Dear Bill,

Thanks for your comments.

As we previously told in reply to a similar comment by Prof. Ellis, in our analysis aims and intention are detection of GWs, realization of a GW astronomy and potential implications on the research of the unification of physics. Concerning the theme set for this competition, this is a very particular case for an important reason. For a long time, the correct identification of aims and intention has been a very controversial issue based on the large debate, characterized by wandering through a wild territory of mathematical laws, which involved various scientists, included the same Einstein. That debate focused about the potential existence-non existence of GWs. Thus, in the current case, a big amount of mindless mathematical laws has been needed, not only in order to give rise to aims and intention, but, in a very long preliminary way (about 40 years), also in order to correctly identify such aims and intention.

In addition, I would like to stress a remarkable observation of Jack Hamilton James. He argues that our Essay is a unique and opposite way into the essay contest. In fact, the other Essays start with the external world and try to show how it produces intention. In our Essay we point out to start with maths and try and work it to fit the external world. In all honesty, I do not know if our case is very compelling to the FQXi jury. We will see this in the future.

In any case, our Essay is no more the highest rate essay out of over 150 submitted. It seems that some troll gave us a "1" in order to decrease our score. Finally, I do not understand why the issue that our Essay was the highest rate essay out of over 150 submitted should make you perplexed.

In any case, I will read, comment and score your Essay in next days. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Hi LC,

It is a pleasure re-meeting you here in FQXi Contest. Thanks for your congrats, it will be my pleasure to read, comment and score your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Dang! I gave you a decent score this morning and now you have dropped terribly. I was early on near the top and fell to 5.6 and then climbed up.

We were kicking around a year and a half ago an idea with solitons and tunneling states with rotating black holes. I came up with a bit of something recently that might feed life into that. The idea was that the Kerr frame dragging around a black hole was quantum mechanically analogous to the Josephson junction. I have found this connects with S-duality.

It looks as if you affiliation has changed. It looks a little more solid than what you had. I too need to get myself better situated.

Cheers LC

COMMENT OF THE AUTHOR NATHAN O. SCHMIDT

Hello all!

Thanks for your comments and discussions. For those of you who may be confused about the relevance of this essay, I will attempt an additional clarification.

Numerous scientists (ex. Einstein, Rosen, and others, etc.) were aimed at the goal of establishing a unified field theory of physics; they spent decades trying to determine which mathematical laws correctly encode physical laws via the methods of science and mathematics. These scientists were wandering towards the goal of unification.

In this wandering, many of these mathematical laws, such as those representing gravitational waves and predicting their existence, were a subject of great dispute and great confusion. Hence, the mathematical laws predicting the existence of gravitational waves were considered to be mindless by many scientists. Moreover, the dispute and confusion surrounding gravitational waves was mindless in its own right (i.e. based on the evidence cited in the essay, it seems that Einstein would have agreed to this).

The mindless mathematical laws characterizing gravitational waves combined with the wandering and dispute over the existence vs. non-existence of gravitational waves created a new goal for scientists aiming to unify physics: to prove or disprove the existence of gravitational waves via theory and experiment. Thereafter, during further wandering towards the goal of unification, scientists also found themselves wandering towards the goal of resolving the dispute of gravitational waves; the goal of assessing the validity of gravitational waves and the goal of assessing the predictive capabilities of the theory of general relativity are in alignment with the goal of unification.

After additional years of wandering through the mindless mathematical laws surrounding gravitational waves, scientists eventually found themselves creating LIGO in order to hunt for gravitational waves and to probe systems of massive objects throughout the universe (as predicted by the theory of general relativity). Consequently, the mindless mathematical laws surrounding gravitational waves gave rise to the aim and intent of creating LIGO and detecting the event GW150914.

This is a prime example of how mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention in the real world.

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your comment.

Concerning your being perplexed about the relevance of our Essay you can read the below comment of my co-author Nathan O. Schmidt. I will bring back to you soon concerning your question about the theoretical basis of radiant (as opposed to geometric) gravitational waves.

Cheers, Ch.

Hi LC,

Thanks for your decent score. As usual there are some trolls giving a "1" for decreasing the total score of the Essays. This is not a new in the FQXi Essay Contest...

Send me via private email your new insights on solitons and tunneling states with rotating black holes. We will discuss the situation and we attempt to write a new research paper.

Cheers, Ch.

Dear Christian, Reza, and Nathan,

I enjoyed reading your well-written and instructive essay about gravitational waves and the foundational role of general relativity for the entire physics and other fields. We know from Galilei and Einstein that the fundamental laws of physics are the same everywhere, at any scale, and for any observer. The role of the observer is paramount both in relativity and quantum mechanics, being immersed in a world which in its turn affects, and as Wheeler says, the universe is participatory. This can be seen in many modern approaches to inflationary cosmology, quantum mechanics, and the problem of why these particular fundamental laws and constants are at the basis of our universe. It appears miraculous how mindless laws gave rise to intelligences who were able to predict and measure the gravitational waves, or, if I don't exaggerate too much by saying this, to detect the EEG of these brainwaves of the brain of the God of Einstein and Spinoza, or, as Einstein put it, to know His thoughts. Good luck with the contest!

Best regards,

Cristi

The Tablet of the Metalaw

    Dear Cristi,

    We are very honored by your kind words on our Essay, thanks a lot. Wheeler's statement that "the universe is participatory" is wonderful. Maybe the nascent GW astronomy could help in "knowing God's thoughts".

    We well read, comment and score you Essay soon.

    Thanks again and good luck in the Contest.

    Cheers, Ch.

    Thanks for the good word on my essay over at my site. Sorry to see that your essay seems to have dropped a lot. I have you a high score the other day. I think it was a 9, with 1 deducted for seeming a bit off from the central point of the essay prompt. I wrote the following in response to your statement about unitarity and equivalence principle.

    My sense is that the equivalence principle and the unitarity principle are versions of the same thing. Because of this they do not generally hold completely for general experimental conditions. It is really similar to the duality between reality and locality in Bell's theorem. You can have one, but not the other. The same I think happens here in that if you can measure all quantum states in a nondestructive way (weak measurements, etc) you then have some small deformation of the equivalence principle. On the other hand if you measures the EP to complete accuracy this is traded off by some inability to account for quantum states in a unitary manner.

    Cheers LC

      Hi LC,

      If you are correct on the duality between the equivalence principle and the unitarity principle this is a very intriguing issue.

      Concerning the point that our Essay seems a bit off from the central point of the essay prompt, give a look to the above comment of my co-author Nathan O. Schmidt.

      Our essay has dropped a lot because, as usual, in the Contest there are some trolls which give "1" in order to drop Essays having a score higher than their proper ones.

      Cheers, Ch.

      I got bombed with a 2 yesterday. I will say the essays near the top are pretty good, with one notable exception IMO.

      I am not that wedded to any particular thoery or paradigm. I tend to wear different hats at various times. By doing that I am freer to think about things. The one person who most often restricts a person's freedom is themselves.

      In physics the so called fine tuning problem has two components. The first is from the Higgs field. The П†^4 theory has vertices with four "legs," which makes it the center of mass renormalization. For Оґ the cut-off scale mass renormalization terms are of the form (О»/Оґ^2)^n, which means that for a large number of diagrams they have to cancel properly at ~ 1/Оґ^2. We may then think of this scale as being from the mass scale of the Higgs ~ 200 GeV to the string or Planck scale of 10^{19}GeV which is about 16 or 17 orders of magnitude. We then have to get the theory tuned to within 1/Оґ^2 ~ 10^{-32} orders of magnitude.

      We then of course have vacuum bubbles which give energy to the vacuum. This would not be a problem for QFT if we only dealt with energy differences. However, for gravitation we have that gravitation involves the absolute mass-energy in space and so from the cosmological constant of 10^{54}cm^{-{2} to the Planck scale curvature of 10^{66}cm^{-2} there is then a 10^{120} fine tuning issue. We may think of the vacuum as due to self-interacting П†^4 bubble, say two loops connected at a vertex. For the Higgs field this is О»/Оґ^4, which has 10^{64} to 10^{66} orders of magnitude fine tuning problem. This is of course from the Higgs scale to the Planck scale. If we include the low energy scale where the 3 Goldstone boson fields are absorbed as longitudinal degrees of freedom down the cosmological scale we then recover the quantum gravity fine tuning.

      Of course this is pretty horrendous. However, if we can transform this problem into another guise it might be avoided, or at least ameliorated. This is to look as a soliton version of this theory. Consider the fermion, which in the Thirring fermon theory gives a sine-Gordon soliton for the condensate of that field. We then have that the fermion superfield with

      ОЁ = П€ + C(Оё-barA + ОёA-bar) + ОёОё-barF

      and the Thirring condensate giving the sine-Gordon dynamcs as

      ОЁ в†' exp(ОЁОЁ).

      This of course carries over to the scalar field as well, where the Higgs field is a condensate at the low energy domain with the important Higgs vev = Ој/2О». In this way the fine tuning with the Higgs field can be connected to the problem with gravitation.

      Another way to think of it is Gauss' theorem and holography. The CFT on the AdS boundary, or the equivalent on a black hole horizon (holographic screen) is evaluated on a bounding surface. In the case of black holes with an inner and out horizon this is evaluated on two surfaces. In the bulk however, where one has gravitation, there is more than just the difference in energy. However, holography tells us, as really does Gauss' theorem, this should not be terribly relevant. The gravitational or cosmological fine tuning should be pinned to the field theoretic fine tuning. The QFT fine tuning is ultimately due to the Higgs field.

      Cheers LC

      Dear Professor Christian Corda,

      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

      Dear Christian,

      Thanks a lot for your comment on my essay.

      I have read with great interest the work of yourself and the co-authors.

      The gravitational waves trembled through the text.

      The goal of any wave is insecure, it goes on and on.

      You also deserve a high rating.

      best regards

      Wilhelmus

        Dear Christian Corda,

        When I first read your essay, I too thought that you had missed the point of the essay. But after reading your comments I now understand that you simply placed another interpretation on the question and you actually answered extremely well from that perspective. After all, the mindless math did make predictions for over a century, and gave rise to considerable aims and intentions necessary to evaluate the model.

        I think it's also relevant to focus as you do on development of the 'mindless math', with logical mistakes made along the way and consequent changes in predictions and interpretations.

        So congratulations on finding a unique but relevant perspective and handling it well!

        My best regards,

        Edwin Eugene Klingman

        Dear Wilhelmus,

        Thanks for your kind words and for thinking that we deserve a high rating. Your sentence "The gravitational waves trembled through the text" is marvelous.

        Thanks again and good luck in the Contest.

        Cheers, Ch.

        Dear Edwin,

        Thanks for your comments. We are happy that you understands our interpretation of the question of the Contest and that you like the way we answered from that perspective. We are honored by your congrats.

        Thanks again, we wish you good luck in the Contest.

        Cheers, Ch.

        Hi to you 3,

        Mr Corda,

        I am happy to see your participation to this contest.Hope you are well.

        Congratulations for your relevant papper.

        All the best from Belgium

          Hi Steve,

          Nice to re-meet you in FQXi Essay Contest. Thanks for your comments, I am fine. I hope you are well too. We will read, comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

          Cheers, Ch.

          Nice essay Prof Corda,

          Congratulations on detection of Gravitational Waves. In Novae and supernovae explosions there will be gravitational disturbances and a possibility of GW generation.

          .............................. At this point I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where ...............reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe is described. Dynamic Universe Model is another mathematical model for Universe. Its mathematics show that the movement of masses will be having a purpose or goal, Different Galaxies will be born and die (quench) etc...just have a look at my essay... "Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe" where UGF (Universal Gravitational force) acting on each and every mass, will create a direction and purpose of movement.....

          I think intension is inherited from Universe itself to all Biological systems

          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

            You are welcome.I am fine thanks.For the essay,unfortunately I have not made this contest.

            All the best