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 Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Previous Contests

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest
December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020
Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

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 Fund.
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

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 6:56am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/2/12 at 11:58am UTC, wrote After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I...

Yuri Danoyan: on 9/26/12 at 18:38pm UTC, wrote I think that due to the lack of time you do not have time to read all...

Yuri Danoyan: on 9/26/12 at 18:32pm UTC, wrote I am wondering that there is no reference to Luminet articles They are...

Yuri Danoyan: on 9/26/12 at 18:14pm UTC, wrote This is my simple observation- calculation with mass of elementary...

Hoang Hai: on 9/26/12 at 3:14am UTC, wrote Dear Ugo Fabbri "This matrix is a virtual quantum configuration of energy...

Vladimir Tamari: on 9/24/12 at 1:44am UTC, wrote Dear Ugo I wish I was more of an expert to judge your fascinating and...

Sergey Fedosin: on 9/21/12 at 12:22pm UTC, wrote Dear Ugo, Can you compare the idea of the Theory of Infinite Hierarchical...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Mr Hosein, the MWI of Everett is a philosophical different..." in Good Vibrations

Steve Dufourny: "Hello John and Dr Chiang, Dr Chiang , I have tried to find you on..." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Nicholas hosein: "Reality is a many-worlds Quantum level event." in Good Vibrations

Kwan Chiang: "Hi John and Steve, When the majority talk about Maxwell equations, it is..." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Monika Součková: "What do you feel the most exciting or effective learning environment would..." in Quantum Machine Learning...

Jim Snowdon: "Had we evolved on a swiftly rotating planet like the Earth, our..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Jim Snowdon: "If the rotational motion of the moon is 370km per hour, and the rotational..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Lorraine Ford: "Steve, I would like to point out that physics says that the world and..." in How does an Isolated...

RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Good Vibrations
Microbead 'motor' exploits natural fluctuations for power.

Reconstructing Physics
New photon experiment gives new meta-framework, 'constructor theory,' a boost.

The Quantum Engineer: Q&A with Alexia Auffèves
Experiments seek to use quantum observations as fuel to power mini motors.

The Quantum Clock-Maker Investigating COVID-19, Causality, and the Trouble with AI
Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

Connect the Quantum Dots for a New Kind of Fuel
'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

FQXi FORUM
January 18, 2022

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Genesis: The Origin of Quarks, From the Number Alpha to the Materiality of the Universe by Ugo Fabbri [refresh]

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Ugo Fabbri wrote on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 12:07 GMT
Essay Abstract

In 1623 Galileo Galilei expressed his conviction that the universe was governed by a mathematical order, written in a language whose characters were “triangles, circles and other geometrical figures”: without such instruments it would be impossible to understand the meaning of cosmic evolution, and one would risk being lost in a dark maze [1]. The holistic theory of limits takes up that argument, and proves that Galileo’s intuitive perception (underestimated for four centuries) contains all the information governing the origin of matter and the interaction of gravity therewith, on whatever scale of magnitude. The basic assumption of present scientific knowledge, in fact, comprises the erroneous belief that the sexagesimal system of measurement (which divides the circumference of the circle into 360 degrees) is a mere convention, extraneous to the laws of nature, whereas, on the contrary, it can be shown that this system is correlated with the universal geometrical order described by the Golden Section. In 1913 the scientific community attempted to extend the validity of the Bohr model to all the elements of the Periodic Table, hoping to draw information about the origin of matter, but the attempt failed: the holistic theory of limits, restating Galileo’s perception (now applied to the Bohr atom), reconstructs the matrix of matter within which cosmic evolution begins to take shape. This matrix is a virtual quantum configuration of energy containment (of ideally spherical symmetry), capable of drawing radial energy from the cosmos and of converting it into the corresponding mass.

Author Bio

Ugo Fabbri is an independent researcher, accredited as such in the proceedings of the XCIIth Congress of the Italian Physical Society, Turin 2006, in which an article of his was published. Going against the trend, he has conducted his studies in full freedom without being influenced by any protocol. The results thus obtained prove that “physical reality is the product of its limitations”: what seems a banal enough statement in fact represents a scientific evolution, for all conversions between equivalent energy types (E = E’) that govern cosmic evolution are conditioned by the physical-numerical limits that confer identities.

Download Essay PDF File

post approved

Diane Richards wrote on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 17:09 GMT
Excellent! Your approach has details overlooked, but seem very relevant to,in an article by my partner who just submitted an essay titled "To Seek Unknown Shores". When it becomes available in ~5 days I hope you 2 get together. He has much more to say, but 12 page limit hinders his approach.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Makinson wrote on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 20:02 GMT
Ugo,

Interesting statement, "In the new world view, the universe is seen as a dynamic web of interrelated events. None of the properties of any part of this web is fundamental; they all follow from the properties of the other parts, and the overall consistency of their mutual interrelations determines the structure of the entire web."

Please read the IEEE paper referenced in topic 1294, it provides a mathematical-geometric structure wherein the sizes of all the elements that define the structure are mutually self defining, and one of the related values is the mathematical value for the speed of light.

report post as inappropriate
Frank Makinson replied on Aug. 21, 2012 @ 03:45 GMT
Ugo,

IEEE no longer allows authors to post the published version anywhere. I have provided a link to the postprint.

Methodology

report post as inappropriate

Ugo Fabbri replied on Aug. 24, 2012 @ 08:44 GMT
The research method that you expound (correlation between numerical constants and physical constants) is perfectly functional regarding the holistic theory (see The Origin of Quarks, From the Number Alpha to the Materiality of the Universe) and so I can only wish your theory every success, even if it seems rather difficult to overcome old prejudices that hinder the development of science. Gabriele D'Annunzio (the Italian poet and hero of the First World War) always urged others to "dare the undareable" (Memento audere sempre: Always remember to dare).

Best wishes

report post as inappropriate

Frank Makinson replied on Aug. 27, 2012 @ 15:58 GMT
Ugo,

Thanks for reminding me of the reply above by using my topic, 1294. I keep a list of topics I have made comments to but the list is getting longer and I fail to revisit them often enough. I too have resorted to posting comments, when appropriate, to an authors topic which were made on another topic.

The significant resultant of the triangle pair construct is the single value...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

ugo fabbri wrote on Aug. 23, 2012 @ 08:33 GMT
As a result of a favourable development of mathematical analysis, occurring after the submission of my paper "Genesis: The Origin of Quarks, From the Number Alpha to the Materiality of the Universe", it would be fitting to rework the text somewhat.

In the literature it is argued that the sexagesimal system (used in trigonometric functions) is "conventional", and it is thus wrongly deduced that it cannot regulate cosmic evolution. In contrast, the holistic theory states that the role played by this system (although underestimated) is particularly important, as the origin of all the heavenly bodies, at whatever scale of magnitude, is specifically developed within it.

With regard to this, I have had to reformulate 8 lines of page 5 as follows:

In perfect continuity with Galileo's ideals and intuitive perceptions (according to which the motions of the celestial bodies are governed by geometric figures like "the circles"), the holistic theory proves that the sexagesimal system which contains the regular pentagon is predetermined by the equation l(5) = sqr (2 – A) = 2 sin 36 = 2 sin 72 A = ….

l(5) = the side of the pentagon inscribed in the circumference of the unitary radius. This means that the golden section predetermines the sexagesimal system, with all that follows in the sequence of events (conversely, in the literature, it is erroneously assumed that this system is merely conventional). It is deduced that the Universe, on all scales of magnitude, could be described using two parameters alone: the energy diffused in the cosmos and the goniometric protractor (used as if it were a mathematical operator).

A = [sqr 5 –1]/2 = 0,6180339887 golden ratio. Describes the division of a segment into two unequal parts (a and b), so that: Golden section [(a + b): a = a : b]. From this golden ratio one may trace one’s way to the sexagesimal system of measurement and to the origin of the number alpha (see hereinafter).

attachments: Revisione.testo.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan wrote on Aug. 27, 2012 @ 13:24 GMT
Very interesting essay

I have some observation connected with 18 degrees angle

http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0012

See also my essay http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1413

report post as inappropriate
Yuri Danoyan replied on Sep. 7, 2012 @ 02:44 GMT
In common between as i see limiting angle 18 degrees.

Very interesting coincidence....

report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan replied on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 18:14 GMT
This is my simple observation- calculation with mass of elementary particles.

http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0012

my suspicion this is connected with dodecahedron universe

angle of 18 degrees very interesting phenomenon

for example if the universe evolution is cyclic

then 180 degrees half of 1 cycle

180/18=10 just every angle convert to other dimension

10 dimensions is base of string theory.

I bring to your attention my other article

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1413

Sincerely

Yu
ri

P.S 18 X 7=126 JUST VALUE OG HIGGS BOSON MASS

report post as inappropriate

Ugo Fabbri wrote on Sep. 9, 2012 @ 16:03 GMT
Important Note for the judges of the FQxi Contest

Among the comments on my article "Genesis: The Origin of Quarks, From the Number Alpha to the Materiality of the Universe" (Ugo Fabbri, 20.08.2012 httpf :/ / qxi.org/community/forum/topic/1387) I have introduced the following clarification:

Following the animated discussion arising on the point, I must point out the following:

The relations of golden proportionality inherent in the inscribed pentagon cannot constitute an absolute system of measurement. However, the case of the number alpha (fine structure constant) is different. This number, in fact, describes the relations of proportionality that exist between the physical magnitudes of electromagnetism, in turn defined by the International System of measurement (ISM). The holistic theory shows (page 6 of the article) that the sexagesimal system is a derived effect of the ISM, revealed by the number alpha. The importance of this specification lies in the fact that the sexagesimal system (underestimated in the literature) regulates all cosmic evolution (origin of matter and interaction of gravity).

The primordial universe is void of matter and traversed only by electromagnetic waves defined by the electromagnetic spectrum: the interaction between these radiations is the only instrument available that can give rise to those relations of proportionality (such as the alpha number) governing the formation of the fundamental particles. At the origin of the Whole, therefore, there are only the ratios between the various physical magnitudes (the sexagesimal system of measurement derives indirectly from a conventional choice, which, however, becomes a conditioning factor in every scientific discipline).

report post as inappropriate
Yuri Danoyan replied on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 02:25 GMT
In my essay you can see golden proportion between mass of proton and mass of Hawking primordial black holes.

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Sep. 21, 2012 @ 12:22 GMT
Dear Ugo,

Can you compare the idea of the Theory of Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter (which is in my essay) with the theory of holism in your essay? May nesting of matter has an additional principle? It seems there are possible such properties of reality as maximal, dynamic, global and collective action of different carriers and quanta. In your essay is: < Current science is unable to reconstruct the origin of matter and of the interaction of gravity therewith, and therefore, in order to develop new knowledge, it is necessary to replace the old paradigms.> What can you say about Le Sages theory of gravitation in which the mechanism of gravitation is well understood? And additional remark - at the level of star is a similarity with chemical elements, see Similarity of matter levels .

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Sep. 24, 2012 @ 01:44 GMT
Dear Ugo

I wish I was more of an expert to judge your fascinating and well-written essay. Your ideas point to an exquisite and underlying order at the basis of physics and the cosmos. I fully believe that too, and I have described my own qualitative holistic approach in Beautiful Universe Theory which is the basis of my fqxi essay Fix Physics! . Have you considered any applications of the Fibonacci series in your schemes (after all the Golden Section emerges from a geometrical application of this series)?

You may be interested in other fqxi essays seeking an ordered physics - that about electrons by Kenneth Snelson, and that about the dynamics of nuclear interactions by Norman Cook. Like your and my approach all these theories believe in an ordered constructive universe - so differnt from quantum foam or probability approaches. Your rating is appreciated.

Avanti

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 03:14 GMT
Dear Ugo Fabbri

"This matrix is a virtual quantum configuration of energy containment (of ideally spherical symmetry), capable of drawing radial energy from the cosmos and of converting it into the corresponding mass" - Really great for me.

Although completely different methods, can not believe that we have the same results.

Kind Regards !

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

August 23, 2012 - 11:51 GMT on this essay contest.

report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 18:32 GMT
I am wondering that there is no reference to Luminet articles

They are very close to you

arXiv:astro-ph/0310253 [pdf, ps, other]

arXiv:astro-ph/0501189 [pdf, ps, other]

arXiv:astro-ph/0005515 [pdf, ps, other]

arXiv:astro-ph/9903155 [pdf, ps, other]

arXiv:gr-qc/9604050 [pdf, ps, other]

report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 18:38 GMT
I think that due to the lack of time you do not have time to read all essays. I sending to you only cosmological conclusion from my essay.

As a cosmologist you can assess at a glance.

Appendix 1 Cosmological picture of one cycle

Big Bang; Present; Big Crunch

c=10^30; c=10^10; c=10^-10

G=10^12; G=10^-8; G=10^-28

h=10^-27; h=10^-27; h=10^-27

alfa =10^-3; 1/137; 1

e=0,1 ; e=e ; e=11-12

Dear Ugo

Can you check your alfa with variation my alfa?

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 11:58 GMT
After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I assess the level of each submitted work. Accordingly, I rated some essays, including yours.

Cood luck.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 06:56 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is
$R_1$
and
$N_1$
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
$S_1=R_1 N_1$
of points. After it anyone give you
$dS$
of points so you have
$S_2=S_1+ dS$
of points and
$N_2=N_1+1$
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
$S_2=R_2 N_2$
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
$S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1$
or
$(S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1$
or
$dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1$
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
$dS$
then the participant`s rating
$R_1$
was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

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.