CATEGORY:
Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012)
[back]
TOPIC:
3 Dimensional String Theory by George Rajna
[refresh]
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.
Author George Rajna wrote on Aug. 29, 2012 @ 12:39 GMT
Essay AbstractThis paper examines the possibility to origin the spontaneously broken symmetries from the Planck distribution law. In this way we get for example a unification of the strong, electromagnetic and weak interactions from the interference occurrences of oscillators.
Author BioM. Sc., Physics at Eötvös Loránd University. The SOA Category Winner of the first Connected Systems Developer Competition of Microsoft in San Francisco 2005 with the Next Generation Court System - achieving also the Best Enterprise Mission Critical System Award FY 2005 of Bill Gates. Artificial Intelligence Researcher participated on the 1st World Computer Chess Championship in Stockholm, 1974. International Master of Chess and was among the Top 100 Players of the World in 1987.
Download Essay PDF File
Joe Fisher wrote on Aug. 30, 2012 @ 14:49 GMT
Dear George Rajna,
One of the drawbacks of being as simple minded as I am is that although I valiantly tried to read your extremely well written essay, I fear I did not quite fully grasp the vital implications of your complex partial theory, and how any subsequent practical application of it might best be broadcast. As far as I can tell, one real Universe can only be having one real appearance in one real here for one real now fully contained in one real dimension once. All real stuff has to always stay in one real dimension. I have tried my best to concentrate on where abstract stuff could be distributed in three abstract dimensions, but it is too difficult a task for my limited mental capability. For instance, it would be handy if all of the heavy abstract stuff remained in abstract dimension A, all the abstract intermediate stuff collected in abstract dimension B, and every bit of the abstract light stuff lingered in abstract dimension C, but my thoughts stray to the old water, electricity and gas lines going into one house without the lines crossing problem.
In my essay Sequence Consequence, I carefully explain why only 1 of anything is real. There have never been identical snowflakes of the trillions that have fallen. One real Universe can only have one real law once. If real natural snowflakes cannot be identical, then every one of the sparks created by CERN has to be unique even if it was fabricated in a $10 billion piece of machinery.
report post as inappropriate
George Rajna replied on Sep. 1, 2012 @ 08:29 GMT
Dear Joe Fisher,
I must agree with you, the time dimension is the most important for us, since we are limited in this dimension for a lifetime. I also do not believe in the extra dimensions, the 3 geometrical dimensions are simply helping us describe the space we are living in. Because of this we cannot see free quarks; they are only helping us understand what happens in the physical world.
report post as inappropriate
Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Aug. 31, 2012 @ 10:13 GMT
Dear George Rajna,
If we define quark-gluon plasma as a soup of strings in a domain, the density gradient of the tetrahedral-branes of strings that converges towards the centre of that domain by the tensor of strings, expresses gravity. Thus the fundamental matter of a domain is an eigen-rotational segment of string at its centre, with a minimal string-length than the other segments in that domain. As the dynamics within a domain continues with its exterior, change of eigen-rotational frequencies within that domain propagates from that domain with a modified wave mechanics in analogy with neutrino oscillation and this may describe black body radiation also. Thus, the coupling of spin-correlated 0-D particles evolve
1-D eigen-rotational strings of 3-D tetrahedral-branes, in that, spontaneous symmetry breaking is expressional with the disjunction of string segments for conjunction with other segments.
With best wishes,
Jayakar
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 31, 2012 @ 12:09 GMT
Hello George, how are you?
It is intresting all that !
The oscillations seem relevant considering the convergences with my rotating spheres.
ps the chess? You know I am a beginer,I have played on a platform.I liked a lot the parties of 1 min. It was entertaining. I have stopped because I had always the same player, I must admit that he was very good. I have asked who he was, they have said me the Sri cia.It is bizare all that. I ask me if they do not utilize the SOA , services oriented architecture, I am understanding better the strings :)
I beleive that the binar system can optimized and be universally rational. The solution is the entanglement of uniqueness, its number and its finite serie. The oscillations can converge with the rotations spinal and orbital and the volumes of spheres. I ask me if the system of polarization is a binar system or a fusioned system. In all case the density is correlted proportionally. I beleive that the gravitation is explained when we consider a different sense of rot. for light. Of course the system must converge for the 3D. It seems possible.
IN ALL CASE MY QUANTIZATION OF MASS PROPORTIONAL WITH ROTATIONS is relevant when we converge with the 2D strings !
In the reality, so the universal sphere, the mass is quantized by these rotations and polarizations m/hv. The virtuality can compute without the mass.So the simulations can converge. I beleive strongly that the serie of uniqueness is universal at all 3d scales. This serie is important for the universal quantization of this mass inside a closed evolutive system, the sphere. The central spheres also are essential.
Regards
report post as inappropriate
Angel Garcés Doz wrote on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 17:12 GMT
As its result, very basically correct, it can be shown that an accurate result, the proton electron mass ratio, calculable by several alternative methods equivalents, is a function of the two-dimensional holography seven dimensions.
More precisely, the space-time-mass has holographic features in two dimensions.
The space-time-mass is a two-dimensional holography, whose strings, which...
view entire post
As its result, very basically correct, it can be shown that an accurate result, the proton electron mass ratio, calculable by several alternative methods equivalents, is a function of the two-dimensional holography seven dimensions.
More precisely, the space-time-mass has holographic features in two dimensions.
The space-time-mass is a two-dimensional holography, whose strings, which vibrate in a fundamental state holographic seven spheres, is completely equivalent to the maximum sphere compactification / bulls in two dimensions, playing all a cemtral, the seventh .
The kissing number for two diensiones is 6, plus a center, the seventh.
radius sphere / torus, is the dimensionless ratio of the Planck length and the Planck length in seven dimensions compactified in circles, the simplest model Kaluza-Klein
The one-dimensional model of a string (particle in a box), with a length seven diemensional to a smaller radius of the torus, introduces the fractional part of the number n, which must be added to the value, double twists group in seven dimensions ; 2dim [SO (7)] = 42
Since the Higgs boson mass, less mass is:
Where:
m(VH) = equivalent mass Higgs vacuum value
Is the "probability" of a one dimensional string with a length Planckian in seven dimensions, compacted in circles with the simplest model: Kaluza_Klein
The radius, or length, is the larger radius, a torus in seven dimensions
The "position" of the string / particle is the minimum distance, derived from the uncertainty principle, or zero point vacuum energy: 2
major radius of the torus, by the uncertainty principle implies directly, little energy as possible.
For this reason, the result is correct, to the mass of the lowest mass boson
The mass ratio of the proton-electron mass:
1)
2)
3)
Kissing number 2d = 6 , K(2d)7d = 42
4)
The application of the uncertainty principle implies that the minor radius of the torus corresponds to a mass-peak energy, in this case the minimum value for a baryon mass gap: the mass of the proton
s = spin
Quantum entanglement breakable, factorization
Thanks very much
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 17:55 GMT
the dimensions are all in 3D.
The ultim fractal is a system in 3D at all scales. The volumes permist to class the ste^ps of stabilities. So the convergences in 2d can be made.But the fractal is always in 3D for the respect of our proportions with heat and thermo.And for the respect of proprotions due to rotations spinal and orbital. The volumes are essential. The fractal of these volumes is...
view entire post
the dimensions are all in 3D.
The ultim fractal is a system in 3D at all scales. The volumes permist to class the ste^ps of stabilities. So the convergences in 2d can be made.But the fractal is always in 3D for the respect of our proportions with heat and thermo.And for the respect of proprotions due to rotations spinal and orbital. The volumes are essential. The fractal of these volumes is in 3d. It is so improtant to class correctly this fractal of this 3D.
It is not necessary to show what is the strings theory. The convergences can be rational if you insert several parameters. But your parallelizations are just a kind of mathematical play. The strings are rlevant, my spheres are more relevant than strings. The real meaning of these etradimensions is just a virtual superimposings. My equations, them are real. The strings can be in harmony with my theory.
There are probelms with the factorizations that you have utilized. Indeed it is better to take my proportions with the rotations of spheres and their serie of uniqueness.The tori them are correlated with the volumes.See that the number 1, prime is the main central sphere in 3D. See the same logic for the cosmological correlation about the uniqueness serie.
The results can be correlated in 3D with a finite serie and my equations.E=m(c³o³s³) and mcosV=cosnt.for all physical 3D spheres, quantic and cosmologic.
See that all physical spheres are under these equations more the evolutive point of vue with the increasing of mass, and entropy.
42 indeed is relevant. see that the volumes can be inserted. Now what is the number of this ultim entanglement for the uniqueness? it is the same that the number of cosmological spheres !
the perfect fractal exists.
ps what is for you a real interpretation of a a length seven dimensional? because there me I see only a projective 2d ! you know the geometrical projections are rational in 3D.A little if I said that the 3D is an universal domain important for the proportions with rotations of spheres(elementary particules,stars, planets,BH, Universal sphere). So the geometrical algebras must be axiomatized in respect of this universality in 3D.If not, it is just for the 2D.Now for the holography ok , I can admit , with a projection of the 3D resting in 3D in fact.But not with vectors .The 3D universal sphere is a pure 3D system where we can fractalize this 3D towards our planck scales.Even at the walls, the 3D is present and real and important.
That said the convergences are relevant with the 2D but not in extradimensions.
Or it is just a simple tool of superimposings.
Regards
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Angel Garcés Doz replied on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 23:26 GMT
Dear Dufourny: effectively spacetime-mass, also has fractal characteristics.
The fractality implies symmetry (same configuration), by changing the scale.
Eleven dimensions are needed, like it or not.
Precisely the integer part of the inverse fine structure constant to zero momentum, is a direct function of the possible states of polarization of the photon in 7, 3, and zero-dimensional (time = 0, "static point", ct = x4 = 0 )
The fractal dimension of four dimensions, plays a decisive role in determining the fractional part of the inverse of the fine structure constant (zero momentum)
And like it or not, appear again the extra dimensions, namely the seven non factorizable dimension, nor in Gauus integers, so that quantum entanglement can not "break". This last fact directly implies quark confinement.
137, being a prime number, is factorizable in spherical coordinates (2d holography), for the Gaussian integers, with a real part and a complex or compacted:
Fibonacci numbers, plays a role.
The first six Fibonacci numbers, the number of divisors of nonzero roots of E8 group, (240), are essential:
[equation]8\rightarrow SU(8)\:;\: SU(8)\neq SU(a)\times SU(b)\:;\;(a,b)
report post as inappropriate
Angel Garcés Doz replied on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 23:36 GMT
The fractal dimension 4d:
Like it or not, eleven dimensions are necessary.
Dear Dufourny, thanks very much
Regards
report post as inappropriate
The spherical Jedi replied on Sep. 7, 2012 @ 12:58 GMT
:) weak and not sufficient. ahaha
you can delete you know. That will not change the lesson between us. Indeed alone I give you all, courses. Me I learn all days everywhere in a pure universal and deterministic way.
It is the most important.
Ahahah like it of not, elevan are necessary, yes of course Mr Witten. It could be relevant if you insert spheres for a real quantization, but it is just a suggestion of course.
The SO(0) to how many projective geometrical algebras ?frankly insert the volumes in 3D and after, you shall see the fractals inside the closed evolutive space time. So the finite groups appear with the constants, infinities.It permits to better understand the singularity and the singularities and so the infinite light above our walls.Infinity creates a finite evolutive sphere.....but the futuire of this physicality is the infinity also , eternal.Paradoxal, but so evident for a real understanding of entropy.
report post as inappropriate
The Spherical Jedi replied on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 12:36 GMT
hide replies
Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 7, 2012 @ 00:17 GMT
It is not extradimensions, its just fractal of a 3D.
Like it or not, it is like that. The M Theory is interesting,but it is just projective geomatrical algebras where the vectors are always 3 for our pure realistic universe.
Ask to Mr Witten ,Joy and Lisi. :)
In fact, you know what? I think that Mr Witten fears for his theory :) You know me I have unified the 4 forces and...
view entire post
It is not extradimensions, its just fractal of a 3D.
Like it or not, it is like that. The M Theory is interesting,but it is just projective geomatrical algebras where the vectors are always 3 for our pure realistic universe.
Ask to Mr Witten ,Joy and Lisi. :)
In fact, you know what? I think that Mr Witten fears for his theory :) You know me I have unified the 4 forces and explained the cause of mass ! in 3D. Why people are jealous like that with all your strategies.
Mr Witten be rational please. Like it or not.My Theory is revolutionary.Me I want well for the convergences but what is this circus ?
Now what are for you these 11 vectors ? if you have concrete answers , ok, but I doubt. you know x,y and z. What are these projections? with 11 dimensions ? dimensions of what ? in meter , in what ? because you know the planck scale and the other extrem the universal dimension cosmological are always in 3D we can calculate a particule in meter and the universal sphere in meter.I don't other things me ! The fractal is inside this gauge of scales in 3D. You can insert series, or this or that, it will noit change our universal domain in 3D you know. I beleive that people, the stringtheorists confound the holography and the computing with the realistic determinsitic universe,THE SPHERE AND ITS SPHERES :)
Like it or not, the universe is a sphere, like it or not, the particules also, like it or not the stars, planets, BH, moons...are spheres .like it or not, all is in 3D you know, yoàu can ask to Mr Witten he agrees with me :)
ahahah n tending to infinity and what after a hospital rule for the inderteminations implying extradimensions of course of course because fibonacci says to euler that Cantor and Lagrange are in the seventh dimensions to 11.
Of course !and what after a compactification for the pure reductionism also in 12 dimensions also.
Ironical. and the number 42 you know ahahah :)
I play like a child, you have began , I finish :)
ps eureka from belgium from a small humble horticultor ahahah I am going to make surf in my belgian beach.with my guitar ahahah
The crazyness is the begining of the wisdom, isn't it?
the kindness like the torh of true gentlemen!
here is a beautiful serie 1²+3²+5²+7².............+x²(serie finished)....insert the volumes now !
I am playing really like a child with all this circus.It is refreshing.
dear surfer ,Thank you very much, after we shall speak about entropy and its correlated distribution with primes inside a beautiful 3D evolutive sphere and its quantic spheres and cosmological spheres.See that the finite groups are essential for the serie of uniqueness.
Regards
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Sep. 8, 2012 @ 08:59 GMT
WoW! Submitted on Aug 29 and already (80 ratings)!!! I wish I had so many friends and relatives interested in 3D strings. Way to go George!
I guess congrats on your next award are in order :)
report post as inappropriate
Pentcho Valev replied on Sep. 8, 2012 @ 10:03 GMT
How do you know the community rating, Ms. Vasilyeva? I thought there is no access to this information.
Pentcho Valev pvalev@yahoo.com
report post as inappropriate
Pentcho Valev replied on Sep. 8, 2012 @ 11:13 GMT
Oops, my question was silly - I did not understand your statement. Sorry.
Best regards, Pentcho
report post as inappropriate
Joseph Maria Hoebe wrote on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 18:01 GMT
Hello George,
I like your way of thinking. Nice short and to the point. Geometrically seen you take only the direction as measureable phenomenon. Then there is no need for a particle while only the value of volume/density/exchange of n measureable forces interworking upon n measurable forces occupying a certain space during a given time defines the working upon and the forming of thereof arising complex forms. By which every limit of a form is a sphere of exchange und by its complexity immeasurable into definite numbers. Only approximation. Uncertainty. Like a beautiful cocktail.
A way to bypass this is partly to read in chapter 4 of my essay in this contest: http://www.fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Hoebe_The_I_as_
ObserverObse_1.pdf
I propose there a certain geometry by which form arises according to specific laws. These forms can only be thus and that. The basic form is 3-simplex. An important law is the law of harmony. Its gives way to beauty and that what fit well.
Taken your idea and mine together one could show the geometrical movement of phenomena all according to their volume/density/exchange of force and as force. These forces will be tetrahedral under pressure or low temperature and bi-tetrahedral when having enough space to expand in and as, and by a high value of exchangeability.
This way dark-matter could be seen as the sphere of exchange und by its complexity immeasurable into definite numbers, and its complexity is then merely the immeasurability of their sphere and size of interaction and its almost nothing-ness in density and every-ness in volume and exchange. Like you can feel yourself, but cannot pinpoint it in a location or now. Only the value of being does.
Interested?
All the best,
Jos Hoebe
report post as inappropriate
Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 02:44 GMT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpinski_triangle
report post as inappropriate
Anonymous replied on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 03:00 GMT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplex
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny Jedi replied on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 16:29 GMT
1 central sphere.....serie of spherical volumes decreasing....correlation primes.
perfect contact=the lattices disappear....EUREKA !!!
report post as inappropriate
Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 13:36 GMT
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 - 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.
Regard !
Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY
August 23, 2012 - 11:51 GMT on this essay contest.
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny Jedi replied on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 13:43 GMT
Hello
The higgs are not really intresting because each sphere is unique.So the fractal of bosons is complex considering the volumes of spheres. The higgs in this line of reasoning must insert the fact that the smallest spheres are unique. The volumes of these informations are keys.The mass polarizes this light. The spherical volumes are more complex than these higgs in fact.
ibm.....intersting point of vue isn't it ?VOLUMES OF SPHERES AND ROTATIONS AND UNIVERSAL RELATIVISTIC PROPORTIONS.
Regards
report post as inappropriate
Stebe Dufourny Jedi replied on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 13:46 GMT
indeed each planet or moon are unique like the stars also and the BH.....and our central main sphere also..the uniqueness is the answer Mr Witten and friends.
ps eureka :)
Regards
report post as inappropriate
Eckard Blumschein wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 06:04 GMT
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
report post as inappropriate
George Rajna replied on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 08:56 GMT
You can read in the essay:
"One of the most obvious asymmetry is the proton – electron mass rate Mp = 1840 Me while they have equal charge. We explain this fact by the strong interaction of the proton, but how remember it his strong interaction ability for example in the H – atom where are only electromagnetic interactions between proton and electron."
report post as inappropriate
Eckard Blumschein replied on Sep. 29, 2012 @ 00:45 GMT
What wrong assumptions do you refer to? How do these wrong assumptions relate to 3D string theory?
Since English is not my mother tongue, I do not understand "... , but how remember it his ... ability ...".
report post as inappropriate
George Rajna wrote on Sep. 29, 2012 @ 11:32 GMT
Thanks for the opportunity to make clear this point. Our basic assumption that there is a strong interaction, very different from the electromagnetic, based on the color force. The essay explains that the diffraction patterns of the electromagnetic oscillators can give the base of the strong interactions, where the color is simple the 3 geometric dimensions of the space. The string theory is also based on oscillating things, but needs more than 3 dimensions to explain the physical forces, while my explanation places these things back into the natural 3 dimensional world.
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 11, 2012 @ 18:50 GMT
all false George.You confound the computing 2d and the 3D realism , furthermore the extradimensions does not exist, it is just a fractal of 3D. see the axiom of dimensions !!! 3 vectors and the scalar Mr Rajna.
The strings are intresting, that is all, the spheres them are better.
The rest is vain after all.
The finite groups are essential.
The spherical Jedi
report post as inappropriate
Eckard Blumschein wrote on Oct. 1, 2012 @ 12:00 GMT
You offered a theory instead of answering the topical question; or do you consider string theory a basic assumption on which the current physics with all its enigmas and paradoxes is based?
Doesn't string theory assume a block universe? I am questioning this assumption.
Eckard
report post as inappropriate
George Rajna replied on Oct. 1, 2012 @ 16:03 GMT
I would like to answer your question with another question. Don't you think that the aim of the topical question is to propose some new point of view to improve our understanding of the physical world?
The original idea of the String Theory is that we are very familiar with the electromagnetic oscillations, and the electron – positron annihilation to photons gives a simple example to the energy – matter equivalence of Einstein. My essay shows that the stabile asymmetrical physical configurations can be explained by the electromagnetic oscillations, based on the Planck Distribution Law.
George
report post as inappropriate
Eckard Blumschein replied on Oct. 1, 2012 @ 20:37 GMT
The challenge here is to create new and insightful QUESTIONS or analysis about basic, often tacit, ASSUMPTIONS that can be questioned but often are not.
My answer to your question is no, not as the first step, and for a good reason: More mere speculation added on speculations like string theory will presumably not resolve enigmas and paradoxes that are to be ascribed to unseen flaws possibly affecting our assumptions.
Eckard
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 12, 2012 @ 14:21 GMT
Hello Eckard, George,
I ask me if it was you George on linkedin who has hacked my net and now who tries to imply confusions, the usula suspects are bruce Watkins, Patrick Murphy,Shane Steinman,Jonathan,Tom,Brendan,Christi,Joy,Lisi,Florin,.....M
y parano is logic.
The principle of equivalence must respect the pure 3D and the correlated proportions. The rotations are proportional. My equations are relevant considering the polarity of evolution between m and hv. Indeed the fermions polarize the light in a pure general point of vue.The spherical 3D oscillations of synchro and sortings are relevant when we insert furthermore the volumes and the angles of the serie of uniqueness, so the spheres and their finite number. The cosmological correlation can be relevant considering that the number is the same for the fermions and the bosons. More the cosmological number.The gravitation is seen turning in the other sense than ligh , the 4 forces are unified !!! eureka so in all humility. The strings are interesting for the 2d, it can be relevant also for the 3d convergences. But the spheres are better. It is universal these spheres and the universal sphere.
Regards
report post as inappropriate
Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 05:59 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
report post as inappropriate
Anonymous wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 16:15 GMT
IS IT NOT QUITE AN IRONY THAT THE ESSAY THAT IS UNBEATABLY ESTABLISHED AS NO.1 (WITH 361 RATINGS AND ACVERAGE SCORE 8.7)IN PUBLIC RATINGS IS ALSO THE VERY LAST IN THE COMMUNITY RATINGS?
report post as inappropriate
Anonymous replied on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 17:31 GMT
THE COMMUNITY RATING IS THE RATING OF THE COMPETITORS!
report post as inappropriate
Anonymous wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 21:51 GMT
YA GEORGE,
I AM SO PERPLEXED ABOUT THE WHOLE THING.
SOME COMPETITORS WRITE GOOD COMMENTS ABOUT OTHERS' ESSAYS AND DO DEALS AND MUTUALLY GET HIGH RATINGS FOR THEMSELVES AND GIVE LOW RATINGS FOR OTHERS' ESSAYS. A VERY LOPSIDED PROCESS.
ON THE OTHER HAND DR. VASILYEVA AND OTHERS THINK YOU HAVE GOT HIGH PUBLIC RATINGS THANKS TO YOUR FRIENDS AND RELATIONS.
WHAT IS THIS? IS IT A PROFESSIONALLY ORGANISED COMPETITION OR IS IT A FARCE?
report post as inappropriate
George Rajna replied on Oct. 6, 2012 @ 09:06 GMT
In the next phase the expert judges will give the real scientific value of every essay.
report post as inappropriate
Anonymous replied on Oct. 6, 2012 @ 13:43 GMT
EXPERT JUDGES WILL ONLY LOOK AT THE FIRST 35 ESSSAYS ACCORDING TO THE COMMUNITY RATINGS. PLUS THEY MIGHT PICK UP ONE OR TWO ESSAYS IF THEY FEEL THEY ARE VERY GOOD BUT HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT OF THE FIRST 35.
report post as inappropriate
George Rajna replied on Oct. 6, 2012 @ 14:57 GMT
They need to judge every essay because you are right about the lopsided process of the community rating.
report post as inappropriate
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.