Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

kab: on 3/27/17 at 0:25am UTC, wrote The word is enternal magic. Hope all secret never has answer will be out...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/28/16 at 8:14am UTC, wrote Calm and quietly now steve ,not like before when I was not well...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/28/16 at 7:50am UTC, wrote This team agaisnt me has forgotten several foundamental parameters about...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/28/16 at 7:48am UTC, wrote The truth is always found you know Georgina,always ......

DURGADAS DATTA.: on 6/27/16 at 6:22am UTC, wrote Balloon inside balloon theory of matter and antimatter universes on...

Steve Dufourny: on 4/30/16 at 14:23pm UTC, wrote It is new now, you want to develop about articles ?I am curious Mr Fisher...

Joe Fisher: on 4/30/16 at 13:10pm UTC, wrote This might be a good time to return to making comments about the article in...

Steve Dufourny: on 4/30/16 at 6:55am UTC, wrote And if it is possible,insert my équations ,here is one considering dark...



FQXi FORUM
August 17, 2017

ARTICLE: Does Quantum Weirdness Arise When Parallel Classical Worlds Repel? [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Lee wrote on Apr. 15, 2016 @ 19:35 GMT
Quantum Tunnelling suggests energy leakage. Is there conservation of energy in a Universe or only in the complete set of Universes?

report post as inappropriate


Michael Hall wrote on Apr. 15, 2016 @ 20:53 GMT
@LEE

Your suggestion is correct. Energy is conserved only in total over the complete set of Universes.

report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 16, 2016 @ 14:20 GMT
Only observable infinite unified surface exists. Infinite surface is observable because it is illuminated by infinite light. Light does not have a surface. Why would nature go to all that trouble to make surface visible? Could it be because visibility is the only sensible method of reality that matter could assume? Mindlessly writing about Invisible quantum particles that can be in multiple invisible places at the same invisible time is utter codswallop.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Apr. 16, 2016 @ 14:37 GMT
"Only observable infinite unified surface exists." whatever that is, if not utter codswallop.

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 17, 2016 @ 15:10 GMT
You may not have noticed it, but you have a complete observable skin surface. Every piece of real matter, be it of solid, liquid or vaporous like the clouds construction, has a complete observable surface. No matter in which direction you look, you will only ever see a plethora of seamlessly enmeshed flat looking varied colored surface. Surface must be infinite in scope, otherwise it would not be apparent.. There is no space. Infinite surface is easy to spot because surface is always illuminated by light. Light cannot have a surface.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate


Lorraine Ford wrote on Apr. 17, 2016 @ 00:18 GMT
Re MIW (multiple interacting parallel classical worlds) where “Each world . . . is filled with particles that can exert a group force on their nearby clones in our universe, creating quantum effects”. The team “[reject] quantum weirdness entirely” and posit that “quantum-related probabilities arise from our ignorance as to which specific world we actually occupy”. The team desires “a...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 18, 2016 @ 15:34 GMT
Men know nothing about visible reality. Only real surface is visible at all times. The reason surface is visible is because it is always illuminated by light. Light does not have a surface. There is no physical space. Newton devised laws for the motion of invisible objects traveling through invisible space, ignoring the fact that all material objects have a visible surface and as there is no space, all surface travels at the same constant speed.. Invisible quantum particles cannot exist. The theoretical speculation that an invisible particle can exist in more than one invisible position is utterly preposterous.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Gary D. Simpson replied on Apr. 19, 2016 @ 20:40 GMT
Joe,

I have a couple of questions for you. Do your ideas allow you to make any testable (i.e., falsifiable) predictions? Do your ideas allow you to do any calculations? If so, do these predictions or calculations differ from existing physics?

Think about it before answering and think about why these questions matter.

Regards,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 20, 2016 @ 15:07 GMT
Gary,

You cannot question infinite surface that is always illuminated by infinite non-surface light. Reality is not dependent on my ideas. All ideas are utterly unreasonable because they are invisible and finite. That is why Newton was wrong about the motion of invisible objects through invisible space. Einstein was wrong about how invisible energy could equal invisible mass multiplied by the supposed constant speed of invisible light multiplied by its invisible self. And Hawking was completely wrong about invisible everything.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate


Lorraine Ford wrote on Apr. 21, 2016 @ 02:56 GMT
I think that I understand what science is about quite well: both my school and university education being mainly maths, physics and chemistry (and most of my school and university education was funded by scholarships). Perhaps I understand the downstream implications of physics theories in a way that the adoring uncritical followers of physics don’t.

Physics has been struggling for a hundred years to explain quantum mechanics. Only people who have never had science training could ever mistake the MIW or MWI theories for science: they are belief systems. Perhaps those who are uncritical of theoretical physics never noticed the hefty dose of explanatory narrative in these theories of reality, narrative that is NOT provable because it is not represented by equations or algorithms.

Going by the numbers, it seems that there is something about the male character that has a certain naïve fundamentalist/purist view of reality: e.g. the MIW and MWI adherents. I’m saying that seemingly, men can’t face ACTUAL reality: subjectivity of information; experience of information; creativity of information. Seemingly due to problems with the male character, physics is currently NOT able to face up to the fact that reality is NOT 100% deterministic.

I think that ordinary people (unconsciously) understand science all too well: that’s why they keep away in droves. They see the ivory-tower theorists, e.g. the MIW theorists, entranced and inspired by the beauty of human-created mathematical equations, instead of being entranced and inspired by the beauty of actual physical reality.

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 21, 2016 @ 14:21 GMT
One real observable Universe could only have one real physical observable aspect. The only real aspect you can verify by observation is SURFACE. You have a complete SURFACE including the SURFACE that covers your eyes. Everywhere you look with your SURFACE covered eyes, you will only ever see a plethora of seamlessly enmeshed varied colored flat SURFACE. The laws that govern the real Universe must be consistent. Only infinite SURFACE exists everywhere in the real observable Universe. There is no space. The only reason you can only see SURFACE is because it is always illuminated by an infinite non-SURFACE light. All of Science is utterly mistaken human conjecture concerning the invisible.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Gary D. Simpson replied on Apr. 21, 2016 @ 22:20 GMT
Joe,

In the thread above, I asked you a couple of relatively straight forward questions to which you gave a non-answer. I must therefore conclude that your ideas do not allow you to make any predictions and your ideas do not allow you to perform any calculations. Therefore, you are not presently doing science.

If it is any consolation, few scientists today are doing science either since the major ideas today are not testable. Given their poor example, it is little wonder that things are as they are.

Good luck developing your ideas to a point where they are science.

Regards,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 22, 2016 @ 16:31 GMT
Gary,

Do you, or do you not have a complete skin surface? Does every piece of observable matter, be it natural like a tree, or be it fabricated like a chest of drawers made from a tree not have a complete visible surface? Is the law of reality not consistent throughout the real Universe. Then obviously, the real observable Universe consists of SURFACE. Surface is not put together mathematically, so why would I be stupid enough to show you useless calculations. The real Universe is not scientific. It is utterly simple. So why are you persisting to believe in complicated scientific codswallop.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate


Lorraine Ford wrote on Apr. 22, 2016 @ 00:07 GMT
Prince is dead. But all too alive are the MIW and MWI theoretical physicists (mainly men) telling us that everything that Prince did, every note he played, was 100% determined by nothing but laws-of-nature interacting with the environment (where the environment is itself 100% determined by laws-of-nature). These naïve physicists are telling us that all of reality is identical: they are saying that the murderer, the musician, the Nobel prize winner are all identically 100% victims of circumstances and 100% ruled by law-of-nature rules.

For 100 years now, reality has clearly been telling physicists that this is not the case. Reality has clearly demonstrated that it is NOT 100% deterministic. But the male dominated physics world is too frightened to accept the implications of a non-deterministic reality.

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 22, 2016 @ 16:36 GMT
Lorraine,

I am telling you that physical reality is merely infinite surface. It is easy to spot because surface is always illuminated by infinite non-surface light. No need to thank me, it was a pleasure explaining it to you in terms I am confident you can understand.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 23, 2016 @ 07:07 GMT
Mr Fisher, please.Develop your ideas and reasonings.We don't understand nothing with your surface ,really.You know if you have things to say.Please develop.That has no sense Mr Fisher to always repeat these things.You confoundfor me ,the subjectivity and the objectivity spiritually speaking.

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 23, 2016 @ 14:36 GMT
Steve,

Reality is not MY IDEA. Please understand that you have a complete surface that includes your eyes. Everywhere you look with your real surface covered eyes; you will only ever see a plethora of seamlessly enmeshed partial flat varied colored surface. Only observable infinite surface exists. There is no space. Nature provided that infinite surface. Hawking’s silly contention that invisible nothing exploded 13 and three quarters of a finite billion invisible light year’s ago in the big bang singularity may be scientifically acceptable, but it is utterly unrealistic. It is now up to you. Do you want to continue to believe in the fabulous errors of science, or will you please join me in the promulgation of revolutionary reality.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Apr. 26, 2016 @ 19:26 GMT
Is anybody minding the store? I haven't been able to pull up an edit tab for a month, there are several posts listed in the sidebar of recent posts that don't appear in the body of comments, and I forget how long its been since there has been an addition of a topic to the list in the dropdown window from the fqxi icon on my taskbar. Has attrition set in and nobody wanting to take over the thankless unpaid time consuming task of entertaining delinquents on the fqxi blogosphere?

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 27, 2016 @ 07:29 GMT
I know who are these persons hacking my net and pc.They play, I play also.The most impressing for them is that they didn't know my realpersonality.Irritating for tham, becuse their strategy of discriminations is not really a success.So now for their notoriety, they don't want that I am recognized,logic for their poor international credibility.Just a poor team of frustrated thinking that they are more skillings than others,a big vanity, that is all and poor mathematical copies.Well thei are very bad Fallen because they must kill me.But they aren't thinkers after all,just business man frsutrated wanting what they want.I play with them on LinkedIn,My sciences eat yours at the belgian breakfast.You are against me, but I have also people with me.Ironical no? and what your hate increases ?Logic.....Kill me ;it is better.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 27, 2016 @ 08:09 GMT
dear Fqxi and the future of lifes institute and MIT.These persons hacking my net and linkedin are irritating.Pay attention around you, sometimes persons aren't really general scientists but business men with an enormous vanity.This problem is a big problem.I beleive that it exists several scientists or a team from holland which implies problems.I will not stop, so I tell thzm that I will not stop my transparent publications and reasonings.FqxI please check well the international sciences system.Long life FQXi ,I am with you me and you shallnot be deceived, I don't search the money or others, I just want tolearn more, I have learnt a lot here on thiswonderful fqxi Platform.I have had in the past paranoiac comportments due to these hackers but I am better now:) Regards from Belgium.

report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford replied on Apr. 27, 2016 @ 11:54 GMT
Hi Steve,

Glad to hear you are better now. I was wondering if you still have a garden or if you are growing any plants in pots? I have been working in the garden almost every day: planting and weeding. We have a lot of avocados on our tree,

Cheers,

Lorraine

report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Apr. 28, 2016 @ 16:19 GMT
Dear Ms Ford,

About gardening, our climate here in belgium is probably different than yours in USA.But it is alwaysthe same generality.Substrate,water,light and food.In fact it isjust that each family or species and varieties need specific parameters.For example,one of my favorite floweris thefuchsia.Itcomes from Patagonia in argentina.The climateis specific and the culture of fuchsias ofcourse is correlated.They dislike the full sun.They like the shade and a lot of water the morning and before thenight.They like the fresh water.te substrate is a mix of severalargils and with humus and "Heath terra"Several organic adds can be made to this argilo humic complex.NPK,mineral salts and oligo elements can be add with different natural powders.The bacterias and fungis and micro vegetals and micro animals can work in complementarity.The fuchsias are happy with thiskind of substrate.At this moment I have tested allin the pure compost and the resulst are ok,it is not optimum but it is a good result.Best Regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 28, 2016 @ 16:50 GMT
I have remarkeed that vegetals and animals are linked with compost.The natural resistance and theoptimisation of growth and quality are functions of optimised substrates and cultures.The potential of genetic gives its optimisation when all paramters are checked.It is a little the same for animals , the food, the adn, the external parametrs, .....all is linked.The cancer is a result of these parameters for example even for plants.I have seen that tumors on vegetals can be fought with several methods, natural correlated with the optimisation of paramters.The secrets are in adn and aminoacids, proteins ....The codes are there.The aim is to stop the growth of tumors.I have tested several oils,and others,it is inetresting to see the results.In fact there are many links with adn andthe comportments of cells.The aim is to permit the apoptosis of cells.I have lost my mother and my father with this disease.A kind of vaccin is possible with add of several things.This death of cancer cells is possible.The scales of codes are probably the answer.The cancer is linked with the old time it seems to me.In fact the encodins are correlzted,there are good encodings and bad informations in fact.The health is important.Mine is not very good, my kind of life is not perfect :) and my adn seeing my parents is not very good .I must stop to smoke furthermore.What a life ,I have all the parameters to have a problem.But it is the life.I will accept.But this cancer can be fought but how can we find this miraculous vaccin ?

report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford replied on Apr. 29, 2016 @ 01:49 GMT
Hi Steve,

I’m sorry to hear your fuchsia stock was destroyed. I like fuchsias too. I have several species and varieties of fuchsia all growing in the ground (Australia). I have fuchsia fulgens (it has tuberous roots) and fuchsia regia (it has climbed 5 metres into the sky, through a lonicera japonica). I improve the soil by putting all cut-up prunings on the soil and letting the bugs and microorganisms in the soil break it down. As you say, the micro-organisms and little insects help keep the soil/compost healthy.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 29, 2016 @ 06:40 GMT
Hello Ms Ford,

Thank you very much.It was difficult ,I have had a bankrupcy due to thesepersons putting my flowers at less of zero degree Celsius.I have explained the situation but I haven't been helped.My mother was tired also after 12 Years of administrative pappers, I cannot have a loan since more than 12 years.Fortunally that my notary has seen the errors and has presented me an attorney,I solve my probelms and soon in logic I will have a loan of 69000 Euros and I must pay logically 30000,I will buy a small car to work in horticulture a little, my funds are weak .I have never had a ground for my nursery.I am disgusted by my country.Sometimes it exists bizare people on this earth, I don't understand this human nature and its comportments.WWhere are the universalists ?I am parano now because I have always been nice and kind and people always have profitted of this.I am asking me why ?I am christian and always I see above me before acting.What a world dear Ms Ford, what a sad planet.You have chance to live in australia.:)Best Regards

report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 30, 2016 @ 13:10 GMT
This might be a good time to return to making comments about the article in question. Finite invisible quantum weirdness never arises when invisible classical worlds repel because the observable reality of infinite surface is absolute. Would the author care to identify attractive invisible quantum stability so that we can sensibly compare it with invisible quantum weirdness?

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 30, 2016 @ 14:23 GMT
It is new now, you want to develop about articles ?I am curious Mr Fisher :)

report post as inappropriate


DURGADAS DATTA. wrote on Jun. 27, 2016 @ 06:22 GMT
Balloon inside balloon theory of matter and antimatter universes on opposite entropy path and reverse arrow of time may be regarded as parallel universes due very large size and the common boundary is producing dark energy by annihilation and injected into both the universes for growth, expansion, gravity etc. We therefore observe dark pull, dark flow etc. But as the antimatter universe is getting more composed due to opposite entropy, we may consider it is becoming a gradual increasing black hole . A time will come when a BIG BOUNCE will occur when we will see Dr. Guth"s exponential inflation for a short time and after 380000 years the BICEP2 OBSERVATION of galaxy formation swirls around escaped evaporation black holes from previous era as seeds of galaxy formation. So the scenerio is re cyclic, re bounce again and again and by chance a set of tuned laws may create intelligent life on a planet like earth. We may see some cosmic big circles in CMB BY CLOSE SCRUTINY. Therefore the galaxies at center of all galaxies are older than our universe. In year 2002 , I published some papers in our local journal and some comments in ASTRONOMY.COM which indicated a new physics . Some of the papers are attached herewith for interested reading.

attachments: I_Think_Dr._Datta_Makes_A_Valid_Point_-_an_Astronomy_Net_Blackholes_Forum_Message22.htm, 1_New_Physics_with_Emergent_Gravity_Mechanism._1.doc

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.