Vladimir,

Thanks for the positive comment on my essay. I have just read your paper, although admit I skipped over much of the detail, but got the general thesis. It is a very interesting paper, and I agree that matter is comprised of vortices held together (in part) by gravity. I think you would be interested in my paper where I model electrons and positrons as 3D Electromagnetic standing waves: http://vixra.org/pdf/1507.0054v6.pdf

My wave function solutions could work for any mass plugged in - leading to infinite possible particles, except that my suspicion is that only certain masses lead to just the right amount of wave curvature (due to gravitational bending) to allow stable particles to form. Thus only certain particles can exist. So this bending effect of gravity causes certain energy densities to be able to form stable wave function structures. Also I have long suspected that the Universe may have a fractal nature - the repeated application of simple laws building up bigger and bigger structures, but with a similar appearance at different size scales.

Best Regards,

Declan Traill

    dear Vladimir Nikolaevich

    I have finalized study your article, it is really contains many nice points that is close to me, "but here is not the right place and right time for detailed examination of everything" - ценю юмор!

    And we are people who strive always doing his duty.

    Be well my dear and I wish you succeeded in the contest!

    Best regards

    Dear Vladimir

    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 Vladimir,

      Thanks for visiting my FQXi Essay page.

      You wrote an interesting Essay, despite it is not conventional. Here are some comments and/or questions:

      You wrote that the abstract distortion of space-time is equivalent to a non-ideal medium of the physical vacuum-the variable velocity of propagation of the gravitational fundamental interaction. But, if it is equivalent, how can be also an incorrect use of ideals properties? Equivalent means that we have two ways to interpret a phenomenon and that both of them are correct.

      How can you conciliate the gravitational potential due to toroidal gravitational waves which Einstein's Equivalence Principle, which has today a strong empiric evidence and the consequence that gravitational energy cannot be localized?

      I appreciate your removing probabilistic behavior of physics with deterministic one.

      Beyond your Essay, I am interested on your device for the detection of gravitational waves. Can you give me some detail?

      In any case, you wrote a nice and entertaining Essay, deserving an high score.

      Good luck in the Contest.

      Cheers, Ch.

        The problem with theories that are based on geometric founding structures that are not point-like, is that a mechanism must provide these geometric structures. Point-like objects can be generated by stochastic processes, such as a combination of a Poisson process and a binomial process. The binomial process can be implemented by a spatial point spread function. This mechanism comes already close to the mechanism that produces the wavefunction of objects. The stochastic processes can cooperate to generate more complicated geometric structures.

        See: "Stochastic control of the Universe"; http://vixra.org/abs/1712.0243

          Hi Vladimir,

          I am glad your response to mine directed me to your essay. We agree on many details about the universe, such as the flaw in Newton's laws as applied to orbiting. Your well written and technical essay is well beyond my education level. It does serve as a challenge for me to at least update my terminology limitations.

          Thank you for the very nice comment about my essay. I am learning from yours. If you want to learn more of mine, I have included the principal ideas of the Universe is Otherwise system on the two pages that follow the essay at FQXi. Also My 3 paper summary of 'The Universe is Otherwise' is easy reading. It goes well beyond issues addressed here. I can send it to you.

          While meeting with you, as proposed is unlikely, I would agree with carrying on communication of our common like-minded thoughts.

          Paul Schroeder

          Pshrodr8@aol.com

          Hello again Vladimir,

          Your conclusion: Thus, "fundamental" implies the absence in nature of ideal properties of matter and abstract concepts, and also requires a rethinking of the physical essence of phenomenological constants.

          I humorously believe that certain things should not be discussed in polite company i.e. politics, religion, sex, and high philosophy.

          Phenomenology goes after "the thing in itself". The thing that is beyond attributes. I congratulate your bravery in going after this territory beyond the concepts.

          Best of luck in the contest,

          Don Limuti

          Dear Paul, ...(copied to your and mine)

          Thanks for visiting my FQXi Essay page.

          I'm glad that you liked my thoughts. Send your works as you like, you can send it by e-mail fedorovvlad53@gmail.com.

          Vladimir Fedorov

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

          Dear Declan, ...(copied to your and mine)

          Thanks for the positive comment on my essay.

          I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

          Vladimir Fedorov

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

          Dear Hans, ...(copied to your and mine)

          Thank you very much for your attention and explanations.

          I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

          Vladimir Fedorov

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

          Dear Wilhelmus, ...(copied to your and mine)

          Many thanks warm words about my work and for mutual understanding.

          I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

          Vladimir Fedorov

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

          Dear Vladimir

          (copy to yours and mine)

          The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.

          If you are aware of more valuable essays don't hesitate to inform me.

          best regards

          Wilhelmus

          Dear Vladimir,

          Thanks a lot for reading and giving encouraging remarks my submission The Mysterious "Fundamental" (https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2998).

          I have tried to understand the new ideas propounded in your essay. Prima acie, they appear out-of-box and impressive. However, to gain a wider audience, I would suggest you to subsequently develop your ideas for people who are from non-science background. I salute the challenge you have taken to swim against the tide.

            Mr. Fedorov

            I fully enjoyed the way you put things together it and I think further words are useless.

            Rate it accordingly.

            If you would have the pleasure for a short axiomatic approach of the subject, I will appreciate your opinion.

            Silviu

              Thankyou Vladimir,

              I appreciate your comments on my essay and I am glad we had a similar approach. I read your current essay and found your claims on Newton very interesting ( from what I could understand as my physics is not as strong as yours ) and will reflect on them further.

              Good luck with your latest endeavours into nature and truth.

              Best,

              Jack

                Dear Corciovei,

                (copy to yours and mine)

                Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding. The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.

                I highly appreciate your well-written essay in an effort to understand.

                I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

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

                Vladimir Fedorov

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

                Dear Jack,

                (copy to yours and mine)

                Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.

                The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.

                I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

                Vladimir Fedorov

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

                Dear Don,

                (copy to yours and mine)

                Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.

                Understanding, respect and your advices are highly valued.

                I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

                Vladimir Fedorov

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

                Dear Gary,

                (copy to yours and mine)

                Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.

                The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.

                I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

                Vladimir Fedorov

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

                Dear Christian,

                (copy to yours and mine)

                Many thanks for the kind words, interest shown in my work and for excellent questions.

                You wrote: «Beyond your Essay, I am interested on your device for the detection of gravitational waves. Can you give me some detail?»

                Brief description of the experiment can be read in my Research notebook «The deterministic gravitational waves» https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VMlesBfYVVa-Fp6bIr1I-uzU-Vnq3FFY/view pages 53-60.

                I will tell only the history of the experiment that in 2006 I read a lot about the gravitational waves of LIGO and I had an idea that gravitational waves from stars can be recorded with the help of the Casimir effect on the surfaces of bodies. Then I hung on a torsion balance a package of many sheets of writing paper between framed by frames of the same paper. I assumed that such a package should be a similarity to a gravitational telescope with a flat radiation pattern, and signals from stars should be repeated every day, but I did not see it. But what I saw turned all my ideas about physics.

                When I processed the data and plotted the graph for 2 weeks of measurement https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1MvF-AefpMmOWx2SkE0ZjJXTG8/view , I realized that some neutrino matter is registered from the eastern quadrature of the Earth's orbit, obviously those detected by Michelson and Morley.

                I assembled the second installation, where I placed just a packet of writing paper without frames. There were practically no variations. But when I replaced it with a package with frames, I got the same variations of large amplitude as in the first setup. Those. The package of paper with frames was approximately 100 times more efficient when receiving gravitational waves than a packet without frames.

                The most vivid impression of observations on the monitor in real time was stable periodic signals of large amplitude with a period of 72 seconds. For me it was a enigma. I thought I was on the verge of a great discovery. It is now known to us that such the periodic signals of 72 seconds are recorded in the LISA project in million kilometers from the Earth. This is now I brought in the essay the simple relationships for the calculation, in practice, of all possible resonance frequencies of gravitational waves.

                These experiments were not intended for publication, they were for me.

                So, I realized that:

                1. Gravitons exist. Flows of gravitons can be focused and manage them.

                2. Gravitational waves can be easily registred with the help of packets of parallel planar bodies. X-ray telescopes can easily be converted into gravitational telescopes.

                3. The space is filled with neutrino rigid and superfluid matter.

                4. The Earth does not fall from the orbit, not because space is empty, but because there is a toroidal gravitational wave in orbit that pushes the Earth along orbit from the eastern quadrature of the orbit, compensating for the resistance.

                I understood many other interesting points.

                It is difficult to persuade people. Stimulus can only be the desire to know the truth.

                You wrote «that the abstract distortion of space-time is equivalent to a non-ideal medium of the physical vacuum-the variable velocity of propagation of the gravitational fundamental interaction. But, if it is equivalent, how can be also an incorrect use of ideals properties? Equivalent means that we have two ways to interpret a phenomenon and that both of them are correct».

                Yes, formally, they «that both of them are correct» - the result of the calculations is the same.

                For example, the force of gravitation on Earth can be calculated through the gravitational coefficient (the empirical form of recording the law of gravitation), but can be calculated by the physical form, through the gravitational potential, which has the dimension of the square of the velocity.

                However, very few people know the very simple truth that the gravitational potential is equal to the square of the equilibrium orbital velocity. And, practically, no one knows that the equilibrium orbital velocity is equal to the change in the speed of propagation of the gravitational interaction, which is equivalent to the derivative of spatial coordinates in time (to the formal equivalent - to the distortion of space-time in general relativity). Mechanisms are different - the result is one.

                For example, the speed of propagation of gravitational interaction increases from the surface of the Earth to the periphery of its gravisphere. Near the surface of the Earth, the speed of propagation of gravitational interaction is on 8 km/s less than on the periphery of the gravisphere. Gravitons in toroidal gravitational waves accelerating near the surface of the Earth form the reactive force of gravity for terrestrial bodies.

                You wrote «that the abstract distortion of space-time is equivalent to a non-ideal medium of the physical vacuum-the variable velocity of propagation of the gravitational fundamental interaction. But, if it is equivalent, how can be also an incorrect use of ideals properties? Equivalent means that we have two ways to interpret a phenomenon and that both of them are correct».

                I can quote Valery Morozov: "The formulation of the energy-momentum parameters of a gravitational field in general relativity can not be a tensor, but it is a pseudotensor, a quantity that transforms as a tensor only under linear coordinate transformations. This means that in GRT the energy of the gravitational field can not in principle be localized (which follows from the weak equivalence principle). Various authors introduce their own energy-momentum pseudotensors of the gravitational field, which possess certain "correct" properties, but one their variety shows that the problem does not have a satisfactory solution".

                However, these problems are not mine, but GRT, dig into mathematics, and not in physical mechanisms. I have nothing against the very principle of equivalence. The force of gravitation and the force of inertia have a single mechanism of action. My conclusions are based on a comparison of facts that can be observed, and on phenomena that have analogs around us.

                In my essay 2017, I clearly demonstrated in the example of phenomena in space that there is, assumedly, the only mechanism for the formation of force with the help of toroidal gravitational waves, which minimize the force of gravitation and inertia.

                The gravitational field in a toroidal gravitational wave is a vortex of the medium of a physical vacuum. I suppose the solar system is a vortex of a medium of a physical vacuum with spherical equipotential surfaces having the same speed of rotation and same gravitational potential. Despite the fact that the Earth in orbit is not moving relative to the medium of the physical vacuum, the large vortex gravisphere of the Earth has a resistance.

                However, the gravisphere of Earth in orbit is in the potential well of stability of the orbital soliton gravitational wave, which pushes the Earth along of orbit and compensates for the resistance force.

                The gradient of the gravitational potential of the orbital wave is equal to the gradient of the gravitational potential in the region of the Earth's orbit in the solar system and is directed in the opposite direction. Therefore, the forces of gravity of the Earth to the Sun and the forces of its inertia do not exist

                On the tides, you can see my answer to the question of Peter Jackson.

                If the force of attraction was, the Earth would emit X-ray radiation of enormous power in accordance with the Unruh effect, but the Earth does not radiate, and the comets radiate, because they are attracted to the Sun.

                By most powerful X-ray radiation 1 GW was possessed by a small comet Hyakutake, which moved around the Sun against the motion of the planets.

                For comparison, Jupiter, which is in a circular orbit, has the same power of 1 GW X-ray as Comet Hyakutake, although the masses of these bodies are not comparable.

                Consequently, GRT and Newton's law of gravitation are not valid for orbital bodies. Those. these laws are not fundamental, they are valid only for the surface of the Sun, the surfaces of planets and satellites in the solar system. Fundamental is the assertion that all fundamental interactions have potential stability pits, and are easily combined by a single formalism.

                I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

                Vladimir Fedorov

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