 senses (thus they are dark)... they are hidden by dark matter... it takes light inside the strings (the dark and light energy of consciousness - sound vibrations) to turn them into something consciousness can see as being real (emit into space)... dark matter becomes light matter and moves the particles found in the Higgs Force Field to create physical matter as we know it... and it all comes from that one dimensional surface you talk about in your essay... I believe you are describing how the strings work... they create the surfaces that consciousness can believe (have faith in)... :)

    I wish you the best Joe!

    William Walker

    Thank you ever so much William.

    Joe Fisher, Realist

    I wanted to echo Stephen Ternyik's comment above..

    There is some resemblance in your arguments Joe, to the views of Goethe - as expressed in his classic work 'Zur Farbenlehre (Theory of Colors).' This work documents Goethe's dispute with the theory of Optics championed by Newton, as a proper explanation for the phenomenon of color and the properties of light. It can be found here - if you are interested.

    Zur Farbenlehre (Theory of Colors)

    While you are trying to focus on simplicity, and Goethe is much more complicated for the sake of thoroughness; there is some substantial agreement between you. Heisenberg commented "Goethe's colour theory has in many ways borne fruit in art, physiology and aesthetics. But victory, and hence influence on the research of the following century, has been Newton's." I think you are trying to bring back the view that the perceptual basis of light is its true nature, or reveals a fundamental level of reality.

    Regards,

    Jonathan

      One last thing... today was a beautiful day outside... so while I was on my back deck... I tried closing my eyes and looking directly at the sun... and I didn't see black... I saw blades of yellow, orange, and red coming at me in shapes of the letter A but with bars on the end (like Omega has)... I like to call them Alpha Bolts... because they come at you like bolts of lightning...

      You don't have to respond - just thought I would share...

      Take care

      Dear Sir,

      You have brought out a very interesting detail about eye and vision. We will like to extend your logic. We see through eyes because this is the only sense organ that has the capability to measure electromagnetic radiation. What we say as color is the net reflected wavelengths of light after the full spectrum hits the object and some of it are absorbed by it. We see only these reflected wavelengths within human visible range. Some species may see more colors or different colors because their visible range may be different. But the principle remains same. But when we touch the same object, we cut down the radiation and touch the surface, which is reflecting light. Thus, in both ways, we get incomplete information. You also seem to agree when you say "no eye has ever seen a ball". Only when the various inputs are mixed in our brain, do we know what we are seeing. Since space cannot reflect light, we cannot "see" space. We only see the intervals between surfaces of objects and we call that interval space.

      We fail to understand how "the universe is thought to have had zero size, and so to have been infinitely hot. But as the universe expanded, the temperature of the radiation decreased". Heat is a form of energy that can be transferred from one object to another or even created at the expense of the loss of other forms of energy. Temperature is a measure of the ability of a substance, or more generally of any physical system, to transfer heat energy to another physical system. If the "universe" had "zero size", how could it be "infinitely hot"? What was there to transfer energy? And what is zero? It is something that does not exist at here-now. Then it implies that there was no space and time. From where space-time emerged? If it was zero size, how could it expand? By what mechanism? Where from the invisible particles appear? Even electrons and neutrinos are said to possess mass. How could mass exist within zero size. Though this is not your view, since you are using it, could you please explain?

      Your observation regarding Newton's law and Galileo's experiment can be rationalized with the example of a man standing on the bank and another standing on an idle boat. Assuming no turbulence, the man on the boat will continue to move at the same speed. A leaf moving on the water will also move at the same speed. The mistake with Newton was his treatment of gravity as an attractive force. The apple and the Earth had the same mass just before it fell. They had the same distance. Then why did not the apple fell earlier? The answer lies not in gravity, but the force that held the apple to its stem. With ripening, it was becoming weaker. When it passed a threshold, only then the apple fell. Till such time, it was stabilized in its position by gravity. Gravity is a stabilizing force. Regarding Mercury, Gerber had already solved it much before, which was plagiarized by Einstein (like Poincare had discovered the equation e = mc2, 5 years before Einstein).

      Finally, your conclusion that the "Universe consists only of one unified visible infinite surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light" is interesting. You are hinting at one infinite background structure like the so-called Higg's field, though we do not agree with that concept.

      Regards,

      basudeba

        Dear Jonathan,

        Thank you for reading my essay, and for commenting about it.

        Reality does not have an abstract resemblance. Goethe certainly expressed himself quite admirably, but Goethe never wrote: "The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light."

        I am not trying to focus on writing about simplicity. I am arguing rather strenuously that only naturally visible simple physical structure has ever existed.

        Joe Fisher, Realist

        Dear basudeba,

        Thank you for reading my essay and for commenting about it. Unfortunately, you do not appear to have understood what I was trying to achieve. An eye sees surface because only infinite visible surface exists. It has nothing to do with whether an eye can be affected by any finite measurement of invisible magnetic waves. Newton, Galileo, Einstein and Hawking were all wrong because they thought that the dual condition of matter and space existed independently of each other.

        Joe Fisher, Realist

        4 days later

        Dear Joe,

        I read your essay as requested and, rather than ask a question or make a comment that has been made already, I'm curious what "simplicity" means to you? Given two objects or phenomena or explanations or theories or whatever, how do we tell which is simpler?

        -Joe Brisendine, realist as well but also biophysicist

          Dear Joseph,

          Thank you for reading my essay and for your comment. We can easily identify natural simplicity by noticing that all real objects and real phenomena have a real visible surface. All religious and scientific theories are complex and cannot be applied to natural reality.

          Joe Fisher, Realist

          As usual, the ignorant NASA white male scientists lied to us yesterday about supposedly finding seven planets comparable to earth orbiting a far distant star. One real visible Universe must only have one visible physical condition. Each real star in the real Universe must have real planets and real asteroid belts and real comets orbiting it. One wishes that the white scientists would visit Bedford Stuyvesant. The white scientists could find out that despite having ideal human life supporting physical conditions, many black residents in Bedford Stuyvesant are forced to live in squalid housing conditions that would be unfit to maintain farm animals in. Not one more penny ought to be spent on utterly wasteful white male space exploration.

          Joe Fisher, Realist

          It was good of Pope Francis to declare that it was better for a person to be an atheist rather than that person be a hypocritical Christian. Unfortunately, atheists are just as hypocritical as anybody else for they tend to believe in unnatural science Just as fervently as religious people believe in unnatural religion.

          Joe Fisher, Realist

          9 days later

          Dear Joe Fisher

          Your essay has original content. To some extent we have with you, there is one common view about the importance of surfaces. Being an engineer, I prefer to use and explore for solutions of specific problems very specific surface in the form of gravitational shells with specific properties and structure of their elements. For example.

          «The outer surfaces of the spiral arms of galaxy have gravitational shells at the same temperature in the same gravitational potential and stars have same speed of forced orbital motion, which does not correspond to Newton's law of gravitation».

          «It is known that on the surface of the flat bodies there is Casimir effect, which is associated with the presence of turbulent gravitational shell and large gradient of the gravitational potential».

          However, I can not imagine a single one unified visible infinite physical surface, which limits the specific objects of the universe. Please provide analogues in nature, or analyze specific examples from my essay.

          Kind regards,

          Vladimir Fedorov

            Dear Joe, I too am a self-taut (thinking makes me tense) realist.

            It was explained to me and I realized what a three-dimensional space, when I was 20 years old.

            When a child first opens his eyes again, he sees a flat picture of the world. When he makes the first step, we again see a flat picture of the world, but only different. Making a lot of...a lot of steps in his mind there is an objective world, but he sees it always flat. No matter what the two eyes of man giving him the amount of the world, but it is only close to, but away we again see a flat picture. If we fly in an airplane from new York to Moscow, we will perceive that we are moving over a flat surface and only when necessary can recall the learned in school that it is convex, but again only in the imagination.

            Joe, you are right, in reality, we exist on an infinite plane. Everything else is a figment of our imagination. You're also right that this infinite plane cannot have a void, the Earth must be immersed in something. This is consistent with New Cartesian Physic, which is based on the formula of equivalence of mass-energy makes the conclusion about the equivalence of space-matter. Space is matter, matter is space. Thus, our infinite plane out into the Universe.

            An essay is a literary genre, not a scientific report. It requires a description of something personal, Frank. You got it perfectly. I will give you the highest rating.

            Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko. (Note that I did not know English and use online translator)

            â--¢