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.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

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

Rodney Bartlett: on 2/26/17 at 9:07am UTC, wrote The following post - "Ghosts of Future Science" - is not inappropriate...

Rodney Bartlett: on 2/21/17 at 8:32am UTC, wrote Your scenario is superbly thought out, Peter. It reveals a mind far above...

Peter Jackson: on 2/20/17 at 10:53am UTC, wrote Rodney Brilliant! Well done. And thanks. But something has stopped...

Rodney Bartlett: on 2/20/17 at 6:48am UTC, wrote Many thanks for the praise you gave my essay, Peter. I knew my essay...

Peter Jackson: on 2/19/17 at 21:13pm UTC, wrote Rodney, I think your essay is good, pertinent, and addresses some...

Rodney Bartlett: on 2/18/17 at 7:45am UTC, wrote People don't seem to understand what my essay's about. Maybe I'm not good...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 2/4/17 at 1:47am UTC, wrote In line with Bigbang theory you are proposing a closed universe like a...

Rodney Bartlett: on 2/1/17 at 12:03pm UTC, wrote Hi, my essay addresses the subtitle of the contest - "How can mindless...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jose Koshy: "James Putnam, What do you mean by the acceleration of light? Do you mean..." in Alternative Models of...

Jose Koshy: "Steven, Because we are not sitting face to face, I may not be replying..." in Alternative Models of...

Algernon kk: "Steve Agnew is a legend for doing that. A lot of people at online resume..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

Mohan rao: "Voot app free download Flash Recovery" in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Mohan rao: "My partner and I stumbled over here different website and thought I might..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, BTW, it is the community vote that matters ... not the public vote...." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, You statement regarding your score does not make any sense. You..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Algernon kk: "Steve Agnew is a legend for doing that. A lot of people at custom..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

The Spacetime Revolutionary
Carlo Rovelli describes how black holes may transition to "white holes," according to loop quantum gravity, a radical rewrite of fundamental physics.

Riding the Rogue Quantum Waves
Could giant sea swells help explain how the macroscopic world emerges from the quantum microworld? (Image credit: MIT News)

Rescuing Reality
A "retrocausal" rewrite of physics, in which influences from the future can affect the past, could solve some quantum quandaries—saving Einstein's view of reality along the way.


FQXi FORUM
February 28, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Creating (Recycling) the Universe from Mathematics To Give It Aims and Intention by Rodney Bartlett [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

This essay's rating: Community = 5.0; Public = 2.5


Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Jan. 18, 2017 @ 22:05 GMT
Essay Abstract

Throughout this article, I refer to the cosmos as a whole (which is potentially infinite and eternal) when I use the word "universe" - not merely to the observable universe. True to the nonlinear nature of time (it's arranged in Einstein's warps and curves), electromagnetism may possibly be a product of gravity and also, gravity might possibly be a product of electromagnetism. Fermi (Space Telescope) detected a burst of gamma rays just 0.4 seconds after the first detection of gravitational waves on September 14, 2015 - from the same general area of the sky. Confirmation is not conclusive because the European INTEGRAL gamma-ray satellite did not receive the signal. However, the possibility remains that gravity can produce electromagnetism (if it turns out that gravity makes electromagnetism, the microwave background alleged to be left over from the Big Bang could be of gravitational origin). Gravity could be a product of electromagnetism – in the form of electronic pulses of energy from computers connected to sources of electrical power, with the pulses manifesting as virtual gravitons, the quanta of gravity (more details in CREATION (RECYCLING) OF THE UNIVERSE ACHIEVED ELECTRONICALLY). This provides a possible, electronic method of explaining how this could be a synthetic universe full of binary digits, Mobius strips, figure-8 Klein bottles, and universal Artificial Intelligence on astronomical, subatomic and biological levels. Please read the following, remembering it was reported that "the physicist and writer Paul Davies thinks the universe is indeed fine-tuned for minds like ours. And who fine-tuned it? Not God but minds from the future, perhaps even our distant descendants, that have reached back through time … and selected the very laws of physics that allow for the existence of minds in the first place. Sounds bizarre, but quantum physics actually allows that kind of thing."

Author Bio

I wandered around Australia, towards a place called Charles Darwin University. Then I became curious about cosmology, physics, mathematics, computer science, biology ... I concluded evolution is limited. The evolution proposed by Charles Darwin is indeed wonderful, and the Theory of Evolution certainly explains adaptations and modifications in large forms of life. However, it seems that explaining origins with that theory is an unwarranted leap of faith. So developing these ideas for "electronic origins" (of the universe as well as life) became necessary. The word creation implies an arrow-of-time ... I prefer the term recycling.

Download Essay PDF File




Francis Duane Moore wrote on Jan. 19, 2017 @ 18:43 GMT
I enjoyed the review of ideas given in references. The author submitted a nice compilation of existing ideas and hypotheses

report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Jan. 20, 2017 @ 16:59 GMT
Dear Rodney Bartlett,

The real Universe am not a computer simulation.

One real visible Universe must have only one reality. Simple natural reality has nothing to do with any abstract complex musings such as the ones you effortlessly indulge in. As I have thoughtfully pointed out in my brilliant essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY, the real Universe consists only of one unified visible infinite surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light. Reality am not as complicated as theories of reality are.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate


Branko L Zivlak wrote on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 10:28 GMT
Dear Mr. Bartlett,

It is not clear what you mean when you talk about the infinite universe. When we say the universe is infinite, most people understand as: Space is infinite. But this is not true. We know the spatial dimensions of the universe.

To be precise: At one point of time the universe is spatially finite. Do you agree?

I cited Ruđer Bošković “Now, although I do not hold with infinite divisibility, yet I do admit infinite componibility“.

Therefore I say: mass and space of the universe and any other phenomenon is finite but the number of their combination is infinite and Universe is eternal. Do you agree?

What do you really mean when you say: I refer to the cosmos as a whole (which is potentially infinite and eternal).

Best Regards,

Branko Zivlak

report post as inappropriate


Harry Hamlin Ricker III wrote on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 15:09 GMT
Hi, This essay doesn't seem to address the topic of the essay contest. It rambles and doesn't have a clear objective, focus or conclusion. I couldn't make sense out of the point in writing it.

report post as inappropriate

Author Rodney Bartlett replied on Feb. 1, 2017 @ 12:03 GMT
Hi, my essay addresses the subtitle of the contest - "How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?" To relate my essay to the recent science paper "From Planck Data to Planck Era: Observational Tests of Holographic Cosmology" by Niayesh Afshordi, Claudio Corianò, Luigi Delle Rose, Elizabeth Gould, and Kostas Skenderis: Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 041301 (2017) - Published 27...

view entire post





Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 4, 2017 @ 01:47 GMT
In line with Bigbang theory you are proposing a closed universe like a mobius strip where space is curved and closed on itself. So time travel and Immortality are automatic possibilities. In your own words…’Following the example of matter, energy like a sunbeam or gravity wave has now a) been divided into their quanta (supposedly smallest units) of the photon and still hypothetical gravitation. And proposed a nice new idea of virtual photons and further new subdivided into electronics of Bits of 1s and 0s.'

In abstract, the sentence ' the microwave background alleged to be left over from the Big Bang could be of gravitational origin' is not correct, as they have not accounted for the microwave radiation emitted from Galaxies, Globular clusters and stars etc… see the essay on CMB in previous FQXi...

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1607

report post as inappropriate


Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 07:45 GMT
People don't seem to understand what my essay's about. Maybe I'm not good at expressing my ideas in a long essay. I'll try putting them in a summary -

Hi, my essay addresses the subtitle of the contest - "How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?" To relate my essay to the recent science paper "From Planck Data to Planck Era: Observational Tests of Holographic...

view entire post





Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 21:13 GMT
Rodney,

I think your essay is good, pertinent, and addresses some important fundamental physics. Your '1' score is an insult and unwarranted. Rest assured it's about to rocket! (I know what getting 1's is like; after starting shooting to the top with a 10 I instantly got two anonymous 1's!

Of course it helps that I agree with virtually everything you wrote! I don't think our universe if 'Holographic' but it's certainly Holistic, and I think reviewing what holigraphy is allows many similarities to be drawn.

I also agree (and identify in my essay) the importance of surface electrons.

On redshift, again I agree and have produced a video demonstrating mechanistically how increased wavelength with distance from emitter emerges naturally on the expanding 'Schrodinger sphere' surface (link by request).

All that and more comes from the identification of something unbelievably simple we've missed in our physical understanding of the universe - (again which my essay demonstrates along with the consequences) I think you'll understand and like mine as we seem much on the same wavelength. I'll also value your comments.

Well done and thanks for an interesting read.

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Rodney Bartlett replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 06:48 GMT
Many thanks for the praise you gave my essay, Peter. I knew my essay addressed what you call "some important fundamental physics". But because it was getting very little attention, I had almost decided that reading my own page anymore was pointless. And I twice seriously considered unsubscribing from receiving any comments. Everything feels right with the world now, though.



You...

view entire post




Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 10:53 GMT
Rodney

Brilliant! Well done. And thanks. But something has stopped universal adoption, and I now think I know what and why.

For me it was Feynman's 'wave going backwards in time' that seemed to need the simpler explanation a barmaid could understand. The TQIM extends Feynman somewhat but the 'reverse time' remains standing out like a sore thumb. If you think about my essay the simple explanation is exactly what I've identified; The second 'phase' (the offset cos^2 curve) is that 2nd 'hidden' momentum in OAM, in Maxwell equations but not identified in QM!! It just takes a little thought for that to dawn.

The Mach-Zender 2 path splitter experiment is then unbelievably simple. Reflecting 90^o simply ROTATES THE POLAR AXIS 90^o so the "2ND MOMENTUM" then interacts, which gives the orthogonal 'out of phase' cosine curve of QM's offset 'probability amplitudes'.

All the confusion and counter intuitive concepts are cleared away. Simply measure the TWO momenta distributed on the surface of a spinning sphere!!!!

I hope you may be one of very few immediately able to see the simplicity and profound implications.?

Best

Peter (Copied from post on mine)

report post as inappropriate

Author Rodney Bartlett replied on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 08:32 GMT
Your scenario is superbly thought out, Peter. It reveals a mind far above average! However, even people who are on much the same wavelength will disagree about details on occasion. That makes for good, intelligent discussion – which is one of FQXI's goals.



I think your video's explanation of quantum mechanics is a bit too complicated (at least for me). It's simpler for me to...

view entire post





Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 26, 2017 @ 09:07 GMT
The following post - "Ghosts of Future Science" - is not inappropriate because it refers directly to my essay, whose ideas are critical to the thoughts below.

Ghosts of Future Science

This is my response to "Ghosts definitely don't exist because otherwise the Large Hadron Collider would have found them, claims Brian Cox (independent.co.uk)"

Professor Cox,

“There are...

view entire post





Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'B' and 'D':


Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.