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


Previous Contests

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.
read/discusswinners

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

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 4/7/17 at 10:49am UTC, wrote Dear Sirs! Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of...

Peter Jackson: on 4/6/17 at 14:40pm UTC, wrote Dear Jan-Axel. Interesting stuff. As an Astronomer (of sorts) I can say...

Jan-Axel Nyman: on 3/17/17 at 16:03pm UTC, wrote Dear Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren, thank you for your comment. I am...

Jan-Axel Nyman: on 3/17/17 at 15:53pm UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir Rogozhin, Thank you for your comment. I have read your...

Bayarsaikhan Choisuren: on 3/17/17 at 12:53pm UTC, wrote Dear Jan-Axel Nyman Your mathematical description makes something...

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 3/17/17 at 12:40pm UTC, wrote Dear Jan-Axel, FQXI Contests are first of all new ideas. You give new...

Jan-Axel Nyman: on 3/15/17 at 13:17pm UTC, wrote Dear George Gantz, nice to enter a conversation with another grandfather....

George Gantz: on 3/13/17 at 15:36pm UTC, wrote Good morning Jan-Axel Nyman - You provide an interesting, if unusual...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Cristinel Stoica: "Dear Lorraine, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but QBism gives the humans..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Steven Andresen: "I note your reservations. What I propose doesn’t change the observations..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "Lorraine, did you read "Georgina Woodward replied on Jul. 22, 2017 @ 03:14..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Steven, I can only speak for myself. I am uncertain of my ability to..." in Alternative Models of...

sridattadev kancharla: "Dear All, Using Imaginary part of s in the e power yields correct..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

sridattadev kancharla: "Dear All, I am using Sign function to determine the direction of..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Cohen Geoffrey: "The origin of life on planet Earth A "cosmic cloud" falls from infinite..." in Biological Creativity

Georgina Woodward: "In the example of a spinning ball that was given it should be assumed that..." in The Reality of the...


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.


FQXi FORUM
July 23, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Could the simple equation d = ∛ ½ a × b turn astrophysics upside down? by Jan-Axel Nyman [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Jan-Axel Nyman wrote on Mar. 1, 2017 @ 20:06 GMT
Essay Abstract

The essay pinpoints a hitherto seemingly unknown or neglected very simple fundamental physical causal relation that governs the chain of events comprising all – from the absolutely smallest to the absolutely largest phenomenon in the universe. This relationship is expressed as follows: When objects, moving randomly in a limitless unchanged volume, aggregte to form increasingly larger and thereby fewer lumps, the mean distance between the centres of 2 neighbouring lumps (d) at a given occasion will equal: The ∛of half the sum of the number of the original objects (a) in the two lumps × the mean distance between those original objects (b) before the onset of the aggregation. d = ∛ ½ a × b Or expressed in words: When, in a limitless unchanged volume, randomly moving and evenly distributed objects* aggregate to form increasingly larger and thereby fewer lumps, each lump will be surrounded by an empty volume that equals the sum of the empty volumes that surrounded the constituents of each lump before the onset of the aggregation, minus the volume occupied by the lump itself.  This relationship has a consequence:  Each lump will recede from all other lumps, except those neighbouring lumps that are participating in the aggregation into a still larger lump. This consequence in turn has a profound importance when interpreting observations of the movements of celestial bodies and assemblies such as galaxies and clusters of galaxies.

Author Bio

The author is one of many scientifically enlightened laymen with professions other than scientific, now since some years enjoying a retirement that has given him time to engross in astrophysical issues as far as his basic knowledges in mathematics and physics as a high school graduate way back in 1955 allows. In the present days of dismissives of scientific findings he is expecting the scientific community to act otherwise and not dismiss this attempt at communicating with science and that the essence of this essay will be taken seriously and evaluated to be proven false or true.

Download Essay PDF File




Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 17:08 GMT
Dear Jan-Axel Nyman,

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


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 22:19 GMT
Nice essay Dear Nyman,

Your question is nice….“Is there a hitherto seemingly unknown or neglected very simple fundamental physical causal relation that governs the chain of events comprising all – from the absolutely smallest to the absolutely largest phenomenon in the universe?”

Your ideas and thinking are excellent but I think you are considering only expanding Universe...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Bishal Banjara wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 05:17 GMT
Dear Jan-Axel Nyman,

Will you please explain me your title'Could the simple equation d = ∛ ½ a × b

turn astrophysics upside down?'to match your essay...and please tell me how you got that mathematical relation if you didn't find to reference it....if you really want to see such upside down in physics then please read my essay...i have written in a language that a genuine student could understand it.

report post as inappropriate

Author Jan-Axel Nyman replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 12:52 GMT
Dear Mr. Bishal Banjara.

Thank you for your comment.

Having read your essay which I must admit was far too advanced for my limited knowledge of mathematics and physics, I will try to explain the reasoning behind the equation d = ∛ ½ a × b.

The illustrations on page 2 of my essay show how freely moving and randomly dispersed objects aggregate to lumps and that the number...

view entire post





George Gantz wrote on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 15:36 GMT
Good morning Jan-Axel Nyman -

You provide an interesting, if unusual discussion. It is not clear in your essay what acts upon the objects to form the lumps as you discuss. You might want to look at entropy and, more recently, the concept of dissipative adaptation, as suggesting mechanisms by which component objects within a system are induced to form lumps. These are topics I deal with in my essay (as do other authors).

Regards - George Gantz

report post as inappropriate

Author Jan-Axel Nyman replied on Mar. 15, 2017 @ 13:17 GMT
Dear George Gantz,

nice to enter a conversation with another grandfather.

I have read your brilliant essay which to a great extent summarizes my own conclusions after having followed the progress of science during more than six decades. My main source being a subscribtion on Scientific American since 1968 and the references it provides.

Many years ago it occurred to me that...

view entire post





Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Mar. 17, 2017 @ 12:40 GMT
Dear Jan-Axel,

FQXI Contests are first of all new ideas. You give new ideas, that will help us overcome the crisis of understanding in fundamental science through the creation of a new comprehensive picture of the world, uniform for physicists and lyrics filled with meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E.Husserl).

In fundamental science, including cosmology, today there is a need for a broad competition of ideas, concepts, theories . My high appreciation. I invite you to read and evaluate my ideas

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Jan-Axel Nyman replied on Mar. 17, 2017 @ 15:53 GMT
Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

Thank you for your comment.

I have read your essay and I must admit that, for a simple minded man that I am, it was difficult to comprehend and to find the essence of your essay. I came so far that you are trying to show that there is a general crisis encompassing all the realms of science as far as it has proceeded up today. I can’t agree with that. Science...

view entire post





Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren wrote on Mar. 17, 2017 @ 12:53 GMT
Dear Jan-Axel Nyman

Your mathematical description makes something interesting.

You tried to describe the accelerating expansion of universe by your mathematical problems.

I advise that you should also use it for the Avogadro constant and molar volume.

After reading studiously your article, I will post a comment more in detail on your essay.

Ch.Bayarsailkan

report post as inappropriate

Author Jan-Axel Nyman replied on Mar. 17, 2017 @ 16:03 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren,

thank you for your comment. I am looking forward to your coming post.

Kindest regards

Jan-Axel Nyman




Peter Jackson wrote on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 14:40 GMT
Dear Jan-Axel.

Interesting stuff. As an Astronomer (of sorts) I can say the 'peculiar motions' of celestial bodies as it's called are very complicated and all sorts of 'hand added' adjustments are needed to make things work in any basic gravity, but despite overwhelming floods of data it's still inadequate to have any real certainty, so there may well be somthing to your thesis!

As a mathematician of similar skill level to yours, one with similar disdain for interpretations, and also indeed one with more than one profession, I've interestingly arrived at similar conclusions on accelerating expansion, indeed shown how cosmic redshift can arise perfectly well without it. The video is here if you're interested.

But as I'm about to launch your essay out of the gravitational sink hole it seems to be stuck in I wonder if you may return the compliment by reading and scoring mine before wasting any more of the short time left!

Well done.

Peter

report post as inappropriate


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 10:49 GMT
Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use «spam».

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris

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.