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.

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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Previous Contests

read/discuss • winners

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

*Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.*

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**MIROSLAW KOZLOWSKI**: *on* 4/24/15 at 8:23am UTC, wrote Dear Jason Thaank you for reminder me the Lucas numbers. As a matter of...

**Jason Edwards**: *on* 4/22/15 at 18:04pm UTC, wrote Fibonacci numbers are a subset of Lucas numbers. Good work. Jason

**Angel Doz**: *on* 4/21/15 at 17:37pm UTC, wrote GM = monster group GMB = Baby monster group O >>> Order of group...

**James Hoover**: *on* 4/16/15 at 17:08pm UTC, wrote Miroslaw, I am revisiting essays I’ve read to assure I’ve rated them. ...

**Joe Fisher**: *on* 4/1/15 at 18:34pm UTC, wrote Dear Professor Kozlowski, I thought that your engrossing essay was...

**James Hoover**: *on* 3/7/15 at 2:35am UTC, wrote Miroslaw, My take from your essay finds a novel approach to math, its...

**Branko Zivlak**: *on* 3/3/15 at 16:06pm UTC, wrote Dear Kozlowski, Number rules the Universe, it is no doubt. The problem is...

**MIROSLAW KOZLOWSKI**: *on* 2/16/15 at 8:24am UTC, wrote Dear Miss Sujatha Jagannathan I read your essay with grat pleasure. As...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**Steve Dufourny**: "I must explain what is the real meaning of Spherisation in my theory.It is..."
*in* Mass–Energy Equivalence...

**Georgina Woodward**: "Hi Robert, thank you. I now understand the difference between decisions and..."
*in* Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

**Robert McEachern**: "Making a decision, means selecting between discrete, a priori established..."
*in* Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

**Steve Dufourny**: "Hi Eckard,you seems persuaded by your Words and thoughts.I don t understand..."
*in* First Things First: The...

**Eckard Blumschein**: "In Darwinism/Weismannism there is no first cause, just a causal chain...."
*in* First Things First: The...

**Steve Dufourny**: "lol no indeed it is not a lot,like I said I liked your general ideas.I have..."
*in* The Demon in the Machine...

**Steve Agnew**: "There are three assumptions...is that a lot? The aether particle mass, the..."
*in* The Demon in the Machine...

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.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

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.

A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

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.

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 15, 2019

CATEGORY:
Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015)
[back]

TOPIC: MATHEMATICS, PHYSICS, PLANTS …. FIBONACCI SERIES by MIROSLAW KOZLOWSKI [refresh]

TOPIC: MATHEMATICS, PHYSICS, PLANTS …. FIBONACCI SERIES by MIROSLAW KOZLOWSKI [refresh]

Abstract There have been eras in which an educated man could only live up to his standard if he were at the same time a poet and a philosopher and an experimental or mathematical researcher. I argue that it is a time to come back and look for the physics, mathematics and botany - why not, from the different perspective-Fibonacci series

M.KOZLOWSKI is Emeritus Professor, Warsaw University, Warsaw, Poland. He is author of about 200 papers and 5 monographs printed in USA

Intuition does indeed point the way for physics. Evolution has bred the ability to sense patterns into us.

You noted the example of the central force in 3-D space. The core math is in several other examples in our universe. There are sources and sinks of heat (the heat equation), sources of diffusion, sources and sinks of heat (the heat equation which is the diffusion equation with a constant diffusion coefficient), this may reduce to the Schrodinger like equation with varying diffusion coefficient, etc. These are all the same math with differing parameter definitions. At what point does ``2’’ (2 strands of DNA, mitosis, sex, etc.) and powers of 2 become a cardinal number? That is, what we sense in our size scale is seen in all scales.

Like you I suggest this is not accidental, that life and physics obey the same fundamental principles 2014 contest paper. Further, like you, I suggest in this years entry that math and physics are part of the universe so closely intertwined they are one.

I pointed out the fractal idea. You pointed out the Fibonacci series.

report post as inappropriate

You noted the example of the central force in 3-D space. The core math is in several other examples in our universe. There are sources and sinks of heat (the heat equation), sources of diffusion, sources and sinks of heat (the heat equation which is the diffusion equation with a constant diffusion coefficient), this may reduce to the Schrodinger like equation with varying diffusion coefficient, etc. These are all the same math with differing parameter definitions. At what point does ``2’’ (2 strands of DNA, mitosis, sex, etc.) and powers of 2 become a cardinal number? That is, what we sense in our size scale is seen in all scales.

Like you I suggest this is not accidental, that life and physics obey the same fundamental principles 2014 contest paper. Further, like you, I suggest in this years entry that math and physics are part of the universe so closely intertwined they are one.

I pointed out the fractal idea. You pointed out the Fibonacci series.

report post as inappropriate

Dear John

I share your opinion in full context . I argue that consciousness is a part of our Universe, but part which we recognise with our three dimensional brain. What about if consciousness is relality multidimensional and rest of dimensions of consciousness are not recognisonable -for the moment. Dimensionality of brain is very important, for (1) only in 3D Univese there is not crossroads of axons and (2) only in 3D wave equation transmitted pure undisturbed infornation.

By the way for a long time I was involved in heat transport equation study. I have " discovered", (in Plato sense) the thermal Klein-Gordon equation, which as the hyperbolic equation has the thermal wave solution with wave velocity

v=alpha(i)xc, , i=1,2,3 for alpha(1)= 1/137 coupling strength for electromagnetic interaction , alpha(2)= 0.16 for strong interaction, and

alpha(3)=1 for colored quarks interaction.c= light velocity . All that is contained in our monograph: Thermal processes with attosecond laser pulses, Springer, USA

I share your opinion in full context . I argue that consciousness is a part of our Universe, but part which we recognise with our three dimensional brain. What about if consciousness is relality multidimensional and rest of dimensions of consciousness are not recognisonable -for the moment. Dimensionality of brain is very important, for (1) only in 3D Univese there is not crossroads of axons and (2) only in 3D wave equation transmitted pure undisturbed infornation.

By the way for a long time I was involved in heat transport equation study. I have " discovered", (in Plato sense) the thermal Klein-Gordon equation, which as the hyperbolic equation has the thermal wave solution with wave velocity

v=alpha(i)xc, , i=1,2,3 for alpha(1)= 1/137 coupling strength for electromagnetic interaction , alpha(2)= 0.16 for strong interaction, and

alpha(3)=1 for colored quarks interaction.c= light velocity . All that is contained in our monograph: Thermal processes with attosecond laser pulses, Springer, USA

``...which as the hyperbolic equation has the thermal wave solution with wave velocity "

The dispersion equation seems to describe a point source and sink and waves if the velocity is high. To get the double slit experiment, I assumed the plenum (or ether if you prefer) wave velocity to be much greater than the velocity of light. The plenum has a density at each point. The diffusion (heat) equation has a long term 1/r term from a source or sink. This is needed for gravity.

Treating a second time derivative (hyperbolic) equation as heat transport equation (or diffusion of a scalar to get 1/r) seems odd to me. How do you get 1/r dependence?

Hodge

report post as inappropriate

The dispersion equation seems to describe a point source and sink and waves if the velocity is high. To get the double slit experiment, I assumed the plenum (or ether if you prefer) wave velocity to be much greater than the velocity of light. The plenum has a density at each point. The diffusion (heat) equation has a long term 1/r term from a source or sink. This is needed for gravity.

Treating a second time derivative (hyperbolic) equation as heat transport equation (or diffusion of a scalar to get 1/r) seems odd to me. How do you get 1/r dependence?

Hodge

report post as inappropriate

Dear Prof. Kozlowski,

Without a doubt, Schrödinger's young friend was correct. You appear to believe that reason implies "not only a capacity for logical sequence of argument, but also a sensitivity to balance, as detectable by the intuitive faculty of consciousness. In my opinion, you are correct in your analysis that one needs guard against fantasy. You nailed it:

"Structure as...

view entire post

Without a doubt, Schrödinger's young friend was correct. You appear to believe that reason implies "not only a capacity for logical sequence of argument, but also a sensitivity to balance, as detectable by the intuitive faculty of consciousness. In my opinion, you are correct in your analysis that one needs guard against fantasy. You nailed it:

"Structure as...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Miroslaw,

The wonder of discovery ... it is truly a joy is it not? And those coincidences ... more than two dimensions but less than four dimensions. Hamilton would agree completely regarding the uniqueness of a three dimensional universe.

Good Luck and Best Regards,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

The wonder of discovery ... it is truly a joy is it not? And those coincidences ... more than two dimensions but less than four dimensions. Hamilton would agree completely regarding the uniqueness of a three dimensional universe.

Good Luck and Best Regards,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Dear Miroslaw,

Yours is a nice essay, pretty clear. I gave your essay a 9, and down graded it by one point because of a couple of funny aspects, such as referencing equation 1.181 that made things a bit odd. There is I think another aspect to this, which is Bott periodicity and the 8-fold (mod-8) condition with the dimension of spaces. The Cayley numbers 1, 2, 4, 8 play a role in the structure of division algebras, and quaternion bundles on SU(2) or SO(4) have a moduli space of 5 dimensions. The dimension of space is involves with the quaternion Hopf fibration. With quaternion Hopf fibration 3 --- > 7 ---- > 4 there is a connection between dim = 3 and 4, with 7 as the “linking space.” I think this has something to do with your observation about 2, 3, 5, 8. I am less clear about whether this continues with the Fibonacci sequence. However, 13 mod 8 is 5, 21 mod 8 is 5, 34 mod 8 is 5, 55 mod 8 is 7, 89 mod 8 is 1, 144 mod 8 is 0, 233 mod 8 is 1, 377 mod 8 is 1 and so forth. A computer program might be written to find what “FIBO mod 8” looks like for a large set of numbers. Then maybe a theorem could be proposed and proven. Maybe this excludes the number 6. It might be that this gives 0 and either Cayley numbers and 2, 3, 5, and 8.

You might be interested in my essay where I discuss aspect of the Bott periodicity and the mod-8 structure. I am largely interested in connection between what are at first apparently unrelated things.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2320

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Yours is a nice essay, pretty clear. I gave your essay a 9, and down graded it by one point because of a couple of funny aspects, such as referencing equation 1.181 that made things a bit odd. There is I think another aspect to this, which is Bott periodicity and the 8-fold (mod-8) condition with the dimension of spaces. The Cayley numbers 1, 2, 4, 8 play a role in the structure of division algebras, and quaternion bundles on SU(2) or SO(4) have a moduli space of 5 dimensions. The dimension of space is involves with the quaternion Hopf fibration. With quaternion Hopf fibration 3 --- > 7 ---- > 4 there is a connection between dim = 3 and 4, with 7 as the “linking space.” I think this has something to do with your observation about 2, 3, 5, 8. I am less clear about whether this continues with the Fibonacci sequence. However, 13 mod 8 is 5, 21 mod 8 is 5, 34 mod 8 is 5, 55 mod 8 is 7, 89 mod 8 is 1, 144 mod 8 is 0, 233 mod 8 is 1, 377 mod 8 is 1 and so forth. A computer program might be written to find what “FIBO mod 8” looks like for a large set of numbers. Then maybe a theorem could be proposed and proven. Maybe this excludes the number 6. It might be that this gives 0 and either Cayley numbers and 2, 3, 5, and 8.

You might be interested in my essay where I discuss aspect of the Bott periodicity and the mod-8 structure. I am largely interested in connection between what are at first apparently unrelated things.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2320

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Dear Lawrence

Thank you very much for your comment. To be sure I am rather weak in advanced math . Your essay is very interesting and opened new horizon in my understanding of Universe. I must say that number 8 was for me rather hard to understand in the context of Universe After reading your essay I am filling better :). Without hesitation I valued it highly 10

My best regards

Miroslaw

PS I apologise for that damned formula numer. I was after two surgical eyes intervention and my visus recover very slowly !

Thank you very much for your comment. To be sure I am rather weak in advanced math . Your essay is very interesting and opened new horizon in my understanding of Universe. I must say that number 8 was for me rather hard to understand in the context of Universe After reading your essay I am filling better :). Without hesitation I valued it highly 10

My best regards

Miroslaw

PS I apologise for that damned formula numer. I was after two surgical eyes intervention and my visus recover very slowly !

Thanks for your assessment of my essay. I suppose you have not entered it yet, and somebody gave it a 1. I might look this up, but if the Fibonacci sequence in a mod-8 setting does not have the number 6 that might be curious. We would then have the numbers 2, 3, 5, 8 as one set, 1, 2, 4, 8 as one set and 0 has having some sort of relationship with each other that might lead to surprises.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Dear Miroslaw,

I just read your nice essay. While wishing you speedy recovery from your health challenges, I have two assignments for you to think and work out.

1. You say by conservation of mechanical energy T + V = constant in orbits. Can you calculate the Total energy at Perihelion and the Total energy at aphelion, is there not a difference? By Total, is the sum of the Potential and Kinetic at each position. From the formulae, the Total energy (P.E. + K.E.) is lower at perihelion than it was at aphelion. Where has the 'lost' energy disappeared to? Then from whence is it regained after perihelion and replenished at aphelion?

2. You talked about centripetal force acting and Newton tells us that a force continues to act in its direction unless opposed by another force. After perihelion, the orbiting body starts moving in a direction opposite the centripetal force. If Newton is correct, we must search for a force acting to oppose the centripetal attraction force, do you agree?

When you have the time you may also wish to read my essay and ask some questions.

Best regards,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

I just read your nice essay. While wishing you speedy recovery from your health challenges, I have two assignments for you to think and work out.

1. You say by conservation of mechanical energy T + V = constant in orbits. Can you calculate the Total energy at Perihelion and the Total energy at aphelion, is there not a difference? By Total, is the sum of the Potential and Kinetic at each position. From the formulae, the Total energy (P.E. + K.E.) is lower at perihelion than it was at aphelion. Where has the 'lost' energy disappeared to? Then from whence is it regained after perihelion and replenished at aphelion?

2. You talked about centripetal force acting and Newton tells us that a force continues to act in its direction unless opposed by another force. After perihelion, the orbiting body starts moving in a direction opposite the centripetal force. If Newton is correct, we must search for a force acting to oppose the centripetal attraction force, do you agree?

When you have the time you may also wish to read my essay and ask some questions.

Best regards,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

Dear Akinbo

The conservation of total energy for non-dissipative systems is out of discussion. However if you take into account the structure of interplanetary space you will realise that the orbits of the planet are shrinking due to tha interaction of the planets with interplanetary medium. In any case the planetary systems with the interplanetary ( very low density gases ) medium included are not stable!

Regards

Mirosław

The conservation of total energy for non-dissipative systems is out of discussion. However if you take into account the structure of interplanetary space you will realise that the orbits of the planet are shrinking due to tha interaction of the planets with interplanetary medium. In any case the planetary systems with the interplanetary ( very low density gases ) medium included are not stable!

Regards

Mirosław

Dear Professor Kozlowski,

It would be physically impossible for "interplanetary space" to exist.

Cheers,

Joe Fisher

report post as inappropriate

It would be physically impossible for "interplanetary space" to exist.

Cheers,

Joe Fisher

report post as inappropriate

Dear Joe Fisher

Your joke is fine!I have buyed it

. By the way Wikipedia is rather serious. Best Mirosław

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Look up interplanetary in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Interplanetary may refer to:

Interplanetary space, the space between the planets of the Solar System

Interplanetary spaceflight, travel between planets

The interplanetary medium, the material that exists in interplanetary space

Your joke is fine!I have buyed it

. By the way Wikipedia is rather serious. Best Mirosław

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Look up interplanetary in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Interplanetary may refer to:

Interplanetary space, the space between the planets of the Solar System

Interplanetary spaceflight, travel between planets

The interplanetary medium, the material that exists in interplanetary space

Dear Sir,

Dimension is the perception of differentiation between the internal structural space and external relational space of objects. Since we perceive through electromagnetic interaction, where the electric and magnetic fields are perpendicular to each other and both move perpendicularly, we have three mutually perpendicular dimensions. These are invariant under mutual transformation and can be resolved into 10 different combinations. Thus, the n-dimensional space is a figment of imagination. After failure to find the extra large or compact dimensions, we should not continue with this and scrap all papers dealing with fantasy.

Regards,

basudeba

report post as inappropriate

Dimension is the perception of differentiation between the internal structural space and external relational space of objects. Since we perceive through electromagnetic interaction, where the electric and magnetic fields are perpendicular to each other and both move perpendicularly, we have three mutually perpendicular dimensions. These are invariant under mutual transformation and can be resolved into 10 different combinations. Thus, the n-dimensional space is a figment of imagination. After failure to find the extra large or compact dimensions, we should not continue with this and scrap all papers dealing with fantasy.

Regards,

basudeba

report post as inappropriate

Your conscious effort is appreciated!

Best of Luck!!

Regards,

Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

report post as inappropriate

Best of Luck!!

Regards,

Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

report post as inappropriate

Dear Kozlowski,

Number rules the Universe, it is no doubt.

The problem is where to start.

I point out the views of Ruder Boskovic, who anticipated some scientific achievements two centuries earlier.

Thus, for him there are zeros of force, cohesion and non-cohesion limits. He subdivides them to zeros by zero, first, second… order. The determination of these zeros is of fundamental importance. My view is that it is easier to determine the zeros lower order. In this sense, the Fibonacci series is ideal but not a zero order. I think it is easier to reach conclusions which have the power of prediction in physics using the following mathematical concepts:

bit (it was the subject of the contest FQXi 2013);

exp (x) (You know the unique features of this function);

Euler's identity.

Suitable use of pervious can describe features of the physical World.

If you agree with me, part of the solution can be found in my essay.

Best Regards,

Branko Zivlak

report post as inappropriate

Number rules the Universe, it is no doubt.

The problem is where to start.

I point out the views of Ruder Boskovic, who anticipated some scientific achievements two centuries earlier.

Thus, for him there are zeros of force, cohesion and non-cohesion limits. He subdivides them to zeros by zero, first, second… order. The determination of these zeros is of fundamental importance. My view is that it is easier to determine the zeros lower order. In this sense, the Fibonacci series is ideal but not a zero order. I think it is easier to reach conclusions which have the power of prediction in physics using the following mathematical concepts:

bit (it was the subject of the contest FQXi 2013);

exp (x) (You know the unique features of this function);

Euler's identity.

Suitable use of pervious can describe features of the physical World.

If you agree with me, part of the solution can be found in my essay.

Best Regards,

Branko Zivlak

report post as inappropriate

Miroslaw,

My take from your essay finds a novel approach to math, its aesthetics, and its failure to explain all natural phenomena. I thought of the Nova series on Math and Nature: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/describing-nature-math.

html wondering if you'd seen it. Its perspective reminds me of yours.

Considering your different perspective, I would like your thoughts on my essay.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

My take from your essay finds a novel approach to math, its aesthetics, and its failure to explain all natural phenomena. I thought of the Nova series on Math and Nature: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/describing-nature-math.

html wondering if you'd seen it. Its perspective reminds me of yours.

Considering your different perspective, I would like your thoughts on my essay.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

Dear Professor Kozlowski,

I thought that your engrossing essay was exceptionally well written and I do hope that it fares well in the competition.

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

report post as inappropriate

I thought that your engrossing essay was exceptionally well written and I do hope that it fares well in the competition.

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

report post as inappropriate

Miroslaw,

I am revisiting essays I’ve read to assure I’ve rated them. I find that I did not rate yours, so I will rectify that. I hope you get a chance to look at mine: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2345.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

I am revisiting essays I’ve read to assure I’ve rated them. I find that I did not rate yours, so I will rectify that. I hope you get a chance to look at mine: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2345.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

GM = monster group

GMB = Baby monster group

O >>> Order of group

Fibonacci serie, golden ratio, Phi

alpha^-1(0) = inverse fine structure constante to zero momentum= 137.035999173

mpk= Planck mass ; me = electron mass

Best Regards

report post as inappropriate

GMB = Baby monster group

O >>> Order of group

Fibonacci serie, golden ratio, Phi

alpha^-1(0) = inverse fine structure constante to zero momentum= 137.035999173

mpk= Planck mass ; me = electron mass

Best Regards

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jason

Thaank you for reminder me the Lucas numbers. As a matter of facts I am a "fan" of Leonardo Pisano and his ingenius mind of XII centuru. Really it was a great mistake to coined the "label" dark time: for the medival period in human science revolution. Recently I wrote the extended version of my essay. If you are interested in I will send you the copy. The subject is the Design in Nature ( Gestalt problem). I am of the opinion that what we need , and looking for is metascience, which in some sense is , I think much simpler that the contemporary science divided , like, a human medicine in branches loosly connected.

My best regards

Miroslaw

PS

Jason i Apologise for misprinted error if it exists in a letter- Iam before serious eyes surgical intervention

Miroslaw

Thaank you for reminder me the Lucas numbers. As a matter of facts I am a "fan" of Leonardo Pisano and his ingenius mind of XII centuru. Really it was a great mistake to coined the "label" dark time: for the medival period in human science revolution. Recently I wrote the extended version of my essay. If you are interested in I will send you the copy. The subject is the Design in Nature ( Gestalt problem). I am of the opinion that what we need , and looking for is metascience, which in some sense is , I think much simpler that the contemporary science divided , like, a human medicine in branches loosly connected.

My best regards

Miroslaw

PS

Jason i Apologise for misprinted error if it exists in a letter- Iam before serious eyes surgical intervention

Miroslaw

Login or create account to post reply or comment.