Discussing on "What Is Fundamental" with Albert Einstein by Christian Corda

Dear Chorda.

This makes me smile.

Clearly, the research work on the gravitational atom is not ended. In fact, Bohr model was an approximated model of the hydrogen atom with respect to the valence shell atom model of full QM. In the same way, your Bohr-like BH approach should be an approximated model with respect to the denitive, but at the present time unknown, BH model arising from a full TQG. After a moment, Einstein continued: OK, I sincerely hope that this time you will be considered for a Prize by the FQXi Expert Judges. I wish you good luck in this new FQXi Essay Contest. In any case, you have to do not give too much importance to Prizes and Awards, despite they could be very important and prestigious. The profound beauty of our job of scientists is not given by Prizes and Awards. It is instead given by the insight into the mystery of life [49].

See what mysteries of Life I have with

What is Life? A theory of "More than everything"!

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3093

Hope for a good vote, after you have read it, also comments welcome.

Amazing story you have. About my quote I may have some ideas. It is important what frame you use to get the results.

Thanks.

Ulla Mattfolk

Financial support even...

Dear Christian

I have enjoyed your work in the past, and if you win this contest it is well deserved,

Unlike certain community raters, you have defended your premise and your view point in an extemplary fashion and I congratulate you on your sportsmanship and professionalism

Bravo and a job well done

Andy

You have shown a professionalism and an integrity that the last minute essay rate bombers did not have, and in this, you have elevated yourself above the muck and dirt shown by cowards unwilling to discuss ideas, but who wound on the basis of who knows whom and not of science.'

It is truly fitting if you win this contest, Christian. You are the best rebuke possible to the scum who rate bomb and who act with cowardice, rather than discuss ideas

Contratulations

IMO to those who rate bombed me at the end, my friend , Christian, is everything you are NOT

Andrew Beckwith, PhD

Dear Christian Corda,

After [1] to [7], [25-29], and [31-33] you will definitely deserve the Nobel price or even FQXi's price for THE FINAL UNIFIED FIELD THEORY.

Unqualified reader may nonetheless be confused: Does BH mean Bekenstein-Hawking or Black Hole? I would even write "Herr Doktor" (with the German letter k), and I wonder a bit how well the late Einstein was dressed.

Anyway, those readers who admit not being familiar with your marvellous formulas might nonetheless have understood what "fundamental" means.

Eckard Blumschein

Dear Christian, with the final moments of the community phase upon us you are again top of the ratings. Will the panel be able to deny you a prize again, despite a recommendation from the great master himself? We shall see, but whatever the result it is good that you have addressed the matter with a sense of humour.

On the science side I do like your Bohr atom analogy for black holes. Treating the QNMs as similar to electrons seems like a smart move, and you have worked out the idea in impressive detail. Such work should not be ignored.

Your Hawking quote about the information being effectively lost, while unitarity holds caught my eye. Perhaps we have been taking the word information too literally. This kind of information is more like scrambled data that can never be unscrambled. It would be better described as randomness than information. I have a motto that the universe does not care what we think. In this case it does not care if we cannot access the information. As entropy rises usable information degenerates into the heat bath, or the black hole. Evolution, life and our struggles to understand the universe are our fight to hold onto meaningful information. The amount of information we gather, organise and record temporarily is tiny compared to what is being lost to randomness by the heat of our efforts, yet it is everything to us.

Good luck. I hope this time round will bring you a well-deserved and overdue prize.

An enjoyable read, Christian

I like your discussion with AE and had to laugh when the Unified Field Theory fades before you can read it (I doubt we are anywhere close to such a theory).

A couple questions:

1) If a BH works like an atom and electrons, should there be a 'spectra' of this? I mean like the spectral lines of hydrogen? Could this be verified?

2) Would you say that a BH changes its size in quantum jumps? It would seem, given the analogy provided, that these are not 'tiny' jumps at the particle level, but rather possibly measurable in large units. If so, the question comes up as to how discrete jumps can exist in an otherwise continuous spacetime - or rather how does the 'jump' occur without a continuous change in dimension?

In a different direction, what can be stated about all levels of scale in a BH, between those at the large, BH, scale and those of the quantum particle scale? Do all these other levels not exist, not have any impact on the BH structure, or have we simply not addressed them yet?

Again, a very enjoyable read,

Don

Dear Christian Corda,

I understand your angry reaction as an indication of lacking readiness to accept I might be right when I felt your self-admiration inappropriate among scientists. A good teacher intends teaching as easily understandable as possible.

I ask you to guess: Why did my boss blame a paper of mine as "sowas von" fundamental?

You claimed having proved me wrong in previous contests. Can you please give at least some examples for this? Fortunately FQXi documented all discussions.

What about publishing, I too am a little biased in so far, I tend to not expect accepted work in viXra and Academia. I also refused publishing in GS Journal.

Being not an "anti-relativity boy", I am nonetheless open for hints that may guide to a revelation of possible flaws in non-causal and tenseless models.

With sympathy,

Eckard Blumschein

There persists in all branches of natural philosophy, a societal prejudice which favors the peculiarly human conception of time as being akin to the metronomic pace of Plato's footfalls, and the rhythm of his heart is beating like a drum simultaneously everywhere throughout creation.

Truth is: we can only assume that the rate at which the passage of time occurs

is anywhere between nil and light velocity. jrc

Dear Christian Corda,

I noticed you are with International Institute for Applicable Mathematics and Information Sciences, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad 500063 (India) and also related to uni-frankfurt.de.

By the way does "galilei" instead of galileo indicate you as an outsider? I would appreciate that.

May I hope for your readiness to read, understand, and honestly criticize my definitely uncommon while not lonely arguments concerning very basic fundamentals of mathematics, summarized in my current essay?

I don't denigrate your perhaps excellent publications. Denigrate means to unfair criticize. I criticize that your referenes to own publications are obviously not in any case necessary for someone who intends to understand your answer to the question "What is fundamental?".

When I dared to quote all my eight previous FQXi essays, then each single one directly related to my current essay. In particular, I gave hints to relevant figures.

I have no problems in publishing. What about Einstein's Special Relativity, there are some alternative relativities from Galileo Galilei and Lorentz up to Phipps and Klingman. Let's investigate in all directions. I see Kadin my alley in politics. I just was told, archeology found out, the tropical rain forest in Africa was destroyed for some thousands of years due to local overpopulation.

I look forward reading your criticism on my current essay.

Eckard

I admire you for being a respected Christian in Iran.

Hi Christian

Congratulations on your great score conclusion. I saw you achieve top position, you must have been holding your breath. Didn't stay there but a wonderful result all the same.

Thank you for expressing a willingness to to help me with some technicals. I promise not to abuse this kind offer. My primary interest is to obtain data on velocities displayed within galaxy groups.

Beyond that I would like to have a discussion with you on the following, if you are willing please? To put the terms of my essay in simply summery.

People invented clocks, then Einstein comes along and discovers that clock rates modulate in gravitational environments.

I suggest that, "force drives a clocks function, so forces must be implicated in general relativity's effects". Clock springs redeem this notion as being observable and quantifiable, "force dilation".

Photons being the same type of entity as Gluons. Gluon force gives mass. Dilated Gluon force gives dilated mass. This seams childish in its simplicity, I know. But my essays argument based on mathematical geometry, shows it fits the puzzle of anomalous galaxy velocity. I hope this inspires curiosity. And given the opportunity, I can nail this argument down tighter.

Steve

Again, I look forward reading your criticism on my current essay.

You might also read my comment on Tiainen's horrible essay.

Eckard