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

Sue Lingo: on 3/4/18 at 19:36pm UTC, wrote Hi Christian... Fair answer!! However, in that Einstein claims to now...

Eckard Blumschein: on 2/28/18 at 18:55pm UTC, wrote Dear Christian Corda, You still didn't excuse yourself for your mere claim...

Christian Corda: on 2/28/18 at 9:02am UTC, wrote Dear Phil, I am happy that you appreciated my a sense of humour. Thanks...

Christian Corda: on 2/28/18 at 8:53am UTC, wrote Dear Eckard Blumschein, Sorry, but I do not want read and comment the...

Eckard Blumschein: on 2/28/18 at 6:13am UTC, wrote Again, I look forward reading your criticism on my current essay. You...

Steven Andresen: on 2/28/18 at 3:35am UTC, wrote Hi Christian Congratulations on your great score conclusion. I saw you...

Eckard Blumschein: on 2/27/18 at 17:44pm UTC, wrote Dear Christian Corda, I noticed you are with International Institute for...

John Cox: on 2/27/18 at 16:39pm UTC, wrote There persists in all branches of natural philosophy, a societal prejudice...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "I wrote " As the EMr has periodic motion it is invariant under..." in Breaking the Universe's...

Georgina Woodward: "That should say: Pythagorean mathematics can be used to compare the seen..." in Breaking the Universe's...

Joe Fisher: "Robert Lawrence Kuhn ℅ Closer To Truth November 17, 2018 Ref: Get out..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Agus uye: "The page is very amazing happy to be on your page I found your page from..." in If the world ended...

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

Zimmer man: "Excellent and useful information, thanks for the list. androdumpper apk..." in Neutrino mysteries,...

Edwin Knox: "The genuine Earth had a genuine VISIBLE surface for many years previously..." in Superhuman: Book Review...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Zeeya Merali, Reality am not a humanly contrived finite..." in Alternative Models of...


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 19, 2018

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: Discussing on "What Is Fundamental" with Albert Einstein by Christian Corda [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Christian Corda wrote on Jan. 25, 2018 @ 17:23 GMT
Essay Abstract

Abstract A report of a discussion with Albert Einstein.

Author Bio

Theoretical Physicist and Astrophysicist, Research Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha (RIAAM), P.O. Box 55134-441, Maragha, Iran and International Institute for Applicable Mathematics and Information Sciences, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad 500063 (India). http://hyperspace.uni-frankfurt.de/author/cordacgalileigmail
com/

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Jan. 25, 2018 @ 22:57 GMT
Hi Christian,

Great essay! It is a nice overview of normal modes. Check out my essay and in particular equations 7 through 8. I derive the states of quantum gravitons associated with quantum hair on black hole coalescence as Hermite polynomials. This is an approximation, where the full solution is far more difficult and complex. However, this overlaps with the normal modes model. If you...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 09:19 GMT
Hi LC,

As usual, it is a pleasure meeting you here in FQXi.

I am happy that you find my Essay great. Yes, it is an overview of normal modes, but this time I made it less technical and more educational than in the past.

You Essay seems quite intriguing. I will read, comment and score it asap. I was aware of Maryam Mirzakhani's death. I became very sad for that issue. She was a great scientist.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Lawrence B. Crowell replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 11:02 GMT
The normal modes occur from the small arc approximation I employ. This results in Hermite polynomial solutions that correspond to quantum harmonic oscillator modes. This segues into the concept of normal modes, at least as an approximation, as a description of black hole quantum mechanics. A full set of solutions is obviously bewilderingly complex, but I don't think these dominate the made features of quantum black holes.

A part of the idea is that in black hole coalescence so called quantum hair or quantum topological charge associated with event horizons is magnified and emitted within gravitational radiation. It may be possible to detect this with LISA or the ESA eLISA. This will occur in signatures of so called gravitational memory.

I read Maryam's papers back in 2014 when she won the Fields Medal. At the time the thought occurred to me that this may have some important role in physics. When she died July 14 last year I was sort of angered and depressed about this, given how news of the world of late has been a bit sour. Then later this idea on how this might connect with quantum hair and the RT formula. So for several months I worked pretty hard on this. This paper is based on a loose set of notes and writing I did on this last October. I decided to fold this into an FQXi paper, even though I really thought I would no longer submit papers to these contests.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 13:49 GMT
Thanks LC. I just read, commented and scored your nice Essay.

Yes, I agree with you that quasi-normal modes are not the whole answer to the quantum black hole. On the other hand, they represent a remarkable semi-classic approximation!

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Andrew Beckwith wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 11:41 GMT
Hi, Christian

This is one of your most entertaining essays yet- and the caveat of normal modes is actually quite on target as a serious issue

What I would like to know, as an extension of your ideas is due to the question of quantum entanglement. Do you view that as fundamental, and the entire EPR business, or do you have more of a semi classical treatment of gravity in mind?

If you could, please review my small essay. It was put in December 21st. i.e. materially it is very similar to what I have published with you earlier

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 13:58 GMT
Hi Andy,

I am happy to meet you here in FQXi again. I am honored that you think that i wrote and entertaining essays and that you agree with me that the caveat of quasi-normal modes is actually quite on target as a serious issue.

Concerning your question on quantum entanglement, I must emphasize that I am not an expert of the EPR paradox. In any case, it is my personal opinion that it should be fundamental. It is indeed crucial for the black hole information puzzle.

It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and score your Essay soon. A fortiori, if it is connected to your papers published in my journal.

Good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 17:18 GMT
Dear Dr Christian Corda,

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

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 16:46 GMT
Dear Joe Fishe,

Sorry, but this is not connected with my Essay. Please, kindly comment on it and it will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay asap.

Good luck in the Contest, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



DIOGENES AYBAR wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 20:18 GMT
Dear Christian;

Beautiful work. It makes you completely understand the analogy between Bohr’s atom theory and your gravitational atom of BH theory. But you did not address the issue of the contest. That’s why I have to disagree with herr Doktor Einstein.

You are a great scholar in physics, I respect you for that, but some time we have to understand the very basic to come down to the level of children and be able to teach them. Otherwise they would not get it. And that’s when you fail.

Anyway, I wish you luck this time.

Truly yours;

Diogenes

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 10:15 GMT
Dear Diogenes,

I am honored that you tell that I am a great scholar in physics, but, in all honesty, I do not understand your criticism. Do you really think that unifying physics is not a fundamental issue? I am puzzled. I read in your short biography that you are a chemical engineer. Thus, you should be aware of the fundamental importance of atoms in chemistry. The fundamental importance of the "gravitational atom" in quantum gravity and in the root to unify physics is analogous.

In any case, I wish you good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 16:45 GMT
Dear Dr Christian Corda,

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

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 16:47 GMT
Dear Joe Fisher,

Sorry, but this is not connected with my Essay. Please, kindly comment on it and it will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay asap.

Good luck in the Contest, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Cristinel Stoica wrote on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 05:05 GMT
Dear Christian,

I enjoyed very much reading your essay, you manage to transmit so much about the foundations of physics in such an entertaining way! I think you evoked Einstein so convincingly that maybe he visited you indeed :) Now, beyond the entertaining factor, I think the explanations are clear and the idea is excellent. I find very convincing the role of the oscillations of the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 13:54 GMT
Dear Cristi,

It is always a pleasure meeting you here in FQXi. Thanks a lot for your comments with very rich raised issues.

I am honoured by your judgement on my Essay and I am happy to know that you have found it entertaining. Writing an entertaining Essay was indeed my first goal this time. As I previously told in one of the above replies,for this new Contest I preferred writing a...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Anonymous replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 16:57 GMT
Dear Christian,

Thank you very much for the reply, I am very interested in the future developments of your idea. I'm a bit sad that you didn't see the right hand side of the Equation. At least it seems that no modified gravity is in the left side, so no f(R) or W^2, although I am interested in conformal gravity. Sadly, you didn't have enough time to see if the Einstein tensor is classical or a quantum operator. So in this case the next best thing is to ask you, what is your opinion about this?

Warm regards,

Cristi

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 17:06 GMT
Dear Cristi,

Well, extended gravity could enter, in principle, on the right hand side of the field equations if you wrote its form by adding a "curvature" stress-energy tensor to the ordinary stress-energy tensor. In my personal opinion, the Einstein tensor should enter in the final equation of the unified field theory as a quantum operator, despite Herr Doktor should not be happy by this... :-)

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



John Rider Klauder wrote on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 20:07 GMT
CC

An elegant story that is well told. Personally I find that which is fundamental sometimes to be temporary and thus not eternal. I accept that level of looseness and eagerly look forward to the next level which can be called fundamental. Understanding a phenomenon and whatever it explains has the right to be treated as fundamental, at least as long as it is not dethroned.

JK

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 10:47 GMT
Dear John,

Thanks for finding elegant my story.

Your idea of "temporary levels of fundamental issues" is interesting and seems connected with Einstein's idea that it should not exist a definitive theory, but only subsequent level of better approximation (i.e. non-definitive theories) to explain Nature.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



George Kirakosyan wrote on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 05:36 GMT
Hi dear Christian,

Congratulations with your nice essay! I see you in some new style that is very attractive in my view. Moreover, the giant Einstein is there, who is very rich to advise every one of us! I will try study it more detailed to be take some important parts for me, and maybe - for some discussion also in future.

My Best wishes!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 10:50 GMT
Dear George,

It is very nice meeting you here in FQXi again.

Thanks for your congrats and for your kind words. Potential future discussions are warmly welcome. I will read, comment and score you Essay soon.

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 13:35 GMT
Christian,

Good essay. Informative, interesting, entertaining and probably important, though by the end I was desperate for a paragraph break! I sympathise on the matter of judging as the apparent criteria used often seems at odds with fqxi's mission statement & raisen d'etre.

I said 'probably' above as in my main world of astronomy, astrophysics and observational cosmology a...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 17:29 GMT
Thanks for your kind words, Peter. Concerning your ideas on the existence or non-existences of black holes, I paraphrase Einstein on the existence or non-existences of gravitational waves:

“If you ask me whether there are black holes or not, I must answer that I

do not know. But it is a highly interesting problem"

In any case, I do not like the idea of singularity. I attempted to find solutions on this problem in the past, see for example this paper.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


John R. Cox replied on Feb. 2, 2018 @ 21:04 GMT
Dr. Corda,

This is all too far above my level to rate, and competency to comment. But I can glean enough to gain a little more understanding of what 'quantization' entails, and why. Intuitively however, I have to ask why entropy must operate inside the gravitational extremes of a BH. Would it not be physically reversed to some extent? The crush of quantized matter accelerating perturbations to a frequency where the that velocity would be undifferentiated from the time dilation on particle horizons, and fusion of matter be of the entire inertia of the otherwise separate closed systems ("As a consequence of SR, the energy of a closed system is equal to its inertia." AE) ? Or is that somewhat like what is meant by 'information loss', the loss of quantized differentiation?

It seems to me that there must exist a proportional density that is the greatest density any self-gravitational field needs to attain for inertia to translate throughout the whole field, whether a Quantum Unitary Particle or an aggregate field, and in Stellar and Galactic centers that proportion would also hold whether as a material BH or an amalgamated gravitational field Perfectly Transparent Well.

Thanks for an interesting read. jrc

And Pete,

Hello again. There has been a number of arguments that dispute Relativistic Time in favor of a Newtonian absolute simultaneity, but GR would argue that the speed of time on the surface of a body is equivalent to the corresponding escape velocity. So given the wide range of masses, it wouldn't matter how fast a second is on any surface, a relative simultaneity could be found for corresponding moments in time. It kind of suggests that motion is inevitable if all those different time speeds were trying to sync to a realistic absolute simultaneity, look at the equatorial rotation velocities of gas giants. I'm not going to attempt the math, but its fun to think of. I liked your essay too, jrc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Don Limuti replied on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 02:10 GMT
Hi Christian,

I like this essay very much. I would like to use this style in a conversation with Heisenberg.

Your essay is fundamental and uniquely shows how Einstein's fundamental thought experiments evolve into today's fundamental thought experiments.

Our approaches to quantum gravity are very different in that do not put much attention on black holes. Nevertheless, I think combining our approaches could have some interesting synergy.

Have you ever considered the universe a black hole.

http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/22_The_Schwarzschild_R
adius.html

It is a real treat to be in another essay with you.

Don Limuti

PS: Really, you were born on a small island off the coast of Sardinia! I am jealous.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 12:14 GMT
Christian,

Many thanks for an interesting read. I knew you would wake up on the floor and that you would not get to see the final form of AE's work.

I have sometimes mused about the possible analogies between an atom and a BH. However, I certainly don't know the Math or the Physics well enough to even make a mark on a piece of paper:-) Well done. I would have never imagined that the event horizon might oscillate.

I've also occasionally mused about the analogies between a BH and the visible universe. Maybe you'll discuss that in a future work? BTW, what would you infer regarding a BH if its temperature was 2.7 K?

I definitely agree with AE regarding prizes and such. Don't fret over it at all. There are much bigger things to worry about.

BTW, maybe next time you might add a few paragraph breaks?

Best Regards,

Gary Simpson

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 4, 2018 @ 10:19 GMT
Dear Gary,

Thanks for your kind words and for finding interesting my Essay. Concerning the points that you raised:

The possible analogies between an atom and a BH have been suggested for the first time by Bekenstein. I have always found such analogies very intriguing.

The event horizon's oscillations are also intriguing and mysterious. They can have imaginary frequencies...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Wayne R Lundberg wrote on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 19:25 GMT
Chrstian,

Your essay certainly was creative writing and an enjoyable way to introduce your ideas. I take it that this "gravitational atom" concept is the key insight into your BH model. I have studied BH theory a bit but find little about it that is truly fundamental. However, it is clear from Hawkings acceptance of information-preserving BH that some finite geometric representation of the throat of a BH is required.

I think that there may be some conceptual agreement with my essay, in which I argue that the kernel of a BH must be tetrahedral (simplest geometric shape in 3-space). This geometry allows construction of an information-preserving BH, as well as offers explanations for unsolved problems.

I look forward to finding whether there is further agreement between these fundamental concepts.

Wayne Lundberg

ref https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3092

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 13:23 GMT
Dear Wayne,

Thanks for finding my Essay as being creative writing and an enjoyable way to introduce my ideas.

Actually, Hawking has not yet completely accepted information-preserving BH. In fact, as I stressed in my Essay, his current position seems ambiguous as he recently claimed that "Information will effectively be lost, although there would be no loss of unitarity" and that "Information can be recovered in principle, but it is lost for all practical purposes".

That there may be some conceptual agreement with your Essay is very interesting. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Wayne R Lundberg replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 02:04 GMT
Christian,

'lost for all practical purposes' would agree with cyclic cosmology in that BH are the mechanism converting mass in kinetic motion into potential/preserved mass. The mass is preserved until the universe inverts via a time-reversed Bang. Recall that ralpha'/R...

More to the point, I don't formulate ideas based on interpretations of other's statements of opinion, but look for mathematical consistency and a geometrically similar basis.

Wayne

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 08:33 GMT
Dear Wayne,

Thanks for clarifying. I will read your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Francesco D'Isa wrote on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 07:44 GMT
Dear Christian,

sadly I've not the mathematical tools to fully judge your essay (my formation is in philosophy), but I appreciated your style and the form of a platonic dialogue with Einstein instead of Socrate.

All the best,

Francesco D'Isa

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 13:26 GMT
Dear Francesco,

Thanks for your kind words.

I understand your point that you have the mathematical tools to fully judge your Essay. No problem for this. I am pleasured that you appreciated my style and the form of a platonic dialogue with Einstein instead of Socrate. The first goal of my work was indeed writing an interesting Essay. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers,Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 22:25 GMT
Hello Christian,

While I have gripes about some off-color remarks and liberties taken; I find this essay rather satisfying and quite satisfactory. I was not taken with Makela's winning essay, but I later learned of his papers on Planck scale black holes as the quantum spacetime fabric, which I thought were excellent; and now I see how that idea was tied in with his discussion with Newton. At the time; I was suspicious because of what I perceived as black hole mania - where everything seemed to revolve around black holes, and I was convinced that the majority of BH candidates out there were something else.

Now I am less concerned about calling them that, and I assume that with enough multi-messenger detections the whole zoo of compact objects will someday be known. I agree that the Bekenstein-Hawking equation is a gem of fundamental Physics in the way it weaves different branches together. I devoted a slide to that relation and talked about area quantization next, in my talk at FFP15, because I thought it was essential to showing the development of my subject. It is also a cornerstone in your work, which I am coming to understand better. I now see there are some links to my work.

What is seen at the Misiurewicz point mimicking an event horizon or quantum critical point is that self-similar forms decrease in size to a point of extinction and then grow in size on the other side, but in reverse phase! So if energetic variations coming to a BH event horizon follow this pattern, what is swallowed up is exactly identical to what came in but in opposite phase. This analogy can be extended to BHs that are not Schwarzschild, by assuming there are multiple branches - all self-similar - where some are swallowed and others appear outside the horizon. This scheme also preserves quantum information.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 22:41 GMT
I had meant to include...

This image file refers back to the Mandelbrot Butterfly appearing in Fig. 4 of my essay, illustrating that the event horizon is like the virtual ground or amplitude null in an inverting feedback amplifier. Perhaps if the feedback resistor is seen as representing propagations on the surface or event horizon of the BH, this is an analogy for the QNMs in your Bohr-like atom BH model. Setting the various types of BH boundary in circuit-theoretic terms may allow the Math of category theory to be brought to bear advantageously.

All the Best,

Jonathan

attachments: MandelAmp2.jpg

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 03:40 GMT
Sorry for the run on Christian, It appears that any post after about 22:30 GMT on Feb 5th has been compacted where every carriage return is replaced by an n, although it looks fine in the preview. They want to make it an en-dash perhaps, but it is an obnoxious development.

Regards, Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 09:24 GMT
Dear Jonathan,

Thanks for your kind words. I am honoured that you find my Essay rather satisfying and quite satisfactory.

I well remember your perplexity on black hole physics. We also had various discussions with various colleagues. Concerning the existence or non-existences of black holes, I paraphrase Einstein on the existence or non-existences of gravitational waves: “If you ask me whether there are black holes or not, I must answer that I do not know. But it is a highly interesting problem". Also myself hopes that with enough multi-messenger detections the whole zoo of compact objects will someday be known. I also agree on your opinion on the Bekenstein-Hawking equation. That the Mandelbrot set can mimic a BH is interesting and the analogy between and the feedback resistor is very intriguing. The consistence with preserving quantum information is, of course, fundamental. I have seen that any post is now being compacted where every carriage return is replaced by an n. I agree with you that this is awful.

Again, I wish you good luck in the contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 04:59 GMT
Dear Christian Corda

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

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 09:27 GMT
Dear Steven, thanks for your kind message. I hope that you will enjoy in reading my Essay. I I look forward to see your comments after that reading. I will read, comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest. Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 20:03 GMT
Respected Prof Christian Corda

It is very nice meeting you again FQXi Prof Corda.It is pleasent surprise to know taht You are visiting our city Hyderabad... It is womderful to know that your "gravitational atom" idea goes deep inside in your BH model, very nice thinking and very hard work you did.....

By the way sir....

Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 10:36 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta, thanks for your kind words. Also for me it is very nice meeting you again here in FQXi Contest. I am happy that you think that my Essay represents a very nice thinking and very hard work. Thanks again. Yes, I visited your nice city Hyderabad some time ago and I am a member of the International Institute for Applicable Mathematics and Information Sciences, which has it is Registered Office in Hyderabad, but is also an Italian-Indian collaboration. Its Director is my friend Prof. B. G. Sidharth. Thanks for signaling your Essay. I will read it soon. Good luck in the Contest! Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 14:10 GMT
Respected prof Christian Corda,

You are a relativist and say so many good words.... Thank you for those nice words...on Dynamic Universe Model...Your essay is also very good sir....

I am giving maximum appreciation you for your essay 10... Best wishes for the essay...

=snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 14:12 GMT
New community rating is 7.2

Regards

snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 15:48 GMT
Dear Prof Christian Corda

Your excellent words……

An interesting point is that you stresses the evidence for blue-shifted galaxies, which is often ignored by mainstream cosmologists. Concerning your point that gravity should be due to frequency shifting, can you explain how this can be reconciled with Einstein's Equivalence Principle, which has today a strong empiric evidence?

…………… My discussion……..

1. You are correct…Blue shifted Galaxies are ignored by main streem , which are about 33%.... That’s nor correct…

2. I did not say Gravity due to frequency shifting…. Probably Gravity is property of mass and Mass is property of Gravity….

3. Regarding Einstein's Equivalence Principle, which has today a strong empiric evidence………..

I want to pose a little observation on earth…

You might have seen tide waves in sees. High tide will happen in the evenings and mornings every day, is due to SUN’s attraction on ocean on earth. On full moon and No moon days, the tide will be higher…. Due to Moon… Standard two body problem cant explain….

Best wishes for the essay...

=snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 9, 2018 @ 09:09 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

Thanks for giving the highest score to my Essay. I am grateful to you and honored by this.

Thanks for clarifying points 1, 2 and 3. Concerning Einstein's Equivalence Principle, its main consequence is that gravity is not a force. It is inertia instead.

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 18:37 GMT
Dear Prof Christian Corda

Your excellent words……

can you explain how this can be reconciled with Einstein's Equivalence Principle, which has today a strong empiric evidence?

…………… My discussion……..

3. Regarding Einstein's Equivalence Principle, which has today a strong empiric evidence………..

I want to pose a little observation on earth…

You might have seen tide waves in sees. High tide will happen in the evenings and mornings every day, is due to SUN’s attraction on ocean on earth. On full moon and No moon days, the tide will be higher…. Due to Moon… Standard two body problem cant explain….

I will ask the same observation above in some other words….…. If we take m Kg mass at the sea level calculate force on that, will that be equalling to m x g ( where g is acceleration due to gravity on earth) …? Or will we have to add the Gravitational forces of SUN and MOON on a full moon evening…..?

Best wishes for the essay...

=snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 9, 2018 @ 09:12 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

Please, give a look to my above reply. Concerning to your question, it depends on the reference frame we chose.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Flavio Del Santo wrote on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 19:38 GMT
Dear Mr. Corda,

I found your essay very interesting and original.

I would be glad if you find a moment to go through my essay, and look forward to a nice discussion on our works.

Best wishes,

Flavio

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 9, 2018 @ 09:14 GMT
Dear Flavio,

Thanks for finding my Essay very interesting and original. I will read, comment and score your Essay soon.

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 19:41 GMT
Christian,

A clever FQXi tour de force conversation with the Grand Master scientist. Indeed, "Physical theories which permit us to understand Nature can be considered really fundamental." Of course "your legs were shaking," anticipating the theory of everything equation. My essay references anticipation of such a moment in our attempts to simulate (LHC) and indeed seek the BB with an imagined greatly enhanced LIGO detection of the BB. Hope you get a chance to read my essay.

Wishes for a challenging contest.

Jim Hoover

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 9, 2018 @ 09:18 GMT
Hi Jim,

It is pleasant meeting you here in FQXi again.

Thanks for finding my work clever.

I often worked on gravitational waves due to the BB in the past. Thus, it will be my pleasure reading, scoring and commenting your Essay soon.

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Feb. 9, 2018 @ 19:19 GMT
Hi Christian,

I rated your essay February 2. Highest, of course.

There's so much of substance here, that I don't know where to begin commenting. So let me choose one area -- your equations 1 & 2. Whatever the units, entropy has not been seen to decrease on its own, and Bekenstein-Hawking are expected to lead with that premise for black hole surfaces of not less than 2 dimensions.

Bekenstein-Mayo, however (https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0105055) in their one-dimensional black hole picture, used Pendry's formula for 1 channel entropy flow (their equation 6) to show that it does not differ in form from their eqn. 10, leading one to conclude " ... a black hole in 3–D space is more like a 1–D channel than like a surface in 3–D space. We have checked that these conclusions are not qualitatively changed when the entropy is carried by neutrinos." Thus my suggested neutrino experiment, eliminating the distinction between past and future entropy. Soliton waves pass through each other regardless of origin.

Thanks for reading and commenting on my essay.

All best,

Tom

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 08:56 GMT
Dear Tom,

Thanks for your kind and interesting comments. I am honored that you rated my Essay highest, thanks a lot!

Reading, commenting and scoring on your essay was my pleasure.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Feb. 14, 2018 @ 16:20 GMT
Dear Christian;

I am so proud to be friend with someone who is in such a good relationship with doctor Einstein and above all the entanglement you found from the interior of “the Heaven of Scientists” and its exterior outside the its event horizon, so the information of the inside of this heaven has become available for us in our emerged reality. I quite understand the reason why he...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 09:29 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I am very happy to meet you here in FQXi again. Thanks for finding my approach quite harmonious both for the mind and for the maths.

You said: "a nucleus is not the origin of the energy state of the electron-cloud". Also in the current case, the "nucleus", i.e. the singularity, is not the origin of the energy state of the electron-like cloud. Such an origin arises from the quantum fluctuations near the BH horizon.

Concerning the time-dependence of BH evaporation, here I implicitly refer to Painlev́ and Gullstrand coordinates, where Parikh and Wilczek developed their tunnel approach. In those coordinates the time is the same as Schwarzschild time. Thus, in my approach BH evaporation is time dependent with respect to Schwarzschild time.

OK, I will read comment and score your Essay soon and I will submit it to Grand Master Einstein in order to ask him is opinion (and possible score) in my next dream. In the meanwhile, I wish you good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 16:06 GMT
Dear Christian,

Your research on Black Holes is of real importance I think, once it will be acknowledged by the scientific community.

Thanks a lot for your comment on my thread I will give the answer also here:

quote

Dear Christian,

The Reality Loop approach is actually a kind of proof for the Anthropic Principle.

The Reality Loop "we" are experiencing is one where it seems as if EVERYTHING is made for us...

However this loop is only ONE from an Infinity, each agent in his own loop will have the same experience, and these agents may differ just a little or a whole lot, each one is at HOME in his own loop. Those other loops are until now unattainable for our specific sort.

Each time an agent makes a choice "the reality is not splitting up" (like in MWI) but all other Loops representing other choices become "unattainable", they "withdraw" in the behind Planck limits...

So the fine-tuning of our reality is a logical effect for the specific loop that we are calling REALITY. If our kind of agents were not in our specific loop, the loop is of no use, each reality has to be experienced (conscious of) to be a reality. A loop without consciousness is no loop...

I hope this explains your question.

best regards

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 16:11 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thanks for your kind and interesting explanation. Yes, now the connection between your Reality Loop approach and Anthropic Principle is clear.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Kamal L Rajpal wrote on Feb. 14, 2018 @ 19:56 GMT
Dear Christian Corda,

Einstein was right when he did not agree with the EPR experiment conclusions and had said, “spooky action at a distance” cannot occur and that, “God does not play dice”. Please read Linear Polarization http://vixra.org/pdf/1303.0174v5.pdf

I also request you to read my essay on wave-particle and electron spin at: 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 Christian Corda replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 10:51 GMT
Dear Kamal Rajpal,

Thanks for your comments.

Einstein's opinion on the EPR experiment conclusions is still argument of a large debate. Thanks for signaling your Vixra paper. I will read it with interest. I will also read, comment and score your Essay soon.

Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 12:08 GMT
Dear Christian,

Concerning gravitational waves, this may be of interest to you: On the a. a. Faus Arxiv Article, The Speed of Gravity: What a Theory Says viXra: 1706.0525

Concerning the Bohr-like approach: it is interesting that it is maby somehow opposite of forming matter from non-expanding points – photons – gluons - protons - Bohr atoms - stars. Then the opposite is the process from the star to the non- expanding points.

Concerning general relativity and quantum mechanics, I consider that understanding the role of the mathematical constant exp (2pi) in my papers can be of great help. It should be kept in mind that my works speak about relationships, and that the problem of movement is not considered.

Regards,

Branko

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 17:43 GMT
Dear Branko,

Thanks for finding interesting the Bohr-like approach and for the above clarifications.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Anonymous wrote on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 17:54 GMT
Dear Christian Corda,

Thank you for reading my Essay and giving your views. To get a complete picture of my work please read: Wave Particle http://vixra.org/pdf/1303.0170v1.pdf .

Regards,

Kamal Rajpal

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 17:41 GMT
Dear Kamal Rajpal,

Thanks, I will read your vixra paper soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 13:01 GMT
Hi Christian,

Congratulations and specially about the bekentein Hawking formulas analyses ,

Good luck, friendly

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 17:45 GMT
Dear Steve,

Thanks for your kind congrats.I see that you are not in the Contest this year. I hope to see you in next one.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 12:04 GMT
You are welcome, no I don't make it, It is nice, perhaps the next essay contest if my mind permits it,I try to solve serious problems in Belgium.

Best Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Robert D. Sadykov wrote on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 12:27 GMT
Dear Christian Corda,

If Albert Einstein again visits You, then thank him for creating a special and general relativity. These theories do not let physicists and lyricists get bored for more than a hundred years. The world would be less colorful without gravity waves, black holes and the expanding Universe. The intersection of general relativity with quantum mechanics and, as a consequence of this, the emission and evaporation of black holes adds additional colors to the world picture. Your essay produces a very good impression and I give it a high rating.

At one time, certain efforts were made to reduce the number of postulates in Euclidean geometry. Ultimately, this led to the creation of non-Euclidean geometry, which, in turn, contributed to the creation of general relativity. As an experiment, I decided to replace the series of postulates adopted in special and general relativity with two other postulates based on the experimental data available today. What has come out of this, You can see in my short essay.

Best wishes,

Robert Sadykov

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 09:42 GMT
Dear Robert,

Thanks for your kind words. I agree with you that science must be grateful to Albert Einstein for creating a special and general relativity. In addition, I am grateful to you for give my Essay a high rating. Thanks a lot.

You should have seen that I have read, commented and scored your Essay yesterday. Good luck in the contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 04:13 GMT
Dear Christian Corda,

I see that after Einstein left my Tavern, he managed to find you in Italy and to extract from you a number of details of your theory, analogous to Bohr's 'atom'.

You've designed a Bohr analog and applied it with seemingly good success to a number of issues, each of which Einstein was good enough to draw out of you. I am impressed with your creativity. I do...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 09:54 GMT
Dear Edwin Eugene,

It is a pleasure meeting you here in FQXi again. Thanks a lot for your kind words and for finding my Essay enjoyable and impressive.

Your main focus to review of the math structures that have been projected onto physical reality and used to build on is quite intriguing and consistent with my idea of physics geometrization, which makes general relativity (and more in general, metric theories of gravity) so elegant and is the real reason for which I decided to become a researchers. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 06:52 GMT
Hi dear Christian

I read your wonderful essay and was pleasantly surprised with your new style of presenting the most complex problems of advanced science to ordinary people. In my opinion, the great master Einstein greatly helped you in this noble cause. Thus, we can say that you presented a successful and attractive work deserving the highest evaluation.

At the same time, I see a remarkable problem of gravity in the completely initial level of its origin. Therefore, I try to define first for myself what is the physical cause, or the nature, of what we call gravity, leaving aside intriguing questions as, for example, the behavior of the hair of black holes, how they scream before of death, etc. I naively think that, first of all, we must be able to clearly answer to such a primitive question, for example, where from arises the force that presses us to a chair? When we will able to say this, then it will naturally become clear to us whether we really need in general to think on above mentioned all other issues or not.

I mean the created very doubtful situation - we recognize on the one hand that we absolutely do not know about the physical essence of gravity, but on the other hand we try to somehow connect it with the quantum theory, forgetting that the quantum theory also remains for us something inexplicably-dark thing from cognitive view!

The Great maestro also have talk something very important on this matter in the end of his dramatic life that I mention in my work. So, with all my best wishes on the success in the contest!

Best Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 11:42 GMT
Dear George,

Thanks for your kind words on my Essay, I am honored by them and I am grateful to you for giving me your highest evaluation.

Thanks for your interesting comments on the nature of gravity, that I find sharable. I am aware that Grand Master Einstein talked about something very important on this matter in the end of his life. That you mentioned it in your work is very intriguing. It will be indeed my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 08:10 GMT
Dear Christian,

Here we are again all together.

I highly appreciate your beautifully written essay.

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

Vladimir Fedorov

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 11:45 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

It is nice meeting you here in FQXi again.

Thanks for finding my Essay beautifully written.

I will be pleasured in reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Mark A. Thomas wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 00:58 GMT
Enjoyed your essay. BH entropy has got to be near to the fundamental. Things should simplify and perhaps reduce. Here is a link to something I found that calcuates a quantised step like spectrum of Black hole entropy. It is really simple in that only Planck masses are utilised in the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy formula. This calculates a growing or reducing Black hole entropy sequence 4pi 16pi 64pi 100pi and so on. The title of the link is 'Black hole entropy and order of even squares sequence'. http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.physics/2012-09/msg0
0498.html

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 09:32 GMT
Dear Mark,

Thanks for your kind comments. I am happy that you enjoyed my Essay. I agree that BH entropy has got to be near to the fundamental. Thanks for the link, I will surely read it.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 07:46 GMT
Dear Christian

If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don’t rate them at all. Infact I haven’t issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 09:43 GMT
Dear Steven,

Thanks for your message. Your Essay seems interesting. I will read, comment and rate it soon. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Gary Valentine Hansen wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 17:50 GMT
Christian Corda

Discussing on “What Is Fundamental” with Albert Einstein

Christian,

I enjoyed your notion of a conversation with Einstein. Imagination can often be inspirational, as it was in your case.

Your statement ‘that, at the fundamental level, Nature is inherently random ... due to (the) Heisenberg uncertainty principle’ leaves me in awe.

Use of the terms ‘random’ and ‘uncertainty’ are generally attributable to a lack of comprehension concerning causes of events due to complexity.

It is the human being that is uncertain and randomness is our comfortable explanation for the vast realms of the unknown or unknowable.

The main body of your essay is too technical for the non-specialist reader, which leads the reader inevitably to identify with Maria’s question: “Christian, what’s happening?”

Forgive me for being wonderful but I can’t see the sky due to the blue veil masking it.

Go well fellow. Fundamentally we are all talking to ourselves.

Gary.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 09:29 GMT
Dear Gary,

Thanks for your kind comments. I am happy that you enjoyed my notion of a conversation with Einstein.

Actually, quantum mechanics laws imply that Nature is intrinsically random beyond our lack of comprehension concerning causes of events due to complexity, despite we can detect such a intrinsic random behavior only when we interact with it.

I regret that you can’t see the sky due to the blue veil masking it.

Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 01:57 GMT
Greetings Christian,

I assume you have seen the paper in PRL about Quasinormal modes and cosmic censorship, by Cardoso et. al, but it is worth a look for sure. It looks like things are really starting to heat up in that area of inquiry.

At Physical Review Letters:

Quasinormal modes and Strong Cosmic Censorship

And on arXiv:

Quasinormal modes and Strong Cosmic Censorship

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 09:41 GMT
Dear Jonathan,

Thanks for your kind message. Yes, I was aware of that paper. Maybe it could inspire a future research of mine. Let me know if you are interested in joining me to write a paper. In fact, I agree that things are really starting to heat up in QNMs area of inquiry.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 21:43 GMT
Thanks. Best of Luck!

Regards, JJD

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 06:27 GMT
Dear Christian

I really appreciated your writing style, warm and personal with Big Al. I also had a great appreciation for the relationships you drew upon, a Black Hole being a quantum of the gravitation field in comparative of the atom and its associated fields.

I have to admit a personal limitation. A good portion of your content is part of a curriculum I have not studied, and therefor is unavailable to my comprehension. I wanted to understand more but I can tell that would require an enormous amount of study. There are plenty here more accomplished in your references than me, but I still rate your work highly based on what I did understand.

Would have been nice to make Einsteins acquaintance, I certainly did come away from your essay feeling that.

Perhaps I will try my luck asking technical questions of you some time :) I dont know many gravity physicists.

I hope we have occasion to discuss our mutual interests more

Thank you & kind regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 10:10 GMT
Hi Steve,

Thanks for your kind words.

Yes, I understand what you mean that a good portion of my content is part of a curriculum you have not studied. Today, physics is very specialized and it is not simple understanding details of a particular research field if ones does not work on such a research field. In any case, I am grateful to you for your rating my Essay highly based on what you did understand. Please, be free to ask me technical questions when you want. In fact, it will be my pleasure discussing our mutual interests more.

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Steven Andresen replied on Feb. 28, 2018 @ 03:35 GMT
Hi Christian

Congratulations on your great score conclusion. I saw you achieve top position, you must have been holding your breath. Didn't stay there but a wonderful result all the same.

Thank you for expressing a willingness to to help me with some technicals. I promise not to abuse this kind offer. My primary interest is to obtain data on velocities displayed within galaxy groups.

Beyond that I would like to have a discussion with you on the following, if you are willing please? To put the terms of my essay in simply summery.

People invented clocks, then Einstein comes along and discovers that clock rates modulate in gravitational environments.

I suggest that, "force drives a clocks function, so forces must be implicated in general relativity's effects". Clock springs redeem this notion as being observable and quantifiable, "force dilation".

Photons being the same type of entity as Gluons. Gluon force gives mass. Dilated Gluon force gives dilated mass. This seams childish in its simplicity, I know. But my essays argument based on mathematical geometry, shows it fits the puzzle of anomalous galaxy velocity. I hope this inspires curiosity. And given the opportunity, I can nail this argument down tighter.

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Armin Nikkhah Shirazi wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 10:52 GMT
Dear Christian,

Your light-hearted, self-deprecating approach certainly made your essay fun to read. As your "Bohr-like" approach is still a bit hard for me to follow (GR is only something I study on the side), let me just throw some questions at you which perhaps others might have thought but not asked.

1. In your equation 2, the permittivity of free space seems to be part of the expression, but I thought you were discussing a Schwarzschild BH. I know that in your subsequent discussion of QNM's you need it, but where did come from in the first place if the BH is assumed to be chargeless?

2. Does your approach shed any light on the differece between stellar and supermassive galactic black holes?

3. Does your theory in any way affect the radiation of gravitational waves? If so, how, and can that be used to make novel predictions?

All the best,

Armin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 16:37 GMT
Dear Armin,

Thanks for your message. I am happy to know that you find my Essay fun to read. Concerning your questions:

1. Actually, the permittivity of free space is not present in Eq. (2). I added it when introducing Planck units for the sake of completeness. The quantity 2pi in the RHS of Eq. (2) comes from the relation between the horizon area A and the mass of a Schwarzschild BH, see this technical paper for details.

2. No, it works for both of them when they will start to emit Hawking radiation.

3. In general, QNMs emit gravitational waves. Also the recent detections by LIGO are partially due to QNMs in the ring-down phase of the final BH after the merging of the initial ones. But QNMs due to Hawking radiations are too small in order to emit detectable gravitational waves. In any case, neither stellar nor super-massive galactic BHs are currently emitting Hawking radiation. They will start to emit Hawking radiation when the temperature of the cosmic background radiation will became minor than their proper Hawking temperature, that is, in a very very distant future.

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Terry Bollinger wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 15:15 GMT
Dear Dr Corda,

I found your essay entertaining and informative to read. I particularly liked the little trick you did on the reader by starting with what seemed to be a tangential complaint about how the FQXi Essay process has not treated you fairly, then transitioned into the dream conversation with Einstein. I was caught completely off guard by that one, and got a chuckle out of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 17:00 GMT
Dear Dr. Bollinger,

Thanks for your message. I am happy that you found my essay entertaining and informative to read.Concerning the points that you raised:

1) The " tangential complaint about how the FQXi Essay process has not treated me fairly" was not a trick, but my real feeling before starting this new FQXi adventure. In any case, I decided to follow Einstein's advice to donot give too much importance to Prizes and Awards. I am enjoying in this FQXi Competition, and this is my main interest now.

2) Your criticism that "publication of a paper in a prestigious journal only proves that the paper has passed their minimum review standards for being well-argued and plausible" is absolutely correct, but this works for alls the papers in the whole history of Science!

3) I am happy to know that also you are in the “does not erase” camp concerning the black hole information problem.

4) I disagree on your statement that FQXi question this year was pretty much “how do you tell if a theory is fundamental?” I think indeed that FQXi question can be interpreted in a more general way. In any case, also admitting that you are correct and the FQXi question is “how do you tell if a theory is fundamental?" I stress that my Essay does not only limit itself to the black hole information problem. In fact, it is also important in the framework of black holes as being the fundamental bricks of quantum gravity which is, in turn, fundamental in order to arrive to a unified field theory. Is there a theory more fundamental than the unified field theory?

Thanks again and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 10:21 GMT
Dear Christian,

(copy to yours and mine)

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

You wrote: «Beyond your Essay, I am interested on your device for the detection of gravitational waves. Can you give me some detail?»

Brief description of the experiment can be read in my Research notebook «The deterministic gravitational...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 17:19 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thanks a lot for your kind clarifications. I will surely read your Research notebook on your experiment soon.

Again, I wish you good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 18:46 GMT
Dear Christian,

I read with the big interest your excellent essay. It's time to "serious fight" in basic science , which was expressed by laureate of the Fields Award Vladimir Voevodsky (1966-2017): "The crisis of russian science is not only a crisis of russian science. There is a crisis of world science. Real progress will be in a very serious fight between science and religion that...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 17:52 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

It is a pleasure meeting you here in FQXi again.

Thanks for finding my Essay excellent, I am honored by this.

Thanks also for the very interesting comments. In particular, I find very nice the last one concerning complementarity between physics and poesy. Laws of Nature are indeed highly poetical.

It will be my pleasure to read, comment and rate your Essay soon.

Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Sue Lingo wrote on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 20:59 GMT
Hi Christian...

In that Einstein, claimed that "Energy can not be destroyed, only changed in form", and he raised no objection to your input of Hawking's assessment that "physical information is ultimately lost in BH evaporation", it is possible that either, as I state in my essay, "a gravity collapse disassembles Physical scale entity choreographies of Energy information, freeing Metaphysical scale entity choreographies of Energy information, which a gravity collapse apparently has no influence upon", or someone was impersonating Einstein in your Metaphysical encounter.

Thanks Christian for contributing your insights, and your comments on my essay will be read with those insights in mind.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 08:16 GMT
Dear Sue,

Thanks for your message.

I think that Einstein raised no objection to my input of Hawking's assessment that "physical information is ultimately lost in BH evaporation" because he was waiting to listen my solution on that problem. In any case, your Essay seems interesting. I will read, comment and rate it today. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share


Sue Lingo replied on Mar. 4, 2018 @ 19:36 GMT
Hi Christian...

Fair answer!!

However, in that Einstein claims to now have a "Unified Field theory", by patronizing your need to express yourself, and not immediately redirecting the potential of your Metaphysical cognitive state, to the potential for an Initial State TQG, that must necessarily be facilitated by any valid "Unified Field theory", your "Grand Master" denied you the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 04:28 GMT
Dear Christian Corda, sorry, I will intervene in your conversation with albert Einstein. I want to remind you about the principle of the identity of space and matter Descartes, on which is based the New Cartesian Physics. This Physics needs your support to develop further. Visit my page and give your assessment there.

I hope on your highly appreciate her ideas.

FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 08:18 GMT
Dear Boris Dizhechko,

Thanks for intervening in my conversation with AE.

Your Essay seems interesting. I will read, comment and rate it today. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Maxim Yurievich Khlopov wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 10:24 GMT
Dear Christian,

Thank you for your interesting and inspiring essay.

It deserves highest estimation

With the best regards

Maxim Khlopov

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 11:09 GMT
Dear Maxim,

It is a pleasure meeting you here in FQXi.

Thanks for your kind words and for your highest estimation of my Essay. By the way, my Essay is partially founded on a paper of mine that you handled as Guest Editor for AHEP some years ago, i.e. my reference [5].

Thanks again. I will read, comment and rate our Essay today. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 10:55 GMT
Dear Chorda.

This makes me smile.

Clearly, the research work on the gravitational atom is not ended. In fact, Bohr model was an approximated model of the hydrogen atom with respect to the valence shell atom model of full QM. In the same way, your Bohr-like BH approach should be an approximated model with respect to the denitive, but at the present time unknown, BH model arising from a full TQG. After a moment, Einstein continued: OK, I sincerely hope that this time you will be considered for a Prize by the FQXi Expert Judges. I wish you good luck in this new FQXi Essay Contest. In any case, you have to do not give too much importance to Prizes and Awards, despite they could be very important and prestigious. The profound beauty of our job of scientists is not given by Prizes and Awards. It is instead given by the insight into the mystery of life [49].

See what mysteries of Life I have with

What is Life? A theory of ”More than everything”!

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3093

Hope for a good vote, after you have read it, also comments welcome.

Amazing story you have. About my quote I may have some ideas. It is important what frame you use to get the results.

Thanks.

Ulla Mattfolk

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 11:00 GMT
Financial support even...

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 11:24 GMT
Dear Ulla Mattfolk

Thanks for your message. I am honored that you think that I have an amazing story. Yes, of course the research work on the gravitational atom is not ended. I have some ideas to continue it.

Your Essay seems interesting. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and rating it today. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Andrew Beckwith wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 11:07 GMT
Dear Christian

I have enjoyed your work in the past, and if you win this contest it is well deserved,

Unlike certain community raters, you have defended your premise and your view point in an extemplary fashion and I congratulate you on your sportsmanship and professionalism

Bravo and a job well done

Andy

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Andrew Beckwith replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 11:50 GMT
You have shown a professionalism and an integrity that the last minute essay rate bombers did not have, and in this, you have elevated yourself above the muck and dirt shown by cowards unwilling to discuss ideas, but who wound on the basis of who knows whom and not of science.'

It is truly fitting if you win this contest, Christian. You are the best rebuke possible to the scum who rate bomb and who act with cowardice, rather than discuss ideas

Contratulations

IMO to those who rate bombed me at the end, my friend , Christian, is everything you are NOT

Andrew Beckwith, PhD

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 13:02 GMT
Dear Andy,

Thanks for your message and for your kinds words. I am honored by them. I regret for the last minute Essay lowering rate bombs that you have suffered. I always found such actions due to cowardice. Again, I wish you all the best in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Eckard Blumschein wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 17:25 GMT
Dear Christian Corda,

After [1] to [7], [25-29], and [31-33] you will definitely deserve the Nobel price or even FQXi's price for THE FINAL UNIFIED FIELD THEORY.

Unqualified reader may nonetheless be confused: Does BH mean Bekenstein-Hawking or Black Hole? I would even write "Herr Doktor" (with the German letter k), and I wonder a bit how well the late Einstein was dressed.

Anyway, those readers who admit not being familiar with your marvellous formulas might nonetheless have understood what "fundamental" means.

Eckard Blumschein

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 17:54 GMT
Dear Mr. Blumschein,

I am very honored by your criticisms. On one hand, I suspect they are due to my correcting your very elementary mistakes in previous FQXi Essay Contests. On the other hand, I think they are also due to envy, because you will ever publish papers like [1] to [7], [25-29], and [31-33] neither in the reality nor in your dreams... In any case, I am always very happy to receive criticisms by anti-relativity guys like you. I received the same criticisms by your friends in anti-relativity claims, like Mr. Crothers, Mr. Santilli and others, and I always ridiculed them. Here, you ridicule yourself. By the way, I think that you need an ophthalmologist, because I wrote in line 11 of page 1 of my Essay that BH is the acronym of black hole... I also wrote "Herr Doktor" (with the German letter k) 3 times while I wrote "Herr Doctor" (with the English letter c) only one time. I think that a typo is permitted in this Essay Contest... I do not know if those readers who admit not being familiar with my marvellous formulas might nonetheless have understood what "fundamental" means. I am instead sure that you do not understand what "fundamental" means and, in addition, that you do not understand an enormous number of other thinks... Finally, I suspect that you are the gentleman who lowered my score by giving me "1". Relax, I will neither apply the same favor to you, nor signal to FQXi this squalid issue. In fact, I wasted even too much time with a poor man like you... I pity you.

Sincerely, Christian Corda

Bookmark and Share


Eckard Blumschein replied on Feb. 27, 2018 @ 06:39 GMT
Dear Christian Corda,

I understand your angry reaction as an indication of lacking readiness to accept I might be right when I felt your self-admiration inappropriate among scientists. A good teacher intends teaching as easily understandable as possible.

I ask you to guess: Why did my boss blame a paper of mine as "sowas von" fundamental?

You claimed having proved me wrong in previous contests. Can you please give at least some examples for this? Fortunately FQXi documented all discussions.

What about publishing, I too am a little biased in so far, I tend to not expect accepted work in viXra and Academia. I also refused publishing in GS Journal.

Being not an "anti-relativity boy", I am nonetheless open for hints that may guide to a revelation of possible flaws in non-causal and tenseless models.

With sympathy,

Eckard Blumschein

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 27, 2018 @ 10:51 GMT
Dear Eckard Blumschein,

I regret but you misunderstood me various times.

1) My reaction to your criticisms was ironic rather than angry.

2) My feeling at the starting of my Essay was disappointment instead of self-admiration. In fact, I am sure that the FQXi Panel has been unjust with me in previous years. This feeling is also shared by colleagues, see the below post by Philip Gibbs. Maybe that my criticizing the FQXi Panel further prevents them to award me this year, but this is not important. I have fun here in FQXi and this is my main interest. On the other hand, by claiming that " I felt your self-admiration inappropriate among scientists" you show your proper self-admiration by claiming that you are a scientist. They must be other scientists who state that you are a scientist, not yourself.

3) Sorry, I have no time to search our discussions in previous Contests.

4) If you have problems in publishing, this does not authorize you to denigrate my publications. This seems envy.

5) I am happy to know that you are not an "anti-relativity boy".

Best wishes, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Philip Gibbs wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 21:07 GMT
Dear Christian, with the final moments of the community phase upon us you are again top of the ratings. Will the panel be able to deny you a prize again, despite a recommendation from the great master himself? We shall see, but whatever the result it is good that you have addressed the matter with a sense of humour.

On the science side I do like your Bohr atom analogy for black holes. Treating the QNMs as similar to electrons seems like a smart move, and you have worked out the idea in impressive detail. Such work should not be ignored.

Your Hawking quote about the information being effectively lost, while unitarity holds caught my eye. Perhaps we have been taking the word information too literally. This kind of information is more like scrambled data that can never be unscrambled. It would be better described as randomness than information. I have a motto that the universe does not care what we think. In this case it does not care if we cannot access the information. As entropy rises usable information degenerates into the heat bath, or the black hole. Evolution, life and our struggles to understand the universe are our fight to hold onto meaningful information. The amount of information we gather, organise and record temporarily is tiny compared to what is being lost to randomness by the heat of our efforts, yet it is everything to us.

Good luck. I hope this time round will bring you a well-deserved and overdue prize.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Christian Corda replied on Feb. 28, 2018 @ 09:02 GMT
Dear Phil,

I am happy that you appreciated my a sense of humour. Thanks for your kind words on the science side. I am honored that you thinks that my work should not be ignored.

I find your discussion on the information largely sharable.

Congratulation for your remarkable 4th position in the community rating and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Anonymous wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 23:25 GMT
An enjoyable read, Christian

I like your discussion with AE and had to laugh when the Unified Field Theory fades before you can read it (I doubt we are anywhere close to such a theory).

A couple questions:

1) If a BH works like an atom and electrons, should there be a 'spectra' of this? I mean like the spectral lines of hydrogen? Could this be verified?

2) Would you say that a BH changes its size in quantum jumps? It would seem, given the analogy provided, that these are not 'tiny' jumps at the particle level, but rather possibly measurable in large units. If so, the question comes up as to how discrete jumps can exist in an otherwise continuous spacetime - or rather how does the 'jump' occur without a continuous change in dimension?

In a different direction, what can be stated about all levels of scale in a BH, between those at the large, BH, scale and those of the quantum particle scale? Do all these other levels not exist, not have any impact on the BH structure, or have we simply not addressed them yet?

Again, a very enjoyable read,

Don

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.