Dear Christian,

Your research on Black Holes is of real importance I think, once it will be acknowledged by the scientific community.

Thanks a lot for your comment on my thread I will give the answer also here:

quote

Dear Christian,

The Reality Loop approach is actually a kind of proof for the Anthropic Principle.

The Reality Loop "we" are experiencing is one where it seems as if EVERYTHING is made for us...

However this loop is only ONE from an Infinity, each agent in his own loop will have the same experience, and these agents may differ just a little or a whole lot, each one is at HOME in his own loop. Those other loops are until now unattainable for our specific sort.

Each time an agent makes a choice "the reality is not splitting up" (like in MWI) but all other Loops representing other choices become "unattainable", they "withdraw" in the behind Planck limits...

So the fine-tuning of our reality is a logical effect for the specific loop that we are calling REALITY. If our kind of agents were not in our specific loop, the loop is of no use, each reality has to be experienced (conscious of) to be a reality. A loop without consciousness is no loop...

I hope this explains your question.

best regards

Wilhelmus

Dear Wilhelmus,

Thanks for your kind and interesting explanation. Yes, now the connection between your Reality Loop approach and Anthropic Principle is clear.

Cheers, Ch.

  • [deleted]

Dear Christian Corda,

Thank you for reading my Essay and giving your views. To get a complete picture of my work please read: Wave Particle http://vixra.org/pdf/1303.0170v1.pdf .

Regards,

Kamal Rajpal

    Dear Kamal Rajpal,

    Thanks, I will read your vixra paper soon.

    Cheers, Ch.

    Dear Branko,

    Thanks for finding interesting the Bohr-like approach and for the above clarifications.

    Cheers, Ch.

    Dear Steve,

    Thanks for your kind congrats.I see that you are not in the Contest this year. I hope to see you in next one.

    Cheers, Ch.

    Dear Christian Corda,

    If Albert Einstein again visits You, then thank him for creating a special and general relativity. These theories do not let physicists and lyricists get bored for more than a hundred years. The world would be less colorful without gravity waves, black holes and the expanding Universe. The intersection of general relativity with quantum mechanics and, as a consequence of this, the emission and evaporation of black holes adds additional colors to the world picture. Your essay produces a very good impression and I give it a high rating.

    At one time, certain efforts were made to reduce the number of postulates in Euclidean geometry. Ultimately, this led to the creation of non-Euclidean geometry, which, in turn, contributed to the creation of general relativity. As an experiment, I decided to replace the series of postulates adopted in special and general relativity with two other postulates based on the experimental data available today. What has come out of this, You can see in my short essay.

    Best wishes,

    Robert Sadykov

      Dear Christian Corda,

      I see that after Einstein left my Tavern, he managed to find you in Italy and to extract from you a number of details of your theory, analogous to Bohr's 'atom'.

      You've designed a Bohr analog and applied it with seemingly good success to a number of issues, each of which Einstein was good enough to draw out of you. I am impressed with your creativity. I do feel analogy is an excellent guide to theorizing.

      A major thesis of mine these days is that once physicists project mathematical structure onto physical reality, they come to believe in this physical structure very strongly. Cristi Stoica has written about mathematical isomorphisms and I commented on his thread to the effect that mathematicians easily switch between isomorphic structures, but physicists, once having projected structure onto physical reality, have a tendency to get stuck there.

      As an example, I believe one can derive Bekenstein's 'area' relation without ever using the concept of information. It can be derived based on nothing but energy. Yet all physicists believe that the holographic principle depends on information.

      As I understand your essay, you posit quantum normal modes of the black hole and consider these the states of the BH 'atom'. Analogous to Bohr, you consider state changes to emit radiation and derive the corresponding formulas. I think this is very clever.

      I'm not an expert on black holes, so I have no strong opinions. Like you, I do not put much stock in singularities. As noted above, my main focus these days is review of the math structures that have been projected onto physical reality and used to build on. The question is whether other isomorphic structures are better suited to reality.

      Is always a good exercise, in my mind, to analyze one's theory in terms of how many such structures it assumes. For example, 'entanglement' depends on 'qubits', so if one wishes to analyze 'lost info' entangled with parts of the inner and outer 'wave functions' [another structure projected on to reality) then one implicitly brings qubits into the picture.

      Most physicists are quite happy to assume the structures are real, and they may be, but I think it is eye-opening to ask just how many such "supporting actors" one is bringing along with him in any particular theory. This can be followed by the question, "How would it affect my theory if one or more of these structures failed?"

      These final remarks are not targeted at you but apply to everyone who brings a theory of physics to this contest. I believe it is the best way in which we might all move forward.

      Like you, I write on ideas that Einstein himself treated, with the above focus in mind. I hope you will read and enjoy my essay.

      Anyway, congratulations on an enjoyable and impressive essay and good luck.

      Edwin Eugene Klingman

        Dear Robert,

        Thanks for your kind words. I agree with you that science must be grateful to Albert Einstein for creating a special and general relativity. In addition, I am grateful to you for give my Essay a high rating. Thanks a lot.

        You should have seen that I have read, commented and scored your Essay yesterday. Good luck in the contest.

        Cheers, Ch.

        Dear Edwin Eugene,

        It is a pleasure meeting you here in FQXi again. Thanks a lot for your kind words and for finding my Essay enjoyable and impressive.

        Your main focus to review of the math structures that have been projected onto physical reality and used to build on is quite intriguing and consistent with my idea of physics geometrization, which makes general relativity (and more in general, metric theories of gravity) so elegant and is the real reason for which I decided to become a researchers. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

        Cheers, Ch.

        You are welcome, no I don't make it, It is nice, perhaps the next essay contest if my mind permits it,I try to solve serious problems in Belgium.

        Best Regards

        Hi dear Christian

        I read your wonderful essay and was pleasantly surprised with your new style of presenting the most complex problems of advanced science to ordinary people. In my opinion, the great master Einstein greatly helped you in this noble cause. Thus, we can say that you presented a successful and attractive work deserving the highest evaluation.

        At the same time, I see a remarkable problem of gravity in the completely initial level of its origin. Therefore, I try to define first for myself what is the physical cause, or the nature, of what we call gravity, leaving aside intriguing questions as, for example, the behavior of the hair of black holes, how they scream before of death, etc. I naively think that, first of all, we must be able to clearly answer to such a primitive question, for example, where from arises the force that presses us to a chair? When we will able to say this, then it will naturally become clear to us whether we really need in general to think on above mentioned all other issues or not.

        I mean the created very doubtful situation - we recognize on the one hand that we absolutely do not know about the physical essence of gravity, but on the other hand we try to somehow connect it with the quantum theory, forgetting that the quantum theory also remains for us something inexplicably-dark thing from cognitive view!

        The Great maestro also have talk something very important on this matter in the end of his dramatic life that I mention in my work. So, with all my best wishes on the success in the contest!

        Best Regards

          Dear Christian,

          Here we are again all together.

          I highly appreciate your beautifully written essay.

          I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.

          Vladimir Fedorov

          https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080

            Dear George,

            Thanks for your kind words on my Essay, I am honored by them and I am grateful to you for giving me your highest evaluation.

            Thanks for your interesting comments on the nature of gravity, that I find sharable. I am aware that Grand Master Einstein talked about something very important on this matter in the end of his life. That you mentioned it in your work is very intriguing. It will be indeed my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

            Cheers, Ch.

            Dear Vladimir,

            It is nice meeting you here in FQXi again.

            Thanks for finding my Essay beautifully written.

            I will be pleasured in reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

            Cheers, Ch.

            Enjoyed your essay. BH entropy has got to be near to the fundamental. Things should simplify and perhaps reduce. Here is a link to something I found that calcuates a quantised step like spectrum of Black hole entropy. It is really simple in that only Planck masses are utilised in the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy formula. This calculates a growing or reducing Black hole entropy sequence 4pi 16pi 64pi 100pi and so on. The title of the link is 'Black hole entropy and order of even squares sequence'. http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.physics/2012-09/msg00498.html

              Dear Christian

              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

              Dear Mark,

              Thanks for your kind comments. I am happy that you enjoyed my Essay. I agree that BH entropy has got to be near to the fundamental. Thanks for the link, I will surely read it.

              Cheers, Ch.

              Dear Steven,

              Thanks for your message. Your Essay seems interesting. I will read, comment and rate it soon. Good luck in the Contest.

              Cheers, Ch.