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

sherman jenkins: on 3/2/18 at 1:00am UTC, wrote Posting here and at your essay. Rated your essay a few weeks ago. Did not...

Peter Jackson: on 2/26/18 at 12:15pm UTC, wrote Sherman, Interesting. Do you have a definition of 'charge'? Whats the...

Kamal Rajpal: on 2/23/18 at 17:16pm UTC, wrote Dear Sherman Jenkins, There are three kinds of pions or pi-mesons:...

Luis Patino: on 2/22/18 at 14:07pm UTC, wrote Dear Sherman: That was a fun read! I agree with the "Mental" section of...

Steven Andresen: on 2/22/18 at 7:38am UTC, wrote Dear Sherman If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the...

sherman jenkins: on 2/20/18 at 20:06pm UTC, wrote Structure, charge and the pressure of the Universe; a “solid state”...

sherman jenkins: on 2/18/18 at 1:02am UTC, wrote Charge. Not that of an electron. But the charge of a bare lone...

Peter Jackson: on 2/15/18 at 11:41am UTC, wrote Yes please, Go for it. Before that, my own 1/137th is the fine structure...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

George Musser: "Imagine you could feed the data of the world into a computer and have it..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "Personally Joe me I see like that ,imagine that this infinite eternal..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "Joe it is wonderful this,so you are going to have a nobel prize in..." in First Things First: The...

Robert McEachern: ""I'm not sure that the 'thing as it is' is irrelevant." It is not. It is..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "lol Zeeya it is well thought this algorythm selective when names are put in..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "is it just due to a problem when we utilise names of persons?" in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Georgina Woodward: "I suggested the turnstiles separate odd form even numbered tickets randomly..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 17, 2019

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: One Thirty Seven Is The KEY by sherman loran jenkins [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author sherman loran jenkins wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 16:22 GMT
Essay Abstract

The scientific community, for much of 100 years, has been preparing, expecting and anticipating a new level of basic understanding. This essay reveals a process to help overcome misconceptions that have resulted in this century of searching for a union of theories. And discloses a process to construct a new level of understanding and simplicity. 137 is the key.

Author Bio

Sherman Jenkins studied Mathematics and Physics at the University of Missouri at Rolla, Washington University in St. Louis, and the University of California. He has submitted three FQXI essays including for the first FQXI contest, “The Nature of Time.” That essay shared a vacuum structure that reveals the origin of time, the Higgs field, and answers many questions including the source of alpha.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Jan. 27, 2018 @ 15:41 GMT
Dear Sherman Loran Jenkins, you very briefly and brilliant identified a fundamental problem in physics: “When we envision the structure of the vacuum we can then see why 1/137

is so central to all physical processes”. I can only add, the physical vacuum is a state of physical space, which according to Descartes is matter. Look at my essay, where I spoke about the application in physics of the principle of the identity of space and matter of Descartes. I'll give you a rating after your comment.

Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sherman loran jenkins replied on Jan. 28, 2018 @ 00:14 GMT
Dizhechko,

You are correct to note the relationship between various good physical theories and see that they must share fundamental principles. The present state with fragmented theories and observations can be assembled into a single theory after setting aside unnecessary and distracting parts. These odd parts are often holdover from previous theories or based on unwarranted mathematical projections.

I agree that “space is matter.” And propose that most anyone coming to this place with an open mind can reach a similar conclusion. And see that the localized motion of these bits of matter give us what is known as the Higgs field. And the basis of time. The curvature of this solid body gives the force we call gravity. And the slightly denser region in and near galaxies is called “dark matter."

Congratulations on an excellent essay. I will post both at your essay and after your comment on my essay.

Sherman Jenkins

Bookmark and Share


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich replied on Jan. 28, 2018 @ 03:27 GMT
Dear Sherman Jenkins, you correctly believe that the number 137 is fundamental, which determines the structure of matter. I read two authors who showed that this number is related to another fundamental number - 3.14 ...... I appreciate your essay because you are on the right track.

I wish you success! Dizhechko

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sherman loran jenkins replied on Jan. 28, 2018 @ 05:36 GMT
Dizhechko,

137 is not exactly fundamental. If we were dealing with a full deck as the basis of all reality and interested in the chance of drawing the queen of hearts; the odds would likely be 1 in 52. And the chance of selecting an ace would be 4 in 52 or 1 in 13. In this example the deck of cards is fundamental. What we are looking for is the structure of the vacuum.

Sherman

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 02:31 GMT
Hi Sherman

I did not follow, why structure is required for vacuum "When we envision the structure of the vacuum we can then see why 1/137 is so central to all physical processes." Can you please explain a bit further? By the way....

Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed...……..….. yours is very nice essay best wishes …. I highly appreciate hope your essay and...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 18:14 GMT
Sherman,

I found your essay had a very fine structure, constant good advice and unified sections. I suspect 1/137th is very fundamental, but who knows.... yet.? Nice concise job, well written, interesting, amusing and spot on topic!

If you've read any of my own recent finalist essays (from 2011 on) you'll see I've used the exact methodology you identify for your grandmothers jigsaw! First focussed on SR, I then tested the solution found (Peer scored both 1st & 2nd so clearly most agreed!) on QM (also cosmology etc with interesting results). A few months ago the last component slotted in to place and, shockingly, it all seemed to come together!

I hope you're competent enough to have a look and tell me where it might have gone wrong, as very few here seem able to do so!! (no faults found, they just seem to look and run away with a bout of cognitive dissonance!) I hope you'll also see Declan Traill's short essay for the matching computer code & plot).

Unlikely I know, but funny thing about jigsaw puzzles, it seems they're either right, if the bits all fit, or obviously wrong.

Nicely done for yours. Worth a decent score despite it's brevity.

Very best

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sherman loran jenkins replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 07:19 GMT
Peter,

So close. Still too complicated. More fundamental still. The barmaid will still have some of the same roadblocks. Namely preconceived ideas. And “..if it was that simple...surely someone would have thought of that.” I have tried the barmaid theory more than once, no luck. What I mean is, they didn’t grasp the explanation. But you may have even less luck with the expert with their own idea and politically correct limitations etc.

Sherman

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 11:10 GMT
Sherman,

I agree. Physics is closed minded. So I try Feynmans method, start by explaining it to a child...

A spinning sphere works well if I'm there to explain it; child or in the bar. But let me try my fishbowl: Go down to the other end of the bar, shine a pulsed (1 sec) laser back at my fish bowl. The light slows to c/n glass then back to c/n air (or water or vacuum with some...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author sherman loran jenkins wrote on Feb. 14, 2018 @ 06:05 GMT
OK. OK. Will tell what is fundamental. What fundamental is. I don’t want to; it is so much more exciting to find a truth for one self. If you are sure you want to know, just say so. We are talking about Physics, right. Reality. Mass and energy, time and space?

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 11:41 GMT
Yes please, Go for it.

Before that, my own 1/137th is the fine structure surface fermions required to couple with EM in the 2-fluid plasma transition zone (Maxwells TZ). With motion that then increases to remain a constant with /b]inertial mass, because a denser TZ is required to perform the speed change (LT) between frames.(Inc local virial rotations F = ma = mv2/r). It's also the 'Unruh effect'.

So effectively pair production (Higgs process) from increased 'pressure' or motion through the ambient medium. Max density is however ~10^22/cm^-3. which is plasma 'optical breakdown' density' & rather hot. I identified a "a 'virial kinetic entity' (VKE)" defining/bounding a local system, i.e. a heliosphere, and initially also wrote;

Principle II of space as a wave medium can then be more clearly interpreted as the energy being 'handled' by the particles; ( 'At each point in space, waves from all wave center 'particles' in the universe combine their intensities to form the mass-energy density of space.');

Mass-energy density of space ~ mc2 = hf = k [SUM(Fn) 2/rn2)]


I'm sure you have a more complete fundamental derivation with some proper sums (I don't do those - see my top scored 2015 maths essay!) which I'd love to see. Let me know if you see any connections at all with the above.

Very best

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author sherman loran jenkins wrote on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 01:02 GMT
Charge. Not that of an electron. But the charge of a bare lone “Higgs.” Charge and the pressure that confines each bit of charge in relation to surrounding bits. Charge and pressure. And the dynamic structure formed by a Universe of charge. Charge and pressure and structure are fundamental.

Bookmark and Share



Author sherman loran jenkins wrote on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 20:06 GMT
Structure, charge and the pressure of the Universe; a “solid state” structure composed of “distorted dodecahedra” with a single “bit of charge” in each dynamic cell. A unit of charge in each cell and dynamic bounds formed by surrounding units of charge. Maximum packing density of elements would be “close packing” for solid round static bits of charge. But for charged dynamic particles density is greater than "close packing." This "shape" may be described as a distorted dodecahedra. This maximum in the packing density prescribes the background temperature of the cosmos! And it varies with direction! Can you see the dodecahedral structure in the cosmic microwave background (CMB)? Yes. And the maximum density of the “vacuum charge” distorted dodecahedra-- is less symmetrical than one may at first assume. It has a natural twist.

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 12:15 GMT
Sherman,

Interesting. Do you have a definition of 'charge'? Whats the maximum packing density? And where do you find the dodecahedron in the CMB? I assume in the underlying helix, but as an astronomer I've analysed the anisotropies & plank data in detail and haven't seen it. I've look outside lots of boxes, but what am I missing?

I do like your essay anyway,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sherman loran jenkins replied on Mar. 2, 2018 @ 01:00 GMT
Posting here and at your essay. Rated your essay a few weeks ago. Did not get to everyone I wanted to read and rate. But we can continue to study and comment. About CMB patterns that more than hint at the structure of the vacuum: Keep in mind that a politically correct notion of a “big bang” is a defining element of the “standard model” of the Physics of the Universe and its origin. A string of questionable adjustments are continually made to both the “standard model” and “big bang” theory in order to accommodate new observations. Look to CMB data before all the corrections are made for unseen dark matter and any adjustments made for mysterious symmetrical equipment errors.

Corrections for the motion of receivers, the Earth, the Sun etc. are needed unless one is a member of the “Earth centered universe club.” And dark matter is a factor but it is not appropriate to define an artificial distribution of dark matter based on a desire to smooth out the CMB data.

As polarization data accumulates for CMB, I believe the structure of the vacuum will be more and more apparent.

Bookmark and Share



Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 07:38 GMT
Dear Sherman

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


Luis F Patino wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 14:07 GMT
Dear Sherman:

That was a fun read!

I agree with the "Mental" section of your essay that a useful meaning of fundamental is that which brings us ever closer to the truth.

I further agree that it's not so much the actual number 1/137 that is fundamental in this sense but how it arises. Nevertheless, if derived as you indicate, its value may be indeed a key a to a better (more fundamental) understanding of the physics of the Universe.

Luis Felipe Patino-Cuadrado

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Kamal L Rajpal wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 17:16 GMT
Dear Sherman Jenkins,

There are three kinds of pions or pi-mesons: positively charged pi(+), negatively charged pi(-) and electrically neutral pi(0). The masses of pi(+) and pi(-) are equal, and are 273 times the mass of the electron. The mass of pi(0) is 264 times that of the electron. Perhaps, one unit of electron or positron charge has some relationship with 9 units of electron mass.

Quantum Mechanics claims that an electron can be both spin-up and spin-down at the same time. In my conceptual physics Essay on Electron Spin, I have proved that this is not true. Please read: https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3145

Kamal Rajpal

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.