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

Anonymous: on 10/4/12 at 22:04pm UTC, wrote Many thanks for your personel review, Prof. Bob! Indeed, one could easily...

Renate Quehenberger: on 10/4/12 at 20:42pm UTC, wrote Thanks Han, if so, you may find more Nietzsche here: ...

Han Geurdes: on 10/4/12 at 12:47pm UTC, wrote Cheers Reni. Like the Nietsche quote.

Anonymous: on 10/4/12 at 12:34pm UTC, wrote good text

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 4:27am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Bob Coecke: on 10/3/12 at 19:08pm UTC, wrote Hey Renate, love the prose and historical intertwines. Great piece. A...

Hoang Hai: on 10/1/12 at 3:14am UTC, wrote Dear Renate Quehenberger Your proposal is very interesting, wish you...

Jayakar Joseph: on 9/30/12 at 7:52am UTC, wrote Dear Quehenberger, In the conjecture of Tetrahedral-branes in...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Amrit Sorli: "We have only 2 times in the universe: - psychological time that has its..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Jim, David, Amrit, I agree in the sense that this time is a kind of..." in The Nature of Time

Jim Snowdon: "Hi S. David Coleman, It`s my contention that time does not..." in The Nature of Time

Georgina Woodward: "Without a free particle moving with the wire’s electron's, just to judge..." in The Present State of...

Lorraine Ford: "The minimum requirement for any mathematical system. Remember? Remember all..." in Consciousness and the...

olivier denis: ""I d like to know more about your general philosophy of this universe, what..." in Alternative Models of...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Olivier, I try to understand why we have this problem of mass of protons..." in Alternative Models of...

Steve Dufourny: "Here are ideas for the quantum computing the real secret is to converge..." in The Quantum Refrigerator

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
December 3, 2021

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Revising Space Time Geometry: A Proposal for a New Romance in Many Dimensions by Renate C.-Z. Quehenberger [refresh]

Author Renate C.-Z. Quehenberger wrote on Sep. 5, 2012 @ 11:38 GMT
Essay Abstract

The ontological positioning of our existence, deeply connected with the hierarchy problem concerning the dimensions of space and time, is one of the major problems for our understanding of the “ultimate” nature of reality. The resulting problem is that mathematical concepts that need so-called “extra-dimensions” have been widely disregarded owing to a lack of physical interpretation. This article reviews conventions, imaginations and assumptions about the non-imaginative by starting at the origins of the of 4D and 5D space-time concepts and proposing a new geometrical approach via a hyper-Euclidian path for a mentally accessible vision of continuous AND discrete complex space configuration in dimensions up to higher order.

Author Bio

R.C.-Z. Quehenberger. I‘m currently working as a scientific researcher on the art-based research project funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) in the framework of the PEEK programm established in the Department of Mediatheory, head Peter Weibel, at the University of applied Arts Vienna, and in parallel on my thesis in philosophy on the Penrose Tilings in the Department of Art and Science Transfer at the same University. Within the last years various art-reviews were published on www. artmagazine.cc

Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 15:15 GMT
Dear Renate! Excellent essay. It looks like we're going with you in one direction. Sincerely, Vladimir Rogozhin

report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 15:31 GMT
Added: New Romance with a New Ontology ... I call it - OntoTopoLogia

report post as inappropriate
Renate Quehenberger replied on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 18:20 GMT

What about a toplogy dinner ? : http://quantumcinema.uni-ak.ac.at/site/qc-goes-public/qc_art
s-birthday-2012/

Sorry for the late response: I got lost in France: http://membres-liglab.imag.fr/nesme/founqi2/

report post as inappropriate

M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 17:15 GMT
Renate, loved your essay. I too argue for the 4th spatial dimension. I am glad that in the end I limited the history review to just one paragraph, for I could never match your exhaustive research into the area. Well done!

I am here: The Nature of Space

So far I counted 4 people referencing Abbott's Flatland, us included. I wonder how Flatlanders will react, lol.

report post as inappropriate
Renate Quehenberger replied on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 18:27 GMT
Very interesting that flatland is still so much around, M. V. Vasilyeva

... if we consider that the idea was fist mentioned by Gustav T. Fechner (1846) too.

You see how much one story, - or two- may evoke !

Good luck with your story !

report post as inappropriate

Stephen M Sycamore wrote on Sep. 8, 2012 @ 18:16 GMT
Renate,

Congratulations on a nicely written essay. I too agree that quaternions, and the algebra they represent, SU(2), have the potential to reveal certain physical relationships are are essential. It's no accident that very much work in elementary particles is done according to that.

Higher dimensional forms for relativity, such as Kaluza-Klein theory are an interesting alternative to look into. I believe the "capu nili" difficulty you mention is related to the splitting of the Lorentz transformation into parity classes depending on whether the transformation is proper and orthochronous. That is dealt with in the essay Is Kinematics Compatible With Field Symmetries?

Now the especially interesting thing you can see in that essay is that the higher dimension of mass normally associated with Kaluza-Klein type approaches collapses the common space-time relativistic relations back into equations of 3 dimensional space showing the dispersion of energy while at the same time being equivalent to the 4 dimensional expressions!

Best regards,

Steve Sycamore

report post as inappropriate
Renate Quehenberger replied on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 18:54 GMT
Dear Steven,

It provides deeper inights into the relevant mathematical structures.

I see, your conclusion that only"c^2 is the invariant (...)

[and] "not c as it is in Special Relativity and Lorentz theory " meets well the quaternionic approach,- isn't it ?

Good luck and best regards,

Renate

report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 8, 2012 @ 18:41 GMT
Dear Renate

Plato's cave = holographic universe?

See my essay http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1413

report post as inappropriate
Renate Quehenberger replied on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 19:00 GMT
Dear Yuri, may I correct: Plato's world ideas meets the higher dimensional quantum world, David Bohm's holographic universe on level-1

Plato's cave demonstrates our 3D perception

Good luck!

report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan replied on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 20:11 GMT
Just in case

http://www.galiulin.narod.ru/ufn022f.pdf

http://www.galiu
lin.narod.ru/crys03_6.pdf.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Renate Quehenberger replied on Sep. 29, 2012 @ 01:18 GMT
Thank you so much for this invaluable links, Yuri!

report post as inappropriate

Rick Lockyer wrote on Sep. 10, 2012 @ 05:56 GMT
Renate,

You really should read my essay The Algebra of Everything. I think I do a reasonable job of tying physical reality to the 8 dimensions of Octonion Algebra. The Quaternions you like manifest themselves within their 7 subalgebras of O. Their chiral choices determine the full variability in the definition for O. This variability and the easy assumption it should have no impact on the description of physically observable phenomenon mandates the form the mathematical description of reality must take. Electrodynamics is best and most fundamentally demonstrated in an O framework, not an H or Minkowski space-time. Take a look, it will be worth your time.

Rick

report post as inappropriate
Renate Quehenberger replied on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 22:18 GMT
Dear Rick,

Now I guess, I understand why octonionic algera exceeds he Hilbert space ...

Here you might find the preliminaries for a geometry of a diecrete space using grid Z5 which should support the geometric visualisation octonions (- work in progress).

www.researchcatalogue.net/view/22616/22617

I wish to proceed far enough to visualize one day soon your complex field equations;-)

Best wishes !

Renate

report post as inappropriate

Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 21:26 GMT
Dear Renate,

I enjoyed reading your essay! The historical context is very interesting. It’s nice to have this all in one place. A couple of questions and remarks.

1. I think Maxwell’s poem was referring to the fact that all (one-dimensional) knots come undone in four-dimensional space. Is this what you were referring to on page 8?

2. The quaternions and octonions (defined by Cayley) are related to Hopf fibrations, which are geometrically beautiful and also physically relevant (for instance, in quantum information theory).

3. You mention Klein’s program in regard to covariance (i.e. “Lorentz invariance.”) I think it’s interesting to consider the possibility that this is only an approximate concept. This is one of the topics I discuss in my essay On the Foundational Assumptions of Modern Physics.

4. Another interesting thing to consider is non-integer dimension (fractal dimension, emergent dimension, etc.). This is particularly relevant in discrete models.

Thanks again for the interesting read! Take care,

Ben Dribus

report post as inappropriate
Renate Quehenberger replied on Sep. 29, 2012 @ 01:15 GMT
Dear Ben,

many thanks for your interesting remarks:

ad 1) yes and I described it why,- ) Yes, one-dimensional strings if you like, but you may also take a thick rope which can be considered as a 3d dimensional knot, but if you make a knot into a 2D surface you get a pentagon and if you try to make a knot into a pentagon you get an epitahedron ...

ad 2 ) Here you may watch a 3-sphere, where the circle bundels of the Hopf fibration became hemispheres: http://quantumcinema.uni-ak.ac.at/site/

ad 3) I guess Kretschmann meant what you call: "The properties of Minkowski spacetime impose external symmetries described by the Poincaré group.

If you embed 4D space into a discrete higher dimensional space stucture, all problems with the socalled "incompatibility of general relativity with Quantum Mechanics "are vanishing.

ad 4) Higher dimensional spaces are complex configurations of 3 dimensional spaces, therefore I don't think we have to consider fractal dimensions as relevant for discrete space models, because usually they serve as the measure of a certain space-filling capacity in 2D patterns.

Best wishes!

Renate

report post as inappropriate

Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 30, 2012 @ 07:52 GMT
Dear Quehenberger,

In the conjecture of Tetrahedral-branes in Coherently-cyclic cluster-matter paradigm of universe, reductionism of extra-dimensional expressions is by the non-descriptive complexity of the coordinates of configuration space, in that its generalized coordinates are time, string-length and the central angle of transformed eigen-rotation. Thus in this scenario of dimensionality, three-dimensional structures emerge with fractals.

With best wishes

Jayakar

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Oct. 1, 2012 @ 03:14 GMT
Dear Renate Quehenberger

Your proposal is very interesting, wish you success.

Kind 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

Member Bob Coecke wrote on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 19:08 GMT
Hey Renate, love the prose and historical intertwines. Great piece. A nice example of ScienceArt, both with capitals. Although to my personal taste there's a bit to much geometry here and a bit too little topology here. :) We all meanwhile know where babies come from, but where do dimensions come from? Where do lines come from?

report post as inappropriate
Anonymous replied on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 22:04 GMT
Many thanks for your personel review, Prof. Bob!

Indeed, one could easily draw a line of thoughts from the abolished Limbo, via the abandoned ether and Plato‘s forgotten „order of heavens“ to the hierarchy problem.

A topologist, could take a bundle (F) of hyperbolic spaces with some handles and loopholes in it, apply the Fourier transform, arrive in 6D and - wait for the babies.

A geameter exists already there,- in Plato's ideal world, filled with (Maxwell's and Faraday's) interfering lines of forces, forming triangles over and over, entangled towards manifolds of all possible higher order.

Didn‘t Klein tell, that all geometries and topology are merging in higher dimensions?

Good question; - can we realy explain „dimensions“ with "degrees of freedom" only ?

I guess they are necessary to avoid Hilberts trap and mix up a beer mug with ...

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 04:27 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.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Anonymous wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 12:34 GMT
good text

report post as inappropriate

Han Geurdes wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 12:47 GMT
Cheers Reni.

Like the Nietsche quote.

report post as inappropriate
Renate Quehenberger replied on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 20:42 GMT
Thanks Han,

if so, you may find more Nietzsche here: