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

Mohamed Haj Yousef: on 2/27/17 at 20:10pm UTC, wrote Thank you Muder, I will share it with you!

Muder Moldier: on 2/27/17 at 19:12pm UTC, wrote >> ...the Single Monad Model solves all the problems solved by...

Mohamed Haj Yousef: on 2/27/17 at 19:07pm UTC, wrote Dear Munrid; Thank you for your positive comments, and I am looking...

Munrid Qaraq: on 2/27/17 at 17:32pm UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Yousef; I was very happy to come across your article. It is...

Janice Murin: on 2/27/17 at 16:09pm UTC, wrote thank you

Mohamed Haj Yousef: on 2/27/17 at 10:35am UTC, wrote In this model of continuous space construction, multiplicity is revealed...

Janice Murin: on 2/27/17 at 10:00am UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Yousef; So according to your model; is space and time discrete or...

Janice Murin: on 2/25/17 at 14:05pm UTC, wrote Thank you for posting this video, it is very nice.


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: The Cosmic Computer: digital manipulation of matter, space and time by Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

This essay's rating: Community = 6.1; Public = 7.3


Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef wrote on Jan. 26, 2017 @ 20:18 GMT
Essay Abstract

Relativity is mainly based on the principle of the constancy and invariance of the speed of light. Although this has been proved experimentally, there is yet no philosophical explanation why this speed can never be surpassed. This article introduces the concept of the duality of time, based on the Re-creation Principle of the Single Monad Model that was first introduced in 2005. This model reduces “matter” and “space” into “time” by explaining how the physical multiplicity is perpetually being constructed by a metaphysical monad which is spreading chronologically over the inner dimensions of space, and then extending over the outer dimension of time to create the dynamic universe. This innovative concept, which has an intrinsic arrow of time, will solve the problem of entropy and explain causality and nonlocality and why the speed of light is the maximum cosmological speed limit. It will be shown that each metaphysical point is continuously and sequentially blinking between rest and light speed, which makes the cosmos literally like a digital machine where the physical properties of particles, such as mass and energy, result from averaging these fluctuations that occur in the inner metaphysical level of time and then evolve over the outer physical level.

Author Bio

A writer and researcher in philosophy, physics and cosmology. He studied physics in the University of Aleppo, then he got the Master's degree in Microelectronic Engineering and Semiconductor Physics from the University of Cambridge in the UK in 1992. After a period of work in the field of teaching, he studied Islamic philosophy, where he received a PhD from the University of Exeter in 2005. He published many books including: Ibn Arabi - Time and Cosmology, and The Single Monad Model of the Cosmos. He is currently working in UAE University.

Download Essay PDF File




Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef wrote on Jan. 26, 2017 @ 21:45 GMT
I would like to thank FQXI for publishing this article.

I would like also to thank the readers for taking the time to read it, and I welcome any comment or criticism.

For more information about the Single Monad Model: http://www.smonad.com

For more information about Ibn Arabi: http://www.ibnalarabi.com

For more information about the author:...

view entire post




Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 16:04 GMT
more about the Single Monad Model

more about Ibn Arabi

more about the author



Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 17:31 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef,

Please excuse me for I do not wish to be too critical of your fine posted comments.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

One real visible Universe must have only one reality. Simple natural reality has nothing to do with any abstract complex musings about the supposed constant speed of light.

The real...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 18:06 GMT
Thank you dear realist Joe Fisher... I like serious critical comments, they are more useful, but I am not sure if you really read my article carefully because you seem to have posted the same comments to other articles as well.

Anyway, in general your conclusion is really correct: the reality of nature is so simple that a single cell amoeba could deal with it. Thus, nothing is more simple...

view entire post





Branko L Zivlak wrote on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 23:04 GMT
Dear Mr. Yousef,

You are a philosopher, with extraordinary observations in your work. Surprise me that you do not have the references of Leibnitz and Bošković. By reading you and Ibn Arab once again I see that I was right that I noted in my essay:

"All I would say has already been told countless times and all my attempts at philosophy would thus be a repetition of what had already...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 00:12 GMT
Thank you dear Branko for the kind comments.

Originally my paper is about 30 pages, so I had to delete many sections and cut others in order to make it fit the FQXI contest rules. That is why I removed the historical introduction which included references to the works of philosophers. In fact I held the view that although Newton's laws and theory of gravity lead to great industrial...

view entire post




Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 10:35 GMT
Note: the difference between vacuum and void is that vacuum is an empty "space" which can be excited into virtual particles, which is also known as quantum foam, but void is absolute "nothing".



Janice F. Murin replied on Feb. 13, 2017 @ 14:26 GMT
Very nice and precise distinction between VACUUM and VOID. i also like the idea that the (potential) future is vacuum and the past is void and the presence is in between, continuously becoming and going. VERY NICE!

report post as inappropriate


Efthimios Harokopos wrote on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 17:40 GMT
"Consequently, there is no gradual motion in the common sense that the object leaves its place to occupy new adjacent places, but it is successively re-created in those new places, i.e. motion occurs

as a result of change and not transmutation, so the observed objects are always at rest in the different positions that they appear in. "

This is the old idea of Descartes, "continuous...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 18:08 GMT
Dear Efthimios Harokopos;

Leibniz is not the fist philosopher to talk about monads, and the main idea here is the Single Monad, not the monads in general. Moreover, this essay is dedicated to study some of the consequences of the Single Monad Model which have been explained in other publications as referenced in this essay. I have discussed the various philosophical views and the history of monadology in chapter six of my book (The Single Monad Model of the Cosmos).

Best Regards



Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 19:11 GMT
Also I would like to mention that, just like the theory of monads, the doctrine of "continuous recreation" is not idea of Descartes, as he himself acknowledged. On the other hand, although the Single Monad Model view the cosmos as discrete instances in space, and therefore motion is only a change rather than transmutation, yet each subsequent instance is connected to the previous like the connection between a cause and effect, and that is because of the laws of conservation of energy and momentum. Therefore, this is different from the Occassionalism doctrine.



Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 6, 2017 @ 19:03 GMT
The principle of re-creation is traced back into many ancient philosophies, and also the monads. The Greeks have most likely inherited that from Egyptian or Babylonians. Parmenides was famous for such views, and all his students including Plato who have actually transferred it to the West.

report post as inappropriate


Harry Hamlin Ricker III wrote on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 14:57 GMT
HI, This is an interesting essay and might be well wroth thinking about, but I was unable to understand what if anything it had to do with the essay contest topic.

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 15:37 GMT
I thank you Harry for your important note.

If all physical matter and space are manipulated on the deeper metaphysical level, this means that everything is predestined. The article clearly shows that despite all the apparent motion of particles and objects, effectively everything is at rest at every instance of the actual flow of time. Therefore, because of this zero instantaneous velocity all motions instantly amounts to zero, but the changes occur as a result or re-creation. This means that the cosmos is programmed to run in the way it is running, and we are like actors simply following one manuscript, each performing his or her own role with his own goals, but leading to the final total destination.

We can compare the cosmos to a movie or even a game that is displayed on a computer monitor, but the manuscript is manipulated inside the vertical hierarchy of this cosmic computer structure. This was already nicely demonstrated in the Allegory of the Cave in the Republic of Plato. Therefore, all the images and shapes that are displayed on the screen are pure simulation.



Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 1, 2017 @ 16:49 GMT
If everything is predestined, what is then the role of the players and how could they become responsible for their actions!

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 1, 2017 @ 18:25 GMT
Well Muder this is really a very tricky question, and I am no sure if my answer will be convincing, but I will try to answer in the form of a narration I have read in this respect about (maybe hypothetical) encounter on the judgement day between God and Lucifer who asked this question: "How come you punish me for something which you have preordained on me!" Then God answer: "When did you know that it was preordained? Before or after!", Satan said: "After!" So although everything is destined to be in the way is going to be, but everyone works only according to his/her own will, because at the time they don't know what was destined to be before it is.

Nature gives us certain limited choices and we choose to do one way or the other or even not to do, all under our own will, which what makes us responsible.

I hope this answer is convincing, but the issue is more complicated and it may lead way beyond the theme and beyond the laws of physics.




Muder H. Moldier wrote on Feb. 2, 2017 @ 12:33 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef;

You mention in the abstract: "This innovative concept, which has an intrinsic arrow of time, will solve the problem of entropy and explain causality and non-locality and why the speed of light is the maximum cosmological speed limit". After reading the article, I can now understand why the speed of light is constant and invariant and how non-local quantum interactions could...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Feb. 2, 2017 @ 15:19 GMT
Indeed it is all the reason of continuous recreation that leads to all these astounding results, an even much more than what is mentioned in the abstract or even this short essay.

So because of the fact that the recreation takes time (the inner level of time) we have a maximum cosmological speed that can never be exceeded. And because of the resulting granular structure of space-time, we have discrete change and not continuous transmutation, which explains nonlocality without breaking this speed limit. Yet also in the same way now causality is a result of the conservation of energy between the consecutive discrete frames of space so that any perturbation in one frame will require synchronization in the following frames until the specific energy is dissipated into other points of space which may also not be directly connected through space or time, but by quantum entanglement.

Furthermore, we now don't need any inflation to explain why the cosmos is homogeneous or why its density is flat, because it is created instantaneously from the same single source, as if we have instantaneous (or eternal) inflation, which will also explain why we don't observe the magnetic monopole.

The cosmological constant problem can also be eliminated, simply because the ground state energy is the result of one single particle and not the sum of all particles because they are created in chronological sequence in the inner level of time.

I have tested this concept of the duality of time against all major problems in physics and cosmology, and, as far as I can clearly see, it solves them all!

report post as inappropriate

Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 3, 2017 @ 10:40 GMT
This reply appears to me as "Anonymous", but I suppose the writer is the author of the article: Dr. Mohamed Haj Yousef.

If what you are saying is true, it will be the next Nobel prize!

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 3, 2017 @ 11:22 GMT
Yes I am the one who replied, yet I don't know why it appears as "Anonymous".




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 3, 2017 @ 21:09 GMT
Recent experiments showed 'speed of light can be surpassed', this proposition as given in the start of Abstract is controversial ... see for example for super luminal neutrinos.......

arXiv:1109.5917v2 [hep-ph] 26 Oct 2011

arXiv:1109.4980v2 [hep-ph] 13 Jan 2012

arXiv:1109.5368v5 [astro-ph.HE] 31 Oct 2011

arXiv:1109.6930v3 [hep-ph] 8 Oct 2011

etc

Like all...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 3, 2017 @ 21:29 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu ;

I would like to thank you for commenting on this article, but I don't agree with your conclusion at all, because there is absolutely no verified experimental results of anything "travelling faster than light".

The faster-than-light neutrino anomaly that was observed by the OPERA experiment in 2011 has been falsified and the team themselves reported two flaws in their data.

Other reports may refer to some quantum phenomena as superluminal, but this is not "travelling faster than light". For example in EPR and quantum tunneling it is possible to communicate information non-locally. Galaxies could also apparently move faster than light but this is only due to the expansion of space.

So indeed there is no single experiment or theory which incorporates objects or particles with superluminal speeds.

Best Regards

Mohamed Haj Yousef



Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 3, 2017 @ 21:51 GMT
I would like also to add that if there was no cosmological speed limit then we must be able to observe superluminal speeds on large scale, for example at hundred times faster or even millions.

Of course it is generally accepted that the constancy and invariance of the speed of light is a cornerstone of modern physics.



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 04:27 GMT
Dear sir,

I hope you will get some time for your perusal on Dynamic Universe Model...

See the wiki page… for Neutrinos travelled faster than light….

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neu
trino_anomaly

… Said..”This comparison indicated neutrinos had arrived at the detector 57.8 nanoseconds faster than if they had been traveling at the speed of...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Muder H. Moldier wrote on Feb. 4, 2017 @ 11:09 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef;

I completely agree with you that there is no verified experimental results of anything "travelling faster than light". And you mentioned in one of your replies above that you "postulate that its (light) full speed in absolute vacuum, or void, is exactly 300000000 m/s, because of the three dimensions of space to one dimension of time". And that you don't think the definition of meter and second are conventional.

I would appreciate it if you could elaborate further on this issue!

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 4, 2017 @ 14:07 GMT
The standard value of the speed of light in vacuum is now considered a universal physical constant, and its exact value is 299,792,458 meters per second. Since 1983, the length of the meter has been defined from this constant as well as the international standard for time. However, this experimentally measured value corresponds to the speed of light in vacuum that is in fact not exactly empty,...

view entire post




Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 5, 2017 @ 14:24 GMT
Thank you Dr. Yousef, I think the subject requires a dedicated study, because I completely agree with you that the measured value of the speed of light is so close to 300000000 that it cannot be by chance, despite the fact that the meter was defined well before the measurement of the speed of light.

report post as inappropriate

Janice F. Murin replied on Feb. 13, 2017 @ 15:21 GMT
How do you get infinity=1/12 ?

report post as inappropriate


Muder H. Moldier wrote on Feb. 11, 2017 @ 12:48 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef... I found on your website that you have a book called "the cosmic heart", but I could not find this book on the internet. Could you please send me the link or information on how to get it?

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 11, 2017 @ 16:38 GMT
Dear Muder;

Thank you for this inquiry.

Actually this book is not ready yet. I am in the process and I think it might take a year before it is pub;ished. If you leave a note on the website or send me your email I will inform you when it is ready.

Best Regards

Mohamed



Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 08:07 GMT
Here you can read more about this book () which is actually based on the same idea presented in this essay.

The conceptual conflict between the Quantum and Relativity theories is the modern version of the recurring ancient philosophical competition between the continuum and discrete views of matter. The problem is that these two contrasting views are mutually exclusive, yet each one alone...

view entire post




Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 08:09 GMT
Sorry the link did not appear! here again: The Cosmic Heart




Patrick Tonin wrote on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 13:02 GMT
Dear Mohamed,

You wrote an interesting essay. We share of lot of views (monads, recreation, everything at rest etc..) but I don't agree on "everything is predestined". I believe that although we are going through a series of 2D frames of information (like in a movie), that movie is played an infinite number of times and the "pixels" making up the frame can change over "Universe" time. I believe that past/present/future coexist as concurrent layers of information and are constantly changing.

You might want to take a look at my essay where I try to show that monads (existence/non-existence) and a primordial state of consciousness are inevitable and ubiquitous in the Universe.

All in all, well done for your essay and your model.

All the best,

Patrick

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 16:07 GMT
Thank you dear Patrick for your positive comment.

I read your essay, and although it is very short but it does actually touch on the basic reality, though it requires further analysis.

In my openion althogh everything is essentially predestined, but since we do not know the destination we need to work in order to arrive to it. So you see it is all about knowledge and information as...

view entire post




Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 16:08 GMT
Good the equations work here.

Only please notice that for m=0 we have v=c.



Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 20:11 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef;

This is really amazing, it is the first time I understand how everything could be predestined and yet we feel that we are in control, we feel we are the ones who are doing the things we do!

I completely agree with you that we must take the two points of views at the same time, just as Relativity does. I think you have solve the biggest problem in theology and philosophy!

AMAZING!!!

So the speed of light holds the key to all that: because it is the maximum speed limit and no mass could be accelerated to the speed of light ... this is not only the reason behind the theory of relativity, but it is also the reason behind the relativity of perception or consciousness.

But how could someone achieve these limits? You mentioned that one has to give up mass! How?

I thank you in advance and I appreciate it if you could elaborate further.

report post as inappropriate


Janice F. Murin wrote on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 09:26 GMT
I don't how did you get the mass-energy equation E=mc^2.

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 09:40 GMT
Dear Janice;

I answered your question above, but it may not be visible until you click on "show all replies".

Best Wishes

Mohamed



Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 09:58 GMT
Ok Janice I will repeat the answer here with more clarification:

If you integrate the first equation above:



if you integrate it in a regular way you will get the standard equation that gives us the kinetic energy:



that is if you assume dm=0 for normal velocities. The reason why we are getting the "half" in this equation is because the velocity increases gradually with time, which makes the integration equals the area of the triangle. Please see the figure in E=mc^2.

Now if you integrate the same first equation above from 0 to c but considering that this happens abruptly without gradual increase on the outer time level because it is not possible to accelerate a mass to the speed of light on the normal time level, but I showed in the article that it is possible on the inner level of time which appear instantaneous on the outer level. So we get:



In this case the integration will give us the area of the square as in the figure in E=mc^2.

Also you can get the same result if you integrate from m to zero or vice versa (and considering dv=0):



Or also from 0 to m, it will give the same result, which corresponds for example to the emission of radiation while the first one corresponds to the absorption.

I hope this clarifies the problem.

Please tell me if you need more clarification, because this is really in the heart of the mathematical formulation of the single monad model.



Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 12:49 GMT
I think this derivation of E=mc^2 is different from Einstein's derivation, because I remember the original derivation is based on Doppler shift.

report post as inappropriate


Janice F. Murin wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 18:09 GMT
Dear Dr. Mohamed Haj Yousef;

I understand from your title and abstract that the "digital manipulation" of the cosmos that what we see in the cosmos is not real!

Is this true?

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 19:39 GMT
Dear Janice;

No this model does not deny the objectivity of physical things, but it concludes that they are produced by the sequential multiplication over the inner

dimension of time, thus they all exist but not in the same real instance. Being part of this physical multiplicity that we describe as the universe, the other parts are as objective as ourselves, but we cannot conceive of them without the

flow of time.

Mohamed



Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 19:40 GMT
The essential underlying principle in this model is that no two entities can ever co-exist together in a real single instance of time, so the physical multiplicity can only emerge by the sequential multiplication of a metaphysical monad through the inner level of time, and then evolve throughout the outer level. This can even be proved with simple logic, as follows: Because of the three...

view entire post




Janice F. Murin replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 10:58 GMT
I don't really understand how the physical cosmos is still objective and yet you proof that it is metaphysical!

report post as inappropriate


Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 12:57 GMT
Dear Mr. Yousef,

I am satisfied with the your response to me and the other participants. Your: speed jumps from 0 to c, agrees with Boskovic's curves. So that function is broken. It should therefore be very careful when using the integral and differential (see articles of Temur Kalanov). My personal opinion; the reason for the existence of Big Bang Theory is a misunderstanding of mathematics.

Regards,

Branko

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 17:11 GMT
Thank Dear Branko for your positive comment:

You are completely right about mathematics.

Mathematicians usually start their theories by saying: "Let us suppose ..." and they build up on their suppositions which work nicely in all practical situations, but not in extreme theoretical situations.

Analysis, for example is based on the concept of limits which presupposes infinitesimal changes, which is impossible in nature because it implies infinities. In the end it might work as a kind of approximation, but cannot be used to describe the reality.

You are right: the reason for the existence of Big Bang Theory is a misunderstanding of mathematics.

Thank you for suggesting the articles of Temur Kalanov. I will have a look.

I appreciate it if you do rate my article.

Best Regards

Mohamed



Janice F. Murin replied on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 21:49 GMT
Einstein says: “If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.” After several readings I think I am starting to grasp the meaning of the inner time, but it is still unbelievable.

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 23, 2017 @ 05:47 GMT
Thank you Janice, I like your quote of Einstein: “If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.” An you are right, the idea is really absurd even to me: how can all this physical multiplicity, all the stars and galaxies are being made from one single metaphysical monad every instance of time!

I proposed this model in 2005, and only after inventing the concept of the duality of time and applying it to Relativity and mass-energy equivalence, and I found that id does solve most, if not all major physics problems, only after that I am starting to take it seriously.

I don't think people will take this model seriously very soon, it is really crazy. We spend so much time and money searching for the truth and when we find it we deny it.




Muder H. Moldier wrote on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 12:49 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef;

Your model explains how "space" is created in "time", but what about matter particles, since you also say in the title that they are also manipulated?

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 15:44 GMT
Dear Muder;

I thank you again for asking this question.

Honestly I don't have a clear idea how matter is dynamically created with space in the inner dimensions of time, but my impression is that the difference between matter and space is that "space" is the simplest form of matter, you can say it is "flat matter" and "matter" is condensed or curved space. I believe that this will agree with general relativity which confirmed that matter causes the curvature of space, and will potentially solve the problem of dark matter and dark energy.

As I said in one previous comment that the SMM model brings back the concept of aether and quintessence in a novel way that does not require it to affect the speed of light or matter particles, since it is now the background space itself, and not something in the background.

Best Regards




Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef wrote on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 16:28 GMT
Dear friends;

I would like to share with you this video presentation by prof. Haider Khan. His discussion in this short video is right into the point of what I am trying to show of the relation between time, space, and matter, which is based on Ibn Arabi-Time and Cosmology and he puts it in the context of the theory of relativity.

Best Regards



Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 16:40 GMT
I am sorry the link was broken, here again I hope it will work:

I would like to share with you this video presentation by prof. Haider Khan. His discussion in this short video is right into the point of what I am trying to show of the relation between time, space, and matter, which is based on and he puts it in the context of the theory of relativity.



Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 17:11 GMT
Thank you Dr. Yousef; I always thought that super-strings is the scientific version of the "science of letters" which I also think it is related to they philosophical theory of Pythagoras.

report post as inappropriate

Janice F. Murin replied on Feb. 25, 2017 @ 14:05 GMT
Thank you for posting this video, it is very nice.

report post as inappropriate


Janice F. Murin wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 10:00 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef;

So according to your model; is space and time discrete or continuous?

Regards

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 10:35 GMT
In this model of continuous space construction, multiplicity is revealed through the inner level of time, and then evolves over the outer level. Although the reality of time in both levels is discrete, on the inner level, where space and matter are constructed, space will appear potentially continuous due to the vast possible manifestations that spread over the three outward dimensions and any other inward curled dimensions. Eventually, the ultimate structure of space could be discrete below the Planck distance as it is commonly believed, though this is still an open question, but in my opinion it is not, because the potential possibilities are always infinite regardless of scale. The same could also be said about the outer level of time, which will also appear potentially continuous, and is expected to be discrete below the Planck time. The difference happens only when we make an observation or measurement, because the possibilities will be now confined and mostly the particle nature will be revealed. Even when waves are observed they are still confined in a region of space in which the field will take certain finite values each of which is inevitably represented by some confined particles or finite space points.



Janice F. Murin replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 16:09 GMT
thank you

report post as inappropriate


Munrid Qaraq wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 17:32 GMT
Dear Dr. Yousef;

I was very happy to come across your article.

It is really very interesting and I am enjoying the discussion.

I just scanned your replies, but I will study them carefully because I believe your model really solves many problems and answer many deep questions.

Meanwhile, can I ask you if this idea of the duality of time has ever been proposed before?

Many Thanks

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 19:07 GMT
Dear Munrid;

Thank you for your positive comments, and I am looking forward to answer your questions when you study the article and comments.

To answer your question above: As far as I am aware, the concept of the duality of time has never been proposed or discussed by anyone before.

However, if you think about it is equivalent to, but more realistic than, the inflation scenario by Alan Guth. The reason is that inflation leads to eternal inflation or infinite hypothetical multiverse. The duality of time, which is part of the Single Monad Model, solves all the problems solved by inflation because the cosmos is re-created, or inflated, from the single monad every instance of time.

Best Regards



Muder H. Moldier replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 19:12 GMT
>> ...the Single Monad Model solves all the problems solved by inflation because the cosmos is re-created, or inflated, from the single monad every instance of time.

Amazing, absolutely amazing. REALLY AMAZING! I believe this is Nobel prize model. I can see it very clearly. It is a matter of time.

report post as inappropriate

Author Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 20:10 GMT
Thank you Muder, I will share it with you!




Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'H' and 'J':


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