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

Jonathan Dickau: on 4/23/15 at 0:53am UTC, wrote Hello Vad, This essay was a bit hard to read in places, which I expect is...

Branko Zivlak: on 4/12/15 at 20:30pm UTC, wrote Dear Vad, Your essay is very good. It deserves high score. There is a wide...

Vad Bobrovski: on 4/11/15 at 11:27am UTC, wrote Dear Michel, The Vlasov equation (1938) was called collisionless Boltzman...

Michel Planat: on 4/10/15 at 8:41am UTC, wrote Dear Vad, As I was browsing through the bottom essays of this context I...

Joe Fisher: on 4/7/15 at 15:42pm UTC, wrote Dear Vad, I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was...

Vad Bobrovski: on 3/17/15 at 4:05am UTC, wrote Development of the universe is permanent evolution process. According to...

Vad Bobrovski: on 3/12/15 at 4:53am UTC, wrote Much has been written through the Contest that the math models are wrong...

Vad Bobrovski: on 3/5/15 at 16:42pm UTC, wrote Essay Abstract Discussion about instantaneousness interaction...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

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 Agnew: "There are some questions that do not seem to have answers in the classical..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Agnew: "Yes, there are two very different narratives. The classical narrative works..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

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.


FQXi FORUM
October 14, 2019

CATEGORY: Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015) [back]
TOPIC: Who will hack the Multiverse? by Vad S Bobrovskiy [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Vad S Bobrovski wrote on Mar. 5, 2015 @ 16:42 GMT
Essay Abstract

Discussion about instantaneousness interaction transfer goes back to the times of Descartes. In the beginning of the 21st century, this issue switched from theoretical field into experimental.

Author Bio

Vad Bobrovskiy is a researcher in the Distant School Cosmic-Meteo-Tectonics. Passionate about new science frontiers since the University and postgraduating, Vad focuses on the achievements of nonlocal statistical mechanics theory by Vlasov and Vlasov-Everett Many-world conception.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author Vad S Bobrovski wrote on Mar. 12, 2015 @ 04:53 GMT
Much has been written through the Contest that the math models are wrong since there is difference between what the models predict and what we observe. Both cosmology theories, including Big Bang, and quantum mechanics and other branches of science are full of “slippery terms”. But rather than pursuing down and deeper a matter of facts, the essay has humble task to show that this is how a science develops by the way of errors, intuition, observation and implementation.

Astronomers observe unique structures, indeed, but they use classical mathematics in the Newtonian unitary closed universe, consisting of as little as two locally interacting objects (mass, ...). That’s why such unique structures are mystic phenomena.

19, 20, 21 centuries have brought to us the evidences that denial of Cartesian model of dual (expanded-vortex) universe, forces scientists to use fictitious values (variables, dark conceptions…) in the mathematical and physical models which are constructed under the stipulation that our “unique” universe is closed single system with only two interacting objects. The answer to the question of the Contest “Trick or Truth?” is positive. The truth of our open universe lies behind tricks of our mathematics.

Bookmark and Share



Author Vad S Bobrovski wrote on Mar. 17, 2015 @ 04:05 GMT
Development of the universe is permanent evolution process. According to the famous Goedel’s theorem, if there is happen to be going the description of open system and if the description is interrupted by dot, then the system would lose its openness and become close at once. In another words, to describe open and developing system it is used to be the increasing number of bit of information.

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 7, 2015 @ 15:42 GMT
Dear Vad,

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


Michel Planat wrote on Apr. 10, 2015 @ 08:41 GMT
Dear Vad,

As I was browsing through the bottom essays of this context I found yours very relevant and exciting. It is difficult not to agree that there are big unsolved (dark!) problems in cosmology and may be our starting point to tackle them is not appropriate. It turns out that the 2010 Field medalist Cédrick Villanni (present director of the Poincaré's Institute in Paris) considers Vlasov-Poisson equation (related to Landau damping in his work) as an angular stone of the understanding of astrophysics.

Can you explain more or give references about why the multiverse has to do with Vlasov's work.

Thanks and all the best.

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Vad S Bobrovski wrote on Apr. 11, 2015 @ 11:27 GMT
Dear Michel,

The Vlasov equation (1938) was called collisionless Boltzman equation and was used for plasma physics research. Since Vlasov’s approach to study plasma had aroused strong reaction by physicist-theorists, now we know well Landau damping and collisionless Boltzman equation. Whole things including Nonlocal Statistical Mechanics (NSM), Vlasov did after 1944, are still unknown...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Branko L Zivlak wrote on Apr. 12, 2015 @ 20:30 GMT
Dear Vad,

Your essay is very good. It deserves high score. There is a wide range of problems that you have explained. I am particularly interesting in part, related to self-organization, because I think it is neglected in modern science. I suggest that you, along with Vlasov use and papers of Ruđer Bošković, you may reach extraordinary insights. I'm in my essay made the original hypotheses that have led to significant prediction. I would be grateful if you could comment on the results of my essay.

Regards,

Branko

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Apr. 23, 2015 @ 00:53 GMT
Hello Vad,

This essay was a bit hard to read in places, which I expect is because English is not your first language. I have mixed feelings about the content. There is some value in what is presented, but one has to know a little about your subject area to find it. I think you are better at complaining about what is wrong or missing from the conventional interpretation in Physics, and you seem less proficient at explaining how the better ideas of Vlasov and others are superior. This paper was better than the average, and the work you highlight deserves some attention, so I raised your score somewhat.

All the Best,

Jonathan

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.