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

Chidi Idika: on 5/31/14 at 23:33pm UTC, wrote Dear Murat, Your essay hold bold views. You say for instance: "What we...

James Hoover: on 5/27/14 at 17:21pm UTC, wrote Murat, Thank you for reading and evaluating my essay. Jim

James Hoover: on 5/26/14 at 16:44pm UTC, wrote Murat, "Therefore, the author believes that the Higgs boson is not a real...

Janko Kokosar: on 5/25/14 at 11:19am UTC, wrote Dear Murat, I like some parts of your essay. 1. You gave good five...

Anonymous: on 5/25/14 at 11:17am UTC, wrote Dear Murat, I like some parts of your essay. 1. You gave good five...

murat gaisin: on 5/23/14 at 4:59am UTC, wrote Dear James A Putnam, thanks for the appreciation of my critics state of...

murat gaisin: on 5/16/14 at 17:30pm UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir Rogozhin, I believe that in modern theoretical physics...

James Putnam: on 5/16/14 at 14:07pm UTC, wrote murat Asgatovich gaisin, Fixing physics should have a high priority. An...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

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

Steve Dufourny: "lol REVOLUTION SPHERISATION everywhere at all scales,REVOLUTION..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "The kind of time required, over which the material change is happening, (to..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "after all like Borh has made,this universe and its spheres for me are like..." in Alternative Models of...

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

Lorraine Ford: "With the “A.I. Feynman” software, Silviu-Marian Udrescu and Max Tegmark..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Georgina Woodward: "Coin toss co-state potentials: With the measurement protocol decided, in..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "If we correlate with the consciousness, can we consider that all is..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...


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
October 23, 2019

CATEGORY: How Should Humanity Steer the Future? Essay Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: About the possibility to solve the main problems of theoretical physics by murat Asgatovich gaisin [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin wrote on Apr. 16, 2014 @ 20:46 GMT
Essay Abstract

The author in his article shows the possibility to solve the main problems of theoretical physics by full revision of its basic principles.

Author Bio

I am an independent theoretical physicist. My interest is the study of the foundations of theoretical physics. I have published in the Internet more than 20 scientific articles.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Eckard Blumschein wrote on Apr. 17, 2014 @ 07:32 GMT
Dear Murat Asgatovich Gaisin,

Since you wrote: "the four-dimensional space-time which is viewed in the general theory of relativity as the physical object in fact is the abstract mathematical object. So, all the conclusions drawn from the special theory of relativity and the general theory of relativity about the physical reality are mathematical abstractions", I hope you will comment on essay 2021.

Regards,

Eckard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on Apr. 18, 2014 @ 05:58 GMT
I will read the article that you wrote.

Bookmark and Share



John C Hodge wrote on Apr. 17, 2014 @ 10:24 GMT
I see you are interested in foundations of physics. The section 2 of entry has some suggestions for alternate postulates. Some of them are in the STOE. The STOE correspondence to general relativity and quantum mechanics develop this idea a little. There is a long way to go.

I’d be interested in your comments.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on Apr. 18, 2014 @ 04:40 GMT
13. N. Nikitin “It is time to look for Higgs”.

http://www.astronet.ru/db/msg/1176523,

accessed on April 12, 2014,

14. М. А. Gaisin “The Standard Model of physics - the triumph of the absurd”

http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/rus/catalog/pages/10172
.html,

accessed on April 12, 2014.

Bookmark and Share


Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on Apr. 21, 2014 @ 08:00 GMT
Dear John C Hadge,

I would be interested to read your article

Regards,

Murat Asgatovich Gaisin

Bookmark and Share



Leo Vuyk wrote on Apr. 17, 2014 @ 15:04 GMT
DEAR MURAT,

Could you please check your reference links, I tried four but half did not show up.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on Apr. 18, 2014 @ 04:36 GMT
Links checked.

Literature

1. Lee Smolin. «The trouble with physics: the rise of string theory, the fall of

a science, and what comes next» Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 2006. Translated by

Juri Artamonov. http://www.rodon.org/sl/nsfvtsunichzes/,

accessed on April 12, 2014.

2. «Will the astronomers’ observations undermine the theoretical basis...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Georgina Woodward wrote on Apr. 20, 2014 @ 08:36 GMT
Murat Asgatovich Gaisin,

Just want to let you know that I have read your essay. I'm afraid I have failed to find, what would appear to me, to be actual solutions to or approaches to solving the main problems of physics, or how humanity should steer the future. Nevertheless it was interesting for me to hear your thoughts on a number of subjects.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on Apr. 21, 2014 @ 04:02 GMT
The main point of my article is that modern theoretical physics consists entirely of epistemological errors.

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 21, 2014 @ 16:30 GMT
Dear Mr. Asgatovich,

I thought that your excellently written essay was fascinating. I hope you do not mind my offering a solution to your “Problem 1: To merge the grand theory of relativity and the quantum theory into the one, which can claim to be the theory of nature.”

INERT LIGHT THEORY

Based only on my observation, I have concluded that all of the stars, all of the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on Apr. 24, 2014 @ 07:55 GMT
I read your article with interest.

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Apr. 24, 2014 @ 18:19 GMT
Dear Murat,

Fully agree with you: in basic science (physics and mathematics) understanding crisis, the crisis of the philosophical foundations of fundamental sign systems. But what will it take to overcome this crisis?

Here, writes Carlo Rovelli article «SCIENCE IS NOT ABOUT CERTAINTY: PHILOSOPHY OF PHYSICS»

«This is a standard idea of how science works, which implies that science is about empirical content, the true interesting relevant content of science is its empirical content. Since theories change, the empirical content is the solid part of what science is. Now, there's something disturbing, for me as a theoretical scientist, in all this. I feel that something is missing. Something of the story is missing. I've been asking to myself what is this thing missing? I'm not sure I have the answer, but I want to present some ideas on something else which science is.

This is particularly relevant today in science, and particularly in physics, because if I'm allowed to be polemical, in my field, in fundamental theoretical physics, it is 30 years that we fail. There hasn't been a major success in theoretical physics in the last few decades, after the standard model, somehow. Of course there are ideas. These ideas might turn out to be right. Loop quantum gravity might turn out to be right, or not. String theory might turn out to be right, or not. But we don't know, and for the moment, nature has not said yes in any sense.

I suspect that this might be in part because of the wrong ideas we have about science, and because methodologically we are doing something wrong, at least in theoretical physics, and perhaps also in other sciences.»

The development of mathematics and physics, to overcome the "crisis of understanding" - is more secure future of Umanity. Is not it?

Sincerely,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Apr. 24, 2014 @ 18:54 GMT
Murat,

Give references the original article Carlo Rovelli and in Russian

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on May. 16, 2014 @ 17:30 GMT
Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

I believe that in modern theoretical physics underestimated philosophical thoughts. As a result, the basis of theoretical physics contained errors on the epistemological level.

Regards,

Murat Asgatovich Gaisin.

Bookmark and Share



Andrej Rehak wrote on May. 5, 2014 @ 10:57 GMT
Dear Murat

I would refer to five greatest problems you quoted. Explaining these problems is not the issue. The problem is in the acceptance of the "insulting" simplicity of their single solution. As we witness, in all aspects of our institutionalized society, the problems are maintained and created. This knotted matrix of problems iterates itself... maintaining and creating the age of problems.

I appreciate your criticism, which is to be expected from anyone who is sane :), but I have to correct your delusion about mathematics. In their description QT, STR, or GTR use mathematical rues of relations. However, their equations contain unexplained variables, so called "universal constants of nature". Hence, they are not mathematics. As such, they remain local descriptions, not universal explanations. Mathematics and the physical world are the same - the abstract principle, independent of scale. Nature draws shapes and motions the same way geometry does.

Regards

andrej

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on May. 6, 2014 @ 19:48 GMT
Murat,

Very well written, I commend you on all counts, including the incorrect concept of time (SR and GR), and that fundamentally; "modern theoretical physics consists entirely of epistemological errors." Full marks for all of that. You'll recall our positions were the same last years

However two small points I'd like to raise. You say that to unify SR and QM, first; "it is necessary that the original theories are accurate." True if we're being pedantic, but I've found a small fundamental change of assumptions to each DOES then allow unification. Time is absolute, space contains a diffuse particulate medium, (pure fermion/proton plasma) parts of which move just like air or water, and c is the local propagation speed everywhere, so waves Doppler shift just like sound. (I think you agreed may last 3 essays setting out other conditions and evidence). interestingly that means the postulates themselves just need better interpreting. Most have been looking in the wrong place.

QM is simpler to resolve with classical mechanics. That what I do in this years essay using geometry and simple dynamics. The same mechanism solves the errors of both, we just need to properly apply absorption and re-emission, the latter always at c in the electron rest frame. We have just been short of intellectual evolution. But we can't solve the problems at the heart of physics in a few lines. I do hope you'll read my essay as I'm sure you'll understand and agree (I hope so anyway, I also need the points!). I hope you don't lose heart and keep putting out the message, the more specific and evidenced the better. We're long overdue for a paradigm change. Heads can't stay implanted in the sans forever.

Very best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson replied on May. 13, 2014 @ 16:29 GMT
Murat,

You seem to have disappeared, I hope you are well, and your score undervalues the quality of your essay. I also hoped you may read and discuss my own which agrees your basic premises with important results.

Best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on May. 16, 2014 @ 04:39 GMT
Dear Peter Jackson,

I will read your article.

Regards,

Murat Asgatovich Gaisin

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on May. 15, 2014 @ 01:19 GMT
Dear Author murat Asgatovich gaisin

Your concern to Theoretical Physics also is the issue that I'm trying to fight. I enjoyed your analysis and especially as conclusion section .

10 points to the incentive for your beliefs .

Hải.CaoHoàng

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on May. 15, 2014 @ 03:14 GMT
Dear Hải.CaoHoàng,

thanks for the appreciation of my critics state of modern physics.

Regards,

Murat Asgatovich Gaisin

Bookmark and Share



James A Putnam wrote on May. 16, 2014 @ 14:07 GMT
murat Asgatovich gaisin,

Fixing physics should have a high priority. An improved future for humanity includes understanding the nature of the universe. Empirically unverifiable properties invented by theoretical physicists have been made permanent additions to physics equations. It would be best for the future of humanity for physics to be correct about the nature of the universe. I think that physics should be a firmly empirically based science with empirically unsupported abstractions of theorists removed from its equations. That is my view. I welcome your view. I appreciate your contribution to this contest. Good luck.

James Putnam

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author murat Asgatovich gaisin replied on May. 23, 2014 @ 04:59 GMT
Dear James A Putnam,

thanks for the appreciation of my critics state of modern physics.

Regards,

Murat Asgatovich Gaisin

Bookmark and Share



Anonymous wrote on May. 25, 2014 @ 11:17 GMT
Dear Murat,

I like some parts of your essay.

1. You gave good five points of Lee Smolin, about the problems in theoretical physics. There fails still the sixth point, unexplained consciousness: My essay 2013 about consciounsess

2. You claim that ''four-dimensional spacetime which is viewed in general theory (GR) of relativity as the physical object''. Many people so...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Janko Kokosar wrote on May. 25, 2014 @ 11:19 GMT
Dear Murat,

I like some parts of your essay.

1. You gave good five points of Lee Smolin, about the problems in theoretical physics. There fails still the sixth point, unexplained consciousness: My essay 2013 about consciounsess

2. You claim that ''four-dimensional spacetime which is viewed in general theory (GR) of relativity as the physical object''. Many people so...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 26, 2014 @ 16:44 GMT
Murat,

"Therefore, the author believes that the Higgs boson is not a real material object, but a chimera of the standard model." I salute your open-mindedness to other interpretations and, not being a mathematition, give less credence there. I also realize that acceptance of the orthodoxy of the standard theory is very tempting.

In fact, part of my solution relates to "looking beyond" as in using the imagination of your brain, somewhat of a neural universe, to explore the nonconventional somewhat like Einstein did.

I would like to see your views on my essay, Murat.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 27, 2014 @ 17:21 GMT
Murat,

Thank you for reading and evaluating my essay.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Chidi Idika wrote on May. 31, 2014 @ 23:33 GMT
Dear Murat,

Your essay hold bold views. You say for instance:

"What we measure by hours is the measure of reality state change, but there is only reality. That is why the four-dimensional space-time which is viewed in the general theory of relativity as the physical object in fact is the abstract mathematical object."

Yet it seems to me that the more we want our definition of reality to be all-inclusive the more we find that our definition tends towards abstraction. So I ask, how do you define REALITY?

Here is how I myself try. And I will appreciate you questions and comments.

I have decided I will read your essay at least a second time. And I will be here to rate

Wishing you the best,

Chidi

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.