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

jack rider: on 2/5/19 at 14:38pm UTC, wrote https://www.smore.com/htpg5

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 4:03am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

George: on 10/2/12 at 18:13pm UTC, wrote Sorry, i don't know the empirical methodology of calculation to your...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/2/12 at 6:26am UTC, wrote After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I...

Yuri Danoyan: on 9/25/12 at 11:06am UTC, wrote See my discussion with George Ellis ...

Hoang Hai: on 9/19/12 at 15:51pm UTC, wrote Dear Very interesting to see your essay. Perhaps all of us are convinced...

Yuri Danoyan: on 9/19/12 at 1:06am UTC, wrote Very interesting article from India ...

Benjamin Dribus: on 9/17/12 at 4:54am UTC, wrote Dear Rudolf, It's a pleasure to meet you! My email address is...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jim Snowdon: "What about the dinosaur bones Steve? They are still here with us in the..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Lorraine Ford: "P.S. Clearly, a situation symbolically representable as: ..." in The Present State of...

Lorraine Ford: "So, in reply to the posts by Stefan Weckbach and Steve Dufourny above,..." in The Present State of...

Georgina Woodward: "If considering existence rather than appearances, the time dimension..." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Georgina Woodward: "That is about the 'anatomy"" of spacetime." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Steve Dufourny: "Hello Jim, yes indeed in a sense we have these motions and we have invented..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Georgina Woodward: "Thank you. Good luck." in The Nature of Time

Lorraine Ford: "Rob, As you have not replied, I take it that you now concede that the..." in 16th Marcel Grossmann...

RECENT ARTICLES

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.

Can Choices Curve Spacetime?
Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

The Quantum Engine That Simultaneously Heats and Cools
Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

The Quantum Refrigerator
A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

FQXi FORUM
September 17, 2021

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Scaling Laws in Particle Physics and Astrophysics by Rudolf Muradyan [refresh]

Author Rudolf Muradyan wrote on Sep. 7, 2012 @ 11:12 GMT
Essay Abstract

In 1973 dimensional scaling laws were developed for understanding high energy behavior of hadrons scattering at large fixed angels. The Part I of this essay is devoted to examination of this relation. In the part II of essay the Spin/Mass universal scaling laws are analyzed for cosmic bodies such as planets, stars and galaxies on the basis of generalization of the Regge-Chew-Frautschi string like relation to the two- and three-dimensional objects.

Author Bio

I worked for many years in Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (Dubna, Russia), Yerevan Physics Institute and Byurakan Observatory (Armenia). Now I am living in Pasadena, CA and affiliated with Pasadena City College.

George wrote on Sep. 9, 2012 @ 12:41 GMT
Hi Dear Rudolf,

You have trust 3quark composition of hadrons due to experiments pointed to presence of its internal structure and form factor. Well, however the same facts may confirm other model as well that you may find in the end of mine work.

Your style of narration is nice. Yes gnahatum em qo gorce.

report post as inappropriate
Rudolf Muradyan replied on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 00:43 GMT
Dear George,

I remember, that some time ago I tried to one of your equations, using MATHEMATICA.

It will be interestin to know, how yoyr model describe real experimental data about, say, large angle proton-proton scattering at high energies?

Thanks,

Rudolf

report post as inappropriate

George replied on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 18:13 GMT
Sorry, i don't know the empirical methodology of calculation to your question.

Bayc Dzes chanachoxneric mekn asac vor duq kargin mard eq ....

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 06:14 GMT
Dear Rudolf,

You describe the Chew- Frautschi conjecture for hadrons with the conclusion that it is necessary to use the conjecture at the level of star and galaxy too. I explain the Chew- Frautschi conjecture at the end of §12 of the book: The physical theories and infinite nesting of matter. Perm: S.G. Fedosin, 2009-2012, 858 p. ISBN 978-5-9901951-1-0. Some quantum relation for the Solar system are described in the article Similarity of matter levels. All these results follow the Theory of Infinite Nesting of Matter which is the subject of my essay.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Rudolf Muadyan wrote on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 01:10 GMT
Dear Sergey Fedosin,

Could you be so kind to send me by email (rudolfmm@gmail.com) some details about your approach to the Chew-Frautschi conjecture?

Thanks beforehand,

Rudolf

report post as inappropriate

Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 07:07 GMT
Dear Rudolf,

This is very interesting. It is striking that a simple scaling law would have such a wide range of validity. I wonder how dark matter comes into this, though; it seems like the question of how one explains the dynamical anomalies usually attributed to dark matter would make a large difference to the angular momentum estimate. Also, I'm glad you pointed out that the quark counting rules have been re-derived from string theory; I wasn't aware of that. Take care,

Ben Dribus

report post as inappropriate
Rudolf muradyan replied on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 22:00 GMT
Hi dear Benjamin,

I have feeling, that some "hidden" angular momentum with quantum-mechanical origin can eliminate the need of Dark matter hypothesis.

May be sometime we could discuss it in more detail.

Best regards,

Rudolf.

rudolfmm@gmail.com

report post as inappropriate

Member Benjamin F. Dribus replied on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 04:54 GMT
Dear Rudolf,

It's a pleasure to meet you! My email address is bdribus@math.lsu.edu. By the way, if you would like to know why I am interested in problems of scale, I have an essay here too: On the Foundational Assumptions of Modern Physics. My background is mostly mathematical, and I am sure you will find my ideas speculative, but I am still learning. Take care,

Ben

report post as inappropriate

Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 01:06 GMT
Very interesting article from India

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1209/1209.3765.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 15:51 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

Yuri Danoyan wrote on Sep. 25, 2012 @ 11:06 GMT
See my discussion with George Ellis

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 06:26 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

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 04:03 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