Boris,

Thank you very Much! That gave me a 7, which logically gives me a lot more readers. I have to say I didn't enter this contest with any intentions, other than participating in the discussions. Which should be evident in my lack of editing. Suffice to say, I'm used to not being taken seriously, yet various people have liked the point, given my score and that I know a got a few down votes to lower it.

I really did like your essential argument and understand Decartes is a big influence, but it does fuzz the observation a bit, at least for me, not being as big a fan of him. Consequently I couldn't make it a quid pro quo and give you a ten, but considered it worth a nine.

Regards,

John

Thank you Joe for the appreciation of the New Cartesian Physics. That means I have to improve it.

Boris Dizhechko

Boris,

You are something of an artist. You paint with very grand ideas.

I see some similarity in your thinking and mine. The derivation you present in Section 3 is similar to the hypothesis that I presented in the last essay contest. I took the Lorentz Transform and added to it the term (v/c)i. That made their sum equal to Euler's Equation. Essentially, that produced the right triangle that you use.

In Sections 4 and 5, you present ideas that are similar to the form of the Maxwell Equations that I was taught.

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

    Gary, I thinkin in order to develop our ideas, which coincided, by the use of quaternions.

    New Cartesian Physics needs your support to develop further.

    I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

    Dear Boris,

    Sorry for my late reaction to your post on my essay.

    Descartes had the combination of mathematics, physics and philosophy, which in our present time is not much seen, listening to someone like him is so advisable.

    Also, his infinitesimal calculus gave a method to work with something that is difficult to understand in the "real" world.

    "Cogito ergo sum" is one of my favourite thoughts, only I have made a difference by accepting that "thinking" is a quality of Consciousness. Only the consciousness as I see it is NOT the result OF COMPLEXITY, but complexity is a result of consciousness, (as you may have read in my essay).

    Space and matter are both the same "emerging phenomena", at which I add also TIME.

    We are the same age Boris, I was born in July 1945 in Holland and live in France now for 20 years. I appreciated your essay highly and hope that will do the same to

    mine

    best regards

    Wilhelmus de Wilde

      Wilhelmus de Wilde, Descartes was determined to create a theory of everything. He said: "give me matter and I will build the whole world." The space had been the matter that moves. Would be great if this idea of the Great French philosopher, mathematician and physicist suddenly helped to overcome the current crisis in physics.

      I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

      Hi Boris,

      I agree with the idea that space is filled. The 'space-matter' is not all uniform and so needs differentiating into its different kinds of actualization. I think that saying space is 'matter' is potentially confusing because of the particular word chosen. The rest mass of the non atomic or sub atomic 'space-matter' is also a problem because space without sub atomic particles or objects is taken to be void of mass (rather than energy) and measurements are calibrated that way. So it doesn't fit the definition of matter, which is said to have rest mass. Volume is a little tricky too as we tend to think of that space that is not a part of the volume of an object as not being volume so the two, object and not object, can be separated. I just think another term might cause less problems.

      The idea of motion being circles is potentially a useful way of thinking about motion in the universe when there isn't propulsion taking an object out of the natural motion that would occur.

      I don't like the use of Einstein's Relativity to describe something quite different from relative perception happening deep within atoms. I don't think it applies. I also don't think that existence is at different times. So having time stopped in the centre of the atom isn't helpful in my opinion. As you will have read I consider foundational passage of time to be something very different from the signal transmission time considered by Einstein.

      Kind regards Georgina

        Dear Georgina , Time is a synonym for universal, total movement of space, which is matter. Your soup forever bubbling and boiling. We do not see the space that is in a state of physical vacuum, it is transparent as glass, but we see particles that have merged in the body. Corpuscles also created from space, which is matter and which rotates in the corpuscle. The rotation creates a centrifugal acceleration. Flux of a vector of this acceleration is mass. Multiply any mass on the gravitational constant and you get the value of the flow vector of the centrifugal acceleration. Multiply the mass by the square of the speed of light, and you will get the energy that is accumulated in the corpuscle in the movement of space, which is matter.

        I was also against Einstein, but then I realized that all the paradoxes arise from the inertial reference systems with infinitely long numerical axes. If you take the inertial frame with an infinitely small numeric axes, it turns out all good. Nothing wrong with that in them time stops, no, because they are infinitely small.

        I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

        Dear Dizhechko

        If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please?

        A couple of days in and semblance of my essay taking form, however the house bound inactivity was wearing me. I had just the remedy, so took off for a solo sail across the bay. In the lea of cove, I had underestimated the open water wind strengths. My sail area overpowered. Ordinarily I would have reduced sail, but this day I felt differently. My contemplations were on the forces of nature, and I was ventured seaward increasingly amongst them. As the wind and the waves rose, my boat came under strain, but I was exhilarated. All the while I considered, how might I communicate the role of natural forces in understanding of the world around us. For they are surely it's central theme.

        Beyond my essay's introduction, I place a microscope on the subjects of universal complexity and natural forces. I do so within context that clock operation is driven by Quantum Mechanical forces (atomic and photonic), while clocks also serve measure of General Relativity's effects (spacetime, time dilation). In this respect clocks can be said to possess a split personality, giving them the distinction that they are simultaneously a study in QM, while GR is a study of clocks. The situation stands whereby we have two fundamental theories of the world, but just one world. And we have a singular device which serves study of both those fundamental theories. Two fundamental theories, but one device? Please join me in questioning this circumstance?

        My essay goes on to identify natural forces in their universal roles, how they motivate the building of and maintaining complex universal structures and processes. When we look at how star fusion processes sit within a "narrow range of sensitivity" that stars are neither led to explode nor collapse under gravity. We think how lucky we are that the universe is just so. We can also count our lucky stars that the fusion process that marks the birth of a star, also leads to an eruption of photons from its surface. for if they didn't then nebula gas accumulation wouldn't be halted and the star would again be led to collapse.

        Could a natural organisation principle have been responsible for fine tuning universal systems? Faced with how lucky we appear to have been, shouldn't we consider this possibility?

        For our luck surely didnt run out there, for these photons stream down on earth, liquifying oceans which drive geochemical processes that we "life" are reliant upon. The Earth is made up of elements that possess the chemical potentials that life is entirely dependent upon. Those chemical potentials are not expressed in the absence of water solvency. So again, how amazingly fortunate we are that these chemical potentials exist in the first instance, and additionally within an environment of abundant water solvency such as Earth, able to express these potentials.

        My essay is an attempt at something audacious. It questions the fundamental nature of the interaction between space and matter Guv = Tuv, and hypothesizes the equality between space curvature and atomic forces is due to common process. Space gives up an energy potential in exchange for atomic forces in a conversion process, which drives atomic activity. And furthermore, that Baryons only exist because this energy potential of space exists, and is available for exploitation. Baryon characteristics and behaviours, complexity of structure and process might then be explained in terms of being evolved and optimised for this purpose and existence. Removing need for so many layers of extraordinary luck to eventuate our own existence. It attempts an interpretation of the above mentioned stellar processes within these terms, but also extends much further. It shines a light on molecular structure that binds matter together, as potentially being an evolved agency that enhances rigidity and therefor persistence of universal system. We then turn a questioning mind towards Earths unlikely geochemical processes, (for which we living things owe so much) and look at its central theme and propensity for molecular rock forming processes. The existence of chemical potentials and their diverse range of molecular bond forming activities? The abundance of water solvent on Earth, for which many geochemical rock forming processes could not be expressed without? The question of a watery Earth? is then implicated as being part of an evolved system that arose for purpose and reason, alongside the same reason and purpose that molecular bonds and chemical process arose.

        By identifying process whereby atomic forces draw a potential from space, we have identified means for their perpetual action, and their ability to deliver perpetual work. Forces drive clocks and clock activity is shown by GR to dilate. My essay details the principle of force dilation and applies it to a universal mystery. My essay raises the possibility, that nature in possession of a natural energy potential, will spontaneously generate a circumstance of Darwinian emergence. It did so on Earth, and perhaps it did so within a wider scope. We learnt how biology generates intricate structure and complexity, and now we learn how it might apply for intricate structure and complexity within universal physical systems.

        To steal a phrase from my essay "A world product of evolved optimization".

        Best of luck for the conclusion of the contest

        Kind regards

        Steven Andresen

        Darwinian Universal Fundamental Origin

          Dear Dizhechko;

          I have read your essay on the New Cartesian Physics. I agree with you that modern physics is based on mathematical solutions to hypothesis that lead to results that could be interpreted in many ways. And it is true that those hypotheis lack foundation in reality.

          Your proposal has been a litle bit dificult for me to grasp; I hope we could discuss it further.

          Best wishes;

          Diogenes

          Dear Stephen Anderson, your comment is similar to a work of art. You write like Shakespeare.

          I answer briefly on three points, as they are seen in New Cartesian Physics.

          1. The Sun thermonuclear reactions are intermediate reactions. There stands out energy of rotation of the solar system.

          2. The interaction no between space and matter, so as space is matter.

          3. The possibility of evolved optimization inherent in the structure of physical space

          I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

          Thanks Dizhechko for your kind comments.

          Descartes dualism concerned the mind/soul/ghost vs.matter/machine. If we tie matter to space how does this resolve the mind/soul/ghost relation? I think you offer very interesting ideas and rate your effort well. I am glad you find solace in your theories and get rewards from them after living such a long life during an amazing period of human history.

          Thanks again,

          Jack

            Thank you, Jack, for your kind words. my dream came true in the form of a New Cartesian Physics . I'm here to convince everyone to use the principle of identity of space and matter to develop a theory of everything.

            Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

            Dear Boris,

            Very strong and deep ideas for overcoming the crisis of understanding in fundamental science. Yes, indeed today in science a neo-Cartesian revolution is needed to create new philosophical bases of knowledge.   I understand it as the Ontological revolution. Especially important is the competition of ideas in cosmology . Pavel Florensky made a good conclusion, which is topical for physicists and mathematicians: "Мы повторяем: миропонимание -- пространствопонимание./ We repeat: world understanding is spaceunderstanding." ... Physicists and poets should have a single picture of the Universum as an holistic generating process, filled with the meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E. Husserl).

            Best regards,

            Vladimir

              Yes, Vladimir, for a long time believed that the Foundation for fundamental theories is matter, a mandatory attribute which was mass. Once there was a formula of mass - energy equivalence, which has revolutionized the field of high energy about the matter rarely began to remember and physics has lost the Foundation. Often began to use the assertion that matter exists in space and in time , which justifies the concept of space-time. The principle of identity of space and matter Descartes negate such an equalization of these two concepts and allows us to speak about what the space is moving. Time is a synonym for universal total movement.

              Dear Boris,

              Thanks for appreciating my essay The Mysterious "Fundamental" ( https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2998 )

              As suggested by you I have tried to get familiar with the New Cartesian Physics. I am impressed with the explanation about SPACE and TIME.

              Whether this explanation about the Nature becomes THE Fundamental theory, or gets treated as one of the explanation, is ultimately limited to perception, imagination and the state of knowledge of the OBSERVER / Human species in this case. The current state of knowledge, we human possess, is lacking in many ways which I have tried to delve in my essay.

              Best Wishes.

              Brajesh Mishra

              Yes it is obvious as you say --- too much of modern physics is based on "over the top" maths, and too many solutions are just mathematical results not physics interpretations. I have to say I can see many common threads and ideas with Edwin's essay. Also the basis of modern physics isn't based on a good philosophical foundation so I can see where you are coming from in your essay.

              Impressive results I will be reading your essay again and again over the next few weeks to understand it totally.

              I hope you do very well in the competition a great essay. Yours Harri. I have rated it highly.

              If you have time have a look at my essay https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3133

              Yours Harri

                Dear Jouko Tiainen Harri, the speed of light as the imaginary unit is very interesting, I bet 10. But I think you don't need to associate a complex number with the geometry of Minkowski is interesting only from an analytical point of view, but not physical. In New Cartesian Physics is the imaginary unit used as an operator of rotation of the radius vector 90 degrees, the square of the imaginary unit turns the radius-vector by 180 degrees. Thus, where the formula is the imaginary unit, we observe a rotation.

                New Cartesian Physics needs your support to develop further. Visit my page and give your assessment there.

                I hope that you are interested in her ideas.

                FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

                I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

                Hello Boris,

                I enjoyed your comment to the effect that we 'need to break away from real life and go into a virtual world which allows everyone to create their fantasies on the subject of modern physics.' Many have done to so, to the effect of making the discipline of physics much less disciplined.

                I concur with you that 'the Foundation of physics was originally based upon (the search for) truth, entirely covering the whole real world" The apparent absence of absolute truth should not deter us from seeking relative truth when to do so benefits mankind.

                The fragmentation of physics and mathematics are overriding and undermining any prospects of achieving the harmonic integration of systems.

                I suspect that Rene Descartes' perceptions of physics were last time that the discipline has been truly disciplined. Looking backwards, perhaps that is the place from which we should begin again to search for new directions.

                Concerning your statement that the 'Pressure of [vacuum in] space is the cause of all movements occurring in the real world'; in matter we find an exhibition of defiance against vacuum (the predominant constituent of the cosmos), the exception that proves the rule. What is the rule? The rule is that vacuum abhors nature, and flows to fill its absence. We are players in a kind of push-me-pull-you game that we misinterpret from the earth as a gravitational 'pull' but which when seen from outer space would be recognizable as a 'push'.

                Keep sharpening your focus and your pencils I believe that you are going down the right road. itsinmybook.com

                Thank you and best wishes Boris,

                Gary

                  Thank you Gary for your kind words. You great entered the New Cartesian Physics in his scientific picture of the world.

                  Boris