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

Jens Koeplinger: on 12/15/08 at 2:13am UTC, wrote Dear Lawrence - thanks for clarifying! I'll read up on the areas you...

Lawrence B. Crowell: on 12/15/08 at 1:36am UTC, wrote Higher algebraic systems are sporadic groups, which are usually lattice...

Jens Koeplinger: on 12/13/08 at 21:00pm UTC, wrote PS: Lawrence, if you meant "normed division algebra", then you're of course...

Jens Koeplinger: on 12/13/08 at 16:22pm UTC, wrote Dear Michael - sorry for my belated reply! Thank you so much for your...

Lawrence B. Crowell: on 12/12/08 at 18:56pm UTC, wrote M. Shrebon mentions sedenions. Since you run out of division algebra it...

Jens Koeplinger: on 12/9/08 at 14:03pm UTC, wrote Dear Dr Dray, Thank you so much for leaving your comments, they're...

Michael Sherbon: on 12/8/08 at 18:05pm UTC, wrote Okay Jens, found the references: "Observable Algebra" Merab Gogberashvili...

Michael Sherbon: on 12/7/08 at 21:10pm UTC, wrote Jens, Thanks for mentioning this, "Merab Gogberashvili showed that...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Georgina Woodward: "Just shutting up and calculating won't do. The steps are; correctly..." in Space-time from Collapse...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Georgina Woodward: "Specifically identifying and naming the issue is a significant advance. It..." in Space-time from Collapse...

Steven Andresen: "Anybody got the inside word on the theme for this years essay contest? ..." in Alternative Models of...

john smith: "It's a new thing for my knowledge I am looking for the same I recently..." in Neutrino mysteries,...

Elina Williams: "Technology is becoming an integral part of our life. From handheld devices..." in Manipulating the Quantum...

Jena Somerhalder: "Hello! I must say this post is very interesting for reading. I found there..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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

Constructing a Theory of Life
An all-encompassing framework of physics could help to explain the evolution of consciousness, intelligence, and free will.

Usurping Quantum Theory
The search is on for a fundamental framework that allows for even stranger links between particles than quantum theory—which could lead us to a theory of everything.

Fuzzballs v Black Holes
A radical theory replaces the cosmic crunchers with fuzzy quantum spheres, potentially solving the black-hole information paradox and explaining away the Big Bang and the origin of time.

Whose Physics Is It Anyway? Q&A with Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
Why physics and astronomy communities must take diversity issues seriously in order to do good science.


FQXi FORUM
November 13, 2018

CATEGORY: The Nature of Time Essay Contest (2008) [back]
TOPIC: Emergent Time from Non-Associative Quantum Theory by Jens Koeplinger [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Jens Koeplinger wrote on Nov. 19, 2008 @ 09:36 GMT
Essay Abstract

Operator quantum mechanics on non-associative algebra aims at modeling existing forces of nature on a genuinely non-associative background. We highlight select findings, and discuss time (and space) as emergent parameters. Key characteristics of quantum mechanics will be put in question, namely time asymmetry, indeterminism, and uncertainty. In this essay, these are hypothesized to result from an unnatural, human-centric desire to ask for the result of a measurement outcome as a function of time. Supporting arguments come from findings on octonionic algebras: One may model unobservables (as opposed to "hidden variables"), relate Heisenberg uncertainty and the light cone geometrically, and describe four dimensional Euclidean operator quantum gravity. A new unified treatment of isospin and space-time symmetries is envisioned, where observables cannot be distinguished anymore from the parameters which describe them. Time would emerge as a parameter only when asking a quantum system for information, whereas a speculated master symmetry would not be built on a space-time (or higher dimensional) manifold anymore. - Acknlowledging the speculative nature of some of these claims, we supply a good dose of self-irony as well.

Author Bio

Jens Koeplinger received a "Diplom" (M. Sci.) in physics at the University of Heidelberg, Germany, in 1999. At daytime hours, he works as IT Systems Analyst for AT&T in Greensboro, NC, USA. Vladimir Dzhunushaliev is Professor for Theoretical Physics at the Kyrgyz-Russian Slavic University in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic. Merab Gogberashvili is Professor for Theoretical Physics at the Andronikashvili Institute of Physics and Javakhishvili State University in Tbilisi, Georgia. Both (V.D. and M.G.) are Senior Associates of the Abdus Salam ICTP.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



matthew kolasinski wrote on Nov. 25, 2008 @ 04:43 GMT
Hello Mr. Köplinger

loved the clock! how'd he do that?

very fun. :-)

thanks,

matt kolasinski

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Nov. 25, 2008 @ 13:42 GMT
Hello Matt - thanks for asking! I took a public-domain version from Wikipedia, and used The Gimp to modify it. The font for the digits is Minisystem. Thanks, Jens

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Nov. 29, 2008 @ 13:33 GMT
There's a wrong reference pointer in the submission; on page 7, it should read "(this and the following sections per [7])" instead of pointing to ref [6]. Apologies for any inconvenience. Thanks, Jens

Bookmark and Share



Cristi Stoica wrote on Nov. 30, 2008 @ 22:13 GMT
Dear Jens et. al.

Very interesting and entertaining work! Nice presentation of octonions. I definitely agree that quaternions, octonions, and Clifford algebras must play a role at a fundamental level.

Good luck with your research.

Cristi Stoica

“Flowing with a Frozen River”,

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/322

Bookmark and Share



matthew kolasinski wrote on Dec. 1, 2008 @ 03:35 GMT
hello Jens,

re:

"I took a public-domain version from Wikipedia, and used The Gimp to modify it. The font for the digits is Minisystem."

i've just recently started exploring Gimp.

i'll have to remember that one next time someone asks what time it is.

thanks for your reply.

:-)

matt.

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Dec. 1, 2008 @ 04:02 GMT
Dear Cristi - thank you for your kind words, and your well-wishing. I'll pass it on.

Dear Matt - :))

Thanks, Jens

Bookmark and Share



Brian Beverly wrote on Dec. 6, 2008 @ 08:30 GMT
I loved this essay. I am curious if the generalized uncertainty principle can come from your method or did you just focused on the Heisenberg uncertainty principle? Thank you for leaving consciousness out and discussing only the physics. Stay humble physicists and leave that stuff for psychology and neuroscience.

I prefer the apple instead of the dead cat. In Newtonian physics we can only bang our heads against the apples. In quantum physics we get to taste the forbidden fruit.

Bookmark and Share



Michael Sherbon wrote on Dec. 6, 2008 @ 20:58 GMT
Enjoyed your essay Jens, et al,

Also have followed your work on Muses and hypernumbers,

and sorry Brian, consciousness enters the picture with this.

(even though this essay does not draw attention to it).

And Wolfgang Pauli was one of the main advocates of the

necessary inclusion of psychology in the fundamental foundations of physics. Many of the problems discussed in these essays are because of the exclusion of consciousness. Another major proponent of this connection is Jacob Needleman, considering it humble to admit the need for understanding how physics is related to our inner nature. All for "now"!

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Dec. 6, 2008 @ 21:15 GMT
Dear Brian - thanks for leaving your notes! You also name exactly the two reasons why it just had to be an apple.

You ask about the uncertainty principle; Merab Gogberashvili showed that Heisenberg uncertainty appears on the same geometrical footing as the maximum speed of light, on split-octonions, and we generally tried to remain with algebraic properties. The goal here was to advertise physics on non-associative algebra as serious field of research, demonstrate how proven laws emerge from it, yet are embedded in a formulation that allows new ways of manipulating them that may not have been tried before. We are not attempting a more general interpretation, as e.g. in "Free will, undecidability, and the problem of time in quantum gravity" by Rodolfo Gambini here in this contest.

On a sidenote, the "not-so-serious" summary should not be overextended. When proposing physics on non-associative algebra, it may appear difficult to exactly define the domain these models affect: There seems to be so much impact across the laws of nature we know, that already work very well. The "humbleness" note at the end is really pure humor, and we're not talking down on anyone. Very subjectively, and imcompletely, I did enjoy reading articles outside my domain, so to speak, for example "Time, Consciousness, and the Subjective Universe" by Daegene Song, or "Ultimate Reality and Nonmaterial Origin Of Universe" by Prem Nath Tiwari.

Thanks, Jens

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Dec. 7, 2008 @ 04:03 GMT
Dear Michael - thanks for leaving your note! Thanks, too, for mentioning my personal interest (trying to establish clear defining relations for the rather vague "hypernumbers" after C. Muses). You must have posted when I wrote my previous note, please let me know if there's anything else that you'd like to see addressed. Thanks, Jens

Bookmark and Share



Tevian Dray wrote on Dec. 7, 2008 @ 18:32 GMT
Enjoyed reading your essay -- octonions rule!

A couple of comments:

While the norm on the octonions is indeed Euclidean, it is well-known how to use them to describe Minkowski space (in 9+1 dimensions).

And I'm afraid I find the unification h and c to be somewhat artificial. Put differently, I'd like to see a discussion of the naturalness of your unification of position and momentum.

Bookmark and Share



Michael Sherbon wrote on Dec. 7, 2008 @ 21:10 GMT
Jens, Thanks for mentioning this, "Merab Gogberashvili showed that Heisenberg uncertainty appears on the same geometrical footing as the maximum speed of light, on split-octonions, ..." (Can you give a reference, for clues to a "natural" view?) This is fascinating, and I'll note this for further study. Arthur Young (for those unfamiliar with this, Arthur Young collaborated with Charles Muses on several projects) showed how close Sir Arthur Eddington was to recognizing pi as a key to the relationship between the uncertainty of quantum theory and the curvature of relativity. He also suggested complex numbers were sufficient to explain asymmetry. Perhaps a secret to ponder here is pi written in its complex form (Nahin).

You've significantly advanced the vague, intuitive ideas, and worked the mathematical relationships out in much greater detail. Your latest paper "Quantum of area from gravitation on complex octonions" shows you've made a lot of progress from "conic sedenions" and "time permitting" hope to study this further too.

Bookmark and Share



Michael Sherbon wrote on Dec. 8, 2008 @ 18:05 GMT
Okay Jens, found the references:

"Observable Algebra" Merab Gogberashvili arXiv:hep-th/0212251v3

"On Gravity and the Uncertainty Principle"

Ronald J. Adler, David I. Santiago

arXiv:gr-qc/9904026v2

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Dec. 9, 2008 @ 14:03 GMT
Dear Dr Dray,

Thank you so much for leaving your comments, they're well-taken.

We were happy to reference your and Dr Manogue's "Quaternionic spin" paper in the essay [9], in which you discuss dimensional reduction from 10 to 4 in detail, using octonionic spinors. Important works on octonions, e.g. by M. Günaydin, F. Gürsey, S. K. Adler, S. Okubo, F. Toppan, and many more could not be referenced, due to the constraints of the essay contest (5000 words, enjoyable, less technical than a review article, original content). We had to leave out octonion treatment of the strong force, supersymmetry, Yang-Mills instantons, and octonion uses in GUTs and String Theory, and instead focus on space and time operators, what a non-associative background infers for the time evolution of a general operator, and how extraction of information over time is somewhat "unnatural" to a quantum system.

Whether the proposal in this essay is any more "natural" than what is put in question, remains speculative, and I hope that we have left appropriate wording at the right places. "Guilty until proven innocent", I would respond to your second comment, and agree that further investigation is needed. However, I do find Dr Gogberashvili's treatment of the light cone convincing, as e.g. in "Octonionic Electrodynamics" arXiv:hep-th/0512258, and "Octonionic Geometry" arXiv:hep-th/0409173. Together with Dr Dzhunushaliev's treatment of unobservables ("Hidden structures in quantum mechanics" arXiv:0805.3221, and "Non-associativity, supersymmetry and hidden variables" arXiv:0712.1647), it creates the appearance as if quantum theory on octonions would not care to distinguish parameters from properties.

Thanks again for writing, and also my congratulations to you and Dr Manogue for winning the 2008 FQXi grant, for work on octonions! I am eager to see your "Octonions, E6, and Particle Physics" conference proceeding from September this year, to show in print (is a preprint version available?).

Best wishes,

Jens

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Dec. 12, 2008 @ 18:56 GMT
M. Shrebon mentions sedenions. Since you run out of division algebra it would appear best if one is to consider higher ordered systems to consider sporadic groups. Can you really do much with sedenions?

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Dec. 13, 2008 @ 16:22 GMT
Dear Michael - sorry for my belated reply! Thank you so much for your encouraging note. Also, PI certainly is an extraordinary value, as you contemplate in your interesting essay. Regarding the references you asked for, you've already found one, and two more should be in my reply to Dr Dray right above; just let me know if you need anything else.

Dear Lawrence - thanks for writing. Just a couple of remarks: I don't think division algebra is exhausted with the octonions; you could contemplate algebras without unit element, some Banach algebra, or any kind of space with a reasonable topology. You would need to show how (why) that would be required. Regarding sedenions (from Cayley-Dickson construction), one could even argue that it only becomes interesting *from* here on :) - Notably, Robert de Marrais has done extensive work on zero-divisor subspaces that show only from the sedenions on: de Marrais in arXiv.

Thanks, Jens

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Dec. 13, 2008 @ 21:00 GMT
PS: Lawrence, if you meant "normed division algebra", then you're of course correct: Octonions are as wide of an algebra as you can get. Thanks, Jens

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Dec. 15, 2008 @ 01:36 GMT
Higher algebraic systems are sporadic groups, which are usually lattice associations of E_8 and octonions. Yet it appears difficult to define an algebra by moving further up the Hopf fibration. I tend to think that working with Golay codes on Leech lattice constructions to be more fruitful.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share



Jens Koeplinger wrote on Dec. 15, 2008 @ 02:13 GMT
Dear Lawrence - thanks for clarifying! I'll read up on the areas you mention. Jens

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.