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.

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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

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

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**Peter Leifer**: *on* 4/6/17 at 7:47am UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir, Thank you for your attention to my essay. I would like to...

**Peter Leifer**: *on* 4/6/17 at 6:46am UTC, wrote Dear Peter, Thanks for your very kind post! I really missed a lot of...

**Vladimir Tamari**: *on* 4/5/17 at 3:09am UTC, wrote Dear Professer Leifer I enjoyed reading your essay, especially since you...

**Peter Jackson**: *on* 4/4/17 at 13:57pm UTC, wrote Peter, Brilliant work towards progress on what Penrose has described as...

**Héctor Gianni**: *on* 3/12/17 at 0:09am UTC, wrote Dear Peter Leifer I invite you and every physicist to read my work “TIME...

**Steve Dufourny**: *on* 3/11/17 at 0:43am UTC, wrote I made an error about my equation, I hed not differe,ciated the wo...

**Wilhelmus Wilde**: *on* 2/27/17 at 14:59pm UTC, wrote Dear Peter, Thanks for your reaction. Different colours make a beautifull...

**Satyavarapu Gupta**: *on* 2/24/17 at 14:21pm UTC, wrote Dear Prof Leifer, Thank you for the good essay on “quantum geometry" ...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**Steve Agnew**: "The universe is finite and not infinite. The notion of infinity or..."
*in* Watching the Observers

**Anonymous**: ""According to quantum mechanics, a vacuum isn't empty at all. It's actually..."
*in* Manipulating the Quantum...

**Lorraine Ford**: "Dear Rajiv, I have already addressed your 3 points, but I will put it to..."
*in* FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

**Joe Fisher**: "Dear Georgina, That is very interesting, but please remember that the..."
*in* Watching the Observers

**Peter Morgan**: "An e-mail sent to me by Springer Nature today tells me that because I am at..."
*in* Manipulating the Quantum...

**munized ward**: "Variety exists inside all populaces of life forms. This happens somewhat in..."
*in* Natural Selection in...

**Pentcho Valev**: "Not Even Wrong Concepts in Physics: Entropy The following argument is..."
*in* We Are All Connected

**Rajiv Singh**: "Dear Lorraine, Oh! I did not check your recent responses. Let me address..."
*in* FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

RECENT ARTICLES

*click titles to read articles*

**Watching the Observers**

Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

**Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness**

Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

**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.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

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

FQXi FORUM

June 23, 2017

CATEGORY:
Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017)
[back]

TOPIC: Quantum relativity as the way towards reality by Peter Leifer [refresh]

TOPIC: Quantum relativity as the way towards reality by Peter Leifer [refresh]

Wandering in quantum researches should lead to the rational goal - understanding. All history of the science shows how meaningful mathematical laws in physics, engineering, chemistry, etc., arose on the ground of rational human practice. I would like show that in the contradictory development of quantum physics, the theory ultimately follows the same line. ``Elementary" particles do exist. This fact does not depend on the procedure of a measurement. The existence, however, requires some description that mostly based on relations between measurable values. Our goal is to bridge this objective reality and its mental reflection. It is assumed that existence should be based on the invariant relations between measurable values. What kind of the invariance should be used?

I am physicist, Ph.D in physics and mathematics (1990), worked as scientific researcher at the Simferopol State University (1981-1992) and at the Institute for Advanced Studies at the Tel-Aviv State University (1993-1997). I worked as associate professor at the Crimea Engineering State University and Crimea Medical State University during (2002-2006) and (2011-2015). I retired and work as independent researcher. The area of my interests: foundations of quantum physics, quantum field theory, general relativity.

Hello Mr Leifer,

A beautiful essay,congratulations I like your ideas.Don't forget 1D gravitational aether ....S3 SU(3) ...S(n) gravitationa sphere tending to infinty.I said me that you play with quantern,ions, octonions, sedenions .....the fracital of the spherical volumes so appear if and only if of course the commutativity and associativity is well utilised like the domains and the groups.

Quantum states indeed ,they turn so they are and the innertial comportments appear.

Good luck in this contest,

Regards

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

A beautiful essay,congratulations I like your ideas.Don't forget 1D gravitational aether ....S3 SU(3) ...S(n) gravitationa sphere tending to infinty.I said me that you play with quantern,ions, octonions, sedenions .....the fracital of the spherical volumes so appear if and only if of course the commutativity and associativity is well utilised like the domains and the groups.

Quantum states indeed ,they turn so they are and the innertial comportments appear.

Good luck in this contest,

Regards

report post as inappropriate

Dear Steve,

Thank you for kind notes and tips!

In connection with the mathematical formalism I may note following.

1. Up to now only the differential geometry of the SU(N) and CP(N-1) was taken into account.

2. I use only complex coefficient functions of the SU(N) generators.

More important the physical details:

1. The generalization of the Einstein's relativity to the ``quantum relativity" of a measuring device. This needs the intrinsic unification of quantum and relativity principle and reformulation of the inertia principle. People in the framework of this contest discuss SR and GR trying mostly deny their correctness. I may note shortly that absolute motion does exist but not in spacetime, in quantum state space.

2. Such approach requires new primordial elements.

3. These elements give a possibility to formulate mathematically new conservation laws and field equations.

Best regards,

Peter

Thank you for kind notes and tips!

In connection with the mathematical formalism I may note following.

1. Up to now only the differential geometry of the SU(N) and CP(N-1) was taken into account.

2. I use only complex coefficient functions of the SU(N) generators.

More important the physical details:

1. The generalization of the Einstein's relativity to the ``quantum relativity" of a measuring device. This needs the intrinsic unification of quantum and relativity principle and reformulation of the inertia principle. People in the framework of this contest discuss SR and GR trying mostly deny their correctness. I may note shortly that absolute motion does exist but not in spacetime, in quantum state space.

2. Such approach requires new primordial elements.

3. These elements give a possibility to formulate mathematically new conservation laws and field equations.

Best regards,

Peter

You are welcome Mr Leifer,

Thanks also for these détails,I learn in the same tilme these parallelizations.Very relevant in all case your line of reasoning about these new conservationlaws and fields équations.I beleive strongly Mr LMeifer that we can find this quantum gravitation with this kind of mathjematical method in breaking this klind of bridge implying our standard model with...

view entire post

Thanks also for these détails,I learn in the same tilme these parallelizations.Very relevant in all case your line of reasoning about these new conservationlaws and fields équations.I beleive strongly Mr LMeifer that we can find this quantum gravitation with this kind of mathjematical method in breaking this klind of bridge implying our standard model with...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

I made an error about my equation, I hed not differe,ciated the wo different matter, baryonic and not baryonic.E=m(b)c²+m(nb)l² m(b( mass baryonic and m(nb) mass not baryonic,we have a road towards this entire infinite pradoxal entropy also and this correlated gravitation.

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Greetings Peter; I am pleased to see your ideas about the deformation Geometry.My essay and your ideas might be combined into a more understandable model. See My essay "Proton three plane immersion connection theory". Keep going with the idea. Sincerely Francis Duane Moore.

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Francis Duane Moore,

Thank you for greetings. Please give me a time to read you essay.

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Thank you for greetings. Please give me a time to read you essay.

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Peter, do you have suggestions on the quantum geometry referred to in your paper? The reason I ask is that our paper that we submitted models particles and shows similarity to atomic elements. In your paper, you conclude with spin and charge may be included in the geometry of space. In ours, we suggest that the geometry of the particle itself may be responsible for spin and charge.

What we were able to show in our paper is that a particle's mass may be similar to the construct of how protons bind in an atomic nucleus to create elements. This applies only to mass and leaves important particle characteristics of spin and charge out, which we know needs to be addressed. Hence my interest in the work that you've done. If you're curious to see our work, I'll attach a link. Meanwhile, I'm giving you a good rating on a job well done.

The Relation of Particles Numbers to Atomic Numbers

report post as inappropriate

What we were able to show in our paper is that a particle's mass may be similar to the construct of how protons bind in an atomic nucleus to create elements. This applies only to mass and leaves important particle characteristics of spin and charge out, which we know needs to be addressed. Hence my interest in the work that you've done. If you're curious to see our work, I'll attach a link. Meanwhile, I'm giving you a good rating on a job well done.

The Relation of Particles Numbers to Atomic Numbers

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jeff Yee,

Thank you for estimation, interesting questions and you article.

I need some time to read it. I should understand what means the ``geometry of the particle itself".

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Thank you for estimation, interesting questions and you article.

I need some time to read it. I should understand what means the ``geometry of the particle itself".

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Dear Peter,

It is a very clear essay. Your interpretation of reality is another one s mine. I think that your interpretation together with all the others here in the conquest are forming a totality of human thinking.

I hope you will find some time to read my thinking about reality you find it at : http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2770

Pls be warned that thre are participants throwing one's as rating when you have a good score (I reveived thrre ones!!!)

best regards and good luck

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

It is a very clear essay. Your interpretation of reality is another one s mine. I think that your interpretation together with all the others here in the conquest are forming a totality of human thinking.

I hope you will find some time to read my thinking about reality you find it at : http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2770

Pls be warned that thre are participants throwing one's as rating when you have a good score (I reveived thrre ones!!!)

best regards and good luck

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Dear Professor Leifer,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

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

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

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

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Dear Prof Leifer,

Thank you for the good essay on “quantum geometry"

You are observations are excellent, like…

1. “The experimental foundation is, say, material provision for the correctness of theoretical schemes that gives rational explanation of observations.”

2. “Einstein’s words…. “God does not play dice" . But it is not only the methodological...

view entire post

Thank you for the good essay on “quantum geometry"

You are observations are excellent, like…

1. “The experimental foundation is, say, material provision for the correctness of theoretical schemes that gives rational explanation of observations.”

2. “Einstein’s words…. “God does not play dice" . But it is not only the methodological...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Dear Peter,

Thanks for your reaction.

Different colours make a beautifull rainbow....

I mentioned the ratings because I began with a 6 and a 9 nd then from nothing three 1's appeared , so I had to struggle from downwards on...

It seems to happen more, as I was warned by another author.

I just don't know who is playing this game of ones...

best regards

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Thanks for your reaction.

Different colours make a beautifull rainbow....

I mentioned the ratings because I began with a 6 and a 9 nd then from nothing three 1's appeared , so I had to struggle from downwards on...

It seems to happen more, as I was warned by another author.

I just don't know who is playing this game of ones...

best regards

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Dear Peter Leifer

I invite you and every physicist to read my work “TIME ORIGIN,DEFINITION AND EMPIRICAL MEANING FOR PHYSICISTS, Héctor Daniel Gianni ,I’m not a physicist.

How people interested in “Time” could feel about related things to the subject.

1) Intellectuals interested in Time issues usually have a nice and creative wander for the unknown.

2) They usually enjoy this wander of their searches around it.

3) For millenniums this wander has been shared by a lot of creative people around the world.

4) What if suddenly, something considered quasi impossible to be found or discovered such as “Time” definition and experimental meaning confronts them?

5) Their reaction would be like, something unbelievable,… a kind of disappointment, probably interpreted as a loss of wander…..

6) ….worst than that, if we say that what was found or discovered wasn’t a viable theory, but a proved fact.

7) Then it would become offensive to be part of the millenary problem solution, instead of being a reason for happiness and satisfaction.

8) The reader approach to the news would be paradoxically adverse.

9) Instead, I think it should be a nice welcome to discovery, to be received with opened arms and considered to be read with full attention.

11)Time “existence” is exclusive as a “measuring system”, its physical existence can’t be proved by science, as the “time system” is. Experimentally “time” is “movement”, we can prove that, showing that with clocks we measure “constant and uniform” movement and not “the so called Time”.

12)The original “time manuscript” has 23 pages, my manuscript in this contest has only 9 pages.

I share this brief with people interested in “time” and with physicists who have been in sore need of this issue for the last 50 or 60 years.

Héctor

report post as inappropriate

I invite you and every physicist to read my work “TIME ORIGIN,DEFINITION AND EMPIRICAL MEANING FOR PHYSICISTS, Héctor Daniel Gianni ,I’m not a physicist.

How people interested in “Time” could feel about related things to the subject.

1) Intellectuals interested in Time issues usually have a nice and creative wander for the unknown.

2) They usually enjoy this wander of their searches around it.

3) For millenniums this wander has been shared by a lot of creative people around the world.

4) What if suddenly, something considered quasi impossible to be found or discovered such as “Time” definition and experimental meaning confronts them?

5) Their reaction would be like, something unbelievable,… a kind of disappointment, probably interpreted as a loss of wander…..

6) ….worst than that, if we say that what was found or discovered wasn’t a viable theory, but a proved fact.

7) Then it would become offensive to be part of the millenary problem solution, instead of being a reason for happiness and satisfaction.

8) The reader approach to the news would be paradoxically adverse.

9) Instead, I think it should be a nice welcome to discovery, to be received with opened arms and considered to be read with full attention.

11)Time “existence” is exclusive as a “measuring system”, its physical existence can’t be proved by science, as the “time system” is. Experimentally “time” is “movement”, we can prove that, showing that with clocks we measure “constant and uniform” movement and not “the so called Time”.

12)The original “time manuscript” has 23 pages, my manuscript in this contest has only 9 pages.

I share this brief with people interested in “time” and with physicists who have been in sore need of this issue for the last 50 or 60 years.

Héctor

report post as inappropriate

Peter,

Brilliant work towards progress on what Penrose has described as the "Holy Grail", closing the "Chasm" between SR and QM. You'll now you're not there yet, but I can now offer some solid help. Did you read my (top scored) 'Red & Green socks' essay last year? (or past top 10 finishers deriving Special Relativity in a way possibly compatible with a classical derivation of QM?)

Well this year I identified the final piece of the puzzle, pretty well as you describe, but with actual rotation (angular momentum) and electrical charge identified as real orthogonal momenta on a spinning sphere, the cosine value distribution from an extension of Pythagoras to 3D dynamics, and then the subsequent mechanism producing the squared cosine values. i.e. Classic QM, fully meeting your aim of Quantum Relativity.

See also Bill McHarris's excellent essay (and both ours from 2 years ago).

I have produced papers (inc. joint with John Minkowski) but we're incapable of getting anything published in a mainstream journal, as most would be without much more collaboration. I hope you'll consider that. But do read (and score) my essay first (which first explains why most brains won't allow such progress!)

Top job, well done. And just before time expires. Yours gets a getting a 10 from me right now and I'm pretty sure you'll want to give mine the same.

Very best

Peter

I also have a video. See the essay first and I'll post some links.

report post as inappropriate

Brilliant work towards progress on what Penrose has described as the "Holy Grail", closing the "Chasm" between SR and QM. You'll now you're not there yet, but I can now offer some solid help. Did you read my (top scored) 'Red & Green socks' essay last year? (or past top 10 finishers deriving Special Relativity in a way possibly compatible with a classical derivation of QM?)

Well this year I identified the final piece of the puzzle, pretty well as you describe, but with actual rotation (angular momentum) and electrical charge identified as real orthogonal momenta on a spinning sphere, the cosine value distribution from an extension of Pythagoras to 3D dynamics, and then the subsequent mechanism producing the squared cosine values. i.e. Classic QM, fully meeting your aim of Quantum Relativity.

See also Bill McHarris's excellent essay (and both ours from 2 years ago).

I have produced papers (inc. joint with John Minkowski) but we're incapable of getting anything published in a mainstream journal, as most would be without much more collaboration. I hope you'll consider that. But do read (and score) my essay first (which first explains why most brains won't allow such progress!)

Top job, well done. And just before time expires. Yours gets a getting a 10 from me right now and I'm pretty sure you'll want to give mine the same.

Very best

Peter

I also have a video. See the essay first and I'll post some links.

report post as inappropriate

Dear Peter,

Thanks for your very kind post! I really missed a lot of interesting and important contributions during last years in FQXi. I think that your ``classical QM" is very close to the relatively new Complex Mechanics of C.-D. Yang.

You may ask me to send pdf in my email peter.leifer@gmail.com. In any case your approach with nice visualization of quantum states and graphics are very prolific! May be it is much more acceptable in comparison with my abstract discussions. I must think about it!

I try to read your essay 2015 and 2017. I hope I may to vote! In any case the manner of the score calculations is VERY DARK. How they do it?

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Thanks for your very kind post! I really missed a lot of interesting and important contributions during last years in FQXi. I think that your ``classical QM" is very close to the relatively new Complex Mechanics of C.-D. Yang.

You may ask me to send pdf in my email peter.leifer@gmail.com. In any case your approach with nice visualization of quantum states and graphics are very prolific! May be it is much more acceptable in comparison with my abstract discussions. I must think about it!

I try to read your essay 2015 and 2017. I hope I may to vote! In any case the manner of the score calculations is VERY DARK. How they do it?

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Dear Professer Leifer

I enjoyed reading your essay, especially since you so clearly question various Bohrian positions in QM in favor of a more realistic physics such as Einstein wished for.

"God does not play dice." Exactly but I have explained in my fqxi essay how - ironically - it was Einstein's unwarranted description in 1905 of the photon quanta as a point particle (not just a bundle of wave energy =hv). He created the false notion of duality which led to probability and plagues physics to this day.

Heisenberg: " I think that Einstein was sure that quantum theory requires a new more deep kind of“quantum geometry” hidden behind details of measurements. The invariance closely related to the concept of “reality” "

Excellent - perhaps that geometry is Cellular Automata creating space, matter, energy as in my Beautiful Universe Model

"Even spacetime cannot save its independent and a priori structure". Great! I have been outspoken in the need to reconstruct physics without spacetime as in the above papers.

Your essay contained other topics difficult for me to understand such as your proposals for new primordial elements. In my model such elements are of one kind: simple qubits that have dielectric dipolar properties affecting the spin and orientation of their neighbors in a universal lattice.

Wishing you all the best,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

I enjoyed reading your essay, especially since you so clearly question various Bohrian positions in QM in favor of a more realistic physics such as Einstein wished for.

"God does not play dice." Exactly but I have explained in my fqxi essay how - ironically - it was Einstein's unwarranted description in 1905 of the photon quanta as a point particle (not just a bundle of wave energy =hv). He created the false notion of duality which led to probability and plagues physics to this day.

Heisenberg: " I think that Einstein was sure that quantum theory requires a new more deep kind of“quantum geometry” hidden behind details of measurements. The invariance closely related to the concept of “reality” "

Excellent - perhaps that geometry is Cellular Automata creating space, matter, energy as in my Beautiful Universe Model

"Even spacetime cannot save its independent and a priori structure". Great! I have been outspoken in the need to reconstruct physics without spacetime as in the above papers.

Your essay contained other topics difficult for me to understand such as your proposals for new primordial elements. In my model such elements are of one kind: simple qubits that have dielectric dipolar properties affecting the spin and orientation of their neighbors in a universal lattice.

Wishing you all the best,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Dear Vladimir,

Thank you for your attention to my essay. I would like to do some notes very shortly.

1. ``He created the false notion of duality". I may agree that DUALITY is not the final true! Please take into account that on the concept of duality based not only QFT but quantum solid body state, quantum theory of magnetism, etc. You blame Einstein but he was the first who try to reach the UNITY.

2. Heisenberg: " I think that Einstein was sure that quantum theory requires a new more deep kind of“ quantum geometry” hidden behind details of measurements. The invariance closely related to the concept of “reality” " You prescribed this phrase to Heisenberg but this is my. I erroneously assumed that cite italisation will be enough.

3. I found in you essay the identity ``acceleration=gravity" and it is treated as the equivalence principle. But it is incorrect! Acceleration is only external representation of the motion due to interaction. Please read on of the last my articles.

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Thank you for your attention to my essay. I would like to do some notes very shortly.

1. ``He created the false notion of duality". I may agree that DUALITY is not the final true! Please take into account that on the concept of duality based not only QFT but quantum solid body state, quantum theory of magnetism, etc. You blame Einstein but he was the first who try to reach the UNITY.

2. Heisenberg: " I think that Einstein was sure that quantum theory requires a new more deep kind of“ quantum geometry” hidden behind details of measurements. The invariance closely related to the concept of “reality” " You prescribed this phrase to Heisenberg but this is my. I erroneously assumed that cite italisation will be enough.

3. I found in you essay the identity ``acceleration=gravity" and it is treated as the equivalence principle. But it is incorrect! Acceleration is only external representation of the motion due to interaction. Please read on of the last my articles.

Sincerely yours,

Peter

Login or create account to post reply or comment.