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

Dear Christian,

Concerning gravitational waves, this may be of interest to you: On the a. a. Faus Arxiv Article, The Speed of Gravity: What a Theory Says viXra: 1706.0525

Concerning the Bohr-like approach: it is interesting that it is maby somehow opposite of forming matter from non-expanding points - photons - gluons - protons - Bohr atoms - stars. Then the opposite is the process from the star to the non- expanding points.

Concerning general relativity and quantum mechanics, I consider that understanding the role of the mathematical constant exp (2pi) in my papers can be of great help. It should be kept in mind that my works speak about relationships, and that the problem of movement is not considered.

Regards,

Branko

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 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

Hi Christian,

Congratulations and specially about the bekentein Hawking formulas analyses ,

Good luck, friendly

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

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