FOUNDATIONAL QUANTUM REALITY LOOPS by Wilhelmus de Wilde

Wilhe;mus, your effort has the rare originality of fresh approach. It involves depth in understanding and comprehension of entity called CONSCIOUSNES. I find lot of confusion in the best of top ranking essays that it is being confind to human awareness only. It is in my and your opinion an rntity that exists for ever. In fact the Universe of ours is also ITS brain child if i digress to claim. Our understading of issues differ in words because of our respective cultural background. One need to rise above the self and take a look at one's TRUESELF! How many of us can try such introspection, remains the big Question!

I personlly rate your Essay as 9 out of 10 but shall put my ratings towrads the end of the competition, if you are not in a hurry about it.

Wilhelmus,your taking a Planck area as a unit to emerge out the 4 dimensional space time reality intrinsicaaly assumes the correctness of founding aspect of QM THEORY THRUGH the uncertainity equivalene. QUANTUM LOOPS ARE BOUND to emerge. Can you digress for me where you introduce CONSCIUOSNESS as an entity to descibe reality or lack of it! I am naive to request you to explain in less abstract manner. that will help provide insight to our understanding of consciousness. I too believe consciousness is tied to the origin of the Universe itself, as it is a pre-existence ever present entitity. Universes can emerge out of it through its cosmic nature!

Hi Wilhelmus de Wilde

You are wonderfully connecting the singularity of Plank area with consciousness of agent, your words "The incomplete consciousness of an agent in his specific emerging reality is a contribution to the Completeness of Total Consciousness. Emergent phenomena are ILLUSIONS originating from a space and timeless Point : a NOTHING" are really indicative of your superb thinking dear Wilhelmus de Wilde. As you are an independent researcher, you can more freely express your ideas. Probably I am also doing the same.... I highly appreciate your essay and hope for reciprocity.

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

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

Dear Fellow Essayists

This will be my final plea for fair treatment.,

FQXI is clearly seeking to find out if there is a fundamental REALITY.

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 must consist 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

Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde

Thank you for your nice appreciation....

.............Your comments......

I agree with all the points beginning with NO etc. Why ? Because I think that ALL of them were emergent phenomena in a past that applies to the emergent reality of an alo emergent agent, THEY ARE JUST ONE ILLUSION OF AN INFINITY NUMBER OF REALITY LOOPS. It is the result of time-interperetation of our limited consciousness. That is also the reason that our universe is looking ultimate fine-tuned. It is not useful to create a reality that is not perceived by an agent (in our case the agent is a human being).

..............Reply.......

Yes correct, the agent who understands all these is agent....

.............Your words.......

Your perception of reality is as you say a "singularity free tensor based math model".

I can fully agree with that because any singularity will be behind the Planck area, so as an "entity" not part of emerging reality. The "math" part is the part of "thinking" the language of consciousness. I cannot follow you in the math part because mathematics are not my strongest point, but I assume that you will be right.

...............Reply.......

Yes Math part is consciousness....

.............Your words.......

Furthermore my perception is that in your own emergent unique reality this is YOUR finetuned explanation which is TRUE for you. It is YOUR "quantum reality loop". In middle ages there was no quantum mechanics and people had their TRUTH. In a million years when there are conscious agents that have the availability of other different senses and techniques in their OWN LOOP (where our history is placed in) will smile about us and our efforts. .

..............Reply.......

Yes, they are quantum reality loops, we may not wait million years, but 400 or 500 years will be sufficient, so much software development is going on you see...

.............Your words.......

But we are both sharing on our Subjective Simultaneity Sphere a lot of the same incoming data. I cannot but agree with the trgee cases you indicated. .

..............Reply.......

Thank you so much...

.............Your words.......

For ALL the questions that you are answering by DUM, you know already my answers, we are both right....

I thank you for a well founded theory, that is is a valuable contribution to our thinking. .

..............Reply.......

Thank you once again

.............Your words.......

I esteemed you essay high with a rating and hope that you will do so also with mine.

..............Reply.......

I am just doing the same for your esteemed essay.... Highest appreciation i am doing...

Best regards

=snp

Cool :)

Incompleteness of observations is a good term, pointing not to incomplete superposition, but an incomplete 'collapse'? It again Points to some selection, due to the frame the event interacts with, like some 'meaning'...

I like 'incompleteness of observations', because it put the focus in 'reality' as we call it.

A conscious agent is an agent that is aware of his "I AM", not just a bundle of

information available for algorithms. - again a truth. But this we cannot proove, too bad.

... in the so called space-time, filled with subjective simultaneity spheres there is NO absolute simultaneity. - We usually call this moment for NOW, but that NOW has problems, because it is eg an emptyness, something that is 'nothing' but also like a self-energy that oscillate back and fro? A bit like a black hole, maybe?

I tried to make you see how we can 'fix' time by putting it on a space scale, I Think it is much what you describe too. Time is seen as a parameter, no particle directly describes time, except that order formed in a space-scale, but with its own 'dimension' still. It is a bit odd, isn't it?

You also end up with the quality as in HOW and WHY, the 'unwanted' questions... It deserve a deeper study why it is so.

To THINK and to Dream have many similarities, both make the body inactive... and our actions are the 'real I'.

This implicates that the nature of particle/wave is most likely undefined until a conscious measurement is made. - like an error correction, also including memory?

Fig. 1: Sky and Water I. - describes a compressional force, like in the 'compactification' that preceedes the 'lifting' I talk of :)

Your Planck Area in fig 2 a. is like a BEC, very compressed, but even there are 'structures' of compressed Waves (solitons) seen... What is the limits of the Planck Area? You know, not even the magnetic monopole is just as one minute Point, it is rather like a superposition where the dipoles cannot be differed from each others, an end of a loop and a new beginning.

Many good Points here, Congrats.

Wilhelm, our essays are walking in parallel but these are not in the big race in this competition. We are for participation and not for prize. If money comes it will go fast too. For walkers it is best to keep our health together with our mind and body and use our respective spirit of CONSCIOUSNESS together all the way together, an ultimate in life!

Narendra

Dear Wilhelmus

I am glad that you have included backward causation in your picture, and that you see space and time as emergent. I agree. How do you see the role of symmetry at a fundamental level? Is it emergent? Symmetry of space and time means that the laws of physics are unchanging over space and time. If that were not the case it would be hard to do science. Does this mean that symmetry must be fundamental?

Dear Philip,

Your question "Symmetry of space and time means that the laws of physics are unchanging over space and time. If that were not the case it would be hard to do science. Does this mean that symmetry must be fundamental?聽" is linked to the approach you have in your essay.

"symmetry is agebraic" you say, so it is part of a "language" that is an intermediate between thinking and reality (both emerging phenomena). In my approach fine-tuning is an essential result of the Reality Loop the agent is part of. (if its was not fine-tuned the agent would be a different agent in a different reality loop. One of the languages agents are using to explain this fine-tuned reality is emerging algebra (symmetry).

You argue "I expect to find this symmetry in a pre-geometric meta-law that transcends spacetime,taking a purely algebraic form, only beyond that point will it be emergent, rising from immutable relationships between systems of information." Indeed in this approach symmetry transcends space-time because space and time are (dimensional) restrictions (emerging from total simultaneity), and algebra/symmetry/thinking are not limited by these restrictions because they are the "cause" through consciousness of reality. The what you are calling "immutable relationships between systems of information" is maybe too strictly bound to our emerging reality. My approach places the "rising" outside our reality, so even more foundational.

"If those leaders say that symmetry is unimportant because it is emergent or that geometry is more fundamental than algebra, other possibilities may be neglected."

Fully agreed, every emerging phenomenon is essential in a specific reality. Geometry is a description methodology, to be compared to filling in data in a computer, it is the software (thinking) that is concluding.

Thank you for your attention Philip and

Best regards

Wilhelmus

Wilhelmus, your approach has freshness but you are not driving full strength from total or may i call Uinversal or cosmic consciousness. Just widen the scope of your theory towards totality of physical phenomena and not confined to few explanations and forget about the agreement with facts as discovered experimentally. I have seen repetition of experiments resulting in opposing interpretations. The reason lies with how we postulate the basic tenents in a theory. Let me cite an experience about a theory we used widely to reproduce the excitation functions of nuclear reactions, like inelastic scattering. We could successfully assign spin /parity to excited states relative to the ground state known values successfully. The propounder of the theory was Herman Feshbach of MIT. He expressed surprise that we could utilise his imperfect theory so very well. As excitation fuctions were reproduced well only when the valus saturated but not at lower energies of excitation where the predictions were off by a huge margin. This led another theoretician to attribute the lower rising part of excitation function to be affected by level width fluctautions due to comp! We then found that the entire compound nucleus formation as an intermediate state was indeed causing such discrepencies! Such is the beauty of eperiment affecting improvement in the theorrtical approach through refining iniyial postulates!! Hurrey hurrey

Wilhelmus,

No reasonable perception of the universe can be discarded by a thinking person. I never considered that my perception is folded into the big bang image of figure 2b, but what if I don't subscribe to the big bang and what about those who posit a big bang inversion. I suppose all are part of an infinity of realities, a tiny part of total consciousness.

None of us know the true fundamental, but yours is a fascinating addition. Each of our concepts contributes to the miasma of reality loops, some more esoteric than others.

Good luck.

Jim HOover

Wilhelmus

SUCH dishonest scoring is imposed on all of us. I am visiting a relative at the hospital and will get back to you.

Jim

Wilhelmus,

Having been a victim of a 1 and a 2 score already w/o comments, I keep track of my own scoring. I am now checking my spreadsheet and find that I scored you on 2/7 with a 7.

Regards,

Jim Hoover

Hi Wilhelmus,

We both find the Planck units fundamental. You favor the Planck area, I favor the Planck mass.

We both like and reference the work of Roger Penrose.

We both feel that current trends in mainstream physics are goofy.

We both believe that emergent phenomena are illusions, which are sometimes annoyingly persistent.

I think I got that right. So, it feels like I will be voting for myself :)

Don Limuti

Dear Wilhelmus,

Pleasant and interesting work, despite a bit speculative and provocative. I appreciate that you think that the Plank area is fundamental. I surely agree with this point. In fact, considering the the Plank area as being a fundamental unit permitting to emerge from the space-time is in agreement with my recent studies on black holes. But in my approach the spatial volume is not constant. It is energy-dependent instead.

I have a question: Is there room for the Anthropic Principle in your Reality Loops approach?

In any case, your Essay was a nice reading. It deserves my highest score. Congrats and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.