Dear Christian Corda,

To Vladimir Tamari you wrote: "You realized my worst scientific nightmare! I DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN A WORLD WHERE EINSTEIN'S THEORIES DO NOT WORK!!!!!!!"

This sounds too emotional to me. I would rather hope for a distinction between correct or at least useful theories on the other hand and untenable or even misleading ones on the other hand. In my essay, I dealt with evolution and used a rational criterion: non-arbitrariness. My results are definitely unwelcome not just to you. Feel challenged.

Sincerely

Eckard

Dear Christian Corda:

I enjoyed reading your paper. You present an eloquent approach to achieve unification based on GWs. I would like your views on my contest paper on achieving unification -- FROM LAWS TO AIMS & INTENTIONS - A UNIVERSAL MODEL INTEGRATING MATTER, MIND, CONSCIOUSNESS, AND PURPOSE-A. Singh elaborated below. The paper tests and vindicates the hypothesis of the spontaneous decay of the atom as the fundamental reality behind the observed universe which also describes the inner workings of QM resolving physics' outstanding paradoxes and incompleteness.

FQXi is a unique forum to address key open issues related to science that impact humanity and life. The mainstream science has treated the universe, laws, and fundamental particles as inanimate entities devoid of life, consciousness, or free will. As a result, the mainstream theories of science are also devoid of consciousness or free will. While science, especially quantum mechanics, recognizes the spontaneous free-willed (without any cause) birth and decay of particles out of the Zero-point vacuum as a fundamental physical phenomenon, it refutes existence of free will via consciously labeling it as "Randomness" in nature. This vicious circle has failed science in two ways - first is its erroneous prediction of a purposeless universe and life in it making the science itself purposeless and meaningless from a deeper human perspective. Secondly, ignorance of consciousness or free will which is a fundamental dimension of the universe along with mass/energy/space/time leaves scientific theories incomplete leading to their current paradoxes and internal inconsistencies.

Just like a dead mother cannot nurture and give birth to a living baby, a dead universe governed by inanimate laws cannot support any living systems within it. Universal consciousness is fundamental to the emergence and sustenance of any living system - quantum or biological. The mathematical laws must be living to give rise to living aims and intentions. If the fundamentality of the consciousness of the universe and laws is not understood, a scientific theory would be like a castle built on sand.

FQXi forum is participated by brilliant and accomplished scientists representing in-depth knowledge and expertise in diverse fields. I would propose that the forum scientists take on a challenge to enhance and uplift science from its current status quo as an incomplete science of the inanimate (dead) matter to the wholesome science of the living and conscious universe. This would complete science and make it purposeful and meaningful adding to its current successes as a tool for enhancing material life alone. Science deserves its long-awaited recognition to address not only matter but mind as well and not only material but spiritual life as well. Considering the current political and economic threats to the basic survival of science and religious extremism/terrorism threatening the fundamental freedom (free will) of humanity, the role of a wholesome and genuine science has become even more vital to humanity.

I have forwarded a humble and example proposal detailing how a consciousness-integrated scientific model of the universe entailing matter-mind could be developed that resolves current paradoxes of science including QM, predicts the observed universe, and offers a testable theory via future empirical observations. This proposal and theory are documented in my contest paper.

I would greatly appreciate any feedback as well as constructive criticism of the proposed approach in my paper to advance physics and cosmology.

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

Dear Avtar,

Thanks for your kind comments. We are happy that you enjoyed reading our Essay. We will read, comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Dear Christian, Reza and Nathan

I read your essay with great interest. A space-borne experiment called LATOR (Laser Astrometric Test Of Relativity) was proposed more than a decade ago. The experiment would use the International Space Station as a base for interferometry. The solar panels on the ISS point towards the Sun with a high degree of accuracy. A pair of satellites orbiting the Sun would reflect laser light back to the ISS, allowing gravitational parameters to be deduced from changes in path length.

A variation on this experiment would put the base at a Lagrange point, but even the ISS orbiting Earth is supposed to provide sufficient accuracy to discriminate second-order terms in the various gravitational models. For example, take the dimensionless quantity GM/Rc^2 for the Sun to be about 10^-6, one part in a million, which corresponds to the first-order term in power series expansions. The second-order term is on the order 10^-12. It is only at this level of accuracy that new information about gravitation can be acquired.

Given the success of LIGO, it seems strange that LATOR has not been supported. The only objection that has come to my attention is the possibility that helium gas could refract the laser beam.

Do you know if LATOR, or some variation, is being considered for a second-order test of general relativity?

Best regards,

Colin

    Dear Christian,

    Many thanks for the kind words about my "provocative" essay .

    I pleasure read your essay, gave him high mark, and understood why many people have questions to him.

    But I'm not embarrassed «confused about the relevance of this essay».

    This dispute about gravity and gravitational waves has the deep roots of the dispute between Descartes and Newton and the dispute is still not resolved.

    "Today it is hard to believe, but contemporaries accused Newton that his theory "returns science in the Middle Ages" Thomas S. Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (1970) . If the bodies are attracted one toonher, then they should spend energy, but from the theory it is not visible, where does the energy come from and how does it replenish? ... There was no (and is no now) a cycle of energy in the theory, and this happened after Descartes, After Descartes introduced the principle of conservation of momentum, which natural science took literally as a life-giving sip of water." L.E. Fedulayev (2009).

    The dispute that you raised about the gravitational waves will allow adequately answer the questions of this contest. The theory of gravitational waves is the key theory of self-organization of matter, therefore we observe gravitational attraction as a mechanism for its realization, which is still to be understood in detail.

    I wish you success in the contest.

    Kind regards,

    Vladimir

      Dear Authors,

      Please, some refinements and judgment:

      Both Poincare and Einstein's Relativity theories are based on Kantian heuristics and Poincare's " Lorentz invariant". However, only Poincare's gravity theory discovered a whole family of consistent theories which cannot be geometrized in a Riemann manifold... Hence, Poincare's relativistic gravity was not able to predict an existence of gravitational waves.

      In historical Kantian context, Poincare 's Relativity is connected with Eddington's Kantianism of a priori constants and later Matvey Bronstein's brilliant physics( author of the first dissertation on quantum gravity and detection of gravitational waves, Leningrad University, Russia, 1934-5 )... Matvey showed that the next step from gravitational waves to quantum gravity of some future unified physics is needed real Post - Kantian Revolution in Space - and - Time geometric algebra ( Eddington developed prototype in the form of so- called " E - Algebra ").

      However, as I showed in my essay recently ( " Kantian Answers "), popular analytical attitude against Kantian transcendental aesthetics represents main difficulties for Physics Unification.

      Best

      Michael

        Dear Colin,

        Thanks for your interesting comments. We are happy to know that your have read our essay with great interest.

        Concerning LATOR, I was informed on the existence of this experiment some years ago, but I must confess that I did not deepened about it. Thus, I cannot tell you if LATOR, or some variation, is being considered for a second-order test of general relativity, which should be of enormous interest. Yes, I agree that it is strange that LATOR has not been supported and not only based on the success of LIGO. In any case, I will take infos on this issue soon.

        Good luck in the Contest, we will read, comment and score your Essay in next days.

        Cheers, Ch.

        Dear Vladimir,

        Thanks for your kind message. We are happy that you pleasured reading our essay, and we are honored that you gave it a high mark. Thanks a lot. We are also happy to know that you thinks that the dispute that we raised about the gravitational waves will allow adequately answer the questions of this contest. This is a key point. Claiming that Newton's theory "returns science in the Middle Ages" is very wrong. Without Newton we should not have had Einstein! Thanks again and good luck in the Contest!

        Cheers, Ch.

        Dear Michael,

        Thanks for your comments. I am not expert on the historical Kantian context, but, from the physical point of view, Poincare's gravity theory and the whole family of consistent theories which cannot be geometrized in a Riemann manifold are ultimately ruled out by the Equivalence Principle, which is today tested with a precision of order 10^-13. The same authors of this Essay, i.e. myself, Nathan and Reza, ultimately clarified this issue - which is also stressed in various works of Weinberg, Will and other famous scientists - in this paper.

        Thanks for signaling the work of Matvey Bronstein, I were not aware of it. Instead, I were aware of the remarkable work of the Soviet physicists Mikhail Gertsenshtein and Vladislav Pustovoit in 1962, who were the first to propose LIGO's approach, using laser interferometry, to detect GWs.

        We wish you good luck in the Contest, we will read, comment and score your Essay soon.

        Cheers, Ch.

        Dear Dr. Christian Corda and others,

        I have read your scientific essay and there are scientific seriously innovative ideas written.

        I so appreciate your research works on the ground-breaking detection of GW150914 by LIGO.

        Gravitational waves carry completely different information about phenomena in the universe.

        Gravitational waves generated from distant sources throughout the universe are as a disturbance, or ripple effect, as the generated water waves, which were first anticipated by Albert Einstein a century ago.

        But, I think that this imagination about gravitational waves maybe little bit different from the reality of nature.

        The speed of gravitational waves in the general theory of relativity is equal to the speed of light in vacuum. (but, I think that it might be instantaneous action at a distance)

        As you said, in order to develop the interferometric GW detectors using the seismic noise, the general theory of relativity must be extended for an ultimately clarify of gravitational interaction.

        If someone consider whether the foundation of the nature is a physical vacuum medium or an elementary particle, it must be defined more definitely, as close as possible to the reality of nature.

        Of course, it is a big question.

        "Law of gravity is valid only near the surfaces of celestial bodies of the solar system", but, it is impossible to be definable at plank scale and around supermassive black holes in the center of many galaxies, unless an exact mechanism of gravitational interaction is discovered.

        Thank you so much, again

        Cheers for success in your research achievements.

        With Best Regards,

        Ch.Bayarsaikhan

        Dear Ch.Bayarsaikhan,

        Thanks for you interesting in our Essay. We are happy and honored that you appreciate our research work.

        Concerning your interesting comments, maybe that GWs maybe little bit different from the reality of nature. Let us hope in consolidating the GW astronomy which started with the LIGO detections in order to have more infos. We agree that considering whether the foundation of the nature is a physical vacuum medium or an elementary particle is a very important issue. We also think that discovering an exact mechanism of gravitational interaction if fundamental also concerning the big hope to unify physics laws.

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

        Cheers, Ch.

        Dear Christian Corda, et al.,

        Thank you for your essay. As an astrophysicist working on cosmology initiatives I find this essay fascinating and interesting. I am not entirely sure how it relates to the core question at hand though? Perhaps I have missed a key point and may need to have another look. In any event I wanted to wish you well in the contest and let you know that topic notwithstanding how much I have enjoyed your essay.

        Regards,

        Robert

          Dear Robert,

          Thanks for your comments. We are happy to know that you find our Essay fascinating and interesting. Concerning the issue of how it relates to the core question at hand though, I past below a complete clarification by my co-author Nathan Schmidt. We will read, comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

          Cheers, Ch.

          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.

          Sorry Peter, but still the link on the Tidal Prediction Tables does not work. Can you send me them privately via e-mail at the address cordac.galilei@gmail.com?

          Thanks and regards, Ch.

          Dear Authors,

          Thank you very much for your clarification. I appreciate your interesting and creative interpretation of the question posed by this essay contest. As mentioned before, I enjoyed the work you have done in your essay on GW150914 and see the example you give of how the "mindless" Einstein Field Equations lead people to construct LIGO to perform an experimental verification. (Without the EFE, there would be no LIGO.)

          Thank you also for commenting on my essay on my forum and I really appreciate the time you have taken to read and rate it.

          Regards,

          Robert

          • [deleted]

          • Post #76

          Dear Christian Corda, Reza Katebi, and Nathan O. Schmidtl

          If you believed in the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes, then your essay would be even better. There is not movable a geometric space, and is movable physical space. These are different concepts.

          I inform all the participants that use the online translator, therefore, my essay is written badly. I participate in the contest to familiarize English-speaking scientists with New Cartesian Physic, the basis of which the principle of identity of space and matter. Combining space and matter into a single essence, the New Cartesian Physic is able to integrate modern physics into a single theory. Let FQXi will be the starting point of this Association.

          Don't let the New Cartesian Physic disappear! Do not ask for himself, but for Descartes.

          New Cartesian Physic has great potential in understanding the world. To show potential in this essay I risked give "The way of the materialist explanation of the paranormal and the supernatural" - Is the name of my essay.

          Visit my essay and you will find something in it about New Cartesian Physic. After you give a post in my topic, I shall do the same in your theme

          Sincerely,

          Dizhechko Boris

            Dear Boris,

            Sorry, but I cannot find your Essay. Please, can you kindly give us a link?

            Cheers, Ch.

            Dear Christian, Reza, and Nathan,

            You have presented one professional work where however the non-specialists also can comprehend for himself the whole importance of the ongoing events in the advanced edge of theoretical and experimental physics. I believe that we will be able to overcome the crisis of understanding in fundamental science through the creation of a new comprehensive picture of the world, uniform for physicists, mathematicians,

            "> poets ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpBGPv6s2s4&list=FLTAAJTuBZSNWG96hdrzQ6bQ&index=8

            ) and musicians filled with meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E.Husserl). I see your work as very important to overcome the crisis of understanding, the creation of the ontological basis of knowledge. I invite you to read my ideas of the ontological unification of matter (absolute forms of existence), including the ontological (absolute) wave, integrating all the waves of the Universum as holistic process of generation of structures.

            Best regards,

            Vladimir

              Dear Dizhechko Boris,

              Now, I have found your Essay under your surname, i.e., Semyonovich. We will read, comment and score your Essay soon.

              Cheers, Ch.

              Dear Vladimir,

              Thanks for your comments with kind words. We are happy and honored that you have found our Essay as very important to overcome the crisis of understanding, the creation of the ontological basis of knowledge. Thanks a lot. We will read, comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

              Cheers, Ch.