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

David Brown: on 1/28/17 at 18:30pm UTC, wrote Thank you for your interest in my speculations. Note the following: ...

Odessa Sabah: on 1/28/17 at 14:40pm UTC, wrote It's a great blog post and read it twice for better knowledge. This is an...

Kamilla Kamilla: on 4/10/16 at 17:28pm UTC, wrote Thanks for sharing this interesting blog with us.My pleasure to being here...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 19:09pm UTC, wrote Dear David, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

Peter Jackson: on 8/6/13 at 17:29pm UTC, wrote David, Ref your question above, I've recently been discussing 'reddening'...

Sreenath N: on 7/27/13 at 17:08pm UTC, wrote Dear David, Feel free to visit my site...

Sreenath N: on 7/27/13 at 17:05pm UTC, wrote Dear David, For your essay topic you have chosen a very mysterious subject...

Jonathan Dickau: on 7/26/13 at 6:08am UTC, wrote Thanks David, I appreciate your bringing the space roar to my attention,...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: ""The motion of the solar system, and the orientation of the plane of the..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Jim Snowdon: "On the permanently dark side of the Earth, the stars would appear to stay..." in The Nature of Time

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Jorma, some thoughts; You mention mutual EM connection. I think you..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

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

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

akash hasan: "Some students have an interest in researching and space exploration. I..." in Announcing Physics of the...

Michael Jordan: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Anonymous: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Constructing a Theory of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi FORUM
May 26, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: Does Information Below the Planck Scale Explain the Space Roar? by David Brown [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author David Brown wrote on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 16:44 GMT
Essay Abstract

If quantum information is reducible to more fundamental deterministic information, then the reduction should explain new physics. The space roar might be a clue to new physics.

Author Bio

David Brown has an M.A. in mathematics from Princeton University and was for a number of years a computer programmer.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 16:55 GMT
David,

Your essay was rather short in length, yet still technically constructed at a higher level than my ability to understand it.

Could you answer a daft question from a daft realist? Eclipses are caused when the moon blots out the sun. There are an awful lot of stars and galaxies up above. Surely it is not inconceivable that the odd one or two of them might move in front of each other every now and then. Would that not be a possible source of the dark matter phenomenon?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Brown replied on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 12:50 GMT
@Joe Fisher:

http://www.ted.com/talks/patricia_burchat_leads_a_sea
rch_for_dark_energy.html Patriciaa Burchat: Shedding light on dark matter

Discussion of dark matter begins around 37:00 in the following video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWaOyy3WfWk Dark Matter, Dark Energy and Inflation: The Big Mysteries of Cosmology presented by Michael S. Turner, Kavli Institute, Feb. 2011

Discussion of dark matter begins around 22:00 in the following video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZfRtUDAy04 SEGRE LECTURE: What Makes Up The Dark Matter Of Our Universe presented by Blas Cabrera, Stanford U., June 2012

http://www.astro.umd.edu/~ssm/mond/moti_bullet.html Milgrom's perspective on the Bullet Cluster

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZF9bPVOsb4 Dark Matter - The Debate, 2010

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 17:36 GMT
David,

Very much enjoyed your essay (shorter get better the more I read!)

I agree the current derivation is probably quite wrong. It was only a guess at the time, and a poor one I thought, but as it was the only one about back then, it's now acquired the protection from falsification afforded only by temporal ingraining of beliefs!

For instance it's long been shown that quasar activity can very adequately explain all the re-ionization of the matter in the universe as found. Yet nothing can budge the old beliefs in the early and anomalous 're-ionization' epoch. I suspect we need to remind ourselves more often that "all theory is provisional".

Your idea is very interesting, original and clearly argued. That's not to say I necessarily agree it's correct of course as I have identified other consistent candidates. One prediction is that it will be found to be a directional effect, and on the axis of the cosmic flow. It it proves not to be, I'm with you!

Will it rescue string theory from it's third dip? If string theory can re-invent itself with a more realistic analog perhaps it may help. I wonder what your view as a mathematician is of the "Dirac line" I've suggested in my own essay, perhaps freeing both maths and reality from paradox. I hope you may read and comment.

I see you too have a 'trolled' low score, when I start scoring it will help. It's nonsense suggesting such essays are only worth 2-3 of 10! I did like your postulate 2 by the way. The measurement affects the fact.

Best of luck

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Brown replied on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 12:54 GMT
@Peter Jackson: In your article "Inertial Frame Error Discovery ... " with R K Nixey, you state: "We conclude that the limits of EM coupling potential and the field qualities of GR are adequate to provide the Discrete Field Model boundary shock conditions as observed both in space and around accelerated particles.” http://vixra.org/pdf/1007.0022v9.pdf

Have you attempted to explain the GZK paradox with your Discrete Field Model?

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 12:12 GMT
David,

No, but I just had a look and a possible explanation emerges from the DFM via non-linear optics.

At a certain (very high) intensity particles can be polarized depending nonlinearly on the incident electric field. This gives a change to refractive index, and is known in optics from the effect producing the 'frequency comb' we now use for better astronomical spectroscopy, referred as 'supercontinuum' generation.

It's a very complex mechanism, but the effect would seem to be that at anything over a certain energy absorption in the QV would be higher, so reducing the maximum. This of course may then also have implications for redshift.

I've done a paper deriving the LT's gamma limit from two-fluid plasmas and the optical breakdown ionization density limit (wavelength gamma). It sounds like another may be needed. Lee Smolin apparently thought it would be 'momentous'.

If you agree that could you collaborate on the maths? I'm a little tied up with an EPR paradox paper at present (as my essay). Have you read and rated mine yet? I confirm I also think yours should be rather higher.

Let me know if you find any resonance with the above, or have any better ideas. I only researched the comments for an initial 10 minutes as I'm a bit buried under essays!

Very best wishes.

Peter

very best wishes.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John C Maguire wrote on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 02:33 GMT
David,

Bit short but poses some interesting questions. Could you provide a bit of a hypothesis concerning your conclusion:

"Something unknown happened in the early universe to cause the space roar, and string theory might be the key to understanding this mystery. Information below the Planck scale might somehow solve the mystery of string theory."

Thanks,

JM

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Brown replied on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 12:57 GMT
@John C. Maguire:

So far, I have two basic testable predictions: the Fernández-Rañada-Milgrom effect and the Space Roar Profile Prediction. My guess is that superstring determinism based upon the monster group and the 6 pariah groups is the correct way to implement string theory. I need a deterministic model that correctly predicts the free parameters of the Standard Model of particle physics. The best clue might be John P. Lestone’s heuristic string theory.

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0703151 Physics based calculation of the fine structure constant

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 07:41 GMT
Hello, David!

It's wonderful that you are in your essay actualized the idea of space and its structure. Science has already accumulated enough facts to make the space to think differently than they thought in any previous generation, including physics. Modern physical picture of the world is too semantically poor, if not flawed. And it should start again with the concept of "space", and only then comes the understanding of the nature of information and its place in the physical world. A new breakthrough in string theory is only possible through the ontology and the dialectics of concepts of "space" and "matter" mainstream ideas of "generating structures." I wish you success! Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Brown replied on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 14:48 GMT
@Vladimir I. Rogozhin: "Modern physical picture of the world is too semantically poor, if not flawed." My guess is that to unite quantum field theory and general relativity theory there is need for some form of string theory. If nature is finite then I think that SU(8) governs the Big Bang, SU(5) governs the Big Stop to the Big Bang (recurring every 81.6 ± 1.7 billion years), and SU(3) X SU(2) X U(1) governs all time except the first and last Planck time intervals. If nature is infinite then I think that superpartners (in some form) occur in nature. Is the Koide formula merely a coincidence? What might be the physical semantics of:

((mass electron) + (mass muon) + (mass tau))/((mass electron)^.5 + (mass muon)^.5 + (mass tau)^.5)^2 = .66667 approximately ?

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 20:43 GMT
Dear David

The space roar that is information created from the inability of system the fundamentals theory in the current science of us.

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Brown replied on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 14:50 GMT
@Hoàngcao Hai: "... we often choose a concept to accept and did not use a measure to determine." String theory now lacks a solution to its measurement problem, but space roar seems to be empirically valid.

http://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/archive/arcade/pubs/arc2_apj_
cmb_2011.pdf "ARACADE2 measuremnt of the absolute sky brightness at 3–90 GHz", by Fixsen, Kogut, Levin, et al., 2011

Bookmark and Share



Kjetil Hustveit wrote on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 09:16 GMT
Hi David,

it was short but very interesting. I haven't contemplated about the space roar but it fits very well into a finite and discrete model of the universe. And this may be the thing to look for. I've touched some of these ideas in my essay. You may find it interesting

Regards,

Kjetil

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Brown replied on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 14:52 GMT
@Kjetil Hustveit: "If we discover that a finite solution is impossible, then we have to backtrack to the temporal infinite solution." My guess is that unless the finite nature hypothesis explains dark matter, dark energy, and the space roar in a convincing way, then the finite nature hypothesis is either wrong or useless as a physical hypothesis. In any case, I think that anyone who wants to create a valid theory of quantum gravity must consider the space roar.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 02:00 GMT
Dear

Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon.

So you can produce material from your thinking. . . .

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:40 GMT
David,

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


Sergio Miguel wrote on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 02:23 GMT
Hello David,

I like your article it is a good synthesis of a current position, although discreetness is not the only possible feature of information and computation. I did an article to explain this. I you have time read it, and let me know "Nature from the bit and beyond". Do you thing string theory could speak about continuous information or just discrete information? Let me know your opinion.

Best regards,

Sergio

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Sergio Miguel replied on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 02:33 GMT
Sorry I saw some errors in my message, it is too late here :)I write it again.

Hello David,

I like your article it is a good synthesis of a current position, although discreetness is not the only possible feature of information and computation. I wrote an article to explain this. If you have time, read it, and let me know your opinion "Nature from the bit and beyond". Also I have a question for you if you read it. Do you think that string theory could speak about continuous information or it can only use the concept of discrete information? Let me know your opinion.

Best regards,

Sergio

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


adel sadeq wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 03:35 GMT
Hi David,

This subject is very interesting (I have rated you good). In my system I can simulate using both real numbers and integer, both give similar results at large distances. but for small they differ , particularly it seems to say that space has a cut off at .2 proton size. And strangely that is what was heard with Hogan's experiment, they expected a planck length effect. But I am not sure yet, this real vs integer is driving me crazy with all the simulation that I have to do.

I have also selected you because you are a programmer.

Please if you have the time run The programs which are at my website

http://www.qsa.netne.net

please make sure you unzip the file properly, the code is in JavaScript, the programs are very simple. also see the posts in my thread for some more info.

you can find my essay at this link

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1877

see the amazing formulas in section 6, like this one

alpha/FSC =.007297352568, charge ^2=3, 27=3^3, m_e, m_p are electron and proton mass

M_p/m_e= (27/2)*(1/(alpha) -1) -1/3 = 1836.152654

Thank you.

Adel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Armin Nikkhah Shirazi wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 11:42 GMT
Dear David,

Thank you for bringing the "space roar" to my attention, somehow I did not know about it. This is very interesting and I will read more about it.

I regret that in your short paper did not say some more about what possibilities exist to explain this phenomenon in terms of more established physics and where you stand on this.

Although I am a skeptical that string theory will turn out to be a valid fundamental theory of nature, property #2 in your paper caught my eye. I hope you won't mind if I link to a paper I wrote some time ago, called Are the concepts of mass in Quantum Theory and in General Relativity the same? which explores this as a way of understanding that there is a boundary between the domains of QT and GR.

All the best,

Armin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 19, 2013 @ 10:16 GMT
Hello David,

I like your essay very much, clear and concise is always a sign that the author understands and believes what they are putting across. Some ramble. You don't! These ideas are original and interesting, certainly relevant to the contest.

I'm going to rate you very highly now, as you deserve to do well!

Please take a look at my essay, as I hope you'll like it. If black holes aren't your thing, then please also consider that the ideas I present should apply at the quantum scale to particles, so my be relevant to your Planck approach. I'm working on a theory away from the contest which uses simplex geometry to partly unify the forces of nature and resolves the three paradoxes of cosmogony.

Best wishes & nice to "meet" you,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 06:08 GMT
Thanks David,

I appreciate your bringing the space roar to my attention, and I've passed on some info to a colleague who is in gravity wave research, and was exploring early forming black holes. The Cosmic Radio Wave Background is a new one for me. Of course; as the researchers comment, they will have to repeat and expand the experiment. Anyhow, thanks for the tip.

Regards,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 17:05 GMT
Dear David,

For your essay topic you have chosen a very mysterious subject called ‘space roar’ whose source is yet to be identified and currently it is a challenge to astrophysics since known theories such as relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, etc. cannot account for it. Thus the information available to us through the signals of space roar is to be properly comprehended in order to make it fit in to our known theoretical frame work. It is also to be known whether it is a universal phenomenon or a mere local effect. This subject certainly raises curiosity in the minds of knowledge seekers. For this, this article deserves a very good rating.

Best wishes,

Sreenath

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Sreenath B N replied on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 17:08 GMT
Dear David,

Feel free to visit my site (http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827) and post your comments on my essay in my thread.

Sreenath

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 17:29 GMT
David,

Ref your question above, I've recently been discussing 'reddening' in DFM terms and suddenly realised it is another prime candidate for the GZK limit, or certainly a contribution thereto.

It's about absorption of the higher energies by QV particles which don't affect higher wavelenths, so the top part of the spectrum is 'subdued'. This is just like radio waves at out ionosphere. After your question I put GZK in the (long) line up to point the DFM at. Can you give me any better description and evidence on your own derivation? I'd be interested to discuss more.

I'm just doing final ratings and not I hadn't done yours so a boost is due. I don't recall any comments on my blog from you (but there are 220!) and hope you'll read it by the deadline if you haven't yet. (If you think it's nonsense please don't score it till Thursday!) You should ignore the offputting dense abstract it's been kindly described in the blog with; "groundbreaking", "clearly significant", "astonishing", "fantastic", "wonderful", "remarkable!", "deeply impressed", etc. so I hope you're tempted.

Well done and very best wishes.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 19:09 GMT
Dear David,

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


Kamilla Kamilla wrote on Apr. 10, 2016 @ 17:28 GMT
Thanks for sharing this interesting blog with us.My pleasure to being here on your blog..Iwannacomebeck here for new post from your site

192.168.l.254

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Odessa Qamar Sabah wrote on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 14:40 GMT
It's a great blog post and read it twice for better knowledge. This is an impressing article which gives us good thoughts and interests to read more article like the same.

192.168.1.1 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.1

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Brown replied on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 18:30 GMT
Thank you for your interest in my speculations.

Note the following:

Q(√(-5)) has class number 2 & 5 is congruent to –19 modulo 24

Q(√(-23)) has class number 3 & 23 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

Q(√(-47)) has class number 5 & 47 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

Q(√(-71)) has class number 7 & 71 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

Q(√(-167)) has class number 11 & 167 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

Q(√(-191)) has class number 13 & 191 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

Q(√(-383)) has class number 17 & 383 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

Q(√(-311)) has class number 19 & 311 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

Q(√((-647)) has class number 23 & 647 is congruent to –1 modulo 24

http://www.numbertheory.org/classnos/ "Tables of imaginary quadratic fields with small class numbers”]

The prime numbers that divide the order of the monster group are:

2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 41, 47, 59, & 71

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster_group

I conjecture that the preceding 9 facts about the class number of imaginary quadratic number fields have some profound meaning in terms of the foundations of physics.

Note that 1728 = (2^6) * (3^3) = (2^3) * (6^3)

I conjecture that the (2^3) represents Gell-Mann’s Eightfold Way and the (6^3) represents 6 dimensions of gravitational freedom vibrating at 3 energy-density levels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1728_(number)

http://en.w
ikipedia.org/wiki/Eightfold_Way_(physics)

http://www.aneki.co
m/top_living_physicists.html

http://www.aneki.com/top_living_
mathematicians.html

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20150312-mathematicians-chase
-moonshines-shadow/

Bookmark and Share



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.