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


Previous Contests

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

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 6:32am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Vladimir Tamari: on 9/28/12 at 2:20am UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Suntola I enjoyed reading your essay with its analogy of the...

Hoang Hai: on 9/22/12 at 19:32pm UTC, wrote Dear Tuomo. I also think that : "Keeping in mind that the purpose of...

Viraj Fernando: on 9/9/12 at 16:00pm UTC, wrote Dear Tuomo, You have stated that Galileo’s relativity was incorporated...

Jose Koshy: on 8/29/12 at 8:08am UTC, wrote I agree with your conclusions. It is time we replaced the concepts like...

Ted Erikson: on 8/23/12 at 21:17pm UTC, wrote Does nature recognize fancy mathematics? Seems as tho mass, length and time...

NARSEP: on 8/23/12 at 8:38am UTC, wrote dear all, you may have a look at...

ABRAHAM: on 8/23/12 at 5:28am UTC, wrote Tuomo, John, I too had the same idea - to find the simplest geometry that...


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
click titles to read 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: The Big Puzzle by Tuomo Suntola [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Tuomo Suntola wrote on Aug. 22, 2012 @ 11:34 GMT
Essay Abstract

How do we start composing a jigsaw puzzle? It is certainly helpful if we see the picture of the puz-zle when fully composed. If not, we may find it easiest and logical to search out the scheme of the picture from the corners with a wish that the parts will fit with each other when completed. In the big puzzle of physics, we are about to fit the highly tuned parts together to see whether they match, and what the total picture looks like – have we created a monster or a beauty, or something in between?

Author Bio

Tuomo Suntola, PhD in Electron Physics at Helsinki University of Technology (1971). Dr. Suntola has a far-reaching academic and industrial career comprising pioneering work from fundamental theoretical findings to successful industrial applications like the Atomic Layer Deposition method widely used in the semiconductor industry. “Considerations of the philosophy of science and the foundations of physics have been a source of inspiration throughout my career – in search for a ho-listic view of the physical reality”

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



John A. Macken wrote on Aug. 22, 2012 @ 20:50 GMT
Tuomo,

In your author bio you said, "Considerations of the philosophy of science and the foundations of physics have been a source of inspiration throughout my career - in search for a holistic view of the physical reality". Your essay certainly reflects this pursuit. I have had a similar interest in discovering the foundations of physics but started with a more philosophical question: What is the simplest possible starting assumption if I wanted to build a theory of everything? I have concluded that the simplest possible starting assumption is: The universe is only spacetime. I realized that this might be a wrong assumption, but it is so restrictive that the incompatibility should soon be obvious. However, this has been a very fruitful pursuit that has resulted not only in many new insights into the universe, but there have also been concrete predictions. For example, my essay describes a previously unknown relationship between gravity and the electromagnetic force that actually emerged as a prediction from this effort.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

ABRAHAM replied on Aug. 23, 2012 @ 05:28 GMT
Tuomo, John,

I too had the same idea - to find the simplest geometry that could serve as a foundation for the unification of QM, QED, SR & GR.

I would like to point out that if you replace your current SPHERICAL geometries with EQUILATERAL triangular geometries you will find a whole new visualisation of current physics is possible. [see attached]

It is from this simple postulate that I have developed Tetryonics - the charged geometry of EM mass-ENERGY-Matter which was submitted as a separate paper in this forum. This equilateral geometry is in fact reflective of quantised angular momentum [QAM] which has been historically viewed as a rotational vector component of QM. Linear momenta [as used by Newton in classical mechanics] is also present as the square root of these equilateral quanta.

In fact many of physics more mystifying properties such as 'Square' quanta energies, Wave functions, Wave-Particle probabilities and the source of physical constants become readily apparent using this geometry as a basis. [as do the physical geometries of all mass-ENERGY-Matter waveforms]

All of this can be achieved without changing any of the accepted formulations you have used for physical properties and interactions [although it does point out that our current Mathematics, while correct, was based on a mistaken geometry].

I have applied this geometry throughout all the accepted physical theories [QM, QED, Chemistry, SR & GR] and offer it to you as the simple solution you hint at in your paper.

attachments: 1_Figure_01.07__Quantised_Angular_Momentum_800x600.jpg, 1_Figure_80.22__Geometric_Physical_Maths_800x600.jpg

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

NARSEP replied on Aug. 23, 2012 @ 08:38 GMT
dear all,

you may have a look at http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1345 for a new spacetime alternative.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ted Erikson wrote on Aug. 23, 2012 @ 21:17 GMT
Does nature recognize fancy mathematics? Seems as tho mass, length and time it may.

My essay is perhaps overly simplified, but addresses the real problem of Physics. Wherein lies "consciousness"? Very murky, but emergentism (growth) and panpsychism (memory are properties suggested that aligns them with probabilities of a 1-D, 2-D, and 3-D geometric world, where sphere and tetrahedron have identical "activities". See:

To Seek Unknown Shores

   http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1409

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jose P. Koshy wrote on Aug. 29, 2012 @ 08:08 GMT
I agree with your conclusions. It is time we replaced the concepts like space-time.The physical world is real, and everything here should be expressed in real positive values greater than zero in kilograms, meters, and seconds. If any value is zero, then there is no universe (no matter), only space and time.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Viraj Fernando wrote on Sep. 9, 2012 @ 16:00 GMT
Dear Tuomo,

You have stated that Galileo’s relativity was incorporated into Einstein theory after revising the concepts of time and space. I have to disagree with you. Einstein NEGATED Galileo’s principle and incorporated a fake imitation of it. What Einstein incorporated was the very antithesis of Galileo’s principle. This is why Einstein could not fulfill his own dream of extending...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 22, 2012 @ 19:32 GMT
Dear Tuomo. I also think that :

"Keeping in mind that the purpose of scientific models is to make nature understandable, alternatives for the unintelligible relativistic spacetime construction and the somewhat artificial wave function would be warmly welcomed".

The ABSOLUTE THEORY of me and an explanation of the nature of the Mass :

Be identified due to the change by the purely feel and rely on

the determination by our measurement equipment.

Must be the impact to get this changes,and the absolutely is only

one the mainly reason,that of course is the impact of a type of

the force.

So: the absolutely nature or the definition of mass would be:

Expression due the impact of force on to the material.

What do you think about this idea?

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

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

Kind Regards !

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Sep. 28, 2012 @ 02:20 GMT
Dear Dr. Suntola

I enjoyed reading your essay with its analogy of the state of physics to an unsolved jig-saw puzzle. Another way to present the analogy would be that somehow the pieces from three or more separate puzzles, each complete on its own, were mixed together, and then some parts went missing!

Your masterly mathematical proposal of a 4th dimensional dipole where Planck's law and Maxwell's equations coexist is intriguing. With the time dimension, could that be a form of the Kaluza-Klein 5th dimension? The latter was interpreted as an ether lattice.

In my 2005 Beautiful Universe Theory (BU) on which I based my fqxi essay Fix Physics! the entire Universe is made up of identical building blocks made up of dipolar lattice nodes with energy in units of (h).

I wonder if you can find quantitative correspondence between the (BU) and the proposals you made in your essay? With best wishes,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 06:32 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
and
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
of points. After it anyone give you
of points so you have
of points and
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
or
or
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
then the participant`s rating
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

Bookmark and Share
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.