Gravity is not fundamental; or is it? by Jonathan J. Dickau

Thank-you Jonathan,

I did not know that. But ironically I spent a dozen years from my early 20's handling 300# blocks of ice and lesser chops with a set of tongs. I preferred a strap handle where others liked a two handle. ("There's no such thing as cold. Cold is the absence of heat.")

I think Tom's point is interesting also. And its the interplay of symmetry and asymmetry that becomes fascinating, like you spoke about of teaching methods. I am reconciled to my naivete, and know at times I can't help but be a pest. I came too late to the party of what mathematics really is to attempt a comprehensive study, comprehension is my goal. One thing for certain is that symmetry is essential to achieving empirical measurement, but that also is a mathematical requirement more than a physical absolute. Epistemology, I guess. Its the actual math that for me is the unnecessarily complicated, mindless chore unless I can intuitively see a reason for chasing it down. And even then I have a bear of a time remembering the symbolic meaning of function. I think it goes back to working nights in high school and having to cover for my folks when a creditor would call who was my algebra teacher's spouse. But I do enjoy how much enjoyment you all show in the endeavor, and have managed to learn some of real value. And I get a good laugh at my audacity at times trying to figure out what people are talking about. What I like is that Physics is about that which is physical and trying to puzzle what is.

All the best. jrc

Hi Jonathan,

Another good essay and interesting thesis. I also read your Gravity paper. Of course all very speculative but speculation is essential to find the way round present barriers to understanding (your; 'Impasse'). John Bell said of QM it would take an 'astonishing leap of imagination.. which would amaze'.

Actually I do hope you'll get to my essay (and Declan Traill's short code & plot) as after trying many such leaps, amazingly one seems to have worked! And yes, it came from a more complex partial symmetry of momentum on a condensed electron than the imaginary 'spin up/down' Bohr allowed for.

You identified; 'Condensation is a natural consequence of thermodynamic cooling that also arises in the context of emergent gravity theories'. Yet for Higgs and 'pair production' it seems to relate more to an additional macro spin state in the dark energy or 'sub matter condensate' whatever that is (smaller fractal spins?). I don't think the thermodynamic view has born fruit (or maybe now will), have you seen advances?

But I vote Yes & No, Gravity is a fundamental effect but as a consequence of the process condensing matter, which just any relative 'motion' seems to do. Then isn't the real question; what is the Mandelbrot set, and matter, 'made of'?

Very nice job & best of luck.

Peter

Respected Prof Jonathan J. Dickau

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

I posted the revised abstract on Jan 2, I was travelling and I posted an earlier essay by mistake. I was in Bhilai for few days then. I know FQXi will not change the essay

.....May please see... sorry for the error....

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:58 GMT

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

I am sorry to disappoint, Satyavarapu...

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

No disappointment sir, I am trying to understand your nice observations about this model, it is a learning for me....

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

There is some value to various ideas featured in this essay, but it is full of basic errors that seem to reflect a fundamental misunderstanding. Perhaps you have under-estimated the depth of the problem, or perhaps you have some misconceptions about what the endeavor of Physics should be. However; if I was sent this paper as a reviewer for any of the journals where I have been a referee, I would have to say it has some flaws too deep to fix. Academic reviewers often use a three strike rule, where once they see 3 major flaws they will stop reading and if they are kind, they will enumerate those errors.

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

I want to learn the basic errors in this model, you will be pointing out....

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

I read the whole paper, however. So I'll start with the color vs frequency issue; do you realize that blue has a higher frequency than red? In several places; you appear to be saying the opposite. I think you mean that wavelength increases are a red shift while decreasing wavelengths indicate a blue shift. I agree, by the way, that evidence for blue-shifted galaxies is often ignored, and people have the false impression that everything in the cosmos is red-shifted. ..............Reply.......

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:58 GMT

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

At the 2nd Crisis in Cosmology conference, back in '08; more than one speaker cited blue shift evidence in their talk.

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

Some references please

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

I also agree with your basic premise that gravity can be treated as a kind of frequency shifting phenomenon. There have been a handful of serious academic papers about this, and it is an interesting topic to explore. Unfortunately; a much deeper understanding of things like virtual particles and photons, wave-particle duality, energy of motion, deBroglie wavelength, and so on, is required for a factual treatment of this subject. You come up short.

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

May please see my paper on Nucleosynthesis

https://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.com/p/10-feb-201-6-all-my-published-papers.html

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

I think you got lucky, because I already rated this paper a few days ago, and I was likely more generous than I would be today. Even with some of the deficiencies; it would not be so bad except for the exaggerated claims. But the fact you make such bold promises without a firm basis is offensive.

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

Thank you very much, I am sorry for the mistake done in a hurried way.... I did not intend the post wrong paper...

I did not rate your essay yet, I did not give less than 10 to any one or I refrain rating that essay...

Hope you will read the posting on Jan 2nd.

Hope you will point out some more mistakes... So that I will correct my self...

Thank you for the valuable time you spent on my paper and work...

Thank you for the blessings...

Best Reards

=snp

Jonathan Dickau

I forgot to ask what you mean by 'pedigree', as you said on my page. (English is not my normal language.)

Regards from ____________ John-Erik Persson

Jonathan Dikau

Thanks for clearifications.

I have proved why Michelson and Morley's tests and stellar aberration cannot give any indications regarding the ether wind. You can see this also at my blog page at:

http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/site/

Regards from _______________ John-Erik Persson

Jonathan

See My blog

John-Erik Persson

Hi Jonathan:

Your statement is intriguing - "And yet, there is a debate among scientists as to whether gravity is a fundamental force of the universe or not. "

Stretching your logic further, my research shows that anti-gravity is fundamental reality that explains 96% of the missing universe from the current mainstream theories. I would like to draw your attention to the missing fundamental physics governing - "What causes a photon to accelerate to the speed of light?" I would like to invite you to look into my paper - "What is Fundamental - Is C the Speed of Light". that describes the fundamental physics of antigravity missing from the widely-accepted mainstream physics and cosmology theories resolving their current inconsistencies and paradoxes. The missing physics depicts a spontaneous relativistic mass creation/dilation photon model that explains the yet unknown dark energy, inner workings of quantum mechanics, and bridges the gaps among relativity and Maxwell's theories. The model also provides field equations governing the spontaneous wave-particle complimentarity or mass-energy equivalence. The key significance or contribution of the proposed work is to enhance fundamental understanding of C, commonly known as the speed of light, and Cosmological Constant, commonly known as the dark energy.

The paper not only provides comparisons against existing empirical observations but also forwards testable predictions for future falsification of the proposed model.

I would like to invite you to read my paper and appreciate any feedback comments.

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

Dear Jonathan

What an intriguing, thought-provoking essay! I really liked it. Asymmetry ought to be an important factor and should be investigated thoroughly, especially since nonlinear systems can generate it rather easily. I also appreciate your use of the Mandelbrot Set as an alternate to standard group theory. I have posted a more extensive reply after your comments on my own essay, so I won't repeat those ideas here.

Keep up the good work.

Best wishes,

Bill

If a Misiurewicz point refers to the Mandelbrot set and this refers to topological isomorphism which on its part refers to point-set-topology (PST) then I am not sure whether it is fundamentally anchored in the logic Archimedes infinity or just in the pragmatic mathematical Bernoulli/Leibniz infinities.

As to say it blunt: A child with scissors is able to perform a symmetrical cut while PST struggles with a Dedekind point.

Exact self-similarity in the sense of mirror symmetry is rarely, if at all, found in the fundamental frog's perspective.

Eckard Blumschein

Jonathan,

Do you have a particular working conception of how the Mandelbrot set relates to the distinction between *average* and *constant* ? I can arrive at an average value across a region of changing values, but anywhere in a region of constant values will also be the average value. This goes to energy density and how fields can conduct valued quantity exchanges between domains, and the problem I (at Least) always have in contemplating how wave dynamics alone can create definite "domains that remain". Thanks for your thoughts. jrc

Jonathan,

As time grows short, I recheck those that I have commented on to see if I've rated them. I find that I have not rated yours and am correcting that now.

Hope you can get a chance to look at mine.

Jim Hoover

Hi Jonathan, beautiful essay, Mandelbrot is in you and the octonions and its not commutativity also, Klee and garreth and cristic d like your essay :) best regards

Hello Jonathan Dickau,

You are correct that all forces are the consequence of one unified field of interactions. Its called GRAVITY!

My opinion of physical reality is as straight forward as possible and gravity is the specific topic which current theory must address first. There are others here at RQXi that focus on gravity but they complicate it. My system inverts much current theory and is complete as is so I don't investigate things like you do and I cant relate to your idea of push related to Mandelbrot condensation.

Otherwise I find your paper to be very well done, impressive in detail actually. But obviously I disagree with some of the topics. Entropic and emergent gravity is typical metaphysics. Motion and infinity are requisites. Deep theory, extensive data, and wordiness blurs simple logic and leads to what physics has become. Applying the idea of symmetry in physics is also misleading. Building an overall perspective of the universe cant include concepts like entropy that override disorder.

I appreciate you providing references with ideas. But my model is extensive and unique. It doesn't connect with relativity, as does My Choisuren, nor does Mr Singh's quantum background push gravity idea logically fit.

Ultimately people who recognize gravity's role are key readers whom I seek for support and for selling others on the value of my system perspective. When you read my essay did you see the two follow up pages? Forty plus components of my system are listed there. I hope you go back and review those points, and subsequently respond again. My total system in 3 papers is available for review. My unique perspective seeks further support.

What better praise could I ask than your enjoyment of my essay? Thank you, Johnathan. I enjoy much folk music including Pere Seeger.

Best regards,

Paul Schroeder