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

Paul Butler: on 5/4/18 at 2:14am UTC, wrote Dear Sue, I await your response. The contest pages stay on the site and...

Sue Lingo: on 4/18/18 at 20:02pm UTC, wrote Hi Paul... Appreciate your thoughtful response, and will at first...

Paul Butler: on 4/14/18 at 17:08pm UTC, wrote Dear Sue, I checked on your paper’s page and was able to expand your...

Sue Lingo: on 3/29/18 at 3:16am UTC, wrote Hi Paul... Please note: My post have been truncated by the FQXi system...

Paul Butler: on 3/21/18 at 17:55pm UTC, wrote My comment on Sue Lingo’s paper’s page on Mar. 21, 2018. Dear Sue, I...

Paul Butler: on 3/8/18 at 17:35pm UTC, wrote To All, In some of my comments I mentioned that if a point is located one...

Paul Butler: on 2/28/18 at 12:57pm UTC, wrote Dear Peter, Thanks for the good rating. I got up to 5.3 for about a day. ...

Peter Jackson: on 2/24/18 at 14:12pm UTC, wrote Paul, Time now short, Thanks for your kind and long responses but no time...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

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...

Eckard Blumschein: "Isn't symmetry simply closely related to redundancy even if physicist may..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Robert Rise: "Meet many types of women on ihookup. Some dates better than others. It is..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Steve Dufourny: "FQXI you too I need your help, come all too we have a work to do there..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

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...


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: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: The Fundament of the Fundamentality of What is Fundamental by Paul N Butler [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Paul N Butler wrote on Dec. 20, 2017 @ 21:39 GMT
Essay Abstract

In this paper I start with a search of the accepted meanings of the word fundamental beginning with the words that it is derived from and going forward to its present general meanings. I then look for the way that its meanings apply to structure in physics and finally use this understanding to apply it to the various structural levels of the construction of the universe. I then do a quick analysis of that structure to see what it points to as the next possible unknown area of structure to be understood and to yet be developed. In order to accommodate all main structural levels, etc., I could only cover the basic fundamentals in each one briefly due to space limitations for the paper. I believe that it should be adequate to demonstrate the basic topic concept of “What is Fundamental”, however.

Author Bio

The author has long been interested in understanding the fundamental structure of the universe. In order to accomplish this it has been necessary to come to understand what is fundamental.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Dec. 23, 2017 @ 18:38 GMT
My comment on Scott S Gordon’s paper:

Dear Scott,

I read your paper and it has some good understandings and concepts, such as the understanding that we must question everything that we know about time and space and I would add that we must also question everything that we know about the structure of the fields, energy photons, and matter particles that exist in that space and the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Dec. 29, 2017 @ 23:40 GMT
Scott S Gordon's comment back to me on Dec. 23, 2017.

Author Scott S Gordon replied on Dec. 23, 2017 @ 23:06 GMT



Hi Paul –

I have to say you have very diligent in reading my paper – You have made some very important points and I will address the best I can in a post.

You state, “your paper is much like many others that I have seen that fall short of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Dec. 29, 2017 @ 23:45 GMT
My comment back to Scott S Gordon on his paper on 29 Dec., 2017

Paul N Butler replied on Dec. 29, 2017 @ 23:31 GMT



Dear Scott,

You are right that I am using my current knowledge, but I am not really trying to apply it to space-time because my current knowledge goes beyond the concept of space-time so that concept is no longer required to explain the structure and...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 21:55 GMT
Scott S Gordon's comment to me on his paper's page on Jan. 14, 2018

Hi Paul,

You have a lot of questions for me to answer... I can't post my entire book... I can refer you to this paper which gives a brief manner in which particle contain energy proportional to c^2.

https://www.academia.edu/27987699/_Why_Cant_the_LHC_Find_New


_Math_

I can also tell you that the energy of spacetime is real and it is important. The energy field of particles are created by the interaction of E1/E2 energy with the E0 energy of spacetime. In addition gradients in the E0 energy of spacetime is responsible for the outward force on all matter, so in this regard the energy is real.

There is no constant creation of New energy - the displacement of GOD entities in the examples I gave were purely "what if's" and cannot happen in actuality. These examples were given to derive mathematics of E0 energy being proportional to c^0.

In addition you throw around the term "dimension" as if you are physicist thinking that you know what a dimensions is and how a dimension is created... You should read this paper on dimensions:

https://www.academia.edu/30755282/Hidden_Dimensions_..._Not_


So_Hidden_After_All

All the best!

Scott

Bookmark and Share



Georgina Woodward wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 02:23 GMT
Hi Paul , I think you make some interesting points about language and how it can confound our thinking. I think that is significant in physics, where sometimes the precise vocabulary doesn't exist or is ambiguous. One example that springs to mind is 'light', as seen and as an unseen electromagnetic waves. Another is 'colour' used both for seen colour and frequency of electromagnetic radiation. I like that you got to the bottom, literally. of fundamental. Although I have interpreted it more as 'most important', as in a main ingredient (eg. base of a soup) or giving rise to the most things and /or phenomena. Rather than basement level or foundation. I am not criticizing your thorough research into the root of the word. Having talked about that first level you seem to forget the focus on the fundamental and take us on a long journey through many other (to me, strange) levels, which was too much for me, I'm sorry to say. Kind regards Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 22:18 GMT
Dear Georgina,

I am glad that you understand that there is often much vagueness or imprecision in the language that is used by man in every area of expression. It can be worse in areas where the expression of very complex concepts is involved, such as in physics, etc. When I first began to look at physics, I noticed that the understanding of those involved in the field was often very...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jan. 9, 2018 @ 16:07 GMT
My comment on Karl H Coryat’s paper’s page on Jan. 5, 2018

Dear Karl,

I read your paper and I agree with the importance of the four pillars of fundamentality that you cover in it. I would only disagree to one degree or another with the examples that you include for each of the pillars.

I agree that as much as possible a fundamental theory should be general and include an...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Jan. 10, 2018 @ 16:10 GMT
Dear Paul n. Butler,

You wrote: “The Definition of the Word Fundamental Man’s language is confounded in many ways.”

My research has concluded that Nature must have provided the only physical structure allowable and that allowed physical structure had to be in place millions of years before any language fluent people ever appeared.

It would be illogical for Nature to devise different physical conditions in different places at different times. The real Universe consists of only one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated by mostly finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 16:21 GMT
Dear Joe,

We have conversed several times in past contests. I usually try to address every part of your comment and your return comment mostly just repeats your comment to me without giving me any new more detailed information about what you said that might give me a better understanding of what you are actually saying and meaning in your comment. This time I will try a different approach to see if you actually desire that people understand what you are saying. In your comment you mention “one single infinite dimension”. Describe to me what that dimension is and how it is structured and how it works, etc.

Sincerely,

Paul

Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jan. 10, 2018 @ 18:38 GMT
My comment to John-Erik Persson on his paper’s page on Jan. 10, 2018

Dear John-Erik



I read your paper and I find that in many ways you have a better understanding of structural concepts than many who are committed to trying to fill the holes in existing quantum mechanics and relativity theories. You are correct that what is usually called ether exists and it is composed...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



John-Erik Persson wrote on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 12:25 GMT
Paul Butler

Thank you for your deep interest in my article. A very important fact is that we both can agree that there is a 'black hole' in our fundamental knowledge, due to the fact that the important concept ether is missing.

I will read your article about the interesting uncertainties in language.

From John-Erik Persson.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 12, 2018 @ 01:21 GMT
John-Erik Persson's comment to me on his paper's page on Jan. 11, 2018

Author John-Erik Persson wrote on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 12:09 GMT





Paul Butler

I thank you very much for good words about my essay. Yes, i agree that the ether is a very important and fundamental concept together with space and time (not spacetime).

I will take look at your article. It appears to regard uncertainties in language. It seems interesting.

Thanks, and good luck _______________ John-Erik Persson

Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 12, 2018 @ 01:27 GMT
Dear John-Erik,

I saw your comments to me both on your page and also on my page and that they were a little different from each other. I will just make a single comment that covers both of them.

My current paper starts out covering the meaning of the word fundamental because that is what the contest topic is about and I do start out mentioning the vagueness of man’s abstract...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 21:31 GMT
John-Erik's comment to me on his page on Jan. 12, 2018

Paul Butler

Thanks for making it more clear. I agree to your opinions regarding the relation between physics and mathematics. Mathematics is not fundamental to physics itself, but to our understanding and knowledge of it. It is good that you try to define what fundamental means. Thanks.

Best regards from _____________________ John-Erik Persson

Bookmark and Share



Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 10:13 GMT
Yes Paul, we are here as the builders of the tower of Babel. Want to build fundamental physics, and do speak different languages. So I want to convince everyone that space is matter, and no one understands me. I already said that space is the body of God Because He ascended into heaven, he returned to his body. The fundamental should be very simple. The idea of God is very simple and it needs to be translated into the language of physics. Check out my essay, even if you are not all clear.

Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 23, 2018 @ 17:22 GMT
Dear Dizhechko,

I noticed that in the comments on your paper’s page, people seem to address you as Boris. Is that what you prefer? If so, I will do that next time.

I did have some trouble with translation of your paper, but I think I got some of it figured out. We both agree that current physics over emphasizes abstract math modeling that is often not as connected to observed...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich replied on Jan. 24, 2018 @ 11:23 GMT
Yes, Paul, We both agree that current physics over emphasizes the abstract math that is often not connected to observ ...

The mathematical language is the language of knowledge and it is from Satan, which sows discord between people. In this discord I participate. The main thing in my essay is the principle of the identity of space and matter of Descartes, which physicists do not want to accept. I tell them why you need the idea of ​​a mythical ether, when Descartes gave us the idea of ​​physical space, which is matter. Matter is space, space is matter. Space is the foundation that fundamental theories lack.

Thank you for the information from the Holy Scripture. I think about the three-dimensional rotation for a long time, but in the beginning it is necessary to convince physicists that space is matter and it rotates.

The time of the contest does not allow a long time to communicate. Here the main thing is to quickly exchange opinions and get a rating. I have already highly appreciated you and I hope that you will also strengthen me in my desire to bring people closer to the idea that space is the body of God.

To receive notifications by mail and respond quickly, write to me on my page, and I will respond to your page.

Sincerely, Boris

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on Jan. 25, 2018 @ 21:32 GMT
Dear Boris,

You did not tell me of your preference, so I used Boris this time. Let me know if that is not ok with you. Numbers and quantities are used by God in the creation. For the most part math is man’s abstract language used to work with them, so I don’t believe that math is of Satan, but like all of the parts of man’s abstract language system it can be used either for good to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 18:21 GMT
Paul,

Fascinating essay and hypothesis. I found your comments on language and communication true and became moot as I did struggle a little from the lack of natural paragraph breaks towards the end. But all in all very readable and interesting.

We start from a similar premise of simple motion and spatial structure with speed and relative interactions being key. We head off different ways from there, but both valuable I think. Your 5th dimension motion seems to me analogous to my orthogonal Chiral handed rotations giving Majorana electrons as their own 'antiparticle. I then derive a classical QM, but I hope you may comment however much you may understand QM or not.

Nicely done for yours.

Very best.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on Feb. 10, 2018 @ 15:44 GMT
Dear Peter,

Thank you for the positive comment on the essay and hypothesis and the comments on language and communication. I do have a tendency to transfer the information without always including all of man’s language structures in the written form because they are not included in the form in which it is provided to me. I try to add the commas and paragraph extra lines, etc., but I...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 20:42 GMT
Peter Jackson's comment to me on his paper's page on Feb.11, 2018.

Paul,

Wow to that to! Much agreement, but I'll just focus on your questions.

1. The 'We' isn't quite the 'Royal' we. I've worked with other specialists on various aspects of the discrete field model (DFM) first described here in 2011 removing some of the nonsense interpretations surrounding SR (postulates are...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 20:48 GMT
My comment to Peter Jackson on his paper's page on Feb. 16, 2018.

Dear Peter,

1. I guess then that you really aren’t the Pope or the king of the world as I thought you were. That is such a disappointment. I was thinking that you might have the power to open up diplomatic relations with my world. That was a Si-Fi moment. At least as far as you know. It looks like you are very...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 00:07 GMT
My comment to Claude Michael Cassano on his paper’s page on Feb. 5, 2018

Dear Claude,

Does your math model tell us the basic substance of which matter particles, energy photons, and fields are composed or constructed? If so what is it? Does it tell us how this basic substance is structured in each of them to give them their individual observable properties? If so what are those...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Feb. 13, 2018 @ 02:25 GMT
My comment to Claude Michael Cassano on his paper’s page in response to his comment to me on that page on Feb. 6, 2018

Dear Claude,

First I will explain the situation about the printing of the letter n instead of a line feed because that should be the easiest part. I have used the same copy of Microsoft word to type out my comments for several years and that was the first time...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 20:57 GMT
My comment to Karen Crowther on her paper’s page on Feb 18, 2018

Dear Karen,

I read your paper and found it very interesting in many ways. If taken strictly as presented the nine conditions could possibly identify a most fundamental theory depending on how they are interpreted. As an example, since the universe is constructed as a structural substance hierarchy, although it is...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 21:01 GMT
Karen Crowther's comment to me on her paper's page on Feb. 19, 2018.

Dear Paul,

Thanks for your comments. There is a lot in what you have said, and I can't fully respond to all of it, so I'll just make a few comments.

On the idea of potentially "compartmentalising" the theory into sections that deal with particular phenomena at different scales, in order to simplify its...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Author Paul N Butler replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 21:07 GMT
My comment to Karen Crowther on her paper's page on Feb. 20, 2018.

Dear Karen,

In order to give you an idea of what can be extrapolated from current observational data and theories, I guess it would be best to start at the lowest most fundamental level of physical substance structuring and build up from there. If you look at E=MC^2 where E=energy, M=mass, and C=the speed of light,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Mar. 8, 2018 @ 17:35 GMT
To All,

In some of my comments I mentioned that if a point is located one inch from the earth’s north or south rotational pole central axis point of rotation, it would only travel about a little over 3 inches in one rotation (about 3.14 inches). That is not correct, of course, since that would be the radius times Pi. The right answer would be C = 2 Pi r or the diameter times Pi or 2 X Pi = about 6.28 inches. Since no one corrected me on it, I figured that it would be good for me to correct it for posterity. It is interesting how people can get so far down the quantum mechanics / relativity rabbit hole that they forget the basics. Of course, the idea that spin can be a basic motion, that a point object could spin, or that a point object could even exhibit the property of angular motion are other examples of lack of understanding of the basics.

Sincerely,

Paul

Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Mar. 21, 2018 @ 17:55 GMT
My comment on Sue Lingo’s paper’s page on Mar. 21, 2018.

Dear Sue,

I read your paper and found that your approach can be useful. Although, in a way, FQXI tries to frame the contest subject around existing currently accepted theory, such as quantum mechanics and relativity, etc., papers that are accepted for the contest generally allow for a relatively wide range of variation. ...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Sue Lingo wrote on Mar. 29, 2018 @ 03:16 GMT
Hi Paul...

Please note: My post have been truncated by the FQXi system without option to "view entire post"?... but I log all UQS Social Media and Forum commo online.

REF:UQS Social Media and Forum Log http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSSMF.php

The inherent conundrums of any language, to include mathematics, do indeed impose constraints/limits on conceptual analysis, and I am...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on Apr. 14, 2018 @ 17:08 GMT
Dear Sue,

I checked on your paper’s page and was able to expand your comment to me on your page and also your comment on my page ok.

I will start with your comment to me on your page and number my responses to the paragraphs starting with (1.) in response to your paragraph that starts with “It is my contention that CAD/SIM analysis,”.

1. CAD/SIM analysis can be used to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Sue Lingo replied on Apr. 18, 2018 @ 20:02 GMT
Hi Paul...

Appreciate your thoughtful response, and will at first opportunity reciprocate in kind.

However, if FQXi does not graciously maintain contestant essay pages after May 1st., I will need an e-contact.

In the interim, if one keeps in mind that UQS is not a belief/theory... i.e. UQS is a math model that resolves a visual geometry solution, and associated digital code, for pulsed distribution of minimum units of Energy (QE) equal in all directions from a single point source... one can find answers n the UQS Project on-line archived papers, to many of the question you pose.

For example: "23. Why only 24 points around the initial point? Are these 24 QI positions spread only in a two dimensional plane around the initial point or are these 24 points spread over three dimensions?"... is contextually addressed and 3D CAD illustrated at:

Comparative Singularity Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQST-TVNH.php

Thanks again Paul, for sharing your insights and providing opportunity for exchange.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

WWW.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Paul N Butler replied on May. 4, 2018 @ 02:14 GMT
Dear Sue,

I await your response.

The contest pages stay on the site and can be accessed with new comments for at least a year after the contest is over. My first paper on the FQXI site was in 2008, which I think was their first contest and I can still access it and print copies of the paper at this time. I have not tried to put a new comment on that old paper lately, but I did put...

view entire post


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.