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 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

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Previous Contests

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.

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


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

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

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

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
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


John Merryman: "The problem is that we do experience reality as those discrete flashes of..." in The Quantum...

Thomas Ray: "(reposted in correct thread) Lorraine, Nah. That's nothing like my view...." in 2015 in Review: New...

Lorraine Ford: "Clearly “law-of-nature” relationships and associated numbers represent..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Information Channel. An example from Jon Barwise. At the workshop..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Please clarify. I just tried to put a simple model of an observer in the..." in Alternative Models of...

Lee Bloomquist: "Footnote...for the above post, the one with the equation existence =..." in Alternative Models of...

Thomas Ray: "In fact, symmetry is the most pervasive physical principle that exists. ..." in “Spookiness”...

Thomas Ray: "It's easy to get wound around the axle with black hole thermodynamics,..." in “Spookiness”...

click titles to read articles

Why Time Might Not Be an Illusion
Einstein’s relativity pushes physicists towards a picture of the universe as a block, in which the past, present, and future all exist on the same footing; but maybe that shift in thinking has gone too far.

The Complexity Conundrum
Resolving the black hole firewall paradox—by calculating what a real astronaut would compute at the black hole's edge.

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

March 18, 2018

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: A Tragedy in Physics by John-Erik Persson [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author John-Erik Persson wrote on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 16:20 GMT
Essay Abstract

This article is about the not observed difference between the beam direction, representing the motion of light, and the ray direction, representing the orientation of the wave fronts. Disregarding this difference has delayed development in physics for a long time.

Author Bio

The author is a retired engineer with an MS in EE. He is a member of the CNPS (Chapell Natural Philosophy Society). See the blog at:

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share

George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 12:44 GMT
Dear John-Erik

Sorry! I was a little busy. Just now I seen your post and have read your kindly words on my work. Thank you!

Now I start read your "tragedy" with interest - as we really have faced to biggest tragedy!

I will return soon with my opinion, as I felt it may to interest you.

Best wishes

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jose P. Koshy wrote on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 14:10 GMT
John-Erik Persson,

The Title of your essay attracted me. I thought you would be saying something about 'mindless mathematical laws' causing tragedy. But the tragedy turned out to be something else. However, I agree with your view regarding time-dilation. The Relativity Theories of Einstein view everything in the universe to be relative, except the 'clock'. Wherever you go, your clock knows the 'speed of time' at that place; we can call it an 'absolute clock'. The question is whether it is the 'clock' or the 'time' that is absolute.

Regarding light, I am with Newton. I propose that light is streams of rotating particle-pairs having fields. Rotating pairs create wave-patterns, and so light shows properties of waves.

Jose P Koshy

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher wrote on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 17:14 GMT
Dear Mr Persson,

Please excuse me for I do not wish to be too critical of your fine essay and I do hope that it fairs well in the competition.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Eckard Blumschein wrote on Feb. 16, 2017 @ 21:51 GMT
Dear John-Erik Persson,

Fundamental criticism requires not just ideas but also serious scientific scrutiny of literature. May I kindly ask you to comment on ?

Maybe, already an appropriate hint could be helpful even if we are a bit off topic in this contest.

Thank you in advance,


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 04:49 GMT
Dear Erik,

I am fully with you that we are in big trouble - that is why I welcome your essay!

However, you try to solve problems by reanimation the ether. It is wrong. I just friendly asking you to trust me. The ether is not there, It is harmful and no need!

So, I can evaluate your work as fifty on fifty!

Best wishes

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 06:30 GMT
Thank you Persson

.... for your excellent essay giving good history of contemporary science, that delayed progress of science, but you touched upto Special theory of relativity only. You have nicely touched many problems like ether on GPS… Why you have left General theory of Relativity and Expanding Universe models based on Bigbang !?!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jeff Yee wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 05:21 GMT

Kudos, kudos, kudos! I wasn't sure what to expect after reading the title of your paper, but the contents are spot on. In fact, I've already signed up as a member of the blog site that you mention. I have been an advocate to bring back aether and absolutely agree that its dismissal has led to more than a century of wrong turns in physics because it could not be factored into equations.

I thought you might be interested to see Gabriel LaFreniere's computer simulation as an explanation to the Michelson Morley experiment. His work is on this site:

Also, I'll post some of my work on the Natural Philosopher's Community now that I'm signed up, but as it relates to FQXi, here's a paper that my colleagues and I submitted for this contest if you're curious to give it a read:

The Relation of Particles Numbers to Atomic Numbers



Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 13:50 GMT
Dear John-Erik Persson

I support your desire in essay to substantiate error of negative result of the Michelson.

"Although the effect predicted by Michelson, really, is not observed from the - for this compensation."

In My essay it is shown that the using of mathematical abstractions and ideal properties of matter and fields in the description of physical...

view entire post

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren wrote on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 00:00 GMT
Dear John-Erik Persson,

Your essay is interesting for me. Because you assumed the aether.

Particular your idea interesting that

“An ether wind transverse to wave velocity is falling inside the plane of the wave front. This means that changes in transverse ether wind cannot change orientation of wave front, since all points on the wave front are affected equally. Transverse ether wind is therefore irrelevant in relation to the ray direction, but relevant in relation to the beam direction. Transverse ether wind can change motion of light, but not orientation of wave fronts. This fact is important, and means that in systems sensitive to phase only the component in ether wind parallel to wave velocity is relevant….

We find also that Faraday’s ether not only exists; the ether can explain gravity as well, and also the Pioneer anomaly and other effects.”

Also I tried to explain the mechanism of gravitational interaction while assuming aether in my essay that

Also I visited at your site

I appreciate your essay in the Contest.

With Best Regards,


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rodin wrote on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 13:55 GMT
Very good work, Mr. Persson and it must be said, unfairly low sized up. I agree almost with all excluding of "ether wind". Neatly formulated conclusion. Bravo! I certainly highly appreciate yours paper.

Regards and good luck,

Vladimir A. Rodin

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.