What is more fundamental - time or movement? The answer received in this essay as a consequence may seem somewhat unexpected.

    5 days later

    In the special theory of relativity, the dilation of time has a strictly symmetrical character. However, in reality, this symmetry is violated. The reason for the violation is shown in the essay and this is certainly gravitation.

    Dear Prof Robert D. Sadykov

    You have nicely analyzed the two fundamental properties of gravitation in the light of STR and GTR... Telling that Gravitational Bending of light is a fundamental property of light... Have a look at my alternative theory of gravitation..... "Dynamic Universe Model" also.

    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 Very Nice Essay ,

    I gave you 10, previously it was 5 now it is 7.5

    best wishes

    =snp

    Dear Robert Sadykov, Considering movement photon's in gravitational field, you come to conclusion: "The conclusion is that kinetic energy is themost fundamental form of energy and any potential energy, including the internal energy of particles, is ahidden form of kinetic energy " In the New Cartesian Physics shown, that formula mass - energy equivalence occurs from pressures Universe's. Your reasonings not suffice identities spaces and matters Descartes'. When Copernicus began to assert that the Earth revolves around the Sun, he had, according to Descartes, to add that along with the Earth around the Sun, the entire circumsolar space rotates. Look at my essay, FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows this principle. 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, which wants to be the theory of everything OO.

    Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

      Dear Robert Sadykov

      Your essay is very intresting topic. I think we agree many points, concerning the Nature of Gravity and Photon.

      "gravitation has a sufficiently large number of different manifestations and the observed effect of gravitational forces is just one of many consequences from two fundamental gravitational effects." Which I agree.

      Here is my essay that I think you may be Interested, and I would like your comments.

      https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3143

      Best wishes

      Bashir

        Dear Robert Sadykov,

        Thank you for a fascinating essay. Your diagrams are clear and well described in the text. While not completely compatible, our essays complement each other; we both consider photons in local gravity. For example, what you term the "gravi-kinetic" effect is represented in eqn (1) in my essay. I appreciated your mention of the Sagnac experiment as demonstrating constancy of the speed of light relative to the earth. This constancy predicts the null results of the Michelson-Morley experiment.

        In my essay I argue against length contraction (see my reference 10) which I believe you may represent as "gravi-contraction". Since you do not discuss the associated wavelengths of the photons, I wonder if 'gravi-contraction' is equivalent to changes in wavelength of the photon? I hope you will extend your theory to cover photon wavelengths.

        We also discuss "the dilation of local time". In my essay I reinterpret time-dilation from Einstein's space-time symmetry to an energy-time principle that is based on changes in energy. This seems to be compatible with your energy-based model. You note in a comment above that "the dilation of time has a strictly symmetrical character", but, in reality, the symmetry is violated. I agree 100%, as this is seen in the Global Positioning Sysytem.

        We are led to the same conclusions, such as that light emitted from an accelerated proton is constant relative to the earth, but not relative to the proton.

        Finally, while our particular models differ somewhat, I agree with you that kinetic energy is the most fundamental form of energy and provides the basis of mass.

        Thank you for a fascinating and excellent essay. I hope you will read my essay and comment on it.

        My very best regards,

        Edwin Eugene Klingman

          Dear Boris Dizhechko,

          On the key points, I fully agree with You. Indeed, space has a certain set of physical properties and therefore it is matter or substance. Of course, the properties of this substance are different from the properties, for example, of an electron. But the available properties are sufficient for the recognition of space as a substance. Gravity as a phenomenon in one way or another is related to the properties of space. Regarding energy. If any potential energy is a hidden form of kinetic energy, then any substance that has its own energy must consist of structures or elements that have zero rest mass and are moving at the speed of light. For example, an electron can be a ring-shaped closed string that has zero rest mass and rotating at the speed of light. Under these conditions, the zero mass of the string forms the usual non-zero mass of the electron. Other implementations are also possible, but some kind of movement or - in your terminology - vortices should be. I give You a high rating.

          Best wishes,

          Robert Sadykov

          Dear Robert Sadykov from your essay shows that you study the gravitational field very seriously and professionally. In New Cartesian Physics there are two forces: the pressure force of the Universe and the centrifugal force of rotation of the physical space. The other force is a combination of both.

          I wish you success, Dizhechko Boris

          Dear Edwin Klingman,

          In nature, everything is interconnected and, of course, time is connected with energy. Besides, time is associated with inertia, momentum, movement and space. The question is what connections are short and direct, and which are indirect? Let us consider these connections on the example of an electron. If the internal energy of an electron is kinetic energy, then any point that is part of the electron has zero rest mass and moves at the speed of light. The zero mass of points in a closed volume forms a nonzero mass of the electron. Here the points are very conditional definition - these can be any structures with nonzero dimensions. The motion of points inside an electron is an internal process of an electron. This motion causes a continuous change in the state of the electron, since each point continuously changes its spatial coordinates. The change in the state of the electron forms the proper time of the electron. Now imagine that the gravitational field has one single property - the action on the speed of light, and the smaller the distance to the central mass, the speed of light is less. Let the electron be placed in a gravitational field. In this case, all processes inside the electron slow down in proportion to the decrease in the local speed of light and this leads to a dilation of the electron proper time. In the case of an electron moving relative to the central mass, the average rate of processes inside the electron is additionally slowed down and this leads to an additional expansion of the electron proper time. Both forms of time dilation are observed in the GPS satellite system. In reality, the gravitational field has not one but two fundamental properties, and the combined action of these properties causes various adventures for the electron, including its gravitational acceleration. More details are shown in the essay.

          The length contraction caused by gravity can be discussed in the future. Here I note that the rate of time flow in different frames of reference can differ very much, but any two events that are simultaneous in one reference frame are also simultaneous in any other reference frame. So, I give You a high rating.

          Best wishes,

          Robert Sadykov

          Dear Bashir Yusuf,

          I will definitely find time to read and comment on your essay.

          Best wishes,

          Robert Sadykov

          Dear Robert,

          Being a physicist of gravitation, I found your Essay very interesting. Here are some comments:

          Your remark that the energy of the gravitational field is absent (I suppose that you mean that it is locally absent) seems consistent with Einstein Equivalence Principle (EEP) which has today a strong, unchallengeable empiric evidence. You stressed that your approach is consistent with the existing proportionality between inertial mass and energy. In order to have full consistence with EEP you need also to find an equivalence between inertial mass and gravitational mass (which is currently tested with the enormous precision of 1 part to 10000 billions). Do you obtain such an equivalence in your approach? Also notice that, if such equivalence is present in your theory, this should imply that your theory should be a good approximation of a full metric theory of gravity (general relativity or an extended theory of gravity). This should be very intriguing and a confirmation that your approach is correct.

          In any case, you wrote a nice and entertaining Essay, deserving my highest score.

          Maybe you could be interested in my Essay, where I discuss on gravitation and unified field theory ... with Albert Einstein!

          Good luck in the Contest.

          Cheers, Ch.

            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.

            Best wishes,

            Robert Sadykov

            Dear Robert Sadykov,

            We have very similar models of the electron, as 'confined kinetic energy'. I derive mine from the nonlinear equations(1) in my essay. And we seem to agree essentially on 'proper time' as it relates to these models. And that light emitted from an accelerated proton has constant speed relative to the Earth (or source of local gravity), not relative to the proton (or its 'inertial frame'.)

            I agree that length contraction can be put aside for the future, but I still hope that you will investigate a wavelength formulation of your model.

            Thank you again for stating that "the rate of time flow in different frames of reference can differ very much, but any two events that are simultaneous in one reference frame are also simultaneous in any other reference frame."

            Thanks for writing an excellent essay and entering it in the contest. Good luck.

            Edwin Eugene Klingman

            Dear Robert,

            Very deep analysis and ideas aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in fundamental science. Today, the broadest competition of ideas is needed, especially in cosmology . I would just add an ontological justification (basification) for your conception. In physics, it is necessary to introduce the Ontological standard of substantiation of fundamental theories. Physicists and poets should have a single picture of the Universum as an holistic generating process, filled with the meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E. Husserl).

            Yours faithfully,

            Vladimir Rogozhin

              Dear Robert

              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 Robert,

              I am pleased to see fresh ideas on the foundations of established theories, in particular I am interested in the Mach principle. Although I am very happy with GR, I think new fresh views deserve investigation and more considerations, either to check again the foundations, or to increase our understanding. Understanding the foundations is needed, especially since we want to see how GR stands in relation to QT. I wish you good luck in the contest!

              Best regards,

              Cristi Stoica, Indra's net