Dear Sue,

Thanks for your message.

I think that Einstein raised no objection to my input of Hawking's assessment that "physical information is ultimately lost in BH evaporation" because he was waiting to listen my solution on that problem. In any case, your Essay seems interesting. I will read, comment and rate it today. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

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

    Dear Maxim,

    It is a pleasure meeting you here in FQXi.

    Thanks for your kind words and for your highest estimation of my Essay. By the way, my Essay is partially founded on a paper of mine that you handled as Guest Editor for AHEP some years ago, i.e. my reference [5].

    Thanks again. I will read, comment and rate our Essay today. Good luck in the Contest.

    Cheers, Ch.

    Dear Ulla Mattfolk

    Thanks for your message. I am honored that you think that I have an amazing story. Yes, of course the research work on the gravitational atom is not ended. I have some ideas to continue it.

    Your Essay seems interesting. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and rating it today. Good luck in the Contest.

    Cheers, Ch.

    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 Andy,

    Thanks for your message and for your kinds words. I am honored by them. I regret for the last minute Essay lowering rate bombs that you have suffered. I always found such actions due to cowardice. Again, I wish you all the best in the Contest.

    Cheers, Ch.

    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 Mr. Blumschein,

      I am very honored by your criticisms. On one hand, I suspect they are due to my correcting your very elementary mistakes in previous FQXi Essay Contests. On the other hand, I think they are also due to envy, because you will ever publish papers like [1] to [7], [25-29], and [31-33] neither in the reality nor in your dreams... In any case, I am always very happy to receive criticisms by anti-relativity guys like you. I received the same criticisms by your friends in anti-relativity claims, like Mr. Crothers, Mr. Santilli and others, and I always ridiculed them. Here, you ridicule yourself. By the way, I think that you need an ophthalmologist, because I wrote in line 11 of page 1 of my Essay that BH is the acronym of black hole... I also wrote "Herr Doktor" (with the German letter k) 3 times while I wrote "Herr Doctor" (with the English letter c) only one time. I think that a typo is permitted in this Essay Contest... I do not know if those readers who admit not being familiar with my marvellous formulas might nonetheless have understood what "fundamental" means. I am instead sure that you do not understand what "fundamental" means and, in addition, that you do not understand an enormous number of other thinks... Finally, I suspect that you are the gentleman who lowered my score by giving me "1". Relax, I will neither apply the same favor to you, nor signal to FQXi this squalid issue. In fact, I wasted even too much time with a poor man like you... I pity you.

      Sincerely, Christian Corda

      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

        Dear Eckard Blumschein,

        I regret but you misunderstood me various times.

        1) My reaction to your criticisms was ironic rather than angry.

        2) My feeling at the starting of my Essay was disappointment instead of self-admiration. In fact, I am sure that the FQXi Panel has been unjust with me in previous years. This feeling is also shared by colleagues, see the below post by Philip Gibbs. Maybe that my criticizing the FQXi Panel further prevents them to award me this year, but this is not important. I have fun here in FQXi and this is my main interest. On the other hand, by claiming that " I felt your self-admiration inappropriate among scientists" you show your proper self-admiration by claiming that you are a scientist. They must be other scientists who state that you are a scientist, not yourself.

        3) Sorry, I have no time to search our discussions in previous Contests.

        4) If you have problems in publishing, this does not authorize you to denigrate my publications. This seems envy.

        5) I am happy to know that you are not an "anti-relativity boy".

        Best wishes, Ch.

        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

        Dear Phil,

        I am happy that you appreciated my a sense of humour. Thanks for your kind words on the science side. I am honored that you thinks that my work should not be ignored.

        I find your discussion on the information largely sharable.

        Congratulation for your remarkable 4th position in the community rating and good luck in the Contest.

        Cheers, Ch.

        Dear Christian Corda,

        You still didn't excuse yourself for your mere claim having corrected my "very elementary mistakes in previous FQXi Essay Contests", for your lacking readiness to reveal what you referred to, and for other arrogancies. The positions on top of the community ranking were often changing. Moreover, the panel was so far not obliged to agree with such pretty random ranking. It was you who caused me to rate your essay lower than you expected, and I consider my courageous decision necessary. Maybe, I gave you a 3 or 2, and this might have influenced others.

        It was your own exaggerated price-dream bomb that perhaos killed your hope.

        I am still ready to accept you as a serious investigator of fundamentals in science, not just as a prolific publicator, if you will surpass yourself, and prove my main arguments wrong, even if I am just a guy for you.

        You mentioned "your friends in anti-relativity claims, like Mr. Crothers, Mr. Santilli and others". My eyes are indeed getting weak. I didn't find them here.

        Eckard Blumschein

        4 days later

        Hi Christian...

        Fair answer!!

        However, in that Einstein claims to now have a "Unified Field theory", by patronizing your need to express yourself, and not immediately redirecting the potential of your Metaphysical cognitive state, to the potential for an Initial State TQG, that must necessarily be facilitated by any valid "Unified Field theory", your "Grand Master" denied you the opportunity to examine his "Unified Field theory", and report to the FQXi community.

        It is my contention that an Initial State resolve of minimum units of Space (QI) and Energy (QE) is required for any valid "fundamental" TQG, so I will not apologize for not patronizing elaborate mechanisms to resolve a TQG from speculative Black Hole analysis, but I do have a gift for you... i.e. a Unified Field geometry... from which you can, with the Knowledge Base (KB) access you demonstrate, visually derive an Initial State TQG that facilitates Scale Invariance... i.e. a "most fundamental" gravity analysis.

        REF: UQS Virtual Quantum Lab http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSDB.php

        REF: Geometry Paradigms http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSReTB.php

        It is often difficult to read textual content designed to convey an understanding of a fundamental concept, so I rely heavily on 3D CAD illustrations... i.e. it is my intent that the UQS concept can be assimilated by exposure to the pictures that accompany my online papers.

        In regard to your inquiry as to whether my essay comment... i.e. a gravity collapse disassembles Physical scale entity choreographies of Energy information, freeing Metaphysical scale entity choreographies of Energy information, which a gravity collapse apparently has no influence upon... is "a proposal to resolve the black hole information puzzle?", I have posted a reply to your review of my essay.

        REF: Knowledge Base (KB) Access as Fundamental to Info Processor Intelligence https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3000

        Sue Lingo

        UQS Author/Logician

        www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com