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

Peter Jackson: on 4/17/15 at 15:54pm UTC, wrote Frank, Thanks, we agree on most things, indeed I find it hard to...

Frank Makinson: on 4/6/15 at 3:37am UTC, wrote The scientists of a century ago were wrong about a lot of things. They were...

Joe Fisher: on 4/3/15 at 16:28pm UTC, wrote I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about...

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 3/17/15 at 10:52am UTC, wrote Dear Frank, Have you tried to consider the ontological interpretation of...

Frank Makinson: on 3/13/15 at 17:21pm UTC, wrote Peter, Yes, it has been awhile. I had prepared my paper for another...

Peter Jackson: on 3/13/15 at 12:54pm UTC, wrote Frank, Good to see you back, and with another valuable perception of...

Frank Makinson: on 3/13/15 at 4:15am UTC, wrote Your lack of space is not compatible with the core mathematics...

Joe Fisher: on 3/12/15 at 14:42pm UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Makinson, You wrote: “Time is not something we can ignore, nor...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

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...

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: Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015) [back]
TOPIC: The Geometric Core of Spacetime by Frank H Makinson [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Frank H Makinson wrote on Feb. 20, 2015 @ 21:38 GMT
Essay Abstract

The mathematical abstraction of geometry has a good fit to physical law. A pair of very basic geometric forms can be linked to mutually define the size of the most basic units of measure, a unit length and a unit time duration and produce a mathematically defined value for the speed of light. One does not need to know ahead of time the actual physical size of the dimensions used to describe the elements of the triangles. The result of the paired geometric process identifies the perfect union between space and time.

Author Bio

The author received a BS in electrical engineering after his military participation in the Korean War. So far, he hasn't retired from learning.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



John McVirgo wrote on Feb. 22, 2015 @ 03:20 GMT
Your essay doesn't appear to have anything to do with the competition topic

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Frank H Makinson replied on Feb. 24, 2015 @ 16:45 GMT
John,

I stated in the first paragraph, “I do not believe there is a mysterious connection between physics and mathematics;” I do not know why the contest title used the term mysterious. If we use the premise that specific mathematical structures, such as arithmetic, geometry, algebra, etc., were developed to solve a type of problem, there is nothing mysterious about that. Basically, what we possess is incomplete information as to why certain mathematical structures were originally developed; algebra and geometry are examples.

To illustrate there is no mystery, I restructured the explanation of the concept that was published in an IEEE publication to show how a slight change in the mathematical structure of geometry can provide a numerical solution to a physical law that cannot be done with measurements.

Perhaps scientists will now understand why the transcendental numeric value of 6.28317...., which we symbolize with 2pi, has a good fit in equations dealing with physical law.

Bookmark and Share



Sujatha Jagannathan wrote on Feb. 26, 2015 @ 17:04 GMT
Your abstract vision to co-relate the process of union with the parable is rightly holding the space between time and space!

Good-Luck!

Sincerely,

Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Frank H Makinson wrote on Feb. 27, 2015 @ 03:55 GMT
Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

Your quote of Bertrand Russell is quite apropos. “Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the physical world, but because we know so little; it is only its mathematical properties that we can discover.”

My essay did not attempt to define space, “whatever its composition.” My essay identifies a mathematical relationship between space and time. Please note that I adjusted the time unit scaling to 10-6 to reflect our human perspective of time. I do not know if the mathematically defined time unit duration, without the 10-6 adjustment, has a relationship to an event duration mentioned in your essay.

Bookmark and Share



Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 28, 2015 @ 03:59 GMT
Frank,

This was an interesting essay. Is it possible that the angle associated with your triangles is 26.565 degrees instead? If so, you might be interested in a paper that I have posted to viXra.org. The title is "The Wave Medium, the Electron, and the Proton - Part 1".

It is a minor point, but there are several places where you wanted to express meter second^-1, but the text does not indicate this.

Many of the essays discuss geometry in one way or another. This seems to be a general consensus regarding part of the effectiveness of mathematics.

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Frank H Makinson replied on Feb. 28, 2015 @ 04:56 GMT
Gary, Sorry, the approx. 26.25400 degrees is the angle that applies to my triangle pair when expressing the angle related to the time duration of the second.

The conclusion of your vixra paper stated, "Therefore, the author believes that the electron and the scalar field are identical. The electron is the scalar field. The scalar field is the electron. They are the aether. "

Astronomers use the term "dispersion measure" to describe the presence of electrons in space that cause the low frequency component of a signal to be received at a later time than the high frequency components. I became acquainted with the term when I read about "Fast Radio Bursts." Astronomers must agree with you that electrons are uniformly distributed throughout space.

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 12, 2015 @ 14:42 GMT
Dear Mr. Makinson,

You wrote: “Time is not something we can ignore, nor space, which has a dimension in all directions. How space and time are interrelated has consumed immeasurable hours of effort by philosophers and mathematicians.”

For the first time in your life Mr. Makinson, please behold unified reality: Proof exists that every real astronomer looking through a real...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Frank H Makinson replied on Mar. 13, 2015 @ 04:15 GMT
Your lack of space is not compatible with the core mathematics described in my essay. I do agree that the current definition of space that is generally accepted is lacking. No one seems to challenge the basic assumption that is the basis for the Michelson-Morley experiment, in 1887. Those two individuals made their assumption based upon incomplete information, which is why their experimental result is basically invalid. I stated in my essay, "In 1908, Minkowski and other scientists of that era were unaware that we are constantly bathed in broadband electromagnetic (EM) radiation from the cosmos."

It seems obvious that the universe is a complex EM Energy Transfer Structure (EM-ETS). I have another paper that I am working on that will upset the conventional thinking on how energy is exchanged in the universe. I will work on that paper when I get time from promoting my most recent paper, "The Electromagnetic Cause of Shell Shock." viXra 1502.0196

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Mar. 13, 2015 @ 12:54 GMT
Frank,

Good to see you back, and with another valuable perception of underlying matters. I suspect the 'off topic' comment above took the literal sense not intent of the subject.

You'll recall I agree with your fresh and perceptive views from previous discussions, and I found your original twin triangle approach fascinating and valuable. I feel the need to further explore it when time allows. I certainly think it deserves far higher scoring and am glad to help. I also look forward to reading the paper you mention soon.

My essay also identifies fundamental flawed assumptions with major consequences, apparently missed by the first few scorers. I'm sure you'll see them and look forward to discussion.

Best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Frank H Makinson replied on Mar. 13, 2015 @ 17:21 GMT
Peter,

Yes, it has been awhile. I had prepared my paper for another purpose, but then found it could be applied to this years' FQXi essay contest. In the response to my first essay comment I stated, If we use the premise that specific mathematical structures, such as arithmetic, geometry, algebra, etc., were developed to solve a type of problem, there is nothing mysterious about that....

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Apr. 17, 2015 @ 15:54 GMT
Frank,

Thanks, we agree on most things, indeed I find it hard to understand how so many self apparent truths are ignored in favour of unproven but entrenched doctrine.

I've not read many but I'm now crazily speed reading trying to catch up. I hadn't applied your (high) score but will now. I hope to get to your other paper, do please send me or post a live link if you can.

Thanks Best of luck.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Mar. 17, 2015 @ 10:52 GMT
Dear Frank,

Have you tried to consider the ontological interpretation of equilateral "heavenly triangle" of Plato, where the parties (vector) – representants of absolute states of matter (absolute forms of existence)? Edmund Husserl in "Origin of Geometry indicated a sure way to primordial structure of space: "Only to the extent, to which in case of idealization, the general content of spatio-temporal sphere is apodictically taken into account, which is invariant in all imaginable variations, ideal formation may arise, that will be clear in any future for all generations and in such form will be transferable by the tradition and reproducible in identical intersubjective sense ."

This requires deep digging to the most remote depths of meanings - in the ontology and dialectics of Nature, dialectics logos and eidos.

I think that first need to "grab" the primordial structure of space and only then possible to understand the nature of primordial fundamental constants and the nature of time as polyvalent phenomenon of the ontological (structural, cosmic) memory.

Kind regards,

Vladimir, electrical engineer

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 3, 2015 @ 16:28 GMT
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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Frank H Makinson replied on Apr. 6, 2015 @ 03:37 GMT
The scientists of a century ago were wrong about a lot of things. They were aware of light coming from the stars, but they were unaware of the broadband electromagnetic spectrum being emitted throughout the cosmos; this wasn't revealed until 1940 when Grote Reber managed to get his paper, "Cosmic Noise," published. Minkowski was on the correct path when he stated, "The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality" He really couldn't do much more than what he did, as he was limited by the incomplete information available to him in 1908.

Also, my paper indicates that geometry has a basic link to space-time, thus I cannot agree with the statement presented in your papers' title. If Tegmark reads my essay, he will have a very simple example of how the universe is linked to mathematics.

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.