EINSTEIN THEORIZED, BUT THE UNIVERSE, LIKE OLD MAN RIVER, JUST KEEPS ROLLING ALONG by Vladimir F. Tamari

I agree about 98% with your position. Although, some will suggest that you may have felt it necessary, as many others have, to slip into saddles and ignore the request: "While this topic is broad, successful essays will not use this breadth as an excuse to shoehorn in the author's pet topic, but will rather keep as their central focus the theme of the contest." It is necessary to speak truth from a position of common understanding.

That should be sandals.

Dear Vladimir F. Tamari ,

Every year I look forward to your art and essay. Growing up on the Mississippi River, and growing up with Einstein's ideas, I appreciate your title. I too believe it is the River of Now that we are rolling on.

You mentioned the world turned upside down with special relativity and velocity-dependent attributes. In my mind this is another case of focusing on the mathematical projections imposed on reality by physicists. I believe in the physical reality and seek to understand such reality through appropriate models. For example, I believe the appropriate model for special relativity is the "radar" model. My radar sits in my rest frame in London and sends a pulse at the speed of light toward a V2 rocket headed for London with velocity v. When my pulse strikes the nose of the V2, it returns to me at the speed of light. But a portion of the radar pulse wave-front continues toward the tail of the rocket. While my pulse travels to the tail fin at c, the tail fin is traveling toward me at v, and analysis of the return pulse implies that the V2 rocket is shorter in length than is actually the case.

Since I cannot reach out and touch an object in another inertial frame, but can only send and receive messages traveling at the speed of light, [even if that varies from place to place or time to time!] then Newtonian physics dictates a "length contraction" for objects so measured in a frame moving with respect to myself. I see no reason to believe the V2 has turned into silly putty. I simply see that communication at the finite speed of light complicates analysis of communications between moving reference frames.

Similarly, the "clock model" that times 'ticks' in terms of the round-trip travel between a source and detector on the floor of the railroad car and a mirror on the ceiling will show time dilation for moving clocks, compared to the identical optical clock stationary in the station. Again, essentially the radar model. No nonsense about "perfect" clocks.

I agree that the Equivalence Principle has problems. It completely fails when either tidal forces or local rotation cannot be ignored. Why choose a fundamental principle that has glaring exceptions? The main consequence is that the gravitational energy of the field can always be transformed away in a suitable reference frame, yielding a purely geometric formalism. This follows from ignoring the Maxwell-Einstein gravito-magnetic aspects of dynamic gravity. If these aspects are considered it plays havoc with the Equivalence Principle and also with Copenhagen 'particle-wave duality'. The gravito-magnetic wave induced by ultra-dense matter (such as electrons) cannot be ignored. It is primarily due to the statistical/thermodynamic Partition function that the wavelength of this field can be related to energy and hence probability, resulting in the endless confusion known as QM.

I am amazed and pleased that your summary diagram on page 6 is almost 100% compatible with my theory of reality (with the possible exception of the bottom left corner [21st c]). You have been very busy my friend!

To tie some of this together, I hope you find the time to look at my recent paper

The Nature of Quantum Gravity

I think you will like it. The issue with Bell derived from his projecting the 'qubit' "two state" model onto a simplistic interpretation of Stern-Gerlach. But there is no fiercer branch of the QM religion than the church of the entanglement, so that is a fight to be avoided if possible. Thank God as you note, there are competent thinkers outside the establishment to do the work that must be done to escape the mess we're in.

I am in full agreement with viewing gravity as aether that acts as an optical field of variable index of refraction bending light. Since local gravity (aether) did not change for Michelson and Morley, wherever in orbit, they should've expected null results!

I showed in my dissertation that any axiomatic theory of physics can be formulated as automata. An example in my endnotes shows the mapping between the canonical form and one of Feynman's path integral terms. I also observed that the automaton's 'next state address' is conceptually equivalent to potential (as shown in the example.)

Vladimir it is so rewarding to see that many here continue to improve their theories in their essays every year. You and I are converging in many areas. That is so pleasing.

My very best wishes for you,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

PS. Can you recommend a specific paper or place I should study to familiarize myself with Eric Reiter's work?

Dear Vladimir,

Very interesting essay in the spirit of radical Cartesian doubt and ideas to help find a way out of the modern crisis of understanding in fundamental science. Beautiful thoughts with the singing of Paul Robeson and the image of the River for "grasping" ( understand) the picture of the world:

«Robeson is most famous for his song "Ol' Man River" from the musical Show Boat. One can well imagine 4 Einstein watching the Universe as the protagonist of the song watched the Mississippi, flowing according to its own laws of hydrodynamics, oblivious of human existence: "I must keep livin' until I'm dyin,/ But Ol' Man River,/ He jes' keeps rollin' along!" - From the song "Ol' Man River" in Show Boat 1927.»

I believe that the picture of the world of physicists, mathematicians, poets and composers should be united and filled with the senses of the "LifeWorld" (E.Husserl).

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." ( Albert Einstein)

Undoubtedly, in order to overcome the crisis of understanding, the crisis of interpretation and representation, today we need the competitive work of several gnoseological paradigms, new conceptual ideas and eidoses. You give these competitive ideas and eidoses.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir

Vladimir,

Quite cogent and interesting discussion, even entertaining. One can well imagine Einstein overseeing the universe as the protagonist of the song, watching the Mississippi and with his thought images. Your colorful chart with Einstein impacts are in that spirit too.

I'm not familiar with your cellular automaton but I would imagine it is like a supercharged excel spreadsheet where you control the rules of each cell location and overall neighborhood cells and their inter-relationships, something you could use for all sciences, depending on the application. I imagine you also have dimensions and states, perhaps like element states in chemistry. Sounds like a very flexible modeling tool.

Is this your way of demonstrating aim or intent: the cellular automaton. You say "Hooft's work is still weighed down by the useless baggage of spacetime, and he does not yet discuss gravity." Does your model? If the model represents aim or intent, it is still your model with your aims or intent. How do you separate your own aims and lend it as nature?

Quite interesting. My essay has great difficulty in dealing with the inscrutable essay task. I would like to hear your ideas regarding my essay.

Jim Hoover

Dear Vladimir,

Very interesting essay, and nicely written. As you also mentioned many great physicists of 20th century amount them Einstein, Plank, Schrodinger, ... have changed the conception of the classical physics but later emerging theories like dark matter also challenged Newton and Einstein gravity which can't apply to very large / small scales.

You also mentioned speed of light is constant but the whole space time can change form and surprisingly not speed of light, or if gravity equals acceleration then linear acceleration must also must change space time as much?.

Or the fact that although stars are surrounded by plasma which at least in its non charged state can bend the light as our atmosphere but this fact was totally ignored till our days.

Also particle entanglement has showed that it's speed is instant and many other facts...that make the new physics changing conception constantly as new theories are born. I feel at this stage we are both enlightened and at the same time more lost!

Good luck with your essay

Kind Regards

Koorosg

Vladimir,

My rating of your essay brought your score up to a 6.0 and mine was the 7th rating. I tell you this because many of us have been so stricken and your essay is superior. I got a "1" w/o any comments.

Luck in the future.

Jim

Vladimir,

I've done my share of programming, simulations and such. Rudimentary is a good start, something to build on, given the right tool. I did my modelling in the defense industry for the B2.

Jim

Dear Vladimir,

I have read your nice narrated (and also nice formatted!) essay and I have find too many things there close to my soul. This is not just a cheap compliment or kindly words. I see you're right approach to Einstein's heritage as well as the necessity of right evaluation of this. You have somewhat touched to mystery of quantum - classical duality, that also needed to be solved. All the mentioned problems are my themes also that you can see in my essay. I see that we are mainly like-minded and I consider it just my duty to support you. I hope to see your comments on my work in my page.

So, successes to you!

Shokran, kollu zain, Dear Vladimir!

Thank you very much for offering your "Beautiful Model". I have open it already and now I can say only that really it seems so beautiful. I have read now some sentences only and just surprised how you rightly (in my opinion) have approached to basic question - I mean about uniqueness of primordial substance. So, I will read it carefully in my good time, then we can exchange ours judgements. I cannot wait however, to not drive your attention on the unimaginable importance of comprehension the extraordinary role of fine structure constant (a=1/137) in the construction of our cosm in whole. I did not see it there .. but you do not worry, we will talk everything some later.

My Best wishes!

(P.S. I have here many Palestinian friends here - I am in Dubai)

Dear Vladimir,

What I meant by enlightened was actually we learned new things but at the same time we become more confused and then new inconsistent theories emerged for fixing the old inconsistencies, which made the new physics which in my view is conceptually wrong, please refer to this article http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2313 you can of course see my new essay about speed of light here.

Warm regards

Koorosh