Title: Consciousness is fundamental Geometry Of Dimensions, GOD by sridattadev kancharla

Dear sridattadev kancharla.

You wrote: "In the most abstract sense the universe is purely mathematical."

My research has concluded that Nature must have devised the only permanent real structure of the Universe obtainable for the real Universe existed for millions of years before man and his finite complex informational systems ever appeared on earth. The real physical Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Exactly Correct Dear Sri Dattadev!

.......... I request you have a look into Dynamic Universe Model also.... I highly appreciate your essay and hope for reciprocity. and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information........

.... Now this time....

Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.

In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from "http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ "

I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied

I request you please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :

-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 GR on any condition

-No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models

-No many mini Bigbangs

-No Missing Mass / Dark matter

-No Dark energy

-No Bigbang generated CMB detected

-No Multi-verses

Here:

-Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies

-Newton's Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way

-All bodies dynamically moving

-All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium

-Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe

-Single Universe no baby universes

-Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only

-Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..

-UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass

-Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step

-Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering

-21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet

-Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy

-Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.

- Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true....Have a look at

http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.html

Best

=snp

Dear Fellow Essayists

This will be my final plea for fair treatment.,

Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Only the truth can set you free.

Joe Fisher, Realist

I have to give you partial credit Sridattadev...

I found the fact you put pseudo-Math up front a bit disturbing, and I think the essay overall would have gone over better if you kept the equations til the end. I also know that not all expressions that appear pseudo-mathematical are wrong. In an essay from a few years back; Leo KoGuan put I-Ching characters in the middle of a mathematical expression and it made me laugh. But I later learned that Leibniz had written long ago that the I-Ching trigrams could be interpreted as binary numbers, which have great utility. So it wasn't entirely artificial.

Likewise one can string together expressions like knowledge x experience = wisdom, which reflect a basic truth so they actually do make sense. And furthermore; one can talk about mathematical expressions having a mood or temperament, just as there are moods for each mode of the musical scale, or equivalently the thaats in the various Ragas of Indian music. I have spoken before about the octonion multiplication following a sequence of moods spelling out "One, open, as multiplicity and formless nothingness, finds peace in true relation, and knows all as self." So I have some sympathy for your endeavors to put formulas for enlightenment into equation form.

You are certainly attempting to address the question of what is fundamental, in most of your essay, though your point is far afield of the subject of Physics. I also like some of your creative acronyms. But it is indeed a stretch to claim solving the Riemann hypothesis. I saw a nice lecture by Carlos Castro Perelman at FFP15, and he has a shot. At least he has a handle on the problem, where you clearly do not. But I applaud your attempts anyway, because you managed to sneak some wisdom in with the satire on Math in Physics.

All the Best,

Jonathan

I want to add this...

I read and rated your essay partly because I have enjoyed your writing before, Sridattadev, and I found it at the very bottom of the ratings. My comments above tell why I could not give you a higher score, but I also wanted to say that I share in your view that consciousness is too often forgotten as a fundamental, or has been shorted in our estimations within the Physics community. As a spiritual attribute it is one third of the godhead, along with creativity and being. And presenting some of the same ideas in terms of constructivist Math would make your point clear without raising objections.

So you have something wise to share, which you should not lose sight of regardless of how your work is treated by the FQXi community. You are perhaps a bit too radical in how you get your point across, but you do have a useful and helpful message to share. I think with this essay; I think your poor acceptance reflects a wrong choice of the order to present your ideas. Many people use a three strike rule, in academic review, which means that after seeing three fatal flaws they stop reading - and they enumerate the problems if they are kind. But seeing that even Georgina stopped before the end; I felt obligated to finish reading, and I'm glad I did.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Sridattadev -

Alas, I am unable to follow the math and detangle the humor, the logic and the mysticism in your essay. That said, I agree that there must be some form of universal consciousness (a G.O.D.) operating to initiate and guide the cosmos along the remarkable trajectory in which we find ourselves. Whether that is a subtle "Geometry of Dimensions" or a "Good Old Divinity" is difficult to know - and perhaps they are the same thing.

Congratulations on your effort!

-George Gantz

That is beautiful!

Warm regards, JJD

Srittadev,

I find your rotation on the z axis very incisive. As an additional rotation with the y axes it can unlock the mysterious non integer spins! 100 Sec Video Classic QM inc non-integer spin Also Poincare derived the 4 state sphere in the video, central to my essay deriving classical QM!

I also always enjoy your message. I scored some around yours leaving it adrift at the foot so I'll make due amends now for some important insights.

Very Best

Peter