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.

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 - March 16, 2020*

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss

**What Is “Fundamental”**

*October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018*

*Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Current Essay Contest

Previous Contests

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss

read/discuss • winners

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

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

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**Steve Dufourny**: *on* 10/12/12 at 14:21pm UTC, wrote Hello Eckard, George, I ask me if it was you George on linkedin who has...

**Steve Dufourny**: *on* 10/11/12 at 18:50pm UTC, wrote all false George.You confound the computing 2d and the 3D realism ,...

**George Rajna**: *on* 10/6/12 at 14:57pm UTC, wrote They need to judge every essay because you are right about the lopsided...

**Anonymous**: *on* 10/6/12 at 13:43pm UTC, wrote EXPERT JUDGES WILL ONLY LOOK AT THE FIRST 35 ESSSAYS ACCORDING TO THE...

**George Rajna**: *on* 10/6/12 at 9:06am UTC, wrote In the next phase the expert judges will give the real scientific value of...

**Anonymous**: *on* 10/5/12 at 21:51pm UTC, wrote YA GEORGE, I AM SO PERPLEXED ABOUT THE WHOLE THING. SOME COMPETITORS...

**Anonymous**: *on* 10/5/12 at 17:31pm UTC, wrote THE COMMUNITY RATING IS THE RATING OF THE COMPETITORS!

**Steve Dufourny Jedi**: *on* 10/5/12 at 16:29pm UTC, wrote 1 central sphere.....serie of spherical volumes decreasing....correlation...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**Robert McEachern**: ""At least that's the premise." That's the problem. "the theorems that..."
*in* Alternative Models of...

**Malcolm Riddoch**: "@Robert: ""This latter, Ψ(U), can't describe a 'drug test' can it?" For..."
*in* Alternative Models of...

**John Cox**: "Lorraine, I briefly described the relationship of mass to inertia..."
*in* Emergent Reality: Markus...

**Lorraine Ford**: "John, I would say that you need to think what you mean by “physical..."
*in* Emergent Reality: Markus...

**Lorraine Ford**: "Re "I tend to speed-read then review before scoring after reading a good..."
*in* Undecidability,...

**John Cox**: "George, We shouldn't conflate contradiction with inconsistency. QM has a..."
*in* Watching the Watchmen:...

**John Cox**: "Georgi, by and large I agree. Near the end of the discussion panel,..."
*in* Watching the Watchmen:...

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.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

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.

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

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.

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

January 24, 2020

CATEGORY:
Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012)
[back]

TOPIC: 3 Dimensional String Theory by George Rajna [refresh]

TOPIC: 3 Dimensional String Theory by George Rajna [refresh]

This 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.

M. 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

report post as inappropriate

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 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

report post as inappropriate

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

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

The fractal dimension 4d:

Like it or not, eleven dimensions are necessary.

Dear Dufourny, thanks very much

Regards

report post as inappropriate

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

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

report post as inappropriate

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

I guess congrats on your next award are in order :)

report post as inappropriate

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 pvalev@yahoo.com

report post as inappropriate

Oops, my question was silly - I did not understand your statement. Sorry.

Best regards, Pentcho

report post as inappropriate

Best regards, Pentcho

report post as inappropriate

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

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpinski_triangle

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

1 central sphere.....serie of spherical volumes decreasing....correlation primes.

perfect contact=the lattices disappear....EUREKA !!!

report post as inappropriate

perfect contact=the lattices disappear....EUREKA !!!

report post as inappropriate

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

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

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

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

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

ps eureka :)

Regards

report post as inappropriate

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

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

"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

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

Since English is not my mother tongue, I do not understand "... , but how remember it his ... ability ...".

report post as inappropriate

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

report post as inappropriate

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

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

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

Doesn't string theory assume a block universe? I am questioning this assumption.

Eckard

report post as inappropriate

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

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

report post as inappropriate

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

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

In the next phase the expert judges will give the real scientific value of every essay.

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

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

report post as inappropriate

They need to judge every essay because you are right about the lopsided process of the community rating.

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.