Search FQXi

If you have an idea for a blog post or a new forum thread, then please contact us at, with a summary of the topic and its source (e.g., an academic paper, conference talk, external blog post or news item).
Forum Home
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
April 16, 2014

ARTICLE: Much Ado About Nothing [back to article]
Bookmark and Share

Uncle Al wrote on May. 12, 2009 @ 01:20 GMT
Newtonian (re Green's function) and metric gravitation are even-parity functions: f(x) = f(-x). They don't quantize. Quantum gravitation theories require supplementing Einstein-Hilbert action with an odd-parity Chern-Simons term, f(x) = -f(-x). There is your problem.

If the vacuum is odd-parity in the massed sector then chemically and macroscopically identical test masses composed of opposite parity atomic mass distributions, f(x,y,z) and f(-x,-y,-z), will violate the Equivalence Principle in a parity Eotvos experiment. Einstein's elevator postulates an inert vacuum background. If the vacuum is a metaphoric left foot toward mass, then metaphoric left and right shoes will fall differently for being interactively fit to it.

Self-similar opposite parity atomic mass distributions are single crystal test masses in enantiomorphic space groups P3(1)21 and P3(2)21: quartz, berlinite and analogues, cinnabar, tellurium, benzil. Ditto enantiomorphic space groups P3(1) and P3(2): gamma-glycine polymorph, 2,2-bis(hydroxymethyl)propionic acid, and 1,2,4-thiadiazole-3,5-dicarbonitrile.

Somebody should look. (Solids' sublimation vapor pressures limit organic test masses to gamma-glycine. The quartz lattice is 12.557 A^3/atom. gamma-Glycine is 7.869 A^3/atom. Tight atom packing either way!)

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on May. 12, 2009 @ 07:53 GMT
Hello dear Uncle Al,

Thanks for these informations ,it's very interesting .



report post as inappropriate

Uncle Al wrote on May. 12, 2009 @ 15:25 GMT
Second test for chiral vacuum background (static) and Equivalence Principle parity violation (dynamic): Two differential scanning calorimeters (DSCs) are abutted and positioned so their sample pans are located along a north-south line. Each holds a ~3 mm diameter ~17 mg solid single crystal sphere of benzil, one in space group P3(1)21 (right-handed) and one in P3(2)21 (left-handed), mp = 95°C. ...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on May. 12, 2009 @ 17:55 GMT
I am going to see more about your informations and this Eotvos experiment ,it's fascinating .

Indeed the basis of the equivalence principle are so important in a model .

Thanks for that .



report post as inappropriate

amrit wrote on Nov. 11, 2009 @ 16:10 GMT
Yes, particle grow out of vacuum. Vacuum energy is energy of quantum space. Quanta of space QS are building vacuum. In outher space density of vacuum is extremly high and quanta of space are forming into "cosmic waves" into fresh gas of elementary particles.

In black holes mass get transformed back into energy of vacuum, into energy of quantum space. Gravity motion is result of dynamics between density of vacuum and mass. See more in my article on file attached.

yours amrit

attachments: Original_Solution_of_Gravity__ICFAI.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Narendra Nath wrote on Nov. 16, 2009 @ 12:08 GMT
Ted Jacobson has a valid idea about vacuum in discrete space, to replace the universe expansion through dark energy. What is the situation closer to truth depends on the the concepts of space and time. Are both these discrete? If you dicreteness is pushed to the limit, it becomes homogeneity when the unit of discreteness becomes smaller than what can be ever measured. Thus the whole business of quantum fluctuations really is based on measurement limits which are accompanied by measurement errors intrinsically speaking. In a way determinacy and indeterminacy are just two sides of the same coin and distinction between classical and quantum physics just becomes a game we play with larger number of atoms versus the smaller number of atoms in the sample under study, e.g 10 E 18 or 10 E 3. Now what lies in between, no one has yet bothered to cover, a region where neither macroscopic nor microscopic picture holds! In other words, one may have a situation where the Planck's constant can neither be considered 0 or its full value 'h'.

report post as inappropriate

Azzam AlMosallami wrote on Aug. 7, 2012 @ 17:55 GMT
Dear Ted,

Will you read my essay

it is related to your essy

report post as inappropriate

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.