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

      Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

      One can agree with John Wheeler that philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers. Indeed, philosophy plays a very important role in physics. Moreover, physics began with philosophy. A classic example is the philosophy of Aristotle. Every important step in physics took place with the participation of philosophy. This concerns the creation of both classical and relativistic mechanics. Newton was equally a physicist and philosopher. The general theory of relativity was created under the impression of the works of several philosophers, and above all Mach. In addition, philosophy plays an important role in the generalization of the physical knowledge obtained and allows us to look at everything that is happening from the height of the stars.

      Best wishes,

      Robert Sadykov

      Dear Cristinel Stoica,

      Thank you for your comment. Gravitation can be associated with quanta not in the sense of quantizing the gravitational field as it is realized with the electromagnetic field, but vice versa. The gravitational field remaining a continuous space with the properties of a refracting medium can use the quantum properties of a test particle for the gravitational acceleration of this particle (Section 11). As a consequence, the internal energy of the test particle is converted into the external kinetic energy of this particle (Section 13).

      Best wishes,

      Robert Sadykov

      Dear Robert

      I am fully share your principles of judgments. It is very right your point about controversial of existing interpretation of gravity phenomena, especially on relation to non equality of different representation of gravity energy. It just show that the physical essence of gravity remains still yet unclear on 100% as it has in the time of Great Newton. The successes of GR as will as of many other alternative equal theories we must see as the technical advance only, that we need explain yet from the cognitive viewpoint. From this side, I think really that your approach can be very valuable - i.e. to look gravity as aftermath of some kinetic process.

      This is not only empty-favorable words, but the dynamical imagination of gravity can be change everything in this sphere and bring to opening this unsolved great mystery of nature. Thus, I can surely tell that you move on the right way, then I need to wish you success in the contest.

      Best Regards

      P.S.

      Check here (Article) when you will find good time.

      • [deleted]

      Hi Robert,

      We are both looking at gravity from different viewpoints. I was not familiar with the Sagnac effect .... very interesting. Some of your concepts can fill in gaps in my "space-time" which I claim has something like an index of refraction.

      Check out my essay and view the diagrams, one of which shows an interesting ether that moves with the earth (it is dark energy).

      You can also view my website, and say hello via e-mail. www.digitalwavetheory.com

      High marks on your essay. It is not that it is perfect, but it is breaking ground on the most fundamental of fundamentals (in terms of physics).

      Don Limuti

      Dear Robert,

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

      Your essay allowed to consider us like-minded people.

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

      Vladimir Fedorov

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

      Write a Reply...