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

Joe Fisher: on 3/9/17 at 16:34pm UTC, wrote Dear Jouko Harri Tiainen, Visible rocks, trees, bees, or any visible...

Jouko Tiainen: on 3/9/17 at 7:32am UTC, wrote An example from chemistry about the cardinality class of molecules. The...

Jouko Tiainen: on 3/9/17 at 7:26am UTC, wrote An example from chemistry about the cardinality class of molecules. The...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 3/8/17 at 22:28pm UTC, wrote Dear Tiainen, Nice essay with pictographs, Your way of presentation of...

Joe Fisher: on 3/8/17 at 17:24pm UTC, wrote Dear Jouko Harri Tiainen, Please excuse me for I have no intention of...

Jouko Tiainen: on 3/7/17 at 14:50pm UTC, wrote Thank you for the question and nice to know you found the essay novel. ...

james akerlund: on 3/6/17 at 4:25am UTC, wrote I like articles that make me think in ways that are not standard to my way...

Jouko Tiainen: on 3/4/17 at 10:44am UTC, wrote I'm saying for us counter of things within the flow of time there ARE...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

leonae gonzales: "This seems to be very interesting site. Professionally i am a writer at the..." in Quantum Replicants:...

James Putnam: "Quoting Gary D. Simpson: "If you disapprove of one-bombing and wish to..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Steven Andresen: "It might be that I have come to know where the hidden variable is, to..." in 80 Years of EPR —...

Lawrence Crowell: "The choice for anonymous commenting is a good idea. A person scoring less..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

dieu le: "The Creation of Momentum From the gigantic Milky Way Galaxy to the..." in Alternative Models of...

dieu le: "What causes Things Move in Universe? Things move when encountering a..." in Alternative Models of...

leonae gonzales: "I would like to prepare a review of this topic with the help of research..." in Quantum Replicants:...

Thewitcher: "Đến với dịch vụ chữ ký số giachukyso.net bạn sẽ được..." in Riding the Rogue 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
March 23, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Correlations within QM by Jouko Harri Tiainen [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

This essay's rating: Community = 3.0; Public = 2.0


Author Jouko Harri Tiainen wrote on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 16:02 GMT
Essay Abstract

Abstract – by presenting a model of an “event” or a goal it will be shown that quantum correlations can only be established between mindless mathematical laws and intentional counting within the flow of time.

Author Bio

Just interested in physics.

Download Essay PDF File




Troy Adam Delaney wrote on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 07:45 GMT
Arnt you saying there are no actual events, one event and that' is the constant now. What do you say about the big bang event

report post as inappropriate


Author Jouko Harri Tiainen wrote on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 10:44 GMT
I'm saying for us counter of things within the flow of time there ARE certainly "events" e.g. we can say things like "the Melbourne Cup" race starts on the first Tuesday in November at 3pm in Melbourne and ends some "duration" later. All these concepts are human counting objects within a cycle called a year. But realise you and me are just "human" events within the model since we can actually do the experiment if we chose to - at the start of the paper. The experiment is "the event of actually being able to count within a "flow" with a "march of event" with a direction,...., to get a heap of sand". Clearly the paper answers the question "Can we determine where (and when) the Melbourne Cap ends exactly? The answer is NO with mathematical precision. It means how we measure duration, seems to make the end exact enough to declare a winner and a placement of the other horses." for us. And by the model presented seems to make the "start" an actual thing in the past "A", when the race ends "within duration". YES I know it sounds all the wrong way around to how we think "things work". "Within duration" means duration without "labels like start and end", duration isn't what we call "time".



Author Jouko Harri Tiainen replied on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 07:26 GMT
An example from chemistry about the cardinality class of molecules. The cardinality of the stuff we commonly count things like “rocks, trees, blades of grass, bees,....” which are made of atoms and molecules is called Avorgado's number about 6x1023 (6 followed by 23 zeros). In chemistry we know that “Avorgado's number of atoms or molecules each acting classically makes a mole (or a heap) of substance. Nature counts the substance of common-day events using moles, while we see ordinary stuff such as 5 cats, 2 oranges, etc, Chemistry says what we actually have is so many moles of substance interacting which doesn't match how we see what “numbers” are attached to which “objects”. For example, when a tree burns to the ground, the identity of the tree within the flow of time is lost (recall trees are human “objects” so can “end”), but when viewed as so many moles of substance interacting, the actual number of moles always stays the same or in other terms the number of moles (or the n-event) is conserved over any duration. So when in chemistry we say 1,2,3,4,5,.... we mean 1 mole, 2 moles, 3 moles, ….. and using this as the Mathematical Induction MI series we can justify the conservation of the number of moles over duration. As we know that one mole consists of 6x1023 objects by observation.




james r. akerlund wrote on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 04:25 GMT
I like articles that make me think in ways that are not standard to my way of thinking. Your article does that very well. I thank you for submitting it.

But, (and you probably knew this was coming) you are thinking along the lines of all QM people, that is in the small. In your paper you mention bananas and electrons. And to quote, "There is yellowness going on" or “There is...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Jouko Harri Tiainen replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 14:50 GMT
Thank you for the question and nice to know you found the essay novel.

That is, what I thought stars and galaxies where anyway, “just the results of gravity” and these the actual stars and galaxies you speak of are by the essay model the actual “events” we see because of the PA (the Principle Assumption) which establishes “within the process of MI” our Kantian view of duration...

view entire post




Joe Fisher replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 17:24 GMT
Dear Jouko Harri Tiainen,

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. 8, 2017 @ 22:28 GMT
Dear Tiainen,

Nice essay with pictographs,

Your way of presentation of ideas is very good. Your words… ‘Hence a Quineian philosophy for how events and processes work together. That is we only can have correlations (just as we do in QM) for how objects within the flow of time match up to a measurement result, of a heap, using pure mathematical counting.’ are good….

For...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Jouko Harri Tiainen wrote on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 07:32 GMT
An example from chemistry about the cardinality class of molecules. The cardinality of the stuff we commonly count things like “rocks, trees, blades of grass, bees,....” which are made of atoms and molecules is called Avorgado's number about 6x1023 (6 followed by 23 zeros). In chemistry we know that “Avorgado's number of atoms or molecules each acting classically makes a mole (or a heap) of substance. Nature counts the substance of common-day events using moles, while we see ordinary stuff such as 5 cats, 2 oranges, etc, Chemistry says what we actually have is so many moles of substance interacting which doesn't match how we see what “numbers” are attached to which “objects”. For example, when a tree burns to the ground, the identity of the tree within the flow of time is lost (recall trees are human “objects” so can “end”), but when viewed as so many moles of substance interacting, the actual number of moles always stays the same or in other terms the number of moles (or the n-event) is conserved over any duration. So when in chemistry we say 1,2,3,4,5,.... we mean 1 mole, 2 moles, 3 moles, ….. and using this as the Mathematical Induction MI series we can justify the conservation of the number of moles over duration. As we know that one mole consists of 6x1023 objects by observation.



Joe Fisher replied on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 16:34 GMT
Dear Jouko Harri Tiainen,

Visible rocks, trees, bees, or any visible objects are not made of invisible atoms. All real objects have a visible surface.

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


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.