On the Nature of Asymmetry by Miles Mutka

Dear Miles Mutka,

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

Hello, Miles -

An interesting essay, thanks. You delve on the fringes of one of my favorite topics (the subject of my 2015 essay The Hole at the Center of Creation. As you say "Only a featureless, unchanging void is trivially symmetric under all possible transformations." As we follow the universal evolutionary pathway backwards in time towards the big bang, recovering each of the symmetries that were broken along the way, do we not need to theorize the metaphysical beginning where no symmetries had been broken?

I would be interested in your thoughts on my essay - The How and the Why of Emergence and Intention. I suggest, in the alternative to a randomly directed multiverse, that we are in a well-specified unique universe (symmetries broken in specific ways), one that exhibits a cosmic intentionality.

Best of luck - George Gantz

Nice essay Mutka,

Your ideas and thinking on symmetries are excellent and.. "A purely kinetic system, of Newtonian mechanics and ideal collisions, would behave too symmetrically, all actions mirrored with equal and opposite reactions. An interface between different forms of energy is needed to harness and manipulate forces in a dynamic world"

A Good proposal , I fully agree with you............

..................... 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

Hi Miles,

It is a subtle point you make about mathematical laws evolving. As per your quote below:

"The concept of numbers has evolved during the history of mathematics, to include 0, to include negative numbers, to include complex numbers, and so on; all to satisfy the idea of completeness, to include all possible placeholder solutions to a class of simple equations. This process has muddled the strict ordering that real numbers had in the beginning, but does it hint at deep connections between asymmetry (orderings) and symmetry (completeness)?"

Mathematics that evolves is an interesting concept not too far from nephoscopy. A valid criticism of this essay question.

A little convoluted but like it.

Thanks for your essay.

Don Limuti

Miles,

Super essay, appealing to the geometer in me. I entirely agree your conclusion; "It seems that symmetry is in fact no more fundamental than asymmetry." and think that's a far more important matter than most realise.

How do you consider combined symmetrical but orthogonal relationships? I identify what appears to be a very important classical derivation of QM's predictions from it's analysis!

Yours seems way too low in the 3's and my score will help. I think you'll like mine and hope you get to read comments and score it before the deadline.

Very best

Peter

Hi Peter,

Thanks for reading! The amount of thoughtfully written essays on this site is so staggering, I only found out about it three months ago.

Regarding orthogonality, I will just say that the cartesian coordinate system, which now seems kind of obvious and natural, was quite a revelation at its time, enabling the works of Newton, Leibniz, and even Kant, among others. I guess it was Ernst Mach who first noticed that orthogonality is not so helpful with angular motion.

It looks like your essay touches upon angular momentum, one of the deep mysteries of physics. I am not sure I am qualified to say if this mystery can explain quantum as classical, but the technique is interesting.

Regards,

Miles

Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use «spam».

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris

I liked this essay very much, and also the book you linked :) Thanks.

I Think in the same paths, a bit. I Think of a fundamental law of complexity... it should be information. And I have earlier thought much of the Platonic solides and what information they can code.

I know I am a year too late now, but good luck to you.

Ulla