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

Avtar Singh: on 2/27/18 at 18:05pm UTC, wrote Hi Jonatan: Thanks for your new comments on my paper. Rest mass is only...

Jonathan Dickau: on 2/26/18 at 22:09pm UTC, wrote I wanted to add this... I agree with the notion of a variable speed of...

Kamal Rajpal: on 2/25/18 at 13:52pm UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Avtar Singh, I have re-read you essay. Please read: ...

Narendra Nath: on 2/25/18 at 13:22pm UTC, wrote I find your essay as intriguing in originality and substance. You keep...

Jonathan Dickau: on 2/24/18 at 21:16pm UTC, wrote You highlight some interesting points Avtar... There is a lot to like...

Jonathan Dickau: on 2/24/18 at 6:38am UTC, wrote For the record, I think this essay has been rated lower than what it...

Jonathan Dickau: on 2/24/18 at 6:32am UTC, wrote This essay is interesting Avtar... On first pass; it appears to be more a...

Steven Andresen: on 2/23/18 at 13:32pm UTC, wrote Dear Avtar If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the...


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: What is “Fundamental” – Is “C” the Speed of Light? by AVTAR SINGH [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Avtar Singh wrote on Jan. 17, 2018 @ 21:53 GMT
Essay Abstract

A fundamental concept or law represents the underlying foundation on which the next level or a comprehensive physical theory is built upon and without which a coherent and consistent description of empirical observations at all scales is impossible. The widely-accepted current mainstream theories – General Relativity (GR), Quantum Field Theory (QFT), Maxwell’s Theory, and Standard Big Bang Model (BBM), although vindicated by multiple worldly experiments, are known to exhibit inconsistencies and paradoxical results at universal scale pointing to possible missing fundamental physics. “What is fundamental” is exemplified in this paper via identifying a potential missing fundamental phenomenon of anti-gravity or spontaneous mass-energy conversion leading to spontaneous expansion as evidenced in the observed accelerated expansion of the universe. Relativistic formulations of this fundamental phenomenon provide a new photon dynamics model that eliminates inconsistencies in the current photon model of Maxwell’s theory bridging gaps with relativity theory. The model allows a non-zero photon rest mass that spontaneously dilates to allow accelerated expansion in unrestricted space. Integrating gravity into the model provides a fundamental universe model that is shown to predict the observed universe behavior and resolves current paradoxes (black hole singularity, dark energy, dark matter, inflation). It also explains the apparent weirdness of the inner workings of quantum mechanics (quantum gravity, parallel universes, observer’s paradox, and nonlocality) eliminating known inconsistencies of current theories. The model also provides testable predictions for falsification via future observations. The proposed model provides a new fundamental universal understanding of key concepts of physics and cosmology describing C as a fundamental constant rather than the speed of light.

Author Bio

Dr. Avtar Singh is the author of the book - “The Hidden Factor: An Approach for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology and Universal Reality”. He obtained his Doctor of Science and Master of Science degrees from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA. He has been involved in research and development in science, engineering, and cosmology over the past 30 years. He has published more than fifty technical papers and two monographs. He received the ‘Best Paper Award’ of the American Nuclear Society and several technical excellence awards in nuclear, defense, and space industries.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jan. 18, 2018 @ 05:02 GMT
Dear Avtar Singh,

In your essay you discuss light hitting the semiconductor material, being absorbed and readmitted as "excitons", sometimes referred to as "heavy photons" because they carry energy, like photons, but have mass, like electrons." I will need to study the experiments you refer to, but I was fascinated by your discussion "allowing spontaneous conversion of the photon mass to kinetic energy and vice versa and this is consistent with the recent experimental observations." I find that exciting, as my theory has been pointing in that direction and I am now very encouraged to follow through with this problem.

You are introducing a new photon dynamics model that illuminates inconsistencies in the current photon model of Maxwell's theory bridging gaps with relativity theory. I have held off on my photon dynamics model, because I believed it to be a hard sell, but you are informing me that such a model is needed. Our models are different, but I will study yours to see what I might learn. Anyway, I read the rest of your essay in this light, and loved every minute of it!

It is in this regard that I hope you will read and comment upon my treatment of the history behind Einstein's "relativity of simultaneity". I have not had time to fully absorb your model, but I believe that my essay is relevant yours. I would be most interested in any comments or remarks or responses you might give me.

My very best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Jan. 18, 2018 @ 15:29 GMT
Dear Edwin

Thanks for your comments. I will read your paper soon.

Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share


Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 18:18 GMT
Hi Edwin:

Thanks for your time in reading my paper and providing kind and thoughtful comments. Finally, I got a chance to read your paper and enjoyed throughout.

I do not fully comprehend all mathematical detail of your model but notice your conclusion - "The effect of this belated recognition of ‘ether’ is the restoration of physical intuition and understanding of the fundamental nature of time as universal simultaneity."

Your conclusion contradicts Einstein's relativity of simultaneity, while my photon model in my paper - “What is Fundamental – Is C the Speed of Light” supports Einstein as it is vindicated by the observed universe expansion data. My photon model shows that there is no unique time or clock in the universe as time is only a relative entity to the frame of the observer.

I notice that you are in the bay area; I also reside in Cupertino, may be we can get together to discuss this further. You can contact me at avsingh@alum.mit.edu.

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

Bookmark and Share


Edwin Eugene Klingman replied on Feb. 10, 2018 @ 03:03 GMT
Dear Avtar,

I hope you will read my essay again, as I do not believe you have understood its potential significance for your work. You dismiss it because you say your photon model depends on special relativity, as it matches the observed universe expansion data. But that is not based on the relativity of simultaneity as you imply. Cosmic microwave background on which all cosmology models...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 20:43 GMT
Extremely important contribution, concerning the nature of light and the origin of hidden factors.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 17:29 GMT
Dear Avtar Singh, I will also argue that the law of gravity created the one who first said that the speed of light is finite and constant in all inertial frames of reference. After all, to slow down the movement of the space, there must be forces inimical to it. In addition to the speed of light as the eternal entity, the space still characterizes Planck's constant, which indicates that the space revolves. These two eternal entities form a third eternal essence - the pressure of the Universe.

Take a look at my essay, where I showed examples confirming the effectiveness of the idea of identity of space and matter of Descartes.

Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 18:43 GMT
Dr AVTAR SINGH Sab

Wonderful thinking about the new model, You took “C” the Speed of Light as fundamental… Large amount of Hard work sab…Best wishes for your essay Dr AVTAR SINGH sab……..….. …. I highly appreciate your essay and hope you may please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Avtar Singh wrote on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 19:09 GMT
Dear Gupta Ji

Thanks for your kind comments.

Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share



Author Avtar Singh wrote on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 20:24 GMT
Link to my paper – What is “Fundamental” – Is “C” the Speed of Light.

Bookmark and Share


Author Avtar Singh replied on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 20:26 GMT
Link to my paper – What is “Fundamental” – Is “C” the Speed of Light

Bookmark and Share


Author Avtar Singh replied on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 20:28 GMT
Link to my paper – What is “Fundamental” – Is “C” the Speed of Light.

Bookmark and Share


Author Avtar Singh replied on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 20:38 GMT
Link to my paper – What is Fundamental – Is C the Speed of Light.

Bookmark and Share



Author Avtar Singh wrote on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 21:05 GMT
my paper – “What is Fundamental – Is C the Speed of Light”.

Bookmark and Share



Ajay Pokhrel wrote on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 04:39 GMT
Dear Singh,

Well written essay. I appreciate the large amount of work you have shown in the essay. You reflect on relativistic and rest mass for C. Though some of the content were out of my qualification, I almost followed every part clearly and as far as I could understand.

Meanwhile, I wanted to ask a question on General Relativity since you are an expert in the field.(this question is not related to your essay).

I know that photon is also affected by the gravitational field. But how much force or gravity does it produce by itself? I mean like earth have some gravitational force of its own, how much photons have? Is there any calculation done to deduce the exact answer?

I invite you to read my essay: Is Mathematics Fundamental?

Kind Regards

Ajay Pokharel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 15:57 GMT
Dear Ajay:

Thanks for your time and kind comments.

I am not aware of any calculations regarding the gravitational force of a photon. Mainstream (Maxwell's theory) physics assumes that photon mass is zero and hence no gravitational effects.

Best Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share



Theodore St. John wrote on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 14:27 GMT
Dear Dr. Singh,

I very much enjoyed reading your essay. Your grasp of the topic is impressive and your essay is the most intelligent one I have read so far.



You pose a very good question “How a photon emitted from a stationary (V=0) surface spontaneously accelerates to the speed of light as it travels thru empty space?” And I completely agree with your assertion, that...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Theodore St. John replied on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 15:35 GMT
Dr. Singh,

I would like to contact you regarding your book, The Hidden Factor but couldn't find contact information on Amazon.com. Can you please email me at stjohntheodore@gmail.com.

Thank you

Ted

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Theodore St. John replied on Feb. 4, 2018 @ 17:56 GMT
The link I provided above doesn’t work because I left a space in the address. This one should work

“A Simple Model For Integrating Quantum And Relativistic Physics with application to the evolution of consciousness by Theodore St. John”

I’ve only received 2 ratings so far so I would really appreciate it if you would read, comment and rate it. I very much respect your opinion.

Thanks

Ted

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 16:22 GMT
Dear Ted:

Thanks for your time and thoughtful comments on my paper.

I read your paper and it appears that your ideas are similar but mathematics is different and needs further development to a detailed cosmological model that could then be compared against actual empirical data of the universe observations. Such data validation is necessary to determine its accuracy and consistency.

On a quick note, S=Ct and not S=C*C*t as his will distort all measured data.

The link to my book "Hidden Factor" is as follows:

The Hidden Factor

https://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Factor-Avtar-Singh/dp
/140339363X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1517847455&sr=8-2&keyword
s=hidden+factor+singh

Best Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share



Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 05:09 GMT
Dear Avtar Singh

Just letting you know that I am making a start on reading of your essay, and hope that you might also take a glance over mine please? I look forward to the sharing of thoughtful opinion. Congratulations on your essay rating as it stands, and best of luck for the contest conclusion.

My essay is titled

“Darwinian Universal Fundamental Origin”. It stands as a novel test for whether a natural organisational principle can serve a rationale, for emergence of complex systems of physics and cosmology. I will be interested to have my effort judged on both the basis of prospect and of novelty.

Thank you & kind regards

Steven Andresen

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John R. Cox wrote on Feb. 9, 2018 @ 22:05 GMT
Dr. Singh,

Very well written, you succinctly lay out the principal gaps in understanding and the compromising positions that keeps people searching for solutions. I found much agreement in your conclusion and implications, and will keep your essay on my list for reference.

Your model of a three dimensional projection of EMR is an intriguing variation of a theme I have had long on a...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 10, 2018 @ 16:58 GMT
Dear John:

Thanks for your time and detailed kind comments. I greatly appreciate it.

Yes, the frequency and wavelength discussions were excluded because of the limited length of the paper. In my book, I have described a detailed mathematical model for wave-particle duality based on the homogeneous photon model. The frequency shifts to zero as V approaches C. V never exceeds C in my model as per relativity theory.

Did you get a chance to rate the essay? I would appreciate it deeply.

Best Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share


John R. Cox replied on Feb. 10, 2018 @ 20:08 GMT
Avtar,

Yes, I gave your essay a highest public rating I presume qualified to give as an amateur, the day prior to my comment. I did not submit an essay myself, I'm not quite there yet. Good Luck.

Good to know. I think that the shape of the photon is critical to the kinetic translation of its energy, it would go to the rate of change on the slope of a curve which influences strength...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri wrote on Feb. 11, 2018 @ 21:25 GMT
Prof. Tejinder Sing:

You are an excellent writer!

"We shall define `fundamental' as the process by which the human mind

converts Things into Laws."

You are, of course, correct, as far as the prevailing human culture goes. Unfortunately, such "fundamental laws" have been steadily changing, whether meant for social engineering or nature engineering, without knowing where we are going. Although, we can claim that we have been advancing.



However, as an experimental physicist, I have defined "fundamental" as follows:

"Physicists have been searching for the fundamental building blocks and the fundamental laws that govern the universe since ancient times. I will define those sets of building blocks and those sets of laws of interactions as fundamental, which are minimum in number and yet models and explains the maximum number of observable phenomena."

Chandra.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 12, 2018 @ 22:06 GMT
Avtar,

Thanks for your comments on my string, though it was all about your own essay. I won't follow suit but hope you'll also get to properly read and analyse mine.

I judge yours a good essay, well written and explained at around the right level, though the propositions demanded more (which I know you provide elsewhere). I agreed with all the fundamental analysis and...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 13, 2018 @ 18:50 GMT
Hi Peter:

Thanks for your time and efforts in providing detailed analysis and comments on my paper. I appreciate it deeply.

I am not an expert in optics, plasma, plasmonics etc . Hence, I would try my best to respond to your questions in terms of relativistic formulations of the concerned phenomena:

1. Peter: “You seem to start with an assumption that photons are particles,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 13, 2018 @ 23:01 GMT
Thank you Avtar...

It's good to encounter you here once again, and to see your kind remarks about my essay. I'll begin reading yours now.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Feb. 14, 2018 @ 04:24 GMT
I am reminded that...

We became friends at CCC-2 in Port Angeles, Avtar, where you presented your ideas on how the limited lifetime and decay of protons could explain the excess of background energy that drives the accelerated expansion of the universe. We sat together at the banquet for that event and exchanged stories about our Engineering background and how we got into Physics. Sometimes these chance meetings have afterwards been quite meaningful. At FFP11 in Paris; I sat with Andrew Beckwith, who is also in this contest, and we became friends afterward.

But I am still taken by the sense that people must be dense to rule out the possibility that unbound protons have a limited lifetime, the same as unbound neutrons, and I think it is quizzical. My thought is that the rapid decay of free neutrons is due to the fact that their electrical neutrality is a gauge setting mechanism that requires something positive or negative to be measured against, where the proton is more stable or enduring. But as we have discussed; it too should have a finite duration or half-life - a limited lifetime.

Re-examining the obvious omitted possibility should be mandatory. I will need to read this essay to the end, but the first part seems quite interesting and it reads well. I already know you have something worthwhile to share.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 19:27 GMT
Hi Jonathan:

Thanks for remembering the prior acquaintance and interactions at the CCC-2. It all comes to cherishing the sweet memories of the past.

I read your essay and enjoyed it fully agreeing with most of your conclusions. I also gave the highest rating it deserves. I fully agree with your assertion that forces including gravity are not fundamental and – “…if all forces...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Laurence Hitterdale wrote on Feb. 17, 2018 @ 04:00 GMT
Dear Avtar,

Thank you for the comments you posted on the page for my essay. Thank you also for bringing into the discussion your paper, “A Universal Model Integrating Matter, Mind, & Consciousness Resolves the Hard Problem & Cosmic Conundrum.” The following comments refer both to that paper and of course to your essay for the present contest.

There seems to be an understanding common to both papers that human understanding of reality is still incomplete. Hardly anyone would dispute this. In both essays you mention the fact that currently there is no explanation for dark matter and dark energy, which are the bulk of what exists within the physical world. It is very interesting that in the essay for this contest you confine the discussion mainly to topics relevant to the physical universe, but in the earlier essay you widen the discussion to include phenomena of consciousness also. I am not sure that I fully understand the relationship between the solution of the strictly physical problems related to the possibility of a mass for the photon and the solution of the other problems which involve consciousness as well as physical phenomena. Perhaps the relationship is in the concept of spontaneity. As you say in the paper on matter, mind, and consciousness, “Thoughts or emotions are free willed activities in this sense, similar to the generation of a photon, a kinetic energy wave packet, via self-induced decay of quantum particles. Both processes are spontaneous or self-induced without the presence of an external physical force.” This is a useful way of making the connection.

I think that your discussion of experimental results and future empirical tests is a very good step. Sometimes theoretical discussions lose this link to experience. From what you say, it seems that presently available results are encouraging. That is a good sign for the future.

Laurence Hitterdale

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 17, 2018 @ 05:18 GMT
Hi Laurence

Thanks for reading my paper and thoughtful comments.

Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share



Kamal L Rajpal wrote on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 09:15 GMT
Dear Dr. Avtar Singh,

I have read your essay and suggest that you read Dark Matter http://vixra.org/pdf/1303.0207v3.pdf

QM claims that an electron can be both spin-up and spin-down at the same time. In my conceptual physics Essay on Electron Spin, I have proved that this is not true. Please read: https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3145 or https://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Rajpal_1306.0141v3
.pdf

Kamal Rajpal

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 19:07 GMT
Dear Kamal:

Thanks for your time and comments.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could point out any deficiencies/strengths in my approach and why it it right or wrong? It predicts the empirical universe behavior and dark energy, hence vindicated.

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

Bookmark and Share


Kamal L Rajpal replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 13:52 GMT
Dear Dr. Avtar Singh,

I have re-read you essay. Please read:

http://vixra.org/pdf/1303.0201v1.pdf

Light Speed Invariance & Maxwell’s Equations

Kamal Rajpal

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 18:45 GMT
Avtar,

I cannot pretend to understand the Universal Relativity Model (URM) but can recognize the need for it, and from your past essays, gather the weight and understanding of your approach. Certainly we can agree that "fundamental" is universal, pointing to an ultimate universal reality that is not fragmented. We all look for a ToE that is fundamental, as I mention in my essay. I garner my argument from a more generic definition of fundamental, "that which is necessary for existence." Current mainstream theories -- GR, QFT, BBM do need to unify the dynamics of a mass-energy duality. I believe your work is making inroads in that direction and deserves high marks. Hope you get a chance to check out my essay.

Jim Hoover

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 19:04 GMT
Dear James:

I enjoyed reading your essay and agree with the main theme that understanding light is fundamental. However, as I show in my paper, to understand light (photon), one must answer the question as to how a photon accelerates to the speed of light from zero when it is born. This understanding then changes the whole picture of reality - big bang never happened, universe is eternal, light is the source of dark energy, time is only a relative reality in the frame of matter etc.

This new picture of reality then shows the light, the way, providing a basis for purpose and meaning to the universe and life in it.

Best Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share



Author Avtar Singh wrote on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 18:46 GMT
Dear Kamal:

Thanks for your time and comments.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could point out any deficiencies/strengths in my approach and why it it right or wrong? It predicts the empirical universe behavior and dark energy, hence vindicated.

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

Bookmark and Share



Jonathan Kerr wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 17:36 GMT
Dear Avtar Singh,

I've been reading your essay, I have a question about wave function collapse. I like your way of putting: 'Could quantum uncertainty be the fundamental foundation of nature and reality or merely a measurement induced artifact?' It's true that our views of what it might be range all the way from that to that.

A spontaneous change from energy to matter, if you're saying the change from waves to particles is also that, is an idea I've never heard. But it sounds like an objective collapse model, if it happens literally spontaneously - I'd be interested to know what you think sets it off in the lab. And does it also happen elsewhere, without anything setting it off?

It's good to think about truly new ways of seeing these things, I do think new ways of seeing them are needed. I'd appreciate it if you'd rate my essay (it only has 6 ratings, and it needs 10, or the average doesn't count). It's about conceptual physics, and how new concepts are needed if we're to find the underlying picture, which both Einstein and Wheeler said we'd one day find. I try to work out just what can be worked out, rather than guessing, and there are some things in the essay that have been worked out using conceptual thinking.

Anyway, best wishes,

Jonathan Kerr

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 19:34 GMT
Hi Jonathan

Thanks for your thoughtful comments.

You asked - "A spontaneous change from energy to matter, ... sounds like an objective collapse model, if it happens literally spontaneously - I'd be interested to know what you think sets it off in the lab. And does it also happen elsewhere, without anything setting it off?"

It is already demonstrated in the wave-particle complimentarity wherein mass and energy exist simultaneously and instantly with no delay. Einstein's mass-energy equivalence principle is also based on this spontaneity existing in nature.

I am attending a conference and will try to read your paper as soon as I get a chance.

Best of luck,

Regards

Avtar

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 05:54 GMT
Avtar,

Thank you for reading my essay and your kind words. As the end of the contest approaches, I tend to revisit essays I've commented on to make sure I've rated them. This I did on 2/19/18 with an 8.

Regards,

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 13:32 GMT
Dear Avtar

If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please?

A couple of days in and semblance of my essay taking form, however the house bound inactivity was wearing me. I had just the remedy, so took off for a solo sail across the bay. In the lea of cove, I had underestimated the open water wind strengths. My...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 06:32 GMT
This essay is interesting Avtar...

On first pass; it appears to be more a patchwork of partial answers to deficiencies in the conventional fabric of fundamental Physics, rather than a new view on what is fundamental, but I need to read it again for detail before I determine your rating, or comment further on what you did or did not explain adequately. It is helpful to my understanding, that I have a prior knowledge of your work, but I will have to grade you based mainly on how well the essay explains your point, and how that addresses the question posed by FQXi. I wish you good luck in the contest.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 06:38 GMT
For the record,

I think this essay has been rated lower than what it deserves, but I calculate that giving you a fair grade will still leave you in the basement. I will reread this essay, to see if there are perhaps a few extra points in one category or another upon rereading, given that I rate essays using a grid system.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 21:16 GMT
You highlight some interesting points Avtar...

There is a lot to like about this essay and the ideas behind it. It is so often overlooked, that spontaneous decay of long-lived particles could easily account for the universe's expansion, where people do need a constant reminder that it could make things just work. Likewise; even the tiniest mass of the photon could account for some significant discrepancies we observe between standard model theory and real-world Physics.

It was once assumed that neutrinos were massless, but now we think otherwise. Likewise the graviton is believed to have zero mass, but some theorists posit otherwise because they know it could have profound implications if true. Another participant, Andrew Beckwith, wrote several papers on how minimally massive gravitons could explain accelerated expansion - much as you do with photons. I will have to assume that some of the missing pieces are explained in other work, but I am not 100% convinced that this is realistic Physics.

I gave you very high marks anyway.

All the Best, JJD

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Narendra Nath wrote on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 13:22 GMT
I find your essay as intriguing in originality and substance. You keep things open by saying that things do not get established without firm experimental proof! I like the idea that the so-called physical constants are not really constants over the cosmic time scale. In our essay here i have attached a manuscript 'Inconstancy of the Physical Constants, with my own bias as an experimental worker! Kindly spare time to look up our essay and care to rate us after reading and giving your own comments thereon!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 22:09 GMT
I wanted to add this...

I agree with the notion of a variable speed of light Avtar, as a component for healing any number of discrepancies between observation and theory. But I am doubtful that your application of a stationary boundary condition, leading to a zero initial value of C (on emission) is reasonable. While I think a photon can (and probably does) have a rest mass; I am not sure it actually has a resting state.

Instead; I think the slowness of light is due to the total mass in the observable universe. So I am more of a mind that we can open up the top end of the velocity spectrum in a matter-free regime. But this would seem to jibe with your notion of proton decay being unaccounted for in conventional theory. So I find many of your ideas fulfilling, but the essay somewhat confused or confusing.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Avtar Singh replied on Feb. 27, 2018 @ 18:05 GMT
Hi Jonatan:

Thanks for your new comments on my paper.

Rest mass is only possible or definable when photon is at rest. This is the biggest and most serious inconsistency in the mainstream or Maxwell’s theory that Photon has energy and momentum but no rest mass and that a photon is born with V=C.



I agree with your assertion that the gravitational pull of nearby masses effect the speed of a photon (bending of light). However, this also is possible if photon has a non-zero mass. A zero mass photon cannot be impacted by the gravity pull of other masses.

Regards

Avtar

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.