Essay Abstract

Physicists have been searching for the fundamental building blocks and the fundamental laws that govern the universe since ancient times. I will define those sets of building blocks and those sets of laws of interactions as fundamental, which are minimum in number and yet models and explains the maximum number of observable phenomena. We have not found such minimal sets. Because we face a permanent information retrieval problem. No finite set of experiment can extract complete information about any particular object. In our evidence (data) gathering experiments, we study an unknown object by letting it interact with a "known" object. We never know any object completely. So we are forced to approximate, assume, etc. We can keep refining our knowledge through diverse iterations. Mathematical theory is immensely helpful. However, Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem gives us another limiting block. Hence, our search for fundamental building blocks and fundamental laws of interactions must keep evolving. How to guide this evolution? A working theory, based upon human created postulates and human invented mathematical theories do not automatically guarantee that we can grasp the ontological reality of the universe. We need to adopt system engineering thinking to keep us grounded to ontological reality. If an instrument works, then the working rules behind it are allowed by nature. This is not always true for working mathematical theories. I give an example on how the system engineering thinking, or Interaction Process Mapping Epistemology (IPM-E) applied to mathematical Superposition Principle vs. experimentally observable Superposition Effect, helped me re-discover Non-Interaction of Wave in the absence of interacting media. This has led me to appreciate that space is a Complex Tension Filed (CTF), since it allows both the EM waves and particles to emerge as diverse kinds of its oscillations. CTF is the fundamental field that generates the

Author Bio

ChandraSekhar Roychoudhuri is a Research Professor at the Univ. of Connecticut. He came to USA as a Fulbright Scholar and did his PhD from the Institute of Optics, University of Rochester. He spent 14 years in industries (TRW, Perkin Elmer and United Technologies). His last position in industry was, Chief Scientist, Optics and Advanced Technology Lab, Optical Systems, United technologies. He also served both OSA and SPIE as one of their Board of Directors. Chandra has carried out a wide range of basic experiments on light-matter interaction processes over several decades and re-discovered the generalized property: Non-Interaction Waves (NIW).

Download Essay PDF File

Dear Professor Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri,

FQXi.org is clearly seeking to confirm whether Nature is fundamental.

Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe must consist only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Only the truth can set you free.

Joe Fisher, Realist

    Dear Realist Joe Fisher:

    I do not have valuable comments to add to your opinion.

    Nevertheless, I have a personal problem with "infinity".

    I can mathematically define "infinity" = (0/1); or similar mathematical constructs. However, that does not give me any practical or engineering sense about "infinity". If I cannot design, construct and let people walk through the "infinite bridge"; then "infinity" is just my logically self-consistent, but imaginary mathematical idea only.

    I do not know what the ultimate reality is. Since nature seems to function as a superb system-engineer, I prefer to guide myself as a system-engineering thinker. In fact, that is how our five million year old Mother-Lucy made sure that we keep evolving sustainably through tool-making and persistent skill-honing for further tool making. Mama-Lucy did not even have grammatical language, forget about mathematical theories.

    Sincerely,

    Chandra.

    Dear Fellow Essayists

    This will be my final plea for fair treatment.,

    FQXI is clearly seeking to find out if there is a fundamental REALITY.

    Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

    All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe must consist only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

    Only the truth can set you free.

    Joe Fisher, Realist

    Chandra,

    I'd almost given up hope of seeing you here this year. I've printed you essay and will revert, but you already have some points for the abstract (even though it was missing the whole observable universe!!). ..i.e.

    "We never know any object completely. So we are forced to approximate, assume, etc. .. Yet so many forget that's how our foundational theories and beliefs are constructed. And;

    "We need to adopt system engineering thinking to keep us grounded to ontological reality.

    So true. In doing just that I have an apparently shocking result this year which I'd greatly value your assessment of. (please do also look at Declan Trails matching code and plot).

    Very Best

    Peter

      Peter:

      It is good to learn that you have found my essay.

      I am eagerly looking forward to detailed critique.

      Chandra.

      Chandra,

      Detailed critique is rare & valuable hereabouts but I'll try my best.

      Overall? Quite brilliant and pleasurable in all aspects & scoring criteria. I agree your "Interaction Process Mapping Epistemology" (IPM-E) would be a valuable tool and hope I've applied it well in my own essay to apparently powerful effect.

      You identify well the 'success rut' flawed theory creates and new way of thinking required. I'm in the midst of discussing an SR distinguishability experiment on the LinkedIn 'Theoretical Physics' blog right now. Do take a look. I agree yours is good.

      There are a handful of things in areas I've researched inconsistent with my conclusions and coherent rationale, some published. Lets discuss in turn;

      1. Stationary Background. As shown by George Smoot (Nobel work), others and NASA & Planck data there's an infinite hierarchy of LOCAL 'stationary' backgrounds, NOT just one universal one. That also unlocks a lot of other anomalies. I don't think it detracts from your case but should strengthen it.

      2.'Emission theory' is then consistent in Maxwell's 'near field' but his transition zone is only

      Peter:

      Let me comment only one point.

      STATIONARY BACKGROUND:

      I would appreciate a good reference to Smoot's "LOCAL 'stationary' backgrounds" related article.

      In my essay, I am claiming that there exists only one cosmic stationary background, Complex Tension Field (CTF), which is the FOUNDATION of the entire universe. It holds 100% of the cosmic energy as electromagnetic tensions, which is also capable of sustaining other various potential gradients (forces) generated by the vortex-like self-looped oscillations of this CTF. I am calling the stable, in-phase oscillations as field-particles. EM waves are linear excitation and hence keep traveling forever at "c", leveraging Maxwell's "epsilon-not" and "mu-not". The field particles follow Newton's first law. They stay as stationary self-looped oscillations, unless acted upon by a potential gradient generated by another field-particle. Newton's second law comes out of these potential gradients. However, there are no Newtonian "mass" as the "substance contained in the rigid body"; recall m = E/c2. The mass is not an immutable property of anything in this universe. The self-looped oscillation stays manifest with the energy E=hf, where f is the self-looped oscillation frequency. However, the self-looped oscillation must stay in phase to preserve its stability. This has given Schrodinger the mistaken sense of a plane wave, exp [i2πft]. It is just a harmonic oscillator, albeit with quite complex spatial form.

      Chandra.

      • [deleted]

      Chandra,

      Are you familiar with Lanikea? You should be, you live there. And the 'Great Attractor'? Mapping of the universe shows there's no ONE single absolute rest frame or background medium at rest but a hierarchy of complex flows at very different speeds and directions. It's not just matter moving IN space (unless you think Earth is unique or central in the universe, so the only place NOT doing millions of kph!) it's whole systems, including any background, 'flowing'. Indeed the logic only works if thought of as the flow 'carrying' the condenses 4% of baryonic litter.

      Smoot only analysed up to our local group but had to invoke; 'Frame last scattered' concept. An early paper with Scott included a contorted explanation proving flawed; http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0601307v1.pdf Here's a very good short video going way beyond that; Dynamic flow model of the universe.

      Your model needn't change apart from recognising the valid backgrounds are always LOCAL. Sure, the centre will have a rest frame but with zero relevance locally. Speed c is local and a relative quality. (Even most astronomers struggle to understand and apply that as it varies relativistic interpretations - as would yours but less consistently with observation).

      Also a Planck paper on 'Bulk Flows' here I haven't re studied yet; On the Statistical Significance of the Bulk Flow Measured by the PLANCK Satellite.

      I have an overwhelming stack of stuff on various aspect but hope the above helps. I'm sure you'll see the logic.

      Your score seems to need a deserved boost so I'll apply mine now.

      Very best

      Peter

        Peter:

        I am certainly thankful that you are taking time to give me further references to educate me on Astrophysics (and Cosmology). I sure need to read up more on these.

        I have just looked at the paper, referred by you, written by F. Atrio-Barandela. These LOCAL velocities appears to be based upon Cosmological Redshift measurements. My model for the Redshift is dominantly due to the linear distant dependent dissipative loss of energy of the EM weaves. It is not due to Expanding Universe. However, I do accept various LOCAL movements of galaxies and their clusters. My model preserves Hubble Constanta, to accept all Redshift measurements. I explain why the Doppler Shift model is untenable in the papers #2013.4 and #2013.5. Please, download from my web: {Link:http://www.natureoflight.org/CP/].

        Please, quickly read the last paragraph of the FQXi essay, section on "Conclusion and Comment". I believe, we need to find funding to organize a separate research organization, like Perimeter Institute; but devoted to rebuild physics from the very bottom up, starting from the Newtonian Mechanics. Any thoughts on this?

        Chandra.

        Dear Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri

        Just letting you know that I am making a start on reading of your essay, and hope that you might also take a glance over mine please? I look forward to the sharing of thoughtful opinion. Congratulations on your essay rating as it stands, and best of luck for the contest conclusion.

        My essay is titled

        "Darwinian Universal Fundamental Origin". It stands as a novel test for whether a natural organisational principle can serve a rationale, for emergence of complex systems of physics and cosmology. I will be interested to have my effort judged on both the basis of prospect and of novelty.

        Thank you & kind regards

        Steven Andresen

        Dear ChandraSekhar Roychoudhuri, you just barely got to the point at which the New Cartesian Physics begins. You did not notice the identity space and matter of Descartes', which allows you to affirm that the formula mass-energy equivalence follows from the existence of the pressure of the universe. I agree that 100% of the energy of the universe is in this universal field of CTF, but I notice that humanity has always extracted only it, the other is not.

        Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

          Dear Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich:

          Many thanks for acknowledging that the Complex Tension Filed (CTF) holds 100% of the cosmic energy as "various complex" tensions. Thanks also for underscoring the new developments that you have carried out in "Cartesian Physics". Sorry, I was not aware of this. I will read your essay and other contributions.

          Sincerely,

          Chandra.

          May i request you to clarify why we need not worry about the ultimate truth? I too feel that as we approach this enigmatic query, the answers start to become tougher as illusions from our esisting knowledge come in the way. I am keen if you can spare time to visit our essay and comment on some aspects of philsophical nature we happen to coose to discuss there. For example, certain experiments are difficult to undertake in cosmology where we may measure the speed of light way back billion of years, as we need to approach the Universe that has far receeded from us by now! Kindly do find time to visit our essay and provide your critical comments there beside rating it!

          Respected Prof Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri sab,

          Wonderful words ...."Physicists have been searching for the fundamental building blocks and the fundamental laws that govern the universe since ancient times. I will define those sets of building blocks and those sets of laws of interactions as fundamental, which are minimum in number and yet models and explains the maximum number of observable phenomena. We have not found such minimal sets. Because we face a permanent information retrieval problem. "... Very nice observation....

          Your work on Chandra, and NIW are real milestones in history of Physics...!

          I hope you will not mind me as my work is not in GR...

          By the way...Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed................ yours is very nice essay best wishes .... I highly appreciate hope your essay ....You may please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

          Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :

          -No Isotropy

          -No Homogeneity

          -No Space-time continuum

          -Non-uniform density of matter, universe is lumpy

          -No singularities

          -No collisions between bodies

          -No blackholes

          -No warm holes

          -No Bigbang

          -No repulsion between distant Galaxies

          -Non-empty Universe

          -No imaginary or negative time axis

          -No imaginary X, Y, Z axes

          -No differential and Integral Equations mathematically

          -No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to GR on any condition

          -No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models

          -No many mini Bigbangs

          -No Missing Mass / Dark matter

          -No Dark energy

          -No Bigbang generated CMB detected

          -No Multi-verses

          Here:

          -Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies

          -Newton's Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way

          -All bodies dynamically moving

          -All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium

          -Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe

          -Single Universe no baby universes

          -Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only

          -Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..

          -UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass

          -Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step

          -Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering

          -21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet

          -Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy

          -Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.

          - Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true....Have a look at

          http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.html

          I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information........

          Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.

          In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from "http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ "

          I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied

          Best

          =snp

          Respected Prof Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri sab,

          Thank you for your wonderful Blessings.. and Thank you for these nice words...

          I got some questions....

          Why Astrophysics and cosmology became "professional"?

          Why should these became a religion-like-belief that "the foundation of the edifice of physics has been laid out by GR and QM"?

          Why they became , Such controlling culture, which allows only the creation or invention of "new bricks and/or stones that will fit into the existing edifice? Why the GR and QM are extracting only partial truth of nature? Why this science became religion or culture?

          Yes I am also very happy that that FQXi is helping to open up enquiring minds again.

          Can you please tell me the truth of some these "why"s, I did not really understand them........?

          Thank you for your blessings once again sir for Blissful words..."you have developed some logically self-consistent model that are not predicted by the prevailing theories."

          Best Regards

          =snp

            Respected sir,

            Thank you for the nice analyzing reply and your kind Blessings... I am giving 10, it was 6.6 earlier and now it is 7.2 after 10... Best wishes for the essay....

            Best Regards

            =snp

            Chandra,

            I agree on redshift, indeed I have a great 3D geometry consistent with a 'discrete field' model naturally producing redshift with expansion of the Schrodinger 'light sphere' surface. Video here; Time Dependent Redshift..& implications

            But that's just 'distance'. Peculiar velocities are quite valid. The point is one of logic, distinguishing one 'absolute' background frame (nonsense)from heirarchical LOCAL backgrounds consistent with Minkowski and Einsteins descriptions and SR's postulates (just NOT interpretation!). My other essays here and papers better rationalise and identify overwhelming evidence of the plasma/shock TZ 'surfaces last scattered').

            I couldn't find an 'FQXi essay, section on "Conclusion and Comment". Directions? I agree entirely but am not holding my breath on funding. I'm semi retired with houses DB7 & yacht paid for so have time without funding. Indeed I have a small collaboration already which you'd be very welcome to join. We'd first need to review each others papers & eliminate disagreement. I think consortia have 10 times the power of any 'one man theory'. I found yours tricky to find and access. Most of mine are here; Academia.edu/JacksonP

            I've explored implication in a wide range of areas and resolutions to anomalous findings do keep flowing out! One big tome is half written and I have a queue of important papers to write; i.e. solving the Stellar Aberration and serious 'Ecliptic Plain' problems. i.e. read p6 here carefully; http://aa.usno.navy.mil/publications/docs/Circular_179.pdf

            We must stay in close touch this time. Great to see your essay rising.

            Very best.

            Peter

            Dear "SNP":

            "Why they became , Such controlling culture, which allows only the creation or invention of "new bricks and/or stones that will fit into the existing edifice? Why the GR and QM are extracting only partial truth of nature? Why this science became religion or culture?"

            I am again impressed by your persistent enquiring mind generating newer questions. That is the key to perpetual evolution of human minds. However, this was consciously discouraged by human tribal leaders around the globe once they settled down after developing agriculture, animal husbandry, etc. The strongest and the most intelligent tribal leaders could be easily replaced by any of their progenies. The continued management remained in the hands of the privileged intellectuals (ministers). That is why the older tribal leaders employed the most intelligent administrators (ministers), while giving them access to opulent life.

            India is the best example that employed this technique earliest in the history. Recall that Veda, Upanishad, Geeta still represents best possible deep-thinking human philosophy. Yet, this knowledge was banned from the masses. That was institutionalization of slavery of Bharatiya masses. It started well before three thousand years ago. That is why Buddha and Jain "rebelled" (~500 years before Christ's birth). But our intellectuals, serving their masters, prevailed. Propagated explanations were brilliant to protect tribalism all over the world (later, feudalism, colonialism, capitalism, etc.). It continues even today with brilliant rationalizations, all over the world, as to why modern Democracy is the best. However, it not facilitating the evolution of all human minds! Subtly, the tribal-cultures, all over the world, have been continuously enhancing the interpretations of democracy to exploit the primitive evolutionary minds of the masses - procreation, survival food, pleasure, a sense of "stable life" and the fear of being deprived of these evolutionary desires. Instead of pro-actively nurturing the evolution of the humans masses, they actively "nurtured" to keep us at the level that we were ten thousand years ago; while enjoying the benefits of most modern technologies, managing our lives with fingers on our smart phones.

            Human evolution can be traced back to five million years old "Lucy", the first primitive bi-pedal human. Compared to Lucy, we are so much advanced in technology. But, we still are not consciously constructing a purposeful human civilization. I am sure everybody raises their children to have some purpose in their lives. But, those purposes are defined and constrained by to which "social-socket they can get themselves plugged in". Only rare few individuals venture to explore the meaning and the purpose of human evolution in the biosphere and their long-term purposes and roles in the cosmo-sphere. No country has defined a long-term national purpose for their collective citizenry. Our tribal leader-classes have become masters of applying skills of "animal husbandry" to manage the thinking-human masses all over the world.

            Only by systematic re-kindling of the enquiring minds of all humans can we start to evolve again as a thinking species. Almost all one-year-olds demonstrate that they are born with superb enquiring minds, displayed by their persistent original questions. But, we successfully kill the evolution of those genetically ordained minds by the time they graduate from college. We tend to grow a pair of long ears and a pair of horns like the ships we raise!

            The masses are systematically deprived of recognizing the higher purpose of human evolution through our ten-thousand years' of matured culture directed toward living as if we really belong to the "Animal Farm" (George Orwell). I am really not saying anything new or profound.

            We need to start thinking along the line of "Evolution Process Congruency" and as system engineers. We humans are here today because the brilliant engineers like Lucy and her husband continued to develop tools and technologies to live better than their "the-then best". That is the core biological evolutionary pressure. Remember, Lucy did not have any mathematics; not even any matured language. But they continued successfully through trial and errors using intuitive thinking to emulate the evolving nature, a marvelous system engineer. When something worked, they were automatically emulating some ontological rule (laws?) of nature.

            Yet no large set of (human invented) mathematical rules, or experimental data can gather COMPLETE information about any entity in this world. We are just advanced "Lucie's". We still do not know exactly what the electrons and photons are. However, we have succeeded in ushering in the Knowledge Age by constructing the Global Internet System!

            Please, read the Ch. 12 on how to think in the Indian paperback of my book, "Causal Physics: Photon by Nob-Interaction of Waves", Taylor and Francis, Indian Paperback (2017). You can also go to my web and down load the papers where my concepts have been developed over the last five decades. Remember, Lucy did not invent the modern religions five million years ago.

            Evolution is collective. Diversity is at the very foundation of biospheric evolution. These are not simply politically expedient expressions. Now that the humans have become thinking animals, it is fundamentally critical for us to allow the diversity of concepts to flourish, as long as they are expressly evolution process congruent. The only certain truth is that no individual humans have ever succeeded in finding the ultimate truth about our Cosmic System, of which, the Solar system is only a miniscule entity. When the Sun becomes a Red Giant, no life will exist in the Solar System. So, humans have to become deep Space-Travelers. Fortunately, we still have a billion years to evolve, provided we do not succeed in exterminating ourselves before becoming deep Space-Travelers!

            My papers: http://www.natureoflight.org/CP/

            Chandra.