You don't have to model the universe. You need only to be slightly better than accepted models. That is, model both Gr and QM plus one of the observations that are perplexing to existing models.

Perfect is unattainable, Better is attainable.

    Enjoyable presentation. I agree with you on the past being relics, artifacts and memories materially Now. The two universes is good idea but imo not taken far enough. They need to be of different kinds. Trying to fit presentism and the block universe together is like forcing jigsaw pieces together. Instead something has to give way.Thanks for sharing your thinking on various idea. Regards Georgina

      John, I agree. I was deluded that my computational TOE could be practicably implemented by a computer and give results at the Planck length scale. But a lesser scale 3-D cellular automata may still be interesting to model - I would need to get Wolfram onto it, as I am resource limited!

      I have an alternative to GR that I am exploring, that has arisen from my non-self referential definition of time.

      My gimli theory is able to suggest answers as to the nature of dark matter, and also the gimli model of the electron looks as though it provides the Vector Potential as well as the B field.

      My Ginnungagap theory provides the foundations for a quantum gravity theory that is different from those currently on offer.

      So I am no longer after the perfect TOE!! I'll just keep plugging away on what I have already attained.

      I also enjoyed your essay. It seems as though we have a philosophy in common. The block universe idea fits in with the philosophy of Eternalism, which I believe is at odds with presentism. Chalk and cheese. I am definitely a Presentist, pushing relative verdandism as the way forward. I shall try and find out about your RICP framework and report back.

      I am not a multiverse advocate, but I used the two universe idea to make a point that free will of a conscious entity will stop determinism in identical parallel universes. Regards, Lockie.

      The intro of mine is a quick summary, numbered points on the discussion page. Material uni-temporal universe and from inputs received from there the observer generated 'universe /mapping' experienced or if a device output. Uni-temporal, same time everywhere. Generated 'mapping, spacetime allowing non-simultaneity of experienced event by different observers.

      Lots of papers on viXra

      I liked seeing the proximity of some of our ideas. You explain well.I don't like 'Many Worlds but there are other kinds of universe such as that see-able by occupants of a distant galaxy that I accept as logical. Regards Georgina

      a month later

      Dear Lockie,

      I enjoyed your essay very much, particularly the section on wave/particle duality which I have always found uncomfortable. You make a good argument. I also liked your spin on LaPlace's demon (or omnipotent entity?). It highlights how important free will is, and puts up a good argument against determinism.

      It is a pity someone spammed you with a lousy vote. I noticed they did it to quite a few authors - a real pity. I will vote later after I have corresponded with the various essayists. Good luck from now.

      Marts

      ps. If my essay is accepted you will see I found an old presentation of yours that I used to make an important point. I hope you approve!

        8 days later

        Dear Marts

        I am pleased you liked my essay. I made another original observation re Loschmidt's paradox which shows that wave/particle duality is nonsense. It is a pity no-one has picked up on this before. I think everyone is so enamoured with quantum mechanics that only heretics speak out and ask the hard questions.

        I was also humbled that you used my old "Future of Physics" talk to make a point about variable speed of light. I hope it can help decide on the ether in due course. I see that Demjanov has been using an allied idea for some decades. Maybe now some more physicists will read his work and perform his type of experiment.

        Best wishes for your essay.

        Lockie

        7 days later

        Dear Lockie,

        I enjoyed your essay and especially your excellent observations.

        You note that Laplace's demon cannot collect all the required info "at a certain moment " as special relativity eliminates a universal present across all space.

        Physicists seem to compartmentalize, using, at any given moment, only a subset of physics theories that support their current effort, yet defending others in other contexts.

        You observe that two identical universes might track perfectly until consciousness arises, then all bets are off.

        In my opinion a TOE need not compute everything. Schultz's essay distinguishes between algorithmic patterns (essentially computable) and non-algorithmic patterns which do not place necessary limitations on knowability.

        I think Feynman said: "More can be known than can be proven."

        Your discussion of Loschmidt's paradox is succinct and insightful.

        Finally, your view of presentism in terms of "causal relations between energy forms (...) in the Now" matches my view.

        All in all an enjoyable and insightful essay.

        Edwin Eugene Klingman

          Dear Edwin,

          Thank you for your kind comments on my essay.

          My friend Barry and myself agreed some 20 years ago that everything we discuss and theorise on is 'provisional'. We change our minds on ideas constantly as we flesh them out. We are always looking for the 'best fit' to current data and knowledge from a physical understanding point of view.

          Personally I believe the 'demon' can take a snapshot of the Universe, as the roots of 'simultaneity' are not well considered, and are tied to a constant speed of light and relativity. My algorithmic TOE works via iteration. I consider an iteration to be similar to the tick of a master clock, yet my theory of time is based on the energy density at a point in space, which gives relative flow of time. A relative flow map of the Universe would match a gravitational map for the best part, but it also encompasses time dilation due to kinetic energy relative to the reference frame of an aether. I think of time flow as 'x' seconds per second, where the denominator is empty space (which we conveniently regard as here on Earth), an the numerator 'x' is a dilated time in the range 0 to 1. However tallying energy can be problematic as we do not understand 'dark energy' at all.

          I am glad you like my version of presentism, as I personally find the alternative (eternalism or block universe) abhorrent.

          I am currently reading your marvellous treatise" Everything's relative, or is it?" which I found in a link elsewhere. I am spending about 50% of my time in isolation reading physics essays, it certainly passes the time and relieves he anxiety!

          Thanks again,

          Lockie

          Dear Lachlan

          Good and nice essay! You touch several issues that are well connected with the main topic of this competition. You argue well the problem of computability by relating it to your own experiences. This is a nice way of expressing ideas. The topic of time is very interesting as well, I have thought about it and I am aware of what you discuss; although I am still struggling with this concept. I guess nobody understand time despite that we can measure it.

          All the best!

          Israel

            Thanks for your reflections on my essay, Israel.

            I am enjoying your 'The preferred system of reference reloaded' at the moment.

            There are so many interesting essays and it takes time to read them, reflect on them and then leave comments. I am a newbie at this!

            I have rated your 'Lost in Maths' essay which I enjoyed, and I have found your review paper on MMX, which ties in with quite a few of this year's essays.

            Good luck to you.

            Lockie

            16 days later

            Dear Lockie

            I enjoyed reading your essay and found it very stimulating. It's good to see that the responses you received were so positive.

            I would like to add some thoughts on the "wave particle duality paradox." I totally agree that it is absurd to assume that particles possess a form of schizoid behaviour where it's either a wave or a particle depending on the whim or actions of the observer.

            Maxwell demands that you must not ignore the magnetic moment of the electron, even when stationary, but especially when travelling at constant velocity. The magnetic moment of the electron has several degrees of freedom: it can radiate due to precession or radiate due to rotations or tumbling. Think nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) or rotational spectra, neutrons atoms and molecules also contain magnetic moments. A fast electron can gain angular momentum on interacting with a surface or a force, the result must give rise to radiation in almost all orientations of the magnetic moment. Because of the very small diameter of the electron gamma rays would be generated for practical initial linear velocities. Imagine a squash ball containing a magnet inert-acting with walls, wouldn't Maxwell's Equations insist on radiation? The paradox of Young's two slit with electrons is solved with this approach!?

            Good luck Lockie

            Dear Mr Cresswell,

            I appreciate your take on the turning machine in your endnotes

            Great essay

            The longer form of my essay explores some similar thoughts about the turning machine and it similarity to living biological entities

              Dear Kwame,

              Thanks for your comments on my essay. As you already know I enjoyed yours and encourage you to continue to be an active thinker. People won't always agree with you, but that doesn't matter as along as you have an open mind (which is difficult) and you are your own constant critic!

              LL&P

              Lockie

              Dear Dr Lachlan Cresswell....

              This post I am repeating here

              Thank you for reading my essay very critically, thank you for accepting my essay to 99%, for me it was a difficult task wonderfully achieved!!!

              Now lets come to the point you did not agree.... lets have live discussion....

              These Imaginery numbers or complex numbers; quaternions, octonions, etc used for multiple variables are tracked.............. Quaternions which are non commutative are especially good for rotations in 3D space, something that is important in particle physics. Although Einstein used tensors, quaternions are making a comeback as they can be programmed on computers, and are used a lot in computer graphics........

              I also accept without any problems...... ......

              But assume a situation where a third order or any higher order differential equation is used in one or more dimensions while formation, can you get a real solution???

              Also assume a situation where some value represented in an imaginary axis perpendicular to time axis, what will be the physical meaning of that point?

              Assuming mathematics and giving solutions is ok, what will be the physical meaning ...

              40 years I was working on Dynamic Universe model and used tensors with simple equations but not differential equations. Otherwise the real solutions we will get will have singularities.

              May the hidden Vak be revealed..........!!!!

              Best Regards

              =snp

                Dear Dr,

                I request you not to make any conclusions without a proper discussion.......

                I was working on this Dynamic Universe Model for the last forty years under the guidance given by Maa VAK (She is Hindu Goddess Saraswathi for wisdom and education). Almost all papers are important, all results are important, many predictions came true. I dont know which result to elaborate, For example...

                -Explains Formation of Astronomical Jets and their high Velocities at Galaxy centers..... The particles traveling parallel to plane of Galaxy suddenly they turn perpendicular at Galaxy center !

                -Predicts Frequency shift in electro-magnetic radiation near huge gravitating masses .... this is in addition to bending of light as predicted by Einstein !!

                -Galaxy Disk formation: Densemass Equations ..... There is no requirement of Blackholes!!

                -Explains gravity disturbances like Pioneer anomaly,.... Until now we considered a single body (eg. Earth) gravitation on another (apple) only.This SITA approach solves the Gravitational catapult !

                -Non-collapsing large scale mass structures .... They dont fall a single lump mass dueto gravitation !

                -Offers Singularity free solutions ...... No Bigbang, No blackholes !!

                -Solving Missing mass in Galaxies, and finds reason for Galaxy circular velocity curves.... ... NO MISSING MASS if you calculate using SITA approach !

                -Blue shifted and red shifted Galaxies co-existence, in an Accelerating Expanding Universe...... 30% are blue shifted Galaxies !

                -Explains the large voids and non-uniform matter densities.... UNIFORM density is not observed

                -Withstands 105 times the Normal Jeans swindle test.... other N-body problems fail at at 1% of any position disturbance

                -Explains VLBI variations.... Other wise very difficult

                - Explains energy to mass conversion....... Energy --->Frequency upshifting --> mass

                -Explains Cosmic-rays formation with the same SITA approach, origins of Cosmic Rays expalined

                - Proposed an UNIVERSE model with full cycle of Energy (from Sun)--- to Mass( neutrinos to Hydrogen- to formation of various elements) ---- to formation of Stars and Sun ---- to Energy again---- NO BIGBANG --- No Blackholes etc...

                I can not just explain 40 years of research done in just 9 page essay, I just gave main points.... I am sorry ....

                I just rated your essay now much better than above average, now your is rating is 5.3. Best wishes to your essay

                Please contact me " snp.gupta@gmail.com "

                Warm regards

                =snp

                Dear Dr

                I suddenly remembered OLD 'Two of Us'... Boney M. song

                Two of us riding nowhere

                Spending someones

                Hard earned pay

                You and me Sunday driving

                Not arriving on our way back home

                We're on our way home

                We're on our way home

                We're going home ....................

                Are we really going home?

                Best

                =snp

                  Hi Barry,

                  I believe you are 'right on the money' with your maxwellian interpretation of Young's two slit experiment with electrons. I also believe that the field of the electron also passes through both slits, as well as the radiation due to the various forms of motion of the electron. This of course does not mean I accept wave particle duality in the sense of quantum mechanics. I only accept that an electron (particle) always has its electric and magnetic fields, and that motion of the electron creates waves in these fields. (I know we differ in our interpretation of these particular waves).

                  Good luck with your EPR is resolved essay! I hope some of your long time critics will read this and weep!

                  LL&P

                  Lockie

                  Dear SNP,

                  I am not a Dr., just an armchair spectator and occasional player!

                  I like the lyrics you posted of 'Two of Us' which was written by Lennon/McCartney and performed by the Beatles on 'Let It Be'. Boney M did a good cover, but I like the Beatles version best.

                  Dear SNP,

                  I will continue the 'imaginary debate' via email as you propose. Thanks for rating my essay. Did you enjoy my wander down memory lane?

                  I will continue to reread your essay and ponder on the cosmology section.

                  Thanks for your correspondence, I appreciate it.

                  May the hidden Vak be revealed..........!!!!

                  Best Regards

                  Lockie