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

Vladimir Fedorov: on 2/22/18 at 5:53am UTC, wrote Dear Gene, I highly appreciate your beautifully written essay. Your essay...

Gene Barbee: on 2/19/18 at 16:27pm UTC, wrote Hi Eckard, Thanks for your question. High energy labs submit their data...

Eckard Blumschein: on 2/18/18 at 14:39pm UTC, wrote Isn't CPT possibly an artifact due to abstraction? In 1932, Hermann Weyl...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 1/29/18 at 14:23pm UTC, wrote This is my post only, I was just logged out in between, I dont know why...?...

Anonymous: on 1/29/18 at 14:17pm UTC, wrote Dear Barbee, Thank you for nice Essay, I really appreciate your essay...I...

Gene Barbee: on 1/28/18 at 16:47pm UTC, wrote Hi Joe, So far you are correct, nature is not understood and you appear to...

Joe Fisher: on 1/27/18 at 21:46pm UTC, wrote Dear Gene H Barbee, Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface...

Gene Barbee: on 1/22/18 at 19:22pm UTC, wrote Philip, Thanks for your interest and question. Dr. Klingman and I...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "Yes. The estimate of age of the visible universe, and age of stars, other..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

akash hasan: "Some students have an interest in researching and space exploration. I..." in Announcing Physics of the...

Jorma Seppaenen: "I find this very interesting topic. I am just a amateur enthusiast of..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Michael Jordan: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Anonymous: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Constructing a Theory of...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Hanvi jobs: "Yes i am totally agreed with this article and i just want say that this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Robert McEachern: ""all experiments have pointed towards this and there is no way to avoid..." in Review of "Foundations of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi FORUM
May 24, 2019

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: Time is Fundamental by Gene H Barbee [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Gene H Barbee wrote on Dec. 20, 2017 @ 21:39 GMT
Essay Abstract

Many people interested in science probably started, as I did, taking things apart to see what they were made of. I wanted badly to know what was inside neutrons and worked on the problem for many years. After the discovery that quarks are inside heavy fundamental particles, I wanted to know what quarks are made of. Recently I studied new Particle Data Group (PDG) data [17] that lists measured properties of baryons and mesons. Baryon and meson properties are simple additions of quark properties. But quark properties are Schrodinger based quantum circles consisting of time and information that obey conservation rules involving Charge, Parity and Time (CPT) and Fields (F).

Author Bio

Independent Researcher Mechanical Engineer with long time interest in physics and cosmology Author of many papers published on Academia.edu and viXra.org.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Scott S Gordon wrote on Dec. 21, 2017 @ 01:28 GMT
This paper presents known particles building another model of a proton and a neutron. There are many models for protons already proposed and none of them bring us any closer to what's fundamentals... In your paper Are you saying that time has emerged from your model of a proton (or neutron) as being fundamental? And if so, how can that understanding be used to advance physics?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Gene H Barbee replied on Dec. 21, 2017 @ 20:42 GMT
Hi Scott, thanks for reading the paper. The high energy labs spend a huge amount of money to produce meson and baryon data to uncover fundamentals. Models are an intermediate step between data and fundamentals but I don’t confuse them with reality. It was interesting to me that their properties could be understood as “quantum circles” described by the Schrodinger unitary operator 1=exp(iet/h)*exp(-iet/h). Time doesn’t emerge from the model, but it is in the exponent along with energy that is inverse time. The understanding used to advance physics is that everything is based on the unitary operator that evolves with time. It could be the structure of consciousness. Information and Reality, viXra:1602.0219v2, December 2017 (my paper).

Bookmark and Share



Georgina Woodward wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:13 GMT
Best of luck Gene. I hope you get lots of readers who can understand and appreciate your model and give the kind of feedback you would like.I appreciate the time and effort that must have gone in to your well presented entry. Kind regards Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jan. 15, 2018 @ 22:49 GMT
Dear Gene Barbee,

I enjoyed your essay and agree with a number of your statements. You view quarks as "quantum circles". This is somewhat analogous to Alan Kadin's solitons, and also to my own view of quark construction. I note that more and more physicists are rebelling against "point particle" physics, in favor of some extended (finite density) model. Your 'nested model' is also interesting. I view iso-spin (for example) as a projection onto physical reality that is good for organizing data, but is not a physical reality like spin, so I am uncertain how this plays into fundamental analysis. You seem to make it fit your model, which is impressive.

Your heading "Time underlies everything" seems to agree with Marcel-Marie Lebel's thesis, and is the focus of my current essay, which you succinctly summarized as "time is counted in cycles and is everywhere the same." This relates to your Et/h=1 which focuses on the energy-time conjugation of physical systems. The characteristic 'time' or frequency of quantum systems is conjugate to energy, and it is this 'local frequency' that clocks measure, not time directly. We are in agreement on the fundamental nature of time in the scheme of things.

Your handling of particle data is most impressive. As we have discussed, the tabular nature of your results makes them hard to interpret for the average smoky bear, but some similar comment applies to many of our best efforts. I see steady progress in your work, and the work of many participants in this contest. That is rewarding in itself.

My very best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Gary D. Simpson wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 17:47 GMT
Gene,

You did some homework for this essay. Being able to construct all of those particles using your model is impressive in my opinion.

It is also interesting that you could find a dimensionless similarity between the neutron and the cosmos as we know it. Let's just hope the cosmos doesn't decay like a lone neutron!

Your emphasis on energy also rings true to my ear.

Your description of the GR metric tensor fits well with my essay since it is four squares.

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Philip Gibbs wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 20:20 GMT
You have some interesting ideas about protons, neutrons and quarks, and their relation to the fundamental nature of time. Do electrons, photons and other particles fit into this picture too?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Gene H Barbee replied on Jan. 22, 2018 @ 19:22 GMT
Philip,

Thanks for your interest and question. Dr. Klingman and I communicated a couple of times about my neutron model that decays to become the proton+electron+anti-electron neutrino model. I reduced data and found a way to match the neutron mass about 20 years ago. It shows the three quarks masses, their kinetic energy and associated fields. I used the equation E=e0*exp(N) where N is...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 21:46 GMT
Dear Gene H Barbee,

Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Only the truth can set you free.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Gene H Barbee replied on Jan. 28, 2018 @ 16:47 GMT
Hi Joe,

So far you are correct, nature is not understood and you appear to believe it never will be. Several essays indicate that we are at square one and want to start over with their particular equation or approach. This creates a "tower of babel" situation. I remember a year 2000 Scientific American article by Steven Weinberg that promised a theory of everything approach by 2020. I also recall some author saying our brains are just not advanced enough (he called us "dog brains") to ever understand. Your realist statement fits but it is worthwhile trying.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 22, 2018 @ 13:02 GMT
Wonderful idea Dear Gene H Barbee,

Time is really one of the major Fundamental concepts, You have some exciting ideas about protons, neutrons and quarks, and their relation to the fundamental nature of time. …..

I request you please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

Here Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.

In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from “http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ ”

- Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true….Have a look at

http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.h
tml

I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied

Best

=snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jan. 29, 2018 @ 14:17 GMT
Dear Barbee,

Thank you for nice Essay, I really appreciate your essay...I am giving my maximum appreciation. And for the reply on your nice post, have a look at my essay...

Best Regards

=snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 29, 2018 @ 14:23 GMT
This is my post only, I was just logged out in between, I dont know why...?

Best wishes to your essay

=snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 14:39 GMT
Isn't CPT possibly an artifact due to abstraction? In 1932, Hermann Weyl didn't have an explanation.

Eckard Blumschein

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Gene H Barbee wrote on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 16:27 GMT
Hi Eckard,

Thanks for your question. High energy labs submit their data to the Particle Data Group. Mesons and Baryons are each assigned I, J, P, & C (Iso-spin, Spin, Parity and Charge). You can see the data by searching for Particle Listings and looking for the Summary Tables. I spent several months reading their reports and correlating the data. I believe they are measuring real properties. It appeared to me that the properties are separations from zero and obey CPTI=0 or CPTIF=0 depending on whether they are mesons or baryons. They believe that CPT is violated for certain mesons decays but don't offer an explanation.

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 05:53 GMT
Dear Gene,

I highly appreciate your beautifully written essay. Your essay allowed to consider us like-minded people. I am also an independent Researcher, a mechanical Engineer.

I agree with you. And «I wanted badly to know what was inside neutrons and worked on the problem for many years. After the discovery that quarks are inside heavy fundamental particles, I wanted to know what quarks are made of».

I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.

Vladimir Fedorov

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080

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.