Our Numerical Universe by Ajay Pokhrel

You are welcome Ajay,

You are Young and you see the whole.

Best

Please don't take the community or public voting too seriously. Bad scores do not necessarily reflect an essay's worth but can be due to bias or tactical voting or meanness of the voter. Scores can also fluctuate wildly. Try to keep smiling : )

hi ajay,

i loved that you raise some fascinating questions of your own, and that your conclusion is an inspiration. clearly you are fascinated by numbers and by sequences. have you seen the website oeis.org, or hans de vries' formula for the fine structure constant?

warmest,

l.

Hello Ajay,

You have all the optimism of a person your age ... that is good:-) Believe it or not, but a somewhat famous writer has a book titled "The Mathematical Universe" ... I think he makes some of the same arguments as yourself:-)

You will definitely enjoy some of the essays in the contest. You seek a higher dimensional understanding of many mysteries ... that is exactly what many older people are trying to do also. The mathematics in use by many people are Geometric Algebra and the Division Algebras ... you will find them fascinating.

BTW, under some circumstances, it is possible to divide zero by zero to get a legitimate answer. For example, divide sin(x) by x where x is measured in radians. Use numbers that are close to zero and make them closer and closer to zero. The limit as x approaches zero is one. This is an example of Le Hopital's Rule.

You will find mystery after mystery ... all waiting for that right person to come along ... Perhaps it will be you?

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

Dear Ajay Pokhrel,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

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.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Nice essay Mr Ajay Pokhrel,

Good attempt to show some constants in mathematics... !

Your ideas and thinking are good, like..." As per my view, "God" is a body which lives in the higher dimensions then us, that can be fourth dimension or fifth and so on.

And....

We do have many goals and intentions like understanding the universal laws, Dark energy, Dark matter, string theory, exploring every edge of universe and so on"

As you are interested in cosmology........for your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based on experimental results. Here in Dynamic Universe Model Space is Space and time is time in cosmology level or in any level. In the classical general relativity, space and time are convertible in to each other.

Many papers and books on Dynamic Universe Model were published by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example 'Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary' (1994) , 'Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe', About "SITA" simulations, 'Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required', "New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations", "Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background", "Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.", in 2015 'Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, 'Explaining Pioneer anomaly', 'Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets', 'Observation of super luminal neutrinos', 'Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up', "Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto" etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe.

With axioms like... No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true, like Blue shifted Galaxies and no dark matter. Dynamic Universe Model gave many results otherwise difficult to explain

Have a look at my essay on Dynamic Universe Model and its blog also where all my books and papers are available for free downloading...

http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

Best wishes to your essay.

For your blessings please................

=snp. gupta

Dear Ajay Pokhrel,

i now read your essay. You raise many questions regarding maths. I agree that mathematics seems not only as representing meaning, i think it was invented in a meaningful process - not by humans, but, well by God.

Just look at the multitude of different patterns which are hidden in Pascal's triangle. I cannot count them all, but i remember that even the most elegant series that converges to Pi was found within it. And yes, the fibonacci numbers have also been discovered within it. For me, this triangle is the most astonishing mathematical object (as a layman of course), because it is so simple and contains so much complexity. Even the harmonic series is contained in it (http://www.cut-the-knot.org/arithmetic/algebra/BinomialReciprocalsInPascal.shtml)

Well, a proponent of a mathematical universe would say, yes, that's it - God is much to complicated as a realistic identification with the most fundamental level of reality, maths should be the correct candidate. But i think this conclusion is made to fast. Because for example the Nilakantha series (http://www.cut-the-knot.org/arithmetic/algebra/PiInPascal.shtml) resembles the areas of pythagorean triangles in its denominators, such that the natural numbers are given in an increasing order and is contained in Pascal's triangle. The latter can even be viewed as a Sierpinski triangle, when on cuts out the even numbers. Moreover, the diagonals of a complete Pascal's triangle reproduce the figurate numbers of simplices, starting with a diagonal of only the digit '1', then the diagonal of the natural numbers, the diagonal of the triangular numbers, tetrahedral numbers and pentatope numbers.

Therefore, such a simple pyramid of such simple numbers, ordered in such a simple way, cries out for an explanation. Maths itself does not explain it. Its just a plain fact, like the different digits of Pi and their normal distribution. Nonetheless, all these structures, even those who appear to us as random (for example the different digits of Pi, for there is no obvious reason that this number must necessarily start with the digit 3, there is no obvious threesome property of a circle and its diameter, so why couldn't it not start with the digit 4 or 5? Surely, if so, the whole maths should be altered to make it consistent with it) can be easily compressed by Pascal's triangle.

My conclusion is that maths as well as our ordinary human logics was invented by God, means by an intelligent creator who can in some respect be considered as the personalization of infinity and eternity. Assuming maths to be the fundamental level of existence instead does not make much sense to me, because it does not explain how such an amazingly meaningfull and consistent structure should float around in a sea of nothingness for all eternity and at some point in 'time' should generate a physical world. Even if it does the latter since eternal timespans, it would not make more sense to me. Assuming God has the advantage that only his existence has to be presupposed and some metaphysical properties, and not infinitely many connections and relations as for the case of maths. Alternatively one could assume that logic and maths are properties of God (although not the only ones, because some creative force and power is needed to breath fire into the equations).

Best wishes,

Stefan Weckbach

Great passion, Ajay

I find reading the history of mathematics very enlightening. It shows how much it is a human endeavor and needs human guidance, by those with passion and logic.

I wish you years of enlightenment ahead.

Don

Hi Ajay

I wish I had had half your courage at your age. I would have submitted a lot more essays for review. Since you are very interested in mathematics of numbers, you might want to check out the essays of Yanofsky and Dickau submitted on this forum. They talk about the entire universe of numbers and how that might be relevant for deriving a more complete theory of the universe. It could be what you are looking for as you step up your journey into mathematics. It certainly did expand my horizons.

Kind Regards, Willy

Well done Ajay!

I have mostly positive comments, but a few criticisms too. I like the commentary about numbers and how special they tend to be, even before we try to inject meaning or interpretation. And it's true; people don't tend to realize that 0 is a symbol for what might be a null quantity in any number of dimensions. The common form represents 0 x 1, but the unit Real is normally omitted, so one might write (for complex, quaternion, and octonion null values).

0 = 0 + 0i

0 = 0 + 0i + 0j + 0k

0 = 0 + 0i + 0j + 0k + 0E + 0I + 0J +0K

You state "Every theory in the universe is already proved, but we need someone special to find them." and this is equivalent to what I said in a previous essay, that the Science of the future may supersede our current knowledge, but it already exists and is real - to the extent that it works. Douglas Hofstadter, who wrote "Godel Escher, Bach" got his start because of a fascination with numbers and their properties, to try to find the underlying pattern guiding the universe.

The patterns are real, and we only need someone special to find them. But there is a long journey ahead for you, to see how some of these ideas play out on a larger stage. A lot of interesting Math is hidden behind a wall of symbols, and only once you master their interpretation can they tell you what the underlying Math is really about. That's all for now.

All the Best,

Jonathan

I forgot to add this comment..

When you state "if any number divides zero then the result is zero itself and if zero divides the number then result is indefinite," I know what you mean, and I think you do too, but it is stated exactly backwards - or could be interpreted that way. One way to say it unambiguously would be "zero divided by any number is zero, while any number divided by zero is indefinite." I acknowledge the confusion you mention, but it's best not to inject more.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Best to you Ajay..

Good luck at University, and beyond.

Regards,

Jonathan