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

Current Essay Contest

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

Previous Contests

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

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

Karoly Kehrer: on 10/5/12 at 13:22pm UTC, wrote Dear Ben Dribus I have get more compliment than I deserve. What I try to...

Benjamin Dribus: on 10/5/12 at 3:52am UTC, wrote Dear Karoly, Nice essay! A few thoughts come to mind. 1. Regarding the...

Karoly Kehrer: on 10/4/12 at 23:10pm UTC, wrote Thanks I did not know this Sincerely Karoly

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 5:58am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Karoly Kehrer: on 10/3/12 at 14:14pm UTC, wrote Dear Declan Sorry for a typo. Karoly

Karoly Kehrer: on 10/3/12 at 14:12pm UTC, wrote Dear Geoff "We should always be careful about the difference between...

Karoly Kehrer: on 10/3/12 at 14:00pm UTC, wrote Thank you Ceclan

Geoffrey Haselhurst: on 10/3/12 at 9:47am UTC, wrote Hi Karoly, It is a nice simple essay that is important as it makes us...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RECENT ARTICLES

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

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

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

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

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

FQXi FORUM
January 18, 2022

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Questions About the Constants of Physics and Their Possible Dependency on the Environment by Karoly Kehrer [refresh]

Author Karoly Kehrer wrote on Aug. 29, 2012 @ 12:39 GMT
Essay Abstract

Abstract The realms of the validity of the physical constants are discussed and a hypothesis about the end of the existence of the Black Holes is presented.

Author Bio

Have bachelor degrees in mechanical engineering and master degrees in civil engineering. Provided theoretical analyses and detailed design for electrodynamically levitated vehicles for US Urban Transportation and performed performance test on a full size vehicle. The program was financed by The Federal Transit Authority and private investors. Have several publications on the design and stability issues of Electrodynamic levitation.

Frank Makinson wrote on Aug. 29, 2012 @ 18:21 GMT
Karoly,

"All of these constants were rigorously checked and rechecked several times on the surface of the Earth."

You are one of the few authors that properly qualifies where the "constants" have been measured. I put "constants" in quotes because there is evidence that many so-called constants are not constant. Radioactive decay time variations have been measured which show a dependency upon the distance to the Sun.

I consider it an absurdity that the velocity of electromagnetic (EM) waves everywhere in space (wherever that is) are precisely the same as measured in a vacuum some place on the Earth's surface.

Please read the comments on Topic 1419. I did not realize "dark matter" was created to provide a correction to Newtonian gravity as applied to orbital mechanics for large groupings of stars as compared to a solar system.

Newtonian gravity requires an "instantaneous influence at a distance" for solar system planetary distances. An assumption was made this "influence" has infinite velocity, everywhere.

report post as inappropriate

Gary Simpson wrote on Aug. 30, 2012 @ 02:26 GMT
Glad you could join the party:-)

report post as inappropriate
Karoly Kehrer replied on Aug. 30, 2012 @ 23:14 GMT

report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Sep. 5, 2012 @ 00:51 GMT
Karoly,

As Frank mentioned, there are some interesting experiments with variations of radioactive decay rates. Not only do they seem to vary with the Sun-Earth distance, but they seem to signal coronal mass ejections!

This Physics World article provides background.

The mystery of the varying nuclear decay

This paper provides the latest details.

Additional experimental evidence for a solar influence on nuclear decay rates

And these slides from Recontres de Moriond tell the whole story.

Evidence of Solar Influences on Nuclear Decay Rates

Enjoy,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Karoly Kehrer wrote on Sep. 5, 2012 @ 03:20 GMT
Jonathan J. Dickau

Sincerely

Karoly

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 11:29 GMT
Dear Karoly,

I want add some words that the speed of light in vacuum may be relative and absolute. The relative speed of light in special relativity is the constant c. Such speed is a convention of the theory and is known as postulate of constancy of speed of light. See Extended special theory of relativity. The absolute speed of light may be measured in one-way light experiments, see Metric theory of relativity. In the theory of gravitation the speed of light depends on the position of observer. For local observer it is equal to c (again a convention), and for coordinate observer the speed of light is smaller in strong field.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Karoly Kehrer wrote on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 13:10 GMT
Dear Sergey

Thanks, I do agree. The question I was thinking about what the effect of the variability of the constants would have on our word view?

Could yo share of your thoughts on this?

Sincerely Karoly

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 14:46 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.

Regards !

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

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

report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 10:57 GMT
Karoly

Most enjoyable read and pertinent observations. I agree entirely with your analysis. I hope you'll read my essay which follows this to arrive at what seems a major breakthrough. I start with (agreeing) there is no such thing as a non medium 'perfect vacuum', as your;

"When the relativity theory was formulated it had assumed this (MM) negative result as a positive proof, that the interstellar space-vacuum consists of nothing, it is an absolute void."

I also agree that local density has a significant effect and derive space-time curvature including kinetic effects in agreement with; "...it is probable that permeability and permittivity of the free space - μ0 and/or ε0 - may depend on the interstellar energy/mater density."

A concise, clear and logical essay, and earning a good score from me. I do hope you get to read mine, which may take a little longer to assimilate, but I hope you agree worth the effort.

Best of luck

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Karoly Kehrer wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 12:57 GMT
Dear Peter

Thanks for the kind words. I am still working my way trough the submitted papers. Yours will be next.

Keep in touch

Sincerely

Karoly

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 09:05 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

Declan Traill wrote on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 09:38 GMT
Hi Karoly,

Just gave you a high Community rating: best wishes for the Contest...

Regards,

Declan Traill

report post as inappropriate
Karoly Kehrer replied on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 14:00 GMT
Thank you Ceclan

report post as inappropriate

Karoly Kehrer replied on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 14:14 GMT
Dear Declan Sorry for a typo.

Karoly

report post as inappropriate

Geoffrey Haselhurst wrote on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 09:47 GMT
Hi Karoly,

It is a nice simple essay that is important as it makes us think more carefully about these so called 'constants'.

Three thoughts;

i) It is also an assumption that the universe is expanding from a big bang, the empirical fact is a red shift with distance (a very different thing). We should always be careful about the difference between empirical facts and theoretical interpretations of these facts. This applies to the velocity of light - it is an empirical fact that it is always measured the same, it is a theoretical interpretation that it is constant (I believe it changes but so does wavelength / dimension such that the velocity is always measured the same, seems Nature is very deceptive but ultimately logical!)

ii) Dark energy (Einstein's cosmological constant), required to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe in big bang theory, seems necessarily (in WSM cosmology) to simply be gravity from matter further distant in infinite space.

iii) Black holes, in the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM), cannot occur, infinite energy densities are impossible in reality (only occur in mathematics!)

Cheers and good luck.

Geoff

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1548

report post as inappropriate

Karoly Kehrer wrote on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 14:12 GMT
Dear Geoff

"We should always be careful about the difference between empirical facts and theoretical interpretations of these facts"

I do agree along with your other insightful remarks.

"infinite energy densities are impossible in reality (only occur in mathematics!)" What I cannot comprehend why so many physicist believe in absurdities.

Thanks

Sincerely

Karoly

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 05:58 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

Karoly Kehrer wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 23:10 GMT
Thanks I did not know this

Sincerely

Karoly

report post as inappropriate

Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 03:52 GMT
Dear Karoly,

Nice essay! A few thoughts come to mind.

1. Regarding the "Higgs Aether" view you mention, I think this is something worth thinking about, in the following sense: suppose the Higgs boson had been discovered in 1900 rather than 2010-2012. Would not the scientific community then have concluded "this is the aether?" It's funny how much the view of "spacetime" as "empty void" has changed since Einstein argued in his SR paper that light requires no supporting medium.

2. I agree with the statement that "all this tells us that understanding the fabric of the vacuum is the most important thing if one want to understand physics." (page 3)

3. Regarding the cosmological "constant," the causal set theorists have some interesting ideas on this. I am working on a similar approach myself.

Thanks for the enjoyable read! Take care,

Ben Dribus

P.S. There has been a lot of "ratings chaos" the last few days, and one hesitates to comment on people's threads for fear that the author will suspect one of giving a low rating. I want to assure you that I admire your contribution and gave it the rating it deserves.

report post as inappropriate

Karoly Kehrer wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 13:22 GMT
Dear Ben Dribus

I have get more compliment than I deserve.

What I try to do is to question (and get rid of) dogmas that always were , and always will be part of natural philosophy.