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
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/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
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/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
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.
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
Jonathan Dickau: on 8/8/13 at 3:40am UTC, wrote Hello Antoine, I read, enjoyed, and rated as good your essay. More when...
Antoine Acke: on 8/6/13 at 11:06am UTC, wrote Dear Paul, Thanks for commenting and rating my essay. I will do the same...
Antoine Acke: on 8/6/13 at 10:55am UTC, wrote Dear Amazigh H, Thank for your interest in my essay. I will soon comment...
Paul Borrill: on 8/6/13 at 4:22am UTC, wrote Antoine - I'm not sure I am convinced by what you've come up with, but I...
eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/6/13 at 0:05am UTC, wrote Dear Antoine, We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at...
Antony Ryan: on 8/3/13 at 19:23pm UTC, wrote Thanks for the link Antoine! Best wishes, Antony
George Kirakosyan: on 8/2/13 at 3:06am UTC, wrote Hi Antoine, I have do as I say (see in 29 post on captal letters) and I...
Antoine Acke: on 8/1/13 at 9:46am UTC, wrote Hello George, I think your post must be the result of a misunderstanding. ...
RECENT FORUM POSTS
Georgina Woodward: "'Sharp comb" and 'shredder' are used as similes and metaphors because the..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...
Sydney Grimm: "Lorraine, Let’s take an example: E= mc[sup]2[/sup]. It is an equation..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...
Jason Wolfe: "I cannot say that I am enthusiastic about where philosophy has led us. We..." in The Demon in the Machine...
Jason Wolfe: "How can there be any talk of determinism when the real world is built upon..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...
Georgina Woodward: "I might be able to improve on that description. It's early days.If it is a..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...
Robert McEachern: ""do you agree with Davies that these questions will need new physics?" It..." in The Demon in the Machine...
Zeeya Merali: "Joe, You appear to really want to contact Dr Kuhn about his Closer to..." in First Things First: The...
Joe Fisher: "(Zeeya's note: Joe I've deleted the text of this post. It appears to be..." 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.
Jonathan Dickau: on 8/8/13 at 3:40am UTC, wrote Hello Antoine, I read, enjoyed, and rated as good your essay. More when...
Antoine Acke: on 8/6/13 at 11:06am UTC, wrote Dear Paul, Thanks for commenting and rating my essay. I will do the same...
Antoine Acke: on 8/6/13 at 10:55am UTC, wrote Dear Amazigh H, Thank for your interest in my essay. I will soon comment...
Paul Borrill: on 8/6/13 at 4:22am UTC, wrote Antoine - I'm not sure I am convinced by what you've come up with, but I...
eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/6/13 at 0:05am UTC, wrote Dear Antoine, We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at...
Antony Ryan: on 8/3/13 at 19:23pm UTC, wrote Thanks for the link Antoine! Best wishes, Antony
George Kirakosyan: on 8/2/13 at 3:06am UTC, wrote Hi Antoine, I have do as I say (see in 29 post on captal letters) and I...
Antoine Acke: on 8/1/13 at 9:46am UTC, wrote Hello George, I think your post must be the result of a misunderstanding. ...
RECENT FORUM POSTS
Georgina Woodward: "'Sharp comb" and 'shredder' are used as similes and metaphors because the..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...
Sydney Grimm: "Lorraine, Let’s take an example: E= mc[sup]2[/sup]. It is an equation..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...
Jason Wolfe: "I cannot say that I am enthusiastic about where philosophy has led us. We..." in The Demon in the Machine...
Jason Wolfe: "How can there be any talk of determinism when the real world is built upon..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...
Georgina Woodward: "I might be able to improve on that description. It's early days.If it is a..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...
Robert McEachern: ""do you agree with Davies that these questions will need new physics?" It..." in The Demon in the Machine...
Zeeya Merali: "Joe, You appear to really want to contact Dr Kuhn about his Closer to..." in First Things First: The...
Joe Fisher: "(Zeeya's note: Joe I've deleted the text of this post. It appears to be..." 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
September 21, 2019
CATEGORY:
It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013)
[back]
TOPIC: INFORMATION AS THE SUBSTANCE OF GRAVITATIONAL FIELDS by Antoine Acke [refresh]
TOPIC: INFORMATION AS THE SUBSTANCE OF GRAVITATIONAL FIELDS by Antoine Acke [refresh]
Essay Abstract
Gravito-electromagnetism (GEM) describes the gravitational phenomena by introducing a gravitational field that can be viewed as a combination of two fields: a force field and an induction field. It is assumed that this composite field - that serves as a mediator for the gravitational interactions - is isomorphic with the electromagnetic field. In this essay we will show that the GEM-description of gravitation can perfectly be explained by the hypothesis that "information carried by informatons" is the substance of the gravitational field. Our starting point is that any material object manifests itself in space by emitting "informatons": granular mass and energy less entities running away with the speed of light and carrying information about the position and the velocity of their emitter. We will show that the cloud of informatons emitted by a material object constitutes its gravitational field.
Author Bio
Antoine Acke is a civil electro technical engineer (1962 - Ghent University - Belgium). Until his retirement he was active as a professor in electrical and electronic engineering at Kaho Sint-Lieven, a university college in Ghent. His interest in the foundations of physics resulted in the development of the "theory of informatons", a theory about gravitation and electromagnetism.
Download Essay PDF File
Gravito-electromagnetism (GEM) describes the gravitational phenomena by introducing a gravitational field that can be viewed as a combination of two fields: a force field and an induction field. It is assumed that this composite field - that serves as a mediator for the gravitational interactions - is isomorphic with the electromagnetic field. In this essay we will show that the GEM-description of gravitation can perfectly be explained by the hypothesis that "information carried by informatons" is the substance of the gravitational field. Our starting point is that any material object manifests itself in space by emitting "informatons": granular mass and energy less entities running away with the speed of light and carrying information about the position and the velocity of their emitter. We will show that the cloud of informatons emitted by a material object constitutes its gravitational field.
Author Bio
Antoine Acke is a civil electro technical engineer (1962 - Ghent University - Belgium). Until his retirement he was active as a professor in electrical and electronic engineering at Kaho Sint-Lieven, a university college in Ghent. His interest in the foundations of physics resulted in the development of the "theory of informatons", a theory about gravitation and electromagnetism.
Download Essay PDF File
These masses that emit informatons.... how is it that they attract and don't repel other masses?
report post as inappropriate
According to the postulate of the emission of informatons (§2) the g-index of an informaton emitted by a point mass M at rest, is represented by a vector "s-g" that points to the position of the emitter.
In §3.1, it is shown that "E-g" , the gravitational field of M, is the macroscopic manifestation of "s-g", what implies that "E-g" also should point to M.
In §3.2 is demonstrated that the characteristic symmetry of the "own" gravitational field of a point mass m located in a point P of the gravitational field of M is disturbed and that "E-g" in P is a measure for the extent of that disturbance.
To become blind for that disturbance, m should accelerate with an amount "a" = "E-g", what implies that m is attracted by M.
In §3.1, it is shown that "E-g" , the gravitational field of M, is the macroscopic manifestation of "s-g", what implies that "E-g" also should point to M.
In §3.2 is demonstrated that the characteristic symmetry of the "own" gravitational field of a point mass m located in a point P of the gravitational field of M is disturbed and that "E-g" in P is a measure for the extent of that disturbance.
To become blind for that disturbance, m should accelerate with an amount "a" = "E-g", what implies that m is attracted by M.
Dear Mr. Acke,
Can you kindly show how your "information carried by informatons" theory of gravity can explain the following well known experimental tests?
1) Time delay in radar sounding.
2) Deflection of light.
3) Perihelion advance.
4) Spectral shift.
5) Geodesic effect.
Clearly, if your theory cannot explain such tests, it must be immediately ruled out.
Thanks and regards,
P.
report post as inappropriate
Can you kindly show how your "information carried by informatons" theory of gravity can explain the following well known experimental tests?
1) Time delay in radar sounding.
2) Deflection of light.
3) Perihelion advance.
4) Spectral shift.
5) Geodesic effect.
Clearly, if your theory cannot explain such tests, it must be immediately ruled out.
Thanks and regards,
P.
Dear Mr. Planck,
The theory of informatons explains the GEM-description of gravity and so, indirectly, the gravitational phenomena (included those mentioned by you) that can be explained as gravito-electromagnetic effects.
This is shown in numerous articles you can find on ArXiv (Search under "gravitoelectromagnetism"). For example:
- arXiv:gr-qc/0207065: Gravitomagnetic Effects (M. Ruggiero, A. Tartaglia)
- arXiv:gr-qc/0304104: Advance of Mercury Perihelion explained by Cogravity (C. de Matos, M. Tajmar).
The theory of informatons explains the GEM-description of gravity and so, indirectly, the gravitational phenomena (included those mentioned by you) that can be explained as gravito-electromagnetic effects.
This is shown in numerous articles you can find on ArXiv (Search under "gravitoelectromagnetism"). For example:
- arXiv:gr-qc/0207065: Gravitomagnetic Effects (M. Ruggiero, A. Tartaglia)
- arXiv:gr-qc/0304104: Advance of Mercury Perihelion explained by Cogravity (C. de Matos, M. Tajmar).
Professor Antoine,
After reading every word of it four times, I have no idea what essay is about. According to the abstract, “Gravito-electromagnetism (GEM)” is not a real condition. Whatever it is, it merely “describes” (although it is you who is the culprit for trying incomprehensibly to describe it) “gravitational phenomena by only introducing” (and never really establishing) “a gravitational field that can be viewed” (by whom? How? Where? When? With what? For how long?) “as a combination of two fields:” (How counted?) “a force field and an induction field.” (How forceful? How inductive??
Proven real fact: each snowflake is unique. One can observe snowflakes any time it snows.
report post as inappropriate
After reading every word of it four times, I have no idea what essay is about. According to the abstract, “Gravito-electromagnetism (GEM)” is not a real condition. Whatever it is, it merely “describes” (although it is you who is the culprit for trying incomprehensibly to describe it) “gravitational phenomena by only introducing” (and never really establishing) “a gravitational field that can be viewed” (by whom? How? Where? When? With what? For how long?) “as a combination of two fields:” (How counted?) “a force field and an induction field.” (How forceful? How inductive??
Proven real fact: each snowflake is unique. One can observe snowflakes any time it snows.
Dear Mr. Joe,
To describe the gravitational phenomena and to formulate the gravitational laws, GEM (Heaviside, Jefimenko, ...) introduces a vector field that is analoguous to the EM field: a combination of two fields. "E-g" - the "gravitational field" - is analogue to "E", the electric field; and "B-g" - the "gravitational induction" or "cogravity" - is analogue to the magnetic induction "B". "B-g" takes the kinetic effects of gravity into account.
GEM considers that composite gravitational field as a mathematical construction, as an element of our thinking about nature, that itself doesn't belong to the physical world.
In the essay we show that - by introducing "information carried by informatons" - that field and its effects on matter can be understood as a substantial element of nature. We explain it as the macroscopic manifestation of "informatons": granular mass and energy less entities emitted by the material objects, carrying information about the position and the velocity of their emitter and running through space with the speed of light.
To describe the gravitational phenomena and to formulate the gravitational laws, GEM (Heaviside, Jefimenko, ...) introduces a vector field that is analoguous to the EM field: a combination of two fields. "E-g" - the "gravitational field" - is analogue to "E", the electric field; and "B-g" - the "gravitational induction" or "cogravity" - is analogue to the magnetic induction "B". "B-g" takes the kinetic effects of gravity into account.
GEM considers that composite gravitational field as a mathematical construction, as an element of our thinking about nature, that itself doesn't belong to the physical world.
In the essay we show that - by introducing "information carried by informatons" - that field and its effects on matter can be understood as a substantial element of nature. We explain it as the macroscopic manifestation of "informatons": granular mass and energy less entities emitted by the material objects, carrying information about the position and the velocity of their emitter and running through space with the speed of light.
Professor Antoine,
In other words, you have unnecessarily inflicted upon us another dollop of physics abstract mumbo-jumbo. The point of this essay contest as I understood it was to present our respective views concerning information as it related to reality. You seem to have only presented enough information as it relates to your occupation.
report post as inappropriate
In other words, you have unnecessarily inflicted upon us another dollop of physics abstract mumbo-jumbo. The point of this essay contest as I understood it was to present our respective views concerning information as it related to reality. You seem to have only presented enough information as it relates to your occupation.
Hey Antoine!
I think that the essay addresses the fundamental question of how o progress in physics with the concept of information quite well. The expressions for Planck's constant and the formal reduction to Newton's law of force seemed to fit well! I especially liked the mathematical treatment of the concepts with the basic figure-drawn math. It reminded me vaguely of the popular explanatory examples of Special Relativity in that sense. I do think that it is is a mistake to cancel out the gravity field when considering the force between two moving particles. This is such because I can not see the motion of one particle vanishing in its entirety. Because of its spherical shape, if it was extended, it seems to me that no reference point could be taken that doe not have some part of the information circle curved or surrounded by the particle. Particularly, the statement leading to the assumption directly before section 5 that
"Accelerating this way has the effect that the extern(al?) gravitational field is cancelled in the origin of the reference frame anchored to m2"
is not the right way to do business. Besides this, I found the essay to go over more of the grit and grunt work of dealing with information than others, perhaps. Please clear this up or defend your position.
report post as inappropriate
I think that the essay addresses the fundamental question of how o progress in physics with the concept of information quite well. The expressions for Planck's constant and the formal reduction to Newton's law of force seemed to fit well! I especially liked the mathematical treatment of the concepts with the basic figure-drawn math. It reminded me vaguely of the popular explanatory examples of Special Relativity in that sense. I do think that it is is a mistake to cancel out the gravity field when considering the force between two moving particles. This is such because I can not see the motion of one particle vanishing in its entirety. Because of its spherical shape, if it was extended, it seems to me that no reference point could be taken that doe not have some part of the information circle curved or surrounded by the particle. Particularly, the statement leading to the assumption directly before section 5 that
"Accelerating this way has the effect that the extern(al?) gravitational field is cancelled in the origin of the reference frame anchored to m2"
is not the right way to do business. Besides this, I found the essay to go over more of the grit and grunt work of dealing with information than others, perhaps. Please clear this up or defend your position.
Hello William,
Thanks for your comments on my essay.
In §4 it is shown how the composite gravitational field intermediates in the interaction between particles that are moving relative to an inertial reference frame. For practical reasons ("the body of the essay may not exceed 9 pages") the discussion is limited to the case of particles whose speeds can be neglected compared to the speed of light. In §5.2 of the article "GRAVITATION EXPLAINED BY THE THEORY OF INFORMATONS" (reference 6 - direct link) the interaction between moving masses is treated in a more general context. It turns out that the force between two moving masses according to the theory of informatons perfectly agrees with that based on S.R.T. (§5.2.4.2).
The statement
"Accelerating this way has the effect that the external gravitational field is cancelled in the origin of the reference frame anchored to m2"
is based on the principle of equivalence. From that principle it follows that if a body is in a uniform gravitational field and is at the same time accelerating in the direction of that field with an acceleration whose magnitude equals that due to the field, particles in such a body will behave as though they are in an inertial reference frame with no gravitational field.
Thanks for your comments on my essay.
In §4 it is shown how the composite gravitational field intermediates in the interaction between particles that are moving relative to an inertial reference frame. For practical reasons ("the body of the essay may not exceed 9 pages") the discussion is limited to the case of particles whose speeds can be neglected compared to the speed of light. In §5.2 of the article "GRAVITATION EXPLAINED BY THE THEORY OF INFORMATONS" (reference 6 - direct link) the interaction between moving masses is treated in a more general context. It turns out that the force between two moving masses according to the theory of informatons perfectly agrees with that based on S.R.T. (§5.2.4.2).
The statement
"Accelerating this way has the effect that the external gravitational field is cancelled in the origin of the reference frame anchored to m2"
is based on the principle of equivalence. From that principle it follows that if a body is in a uniform gravitational field and is at the same time accelerating in the direction of that field with an acceleration whose magnitude equals that due to the field, particles in such a body will behave as though they are in an inertial reference frame with no gravitational field.
According to the principle of equivalence, a uniform gravitational field in an inertial reference frame {O} is cancelled if it is observed in a reference frame {O'} that is accelerating in the direction of the field with an acceleration whose magnitude equals that due to the field.
Because the g-field in a point of a gravitational field in the essay is identified as the density of the flow of g-information in that point, there can be no transport of g-information in the accelerated reference system {O'}. This implies that the g-index of the informatons should be cancelled in {O'}.
In the attachment#1 "INFLUENCE OF THE ACCELERATION OF THE REFERENCE SYSTEM ON THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELD" we show that this is indeed the case.
attachments: FXQi__attachment_1.pdf
Because the g-field in a point of a gravitational field in the essay is identified as the density of the flow of g-information in that point, there can be no transport of g-information in the accelerated reference system {O'}. This implies that the g-index of the informatons should be cancelled in {O'}.
In the attachment#1 "INFLUENCE OF THE ACCELERATION OF THE REFERENCE SYSTEM ON THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELD" we show that this is indeed the case.
attachments: FXQi__attachment_1.pdf
Dear Uncle Acke
So,we can be defined for information is :The absorption and transmission the impact of material,or not ?
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802
report post as inappropriate
So,we can be defined for information is :The absorption and transmission the impact of material,or not ?
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802
Hallo Dear Mister Hoang cao Hai,
Can you, please, formulate your question more clearly?
Can you, please, formulate your question more clearly?
Send to all of you
THE ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AND A SMALL TEST FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT
To change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition and to demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay and to avoid duplicate questions after receiving the opinion of you , I will add a reply to you :
1 . THE...
view entire post
THE ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AND A SMALL TEST FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT
To change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition and to demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay and to avoid duplicate questions after receiving the opinion of you , I will add a reply to you :
1 . THE...
view entire post
Antoine,
If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, “It’s good to be the king,” is serious about our subject.
Jim
report post as inappropriate
If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, “It’s good to be the king,” is serious about our subject.
Jim
Dear Antoine,
I truly enjoyed your insight and 'theory of informatons' hypothesis as stated in your essay. Although you have a different approach than I do, I find your analytical approach inspiring and most worthy of merit and so have rated it accordingly.
Best wishes to you and your work and I hope you do well in the competition.
Regards,
Manuel
report post as inappropriate
I truly enjoyed your insight and 'theory of informatons' hypothesis as stated in your essay. Although you have a different approach than I do, I find your analytical approach inspiring and most worthy of merit and so have rated it accordingly.
Best wishes to you and your work and I hope you do well in the competition.
Regards,
Manuel
Dear Manuel,
I thank you very much for your kind comment and wishes.
Regards,
Antoine.
I thank you very much for your kind comment and wishes.
Regards,
Antoine.
Dear Professor Acke
Thank you for your message. I have read your essay and see that you have developed the mathematics of your interesting magnetogravitation quite thorougly. In 'my' phyics I always try to imagine a model visually and mechanically, so I tried to imagine what the Electric density and The Magnetic density and the Information field in your theory can look like.
In...
view entire post
Thank you for your message. I have read your essay and see that you have developed the mathematics of your interesting magnetogravitation quite thorougly. In 'my' phyics I always try to imagine a model visually and mechanically, so I tried to imagine what the Electric density and The Magnetic density and the Information field in your theory can look like.
In...
view entire post
Dear Vladimir,
Thanks for your comments on my essay and for your remarks about my "Theory of Informatons" that is developed thouroughly in ref 6 and in ref 7. In the frame of that theory, the concept "information" has a specific meaning.
1. When we say that it is the substance of gravitational and electromagnetic fields, we mean that "information carried by informatons" makes these...
view entire post
Thanks for your comments on my essay and for your remarks about my "Theory of Informatons" that is developed thouroughly in ref 6 and in ref 7. In the frame of that theory, the concept "information" has a specific meaning.
1. When we say that it is the substance of gravitational and electromagnetic fields, we mean that "information carried by informatons" makes these...
view entire post
Dear prof. Antoine,
I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.
Regards and good luck in the contest,
Sreenath BN.
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827
report post as inappropriate
I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.
Regards and good luck in the contest,
Sreenath BN.
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827
Dear Sreenath,
I will do that.
Regards and reciprocal wishes,
Antoine
I will do that.
Regards and reciprocal wishes,
Antoine
Anton
Fascinating essay and ideas, original and obviously well developed. The heavy lacing of maths didn't help the flow but I can see like me that you're a practical man who values evidence.
I did find a slightly analogous link with my Huygens spherelets expanding at c so I think I could follow your conceptions, but never easy with something so original.
Very well done for all the thought and work, and worth a good score from me for sure. I shall keep my eye open for more on informatons. I wonder what you may make of mine which is slightly similarly 'outlying' and original, at once outside the box but more empirically based ..and very ambitious! Do give me your views.
Very best of luck.
Peter
report post as inappropriate
Fascinating essay and ideas, original and obviously well developed. The heavy lacing of maths didn't help the flow but I can see like me that you're a practical man who values evidence.
I did find a slightly analogous link with my Huygens spherelets expanding at c so I think I could follow your conceptions, but never easy with something so original.
Very well done for all the thought and work, and worth a good score from me for sure. I shall keep my eye open for more on informatons. I wonder what you may make of mine which is slightly similarly 'outlying' and original, at once outside the box but more empirically based ..and very ambitious! Do give me your views.
Very best of luck.
Peter
Peter,
Thanks for your positive comments on my essay.
As stated in the abstract, the intention of "the theory of informatons" is to explain the GEM-description of gravitation. GEM identifies the gravitational field as a composite vector field that mediates in the gravitational interactions between (whether or not moving) particles. That field - a purely mathematical construction - is defined by four relations (the GEM equations) that are analogue to Maxwell's equations for the electromagnetic field.
To justify the hypothesis that g-information (information carried by informatons) is the substance of gravitational fields - that a gravitational field is a cloud of g-information - it is necessary that we can deduce the GEM equations from the dynamics of the informatons and that we can show that the gravitational force is an effect of the interactions between the masses and the cloud of g-information in which these are "immersed". It is obvious that this is impossible to realize without a lot of mathematics. In the essay you find an introduction, the details are elaborated in ref 6.
I will go through your essay and give you my views.
Very best luck,
Antoine
Thanks for your positive comments on my essay.
As stated in the abstract, the intention of "the theory of informatons" is to explain the GEM-description of gravitation. GEM identifies the gravitational field as a composite vector field that mediates in the gravitational interactions between (whether or not moving) particles. That field - a purely mathematical construction - is defined by four relations (the GEM equations) that are analogue to Maxwell's equations for the electromagnetic field.
To justify the hypothesis that g-information (information carried by informatons) is the substance of gravitational fields - that a gravitational field is a cloud of g-information - it is necessary that we can deduce the GEM equations from the dynamics of the informatons and that we can show that the gravitational force is an effect of the interactions between the masses and the cloud of g-information in which these are "immersed". It is obvious that this is impossible to realize without a lot of mathematics. In the essay you find an introduction, the details are elaborated in ref 6.
I will go through your essay and give you my views.
Very best luck,
Antoine
Dear Antoine,
Thanks for your comments on my essay and shortly I am going to post my comments on your essay in your thread and rate your essay accordingly.
Best wishes,
Sreenath
report post as inappropriate
Thanks for your comments on my essay and shortly I am going to post my comments on your essay in your thread and rate your essay accordingly.
Best wishes,
Sreenath
Dear eaAntoine Acke,
In your thought provoking essay you have demonstrated in simple terms the sort of relationship existing between the gravitational field and the electro-magnetic field. For this you have invented the concept of “informaton”. Informatons carry the information of the gravitational field. It is interesting to note that you have made informatons more basic to “gravitons” and that gravitons are just an aspect of informatons emitted by an oscillating point mass which transport a packet of energy: they appear as gravitons. The concept of a cloud carrying informatons is quite imaginative. You have based your theory not only on simple original concepts but also have used simple mathematics to derive the sort of relationship existing between both gravitational and the electro-magnetic fields. The notion of a point charge carrying an electro-magnetic field and also at the same time emitting gravitational field or vice versa is simply amazing. If you have time, please, go through my previous year’s fqxi essay contest (2012) paper, in which I have tried to connect both fields on the basis of QG theory but on entirely different concepts and I want to have your reaction to that. I am also currently working on the mathematical aspects of that theory and if you are interested, please, inform me to give a consistent mathematical formulation to that.
For your innovative essay I have given an excellent rate.
Best of luck,
Sreenath
report post as inappropriate
In your thought provoking essay you have demonstrated in simple terms the sort of relationship existing between the gravitational field and the electro-magnetic field. For this you have invented the concept of “informaton”. Informatons carry the information of the gravitational field. It is interesting to note that you have made informatons more basic to “gravitons” and that gravitons are just an aspect of informatons emitted by an oscillating point mass which transport a packet of energy: they appear as gravitons. The concept of a cloud carrying informatons is quite imaginative. You have based your theory not only on simple original concepts but also have used simple mathematics to derive the sort of relationship existing between both gravitational and the electro-magnetic fields. The notion of a point charge carrying an electro-magnetic field and also at the same time emitting gravitational field or vice versa is simply amazing. If you have time, please, go through my previous year’s fqxi essay contest (2012) paper, in which I have tried to connect both fields on the basis of QG theory but on entirely different concepts and I want to have your reaction to that. I am also currently working on the mathematical aspects of that theory and if you are interested, please, inform me to give a consistent mathematical formulation to that.
For your innovative essay I have given an excellent rate.
Best of luck,
Sreenath
Dear Sreenath,
Thanks for your positive comments.
The "theory of informatons" allows to explain the gravitational (ref 6) and the electromagnetic field (ref 7) as the macroscopic manifestation of what I call "informatons", and to understand the gravitational and the electromagnetic interactions as the reaction of an object on the disturbance of its own cloud of informatons (its field) by the flux of informatons emitted by other objects. One can say that the relation of the "theory of informatons" to "the theory of fields" is similar to that of the "kinetic theory of gases" to the "ideal-gas law": the informatons play the role that is played by the molecules.
The identification of a photon (and a graviton) with an informaton carrying a quantum of energy is developed in §6 of ref 7 and allows us to understand the strange behaviour of light as described by QED.
I will with pleasure go through your essay of 2012 and I am interested in your further work.
Best of luck,
Antoine.
Thanks for your positive comments.
The "theory of informatons" allows to explain the gravitational (ref 6) and the electromagnetic field (ref 7) as the macroscopic manifestation of what I call "informatons", and to understand the gravitational and the electromagnetic interactions as the reaction of an object on the disturbance of its own cloud of informatons (its field) by the flux of informatons emitted by other objects. One can say that the relation of the "theory of informatons" to "the theory of fields" is similar to that of the "kinetic theory of gases" to the "ideal-gas law": the informatons play the role that is played by the molecules.
The identification of a photon (and a graviton) with an informaton carrying a quantum of energy is developed in §6 of ref 7 and allows us to understand the strange behaviour of light as described by QED.
I will with pleasure go through your essay of 2012 and I am interested in your further work.
Best of luck,
Antoine.
Hi Antoine,
Thank you for attention to my work and for offering your essay. I LIKE IT and I have download it. Soon I will tell you some more certainly. By the way we are colleagues!
Best wishes,
George
report post as inappropriate
Thank you for attention to my work and for offering your essay. I LIKE IT and I have download it. Soon I will tell you some more certainly. By the way we are colleagues!
Best wishes,
George
Dear Antione,
Apologies - I thought I'd already commented. I've been having problems on my device with comments not posting at first try (or sometimes posting twice).
I like you essay very much, as anything that seeks to unify the forces of nature is a noble quest, which I find very interesting.
I too have a theory which partly unifies the four forces and resolves the three paradoxes of cosmogony, but in my case based on geometry; yet it too states that information must always travel at c.
I like the concept of informatons too - great name!
If you get chance please take a look at my essay, although very different from yours, you may find it of some interest, perhaps it might offer application to your work or vice-versa.
Best wishes,
Antony
report post as inappropriate
Apologies - I thought I'd already commented. I've been having problems on my device with comments not posting at first try (or sometimes posting twice).
I like you essay very much, as anything that seeks to unify the forces of nature is a noble quest, which I find very interesting.
I too have a theory which partly unifies the four forces and resolves the three paradoxes of cosmogony, but in my case based on geometry; yet it too states that information must always travel at c.
I like the concept of informatons too - great name!
If you get chance please take a look at my essay, although very different from yours, you may find it of some interest, perhaps it might offer application to your work or vice-versa.
Best wishes,
Antony
Dear Antony,
Thanks for the expressions of appreciation for my ideas. You can find a lot of complementary comment on my theory on the topic: Gravity and the Nature of Information" by Edwin Eugene Klingman (Post July 28).
I will take a look at your essay and give my comments.
Best wishes,
Antoine.
Thanks for the expressions of appreciation for my ideas. You can find a lot of complementary comment on my theory on the topic: Gravity and the Nature of Information" by Edwin Eugene Klingman (Post July 28).
I will take a look at your essay and give my comments.
Best wishes,
Antoine.
Dear Antoine,
I liked Edwin's essay too! Good taste. Thanks too for the comments over on my thread!
Best wishes & pleased to "meet" you,
Antony
report post as inappropriate
I liked Edwin's essay too! Good taste. Thanks too for the comments over on my thread!
Best wishes & pleased to "meet" you,
Antony
Hello Antoine,
A very interesting essay with radical ideas that respond to the main question of the contest "The nature of the information?", Original substantiation of the conception and original conclusions.
Constructive ways to the truth may be different. One of them said Alexander Zenkin in the article "Science counterrevolution in mathematics":
«The truth should be drawn with the help of the cognitive computer visualization technology and should be presented to" an unlimited circle "of spectators in the form of color-musical cognitive images of its immanent essence.»
http://www.ccas.ru/alexzen/papers/ng-02/contr_rev.
htm
In the russian version of a article: «The truth should be drawn and should be presented to" an unlimited circle "of spectators.»
Do you agree with Alexander Zenkin?
Please look also my essay and essay FQXi 2012 related to the ontological justification of "Absolute generating structure"
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1796
http://w
ww.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1362
Best regards,
Vladimir
report post as inappropriate
A very interesting essay with radical ideas that respond to the main question of the contest "The nature of the information?", Original substantiation of the conception and original conclusions.
Constructive ways to the truth may be different. One of them said Alexander Zenkin in the article "Science counterrevolution in mathematics":
«The truth should be drawn with the help of the cognitive computer visualization technology and should be presented to" an unlimited circle "of spectators in the form of color-musical cognitive images of its immanent essence.»
http://www.ccas.ru/alexzen/papers/ng-02/contr_rev.
htm
In the russian version of a article: «The truth should be drawn and should be presented to" an unlimited circle "of spectators.»
Do you agree with Alexander Zenkin?
Please look also my essay and essay FQXi 2012 related to the ontological justification of "Absolute generating structure"
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1796
http://w
ww.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1362
Best regards,
Vladimir
Hello Vladimir,
Thanks for your positive comments on my essay. I will think about the words of Alexander Zenkin, go through your essay and post my comments on your forum.
Best regards,
Antoine.
Thanks for your positive comments on my essay. I will think about the words of Alexander Zenkin, go through your essay and post my comments on your forum.
Best regards,
Antoine.
Hi Antoine,
I have read and high rated your essay on 29 jul (see my above post) Meantime I have ask your comment to my work. Maybe you decided that it is out from your interest as per as it is critical review first. But let me see that from hard critics only is possible to find right way and move to solutions of ,,unsolvable,, problems. Your approach to gravity problem in my view is right since it is a kind of electromagnetic interaction. But there are some important nuances as well, the examination of which demands a good time.
If you wish then we can discuss this matter in our more free time (after of FQXi battle!)
Now I just hope get your final conclusion about my work (Better visit my forum)
Good luck in contest,
George
report post as inappropriate
I have read and high rated your essay on 29 jul (see my above post) Meantime I have ask your comment to my work. Maybe you decided that it is out from your interest as per as it is critical review first. But let me see that from hard critics only is possible to find right way and move to solutions of ,,unsolvable,, problems. Your approach to gravity problem in my view is right since it is a kind of electromagnetic interaction. But there are some important nuances as well, the examination of which demands a good time.
If you wish then we can discuss this matter in our more free time (after of FQXi battle!)
Now I just hope get your final conclusion about my work (Better visit my forum)
Good luck in contest,
George
Hello George,
I think your post must be the result of a misunderstanding. I have read your work, expressed my appreciation (see your forum) and gave it a high rate on Jul 29 still before you replied. (As an effect of your last post,I tried to rate it today but I got the message: "You rated this essay on Jul 29").
It would be fine to discuss the problematic of gravity and electromagnetism in quiter times.
I wish you too good luck in the contest,
Antoine.
I think your post must be the result of a misunderstanding. I have read your work, expressed my appreciation (see your forum) and gave it a high rate on Jul 29 still before you replied. (As an effect of your last post,I tried to rate it today but I got the message: "You rated this essay on Jul 29").
It would be fine to discuss the problematic of gravity and electromagnetism in quiter times.
I wish you too good luck in the contest,
Antoine.
Hi Antoine,
I have do as I say (see in 29 post on captal letters) and I see how your positon changed. But all of this are small things actualy and we can just trust and respect each to other. So, never mind on this matter and be well!
Good wishes,
George
report post as inappropriate
I have do as I say (see in 29 post on captal letters) and I see how your positon changed. But all of this are small things actualy and we can just trust and respect each to other. So, never mind on this matter and be well!
Good wishes,
George
Dear Antoine,
We are at the end of this essay contest.
In conclusion, at the question to know if Information is more fundamental than Matter, there is a good reason to answer that Matter is made of an amazing mixture of eInfo and eEnergy, at the same time.
Matter is thus eInfo made with eEnergy rather than answer it is made with eEnergy and eInfo ; because eInfo is eEnergy, and the one does not go without the other one.
eEnergy and eInfo are the two basic Principles of the eUniverse. Nothing can exist if it is not eEnergy, and any object is eInfo, and therefore eEnergy.
And consequently our eReality is eInfo made with eEnergy. And the final verdict is : eReality is virtual, and virtuality is our fundamental eReality.
Good luck to the winners,
And see you soon, with good news on this topic, and the Theory of Everything.
Amazigh H.
I rated your essay.
Please visit My essay.
report post as inappropriate
We are at the end of this essay contest.
In conclusion, at the question to know if Information is more fundamental than Matter, there is a good reason to answer that Matter is made of an amazing mixture of eInfo and eEnergy, at the same time.
Matter is thus eInfo made with eEnergy rather than answer it is made with eEnergy and eInfo ; because eInfo is eEnergy, and the one does not go without the other one.
eEnergy and eInfo are the two basic Principles of the eUniverse. Nothing can exist if it is not eEnergy, and any object is eInfo, and therefore eEnergy.
And consequently our eReality is eInfo made with eEnergy. And the final verdict is : eReality is virtual, and virtuality is our fundamental eReality.
Good luck to the winners,
And see you soon, with good news on this topic, and the Theory of Everything.
Amazigh H.
I rated your essay.
Please visit My essay.
Dear Amazigh H,
Thank for your interest in my essay. I will soon comment yours on your forum and rate it.
Greetings,
Antoine.
Thank for your interest in my essay. I will soon comment yours on your forum and rate it.
Greetings,
Antoine.
Antoine - I'm not sure I am convinced by what you've come up with, but I gave you a decent score based on originality. I am looking forward to seeing you develop this theory.
Kind regards, Paul
report post as inappropriate
Kind regards, Paul
Dear Paul,
Thanks for commenting and rating my essay. I will do the same with yours.
My theory is further developed in ref 6 and in ref 7 where I explain the gravitational and the electromagnetic phenomena and where I mathematically deduce the laws of gravito-electromagnetism and of electromagnetism from the dynamics of the informatons.
Kind regards,
Antoine.
Thanks for commenting and rating my essay. I will do the same with yours.
My theory is further developed in ref 6 and in ref 7 where I explain the gravitational and the electromagnetic phenomena and where I mathematically deduce the laws of gravito-electromagnetism and of electromagnetism from the dynamics of the informatons.
Kind regards,
Antoine.
Hello Antoine,
I read, enjoyed, and rated as good your essay. More when there is time.
Regards,
Jonathan
report post as inappropriate
I read, enjoyed, and rated as good your essay. More when there is time.
Regards,
Jonathan
Login or create account to post reply or comment.