Search FQXi

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

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

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.

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

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

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

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

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Ryoji Furui: on 10/19/12 at 10:57am UTC, wrote Hi, I would like to post an attached file as corrections for previous...

Ryoji Furui: on 10/5/12 at 12:25pm UTC, wrote Hi, There might be a correction that time is a compactified dimension as...

Ryoji Furui: on 10/5/12 at 10:49am UTC, wrote Dear Georgina Parry, Thank you for your comments. I just log on to this...

Ryoji Furui: on 10/5/12 at 10:36am UTC, wrote Dear Ke Xiao Thank you for your comment. If I try to mention about...

Ryoji Furui: on 10/5/12 at 10:33am UTC, wrote Dear Sergey Fedosin, What I have been curious about infinite density at...

Georgina Parry: on 10/5/12 at 10:19am UTC, wrote Dear Ryoji Furui, I have just seen your essay. After 10 years of work on...

Ke Xiao: on 10/5/12 at 4:35am UTC, wrote Dear Ryoji Furui, A very impressive essay. Thank you for contributing it....

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 6:47am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "Isn't symmetry simply closely related to redundancy even if physicist may..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Robert Rise: "Meet many types of women on ihookup. Some dates better than others. It is..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Steve Dufourny: "FQXI you too I need your help, come all too we have a work to do there..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "lol REVOLUTION SPHERISATION everywhere at all scales,REVOLUTION..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "The kind of time required, over which the material change is happening, (to..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "after all like Borh has made,this universe and its spheres for me are like..." in Alternative Models of...

RECENT ARTICLES

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

FQXi FORUM
October 24, 2019

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Energy and Spacetime by Ryoji Furui [refresh]

Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Aug. 21, 2012 @ 10:09 GMT
Essay Abstract

Referring to special theory of relativity led by Albert Einstein, we define some properties of gravitons derived by the motion of mass. Based on this concept, we define the geometrical description of mass. Furthermore, we consider the wave function of energy by following these definitions and conclude the eternal universe.

Author Bio

An amateur physicist, born 1974 in Himeji, Japan. http://ryoji.info

Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Aug. 21, 2012 @ 18:41 GMT

Thank you for reading my essay, actually it is my full page paper taking over 10 years ;) I should add this comments on my author bio however let me post here as I cannot edit it anymore.

You must easily find that my paper is not reviewed by any professional physicists nor anyone from any of aspects. There should be more process before submitting to this contest however it was not archived well regardless my efforts. So the reasoning or any of descriptions at any part of paper might be confused and impossible to follow. So I deeply appreciate your patience if you read it through and give me any of your comments.

At the end, I would appreciate that I could have this occasion to share my ideas as a part of this contest's goals & intent.

Regards,

Ryoji Furui

ABRAHAM replied on Aug. 24, 2012 @ 01:15 GMT
Ryoji,

Perhaps I can offer some direction for you on the mail points of your paper.

1. Gravitons - don't exist [they are a consequence of Math without Models]

2. The origin of mass - important point you bring up here - great care must be taken to clearly define and distinguish EM mass [E/c^2] from Matter [E/c^4]

[you can find a clear definition of theses terms and much more in my paper - Tetryonics]

EM mass is a 2D planar radiant energy waveform reflecting the energy density of the wave per unit of time [npi E/c^2]

Matter is a 3D Tetrahedral standing-wave energy geometry that has volume and a mass-Energy density [4npi E/c^4]

3. Wave-functions of Energy - can all be easily visualised and geometrically represented with equilateral Energy quanta [with Photons being 2pi geometries]

[see attached]

4. There are boundaries of Time - as Time is actually the measurement of equilateral quantised angular momentum [QAM]found within all physical systems - this QAM along with EM mass is what we call Planck's constant [kg.[m^2/s]. Its two 'directions' result in the physical property we call Charge and it is charge that is the source of 'broken'symmetry in QM. In fact charge results from the equilateral geometry of energy quanta. [see attached]

Is the balance between the Forces created by radiant EM masses [heat, light EM waves] and the gravitational Matter [Planets, Stars, Galaxies] that creates the eternal Universe you are attempting to describe with Gravitons

report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Aug. 24, 2012 @ 16:21 GMT
ABRAHAM,

It would still difficult to say anything before I understand your theory but it seems geometrical assumptions covers the region I described in the paper. It should be great to look further comparisons.

Right now, I got a brand new image of linear approximation of graviton's geometry, please see the attached file. It is very simple compared yours so it should be so easy for you about what the gravitons are, I hope.

Regards,

Ryoji

attachments: gravicorn.pdf

Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Aug. 24, 2012 @ 19:31 GMT
Here I'd like to add an additional idea here about graviton's which could be added to next paper update.I defined two properties of gravitons which is equation (3) and (6). (In equation (3), it set $m_0=1$ already)

It is intuitive perspective yet, but when I try to apply these properties to metric tensor $\eta_{\mu\nu}$, I guess equation (6) will applied to diagonal element $\mu=\nu$. As well as I defined mass (=energy) as contraction of time axis in section 2, I think spatial axis can be applied to energy element of gravitons. on the other hand, equation (3) would be applied to component $\mu\neq\nu$.

Thanks,

Ryoji

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Aug. 25, 2012 @ 13:57 GMT
Here I made a comparision sheet on attached. Compared with gravitation (my thesis) and electromagnetic.

attachments: comparision.pdf

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Aug. 27, 2012 @ 14:48 GMT
I just keep self posting but just had an update for the previous sheet, update is just split diagonal elements to spacial one and time. So now comparision of gravitation and electromagnetism is like attached,

Can this be a part of gravitational structure?

attachments: 1_comparision.pdf

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Aug. 29, 2012 @ 21:51 GMT
Here, I got update again by introducing potential energy derived by Ernst Fischer to my graviton energy. Here Fischer's radius parameter $r$ to convert to my velocity $v$ as $v=1/r$ (still relativistic?) and put it to my graviton's energy as,

$(\gamma-1)\sqrt{1-v}$
.

Here is brand new graviton energy which will be no longer infinite,

$g_F=\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}$
.

And comparison with light would be attached.

attachments: comparison.pdf

Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Aug. 30, 2012 @ 15:06 GMT
This should be the final correction regarding a solution of graviton's infinite problem. Applying $1/r=\sqrt{v}$ to fischer's $\sqrt{1-1/r}$ then, energy of graviton is simply,

$g_F=(\gamma-1)\sqrt{1-\sqrt{v}}$

I've no idea to simplify this equation anymore. so done?

Thank you for reading many posts ;)

attachments: 2_comparison.pdf

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Sep. 1, 2012 @ 17:07 GMT
Dear Ryoji,

You can see how to deduce the Newton law of gravitation in the concept of gravitons in the paper: Fedosin S.G. Model of Gravitational Interaction in the Concept of Gravitons. // Journal of Vectorial Relativity, March 2009, Vol. 4, No. 1, P.1-24. The concept of gravitons in the framework of Le Sage approach leads then to Covariant theory of gravitation and determination of energy and mass. By the way you can evaluate my essay.

Sergey Fedosin Essay

report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Sep. 1, 2012 @ 21:36 GMT
Sergey,

It would still be difficult to say anything before I understand your theory which is also exceeded my knowledge.

I remember someone told me Le Sage's model is similar to mine quite a long ago. What I agreed with it was that his graviton is falling from the sky to the ground beside gravitons lead from general relativity are running opposite direction as we accelerated upward. That is one of the different points from common perspective. And if these could be discussed here, I would like to explain why I think as they are.

Well, pushing or pulling difference will effect just plus or minus so it won't make so serious difference anyway.

Regards,

Ryoji

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 15:53 GMT
Dear Ryoji Furui

"Once now, to all, I would like to apologize for the negatives and would like to express thankfulness for the positives."

Very respected you for your politeness.

It sounds like you are only good at math, not good at physics, why you love it so much?

Looks like you lack confidence in yourself, your stress and anxiety.

You will never make others believe in you when you did not believe in myself.

I can help you with that, do not worry about the essay again, it was like that.

I as well as many others have known it, it would be to place of it.

You should take care yourself, after more than 10 years was "pregnancy" for it.You be must to live for yourself.

Maybe I am very different with you, so if you want to refer to something, I'm always willing.

Kind Regards !

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

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

Email : hoangcao_hai@yahoo.com

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 16:07 GMT
Send more to you an article that I sent most of the others in this topic for you to entertainment.

Dear

Very interesting to see your essay.

Perhaps all of us are convinced that: the choice of yourself is right!That of course is reasonable.

So may be we should work together to let's the consider clearly defined for the basis foundations theoretical as the most challenging with intellectual of all of us.

Why we do not try to start with a real challenge is very close and are the focus of interest of the human science: it is a matter of mass and grain Higg boson of the standard model.

Knowledge and belief reasoning of you will to express an opinion on this matter:

You have think that: the Mass is the expression of the impact force to material (definition from the ABSOLUTE theory of me) - so no impact force, we do not feel the Higg boson - similar to the case of no weight outside the Earth's atmosphere.

Does there need to be a particle with mass for everything have volume? If so, then why the mass of everything change when moving from the Earth to the Moon? Higg boson is lighter by the Moon's gravity is weaker than of Earth?

The LHC particle accelerator used to "Smashed" until "Ejected" Higg boson, but why only when the "Smashed" can see it,and when off then not see it ?

Can be "locked" Higg particles? so when "released" if we do not force to it by any the Force, how to know that it is "out" or not?

You are should be boldly to give a definition of weight that you think is right for us to enjoy, or oppose my opinion.

Because in the process of research, the value of "failure" or "success" is the similar with science. The purpose of a correct theory be must is without any a wrong point ?

Glad to see from you comments soon,because still have too many of the same problems.

Kind Regards !

report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Sep. 28, 2012 @ 12:11 GMT
Dear hoang cao hai,

Thank you for your comment to my postings.I would be glad to hear positive opinions to mine?

If I can answer to some of your questions, it would be the first one that the difference of gravitation (acceleration) of moon and earth. I noted acceleration as velocity "v" in my paper as it is already quantized. So in the weaker field (moon), you get weaker acceleration as gravitational energy expressed as, (\gamma-1)\sqrt{1-\sqrt{v}}. (applied Ernst Fischer's curve)

you may understand it easier with my attached graph. What I am curious is that it converges to 1/2 and then turn to zero when v=1. These should be explained with actual mechanism of mass energy conversions. time has 1 dimension and space has three. these fact would be the key of this 1/2 value.

regards,

Ryoji

attachments: gravitation.pdf

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 10:57 GMT
Hi,

I would like to post an attached file as corrections for previous post. What I correct is the term of mass and energy in geometrical description in the comparison list.

Regards,

Ryoji Furui

attachments: comparison2.pdf

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 11:36 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

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 03:57 GMT
DEAR Ryoji Furui and TO ALL THE AUTHORS AND READERS WAS INTEREST.

Today, I am finished reading all of the essays in this topic.

First of all, thanks again to FQXi and the donors has facilitated for us to have the opportunity get contribute to science.

Next, would like to express to other author by the thanks for the comments that you have contributed to give me, and sincere apologies to those of you that I do not have specific feedback for your essay.The reason that is because:

The placing for issues and measures to solve for the problems of your offer is completely different from mine, so I can not comment when we do not have the same views on one matter, the purpose is to avoid the discussion became conflict of ideologies,it is will not be able to solve the problem which we are interested.

The end, I hope that : we ( who want the human to put their faith in science) will have the same fear: to someday,every people told each other that:

WAIITING FOR SCIENCE HELPS IS VERY LONGTIME,

LET PRAY TO GOD OR A CERTAIN DEITY SOMETIMES EVEN FASTER !

report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 11:05 GMT
Dear Sergey G Fedosin, Hoang Cao Hai,

I couldn't read any of others essays so many like you regardless I could have much time. And most of them are too difficult for me to understand within this limited period. So I will take more time to read through what has been discussed in this essay contest. I may get contact to you again when I find the subjects I would like to share. I really had a good time being here.

Thank you again,

Ryoji Furui

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 06:47 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

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 10:33 GMT
Dear Sergey Fedosin,

What I have been curious about infinite density at massive point (on the surface of Schwarzschild radius) is that infinite field covers a certain finite mass. Like photons had confirmed the limited and constant speed by the experiment, I was expecting it could be let the limit as observation data but now I guess it can be solved by some modifications within thesis itself.

Regards,

Ryoji

Ke Xiao wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 04:35 GMT
Dear Ryoji Furui,

A very impressive essay. Thank you for contributing it. I hope you can read my essay "Rethink the Double Slit Experiment," which also discuss the energy of particle with space time.

Yours,

Ke Xiao

report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 10:36 GMT
Dear Ke Xiao

If I try to mention about quantum mechanics for further inspect from gravitational (non compactified dimensions) interactions, I would imagine (with no math nor strict understanding of the matters) the whole view could be a certain math framework like lie algebra, e7 which can be the minimalistic framework with standard model plus gravitation whose symmetry is possibly renormalized within 4D spacetime framework. And I wonder if wave function of equation 9 in my paper can be applied to multidimensional (D>4) world as the hidden value.

Regards,

Ryoji

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 12:25 GMT
Hi,

There might be a correction that time is a compactified dimension as its scaler state and other 3 spacial dimensions remain as the non-compactified.

Thank you

Ryoji

Georgina Parry wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 10:19 GMT
Dear Ryoji Furui,

I have just seen your essay. After 10 years of work on it I can understand how important it must be for you and how much you would like constructive feedback or appreciation of it. I'm sorry your entry hasn't had more attention. I don't feel qualified to comment on the mathematics myself, so I have not studied it but extend my good wishes to you. Georgina

report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 10:49 GMT
Dear Georgina Parry,

I just log on to this site for replying comments right now. I've already got much things here so I would be fine with any of result. As I stated above, I might take the time to read yours for days so now I just wish you good luck!

Regards,

Ryoji