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

James Hoover: on 4/22/15 at 23:00pm UTC, wrote Abdelwahed, Shark time, so I am revisiting essays I’ve read to assure...

ABDELWAHED BANNOURI: on 4/22/15 at 9:14am UTC, wrote Dear James Lee: Thank you for your review, I believe that a theory of...

James Hoover: on 4/21/15 at 17:15pm UTC, wrote Abdelwahed, Thanks for looking at my essay. Yours is an interesting study...

ABDELWAHED BANNOURI: on 4/17/15 at 11:58am UTC, wrote THEOREM AND SEQUENCE IN THE SUYSTEM BI-ITERATIVE.

ABDELWAHED BANNOURI: on 4/14/15 at 15:19pm UTC, wrote Dear Peter: In fact, with the word Bi-iterative, I mean two planes crossed...

Peter Jackson: on 4/11/15 at 22:21pm UTC, wrote Dear Bannouri, Thanks for your comments on my string. The response I...

ABDELWAHED BANNOURI: on 4/9/15 at 16:55pm UTC, wrote Dear peter thank you, for your review. In my opinion,mathematics that...

Peter Jackson: on 4/6/15 at 12:58pm UTC, wrote Dear Bannouri Interesting essay. I don't entirely agree the conclusions...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jason Wolfe: "There are two facts that have been established. First, the universe is..." in First Things First: The...

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

Jason Wolfe: "Hi Steve, It sounds like we have similar interpretations of quantum..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Agnew: "Yes indeed, a wavefunction represents a superposition of locations as well..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Jason Wolfe: "Science is motivated to sever the connection with Deity. They use fluff,..." in Constructing a Theory of...

Robert McEachern: ""But what do scientists hope quantum computers will be good for,..." in What Will Quantum...

Zeeya Merali: "Over the past couple of months there’s been renewed interest, and quite..." in What Will Quantum...

Jason Wolfe: "If I could write an unconventional model of reality, it would come with a..." in Alternative Models of...


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 22, 2019

CATEGORY: Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015) [back]
TOPIC: Trick or Truth: the Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics by ABDELWAHED BANNOURI [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author ABDELWAHED BANNOURI wrote on Mar. 10, 2015 @ 15:27 GMT
Essay Abstract

Since ancient times, the rigor and logic of mathematics were Already known. In Egypt, the cosmic order was represented by the goddess Maat. The followers of Pythagoras believed that the world was made by numbers. at the entrance of Plato's academy in Athens ,was written "let no enter ignorant of geometry" The physics was Considered natural philosophy, for long time, only in the last three hundred years, Has assumed the role of the study of natural phenomena, based on scientific rigor and experiment. Today, technological progress has changed many things, despite this, the mathematicians and Physicists continue to formulate only thesis, axioms, Conjectures, hypotheses and theories ..... If the hypothesis of Tegmax mark is right. "The universe is mathematics", then we are Immersed in a giant mathematical structure. Is there a mathematical structure numerical and relativistic? (I assume , the laws of nature are a manifestation of reality through geometry and numbers, the universe is a mathematical structure inside another, just the result of an extensive quantum mechanism). Could theorem Iterativ and Iterativ sequence be the answer? Can we talk about Involved mathematics? What does the paradigm Bi-Iterativ means? The function Bi-Iteractiv requires a universe plastic calculable and computable ... Why should opposites coexist? Why should space be flat and curved at the same time?. What is the relationship between physics and mathematics? It Seems That physics and mathematics are the same thing I think ,We need a new vision, a broad framework That goes beyond quantum mechanics and general relativity ...

Author Bio

BANNOURI ABDELWAHED I studied French Literature in Morocco ,University of Casablanca. In Italy , I studied Bio-naturopathy (natural medecine) with A.MI University (Milan Accademy) I still live in Italy.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author ABDELWAHED BANNOURI wrote on Apr. 3, 2015 @ 15:09 GMT
THE PARADIGM BI-ITERATIVE

In my view, the universe is an hyper-equation "a mathematical structure inside of another and depends on another external"

Paradigm Bi-iterative, is a mechanism, based on the idea of ​​two systems, from one part there are the quantum units (Quantum Mechanics), from another part there are the iterative units ( Iterative Mechanics). these two systems...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Apr. 6, 2015 @ 12:58 GMT
Dear Bannouri

Interesting essay. I don't entirely agree the conclusions but 'agreement' should count for nought in scoring. I see you're at the bottom, but I don't think you should be. In particular I like;

"We need a new vision, a broad framework That goes beyond quantum mechanics and general relativity."

and;

"the universe not only can be described by mathematics, but it is a mathematical structure inside another."

The recursive 'dimensions' of nature are the key ..but I would keep with 'can be described by' and not say 'IS' a mathematical structure, which is quite different!

I've also shown in previous essays how with a helical dynamic; "the wave and the particle are the same thing", and my own essay identifies Galileo agreed with Plato's; "let no one ignorant of geometry enter here."

I hope you'll also read and score mine, which hopefully you should understand even as a non-physicist, but do ask questions I also hope you now stay away from the bottom!

Peter

Bookmark and Share
post approved


Author ABDELWAHED BANNOURI wrote on Apr. 9, 2015 @ 16:55 GMT
Dear peter

thank you, for your review.

In my opinion,mathematics that reflects reality, remains a priority for the current science.The Bi-iterative calculation could be the right one, because it has all the characteristics of a pure mathematics.

“NUMBERS”

first are integers

second are geometric shapes

third are physical entities, with infinite degrees of freedom

fourth maintain always the aspect ratio

fifth are elastic ... ..

Sixth are compact, and unseverable by two egual part.



We take an example:

1 + 5 + 7 + 12 =

                          = 1 + 5 + 7 + (6 + 8 + 10)

                          = 1 + 5 + 7 + (3 + 4 + 5) + 8 +10)

                          = 1 + 5 + 7 + (3 +4 +5) + (1 + 6 - 9) + 10

                          = 1 + 5 + 7 + (3 +4 +5) + (1 + 6 - 9) + 10

                          = 1 + 5 + 7 + (3 +4 +5) + (1 + (3 + 4 + 5) - 9) + 10

                          = 13

                          = 2197

This is a mathematical structure, as you see, is elastic. means a "string" ,it can be lengthened or shortened.

Inside this structure could coexist other independent structures (3 + 4 + 5) and (3 + 4 + 5).

This sequence is another example:

1 + 5 + 7 + 12

2 + 10 + 14 + 24

3 + 15 + 21 + 36

4 + 20 + 28 + 48

5 + 25 + 35 + 60

6 + 30 + 42 + 72

7 + 35 + 49 + 84

8 + 40 + 58 + 96

9 + 45 + 65 + 108

1 + 5 + 7 + 12

This mathematical structure is multidirectional. I mean, not only can go in any direction: circular, spiralform, waveform, straight....,but it can be also expanded or reduced.

That's why, I firmly believe that this mathematics structures could be the right math.

sincerly yours

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Apr. 11, 2015 @ 22:21 GMT
Dear Bannouri,

Thanks for your comments on my string. The response I poster there is below. I agree your mathematical structure, indeed also as the Fibonacci sequence. But you will see my main point is that it's also easy to make false assumptions and arrive at 'fallacios proofs', as we can proving 1=2, or that Dr Bertelmann can't have certain red/green sock sequences. I point out it's such errors that hold back understanding of natures mechanisms and coherent mathematics (including bracket sequences). I thus see no inconsistency in our views, which I see as coherent and complementary.

POST

I agree QM is a small part. Indeed the first of a finalist essay string considered electron absorption and re-emission at local c.

2020 Vision.

The 2013 essay looked closer at the issues you raise, and the role of maths;

The Intelligent Bit.

I also agree "a mathematics that reflects the reality remains a priority". My point is that we're not quite there yet, because we can also mis-use mathematics so fool ourselves and confound understanding. 'Bi-iterative', if used in a recursive sense to increasing 'fractal like' orders certainly seems the way to go. I show a powerful physical mechanism it can describe in the video I've just posted to Christian above. It's only 9 minutes but really should be 30 to cover the topics so may need 'stop/starts'. Do ask any questions.

Many thanks for your comments. I hope your essay keeps rising.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author ABDELWAHED BANNOURI wrote on Apr. 14, 2015 @ 15:19 GMT
Dear Peter:

In fact, with the word Bi-iterative, I mean two planes crossed subsequently superimposed. this concept to do with "the theory of everything"

Recursive calculation, the Fibonacci series and Fractal are wrongly linear, because they consider the space as a bi-dimensional sheet.

The calculation in the system Bi-iterative is different,it consider the reality, multi-directional and multi-dimensional. In fact, exist only set and sub-set. with (1) we mean (1 * 1 * 1).

A system that can not stop,follow the arrow of time. Or rather, it copies itself, reflects itself. So, we have (x + 1), + 1, + 1, + 1 .... "the universe was born so, one bit after another, and continues to do so even now".

We take this example:

(3 + 4 + 5) = 6 216 * 8

(6 + 8 + 10) = 12 1728 * 8

(9 + 12 + 15) = 18 13824 * 8



(12 + 16 + 20) = 24 . .

(15 + 20 + 25) = 30 . .

(18 + 24 + 30) = 36 . .

(21 + 28 + 35) = 42 . .

(24 + 32 + 40) = 48 . .

(27 + 36 + 45) = 54 . .

(3 + 4 + 5) = 6

This structure can be expressed in a linear way:

(3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3) = 6 = 216. ( straight line).

Because we live in a complex and varied reality, only a strutura able to transform can describe it.

The human brain is divided into two halves, the left hemisphere is masculine, active, called rational. The right hemisphere is feminine, passive called irrational.

The most important thing is that these two opposing position must coexist. the linear structure and the non-linear structure (wave) are inseparable.

In mathematical term (x + 1) and ( x-1 ) as the needle of the scale. probably the same for the blushift and redshift. So we can determine our position in space.

Look at the attachment.

Sincerly Yours

Bannouri

attachments: red-blu-shift.jpg

Bookmark and Share



Author ABDELWAHED BANNOURI wrote on Apr. 17, 2015 @ 11:58 GMT
THEOREM AND SEQUENCE IN THE SUYSTEM BI-ITERATIVE.

attachments: 1_Theorem_1.jpg, 1_Theorem_345.jpg

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Apr. 21, 2015 @ 17:15 GMT
Abdelwahed,

Thanks for looking at my essay.

Yours is an interesting study of the mysteries, embedded in history and carried into the present. You show that "the rigor and logic of math were known since ancient times. Your references are almost poetic, including the Gnostic belief that we are gods, fallen from the pleroma, a fulness that is also described in St. Paul in the Collossians (fullness of the Godhead).

I'm not sure about the "shadows which give their back to the true world" meaning.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author ABDELWAHED BANNOURI wrote on Apr. 22, 2015 @ 09:14 GMT
Dear James Lee:

Thank you for your review,

I believe that a theory of everything has to involve all aspects of life. Spirituality in particular is a natural call. somehow the soul must return to its natural form, is an evolutionary path, an inner search.

"Shadows that give back to the real world" is a metaphor, another way of saying two worlds, "one is true the other is reflected." earthly life is an occasion where the soul can transcend. Spiritually speaking, salvation is a high degree.

This centers with physics, because a particle can be in two places at the same time.

I think the main point of modern physics is this:

"The atomic model Standards is not complete, Gravity General Relativity is not correct."

The solution for both is this external reality, BI-iterative model is based on the idea that the real core is outside the atom, the iterative units are an internal clock of another clock regulates everything.

Sincerly yours

Bannouri

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Apr. 22, 2015 @ 23:00 GMT
Abdelwahed,

Shark time, so I am revisiting essays I’ve read to assure I’ve rated them. I find that I rated yours on 4/21, rating it as one I could immediately relate to. I hope you get a chance to re-look at mine: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2345

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.