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

Vladimir, I says the same! (Matter is Made of Waves)

But we need to add here - these (waves) are circularly polarised - ie wave-vortex.

Best of luck!

Nice essay Vladimir Tamari,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent

1. A much simpler theory of gravity is possible: in a gravitational field the local energy density of the ether acts like an optical field of variable index of refraction, bending light as it does in a desert mirage, where heat creates layers of air with decreasing density, refracting light and make it curve.

2. Enter Cellular Automata

It sounds easier to banish, ditch, jettison or drop the cornerstones of 20th century

physics than to reconstruct it anew from first principles.

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

Dear Vladimir Tamari,

I am sure having uttered so many uncommon views that I cannot expect any support or at least serious criticism except from those like you.

On p. 7 of my essay I defined the constant speed c of light in vacuum as follows:

"c equals to the distance between positions of arrival at the moment of arrival and of the emitter at the moment of emission divided by the time of flight".

I am trying to benefit from the trifle that a distance doesn't need coordinates.

Best,

Eckard

Hi Tamari,

You have created another beautiful world with this essay. Thank you so much.

One of your points caught me by surprise!

"A much simpler theory of gravity is possible: in a gravitational field the local energy density of the ether acts like an optical field of variable index of refraction, bending light as it does in a desert mirage, where heat creates layers of air with decreasing density, refracting light and make it curve. This idea was first presented by Arthur Eddington , the man whose eclipse observations proved that a star's gravity curves light, just as GR predicted, thereby catapulting Einstein into world fame."

I thought I invented this a few months back!..... You go on to say: "In my own theory of gravity this density isdue to the spin of qubit-like dielectric nodes making up the ether lattice, the proposed building blocks of the Universe."

I call your qubit-like dielectric nodes ...gravitons. Check out Prespacetime Journal paper:

Prespacetime Journal | December 2016 | Volume 7 | Issue 16 | pp. 102-114

Limuti, D., A Quantum Mechanical View of the Precession of Mercury's Orbit

Or just email me at don.limuti@gmail.com and I will send it. It is really simple...really.

Such a pleasure to be in another contest with you,

Don Limuti

Here is a Bucky quote to keep us sane: "To ask a politician to lead us is to ask the tail of a dog to lead the dog."

Hi Satyavarapu - thank you kindly please excuse the delay I will read your interesting ideas and respond soon.

Hi Eckard - ditto! When you say "people like you" you mean ... ?? haha don't worry I think I understand.

Hi Don,glad you liked the paper. Way to go about gravity being a density of.. something! In my United Dipole Field of 1993 I showed how the electric field of a dipole behaves like a gradient-index gravity field. In Beautiful Universe Model I generalized the concept to the Universe as a whole and added the concept of twisting spin fields to create gravitational attraction. I see from your website that you have attacked the gravity concept more analytically, but isn't using the term graviton confusing because you see it differently than the Standard Model particle. I look foreward to reading your paper requested from Research-Gate.

Best wishes, and good luck to us all.

Vladimir

Hi Vladimir,

I downloaded your papers. The United Dipole 1093 looks very interesting to me at a scan. I will read in detail in a bit. We have similar concepts cloaked in different words. I too believe the space between stars looks a dielectric material (I would call it a prism with a gradient index of refraction). And my hijacked graviton looks very much like a dipole antenna!

Yes, I hijacked the graviton from the standard model and gave it some new clothes..... The standard model was not putting it good use anyway :)

I consider a single graviton to be a photon with a single hop (wavelength) that hops back and forth between chunks of mass (Planck masses). I call it a photon because it obeys the Planck Einstein equation, but it is not really a photon because of its spin (it hops back and forth). The big deal is that this action gives it a mass (like photons trapped between mirrors).

I considered all this playing around kinda nuts, but I gave my new "hijacked" graviton a run at calculating the precession of Mercury....it worked! How can I say...the planet Vulcan lives!

I believe this may be a small "crack in the cosmic egg" that can lead to useful science and technology. I also believe that this result is not a contradiction GR, but I cannot prove this. So, I am calling on FQXi.org cosmologists, to take a look at this and see if gravity can be made understandable.

And your work Vladimir, was pioneering in this area.

Thanks,

Don Limuti

Hi Vladimir,

You realized my worst scientific nightmare! I DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN A WORLD WHERE EINSTEIN'S THEORIES DO NOT WORK!!!!!!!

In any case, your Essay is pleasant and provocative and gave me fun. Thus, I decided to give you the highest score. Good luck in the Contest, I hope that you will have a chance to read our Essay, where Einstein's Universe works in a good way!

Cheers, Ch.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2862

Dear Vladimir F. Tamari,

Thank you for the post on my essay...

Thank you for your blessings given to this essay so kindly. You are definitely qualified sir for the judgement.Thank you once again for your such nice complements.

Best Regards

=snp.gupta

Vladimir,

Yes the ether as discrete zones with local inertial states would work fine, as we've discussed before, and the 'waves must be fluctuations of 'something' even if not matter. Perhaps I rushed reading your description this year. What I suggest is that it's also the case that as the condensed matter (fermion pairs) always evident couples with light to modulate it to local c, then ether doesn't need to also do that job.

Sorry about the link. Sometimes the odd space kills them! I'll give you all 3;

Vimeo; Full.

Vimeo 100 sec glimpse

you tube 100 sec

All seem to be alive, at least for now! Do comment or question. The good news is I notice I hadn't applied your (top!) score so a hike is coming.

It's a beautiful universe! Very best.

Peter

Vladimir,

Sorry, working video links are here, without the http://.

Classic QM Full Video.

100second 'glimpse' on Vimeo

or 100sec. version on Youtube

tested and they all seem to work!

Thanks

Peter

Dear Mr. Tamari,

first of all I'd like to express my admiration of your magnificent work, and also to confirm my full consent with the basic thoughts stated in it. I'm so sorry I've noted too late your essay. Of course it deserves the highest score.

I wish you all the best and good luck in the contest,

Vladimir A. Rodin

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2752

Dear Tamari

I appreciate your essay. You spent a lot of effort to write it. 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

I like your pictures...and Einstein and Robeson and old man river. These are very good metaphors, but filling space with aether is really not the way out of the GR conundrum.

Although my aethertime theory also supposes a fundamental aether particle, it is necessary to set aside the notions of space and time as absolute. Instead, space and time simply emerge from the action of aether and so both matter and action have a phase as well as amplitude.

In a sense, cellular automata is the same as aether just as you argue. However, it is necessary for the CA to have phase as well as amplitude and so as long as you use qubits and not just bits, quantum CA will represent reality. Of course, a quantum CA will allow superposition and entanglement and so that approach will not be determinate.

Most CA models introduce noise as the chaos of large numbers of classical particles and actions. This chaos works well for gravity since gravity is biphotonic and therefore does not show superposition or interference under normal conditions. However, CA chaos does not represent quantum superposition or entanglement and CA needs qubits to show how matter bonds to other matter with phase coherence.

Instead of showing how a CA array transmits angular momentum, start with action as an axiom and from the action of a finite CA set, space and time emerge. In essence, is is from action that the order of space and time emerge and space and time do not exist as a place for action to occur.

Gravity bonds do not show phase coherence but charge bonds do. The CA with qubits is then just a different version of our quantum reality. As soon as the model fills space and time with qubits, the model inherits the same pathologies as the current spacetime paradigm.

If you model allows space and time to emerge from qubit action, it should end up the same as aethertime.

Hi Vladimir,

I disagree with almost everything you say, but I give you a high score for believing it.

After all, one can always be wrong.

Thanks for commenting in my forum. Expect a reply there.

All best,

Tom