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.

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

Marc Séguin: on 9/6/14 at 2:05am UTC, wrote Mark, What this video needs is... MORE CONVECTION! ;) Marc P.S. I see...

Joe Fisher: on 7/8/14 at 14:54pm UTC, wrote Reality does not have to be modeled and reality does not have to be proven....

Mark Prince: on 7/8/14 at 8:36am UTC, wrote Posted twice..... not sure why....

Mark Prince: on 7/8/14 at 8:33am UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Fisher, 1) if reality is not experimental does this mean that...

Mark Prince: on 7/8/14 at 8:32am UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Fisher, 1) if reality is not experimental does this mean that...

Joe Fisher: on 7/7/14 at 15:49pm UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Prince, Reality is not experimental. In your video you implied...

Mark Prince: on 7/7/14 at 12:05pm UTC, wrote Dear Mr Fisher, your theories are complex and well argued. However, as a...

Anonymous: on 7/6/14 at 14:48pm UTC, wrote Mr. Prince, As I have gone to great lengths to point out in my essay...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Agnew: "There is no difference between a word explanation and a math description...." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "I am going to tell you an important thing about the aethers. I thought that..." in Alternative Models of...

Joe Fisher: "Jason, I post sensible comments. I do not provide audio files. Joe..." in First Things First: The...

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

halim sutarmaja: "dewapoker hadir untuk semua pecinta game poker dengan teknologi terbaru dan..." in New Nuclear "Magic...

Jason Wolfe: "Hi Georgina, Steve, What is reality? The humorous answer, almost at the..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Jason Wolfe: "As for religious fundamentalists, I would rather deal with them, then with..." in More on agency from the...

Jason Wolfe: "The best we can do with the environment is to plant more trees and..." in More on agency from the...


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
November 19, 2019

CATEGORY: Show Me the Physics! Video Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: REDSHIFT AND THE BIG BANG!!! by Mark Prince [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Mark Edward Prince wrote on Apr. 18, 2014 @ 20:44 GMT
Video Image





Video URL

http://youtu.be/RBaDmv4Kk1E



Video Description

The Big Bang? Yeah ..."Whatever"! Prove it! Ok......let's start with Redshift!Here we present the evidence that shows we are in an expanding universe,all kindly explained by your friendly, neighbourhood science geeks! Essential Science!



Video Creator Bio

Currently Head of Science at a British Military School, I am a science obsessed dad, husband, ukulele playing sci-fi fan and leader of the fledgling Science Geek video empire on youtube. Our mission? To spread science knowledge around the world with a hint of insanity and a dusting of madcap humour.

Bookmark and Share



Anonymous wrote on Jul. 6, 2014 @ 14:48 GMT
Mr. Prince,

As I have gone to great lengths to point out in my essay REALITY, ONCE, that appears at url http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1982, the real Universe is unique, once. As I have tactfully pointed out in my video JOE FISHER'S THEOREM OF INERT LIGHT, and as I will point out in my video JOE FISHER'S THEOREM OF INERT LIGHT THE MUSICAL, when it gets posted to this site, because it does not have a surface, light cannot move. Red Shifts and Blue Shifts are mere computational abstractions. Please stop teaching children erroneous scientific propaganda about the so-called "expanding abstract universe."

I did enjoy watching your video and I do hope that it does well in the competition.

With high regards,

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share


Mark Edward Prince replied on Jul. 7, 2014 @ 12:05 GMT
Dear Mr Fisher, your theories are complex and well argued. However, as a scientist, unless you can offer me concrete experimental or mathematical proof that your theories are true backed up by reproducible data from other scientists, I regret that I will be forced to continue teaching my students the "erroneous scientific propaganda" that you oppose. It's either that, or I get sacked for peddling unproven philosophical speculation.This is the last thing that I want to happen as it would result in myself and my family experiencing a life of poverty and, as this universe is "unique,once", I would hate to waste this single opportunity starving to death. I enjoyed watching your videos too. They certainly are unique and definitely should only happen once. I searched out your musical version too. Genius. George Formby would be proud. I genuinely hope you do well in the competition.

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jul. 7, 2014 @ 15:49 GMT
Dear Mr. Prince,

Reality is not experimental. In your video you implied that there are such things as “light waves” You helpingly showed graphic linear waves emitted from a graphic depiction of a galaxy. Real light cannot have a surface; therefore, depicting light as having a regular wave or systematic particularized surface is clearly mendacious propaganda. It is akin to showing angels with wings and halos. Your plea for me to show proof from credentialed physicists concerning my conviction of reality is reminiscent of the absurd myth about the skepticism of Saint Thomas.

Although my video JOE FISHER’S INERT LIGHT THEOREM THE MUSICAL has been accepted, it will probably not be posted until next week.

With my highest regards,

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share


Mark Edward Prince replied on Jul. 8, 2014 @ 08:33 GMT
Dear Mr. Fisher,

1) if reality is not experimental does this mean that nothing can ever be proven to be correct, including your own "light has no surface" claim? In which case....what makes you think you are right, baring in mind you can never actually prove it?

2) The wave model of light is exactly what it claims to be. It's a "model", it doesn't pretend to be an accurate...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Mark Edward Prince wrote on Jul. 8, 2014 @ 08:32 GMT
Dear Mr. Fisher,

1) if reality is not experimental does this mean that nothing can ever be proven to be correct, including your own "light has no surface" claim? In which case....what makes you think you are right, baring in mind you can never actually prove it?

2) The wave model of light is exactly what it claims to be. It's a "model", it doesn't pretend to be an accurate...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Mark Edward Prince wrote on Jul. 8, 2014 @ 08:36 GMT
Posted twice.....

not sure why....

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jul. 8, 2014 @ 14:54 GMT
Reality does not have to be modeled and reality does not have to be proven. The one real thing that is common to all real objects is that each object has a real surface that is somehow attached to a real sub-surface. All real surfaces must travel at the same constant speed. All you have to do is look at a real light source in order to see that real light does not appear to move away from its real source. The only rational conclusion that can be drawn has to be that real light cannot have a real surface.

Your wonderful abstract modeled light which you claim is made up of a specific number of abstract photons moves in abstract waves or abstract particles in an abstract straight line at an abstract hyper-speed and all of the stars, and all of the planets, and all of the asteroids, and all of the comets, and all of the specs of astral dust, and all real objects move at some sort of inconsistent variable speed which only your experimental acuity can detect.

I would have no problem explaining reality to any number of children. I am humble enough to believe that my grasp of reality is the same as everyone else’s is.

More puzzling than the fact that your post was published twice is the fact that at this site, the project author’s name is usually given in an orange box.

I am awfully glad that you are responding to my posts.

Please keep it up,

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share



Member Marc Séguin wrote on Sep. 6, 2014 @ 02:05 GMT
Mark,

What this video needs is... MORE CONVECTION! ;)

Marc

P.S. I see what you did here: you tried to make the FQXi people like you by tackling a "modern physics" subject, the cosmological redshift. It won't work: nobody understands what the FQXi people want, or what their plan is. But they have a plan.

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.