Is Mathematics Fundamental? by Ajay Pokhrel

Dear Ajay Pokhrel,

Nature produced one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single dimension that am always illuminated by mostly finite non-surface light millions of years before humanly contrived finite mathematical information ever became evident on earth.

Joe Fisher, Realist.

Dear Ajay,

I liked your Essay. You have pretty mature way of arguing about your point of view. I have also submitted my Essay in this context - wherein I have concluded Nature is too complex- and we human have a long way to go.

with regards

Brajesh Mishra

Dear Ajay,

I think FQXi.org might be trying to find out if there could be a Natural fundamental. I am surprised that so many of the contest's entrants do not appear to know what am fundamental to science, or mathematics, or quantum histrionics.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Ajay,

In your approach, I miss the efforts of Garrett Birkhoff and John von Neumann to establish a fundament that emerges into a suitable modeling platform. In their 1936 paper, they introduced a relational structure that they called quantum logic and that mathematicians call an orthomodular lattice. It automatically emerges into a separable Hilbert space, which also introduces a selected set of number systems into the modeling platform. Hilbert spaces can only cope with division rings and separable Hilbert spaces can store discrete values but no continuums. Each infinite dimensional separable Hilbert space owns a unique non-separable Hilbert space that embeds its separable partner. In this way, the structure and the functionality of the platform grow in a restricted way. After a few steps a very powerful and flexible modeling platform evolves. This model acts as a repository for dynamic geometric data that fit in quaternionic eigenvalues of dedicated operators. The non-separable part of the model can archive continuums that are defined by quaternionic functions.

In other words, the foundation that was discovered by Birkhoff and von Neumann delivers a base model that can offer the basement of well-founded theories and that puts restrictions on the dimensions which universe can claim.

Multiple Hilbert spaces can share the same underlying vector space and form a set of platforms that float on a background platform. On those platforms can live objects that hop around in a stochastic hopping path. This adds dynamics to the model.

The orthomodular lattice acts like a seed from which a certain kind of plant grows. Here the seed turns into the physical reality that we perceive.

The Wikiversity Hilbert Book Model Project investigates this approach.

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Hilbert_Book_Model_

Project

http://vixra.org/author/j_a_j_van_leunen contains documents that treat some highlights of the project.

Hello Ajay,

This is an excellent effort on your part. You argue your point very well.

While I do not think that Math is fundamental, many respected people do. They think of it as existing in the Platonic realm. I will concede that I think Math is the fundamental language of the universe. I also think that we will eventually have a one-to-one correspondence between Physics and Math.

Your youthful enthusiasm shines through much of your essay. Well done and good luck with your continued studies.

Best Regards,

Gary Simpson

Dear Ajay Pokhrel,

a very good work, thank you for sharing, it was pleasurable to read - congratulations also being so young and yet insightful.

I'll be now a little provocative. You write that

> Mathematics聽cannot聽be聽derived聽from聽anything

but we learn mathematics through natural language (and gestures and so on), so couldn't it be this praxis even more fundamental?

Bests and good luck!

Francesco D'Isa

Chi Ajay Pokhrel...

You discussed nicely... "I am going to discuss how our whole universe (Or multiverse), from tiny atoms to huge galaxies, depends on mathematics and numbers for its foundation and operation." Now try these concepts of Dynamic Universe Model also.... Try to understand it ask me questions, I will guide you...dear Ajay Pokhrel, best wishes for your theory.....

............. very nice essay.... I highly appreciate your essay and hope for reciprocity ....You may 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 Ajay,

I've read with interest your Essay. I do understand that there is a strong consensus around the fact the mathematics is fundamental, but I've missed if this is because you can't do without to handle physics, or if it is believed to express some "intrinsic" property of Nature. If you refer to the second, I would suggest to reconsider this position. If you take for instance the work of D'Ariano (see just to make an example: http://www.qubit.it/research/publications/quant-ph0612162.pdf but you may find many other references), mathematical structure is obtained as a consequence of information-related principles, which is a very different - and alternative - vision.

Anyway, congratulations for your work.

E.

I understand your point, mine is that also mathematics has a relational nature, as I've written in my text. All the best, I enjoyed reading you!

Francesco

Hi Ajay,

I would say that: Mathematical patterns exist and we discover them via language and a specialized symbolism. And they could be fundamental, and incomplete.

This is just a quibble. Your essay is super!

Do visit the essay of George Gantz and start a conversation with him. Do not be put off by the title of his essay. Read it, particularly the mathematics part.

You have a great future.

All the best,

Don Limuti

PS I believe calculus has been used beyond its usefulness. If interested see my website: digitalwavetheory.com

Hi Ajay

For a high school student your work is very well written and structured so that it is easy to understand.

I like how you connect your ideas and concepts. Though I think language itself is more fundamental than maths, it was an enjoyable read.

If maths is all then how do "numbers" become "flesh and blood" and the world we comprehend around, about and is us; and also how do you connect the purely maths with the purely physical. Maths has nothing that appears physical involved in it's construction yet it claims to be able to describe our reality.

Have you thought how a world without number or numbers would appear and then compare that with our world -- then you could really show if our world is fundamentally maths or not!