REALITY AM NOT ROCKET SCIENCE by Joe Fisher

Dear Joe,

I read your essay, but I am afraid that I don't understand your non-standard use of the word "am". You are clearly an English speaker, so that this is not just bad English. As you know, "am" is the first-person conjugation of the verb "to be" ("I am"), yet you repeatedly use it in the 3rd person.

Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am". Do you go further into solipsism, that everything you perceive is really just in your mind?

You say that you are a realist. You might be interested in reading my essay, "Fundamental Waves and the Reunification of Physics", in which I propose that a set of slight modifications from classical physics can give rise to a consistent unified realistic physical picture on all scales. There are no point particles or point gravitational singularities; abstract spacetime and Hilbert space are mathematical artifacts. Electrons are distributed wave packets. Space and time are separate, and are defined by frequency and wavelength of these real waves, which can shift in a gravitational potential. There are no extra dimensions.

Alan Kadin

What about vibration? Light came second. Know about the Memra? Am sure, vibration. Reality is no-thing. Some-thing was created by no-thing.Poor Aristoteles fooled modern science. Socrates misguided the youth to think freely.

Hi Joe,

well done for fleshing out your ideas. You are onto something when you describe the appearance of the seen. However I do not agree with the model you have come up with. I know you regard your idea as reality and not a model but nevertheless that is what you have created. It would be good if you could add some background knowledge about how the sense of vision works to your self taught intuitions. It is important because you talk about verifying your claim through looking and seeing.

You make assumptions that include nature devising and designing which implies purpose rather than indifferent physical processese. When you say "nature must have..." It isn't necessarily so but an opinion, which could be argued.

I was surprised when you mentioned the teachings of Rabbis as this is something I have not come across you talking about on the FQXi blog and forum pages. Again I think you are onto something when you mention "that an invisible spirit inspired visible light", which is an idea I can compare to a medium that hosts the light. So for example the bending of light rays where that medium is affected by the presence of a large mass.I do not expect your agreement I am just pointing out those places where I think you have a useful point, even if not expressed in a way that I consider technically correct.

The use of "am" throughout your presentation,even though you have explained its reason, is annoying to me and I think does not help the presentation overall.

Kind regards Georgina

Dear Mr. Fisher,

Sorry to say, but I cannot make neither head nor tail of your essay.

Best

a.l.

Joe, if you ask a believer: "Where is your God?" he will answer: "In heaven". Look at the sky and see a plane. If you climb up, you will again see the plane. Man sees everything as a plane and just moving a lot, he begins to understand the world. But the man moves not only physically but also mentally. And here he starts to create fantasies that are called Sciences.

Joe, last time I appreciated your essay and now I see that I understand you, but I do not see from you the opposite reaction. How do you feel about the fact that space is matter?

Joe,

It seems most dismiss your ideas as all crazy, so lets have a look and form a view of who it is without vision; I suggest assumptions that it's you may prove flawed;

Scientists write; "..excruciatingly complex articles that are essentially about visible finite matter that was always somehow completely surrounded on all sides by invisible space."

"..humanly contrived complex finite abstract misinformation purportedly suggesting that there are different kinds of abstract and generic finite dimensions.

"..nothing exploded in a big bang singularity, and a zero sized universe."

"Atoms are not mostly empty space because there is no such thing as purely empty space"

"modern physicists got it completely wrong by actively postulating incoherent complex abstract information about the invisible big-bang creation,"

"A team of scientists was able to "split" an atom into its two possible spin states, up and down, and measure the difference between them even after the atom resumed the properties of a single state. Yeah, right."

Hmmm. What was it that seems 'crazy' there?

Let's have an analogy you may argue with if you wish but many may at least see. Absolutely ALL the so called 'matter' we 'see' had a surface of free fermions ('electrons') which interact with and dictate characteristics of all 'EM radiation' (light) whether thought of going 'in' or 'out'. Everything is indeed then 'surface'.

Now thinking hard about it I've found that can start to make more coherent sense of much inconsistent physics!

Best

Peter

Joe, I agree with you that the man sees only the endless surface. Everything else is a result of its motion, the impressions which are etched in the brain.

With respect, Boris Dizhechko

Joe,

Thank for your reaction on my essay.

I can agree with your "one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension" it has direct lines of connection with the mergence out of the Planck Area of what I call "REALITY LOOPS".An infinite amount of "Realities" is emerging from ONE SINGLE infinite dimension, in my perception a "dimension" that we cannot understand. The what you call "NON SURFACE LIGHT" can be seen as what I am calling "CONSCIOUSNESS"

Wilhelmus de Wilde

Good idea, Joe, we call the space as infinite surface. In mathematics, it is acceptable if it produces New knowledge.

Last competition I was warned that one should not spend time with you. You are not able to understand others and do not give them grades. I'm waiting for you to refute it. Boris Dizhechko

Joe, I would argue that what you call endless surface is a matter. However, no one believes me and it makes me sad.

Joe, come into my essays and put a score, then I'll put you. I don't want to sound like the last contest, when I gave you 10 and you give me nothing or 1. I'm going to say everywhere that is Joe Fisher, who claims that the man sees only the endless surface. You say that there is a mister Dizhechko, who argues that the endless surface is a matter.

Sincerely, Boris Dicecco

Hi Joe Fisher

"one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension" is nice idea dear Joe Fisher... .......... very nice idea.... I highly appreciate your essay and 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

I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information........

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

Best

=snp