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

Margarita Iudin: on 5/31/14 at 18:10pm UTC, wrote Hello Mr. Law, I read your essay (not exactly an essay,so) with interest....

James Hoover: on 5/31/14 at 15:01pm UTC, wrote Raymond, Thanks for reading and evaluating my essay. Jim

Raymond Law: on 5/30/14 at 12:38pm UTC, wrote Hi, Jim, Thanks for your comments ! But I have to let you know that I am...

James Hoover: on 5/29/14 at 18:52pm UTC, wrote Raymond, I do remember your name in one of the contests before, perhaps...

Raymond Law: on 5/22/14 at 12:17pm UTC, wrote Judy, Thanks for your encouragement. what I have said is totally...

Judy Nabb: on 5/22/14 at 6:27am UTC, wrote Raymond, A brave attempt at a complex subject. I've an interest in that...

Raymond Law: on 5/19/14 at 10:27am UTC, wrote Hello Petio, Thanks for your invitation ! Could you please let me have...

Raymond Law: on 5/15/14 at 16:35pm UTC, wrote Hello Hai, esq., Thanks for your supports ! You are correct in saying...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "Lorraine, I don't agree that relationships can only genuinely exist..." in What Will Quantum...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi to both of you, in all case an egg is a spheroid, that it is sure and..." in What Will Quantum...

Steve Agnew: "Math gives us a way to predict outcomes from precursors just like religion..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

charlie Ford: "This particular papers fabulous, and My spouse and i enjoy each of the..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

elena smith: "Basic Outlook principles that could save your time Nowadays, everybody is..." in Are We Merging With Our...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Joe, what is mostly illuminated by ONE INFINITE type of finite..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar supposedly..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "Let s extrapolate an universal Lagrangian Hamiltonian correlated with this..." in Alternative Models of...


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
December 13, 2019

CATEGORY: How Should Humanity Steer the Future? Essay Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: re-defining gravity and conceptualizing a gravity generator by Raymond Law [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Raymond Law wrote on Apr. 10, 2014 @ 17:18 GMT
Essay Abstract

for the future, humanity should be steered towards all-out space exploration with ramification on science and technology down on earth that would be positive for continuous and positive development for all mankind.

Author Bio

multi discipline, self taught private macro events observer and thinker, seeking direction in resolving unnoticed and unresolved problems on mankind.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Apr. 11, 2014 @ 15:09 GMT
Dear Raymond,

Your essay is trying to explain the "emerging" effects like gravity and (sub)particles.

My perception is that ALL this is just emerging from our consciousness, in my essay : "STEERING THE FUTURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS" I explain this in using the latest findings in physics, so I hope you will find the time to read an comment it on my thread and eventually give me a rating.

regards

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Raymond Law replied on Apr. 12, 2014 @ 15:11 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

You certainly have a lot of fans already. But yours truly has a certain mental limitation in trying to understanding abstract ideas ( even though my creativity has no limitation ).

Nevertheless, I shall find time to go through your professionally written Essay and thanks for your directive.

regards,

Raymond Law,

HONG KONG

Bookmark and Share


Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde replied on Apr. 14, 2014 @ 14:37 GMT
Dear raymond,

I think that your writing is not at all indicating "a certain mental limitation", it is YOU yourself who limits his expressions, so you express what you want to share...

I await your esteemed comment

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Raymond Law replied on Apr. 14, 2014 @ 15:30 GMT
Hey Wilhelmus,

You read my mind ! Please drop me a line at my email box at I have a pleasant surprise installed for you, O,K, ?

Raymond Law,

HONG KONG

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 11, 2014 @ 16:31 GMT
Dear Mr. Law,

Although I did not understand most of your essay, I do hope that it does well in the competition.

You wrote: “Average-orbital- speed” and you implied that each of the planets travel at different speeds. Please do not take this as a criticism of your thoughtful work.

Based only on my observation, I have concluded that all of the stars, all of the planets, all of the asteroids, all of the comets, all of the meteors, all of the specks of astral dust and all real things have one and only one thing in common. Each real thing has a material surface and an attached material sub-surface. All material surfaces must travel at the constant “speed” of light. All material sub-surfaces must travel at an inconsistent “speed” that is less than the “speed” of light. Einstein was completely wrong when it came to physical observation. It would be physically impossible for light to move as it does not have a surface or a sub-surface. Abstract theory cannot ever have unification. Only reality is unified because there is only one reality.

The interferometer that Michelson and Morley used in their solar wind experiment had a surface. The room in which the experiment was conducted had a surface. Michelson and Morley had surfaces. All surfaces travel at the “speed” of light. The only thing that did not have a surface was the light that the pair used. No wonder it performed unusually.

The barrier with the two slits has a surface. The barrier behind the barrier with the two slits has a surface. The laboratory in which the experiment is conducted has a surface. Anybody in the laboratory at the time would have a surface. Only the light shone through the two slits would be absent a surface. No wonder such a light would perform unusually.

All of the surfaces of all of the planets travel at the same “speed” of light Mr. Law.

With warm regards,

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Raymond Law replied on Apr. 12, 2014 @ 15:01 GMT
Dear Mr. Fisher,

I did not ' invent ' those wordings of ' average-orbital-speed ' ; I got that from the wikipedia's coverage on specification columns of various individual planets.

Your writings on surfaces, subsurfaces and their ' speed of light ' are new to me and completely beyond me. So, kindly allow me time to ' soak ' it in.

Right now, only two words seemed to have crossed my mind and are seemingly parallel to your :

1. ' surface, sub-surface ' = masses.

2. ' speed of light ' = vector ?

With warm regards,

Raymond Law,

HONG KONG

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Apr. 15, 2014 @ 14:29 GMT
Mr. Law,

Each surface is unique, and each sub-surface is unique. They do not equal mass. The "speed" of light is not a vector. Light is the only stationary substance in the Universe. I use the term, "speed" of light in order to make my theory easier to understand. When I state that all surfaces travel at the constant "speed" of light, and all sub-surfaces travel at an inconsistent speed that is less than the constant "speed" of light, that is easy to grasp. Newton tried to calculate how material objects moved. Einstein tried to calculate the velocity of light. I simply reasoned differently.

Respectfully,

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Raymond Law wrote on Apr. 15, 2014 @ 14:39 GMT
Dear Mr. Fisher,

Acknowledged with thanks !

Respectfully,

Raymond Law,

HONG KONG,

signing-off

Bookmark and Share



Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Apr. 15, 2014 @ 15:13 GMT
Dear Raymond,

I received your post on my thread.

Only the e-mail adress was not there...

mine is : wilhelmus.d@orange.fr

I await your message

regards

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde replied on Apr. 17, 2014 @ 07:09 GMT
Dear Raymond,

Thank you for the encouragement, we all need that when we are expressing ideas that are not "common".

I will sent you in private mail my latest article that I sent to Cosmology.

best regards

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anselm Smidt wrote on Apr. 22, 2014 @ 17:13 GMT
Nicht von Steering the Future of Humanity.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Apr. 28, 2014 @ 17:01 GMT
Raymond,

Most will see your essay as quite naive, but we should seek 'naiveity' as most of Occam's wisdom is so based. Einstein agreed we should be able to explain physics to a barmaid. I agree.

Having said that you know my views that to communicate with physicists and astronomers you'd need to learn more of the language and be concise and precise. Even though the language is sometimes a mixture of Swahili and gobbledygook you'll struggle to explain to a canoe load of Swalhili speakers that they're heading over a waterfall without a smattering of the language.

I agree, there are a host of serious anomalies in astronomy, and that comes from an astronomer, n many more fundamental than those you suggest. Even the ecliptic plane and Barycentric - Earth centric frame transition cannot be coherently relativistically rationalised. USNO Circ 179 2005 said the solution was expected within the next 5 years or so.

It never came.

Or rather it did come, but hasn't been recognised as such as the nonsense is now too entrenched. Such is science.

A nice easy read essay, I think worth a much better score than at present. But do note that you may do better to read more from the massive free database of arXiv and perhaps less from Wikipedia.

Best of luck,

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Raymond Law wrote on Apr. 29, 2014 @ 16:17 GMT
Peter,

Truly thankful for your comments and opinion, I shall treasure every word.

It is my understanding that all technical fine prints must come from experts like you --- all that I could do is to point out the unnoticed obvious.

Naturally, like what I said in my essay, the Proof is in the Pudding. If my observation were not totally trashed. I might be emboldened to try doing something along this direction and I welcome dedicated ' truth seekers ' to join me in this endeavour.

Once again, thank you very much for your straight talks, I need them all !

Best wishes,

Raymond

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on May. 15, 2014 @ 01:25 GMT
Dear Author Raymond Law

Very bold and exciting - 10 points to cheer for your beliefs.

Hải.CaoHoàng

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Raymond Law replied on May. 15, 2014 @ 16:35 GMT
Hello Hai, esq.,

Thanks for your supports ! You are correct in saying that I was ' bold ' . I had had many sleepless nights in deciding whether I should ' expose ' my personal thinkings on ' Gravity ' in this Forum .

Raymond Law

Bookmark and Share



Judy Nabb wrote on May. 22, 2014 @ 06:27 GMT
Raymond,

A brave attempt at a complex subject. I've an interest in that area and though your research could be deeper you j highlight that there are still unanswered questions, which is important in itself. I think it's worth higher marks and am happy to oblige. Well done.

Judy

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Raymond Law replied on May. 22, 2014 @ 12:17 GMT
Judy,

Thanks for your encouragement. what I have said is totally disruptive to all of us confined by gravity and I have written to a fellow essay contributor that I could be ' stoned to death ' by some traditional thinker.

I was totally surprised to have received positive and supportive comments from you and a couple essay contributors.

I would like to communicate with you on another project on stopping the now rampant overweight pandemic, my concepts of which, is also totally disruptive to all present established thinkings.

So, if possible, use this : lym2000r at yahoo dot com.

Good luck and best wishes to your entry !

Raymond

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 29, 2014 @ 18:52 GMT
Raymond,

I do remember your name in one of the contests before, perhaps when I did one of my earler essays: http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/category/31418 on whether you can cancel gravity. Gravity is a mysterious force but one for which you established physicists don't tend to introduce new ideas. My current essay http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/category/31418 does propose thinking and looking beyond -- the unorthodox - and looking within -- the neural universe of the brain.

I think outlying ideas are the crux of discovery and perhaps PETs are the basis of an ICG conquest of gravity.

Do you believe that neutrinos (saying subneutrinos) having identifiable elements within?

If you have time I would like to see your comments on my current essay.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Raymond Law replied on May. 30, 2014 @ 12:38 GMT
Hi, Jim,

Thanks for your comments ! But I have to let you know that I am not an academic physicist, just a total amateur ! Perhaps, this is why I could see gravity from a totally different perspective and raised all those queries and singled out those discrepancies.

As for your question that whether sub-neutrinos have identifiable elements within ? My thinkings of PETs is already the answer.

You are correct in saying that ICG would be a ' conquest ' of gravity is certain true, as this will be a long and hard battle ahead for all mankind !

As for checking out your current essay, it would be my honour to do it ! But as for commenting on it, I am not so sure that I am qualified to do so ..... I would certainly try, if you do not mind receiving ' silly ' comments.

Raymond

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 31, 2014 @ 15:01 GMT
Raymond,

Thanks for reading and evaluating my essay.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Margarita Iudin wrote on May. 31, 2014 @ 18:10 GMT
Hello Mr. Law,

I read your essay (not exactly an essay,so) with interest. I think I understand it. I would ask you to read my essay, if you have time (my essay has nothing to do with your theme, but I feel it maybe useful to you anyway)

Regards,

Margarita Iudin

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2096

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.