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 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.

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

Le Van Cuong: on 11/21/10 at 17:59pm UTC, wrote I think that Einstein's Special Relativity should correct an invariability...

Dov Henis: on 4/23/10 at 4:40am UTC, wrote Theory Of Everything Without Strings Attached. Embarassingly Obvious And...

William Foehringer: on 1/29/10 at 22:32pm UTC, wrote Is there data that indicates that the time delay is proportional to...

amrit: on 10/29/09 at 17:50pm UTC, wrote Quantum space-time should be made out of grains QS. QS should have three...

amrit: on 9/22/09 at 19:56pm UTC, wrote According to my research quantum space-time does not exists. Stellar...

Steve Dufourny: on 9/7/09 at 13:52pm UTC, wrote Hi all , Dear Brian , yes thanks I am better ,fortunally .Stronger in...

Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 9/7/09 at 0:44am UTC, wrote The door never was open to the physicists' theory of everything. The true...

Brian Beverly: on 9/5/09 at 13:08pm UTC, wrote *hear about those troubles.

March 27, 2017

ARTICLE: Readers' Choice: Journeying Through the Quantum Froth [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Anonymous wrote on Aug. 9, 2009 @ 13:17 GMT
What does this mean for string theory vs loop quantum gravity?

report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 13, 2009 @ 12:09 GMT
There is to my mind an alternative explanation for violations of GZK. The GZK limit is imposed because high energy protons interact with the CMB background strongly. The proton interacts with highly blue shifted CMB photons. However, supernova produce lots of neutrinos, and some of these might through weak interactions produce high energy proton-antiproton pairs above the GZK limit and close enough so the protons are not scattered to lower energy.


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 13, 2009 @ 12:48 GMT
Dear Lawrence ,

What do you think about the paradox about the limits .... 5.10(exp 19)ev.

We see some superior energy No ?



report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 13, 2009 @ 18:21 GMT
The odd thing about this is that it means that the speed of light is dependent on frequency. So suppose you are watching a beam of light with some frequency. You measure its speed of light and find a certain value. You then boost yourself to a different frame moving with some velocity along the direction the beam is propagating. You then again measure the speed of light. Since the light is red or blue shifted you find a different speed of light. This seems to be present a sort of problem.

I read the double relativity papers some 10 years ago. I didn't find as I remember anything wrong with the analysis, but I found it troubling. I think the question boils down to how things transform. I will give two plausible and related explanations for this and the problems with them.

Special relativity tells us that if you observe a rod of length L moving at a velocity v that it is contracted by L' = sqrt{1 - (v/c)^2}L. Double relativity states there is a limit to this contraction, in that L >= L_p. This results in modified boost transformations. Now the length of the rod in motion is some integer number of Planck lengths, L = NL_p. The Lorentz boost then does one of the following things. I reduces the number of L_p's, so the number N is reduced in discrete units by sqrt{1 - (v/c)^2}, which reaches the lower limit of N = 1 as v --> infinity. The theory of double relativity involves an obstruction of this sort. However, this appears to have a muddle between Lorentz transformations on scalars and vectors. We might instead say that sqrt{1 - (v/c)^2} is associated with L_p, so the Planck units of length are reduced. The two explanations are interchangable in a way. The problem here is that the Planck length is the size of a black hole which equals its own de Broglie wavelength. So since the horizon is a null congruence (classically) it is then an invariant. L_p should not transform.

I played with an idea of there being a gauge-like transformation associated with double relativity. So just as a gauge potential makes momentum gauge covariant this was an attempt to covariantize double relativity. The idea was then to subject out any adulteration of special relativity for high energy photons, but to then introduce a gauge-like interaction which occurs with highly relativistic or ultra-high frequency photons. In any case this may simply point to some underlying problem with our foundation of physics.


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 14, 2009 @ 11:07 GMT
You are very strong ,it s a pleasure to see so much informations .

The GZK limits....and if the datas show us a non violation of the limits ?

It's very relevant what you say

"The problem here is that the Planck length is the size of a black hole which equals its own de Broglie wavelength"

These limits ,these natural unities ,which are universal everywhere in the micro and macroscopis Universe are invariants .

The' duality wave/part appears ...I think it exist a perfect balance there and a very high energy ,for me like the total energy wich is everywhere but evidently with our limits of perceptibility in Time and Space .

I don't beleive really what it is possible to reduce these unities ,but I admit what your estrapolations are incredible .

You catalyze the research of truth ,it's important ,thanks for that .

If we take these unities,and the de broglie wavelenght .

The light is thus in this laws No ? If we must change the frequence which is invariant for me ,thus we must change the ultim unity of volume of this duality part/wave of the light .

How chage the ultim pression ,the ultim rotations of spheres of light ,in my model ,this velocity of rotations is maximum for the light ,it's a limit ,a gauge of perceptibilité and relativity in our physical Universe .

The ultim stability is coded and so far of us and so impossible to check too ,still less to change the ultim frequence of the light .

L 1.616 × 10-35 m

M 2.177 × 10-8 kg

T 5.391 × 10-44 s

Θ 1.415 × 1032 K

Q 1.875 × 10-18 C

1.210 × 1044 N

1019 GeV = 1.956 × 109 J

3.629 × 1052 W

5.1 × 1096 kg/m3

1.855 × 1043 rad/s

4.635 × 10113 Pa

3.479 × 1025 A

1.0432 × 1027 V

2.9986 × 101 Ω

What do you think dear Lawrence .



report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 14, 2009 @ 12:13 GMT
The speed of light is a conversion factor. It converts one distance measured in seconds to another measured in lengths (m or cm). The speed of light is a fixture of this this relationship or is a conversion factor. Some time back I got into a debate over variable speeds of light, and the problem is that if you adjust c to some other value then everything else changes in a way so you don't notice any change.

The units which are the most important to check are those which are strictly unitless, such as the fine structure constant. The next are those which are unitless in naturalized systems, such as the speed of light.

The Planck units of length are argued to exist from the Planck length. This length is the length at which a Schwarzschild black hole radius, or more accurately its circumference, is equal to its own de Broglie wavelength. It is not hard to compute this. The other Planck units pertain to other measurement units by various conversion factors, such as Planck time computed with the speed of light and the Planck length --- c is a conversion factor,

Planck units of length, time, momentum, energy and so forth have units of length or reciprocal length in naturalized units. This makes them qualitatively different from the fine structure constant for electromagnetism which is strictly unitless. So the analogue of the fine structure constant in QED for gravity has some fundamental differences. The Planck length is L_p = sqrt{Għ/c^3} and the gravitational constant renormalizes with energy according to a rule written heuristically as

G = G_0(1 +∫_0^ΛdE’ F(E’)), G_0 = standard gravitational constant

So we might imagine we have a Planck conversion factor μ_p = β sqrt{ħ/c^3}, where β = sqrt{G/G_0} and the renormalized Planck length is computed accordingly. Then μ_p might be considered the more important naturalized unitless constant for quantum gravity.


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 14, 2009 @ 16:15 GMT
Have you already compute that ,what are the results ?



report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 17, 2009 @ 12:26 GMT
The renormalization of the gravitational constant is a matter of some research. In string theory there is a nonperturbative scheme of sorts of a renormalization group flow.


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 18, 2009 @ 09:28 GMT
I imagine indeed the numbers of researchs and computing simulations .

LBNL,Argonne,Fermilab,Max Planck Inst,Blue Gene ,Caltech,MIT ,Perimeter Inst,Kavli,....

I suspect a competition ,it's our Earth .

I have a model about the computing ,all is inserted ,the numbers of quantum spheres and theirs specificities ....H fact all mass after can be extrapolated ,after the time evolution .

The entanglement of quantum spheres is specific ,like the future spheres with maximum contact .After we insert to the expansion and we extrapolate the contraction .I imagine a big main central sphere ,after X spheres smaller like mega groups of galaxies (the central spheres),after smaller super groups .....main galaxy central spheres (BH).....stars ..planets....moons ..............quantum link .

This entanglement is interesting it seems to me .

Even if the maximum contact is imaginary ,it's intersting .After we play with PV ,evolution ,mass ,gravity ,activation concept .....the increasing of mass by weak interactions and rotations of quantum spheres implying mass .



report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 21, 2009 @ 11:02 GMT
I ask me how is this specific entanglement of spheres ,the numbers are relevants .

Logically this equilibrium is an universal constant if all is considered between quantum and cosmological spheres .

The aim is to find thus this specific entanglement .Let's assume in this model ,an incompressible matter for quantum spheres and a membran for those spheres .

The volume thus is so important like the pression .After too we can insert rotations and mass .

This membran and inside the ultim matter code thus .

When we take a main central sphere like our two main centers(quant and cosm)after we take the second step with others centers correlated ,

probably some unknew centers ,more complex than a BH in my opinion ,in fact a central sphere whith a big system of balance ,probably for unknew super groups of galaxies ..differents steps ??how many..and we continue.we arrive after with our BH ,galaxies centers and the central specific spheres,we have already a beautiful entanglement and lattices in maximum contact ,after we continue with smaller spheres for stars with light and planets more moons .....

An important point in my model is the rule of thoses entangled spaces ,thoses lattices, specifics in numbers too are a perfect design to permit the rotations interactions with oscillated spherical membrans of spheres.

The fact to have thoses lattices are relevant because that permits for spheres to have a specific comportment with the rotations ,if the spheres are a kind of ultim incompresible matter ,coded,thus the membran and the matter can adapt themselves in a specific rule to create the perception of things in specific systems.

This architecture is the same I think in the quantum and for the future balance of spheres .

What I find intersting too is the increase of mass .

For the Universal sphere in building ,the space is more important due to the evolution and the specific dynamic with expenasion and contraction .

If the universal space contractes ,thus the spheres in wait touchs and oscillates after thus ....there thus the space becomes mass by activation by contact and contraction ,in the quantum these contacts permit to reduce the space and increase the mass too .

Thus during the quantum phase,thats increase thoses oscillations,gravitationals waves by conatcs .

The Universal space will decrease .The quantum space will rest .


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 21, 2009 @ 13:27 GMT
I dlike share with you all this idea about Prime Number .

Sometimes I Take a paper and I extrapolate some ideas in 3D correlated with Euler Works ,the different spirals of prime numbers ,like Ulam or Sacks spirals of prime Numbers .The constants ,series ,oscillations are relevant and too the numbers .In a spherical extrapolations and spheres links ,the frequences are too relevant if we...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson wrote on Aug. 21, 2009 @ 16:33 GMT
Nice thinking guys. The 4 second delay was interesting in relation to some research I'm part of involving Shapiro delay inconsistencies among other things. This was complex to unravel, but when you substitute up to 811 days for the 4 seconds it throws a new light on things.

A problem with this is that astronomers are normally very reticent to publish results that don't conform to previous prediction. Even the 2nd Shapiro result with Jupiter needed some mathematical contortions, and lensing by galaxies..! well if you're an astronomer and have some inconsistent results let me know as there is an answer.

But thats an aside. The outshot is that there is a background dependant inductive model solution that allows equivalence with 'c' as a constant and overcomes the paradoxes, one of which Lawrence highlighted. But for the odd wrong assumtion made a long time ago we would have seen it then. Froth may be one of the right scales to think, but it needs input from a wide range of areas of physics to show it's simple logic. It's certainly not a TOE, but opens more doors than it closes, unifies, and firmly points the way to QG.

The only problem is that it seems Lee Smolin was right. The system itself is faulty and publication, or even examonation, has not proven possible. This at least means it's been comprehensively tested with every new bit of data available, and that some predictions are now already proven. Any answers to that problem may also help.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 22, 2009 @ 19:22 GMT
Hi Dear Peter ,

Nice to meet you .

It's interesting .

I think the aim is not to find the TOE it's impossible ,perhaps at the end of the physical Universe where begins the ultim harmony and eternity in creativity and in optimized interactions between mass systems.

I beleive what A real theory encircles all and we see it everywhere in all centers of interest .A real theory and fundamenatls rest in times and improves itself by synergies because the fundamentals are the fundamenatls .

A real name for a good theory is a theory of grand unification and fundamental ,a good theory will be improved always ,will rest too .

I insist on one thing ,it's important to encircle all centers of interest .

Let's take the quaternions and octonions ,the Klein curves ,Riemann ,Euler ....and thus the differents mathematical extrapolations with heptagons ,differents vectors dimensions between 0 and 8 between i (1) to quaternions and after octonions ,...let's insert too the associative sqaure ,triangle ,otheres ,.....all that must have physical limits and pure correltions with our physicality .All extrapolations are universals when the fundamentals are inserted ,without that it's difficult to understand the two architesture ,the quantum architecture and the cosmological sphere for me in building .

If a lab don't use these fundamenatls ,all mathematical extrapolations are a lost of time ,that's why the numbers of spheres is essential to encircle all our specific dynamic .

The entanglement of spheres is specific and each physical sphere is specific(nature,volume ,density ,mass ,.....)so many specificities .

When a product is made with octonions ,or others ....sall specificities must be considered ,without that it's only for compute and simulate the human thinking but not the reality .

That's why the entanglement and thus all extrapolations must be in these correlations .It's essentiel in my opinion .

All products of systems must be correlated with the physical and universal link .

It's there what the mathematic is in symbiosis with the physic .What I say is simple ,even an imaginary can become a real ,where the systems are in the same frequence .

All models thus must respect these fundamenatls .

If we insert the good numbers and the specificities more rotations ,all is solved like gauge .

All design must have fundamentals ,the quantum is the same in the numbers of spheres .

I am persuaded about this new universal constant about the rotations of spheres ,even our big universal sphere if I resume my perception ,our universal sphere don't turn and the smallest sphere turns around itself at he maximum .The light probably but it's linear like velocity ,probably the main central coded spheres ,our central universal sphere and the main central quantum spheres ,the light in this logic begins by centers towads centers .

The rotations of quantum and cosmological spheres are linked by many constants .



report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 22, 2009 @ 21:28 GMT
I return too about the imaginaries and the axiomatizations ,our universe is not a computer for make simple .Thus an axiomatization take all its sense when the reals and physical constants are fundamenatls thus with limits and physical laws ,it essential it seems to me .

If we extrapolate all models like Von Niemann,we rest in virtuality and computing .

Thus all axiomatizations must be correlated and must be too classed in two roads ,the physicality and the axiomatizations ,virtuals and humans .

On the other side a real physical axiomatization is possible if some things are respected evidently.

This perception ,relativistic ,permit to encircle better our physical dynamic in evolution in my opinion ,but it's just a supposition.



report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 10:53 GMT
Hi all ,

I try to understand why these actuals methods to find our quantum truths.

Let's take the colliders ,It's not the good way the collisions I think ,because the division is not rational .Too much parameters are fogoten to undertand the true nature of our particles .

The bio physics experiments are more fundamentals ,it's easier to find the weak interactions where the polarizations of evolution are considered like fundamentals .

I think these experiments are intersting only about the energy thus the conscious is essential too because more we go far more strong will be the energy .The fission is not an universal solution ,the fusion is more rational .

The polarizations of evolution by specifics dynamics are more relevant .

Let's take a vegetal multiplication where auxins interacts with the very weak interactions ,the mass is relevant when you create a specific sphere of bio physic interactions .

Let's take for exemple a portion of a plants ,and that to multiplicate it by asexual muliplication ,you take a substrat ,and you put some acids like Indol acetic acid or butyric too ,with specific paraeters ,the dynamic appears where all interacts to create a new plant ,These interactions have for exemple all interactions ,the strong towards the weak ,the polarizations of evolution is a fusion to create ,many secrets there are still to discover ,it's evident what some rational methods must be adapted and that to stop to loose monney with non rational experiments .

A collision is a lost of time I think ,a H to make simple is different in a biological building than in an star or in a isolated H .....Further more when we acclerate ,we change the velocity and thus the thermodynamics is variables .

If the collision wants find some interesting things ,it's the lost os particles during this acceleration or an increase of strong interactions ,i think some limits and relaticvistic perception must be considered for the whole of the sciences community .

An other thing too ,,when two protons collides for exemple ,they are specifics and furthermore they loose their specificities ,thus they are separated from their stability ,thus after they are going to search this stability ,perhaps thus the fusion in this case can be better understood ,it's a supposition of course .



report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 10:56 GMT
Thus I d say what the collisions for me are only interesting to know the fusion .

It's the only essential point ,a collided particles ,divided from its system ,wants go to this stability ,some interactions and spherical fields are relevant .....if some news systems are correlated near this collision ,news captors in fact ,biological captors ,it's relevant .


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 11:31 GMT
Let's take our nature and its dynamic and diversity ,all days I see these dynamics ,the light of our star shows us the perceptibility and frequences of creations,these light is the chief orchestra of the very very weak interactions of evolution ,the mass increase by complexification .

Let's take the growth of a plant ,I am horticultor ,this vegetal, this life ,specific ,after a times of billions years of evolution is around us and evolves with very weak polarizations .

The biology is a pure physic system where it's more rational to find the truth in my opinion .

This vegetal with specific parameters and optimization evolves ,builds itself and develop many spherical systems,fields ,gravitational waves ,physical systems where quantum spheres are specifics to capt these weak particles in the perception of our Light .Even the H2O and O2 and CO2 CHNO ...are bad understood ,if we want better understand our World ,it's essential to focus on rationality ,fundamentals and harminical system in correlation with spheres ,spherisation towards this ultim physical spheres .

It's the same with the fusion ,it's more interesting than a fission,all is there ,the polarizations of evolution towards centers .All centers .Because this optic is harmonious and the other is chaotic .

Some limitrs there are essentials .



report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 24, 2009 @ 09:24 GMT
Let's take a spherical system with its volume and presion .

We optimize a susbstrat with an argilo humic complex and its silicates with hydrophil and hydrophob poles ...we add some elements and after that we take a portion of plant for the vegetal multiplication ,we balance the O2/CO2 .

We prepare the plant for the multiplication ,and we put on the plant some adapted auxins proportions correlated with the genetic and familly of the plant.

We create many spheres of action where the quantum dynamic interacts with fields and polarizations .

When you check some parameters after a times ,the vegetal creates its autonomy of growth .The very weak polarizations during this phase is relevant to find some new particles .

During the different steps ,many spherical systems appear .The photosynthesis too is relevant .My experiments are limited unfortunally I haven't any labs but I have interesting extrapolations ,with insects too .I add systems in spherical logics ,the composting ,the growth ,the multiplication ,the interactions can be always increased between mass in movements and statics .The H2O even is still bad understood .

It's possible what the centers of research are not fundamentals ,unfortunally because always the whole is not considered .



report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 24, 2009 @ 11:15 GMT
If we extrapolate some cosmological dimensions ,

let's assume

P1 pression

V1 volume

A Expansion,(if 0 static)

V2 maximum volume

B Contraction(if 0 static)

X sum of ele part

Y sum of non activates particles ,DM llink non relativistic

R rayon of the curvature

K/a² spatial curve

c light speed

.....and several others but it's sufficient to encircle the whole and play with equations .

more the mass link and gravity ,more the numbers of cosmological spheres and quantum spheres ,the rotations like an universal link ,the future universal harmonious sphere can be considered like static at this unification .

The density increase and the mass thus too .

The energy potential of Dark matter is relevant in the specific building of our Universe .The cinetic energy can be correlated too.

The gravitational waves too are correlated with these frequences ,rotations,....

The mass complexificates near centers .

There the third laws of thermodynamics can be insert too with pragamatism .

The pression and volume of spheres are relevants ,if we take P1V1 for our actual sphere,and P2V2 for the finished sphere , we can correlate many things between this gauge system .Thus the space and mass are interestings in this rationality .If the Dark matter is quantum spheres without rotations thus mass,it's relevant about the increase of mass ,and the decrease of space thus volume .The maximum energy is this sum of Energy potential and En cin ,thus our mass is diretly proportional too with this increase and thus the energy too .

The contraction in thus logic can imply some interesting extrapolations ,exponentiels too ......The times can be insert like a constant harmonious of evolution ,of complexification and increase of mass near physical spheres .where all polarizes by very very weak interactions in the light electromagnetism of gauge .

The physical energy increases thus in a sphere volume in dynamic .

The universal cenetr where all turns around is fascinating ,it exists there a paradox of balance between gravities ...the center is specific and like a wall too .the main centrals spheres of all things is the wall in fact between unknew and physicality .The rotations of spheres build a beautiful Sphere .

If the light begins from this main universal center ,and in all directions towards centers ......thus it's relevant even about the curvature of a kind of ultim mmembran in the frontier between the unknew and the physical Universe .This membran is a pure light membran I think ,thus this ceneter is linked with this memebran by the light .Thus the frequences are everywhere between particles inside the physical universal sphere in building .

The center of our Universe is all ,the quantity of light is fascinating ....thus Einstein had understood what all had the same maximum quantity and there is an ultim aim between mass and light .



report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 08:26 GMT
Sometimes I ask me and if the light was only our sun light thus all extrapolations must be adapted in this perception .

I try to understand the rule of our BH in our galaxy .The Stars produce light but why the center of our galaxy don't give light .

Perhaps it's logic to balance our light by stars with this BH .

Thus it's a kind of door of light to continue its diffusion where the ultim code is an ultim frequence of harmonization.

There is a big unknew about this center of galaxy .This super gravity I think ,takes only the light and rediffuse it everywhere by centers .It's logic in fact ,there is so much light from stars and if the light is the secret thus it explains the evolution by weak polarizations ....the ultim sphere mass will be finish when the light will have given all its light ????



report post as inappropriate

amrit wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 13:44 GMT
According to my research there is no “quantum space-time” we can only discuss about “quantum space” where time is not a component of it. Quantum space itself is timeless, see file attached.

Quantum space has a granular structure volume of Planck volume. Mass and quantum space are in dynamic equilibrium. Density Dqs of quantum space and density Dm of mass in a centre of massive object are: Dqs = 1/Dms. With going away of the centre of massive object Dqm is increasing. Less quantum space is dense higher is his tendency to shrink. This shrinking force is gravity.

In black holes density Dqs is extremely low and matter transform there in quanta of space. In AGN density Dqs is extremely high and quanta of space transform into elementary particles that create matter. This transformation is permanent, see more on article attached.

Yours amrit

attachments: 3_With_Clocks_we_Measure.........pdf, 3_5._Active_Galactic_Nucleus_As_A_Renewing_Sistems_Of_The_Universe.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 16:30 GMT
Your works are relevants .

Many things are interestings .About the conclusion of Atemporal begining and end ,it's an other story .

You say

"The speed of physical time diminishes with increasing of the density of physical space."

It's interesting about the wall and the atemporality behind the wall ,But in the physicality we have limits .

Can we admit these mathematical extrapolations like physics ,Probably no .Because the properties of unknew aren't in the physics Universe .These properties are but are't in fact's a question of walls in my opinion and limits orf perceptibility.



report post as inappropriate

Brian Beverly wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 07:46 GMT
Photons falsifying physics theories how "exciting"!

Are the five stages of grief falsifiable?

1) Denial:

It is only one experiment...

2) Anger:

Send some nastygram emails after more experiments, USE CAPS LOCK AND !!!!!!!!

3) Bargaining:

"Well, the (falsified) theory could explain (insert area of physics that is not understood well)"

4) Depression:

FML (eat some ice cream)

5) Acceptance

I learned a lot and it was fun. I am a better person.

Bonus stage:

6) New freedoms allow you to cure cancer, fix leaking toilet, etc.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 08:56 GMT
Hi Brian ,

It's well that you speak about depression ,me who have had a coma (20years old)and after a big depression thus 3 months in psychiatric hospital(29 years old) ,bezodiazepin...anxiolitic and anti deppressor.....) and the fight against the sadeness .....when you wake up after that you are different and it's well like that ,it' well to be stronger becaus this world is difficult for the hyopersensibility .


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 11:53 GMT
About cancer ,have you listened the last resulst from belgium about the cancer .

Very very incredible good news ,it's a revolutionnary discovery .

In fact ,the searchers have understood what at the fisrt moment of life of this anarchic cell ...this cell is protected by our immunitary system .

It was anly simple like that .

The future works about cancer shall be very interstings to improve our Health.

Thus how can we change this immunitary system which protects it .It's a question of enzyms ,proteins ,and genetic .....I have some ideas still about that .I will tell you soon .The transparence is essential for siences and its evolution .



report post as inappropriate

Florin Moldoveanu wrote on Aug. 29, 2009 @ 23:42 GMT
Dear Professor Amelino-Camelia,

I was wandering what would your response be to the claims of Nosratollah Jafari, Ahmad Shariati in gr-qc/0602075?

Thanks you.

report post as inappropriate

Brian Beverly wrote on Sep. 5, 2009 @ 13:07 GMT

Sorry to here about those troubles, I hope things are better now. I look forward to your ideas about cancer.

report post as inappropriate

Brian Beverly wrote on Sep. 5, 2009 @ 13:08 GMT
*hear about those troubles.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 00:44 GMT
The door never was open to the physicists' theory of everything. The true and undeniable [mathematical] union of gravity and electromagnetism/light in a fourth dimension of space is a FACT that has been mishandled and basically denied since it was first realized. This is the problem with reductionist/narrow thinking that lacks originality, consistency, and comprehensiveness. Do we not get BOTH Maxwell's AND Einstein's equations in a fourth dimension of space? Now, here is where common sense comes in. It is clearly apparent that this union must be plainly and significantly obvious in our experience. I have definitively proven that it is; and, now, this is denied. The people who think that they can outsmart experience are in for a rude awakening, and worsening problems of all sorts. (In fact, this is already happening.) This is not something that we want to do, as the natural and integrated extensiveness of being and experience go hand-in-hand in and with time -- as I have shown.

We are outsmarted by the dream. The genius of the dream is evident in the fact that dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism/light). That dream experience is the union of gravity and electromagnetism/light PROVES the limitations of thought -- and that we are outsmarted in the dream.

Finally, a PhD in theoretical physics does not (by itself) even begin to qualify someone to speak of the chances of such a theory of everything. One has to be both a genius of the highest order and extremely well educated (generally/broadly) to do so.

People who are incapable of truth cannot know their limitations, nor can they know the limitations of truth. Balance and completeness go hand-in-hand, in life and understanding(s).

The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience.

The majority of physicists are trying to better understand experience in order to control, reduce, alter, remove, and/or replace it. Instead of you all generally ignoring me, and even attempting to silence and ridicule me, you need to start learning from me.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 13:52 GMT
Hi all ,

Dear Brian ,

yes thanks I am better ,fortunally .Stronger in fact ,I know where I go in fact now.The two medecines who helped me were supers .They save me in fact and my grateful is big.

I have understood and heard these troubles indeed and I accepted to cease to suffer in fact simply.Relativate in fact .It's a little as if I have had a trigger after my...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

amrit wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 19:56 GMT
According to my research quantum space-time does not exists.

Stellar objects move in quantum space that itself is timeless.

Time is not forth dimension of space.

In SR X4 = i x c x t

where t is "tick" of clock.

Physical time is tick of clock in timeless quantum space.

yours amrit

report post as inappropriate

amrit wrote on Oct. 29, 2009 @ 17:50 GMT
Quantum space-time should be made out of grains QS.

QS should have three spatial dimension and one temporal dimension.

I think that existence of such a particle is contradictory of what physics knows until now.

Quantum space seems to be timeless, also 4-th dimension of quanta of space QS is spatial.

Physical time is run of clocks in timeless quantum space.

yours amrit

report post as inappropriate

William h Foehringer wrote on Jan. 29, 2010 @ 22:32 GMT
Is there data that indicates that the time delay is proportional to distance in a simple relationship? Is the time delay different when looking in different directions but the same approximate distance away? Teasing out these variables might be helpful. Bill Foehringer

report post as inappropriate

Dov Henis wrote on Apr. 23, 2010 @ 04:40 GMT
Theory Of Everything Without Strings Attached.

Embarassingly Obvious And Simple.

See the signature links.

Life's Genesis Was Not Cells But First Gene's Self Reproduction.

Life Is Just Another Mass Format.

Since July 5 1997 I have developed and been proposing the following scenario of life's genesis:

* Life's genesis was not cell(s), but the self...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Le Van Cuong wrote on Nov. 21, 2010 @ 17:59 GMT
I think that Einstein's Special Relativity should correct an invariability of a light velocity, because if the measurement of space and time change from km and s to km' and s', then light velocity will also change from c-300,000 km/s to c'=300,000 km'/s'. We must confirm that c=300,000 km/s is different from c'=300,000 km'/s' because unit of measurement of the velocity: km/s is different from unit of measurement of the velocity: km'/s'. ( of which space is denoted by km', km' and time is denoted by s, s' ), or because the velocity = light path/time interval .

report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'S' and 'U':

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