Fundamental Revelations by Gary Valentine Hansen

Dear Gary,

The Existence is only an attribute that does not make sense if one does not name the object to which it possess. I assume that you think the Universe. Is it right?

According to Space, Time, Energy and Matter.

Equality of Energy and Matter is proved by Einstein: E = mcc. Origin of Space and Time from mass is shown in my essay and in attachment to it "New concept of Space." The only one simple Space equation unify all known interactions. There is not necessary hyperspace, strings etc.

Regards

Ilgaitis

You have a wonderful understanding dear Gary Valentine Hansen

You wrote in your OP of Abstract very nicely..."The essence of anything is defined by different authorities differently. The task of reducing multiple definitions to a single all-embracing definition of what constitutes the single most elementary, minimalist and universally applicable component of all "Fundamental" states involves a process of elimination." You have pleasent style of writing, keep it up....

Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed................ yours is very nice essay best wishes .... I highly appreciate hope 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

Hello Gary,

This essay has been overlooked and greatly undervalued, so I elevated your prospects a bit. You do address the topic, you are articulate about what you are trying to say, and you have a good point to make. You have convinced me that existence is fundamental. Good luck enlightening others!

All the Best,

Jonathan

To whom it may concern

This looks correct in the preview. It appears carriage returns in my comments are being converted to the letter n, on the forum page. Sorry.

JJD

Dear Gary,

What a delightful, literate essay! I agree with Jonathan Dickau that your essay has been overlooked and undervalued. Your must have had a lot of fun when writing it. The science is somewhat weak in places, but despite that, I fund it to be a lovely overview of modern physics (especially theory) as seen from a philosophical perspective.

Keep up the good work!

Bill

Gary,

Your essay is great fun to read. I would describe it as a highly comprehensive quick summary of "things fundamental" in history. Your final conclusion both surprised and amused me:

"We must ask ourselves what qualifies as being the foundation of our thinking and all things, be they tangible or ephemeral, known or unknown, past, present or future - and the answer jumps out and hits you as, oh so obvious: Existence is 'Fundamental'."

That may not be the most detailed essay answer to the FQXi question this year, but it is certainly one of the most undeniable ones.

The mystery of existence is so profound!

It is one that possessed me early in life. One of my clearest memories from first grade is of walking slowly west along our driveway under one of our big elm trees, wondering "Why should something like a television set even exist? It is such a detailed thing with so many unique parts. In a universe that could so much more easily have been just a big smooth ball of gas [I was into astronomy early], how could all of those not-smooth details have come into existence? And what was the original source of not-smoothness in our universe that made it possible for such unexpected details to exist now?" (Yes, I admit it: I was a rather strange first-grader?... пЃЉ You can imagine how much trouble I gave my teachers...)

Regarding your essay, I suspect from the very insightful questions you posted at my essay that you have more good reading to offer interested readers, so I'm going to presume to do a quick book plug for you:

It: The Architecture of Existence

(Four volumes on: Relations, Intellect, Volition, Affections)

https://books.google.com/books/about/It_the_Architecture_of_Existence.html?id=M0lDPgAACAAJ

I must confess that I have not read any of them--they appear to be available in hardcover only--but I like your range of topics. Also, I've seen your analytical style from your insightful questions on the topic of "simplicity".

Again, thanks for a nice, highly readable essay!

Cheers,

Terry

Hi Gary,

I like your essay which provides a tour of the concept of fundamental.

Your tour led to the conclusion that Existence is fundamental. You are in good company. Existence as fundamental is a concept that traces itself to the long ago area of India (and probably a bunch of other places). The Sanskrit Sat-Chit-Ananda explains the reality as Existence-Consciousness-Bliss. I think the bliss part comes when we quit figuring what this existence is all about :)

Excellent essay,

Thanks,

Don Limuti

Dear Gary

If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don't rate them at all. Infact I haven't issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to gain.

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 and my essay 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. And again, how lucky we are! for if they didn't then 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 attempt of 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 a 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 formation 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 chemistry processes arose.

By identifying atomic forces as having their origin in space, we have identified how they perpetually act, and deliver work products. 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 explain 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

Nicely written MR. Hansen,

Very nice way of putting things together. Your argumentation is clear and I think further words are useless. Read and rate it accordingly.

If you would have the pleasure to read a related essay (starting from an axiom) I will fully appreciate.

Silviu

Dear Gary,

You wrote an enjoyable essay, informative about historical and philosophical aspects of physics, and containing interesting ideas.

Best regards,

Cristi Stoica

Dear Gary Valentine Hansen your essay is the scientific picture of the world. Try to enter it New Cartesian Physics, which is based on the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes.

You might like to look at the sky and it seems to you empty infinite space in which it moves large and small body. However, this impression is deceptive. According to the principle of identity of space and matter Descartes, space is matter that moves. When Copernicus asserted that the Earth revolves around the Sun, he had to add that along with the Earth revolves around the Sun, all the solar space. Space is what built the world. Space contains information about the development of the Universe . Take a look at my essay in which I showed how radically can change physics, if it will follow this principle. Leave your autograph. FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

Do not allow New Cartesian Physics go away into nothingness, which can to be the theory of everything OO.

I wish you success! Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris

Gary,

Thanks for your post on mine. Great essay and the most enjoyable, pleasing and entertaining read I've had this year. Great to find someone else with vision and who can write! I don't know how I missed your bio, no wonder we think alike.

Top marks for your essay, and thank you.

I hope you may go back to see previous finalist essays of mine as far back as 2011 (& papers) with seminal stuff I'm sure you'll love. QM was just a test as a proof of a more comprehensive model!

Very best

Peter

Dear Gary,

Excellent deep analytical essays with very important conclusions that give directions for overcoming the crisis of understanding in the foundation of science:

- "We should remind ourselves that we are searching for that which is fundamental to all things, including ideas."

- "Existence is "Fundamental".

"Everything is nothing in the absence of existence."

My highest score.

I believe that this is a problem of dialectical-ontological construction of the primordial generating structure. Here we need a new ontology and dialectic of "coincidence of opposites" in the spirit of Nikolai Cusa, taking into account all the achievements and problems of modern fundamental knowledge... Thank you very much for your comment on my forum and the evaluation of my ontological ideas.

Best regards,

Vladimir Rogozhin

Dear Gary,

Thanks for reminding me. I have been away for quite many days and only tonight I can get back here just im time to notice the same you have commented in my essay's page: something fishy is going on and people are desperatly and systematically downgrading top essays (this happened ti me already some days ago!). Anyway, I did read your interesting essay already and rated it high.

Best,

Flavio

Thank you dear Gary Valentine Hansen for your wonderful words,

I like your list of 'No's. If that is 'Reductionism', so be it!

Some essay authors have given little consideration to the FQXi evaluation criterion that essays should be 'accessible to a non-specialist audience'.

We are all enthusiastic about our own interests, and I am no exception - except that I am a member of the 'non-specialist' congregation with respect to physics and mathematics.

.................... Thank you , that's the reason I used as simple words as possible, I hope you understand them, but please ask me what ever the doubts you have.... I will try to clarify you...

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

In ruminating over the subjects covered in your essay you make reference to 'about 125 billion galaxies in the universe'. I read between the lines that you are referring to the popular concept of the universe of all-that-is-known, without questioning what lies beyond; distinguished from the universe of all-there-is (known and unknown) which is singular and extends infinitely in all directions.

........................................ It does not make any difference, to us, if there a few trillion more.... Isn't it?. Universe is not necessarily expanding, there are blue shifted Galaxies also...

................................................ your words.............

This is an important distinction because it leads us to question the function, indeed the very existence of gravity. Insofar as the predominant constituent of the cosmos is vacuum, it follows that, from the point of view of an 'outsider', the outward pressure of vacuum is the cause of an effect that 'insiders' call 'gravity'.

....................................... I don't there is something beyond the universe. According to Dynamic Universe model postulates , there is no multi-verse. So there are no outsiders to universe. As per the definition of Gravity, I don't know. I feel gravity is mass and vice versa mass is Gravity...............

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

In matter we find an exhibition of defiance against vacuum, the exception that proves the rule. What is the rule? The rule is that vacuum (unfilled void or space) abhors nature, and flows to fill it's absence. That flow is Nirvana from the Sanskrit 'nir' meaning 'out', and 'vati' meaning 'it blows'.

........................... Nirvana is something like death for a yogi....Going into vacuum may not be required.

Thank you for your blessings... I hope you will ask some further doubts...

Best wishes to your essay...

=snp