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

Margriet O'Regan: on 8/7/13 at 22:41pm UTC, wrote Hello Robert I too have noticed a revival of 'the ether' but my research...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 21:56pm UTC, wrote Dear Robert, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

Peter Jackson: on 8/6/13 at 20:47pm UTC, wrote Robert, I hope you're just busy not unwell. When you get a chance I...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/6/13 at 1:34am UTC, wrote Dear Robert, We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at...

Hugh Matlock: on 8/3/13 at 9:19am UTC, wrote Looks like the link above does not work. Here is the link to Software...

Hugh Matlock: on 8/3/13 at 9:17am UTC, wrote Posting to sign the thread. Hope you get a chance to take a look at the...

Peter Jackson: on 8/2/13 at 16:04pm UTC, wrote Robert, Sorry for delays. Re the above, answers A; P:....in the WMAP and...

Akinbo Ojo: on 7/30/13 at 9:49am UTC, wrote Hello Robert, Indeed, now that the MMX chains are unleashed, let the ...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "It's difficult for the acrobats to see each other. I want a 3rd party..." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

Georgina Woodward: "Thinking observers are going to notice their own and the other's arms..." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

Lorraine Ford: "Ian, I’m sorry for going overboard on the “physicists think that”..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

andrea gonzalez: "Interesting stuff to read. Keep it up. If want to collect free gift card..." in Memory, Causality and...

Ian Durham: "Well, Lorraine, if you insist on seeing it that way, I doubt anything I say..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in First Things First: The...

Poker Online: "https://www.jakartapoker.net/" in Downward causation:...

Enquire us: "Your Ro system desires regular maintenance to confirm it’s continually in..." in Agency in the Physical...


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
August 24, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: The New Information Channel by Robert Bennett [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Robert Bennett wrote on Jun. 4, 2013 @ 15:50 GMT
Essay Abstract

The New Information Channel MMX Null Voided in Vacuum The ambitious information system that models physical laws, as conceived by John Wheeler, may be limited more by ignorance of real world laws than the mapping and processing of their digital representations in cyberspace. It may be a while before the present state of knowledge in software simulation may be advanced to the stage as Wheeler implied by ‘it from bit’. There is optimism to be found, however, in the recent experimental revisiting of the Michelson-Morley experiment, with a result which revives an old rejected medium as a new potential channel of information, portending new possibilities of superluminal transport of information carried by electromagnetic or gravity fields and resolution of several quantum anomalies involving action at a distance. Like a phoenix, 19th century aether arises from the ashes of the 20th century.

Author Bio

Ph.D. thesis at Stevens Tech: Relativistic Rigid Body Motion College professor and consultant to Bell Labs on software architecture and systems analysis Co- author of Galileo Was Wrong, Sungenis & Bennett, CAI Publishing Inc.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 7, 2013 @ 16:54 GMT
Professor Bennett,

I found your essay to be exceptionally informative and very well written. There is only one comment I can find the courage to make about it. As I have pointed out in my essay BITTERS, only unique is real once. Theoretical Physics ignores unique and once; therefore, the practice of Theoretical Physics must always remain unrealistic.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Robert Bennett wrote on Jun. 8, 2013 @ 15:58 GMT
Joe,

Thanks - I was shooting for interesting - and challenging.

re uniqueness: The scientific method requires empirical repeatability, yet events are technically not perfectly repeatable (space is, time is not).

All theories are based on approximations of reality, so we can only ever say that our knowledge is BCT.... Best Current Thinking.

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jun. 9, 2013 @ 16:14 GMT
Professor Bennett,

Your essay was certainly interesting and extremely challenging. I am glad that you are honest enough to admit that: “All theories are based on approximations of reality, so we can only ever say that our knowledge is BCT.... Best Current Thinking.” Unfortunately, reality is unique and we can never say to ourselves that we are uniqueing.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 8, 2013 @ 16:29 GMT
Robert,

Excellent essay. So nice to read logical argument, and nicely presented. And, even better, I think and hope I may also help further your thesis in more than one way.

First; I agree and also discuss the matters of metaphysics and Godel. I've also analysed the errors of M&M, and the contrary MGP experiment in detail in a Hadronic Journal paper I'll link if you wish. I also...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


basudeba mishra wrote on Jun. 9, 2013 @ 02:58 GMT
Dear Sir,

Why write Wheeler’s name as JAW, It To Bit and Bit To It as ITB:BTI and MM experiment as MMX etc., which is normally not used even in the scientific community? This cult of incomprehensibility might have been an adorable style to express one’s greatness before others, but it is harming science by distancing it from common people. Simpler presentation is not despicable, but is...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 22:22 GMT
Robert,

I very much enjoyed reading (and re-reading) your essay. Your approach is novel and interesting: "from reality to cyberspace and back" with 3-D printing as an example of back!

You note that "information is never disembodied, it always resides in objects...". This is a correct interpretation. I also like your "completeness would require that the computer on which the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Robert Bennett wrote on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 16:09 GMT
Ahoy, Captain Peter,

No need for the Hadronic Journal link - I found it.

Yes, the ultimate It-to-Bit issue is the brain-to-mind interface... which I was tempted to use as the main essay topic. But unlike the impact of the recent MMX testing on aethereal existence, I know of no direct testing of said interface.

If the 'Bow Shock' is actually the boundary between aether layers having different properties (like speed or density), then - in the case of a relative speed difference - it may logically be due to a local aether at rest as well as due to the Earth plowing through some undefined 'space'. The problem with a model of 30 km/sec motion in solar orbit causing the 'Bow Shock' is that this demands the Sun be an absolute reference frame.... The Bradley model for stellar aberration has the same logical flaw, yet it is accepted by relativists.

After all, Peter, why can't the Earth's plummeting towards the Virgo complex at a dozen times its orbiting speed be causing a 'Bow Shock'?

Transforming into the frame of the local observer.... the proper frame.... does not always lead to a light speed of c. As the tests of Sagnac and R. Wang demonstrated, the local speed was c +- v.

All the best - to all,

Robert

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 17:19 GMT
Robert,

"...why can't the Earth's plummeting towards the Virgo complex at a dozen times its orbiting speed be causing a 'Bow Shock'?"

It does. But not at Earth, I need to explain a quite new 'hierarchical' frame concept to you. It seems tricky to grasp. in the WMAP and Plank findings there are many DIFFERENT speeds wrt Virgo, but NO 'speed' is relevant except in the LOCAL background,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Robert Bennett replied on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 14:51 GMT
P:....in the WMAP and Plank findings there are many DIFFERENT speeds wrt Virgo, ..

R: What other speeds are in the CMB sky surveys, besides the dipole??

P:Taking a Far distant rest frame, ALL systems have different frames, but only 'SPEEDS' in the most LOCAL background! ...

R: Unless an observer can be put in that far distant rest frame, no measurements from it can be said to exist ... remote 'testing' is just speculation, according to the scientific method.

P:.... "The implied velocity for the solar system barycenter is v = 368 ± 2 kms?1. ...The derived value for the Local Group is vLG = 627 ± 22 kms?1." ....

R: Implied velocities ....from implied observers? No real observers were at the SSBC or the Local Group center .... so no real observations either.

P:Light propagates at c everywhere LOCALLY.

R: Local light speed in the Sagnac and Wang tests was c +- v(aether speed).

P:...I saw you suggest plasma is visible on a blog.

R: Are you trying to start a rumor, Peter? ....

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 16:04 GMT
Robert,

Sorry for delays. Re the above, answers A;

P:....in the WMAP and Plank findings there are many DIFFERENT speeds wrt Virgo, ..

R: What other speeds are in the CMB sky surveys, besides the dipole??

A: Infinitely many. We must always specify an observer rest frame for speed; This is beautiful;. Dynamic Universe map Video;



P:Taking a Far distant...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Philip Gibbs wrote on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 11:15 GMT
Robert, despite our stark disagreement on basic principles I think your essay is very interesting and clear. I like the analogy between "it from bit" a 3D printer. I wish I had thought of that.

best of luck

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 21:27 GMT
Dear Robert

Your verdict is broad and deep, hope that you will comment on my essay ,

high point for you.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 04:26 GMT
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


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 18:36 GMT
Robert,

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 15, 2013 @ 04:05 GMT
Hello Robert,

Congratulations on a very original, readable, relevant and interesting essay. It is nice to re-explore aether and the idea that it is fundamental and stores information is explored well here.

I think you've totally encapsulated the spirit of the contest. I agree that aether is certainly a good answer to entanglement's spooky action at a distance.

I take a rather boring conformist view, but I don't think that it contradicts your theory, so please take a look at my essay if you have time - I'd be interested to hear if it remains compatible with your ideas.

Best wishes for the contest - I think you deserve a prize!

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 20:59 GMT
Hi Robert,

I agree with you on the idea of the cosmos as a software simulation.

In my Software Cosmos essay I descibe a client-server software architecture for such a system. Part of the model is an "implicate order" that is responsible for dynamics. You might be able to find a connection to the aether you describe.

You wrote:

"The correlation of two modern anisotropies - the light speed results of non-vacuum MMX with the CMB dipole (Cahill) - bespeak of a common aethereal cause."

I was not aware of this result; will have to add it to my list of 150 unsolved observational problems with lambda CDM. :)

Hugh

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Hugh Matlock replied on Aug. 3, 2013 @ 09:17 GMT
Posting to sign the thread. Hope you get a chance to take a look at the essay!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Hugh Matlock replied on Aug. 3, 2013 @ 09:19 GMT
Looks like the link above does not work. Here is the link to Software Cosmos again.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 03:49 GMT
Robert,

"Any rejection of causality denies repeatability and predictability; there would be no 'laws' of science."

I applaud your statement and innovative MMX chains approach and would like to rate your essay highly but I would like to run some questions by you first via email. What is your email address? My email address is msm@physicsofdestiny.com

Regards,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 09:49 GMT
Hello Robert,

Indeed, now that the MMX chains are unleashed, let the

research begin! And I add, now that space is a "something" and not a "nothing"!

You may find encouragement in my essay as well as the judgement in the blog in the case of Atomistic Enterprises Inc. vs. Plato & Ors delivered on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 11:39 GMT. In that judgement points and monads become Wheeler's possible spatial bits.

Well done,

Best regards,

Akinbo.

*I will be checking on those references. Much appreciated. To be well rated.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 01:34 GMT
Dear Robert,

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.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 20:47 GMT
Robert,

I hope you're just busy not unwell. When you get a chance I responded to your questions above. Or if you haven't scored my essay yet a pile of points there would be the priority! I don't recall any posts there, and I do think you'll enjoy and like it as it should work well with your own thoughts. I've now scored yours too. Well done and best wishes.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 21:56 GMT
Dear Robert,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-
V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Margriet Anne O'Regan wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 22:41 GMT
Hello Robert

I too have noticed a revival of 'the ether' but my research has led me "the electric universe" (see thunderbolts.org) & I have concluded along with this lot that we live in a an electric plasma universe & it is this electromagnetic plasma which is that which not only makes up the new ether, not only makes up the new 'dark energy' but is that which accounts for many, many...

view entire post


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.