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

Héctor Gianni: on 8/10/13 at 19:44pm UTC, wrote Dear Craig J. Hogan: I am an old physician...

M. Vasilyeva: on 8/9/13 at 2:47am UTC, wrote Esteemed professor, Jonathan Dickau kindly reminded me about this post --...

Jonathan Dickau: on 8/9/13 at 0:45am UTC, wrote Congratulations Craig! I am glad to see you made the finals and I wish you...

M. Vasilyeva: on 8/8/13 at 2:40am UTC, wrote Esteemed Prof. Hogan, too bad you are not here to discuss your essay. I...

Michael Helland: on 8/7/13 at 16:34pm UTC, wrote I just rated your essay a ten, high gave it a nice push. I hope you like...

Cristinel Stoica: on 8/7/13 at 7:41am UTC, wrote Hi, votes are vanishing again.

Michel Planat: on 8/6/13 at 20:25pm UTC, wrote Dear Craig, Penzias and Wilson experiment had a great impact on our view...

Hugh Matlock: on 8/6/13 at 3:11am UTC, wrote Hi Craig, Thank you for an intriguing approach to discerning evidence that...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Dear Steve Agnew, Naturally provided VISIBLE realty am not a silly humanly..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

James Putnam: "Light bends because it is accelerating. It accelerates toward an object..." in Black Hole Photographed...

Steve Agnew: "Stringy and loop quantum are the two big contenders, but neither has a..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Robert McEachern: "Lorenzo, The nature of "information" is well understood outside of..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Georgina Woodward: "Steve, Lorraine is writing about a simpler "knowing " rather than the..." in The Nature of Time

Steve Agnew: "Knowing information necessarily means neural action potentials. Atom and..." in The Nature of Time

Douglas Hemmick: "begin{quote} For example, in his chapter on Bell's theorem, he concludes..." in Review of "Foundations 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 19, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: Now Broadcasting in Planck Definition by Craig J. Hogan [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Craig J. Hogan wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 15:56 GMT
Essay Abstract

If reality has finite information content, space has finite fidelity. The quantum wave function that encodes spatial relationships may be limited to information that can be transmitted in a ``Planck broadcast'', with a bandwidth given by the inverse of the Planck time, about $2\times 10^{43}$ bits per second. Such a quantum system can resemble classical space-time on large scales, but locality emerges only gradually and imperfectly. Massive bodies are never perfectly at rest, but very slightly and slowly fluctuate in transverse position, with a spectrum of variation given by the Planck time. This distinctive new kind of noise associated with quantum geometry would not have been noticed up to now, but may be detectable in a new kind of experiment.

Author Bio

Craig Hogan is Director of the Fermilab Center for Particle Astrophysics, where he is also a member of the scientific staff and the Theoretical Astrophysics Group. He is also a professor at the University of Chicago, where he is on the faculty of the Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, the Enrico Fermi Institute, and the Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the American Physical Society.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 21:26 GMT
Craig,

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


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 04:07 GMT
Greetings Professor Hogan,

I am happy to see you have an essay here, which I am eager to read and comment on. More people should be aware of this research, which rightly can be called foundational, as it examines those foundations. It will be interesting to see how much progress you and your team have made toward observing Planck scale variations. I wish you the best of luck in the contest.

Regards,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anton Lorenz Vrba wrote on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 11:42 GMT
Dear Professor Hogan,

You correctly observe that "These two great theories [(SR,GR) & QM] of twentieth century physics have never been fully reconciled" . I would argue that they will never be reconciled as the two relativity theories are marble theories, i.e. based on infinitesimal particles that have solid properties, whereas QM is based on a wave theory of wave functions derived from the second order differential wave equation.

You also write "It uses a technique based on laser interferometers like those used to measure gravitational waves." Please enlighten me, have I missed the announcement that gravitational waves have indeed been detected, my current knowledge is that the experiments searching for gravitational waves all continue to return a null results.

Speaking of laser interferometers, i.e. the Michelson-Morley apparatus, there is a serious flaw in the theoretical analysis that relativistic effects are the reason for the Lorentz invariance. Using Einstein's marble analysis then it is explained - no argumentation. However, replace the marbles with a wave like the laser beam in your experiments, and applying Doppler shifts at the point of reflection when observing in a different reference frame then SR does not explain the null result of the MM experiment.

I really hope that you can find time to read my essay, actually just the appendix will do, as in the appendix the above analysis is presented.

Good luck with this competition and the Holometer

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 11:53 GMT
Craig,

As of 7-6-13, 7:53 am EST, the rating function for your essay is not available. Sorry I can't help you out right now by rating your essay. NOTE: I have logged in using a PC and a MAC and different browsers but it appears to be a site function issue.

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Manuel S Morales replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 21:20 GMT
Craig,

I have sent an email requesting that FQXi extend to those of you who had their essay posted on July 5, 2013, be allowed additional days to compensate for the days of not being able to rate these essays.

My experience in conducting the online Tempt Destiny (TD) experiment from 2000 to 2012 gave me an understanding of the complexities involved in administrating an online competition which assures me that the competition will be back up and running soon. Ironically, the inability of not being able to rate the essays correlates with the TD experimental findings, as presented in my essay, which show how the acts of selection are fundamental to our physical existence.

Anyway, I hope that all entrants will be allocated the same opportunity to have their essay rated when they are posted, and if not possible due to technical difficulties, will have their opportunity adjusted accordingly. Best wishes to you with your entry.

Manuel

PS I will be reviewing and rating your entry after this function has been turned back on.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 01:20 GMT
Dear Craig

It would be interesting to know about Holometer, unfortunately just have to wait for your conclusion from it.

And to change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition along with 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...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Yuri Danoyan wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 00:19 GMT
Dear Craig

I wish interesting results from Holometer experiments.

Yuri

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Giacomo Alessiani wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 03:05 GMT
Mr. Hogan,

I'm trying to replace the differential calculus with a particular version of polar coordinates.

This new coordinate system should be useful in quantum physics. But, the formula that represents the 'idea, it worked for my essay in this contest. I would like an opinion.

Thank you.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1903

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ralph Waldo Walker III wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 12:37 GMT
Dr. Hogan,

I found your essay to be exceptionally well-written. As you point out, the, “two great theories of twentieth century physics have never been fully reconciled, because their core ideas are incompatible.”

You also note that:

1. “. . . experiments with quantum systems prove that states in reality are not localized in space.”

2. “. . . the entire...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 13:13 GMT
Dear Professor Hogan,

I found your essay interesting, relevant and above all foundational. Any approach mentioning Planck scale has got to be along the right lines and yours, I think, hit the nail on the head so to speak. The potential experimental results of noise associated with Quantum Geometry is a fantastic prediction. I'm working on a geometric quantum gravity theory which reconciles the three paradoxes of cosmogony & partly unifies the forces of nature, so I found your essay personally very useful too.

Where can I find a "cosmic Internet Service Provider" please? Great phrase! :)

I've approached the contest using entropy, dimensionality and Fibonacci sequence. Hopefully you find the time to read it.

Best wishes

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


KoGuan Leo wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 04:26 GMT
Dear Craig, I hope your experiment on the Holographic universe is successful. I offer my help in terms of ideas and resources if I may. I proposed that we are Tianming holograms living in holographic Multiverse. KQID shows that we are living inside the one singularity Qbit Multiverse that is instantaneouslly projected on the event horizon of our Multiverse that in turns instantaneously are projected into the bulk of ψτ(iLx,y,z, Lm). In other words, all things are one Qbit. I talked with Proffessor Leonard Susskind 3 weeks ago about his Holographic Principle whether he really believed in it. He said yes for sure. But he did not know the mechanism of how those bits are encoded on the event horizon of our universe or Multiverse or simply in a room. KQID offers this mechanism through what I called Einstein complex coordinates as simply generated in that dingularity Qbit according to Euler's formula e^it = cost t + i sin t. If you have time please look at my essay Child of Qbit in time and please make comment if allowed. Best wishes, Leo KoGuan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anton Biermans wrote on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 01:20 GMT
Hi Craig,

The irreconcilable difference between Classical and Quantum Mechanics seems to me the fact that in CM particles are thought to be only the cause of interactions, whereas QM (the double-slit experiment, Schrödinger's cat etc.) can be understood only when we assume that particles, particle properties are as much the source, the cause as the product, the effect of their...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anton Biermans wrote on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 01:21 GMT
In my study I propose a mass definition based on the uncertainty principle in the expectation that using this in GR might fix its flaws: the less indefinite the position of a particle or mass center of an object is, the greater its (rest) mass is. As the indefiniteness in the position of an object also depends on the mass of the observing particle, their distance and relative motion, here mass is...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 13, 2013 @ 14:56 GMT
Dear Craig,

Interesting essay. I wish you luck with the contemplated experiment. Would you be surprised not finding a Planck length? What odds will you bet that it exists, 50:50? I am interested in knowing because contrary to most beliefs that any reality of a Planck length will be important only on the Quantum scale I believe on the Classical scale surprises await us.

Good luck in the contest. You can have a look at an amateur model of Planck pixels here.

Regards,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Armin Nikkhah Shirazi wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 19:27 GMT
Dear Craig,

You have written a nice exposition of the ideas behind the Holometer experiment. Incidentally, Gennady Gorelik wrote an entry which seems to touch on related issues.

One thing that was not clear to me was how all the underlying parts all fit together. The ingredients seem to be

1. If the holographic principle applies, the information about events in spacetime is encoded on a one dimension-lower boundary

2. spacetime might be emergent from a statistical statistical theory

3. The bandwith of information transmission is limited by the inverse of the Planck time

4. The resulting blurriness at macroscopic scales is "hidden" by decoherence

Somehow it is difficult for me to combine these ingredients into one "big picture" but since you are doing an experiment, we will see what happens. Though you mention that if no blurriness is found, this will "experimentally prove a coherence of macroscopic space greater than what is possible with a Planck broadcast" I wonder if this would also rule out anything else beside 3.

I wish you all the best with your experiment,

Armin



If the information

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 21:32 GMT
Dear Craig J. Hogan:

I am an old physician, and I don’t know nothing of mathematics and almost nothing of physics, but after the common people your discipline is the one that uses more the so called “time” than any other.

I am sending you a practical summary, so you can easy decide if you...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 16:52 GMT
Professor Hogan,

Do excuse me; I am a decrepit old realist. You wrote: ‘Reality is that multitude of possibilities, a set of relationships. In general, definite, observable outcomes are impossible to predict.” I did not understand what you meant. As I have explained in my essay BITTERS, one real unique Universe is occurring, once.

Unique, once is not plural. Unique, once is not possible it is inevitable. Unique, once is not relatable. Unique, once can be observed, once. Unique, once does not have an outcome or an income.

Good luck in the contests. I am sure the judges will be impressed with your fine essay.

Joe

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Richard N. Shand wrote on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 22:33 GMT
Craig,

I was aware of the possibility of a quantum granularity in space at around the Planck length from you previous work. However, your concept of Planck broadcast really put a whole new spin on the idea. Very intriguing and well explained!

You invoked the scale-dependency of entanglement as the reason why space-time doesn't appear to be noticeably fuzzy. Eddington introduced the idea of the phase dimension, which measures scale as quantum uncertainty. An increase in the phase dimension, from the size of an elementary particle to the size of the universe, corresponds to an increase in position/time entropy and a reciprocal decrease in momentum/energy entropy (which vanishes towards the Planck limit). Applying quantum information theory, the position/time entropy (de Sitter space-time) emerges from the erasure of entanglement information by the observer. (See my essay "A Complex Conjugate Bit and It".)

This supports your contention that the fidelity of space-time can change depending upon where something is relative to an observer.

Best wishes,

Richard Shand

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Than Tin wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 03:25 GMT
Professor Hogan

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/19
65/feynman-lecture.html)

said: “It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Yuri Danoyan wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 18:10 GMT
Dr Hogan

I would like to now your opinion

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1818

Yuri

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 16:56 GMT
Dear Professor Hogan,

As outreach must be a 2-way street to have any value I do hope you'll engage a little here.

Thank you for your essay. It was a fascinating and valuable to read about the important particle physics aspect. Do you not consider there is a grey and dimly lit area between particle physics and Quantum Theorizing?

I agreed with almost all your propositions and viewpoint, but suggest a slightly new model is possible using the 'fine grained picture' in 4D to decode the 'noise' limiting Shannon's channel capacity.

QM assumes particles have no internal structure. You know this is wrong. I propose and describe a model consistent with PP but also resolving the theoretical question behind 'virtual' electrons using recursive layers of Godel 'fuzzy' n-value logic. This is a physical model testable at Fermilab. (I suggest how baryonic dark matter should emerge from the same consistent model in a previous high scoring essay, and how you can find it).

I hope you'll read my essay "the Intelligent Bit", and advise and comment. I do find and show how the EPR paradox naturally resolves at an order below Bells classical assumption and in line with von Neumann's proposition for consistent QM.

Well done and thank you for participating and inputting from your important perspective. I'm embarrassed by your low score, but most here are not experimentalists. Love the title too. Beat's mine!

Best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Than Tin wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 06:08 GMT
Dear All

A standard-issue big city all-glass high-rise stands across the street from my usual bus stop. When I look up the high-rise facade, I can see the reflections of the near-by buildings and the white clouds from the sky above. Even when everything else looks pretty much the same, the reflections of the clouds are different, hour to hour and day to day.

After I boarded the bus,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


john stephan selye wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 22:33 GMT
Having read so many insightful essays, I am probably not the only one to find that my views have crystallized, and that I can now move forward with growing confidence. I cannot exactly say who in the course of the competition was most inspiring - probably it was the continuous back and forth between so many of us. In this case, we should all be grateful to each other.

If I may, I'd like to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Aug. 3, 2013 @ 04:12 GMT
Professor Hogan,

I want you to know that I enjoyed your essay greatly, and rated it highly, but I have been greatly interested in your experiment from the moment I first read about it in Scientific American. The design of your apparatus should pick up a wide range of quantum behaviors at the extreme microscale of spacetime, not only discrete atoms of space. Also if there is dimensional reduction as we approach the UV limit, a possibility which greatly interests me, this should show up as transverse mode jitters between the two detectors - as well.

So we are eagerly awaiting to know more about your current progress or stage of completion. Of course; we'd all like to hear that you have already got meaningful data, but I know these things take time. If you have any time to respond, I echo Peter's invitation above, and note that a few replies to our comments would be helpful.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 3, 2013 @ 23:38 GMT
Criag. Fascinating Essay. Excellent background and description of the Fermilab Holometer. You’ve given me lots to think about. Thank you.

I tuned in particularly to your discussion of “intervals between events” in QM and GR. Which of course begs a definition of an interval, and of an event. I will follow up on your references after the contest to seek answers to these questions.

My investigation considers intervals in time/space to be the photon path traversal between an emitter and an absorber atom. This defines a finite time which (if the photon were to be reversed) would also reverse time too. If you get chance to look at my essay, I would be honored.

In the meantime, good luck. I will likely come back to you with more questions after following up on your other references in the paper.

Kind regards, Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 17:39 GMT
Hi Craig,

I found your essay was well written, insightful, and a pleasure to read. I hope your much deserved essay makes it to the finals!

Best wishes,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 22:33 GMT
Dear Craig,

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


Hugh Matlock wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 03:11 GMT
Hi Craig,

Thank you for an intriguing approach to discerning evidence that Nature might be discrete.

> Imagine then that the real world is the ultimate 4-dimensional video display.

In my essay Software Cosmos I describe a discrete and computable picture for the cosmos that uses a different technique to reduce information density in large spatial volumes. I also outline (and have already conducted) an experiment to see if the world we observe has discrete characteristics.

I won't spoil the story by revealing the answer here, but I hope you get a chance to look at the essay, as it seems to fit in nicely with your views.

Hugh

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michel Planat wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 20:25 GMT
Dear Craig,

Penzias and Wilson experiment had a great impact on our view of the universe.

May be you will be lucky with your holographic noise.

I have much respect for this topic (after Einstein 1905) and Penzias and Wilson (1978). Myself I did a lot to understand the so-called (universal) 1/f noise.

Congratulations for a great and serious work.

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristinel Stoica wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 07:41 GMT
Hi, votes are vanishing again.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michael Helland wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 16:34 GMT
I just rated your essay a ten, high gave it a nice push.

I hope you like mine:

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1616

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 02:40 GMT
Esteemed Prof. Hogan,

too bad you are not here to discuss your essay. I found it very interesting, in fact almost a perfect article for Scientific American. I have a long-standing interest in the matters of space. What it is, how light, gravity, information travels through it, does it really vibrate and can we detect these vibrations.. It is wonderful that Fermilab Center for Particle Astrophysics which you direct is working on such fascinating questions.

Here are some sentences that jolted my brain in full attention -- despite being quite late at night and having read many essays on this last day of competition:

"The precision and universality of light propagation, even across cosmic distances, suggests that causal structure arises from a fundamental symmetry, even if locality is only approximate." -- can this be understood as 'structure of space'?

"Our radically different hypothesis is that space and time are created from information propagating with Planck bandwidth." wow indeed, how fascinating!

"Information is not localized in space, but resides in non localized correlations." Information as non-localized correlations... this I have to meditate on.

I only had trouble with this sentence:

"Taken together, these theoretical ideas hint that quantum mechanics limits the amount of information in space-time." Did you mean to say that some.. implications of quantum theory limit the amount of info... ? Somehow it does not sound right. From the semantics point of view, of course. Sorry for nitpicking :)

Thank you for your very interesting essay -- hope to see it, prettied out and with beautiful illustrations, in SA, regardless of the final results of this competition,

-Marina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

M. V. Vasilyeva replied on Aug. 9, 2013 @ 02:47 GMT
Esteemed professor,

Jonathan Dickau kindly reminded me about this post -- and I am back in your blog with more questions. Maybe one day I'll get the answers. For now, I leave them here for safekeeping, like writings on a wall.

I see now that there were more reasons for my brain to be jolted than what I realized at the time of writing my previous post. We have strong innate reactions to incongruences, it seems, and what I see now is this:

First you say that "space and time are created from information propagating with Planck bandwidth' -- (through what does information propagate?) --

.. and then you say, "Information is not localized in space, but resides in non localized correlations" -- non-localized correlations... correlations betweeen what? Where? -- They cannot reside in space, because space is what information creates. Where does information reside?

On a fresher head the day after, it seems to me that something does not quite compute here. Sorry for nitpicking again. I simply find the subject of space and your research fascinating. I want to know more and understand what you mean.

Thank you,

-Marina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Aug. 9, 2013 @ 00:45 GMT
Congratulations Craig!

I am glad to see you made the finals and I wish you luck in the contest. Since your essay is about your holometer experiment, I suppose I should wish you luck for that too.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Héctor Daniel Gianni wrote on Aug. 10, 2013 @ 19:44 GMT
Dear Craig J. Hogan:

I am an old physician and I don’t know nothing of mathematics and almost nothing of physics. maybe you would be interested in my essay over a subject which after the common people, physic discipline is the one that uses more than any other, the so called “time”.

I am sending you a...

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.