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

The normal modes occur from the small arc approximation I employ. This results in Hermite polynomial solutions that correspond to quantum harmonic oscillator modes. This segues into the concept of normal modes, at least as an approximation, as a description of black hole quantum mechanics. A full set of solutions is obviously bewilderingly complex, but I don't think these dominate the made features of quantum black holes.

A part of the idea is that in black hole coalescence so called quantum hair or quantum topological charge associated with event horizons is magnified and emitted within gravitational radiation. It may be possible to detect this with LISA or the ESA eLISA. This will occur in signatures of so called gravitational memory.

I read Maryam's papers back in 2014 when she won the Fields Medal. At the time the thought occurred to me that this may have some important role in physics. When she died July 14 last year I was sort of angered and depressed about this, given how news of the world of late has been a bit sour. Then later this idea on how this might connect with quantum hair and the RT formula. So for several months I worked pretty hard on this. This paper is based on a loose set of notes and writing I did on this last October. I decided to fold this into an FQXi paper, even though I really thought I would no longer submit papers to these contests.

Cheers LC

Hi, Christian

This is one of your most entertaining essays yet- and the caveat of normal modes is actually quite on target as a serious issue

What I would like to know, as an extension of your ideas is due to the question of quantum entanglement. Do you view that as fundamental, and the entire EPR business, or do you have more of a semi classical treatment of gravity in mind?

If you could, please review my small essay. It was put in December 21st. i.e. materially it is very similar to what I have published with you earlier

As I indicate in my response quasi-normal modes are necessary as an approximation because the full solution set is virtually impossible. Maybe to some other form of intelligent life in the universe where what might be called an IQ of 250 is considered by them retarded this is tractable. To be honest the full set of solutions in QCD are largely a blank unknown. Maybe some sort of perturbation series can be worked up.

BTW, if Trump manages to win the next election here I am packing my bags. Not sure what is cooking out there in S. Europe, but it can't be as crazy as what is happening here.

Cheers LC

Dear Dr Christian Corda,

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.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Christian;

Beautiful work. It makes you completely understand the analogy between Bohr's atom theory and your gravitational atom of BH theory. But you did not address the issue of the contest. That's why I have to disagree with herr Doktor Einstein.

You are a great scholar in physics, I respect you for that, but some time we have to understand the very basic to come down to the level of children and be able to teach them. Otherwise they would not get it. And that's when you fail.

Anyway, I wish you luck this time.

Truly yours;

Diogenes

Dear Christian,

I enjoyed very much reading your essay, you manage to transmit so much about the foundations of physics in such an entertaining way! I think you evoked Einstein so convincingly that maybe he visited you indeed :) Now, beyond the entertaining factor, I think the explanations are clear and the idea is excellent. I find very convincing the role of the oscillations of the horizon in this elegant explanation, which doesn't introduce new factors in the game, such as giving up an important principle of physics, as it is often considered the black hole information paradox implies we should do. I think both unitarity and the principle of equivalence are essential.

I have some questions. (1) You refer to your solution as "Bohr-like", but you use Schrödinger's equation. Why "Bohr-like" and not "Schrödinger-like"? (2) The radiation takes place similarly to how an excited atom emits a photon. In the case of the atom, the spontaneous emission is described in a good approximation by the Weisskopf-Wigner model. How do you think this happens in the BH case? Of course, to calculate the transition amplitudes you don't need this, but I am interested what is your view about this. (3) Do you think your solution can be related with the BMS symmetry? (4) Your proposal seems to me very natural, and minimalist in the sense of not requiring changes to the laws of physics. Your articles about the subject collected a beautiful number of citations, considering that they are recent. But I think this model deserves more attention. Instead, various proposals of giving up one principle or another, or built by artificially patching solutions, or by counting states made of artificial hypothetical objects, seem to receive much more interest. I think most of these constructions work just because the bound of entropy of quantum systems, you can put there anything as long as this is quantum. But I think yours is much more natural and simpler. So I think this preference is rather sociological, considering that so many people have their own group agendas of quantum gravity. What's your opinion about this? (5) In the notebook Einstein showed you, the final unified theory has as central equation a formula whose left hand side is "something like the Einstein tensor". Did you get the time to notice whether or not there are some tiny hats on those symbols?

Your essay made my day, I wish you success with the contest!

Best wishes,

Cristi

Dear Dr Christian Corda,

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.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Dr Christian Corda,

All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe consists 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.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Christian,

Thank you very much for the reply, I am very interested in the future developments of your idea. I'm a bit sad that you didn't see the right hand side of the Equation. At least it seems that no modified gravity is in the left side, so no f(R) or W^2, although I am interested in conformal gravity. Sadly, you didn't have enough time to see if the Einstein tensor is classical or a quantum operator. So in this case the next best thing is to ask you, what is your opinion about this?

Warm regards,

Cristi

CC

An elegant story that is well told. Personally I find that which is fundamental sometimes to be temporary and thus not eternal. I accept that level of looseness and eagerly look forward to the next level which can be called fundamental. Understanding a phenomenon and whatever it explains has the right to be treated as fundamental, at least as long as it is not dethroned.

JK

Hi dear Christian,

Congratulations with your nice essay! I see you in some new style that is very attractive in my view. Moreover, the giant Einstein is there, who is very rich to advise every one of us! I will try study it more detailed to be take some important parts for me, and maybe - for some discussion also in future.

My Best wishes!