Unified Field by Marcelo Garcia Sanchez

The most major wonders are ensnared in the clarification of numerous marvels, yet are themselves clarified just by a fundamental Principle. Also, how said Einstein 'the really innovative guideline dwells in Mathematics'. Here, we go to this basic Principle. Essay Writers

Dear Marcelo Garcia Sanchez,

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

Yes the least understood sign in all equations is the equal "="/

Marcelo I absolutely LOVE your essay -- so many good points -- and I really like your "dreaminess" in the way you write. Each line give me so many ideas. I agree basically with all your many points -- I like how you present the idea of the mirror and that +iвЃєВ№ and -iвЃ»В№ "duality". I have rated it highly.

What is fundamental - is how we define the imaginary unit in maths. Recall the imaginary unit is defined by solving uniquely the equation xВІ+1= 0. That is, i is a unique (i.e. distinguishable) number defined as the square root of minus one, i.e., i в‰Ў +в€љ-1. Since there are two possible square roots for any number +в€љ and -в€љ, clearly the square roots of a negative number cannot be distinguished until one of the two is defined as the imaginary unit, at which point +i and -i can then be distinguished. Since either choice is possible, there is no ambiguity in defining i as "the" square root of minus one.

Your essay uses the same basis ideas has my essay What is fundamental is the area of the imaginary unit

I hope you have time to read my essay. Cheers Harri

Dear Marcelo Garcia Sanchez. Unified Field is a physical space, which, according to Descartes, is matter and at every point that the number is put under a Unified Law. This law can be the law of the constancy of the flow of forces through the surface of the sphere around this point. . Look at my page , FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes. Evaluate and leave your comment there. I highly value your essay, however, I'll give you a rating after becoming acquainted with the Descartes' idea. Do not allow New Cartesian Physics go away into nothingness.

Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

Precisely the history of science shows that a fundamental understanding of the universe cannot be achieved by "only through a pure thinking".

i = sqrt(-1) implies i2 = 1, but the inverse is not true.

There is not anything special on i "referring to itself, is self-referential" on the expression i=-1/i. The same happens with any other expression as a=1/a or b = 2-b.

There is not any special symmetry on +i+1 = -i-1. In fact it is equivalent to -i+1 = +i-1, which does not satisfy your "mirror symmetry".

The principle of uncertainty is not "a mathematical specification of the initial state of the universe".

The negative sign on the Minkowskian element is not here for mathematical consistency. One can build consistent mathematical spaces without the sign. The reason is physical, time and space are not the same.

Time is a physical property. In fact is is one of the fundamental quantities used in the International System of Units, not an illusion of the mind.

Past and future are not twins. One is well-defined the other is not. Past and future only play symmetrical roles on geometrical approaches that ignore elements such as evolution and irreversibility.

Velocity is not defined as position over time. That is average velocity. Also expressions as V = X+1 wedge X-1 = x * 1/t are dimensionally invalid no matter what dimensions has X.

Minkowski geometrical vision of an unified space and time is incorrect by reasons mentioned above.

Anti-particles and dark matter are two different concepts.

"The classic idea that an electron is an individual that has a defined position and spin". Electron spin is not a classic property, and electrons in quantum theory can have defined position: the state is then given by position eigenfunctions.

"In 1930, Paul Dirac combined Quantum mechanics with Special relativity and proved that space-time symmetries mathematically imply that every type of particle had and associated corresponding anti-particle". In reality he admitted he didn't combine both satisfactory and looked for a proper combination until his death. Also antiparticles can be introduced without any need of "space-time symmetries". The original Dirac equation is not spacetime symmetric. Time is a parameter whereas space is given by an operator.

That "quasi-symmetry amongst particles and forces, the denominated bosons and fermions" is only a mirage based in the belief that both kind of particles are at same fundamental level. It is possible to eliminate photons from a description and leave only electrons, for instance.

Lisi E8 work is incorrect, a mentioned in many places since the first minute his work got attention.

Baez claim that quantum particles "are also waves" is based in a too common misunderstanding of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics says that particles are particles and experiments prove this.

The mention to Paul Dirac search for "mathematical beauty" as the only way to discover an "absolute truth" is kind of ironic when most of the work he did is either not fundamental or just disproven. Any decent quantum theory textbook will mention how the Dirac equation (the original wavefuction equation) is not considered a valid equation anymore, and it is replaced by an identity among operators which is funnily also called the Dirac equation. As Schwinger put it the Dirac hole theory is better left as a historical curiosity and forgoten...

The final equation

+X+1 + (-X-1) = 1

not only disagrees with the "mirror symmetry" (+X+1 = -X-1) presented earlier when X=i, but it does not provide any fundamental description of anything. And the same happens with the transformed expression

X2 - X - 1 = 0

The solution to this equation is

x = 1/2 [1 +- sqrt(5)]

which does not bring anything fundamental or is useful for anything.

Respected Prof Marcelo Garcia Sanchez

Very nice words..." What makes a theory more fundamental is its closeness to our deepest explanations. A phenomenon (entity or process) is 'fundamental' if a sufficiently deep understanding of the Cosmos depends on understanding that phenomenon. And a deeper-understanding is one that has more generality. ..........'the truly creative principle resides in Mathematics'..... wonderfully correct...

I hope you will not mind that I am not following main stream physics...

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

Dear Marcelo

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