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 3/1/18 at 7:37am UTC, wrote Dear Bayarsaikhan, Many thanks for the kind words, interest shown in my...

Jouko Tiainen: on 2/26/18 at 12:42pm UTC, wrote Wonderful ideas, very thorough treatment to a super high rigour. A...

Maxim Khlopov: on 2/24/18 at 13:39pm UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Bayarsaikhan Choisuren, Thank you for your interesting ideas on...

George Kirakosyan: on 2/24/18 at 5:49am UTC, wrote PS Dear Bayarsaikhan I think gravity problem can be solved in the other...

George Kirakosyan: on 2/24/18 at 5:36am UTC, wrote P.S. Dear Bayarsaikhan, I think the gravity problem must be solved in the...

George Kirakosyan: on 2/24/18 at 5:04am UTC, wrote Dear Bayarsaikhan You have presented an excellent alternative idea to the...

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 2/23/18 at 3:15am UTC, wrote Dear Bayarsaikhan Choisuren, contemplating the beauty of your mathematical...

Vladimir Fedorov: on 2/21/18 at 7:13am UTC, wrote Dear Bayarsaikhan, Here we are again all together. С большим...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

halim sutarmaja: "dewapoker hadir untuk semua pecinta game poker dengan teknologi terbaru dan..." in New Nuclear "Magic...

Jason Wolfe: "Hi Georgina, Steve, What is reality? The humorous answer, almost at the..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Jason Wolfe: "Joe, What you are saying sounds like mathematics. But mathematics doesn't..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Jason, You can only unnaturally make an infinite number of finite written..." in First Things First: The...

Jason Wolfe: "As for religious fundamentalists, I would rather deal with them, then with..." in More on agency from the...

Jason Wolfe: "The best we can do with the environment is to plant more trees and..." in More on agency from the...

gmail login: "Thanks a lot for the post. It has helped me get some nice ideas. I hope I..." in Bonus Koan: A Lake of...

Georgina Woodward: "Steve, I don't think the quantum representation of the hydrogen atom is an..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...


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 18, 2019

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY AS A PERFECT FLUID SINK FLOW by Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren wrote on Dec. 21, 2017 @ 21:02 GMT
Essay Abstract

This paper assumes that an extraordinary invisible spatial perfect fluid sink flow that has a critical flow speed equal to light speed c, which can be treated as four-dimensional Minkowski continuum. As considering all elementary particles act as spatial perfect fluid sinks of infinitesimally small strengths, Newtonian dynamics can be extended while theoretically deriving formulas of the relativistic mass increase and the inverse square law of gravity, with an additional term that may represent the Pioneer anomaly. A mass-generation mechanism is alternatively explained on base of the spatial perfect fluid space. Scientific interpretations of concepts of mass and electric charges, and also accelerating expansion of the Universe, cyclic model of Big Rip and Bing Bang, are made.

Author Bio

Bayarsaikhan Choisuren worked as a researcher in the Institute of Physics and Technology of Mongolian Academy of Sciences and the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Moscow Oblast, on Nucleon-Deuteron scattering at high energy by Glauber model

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Scott S Gordon wrote on Dec. 21, 2017 @ 23:44 GMT
Hi Bayarsaikhan,

You have stated something not easily noticed and extremely interesting, "The relative motion in Special and General Theory of Relativity is perceived to be a motion of a material object relative to its ambient spatial fluid (i.e. relative to space itself)."

What you are saying (correct me if I am mis-interpreting this) is that particles in spacetime not only have a relative motion to other particles in spacetime but have a relative motion to the underlying spacetime itself which leads to the consequences we see in special relativity. This is brilliant! Now do you have any idea of what spacetime is composed of to accomplish this? That is what Einstein was looking for but couldn't figure it out... Einstein put some of these thoughts in this presentation he gave:

http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Extras/Einstein_ether.ht
ml

You also seem to be implying with your idea that if spacetime is composed of something and particles are composed of something, that the known energy fields and properties of particles are a result of the interaction of what each is made of. Is that what you are saying? Have you worked out any correlation in regards to this?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Andrew Beckwith wrote on Dec. 24, 2017 @ 11:58 GMT
I enjoyed the essay. I do hope you explain how this essay relates to the fundamental question meme of the contest. Wish you the best as to how your ideas play out in the contest

Andrew

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John R. Cox wrote on Dec. 24, 2017 @ 15:47 GMT
Bayarsaikhan,

Just scanning your essay, I must say that it resembles similar thinking in different metaphysical terminology. Spacetime as a perfect and extraordinary fluid is interesting and practical way of describing the continuum as a real though immaterial origin of energy. You are essentially arguing that space and time differentiate from a unity which continuously creates more energy than there is space at any instant, for it to exist at a minimum energy density bound. And that where energy does exist at that minimum universal density it exists at light velocity. Superluminal velocity is not disallowed in dynamics if we accept that the speed of light is an averaged velocity across the length of any single wavelenghth of a cyclic acceleration/deceleration event. So that minimum density at light velocity is really an empirical lower bound of any spatial fluid sink, conserving space in an energy supersaturate universe.

I freely admit a personal prejudice in favor of your fundamental conjecture, it is very close to my early modeling in simplistic algebraic terms and Euclidean geometry of a rationale to explain the wave-particle duality of electromagnetic radiation, and some subsequent unitary field theorization in the mid-1980's.

Good Luck, I will carefully read your essay before giving my public rating. Thanks for contributing to efforts in rationalizing the Relativity/Quantum impasse. jrc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

John R. Cox replied on Dec. 24, 2017 @ 19:44 GMT
All differences aside, I do like the effort. jrc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Woodward wrote on Jan. 3, 2018 @ 08:15 GMT
Hi Bayarsaikhan,

I appreciate that a lot of thought and effort has gone into your model and the presentation of it here. I'm afraid I can't bring myself to read it in its entirety as I think the fudamental premise is incorrect and so it is 'barking up the wrong tree', so to say. As space-time is not foundational. I see from the comments that other readers are far more inspired and enthusiastic about it. So with good luck you will get more readers like them. Thank you for sharing your work with us. Kind regards Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 10, 2018 @ 10:53 GMT
You mean to say that is Neutrino flow?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 21:48 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan,

Interesting read and theory. I agree there's certainly something out there too small to perceive!

Also nicely written and presented so I think doesn't deserve to be in the 4's.

I am of the view that 'motionless' needs more explanation as you discuss motion in a number of places making it look perhaps contradictory? And can I assume in line 4 of your conclusions we could add 'local' before ambient?

You don't seem to be engaging, which is a shame. I hope you read others, and particularly mine of course!

Very best of luck

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Feb. 10, 2018 @ 10:21 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan,

The FQXi contest is primarily a competition of new alternative ideas on the fundamental issues of knowledge (physics, mathematics, cosmology). You give such new ideas. This is extremely important. Especially important are new alternative ideas in cosmology . I just believe that the "big bang" hypothesis should have an ontological justification.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 07:13 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan,

Here we are again all together.

С большим интересом читаю ваше эссе, которое, конечно, достойно высокой оценки.

With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of the highest praise.

Hopefully you will take away something from my effort that justifies the time you have given me.

Vladimir Fedorov

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 03:15 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan Choisuren, contemplating the beauty of your mathematical formula, can immediately give you 10. I'll give you such a rating, however, I am against unnecessary encryption of physics in mathematical symbols. Spatially the liquid which you explain the essence of body mass, in the New Cartesian Physics is just matter, because according to the principle of identity of space and matter Descartes, space is matter and matter is space that is moving. Look at my essay, FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes. I hope you will not leave without attention to this principle and appreciate good New Cartesian Physics for his radicalism

Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 05:04 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan

You have presented an excellent alternative idea to the solution of the amazing gravity problem. In my opinion, it should deserve serious attention among specialists. I was especially interested in the possibility of interpreting the famous pioneer's anomaly. Well, I also think BB is out of doubt, although there are still many opponents to it. Honestly speaking to me it is difficult so quickly to unequivocally confirm all your calculations and conclusions that require a certain time. But I want to believe and wish that they would all be true, because your work is really impressive. Therefore, I consider it my duty to support you. Please try to look at my critical work, where you will find a few words about ST and GR.

My good wishes to you.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 05:49 GMT
PS

Dear Bayarsaikhan

I think gravity problem can be solved in the other field that is from its logical-cognitive side. Check please here if you have good enough time!

Article

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Maxim Yurievich Khlopov wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 13:39 GMT
Dear Dr. Bayarsaikhan Choisuren,

Thank you for your interesting ideas on the nature of elementary particles, their mass and gravity.

With the best regards

M.Yu.Khlopov

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jouko Harri Tiainen wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 12:42 GMT
Wonderful ideas, very thorough treatment to a super high rigour.

A Perfect invisible liquid with a critical flow speed of the speed of light c. In Figure 1 The red square dot circle illustrates the horizon surface Sc. To paraphrase Dirac, spin is the square root of geometry. The outside of Sc can be treated as the four-dimensional Minkowski continuum -- hence a Geometric picture...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 1, 2018 @ 07:37 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan,

Many thanks for the kind words, interest shown in my work and for excellent questions.

The questions on the forum help to identify topics that I did not explain well enough in the essay.

You write: «I understood that your idea is based on nonideal medium of a physical vacuum».

Non ideality of the medium of the physical vacuum is a key concept....

view entire post


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.