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

Sara: on 10/6/12 at 10:58am UTC, wrote Dear authors, where the ontological foundations of geometry of space-time? ...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 5:23am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Hoang Hai: on 9/25/12 at 14:53pm UTC, wrote Dear You take out the question and opinions solve but not yet specific...

Peter Jackson: on 9/21/12 at 15:02pm UTC, wrote Dear All, "Assuming that a classical underlying space-time geometry...

Yuri Danoyan: on 9/17/12 at 23:28pm UTC, wrote For better clarification my approach I sending to you Frank Wilczek’s 3...

Benjamin Dribus: on 9/12/12 at 23:02pm UTC, wrote Hi All, I read your essay with great interest. It is rather sobering from...

Yuri Danoyan: on 9/5/12 at 23:41pm UTC, wrote Dear Jayakar I am not Yuri Bonder.My name is Yuri Danoyan. For whom is...

Lawrence Crowell: on 9/5/12 at 23:09pm UTC, wrote Dear ABCS, I found your essay to be interesting. I am also intrigued by...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

isabell ella: "If you are facing Cash app related problems and want to get support..." in Cosmic Dawn, Parallel...

Georgina Woodward: "Quite right Lorraine, ( to be clear perhaps I should have said..." in Cosmological Koans

Lorraine Ford: "Honestly Georgina, Wake up! Change of number is NOT energy." in Cosmological Koans

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Michael Hussey: "https://www.google.com" in New Nuclear "Magic...

Michael Hussey: "it is really difficult to understand what is all about all the things..." in New Nuclear "Magic...

Stefan Weckbach: "I have a problem with the notion of time in the multiverse scenario that..." in First Things First: The...

Roger Granet: "By the way, this post was from Roger." in First Things First: The...


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
July 18, 2019

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: A Fundamental Space-Time Geometry: Does It Exist? by P. Aguilar, Y. Bonder, C. Chryssomalakos, and D. Sudarsky [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Yuri Bonder wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 14:10 GMT
Essay Abstract

The search for a quantum theory of gravity must include the recovery of the classical space-time. We consider some of the diculties that must be confronted in any such enterprise. These problems seem to go beyond the technical level, to the point of questioning the overall feasibility of the project. The main issue is related to the fact that, in the quantum theory, it is not possible to assign a trajectory to a physical object and, on the other hand, according to the basic tenants of the geometrization of gravity, it is precisely the trajectories of localized objects that de ne the space-time geometry. This indicates that we should revise the standard geometrical concepts and explore the corresponding notions that could have, at least in principle, operational meaning and that would be at the heart of the above mentioned recovery. The insights gained in this analysis should be relevant to the quest for a quantum theory of gravity even before such theory is completely developed, and might help refocus some of its goals.

Author Bio

P. Aguilar: M. Sc. student at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) Y. Bonder: Postdoctoral researcher at UNAM. C. Chryssomalakos and D. Sudarsky: Professors at UNAM

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Anton Lorenz Vrba wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 23:25 GMT
Hi 

Your  noteworthy contribution to this contest underlines the global goal to reconcile the gravitational and electric-charge phenomena under a common quantum theory.

Have you ever given thought that the gravity and electric-charge  attraction underly a common phenomena? This I propose in my essay, if that thought can be befriended the development of a common quantum theory may be easier.

To P.A.: As a student you may want to explain or comment the paradox of section 2.3 in my essay Rethinking Geometry and Experience

Regards

Anton

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


ABRAHAM wrote on Sep. 4, 2012 @ 01:50 GMT
Yuri,

An admirable attempt to bring to life some of the serious obstacles confronting the development of a quantum theory of Gravity.

I hasten to agree that any attempt to develop such a theory from the current framework of Gravitation [ie Newtonian & GR] faces some serious difficulties most notably: No definition and distinction between mass & Matter.

I would suggest that a bottom-up approach is better suited to achieving the goal of a quantum theory of Gravitation, which is what I have done in Tetryonics [see attached SM particle models].

The strict geometrics of equilateral energies in Tetryonics provides a foundational geometry for the Energy-Space-Time interactions of all fields of Force along with a clear, enforceable distinction between interactive EM masses and gravitational Matter. Revealing nett Gravitation to be the result of 3 quantum field interactions [see attached] as Anton has alluded to in his comment.

I look forward to your comments on this approach to QG [and perhaps a review of my own essay].

attachments: 2_Figure_10.07__Tetryonic_Charge_Geometries_800x600.jpg, Figure_69.03__Quantum_Gravity_800x600.jpg

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Reed wrote on Sep. 4, 2012 @ 13:23 GMT
“The search for a quantum theory of gravity must include the recovery of the classical space-time”.

Why? Ask yourselves what, physically, corresponds with the concepts of space, and time. Physics is supposed to be an objective explanation of physical existence (as manifest to us, ie not a belief system), and I can identify nothing that physically exists which could constitute either space or time.

Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 4, 2012 @ 14:07 GMT
Yuri

I have special point of view to Space-Time. I wrote about it to Dr. Stephen Weinberg.See my essay

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1413

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 4, 2012 @ 18:00 GMT
Dear Yuri Bonder,

Continuum of eigen-rotational string of matters in Coherently-cyclic cluster-matter universe model, is analogue to space-time continuum; in that world line is applicable only for the macroscopic object of dense tetrahedral-branes to describe its path and not applicable for the dynamics of a string that differs from that of a particle.

With best wishes,

Jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan replied on Sep. 5, 2012 @ 23:41 GMT
Dear Jayakar

I am not Yuri Bonder.My name is Yuri Danoyan.

For whom is your answer?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Sep. 5, 2012 @ 23:09 GMT
Dear ABCS,

I found your essay to be interesting. I am also intrigued by the mention of nonassociativity. Towards the end of my essay nonassociativity is briefly discussed. In further blog discussions more is discussed about this, where my work is a sort of prelude to nonassociative geometry. Your approach appears to be almost a pre-quantization procedure for the noncommutative geometry of spacetime. I will read your paper arXiv:1205.0501 for greater details.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Sep. 12, 2012 @ 23:02 GMT
Hi All,

I read your essay with great interest. It is rather sobering from my point of view, since emergent spacetime is my own favorite way of thinking about quantum gravity. I have a few comments and questions.

1. Of the usual “discrete” FTS theories that you mention (LQG, CS, CDT), do you have one in mind more than the others in your research program?

2. On a related...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 23:28 GMT
For better clarification my approach

I sending to you Frank Wilczek’s 3 keen articles

http://ctpweb.lns.mit.edu/physics_today/phystoday/Ab
s_limits388.pdf

http://ctpweb.lns.mit.edu/physics_today/physt
oday/Abs_limits393.pdf

http://ctpweb.lns.mit.edu/physics_toda
y/phystoday/Abs_limits400.pdf

All the best

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Sep. 21, 2012 @ 15:02 GMT
Dear All,

"Assuming that a classical underlying space-time geometry exists, how does the quantum nature of the available probing objects modify the way in which we perceive the geometry?"

I think you hit the nail on the head in your abstract. but also;

" ...characteristics of the center of mass of extended objects."

"...in order to calculate the center of mass of the complete extended

object, all the individual particles have to be identifed as such, as neglecting their internal compositeness would lead to inconsistencies."

"...the trajectories of localized objects that define the space-time geometry."

and the need to; "...revise the standard geometrical concepts and explore the corresponding notions that could have, at least in principle, operational meaning."

I fear your methodology and language may be too steeped in the old mainstream paradigm, but may be wrong as it is surely open minds that count.

Certainly I agree "the recovery of the classical space-time." from the quanta is the holy grail, or 'unification'.

Well written. I hope you may read and comment on the more 'Locally Real' approach I take in my own essay, with some exiting results, and look forward to your thoughts on those and commonality.

Very best wishes

Peter

PS. Paul; For 'space-time' I think you may first substitute CSL in your own language, but leading to gravity.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 25, 2012 @ 14:53 GMT
Dear

You take out the question and opinions solve but not yet specific conclusions.

Can you additional be?

Kind Regards !

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 05:23 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


Sara wrote on Oct. 6, 2012 @ 10:58 GMT
Dear authors, where the ontological foundations of geometry of space-time? I did not find it in the essay. Sincerely, Sara

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.