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

John Klauder

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.

Christian Corda

Dear John,

Thanks for finding elegant my story.

Your idea of "temporary levels of fundamental issues" is interesting and seems connected with Einstein's idea that it should not exist a definitive theory, but only subsequent level of better approximation (i.e. non-definitive theories) to explain Nature.

Cheers, Ch.

George Kirakosyan

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!

Christian Corda

Dear George,

It is very nice meeting you here in FQXi again.

Thanks for your congrats and for your kind words. Potential future discussions are warmly welcome. I will read, comment and score you Essay soon.

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Peter Jackson

Christian,

Good essay. Informative, interesting, entertaining and probably important, though by the end I was desperate for a paragraph break! I sympathise on the matter of judging as the apparent criteria used often seems at odds with fqxi's mission statement & raisen d'etre.

I said 'probably' above as in my main world of astronomy, astrophysics and observational cosmology a supermassive black hole has long been an active galactic nucleus (AGN). These have increasingly been closely studied with billions worth of instruments in all ways and now have far better understood dynamics. Smaller versions at stellar scale are typified by the Crab Nebula core.

I thus have difficulties with theoretical treatments of 'black holes' seemingly ignoring recent findings. It's a little like theory developed on a different planet long ago! The accretion disc, toroidal counter-wound acceleration paths, precessing cusps and opposing helical collimated jet outflow structures I'm familiar with in some detail (even from the 1980's Rees etc!) makes the theoretical objects still 'guessed' about now seem rather alien or from some dream!

I try hard to find greater consistency between theory and observation, but suspect AE was correct; the original conception doesn't exist! As you know I've published on the part the mechanism seems to play in galaxy evolution. I hoped to find more convergence than I did, but then much of the theoretical description is beyond me so I'm sure more exists. Can you help there?

Having said that, scoring criteria don't include 'agreement' on approach or theory so that takes nothing away from the value and quality of your work and essay.

On the matter of playing dice; if you interact at the equator of a spinning body and had to decide if the spin is clockwise or counter clockwise, how reliable would you answer be? Is that not a universal truth of momentum transfer?

Very well done, and glad you were inspired to enter. I had to smile about your ('pain in the ar**) on waking. Best of luck in the judging.

Peter

Christian Corda

Thanks for your kind words, Peter. Concerning your ideas on the existence or non-existences of black holes, I paraphrase Einstein on the existence or non-existences of gravitational waves:

"If you ask me whether there are black holes or not, I must answer that I

do not know. But it is a highly interesting problem"

In any case, I do not like the idea of singularity. I attempted to find solutions on this problem in the past, see for example this paper.

Cheers, Ch.

John Cox

Dr. Corda,

This is all too far above my level to rate, and competency to comment. But I can glean enough to gain a little more understanding of what 'quantization' entails, and why. Intuitively however, I have to ask why entropy must operate inside the gravitational extremes of a BH. Would it not be physically reversed to some extent? The crush of quantized matter accelerating perturbations to a frequency where the that velocity would be undifferentiated from the time dilation on particle horizons, and fusion of matter be of the entire inertia of the otherwise separate closed systems ("As a consequence of SR, the energy of a closed system is equal to its inertia." AE) ? Or is that somewhat like what is meant by 'information loss', the loss of quantized differentiation?

It seems to me that there must exist a proportional density that is the greatest density any self-gravitational field needs to attain for inertia to translate throughout the whole field, whether a Quantum Unitary Particle or an aggregate field, and in Stellar and Galactic centers that proportion would also hold whether as a material BH or an amalgamated gravitational field Perfectly Transparent Well.

Thanks for an interesting read. jrc

And Pete,

Hello again. There has been a number of arguments that dispute Relativistic Time in favor of a Newtonian absolute simultaneity, but GR would argue that the speed of time on the surface of a body is equivalent to the corresponding escape velocity. So given the wide range of masses, it wouldn't matter how fast a second is on any surface, a relative simultaneity could be found for corresponding moments in time. It kind of suggests that motion is inevitable if all those different time speeds were trying to sync to a realistic absolute simultaneity, look at the equatorial rotation velocities of gas giants. I'm not going to attempt the math, but its fun to think of. I liked your essay too, jrc

Don Limuti

Hi Christian,

I like this essay very much. I would like to use this style in a conversation with Heisenberg.

Your essay is fundamental and uniquely shows how Einstein's fundamental thought experiments evolve into today's fundamental thought experiments.

Our approaches to quantum gravity are very different in that do not put much attention on black holes. Nevertheless, I think combining our approaches could have some interesting synergy.

Have you ever considered the universe a black hole.

http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/22_The_Schwarzschild_Radius.html

It is a real treat to be in another essay with you.

Don Limuti

PS: Really, you were born on a small island off the coast of Sardinia! I am jealous.

Christian Corda

Dear John R. Cox,

Thanks for your kind comments. I am happy that you considered my Essay an interesting read.

That the entropy of a black hole is proportional to the surface of its event horizon was conjectured by Bekenstein in the '70s of last century. Such an entropy must be assigned to the black hole in order to have consistence with the laws of thermodynamics as they are interpreted by an external observer. More in general, Bekenstein also showed that it exists an upper limit on the entropy which can be contained within a given finite region of space having finite energy. Black holes exactly saturate such a bound. In general, more are large the black holes and less are high their density and temperature.

Cheers, Ch.

Christian Corda

Hi Don,

Thanks for your kind words and for finding my Essay fundamental.

Having a conversation with Heisenberg, especially on quantum mechanics, should be really intriguing.

That my Essay uniquely shows how Einstein's fundamental thought experiments evolve into today's fundamental thought experiments is a great compliment, thanks a lot.

Yes, maybe that combining our approaches could have some interesting synergy.

I will read your approach in considering the universe a black hole. I know that there are some approaches in that sense, see here, but one must be careful in this approach.

It is a real treat to be in another essay with you too. Thanks again.

Cheers, Ch.

P.S. Yes, Sardinia's sea is really heavenly

Don Limuti

Hi Christian,

1. Thanks for your link on the universe as a black hole ... very informative. Thanks!

2. In this essay I attempted to show how mass curves space-time by creating density gradients of gravitons.

I would also like to develop an understanding on why the speed of light is the same for all observers. My postulate is that light can only go "piggyback" on top of "gravitons". The net of gravitons that is space-time is an "ether" connecting everything in the universe. When objects move on this net the gravitons change their relative distances but the speed of light piggyback on the gravitons remains c!

In other words gravity in the form of gravitons keeps the speed of light constant for objects that move with respect to each other. Michelson and Morley showed that a static background ether did not exist ..... but they never considered the ether being a graviton net.

What do you think? Too crazy....

Theorizing is easy ... good experiments are the hard part.

Don Limuti

Gary Simpson

Christian,

Many thanks for an interesting read. I knew you would wake up on the floor and that you would not get to see the final form of AE's work.

I have sometimes mused about the possible analogies between an atom and a BH. However, I certainly don't know the Math or the Physics well enough to even make a mark on a piece of paper:-) Well done. I would have never imagined that the event horizon might oscillate.

I've also occasionally mused about the analogies between a BH and the visible universe. Maybe you'll discuss that in a future work? BTW, what would you infer regarding a BH if its temperature was 2.7 K?

I definitely agree with AE regarding prizes and such. Don't fret over it at all. There are much bigger things to worry about.

BTW, maybe next time you might add a few paragraph breaks?

Best Regards,

Gary Simpson

Christian Corda

Dear Gary,

Thanks for your kind words and for finding interesting my Essay. Concerning the points that you raised:

The possible analogies between an atom and a BH have been suggested for the first time by Bekenstein. I have always found such analogies very intriguing.

The event horizon's oscillations are also intriguing and mysterious. They can have imaginary frequencies and need very complicate mathematics. A complete solution of them has not yet found. I suspect such a solution is connected with the full quantization of general relativity.

I know that there are some the analogies between a BH and the visible universe, see here. It is a issue that always intrigued me. I think it will be my pleasure discussing that in future works, but, one one hand, I need to find the time. One the other hand, I think that one must be very careful in this approach.

The temperatures of stellar and galactic black holes are much lower than 2.7 K. Thus, being immersed in the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, which is thermal radiation having temperature of about 2.7 K, they CANNOT currently emit radiation in order to do not violate thermodynamics laws. They will start to emit Hawking radiation when the Universe will become much colder. We need various eons to see stellar and galactic black holes emitting Hawking radiation... There is some conjecture of string theory about micro-black holes which should be relics of the early Universe. Being their temperature higher than 2.7 K, they should emit Hawking radiation. But nobody has yet seen such objects.

AE advice regarding prizes and such is very wise and precious. I completely agree with it too.

Finally, you are right. If having few paragraph breaks, the Essay should have been more elegant. But I had to remove them based on the FQXi rules on the maximum number of Essay's pages.

Thanks again for the very interesting issues that you raised and good luck in the Contest. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Wayne Lundberg

Chrstian,

Your essay certainly was creative writing and an enjoyable way to introduce your ideas. I take it that this "gravitational atom" concept is the key insight into your BH model. I have studied BH theory a bit but find little about it that is truly fundamental. However, it is clear from Hawkings acceptance of information-preserving BH that some finite geometric representation of the throat of a BH is required.

I think that there may be some conceptual agreement with my essay, in which I argue that the kernel of a BH must be tetrahedral (simplest geometric shape in 3-space). This geometry allows construction of an information-preserving BH, as well as offers explanations for unsolved problems.

I look forward to finding whether there is further agreement between these fundamental concepts.

Wayne Lundberg

ref https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3092

Christian Corda

Dear Wayne,

Thanks for finding my Essay as being creative writing and an enjoyable way to introduce my ideas.

Actually, Hawking has not yet completely accepted information-preserving BH. In fact, as I stressed in my Essay, his current position seems ambiguous as he recently claimed that "Information will effectively be lost, although there would be no loss of unitarity" and that "Information can be recovered in principle, but it is lost for all practical purposes".

That there may be some conceptual agreement with your Essay is very interesting. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Wayne Lundberg

Christian,

'lost for all practical purposes' would agree with cyclic cosmology in that BH are the mechanism converting mass in kinetic motion into potential/preserved mass. The mass is preserved until the universe inverts via a time-reversed Bang. Recall that ralpha'/R...

More to the point, I don't formulate ideas based on interpretations of other's statements of opinion, but look for mathematical consistency and a geometrically similar basis.

Wayne

Christian Corda

Dear Wayne,

Thanks for clarifying. I will read your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Francesco D'Isa

Dear Christian,

sadly I've not the mathematical tools to fully judge your essay (my formation is in philosophy), but I appreciated your style and the form of a platonic dialogue with Einstein instead of Socrate.

All the best,

Francesco D'Isa

Christian Corda

Dear Francesco,

Thanks for your kind words.

I understand your point that you have the mathematical tools to fully judge your Essay. No problem for this. I am pleasured that you appreciated my style and the form of a platonic dialogue with Einstein instead of Socrate. The first goal of my work was indeed writing an interesting Essay. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers,Ch.

Jonathan Dickau

Hello Christian,

While I have gripes about some off-color remarks and liberties taken; I find this essay rather satisfying and quite satisfactory. I was not taken with Makela's winning essay, but I later learned of his papers on Planck scale black holes as the quantum spacetime fabric, which I thought were excellent; and now I see how that idea was tied in with his discussion with Newton. At the time; I was suspicious because of what I perceived as black hole mania - where everything seemed to revolve around black holes, and I was convinced that the majority of BH candidates out there were something else.

Now I am less concerned about calling them that, and I assume that with enough multi-messenger detections the whole zoo of compact objects will someday be known. I agree that the Bekenstein-Hawking equation is a gem of fundamental Physics in the way it weaves different branches together. I devoted a slide to that relation and talked about area quantization next, in my talk at FFP15, because I thought it was essential to showing the development of my subject. It is also a cornerstone in your work, which I am coming to understand better. I now see there are some links to my work.

What is seen at the Misiurewicz point mimicking an event horizon or quantum critical point is that self-similar forms decrease in size to a point of extinction and then grow in size on the other side, but in reverse phase! So if energetic variations coming to a BH event horizon follow this pattern, what is swallowed up is exactly identical to what came in but in opposite phase. This analogy can be extended to BHs that are not Schwarzschild, by assuming there are multiple branches - all self-similar - where some are swallowed and others appear outside the horizon. This scheme also preserves quantum information.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Jonathan Dickau

I had meant to include...

This image file refers back to the Mandelbrot Butterfly appearing in Fig. 4 of my essay, illustrating that the event horizon is like the virtual ground or amplitude null in an inverting feedback amplifier. Perhaps if the feedback resistor is seen as representing propagations on the surface or event horizon of the BH, this is an analogy for the QNMs in your Bohr-like atom BH model. Setting the various types of BH boundary in circuit-theoretic terms may allow the Math of category theory to be brought to bear advantageously.

All the Best,

JonathanAttachment #1: MandelAmp2.jpg

Jonathan Dickau

Sorry for the run on Christian, It appears that any post after about 22:30 GMT on Feb 5th has been compacted where every carriage return is replaced by an n, although it looks fine in the preview. They want to make it an en-dash perhaps, but it is an obnoxious development.

Regards, Jonathan

Christian Corda

Dear Jonathan,

Thanks for your kind words. I am honoured that you find my Essay rather satisfying and quite satisfactory.

I well remember your perplexity on black hole physics. We also had various discussions with various colleagues. Concerning the existence or non-existences of black holes, I paraphrase Einstein on the existence or non-existences of gravitational waves: "If you ask me whether there are black holes or not, I must answer that I do not know. But it is a highly interesting problem". Also myself hopes that with enough multi-messenger detections the whole zoo of compact objects will someday be known. I also agree on your opinion on the Bekenstein-Hawking equation. That the Mandelbrot set can mimic a BH is interesting and the analogy between and the feedback resistor is very intriguing. The consistence with preserving quantum information is, of course, fundamental. I have seen that any post is now being compacted where every carriage return is replaced by an n. I agree with you that this is awful.

Again, I wish you good luck in the contest.

Cheers, Ch.

« Previous Page Next Page »