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.

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

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

Previous Contests

**Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest**

*December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020*

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

**What Is “Fundamental”**

*October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018*

*Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

Previous Contests

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

*Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.*

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**Christian Corda**: *on* 5/18/20 at 8:03am UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir, Thanks for your message. It is my pleasure meeting you...

**Christian Corda**: *on* 5/18/20 at 7:40am UTC, wrote Dears Professors Pavel Poluian and Dmitry Lichargin, Thanks for your...

**Christian Corda**: *on* 5/18/20 at 6:30am UTC, wrote Hi LC, I hope that you are recovering your health. I think your last...

**Christian Corda**: *on* 5/18/20 at 6:27am UTC, wrote Dear Jim, Sorry but the creation of a horizon is NOT a low-energy...

**Vladimir Fedorov**: *on* 5/16/20 at 13:38pm UTC, wrote Dear Christian, Glad to read your work again. I greatly appreciated your...

**Pavel Poluian**: *on* 5/16/20 at 12:14pm UTC, wrote Dear Professor Christian Corda! Today we reviewed your text. You dare to...

**James Arnold**: *on* 5/16/20 at 6:06am UTC, wrote Christian, I believe invoking quantum tunneling in low-energy situations as...

**Lawrence Crowell**: *on* 5/15/20 at 12:29pm UTC, wrote Christinel. I wrote the following on my blog area: Thanks for the boost....

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**jim hughes**: "I'm not a mathematician. So what I see here is some smart people who..."
*in* Consciousness and the...

**Steve Dufourny**: "Hello FQXi, the members and all, I try to do my best to unite and convice..."
*in* Global Collaboration

**Lorraine Ford**: "The idea of a smooth mathematical evolution of “the wave function”, and..."
*in* Consciousness and the...

**Georgina Woodward**: "Broken machine: What do[es] I see next? The I that was, E.I, has not been..."
*in* The Room in the Elephant:...

**Lorraine Ford**: "Hi Stefan, I hope that a good leader, and a good political party, is..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Lorraine Ford**: "We live in an age of computing. But physics, mathematics and philosophy,..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Georgina Woodward**: "I've copied the comment to the thread where it belongs. This orphan can be..."
*in* The Room in the Elephant:...

**Georgina Woodward**: "Thank you John. What did you think about the questioning whether altitude..."
*in* The Nature of Time

RECENT ARTICLES

*click titles to read articles*

**Good Vibrations**

Microbead 'motor' exploits natural fluctuations for power.

**Reconstructing Physics**

New photon experiment gives new meta-framework, 'constructor theory,' a boost.

**The Quantum Engineer: Q&A with Alexia Auffèves**

Experiments seek to use quantum observations as fuel to power mini motors.

**The Quantum Clock-Maker Investigating COVID-19, Causality, and the Trouble with AI**

Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

**Connect the Quantum Dots for a New Kind of Fuel**

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

Microbead 'motor' exploits natural fluctuations for power.

New photon experiment gives new meta-framework, 'constructor theory,' a boost.

Experiments seek to use quantum observations as fuel to power mini motors.

Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

FQXi FORUM

September 28, 2021

CATEGORY:
Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest (2019-2020)
[back]

TOPIC: Restoration of predictability in gravitational collapse by Christian Corda [refresh]

TOPIC: Restoration of predictability in gravitational collapse by Christian Corda [refresh]

It is shown that the Bohr-like approach to black hole (BH) quantum physics, which has been developed in a series of recent papers, solves the BH information paradox by restoring predictability in gravitational collapse.

I am Professor of Theoretical Physics at the Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Istanbul University, Istanbul, 34134, Turkey and at the International Institute for Applicable Mathematics and Information Sciences, B. M. Birla Science Centre, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad 500063 (India).

Good afternoon, dear Christian Corda!

Finally, we waited for the FQXi essay contest to talk again about what is important in physics. I again put up for general discussion what I put up at the previous competition to consolidate the ideas of the neocartesian generalization of modern physics in scientific circles.

Your attempt to describe the emission of black holes by its quantum properties will necessarily rest against an understanding of what it is. My co-author once told me that, based on the accepted density of the Universe and its size, we can deduce that we live in a black hole. For my part, I added that the black hole in which we live is fragmented into tiny particles and is inside us, so we are so active.

I invite you to discuss some aspects of the neo-Cartesian generalization of modern physics, which I set out in my essay: “The transformation of uncertainty into certainty. The relationship of the Lorentz factor with the probability density of states. And more from a new Cartesian generalization of modern physics. by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich »

Regards, Boris Gechko.

report post as inappropriate

Finally, we waited for the FQXi essay contest to talk again about what is important in physics. I again put up for general discussion what I put up at the previous competition to consolidate the ideas of the neocartesian generalization of modern physics in scientific circles.

Your attempt to describe the emission of black holes by its quantum properties will necessarily rest against an understanding of what it is. My co-author once told me that, based on the accepted density of the Universe and its size, we can deduce that we live in a black hole. For my part, I added that the black hole in which we live is fragmented into tiny particles and is inside us, so we are so active.

I invite you to discuss some aspects of the neo-Cartesian generalization of modern physics, which I set out in my essay: “The transformation of uncertainty into certainty. The relationship of the Lorentz factor with the probability density of states. And more from a new Cartesian generalization of modern physics. by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich »

Regards, Boris Gechko.

report post as inappropriate

Dear Boris Gechko,

thanks for your interest in my FQXi page. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and voting your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

thanks for your interest in my FQXi page. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and voting your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Dear Christian Korda, of course, the new Cartesian generalization of modern physics is not the theory of everything. If this theory is ever created, it is obvious that it will require a neocartesian reading based on the identity of physical space and matter. It is very difficult to understand and accept that space moves because it is matter, because it is foreign to our free will, when space suddenly becomes matter that resists our movement. And it must withstand the movement of bodies in it according to Newton’s second law.

In general, neocartesian thinking led me to the conclusion that the proton is a black hole, so the Bohr-like approach to quantum black hole physics (BH) is justified. For this I will give you high praise. Wish you success!

Boris Dizhechko

report post as inappropriate

In general, neocartesian thinking led me to the conclusion that the proton is a black hole, so the Bohr-like approach to quantum black hole physics (BH) is justified. For this I will give you high praise. Wish you success!

Boris Dizhechko

report post as inappropriate

Dear Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich,

Thanks for your interesting comments. That neocartesian thinking led you to the conclusion that the proton is a black hole is quite interesting. Yes, it is surely a further endorsement to my Bohr-like approach to quantum black hole physics. You could be interested that there is another theory, called the strong gravity theory which was developed by the great Italian physicist Erasmo Recami, who is a friend of mine, by the Nobel Laureate Abdus Salam and collaborators, which considers all the elementary particles in terms of black holes. Here is an interesting paper.

Wish you success too!

Cheers,Ch.

Thanks for your interesting comments. That neocartesian thinking led you to the conclusion that the proton is a black hole is quite interesting. Yes, it is surely a further endorsement to my Bohr-like approach to quantum black hole physics. You could be interested that there is another theory, called the strong gravity theory which was developed by the great Italian physicist Erasmo Recami, who is a friend of mine, by the Nobel Laureate Abdus Salam and collaborators, which considers all the elementary particles in terms of black holes. Here is an interesting paper.

Wish you success too!

Cheers,Ch.

Good to see you here Dr. Corda,

I have already skimmed your paper, and I will have some comments as always. I will likely ask you to explain some things (like what are quasinormal modes?) in layman's terms, after offering possible phenomenological analogies for your review and comment. I think people would benefit from actually understanding this work, while most have only a vague notion of what you are saying. I'm afraid that when it comes to black hole models; people are like sports fans rooting for one team or another (String Theory vs Loop Quantum Gravity; firewalls or none; ...) so they never look beyond their team's offerings. Maybe that can change.

Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

I have already skimmed your paper, and I will have some comments as always. I will likely ask you to explain some things (like what are quasinormal modes?) in layman's terms, after offering possible phenomenological analogies for your review and comment. I think people would benefit from actually understanding this work, while most have only a vague notion of what you are saying. I'm afraid that when it comes to black hole models; people are like sports fans rooting for one team or another (String Theory vs Loop Quantum Gravity; firewalls or none; ...) so they never look beyond their team's offerings. Maybe that can change.

Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Hi dear Jonathan, it is a pleasure meeting you again here. I am a fan of your deep thoughts. In particular, your statement that "when it comes to black hole models; people are like sports fans rooting for one team or another (String Theory vs Loop Quantum Gravity; firewalls or none; ...) so they never look beyond their team's offerings" is regrettably correct. I really hope that can change, but I feel it will be difficult. Physics is sadly dominated by politics.... Looking forward to see your further comments and/or questions. By the way, quasinormal modes are the horizon oscillations due to the black hole back reaction to external perturbations. In my approach I consider the black hole as being "isolated" in the sense that the sole perturbations are due to the emissions of Hawking quanta and/or to the absorptions of external particles.

Cheers, Ch.

Cheers, Ch.

Thank you Christian,

I am happy to see your reply. To my way of thinking; it is only when a BH is regarded as isolated, where as you say it is only Hawking radiation and individual particles being emitted or absorbed, that we can use the Schwarzschild formulation, because once a BH picks up significant spin or charge from what is ingested, that model no longer applies.

Thanks for the time taken to explain. Sorry there is so much politics in Physics. I will wait to do ratings, until I have read at least a dozen papers, to gauge the field, but I will give your paper a thoughtful review in the meanwhile, and comment where appropriate. I wish you luck of course.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

I am happy to see your reply. To my way of thinking; it is only when a BH is regarded as isolated, where as you say it is only Hawking radiation and individual particles being emitted or absorbed, that we can use the Schwarzschild formulation, because once a BH picks up significant spin or charge from what is ingested, that model no longer applies.

Thanks for the time taken to explain. Sorry there is so much politics in Physics. I will wait to do ratings, until I have read at least a dozen papers, to gauge the field, but I will give your paper a thoughtful review in the meanwhile, and comment where appropriate. I wish you luck of course.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Thanks Jonathan, I am honored by your attention to my Essay. I agree that, regrettably, there is too much politics in Physics.

I will be happy to read, comment and score your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

I will be happy to read, comment and score your Essay soon.

Cheers, Ch.

Since I have a little time...

In the realm of ordinary vibrations, such as plucking a string, one creates normal mode harmonic variations where the pure tone of the resonant frequency rings out due to the transverse motion or vibration of the string. When we go to a surface, such as striking a drum head, already the situation gets a little more complex, which makes it an unpitched instrument though it can be tuned. We can also talk about a ball or balloon, which makes a tone when struck, but where the surface tension draws it out so it is not a pure tone.

As I understand it; there are at least two distinct ways a mode of vibration can become quasinormal. One is by stretching or bending that which is vibrating, so by hitting the whammy bar on a guitar or pushing the pedal on a tympani drum, you are changing the tone as it resonates. But in the case of a black hole; the surface tension is so enormous it forbids up and down motion entirely (at least in the static case), so it has to be tension and density compression waves. I also know that black hole merger ringdowns feature both types of quasinormality, resulting in a boing or chirp in the gravity waves.

In your model; the quasinormal modes are seen to mimic the electron cloud of an atom, and I am assuming this appearance would place the orbits only about 10^-12 cm. over the surface. Is this correct? Do the 'electron' modes appear instead as surface plasmons? Are you talking about pseudo-electrons in the density waves at the surface, or are you talking about something in the atmosphere of the object - yet in close proximity? I was unclear after skimming, but I have encountered your theory before. With each pass I gain a deeper understanding of what you are saying.

Good luck in the contest. My entry should post soon.

Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

In the realm of ordinary vibrations, such as plucking a string, one creates normal mode harmonic variations where the pure tone of the resonant frequency rings out due to the transverse motion or vibration of the string. When we go to a surface, such as striking a drum head, already the situation gets a little more complex, which makes it an unpitched instrument though it can be tuned. We can also talk about a ball or balloon, which makes a tone when struck, but where the surface tension draws it out so it is not a pure tone.

As I understand it; there are at least two distinct ways a mode of vibration can become quasinormal. One is by stretching or bending that which is vibrating, so by hitting the whammy bar on a guitar or pushing the pedal on a tympani drum, you are changing the tone as it resonates. But in the case of a black hole; the surface tension is so enormous it forbids up and down motion entirely (at least in the static case), so it has to be tension and density compression waves. I also know that black hole merger ringdowns feature both types of quasinormality, resulting in a boing or chirp in the gravity waves.

In your model; the quasinormal modes are seen to mimic the electron cloud of an atom, and I am assuming this appearance would place the orbits only about 10^-12 cm. over the surface. Is this correct? Do the 'electron' modes appear instead as surface plasmons? Are you talking about pseudo-electrons in the density waves at the surface, or are you talking about something in the atmosphere of the object - yet in close proximity? I was unclear after skimming, but I have encountered your theory before. With each pass I gain a deeper understanding of what you are saying.

Good luck in the contest. My entry should post soon.

Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jonathan,

Thanks for your interesting comments. I gave a detailed description of the black hole quasinormal modes in this paper. You will see that quasinormal modes can be analyzed in terms of superposition of damped oscillation while their quantum interpretation is of a particle quantized on a circle of length proportional to the black hole effective mass. Your statement that "this appearance would place the orbits only about 10^-12 cm. over the surface" is not correct. It is indeed the WHOLE surface which oscillates!

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Thanks for your interesting comments. I gave a detailed description of the black hole quasinormal modes in this paper. You will see that quasinormal modes can be analyzed in terms of superposition of damped oscillation while their quantum interpretation is of a particle quantized on a circle of length proportional to the black hole effective mass. Your statement that "this appearance would place the orbits only about 10^-12 cm. over the surface" is not correct. It is indeed the WHOLE surface which oscillates!

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Thank you for the clarification...

I hope the explanations here in the forum will serve to give your readers more good reasons to like your paper.

Have Fun!

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

I hope the explanations here in the forum will serve to give your readers more good reasons to like your paper.

Have Fun!

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian

Of course, in the vicinity of BH the mass has some structure.

The problem is that it is not possible to test whether it is a Bohr like structure or another.

There are also escape velocity formulas that give values less than the speed of light near a black hole. These are also not proven formulas so far. I believe that the two approaches can be combined to produce the best result.

As I understand your essay and the formulas listed, BH does not exist. At least it does not exist as defined: "that no light can go out".

• I think you should have written that clear in the essay.

• I also think you should have mentioned those who were against the BH singularity at the very beginning of the story of BH. In order to simplify formulas your formulas lose some of the information to the reader. It's not a mistake, but I don't like it.

You are one of the few in this competition who at least tries to verify own ideas with an acceptable mathematical apparatus. That's why you deserve a high score.

Most believe that, based on their extraordinary ideas; others should get results, which would not have been able to do without those ideas. It is not without significance that your results fit into my view that matter and radiation are opposites that are constantly and eternally revolve in the universe.

Regards

Branko

report post as inappropriate

Of course, in the vicinity of BH the mass has some structure.

The problem is that it is not possible to test whether it is a Bohr like structure or another.

There are also escape velocity formulas that give values less than the speed of light near a black hole. These are also not proven formulas so far. I believe that the two approaches can be combined to produce the best result.

As I understand your essay and the formulas listed, BH does not exist. At least it does not exist as defined: "that no light can go out".

• I think you should have written that clear in the essay.

• I also think you should have mentioned those who were against the BH singularity at the very beginning of the story of BH. In order to simplify formulas your formulas lose some of the information to the reader. It's not a mistake, but I don't like it.

You are one of the few in this competition who at least tries to verify own ideas with an acceptable mathematical apparatus. That's why you deserve a high score.

Most believe that, based on their extraordinary ideas; others should get results, which would not have been able to do without those ideas. It is not without significance that your results fit into my view that matter and radiation are opposites that are constantly and eternally revolve in the universe.

Regards

Branko

report post as inappropriate

Dear Branko,

Thanks for your interesting comments. Concerning scientists who were against the BH singularity at the very beginning of the story of BH, one of them was the same Einstein. Together with a young collaborator, F. Felleppa, we recently discovered that such scientists were correct, but in a way they could not imagine. They are quantum effect which remove the classical singularity by transforming the classical singular black hole in a non-singular quantum system of two strongly interacting particles: the "gravitational hydrogen atom".

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Thanks for your interesting comments. Concerning scientists who were against the BH singularity at the very beginning of the story of BH, one of them was the same Einstein. Together with a young collaborator, F. Felleppa, we recently discovered that such scientists were correct, but in a way they could not imagine. They are quantum effect which remove the classical singularity by transforming the classical singular black hole in a non-singular quantum system of two strongly interacting particles: the "gravitational hydrogen atom".

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Dear Christian,

it might be a sign of uncertain times that most responses to this contest (that I've had the pleasure of reading so far) chose to explore how uncertainty, undecidability and intrinsic epistemic limits impact our ability to investigate the world. You, laudably, chose the other option: restore predictability where the appearance of information loss in the Hawking process seemed to threaten it.

Moreover, you bring a fresh perspective to this problem---it's often said that the black hole is the hydrogen atom of quantum gravity, so what better way to handle it than with an approach that mirrors that of Bohr!

I have to say I haven't yet digested everything you bring to the table here---length constraints and the technical nature of the subject no doubt playing their part there---, but the fact that you can get a pure state as the endpoint of evaporation already seems very promising.

Out of curiosity, do you get any quantitative predictions from your approach---say, the evaporation time of the black hole, or the Hawking temperature? You mention that you get the BH entropy out, what degrees of freedom are counted by the entropy? The modes of the horizon oscillations?

Anyway, I'll have to spend some time mulling your essay over. I wish you the best of luck in this contest!

report post as inappropriate

it might be a sign of uncertain times that most responses to this contest (that I've had the pleasure of reading so far) chose to explore how uncertainty, undecidability and intrinsic epistemic limits impact our ability to investigate the world. You, laudably, chose the other option: restore predictability where the appearance of information loss in the Hawking process seemed to threaten it.

Moreover, you bring a fresh perspective to this problem---it's often said that the black hole is the hydrogen atom of quantum gravity, so what better way to handle it than with an approach that mirrors that of Bohr!

I have to say I haven't yet digested everything you bring to the table here---length constraints and the technical nature of the subject no doubt playing their part there---, but the fact that you can get a pure state as the endpoint of evaporation already seems very promising.

Out of curiosity, do you get any quantitative predictions from your approach---say, the evaporation time of the black hole, or the Hawking temperature? You mention that you get the BH entropy out, what degrees of freedom are counted by the entropy? The modes of the horizon oscillations?

Anyway, I'll have to spend some time mulling your essay over. I wish you the best of luck in this contest!

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jochen,

Thanks for your interest in my Essay. I am honored by your kind words and by your nice judgement on it. Concerning your questions: the evaporation time of the black hole and the Hawking temperature depend on the black hole mass and should be almost the same of the original computation of Hawking. Actually, I do not consider entropy in this Essay, but I have shown that it depends on the black hole principal quantum number, i.e., on the black hole excited state, in this paper, where I started my Bohr-like approach to black hole quantum physics some year ago.

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Thanks for your interest in my Essay. I am honored by your kind words and by your nice judgement on it. Concerning your questions: the evaporation time of the black hole and the Hawking temperature depend on the black hole mass and should be almost the same of the original computation of Hawking. Actually, I do not consider entropy in this Essay, but I have shown that it depends on the black hole principal quantum number, i.e., on the black hole excited state, in this paper, where I started my Bohr-like approach to black hole quantum physics some year ago.

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

I ended up writing an essay. This topic has been a source of questions for me over years. I also finally got some time to actually read some essays.

I think that your W operator is a form of density matrix for the black hole. This process is I think an entanglement of the normal mode or states with a quantum state, or approximation thereof, for the black hole. It is in this way that you have a pure state, or at least a close approximation to one. If the ⟨φ_j|W(t)|φ_i⟩ were summed over in a Fermi-golden rule this would then be ⟨φ_j|W(t)|φ_i⟩ ~ e^{-E_{ij}/kT} and would give the thermal Hawking radiation.

Take a look at my essay and see what you think.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

I think that your W operator is a form of density matrix for the black hole. This process is I think an entanglement of the normal mode or states with a quantum state, or approximation thereof, for the black hole. It is in this way that you have a pure state, or at least a close approximation to one. If the ⟨φ_j|W(t)|φ_i⟩ were summed over in a Fermi-golden rule this would then be ⟨φ_j|W(t)|φ_i⟩ ~ e^{-E_{ij}/kT} and would give the thermal Hawking radiation.

Take a look at my essay and see what you think.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Hi LC,

I am happy that you decided to attend FQXi Contest also this year.

That the W operator is a form of density matrix for the black hole is surely correct and it is a genuine S-matrix, not a false S-matrix as stated by Hawking. I will attempt to calculate it when I will have a bit of time.

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

I am happy that you decided to attend FQXi Contest also this year.

That the W operator is a form of density matrix for the black hole is surely correct and it is a genuine S-matrix, not a false S-matrix as stated by Hawking. I will attempt to calculate it when I will have a bit of time.

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Dear Dr. Korda,

You say: "This wave function results entangled with the wave function of the particle with positive energy which propagates towards innity in the mechanism of particle creation by BHs. Now, we show that this key point solves the entanglement problem connected with the information paradox. In fact, the entanglement problem of the BH information paradox concerns the entanglement structure of the wave function associated to the particle pair creation [3, 5, 28]. In other terms, in order to solve the paradox, one needs to know the part of the wave function in the interior of the horizon [3, 5, 28], i.e. the part of the wave function associated to the particle having negative energy (interior, infalling modes)".

The first thing to say: the introduction of "negative energy" in your article is false. The energy of a given particle you cannot give a negative mathematical sign. It makes no sense. This is not physics, this is mathematical philosophy.

The second thing to say: Ince you know what is time, there is no paradox in entanglement. You can read my article attached.

Yours Amrit

attachments: Searching_for_an_adequate_relation_betwen_time_and_entanglement.pdf

report post as inappropriate

You say: "This wave function results entangled with the wave function of the particle with positive energy which propagates towards innity in the mechanism of particle creation by BHs. Now, we show that this key point solves the entanglement problem connected with the information paradox. In fact, the entanglement problem of the BH information paradox concerns the entanglement structure of the wave function associated to the particle pair creation [3, 5, 28]. In other terms, in order to solve the paradox, one needs to know the part of the wave function in the interior of the horizon [3, 5, 28], i.e. the part of the wave function associated to the particle having negative energy (interior, infalling modes)".

The first thing to say: the introduction of "negative energy" in your article is false. The energy of a given particle you cannot give a negative mathematical sign. It makes no sense. This is not physics, this is mathematical philosophy.

The second thing to say: Ince you know what is time, there is no paradox in entanglement. You can read my article attached.

Yours Amrit

attachments: Searching_for_an_adequate_relation_betwen_time_and_entanglement.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Dear Amrit,

Thanks for your comments, but I am not interested to discuss with guys who neither know nor understand basic physics like you. I do not know if you are attending this Contest. If yes, I wish you good luck.

Sincerely, Ch.

Thanks for your comments, but I am not interested to discuss with guys who neither know nor understand basic physics like you. I do not know if you are attending this Contest. If yes, I wish you good luck.

Sincerely, Ch.

Dear Korda,

how much you understand the foundations of physics is showing your comment. The fact is "negative energy" is not physics, this is pure philosophy. You do not have any data supporting negative energy. Your article is a school example of what is not physics. Read my books and learn about BIJECVTIVITY in physics.

I'm not inventing physics as you do, my physics models are related to physical reality with bijective function. You for sure will not teach me physics.

Best, Amrit

attachments: 4_-_Einstein_Vision_of_Time_and_Infinite_Universe_without_Singularities_-_The_End_of_Big_Bang_Cosmology.pdf

report post as inappropriate

how much you understand the foundations of physics is showing your comment. The fact is "negative energy" is not physics, this is pure philosophy. You do not have any data supporting negative energy. Your article is a school example of what is not physics. Read my books and learn about BIJECVTIVITY in physics.

I'm not inventing physics as you do, my physics models are related to physical reality with bijective function. You for sure will not teach me physics.

Best, Amrit

attachments: 4_-_Einstein_Vision_of_Time_and_Infinite_Universe_without_Singularities_-_The_End_of_Big_Bang_Cosmology.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Hello, well, you have not explain this quantum gravitation , if it was the case it is the nobel prise, in telling us that you explain it with these BHs and the informations is totally odd. I beleive Mr Corda that you want to be like the best thinkers but you cannot create a very relevant general revolutionary work. Personally I have reached it in considering this dark cold matter encoded in nuclei and changing several things respecting the newtonian mechanics. You ideas for me are total nonsense to explain this quantum weakest force. In fact let s go deeper, first of all what do you consider like foundamental mathematical anmd physical objects ? strings or points, and after what do you consider like main orgin? a 1d main field like if all was Waves ? we know all on this platform in majority the basic sciences, but the aim is to see the generality at all scales and in philosophy. You have not explain this quantum gravitation, you have just extrapolated a Little bit the BHs with the works of Hawking in repeating already knowns equations and some about the informations. Well what is an information for you , like main essence ? you can utilise the geometrical algebrasm the strings, the geometrodynamics or otehrs….develop because we must analyse the generality in fact simply about the foundamental objects and why they exist and why they create our geometries, topologies, matters and space time. Do ypou consider A 1d main field at this Cosmic scale ? explain us your general philosophy about these objects at this planck scale and this philosophy, if they are strings, why they oscillate and how ….thanks , regards :) don t be irritated, you can go deeper I beleive

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Mr. Dufourny,

I am not irritated. I am amused instead. Yes, I can goo deeper and, I went indeed deeper with a young collaborator, give a look to this paper.

I consider neither strings nor points like fundamental mathematical and physical objects. I think that the fundamental entity is a "particle" in its quantum meaning.

I do not know if you are attending this Contest. If yes, I wish you good luck.

Cheers, Ch.

I am not irritated. I am amused instead. Yes, I can goo deeper and, I went indeed deeper with a young collaborator, give a look to this paper.

I consider neither strings nor points like fundamental mathematical and physical objects. I think that the fundamental entity is a "particle" in its quantum meaning.

I do not know if you are attending this Contest. If yes, I wish you good luck.

Cheers, Ch.

:) I liked your answer, you are nice in fact, I thought on Facebook you have been odd with me, so sorry , I was rude and it was just to see more how you are going to react, I liked in fact your essay even if I see differently, I respect the thinkers. And I wish you a good road in your researchs, sorry the aim was simply to nalance the things . Friendly

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Steve,

Thanks for clarifying. Actually, I do not remember when I was odd with you on Facebook. Maybe I had some problem that day. Can you clarify this issue?

Cheers, Ch.

Thanks for clarifying. Actually, I do not remember when I was odd with you on Facebook. Maybe I had some problem that day. Can you clarify this issue?

Cheers, Ch.

Hi Christian,

Good to see you back, and with a fascinating new take on Black Holes. You'll recall as an astronomer I study AGN, and more recently the physical kinematics of their outflows. As BH's seem ever more closely connected to AGN I found your quite opposite purely theoretical approach of great interest.

I also found it beautifully clearly written as usual. I do suspect the judges may be under to much political influence to elevate it to the ranks of their chosen few, rather like mine.

I take a far more fundamental approach which, despite being quite different, even revolutionary in a different way, I think you'll understand and like.

Very Best

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Good to see you back, and with a fascinating new take on Black Holes. You'll recall as an astronomer I study AGN, and more recently the physical kinematics of their outflows. As BH's seem ever more closely connected to AGN I found your quite opposite purely theoretical approach of great interest.

I also found it beautifully clearly written as usual. I do suspect the judges may be under to much political influence to elevate it to the ranks of their chosen few, rather like mine.

I take a far more fundamental approach which, despite being quite different, even revolutionary in a different way, I think you'll understand and like.

Very Best

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Peter

Black holes are rejuvenating systems of the universe which is eternal and non-created. BB cosmology is a fairy tale.

yours amrit

attachments: BIG_BANG_COSMOLOGY_FUNERAL.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Black holes are rejuvenating systems of the universe which is eternal and non-created. BB cosmology is a fairy tale.

yours amrit

attachments: BIG_BANG_COSMOLOGY_FUNERAL.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Dear Peter,

Thanks for your message. I am happy to re-meet you her in FQXi. Thanks also for the very nice comments on my Essay, I am honored by them.

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

P.S.

Please do not worry for the comments of Mr. Sorli. He is indeed a good guy, but his knowledge and understanding of fundamental physics are completely null. You should merely ignore him.

Thanks for your message. I am happy to re-meet you her in FQXi. Thanks also for the very nice comments on my Essay, I am honored by them.

I will read comment and score your Essay soon. Good luck in the contest!

Cheers, Ch.

P.S.

Please do not worry for the comments of Mr. Sorli. He is indeed a good guy, but his knowledge and understanding of fundamental physics are completely null. You should merely ignore him.

Christian.

Thanks for your comments on mine. For ease I post my reply here. As for Mr Sorli I do understand doctrine is quite different, but don't have the peer pressure you have to endure to regimentally 'toe the line' and stick close to it. Studying AGN had suggested the old 'black hole' concept is quite wrong and a recycling model and Mexican Hat potential where ALL accreted matter re-emerges in quasar jets are far more consistent with observational data, though I understand you may not dare comment on that!

My response on mine is below.;;;;

"Thank you kindly, Yes, common views on Bell are quite different, but I'm careful to actually*quote him accurately* **not ***'interpret',* which shows familiar interpretation quite wrong.

And Pauli/Boscovich 'exclusion' is indeed extended here, as**'relative motion'** implies each party has one definable kinetic state only at any gauge (but a translating body MAY also rotate).

It seems Bosons may be essentially mathematical descriptions of helical motions of smaller change 'states', and photons only quantized on absorption & re-emission (including 'measurement'). Can you think why not?

The revised foundations proposed seem to allow far more consistent physics!

Very best."

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Thanks for your comments on mine. For ease I post my reply here. As for Mr Sorli I do understand doctrine is quite different, but don't have the peer pressure you have to endure to regimentally 'toe the line' and stick close to it. Studying AGN had suggested the old 'black hole' concept is quite wrong and a recycling model and Mexican Hat potential where ALL accreted matter re-emerges in quasar jets are far more consistent with observational data, though I understand you may not dare comment on that!

My response on mine is below.;;;;

"Thank you kindly, Yes, common views on Bell are quite different, but I'm careful to actually

And Pauli/Boscovich 'exclusion' is indeed extended here, as

It seems Bosons may be essentially mathematical descriptions of helical motions of smaller change 'states', and photons only quantized on absorption & re-emission (including 'measurement'). Can you think why not?

The revised foundations proposed seem to allow far more consistent physics!

Very best."

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Hello, it is a good extrapolation but you don t solve the quantum gravitation. If it was the case, it d be the nobel prize, the BHs are not for me the auantum bricks of this quantum gravitation. The problem is that you have forgotten to insiert several parameters, you have analysed these informations but they don t answer even in developing some maths in correlations with the works of Hawking....

view entire post

view entire post

post approved

Sorry still, this one has been approved, I wanted to delete them because i was too much rude, but I cannot Dr Corda. Sorry

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Hi Dr Corda, look at this ,

considering different distances between the protons and electrons and reaching this quantum gravitation ? why ? because we have a deeper logic superimposed to our standard model, we must consider particles of gravitationa encoded in nuclei waker than our electromagnetism and we must probably insert a serie of quantum BHs farer than our nuclear forces, that permits to consider the electrons and protons like just emergent particles due to fields and their mass appear just due to bosonic mechanisms like the higgs fields simply, so now we can see better what is this quantum gravitationa and what we must consider like mass and distances, change now the distances in taking into account these quantum BHs, the main codes and these particles of DM encoded. Oddly I have reached this quantum weakest force .....our standard model needed simply to consider a deeper logic and consider that these protons and electrons are just emergent. That respects the newtonian mechanics dear all....quantum gravitation explained , eureka probably but I must publish correctly

work about this to find the good partitions with the good mathematical Tools chosem, the hamiltion Ricci flow, the spheres, the aether coded, the Ricci flow, the theurston geonetrisation conjecture, the poincare conjecture, the deformations of spheres, the fact that space disappears with specific finiet series of this coded aether, the lie derivatives, the heat equation, the lie groups and the E8 mainly, the topological and euclidian spaces mainly , I become crazy I must say but I evolve each Days. The numbers also are very important , reals, rationals, irrationals, imaginaries,primes, p adics analyses, fourer harmonics , all seems under a pure universal distribution with these spheres and these finite series of this main coded aether .

regards

report post as inappropriate

considering different distances between the protons and electrons and reaching this quantum gravitation ? why ? because we have a deeper logic superimposed to our standard model, we must consider particles of gravitationa encoded in nuclei waker than our electromagnetism and we must probably insert a serie of quantum BHs farer than our nuclear forces, that permits to consider the electrons and protons like just emergent particles due to fields and their mass appear just due to bosonic mechanisms like the higgs fields simply, so now we can see better what is this quantum gravitationa and what we must consider like mass and distances, change now the distances in taking into account these quantum BHs, the main codes and these particles of DM encoded. Oddly I have reached this quantum weakest force .....our standard model needed simply to consider a deeper logic and consider that these protons and electrons are just emergent. That respects the newtonian mechanics dear all....quantum gravitation explained , eureka probably but I must publish correctly

work about this to find the good partitions with the good mathematical Tools chosem, the hamiltion Ricci flow, the spheres, the aether coded, the Ricci flow, the theurston geonetrisation conjecture, the poincare conjecture, the deformations of spheres, the fact that space disappears with specific finiet series of this coded aether, the lie derivatives, the heat equation, the lie groups and the E8 mainly, the topological and euclidian spaces mainly , I become crazy I must say but I evolve each Days. The numbers also are very important , reals, rationals, irrationals, imaginaries,primes, p adics analyses, fourer harmonics , all seems under a pure universal distribution with these spheres and these finite series of this main coded aether .

regards

report post as inappropriate

Dear Steve,

These seem interesting ideas. I hope that you will develop them with rigorous mathematics. Good luck!

Cheers, Ch.

These seem interesting ideas. I hope that you will develop them with rigorous mathematics. Good luck!

Cheers, Ch.

I am thanking you Dr Corda, I work about this, I have an other idea for the formalisation of my theory and these finite series of spheres of this gravitational aether where space disappears, the Ricci flow, normal but also a kind of assymetric Ricci flow to explain the unique things and all the geometries and topologies. I try to create this assymetric Ricci flow and it is inside thje particles , like a code permitting these geonetries, properties and topologies.It seems relevant and it is totally different than this 1Dmain field and the strings like main cause of our reality, the codes are inside the particles, in these finite series of thhis aether. Best regards

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Steve,

I invite you to submit your paper to the Journal for which I serve as Editor in Chief, that is JHEPGC.

Cheers, Ch.

I invite you to submit your paper to the Journal for which I serve as Editor in Chief, that is JHEPGC.

Cheers, Ch.

Christian. I enjoyed your paper and it’s comments on information and black holes. In my paper “Clarification Of Physics—“, I present a different perspective on information, what happens in black holes and their relationships to the creation of “our” multiverse and visible universe. I think you will find it interesting. Also I would appreciate your comments on my essay . John D Crowell

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian:

I enjoyed reading your paper as it addresses the important topic of predicting the collapse of the wave function via gravity.

You may be interested in my paper - https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3440 entitled -"Unravelling the Missing Physics behind Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability" presenting a predictive model for gravitational collapse.

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

report post as inappropriate

I enjoyed reading your paper as it addresses the important topic of predicting the collapse of the wave function via gravity.

You may be interested in my paper - https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3440 entitled -"Unravelling the Missing Physics behind Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability" presenting a predictive model for gravitational collapse.

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

report post as inappropriate

Dear Avtar,

Thanks for your interest in my FQXi page. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and voting your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Thanks for your interest in my FQXi page. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and voting your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Dear Christian

Thanks for the excellent question regarding the absoluteness of mathematical reality. I have answered your question under my essay. I would appreciate your fedback on my answers.

I would like submit my essay to the JHEPGC. Please advise how to proceed. You can email me at avsingh@alum.mit.edu. I am attaching two other papers for possible submission to the journal and would like your feedback.

Thanking you in advance,

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

attachments: Published_Paper_in_Phy_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_2_4Singh.pdf, Published_Paper_in_Physics_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_1_14Singh.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Thanks for the excellent question regarding the absoluteness of mathematical reality. I have answered your question under my essay. I would appreciate your fedback on my answers.

I would like submit my essay to the JHEPGC. Please advise how to proceed. You can email me at avsingh@alum.mit.edu. I am attaching two other papers for possible submission to the journal and would like your feedback.

Thanking you in advance,

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

attachments: Published_Paper_in_Phy_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_2_4Singh.pdf, Published_Paper_in_Physics_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_1_14Singh.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian:

Thank you for your time in reading my essay and providing valuable comments.

Regarding the mathematical basis of the Heisenberg uncertainty, it must be integrated with the physical aspects of the measurement that alters the physical characteristics of the phenomenon being measured. The original mathematical formulation of the Heisenberg uncertainty ignores the relativistic aspects of the quantum phenomenon being measured. My paper shows that integrating the relativistic aspects into the mathematics reveals that the measurement error or uncertainty is caused by the destructive nature of the classical measurement method of an inherently relativistic phenomenon. Hence, the uncertainty is inherent in the measuring method and not in the nature itself.

In summary, incomplete mathematical formulations ignoring the wholesome physical effects could lead to incorrect conclusions regarding the true nature of reality. Similarly, mathematical conclusions leading to multiple universes and dimensions are artifacts of incomplete mathematical formulations ignoring relativistic effects.

Best Regards

Avtar

report post as inappropriate

Thank you for your time in reading my essay and providing valuable comments.

Regarding the mathematical basis of the Heisenberg uncertainty, it must be integrated with the physical aspects of the measurement that alters the physical characteristics of the phenomenon being measured. The original mathematical formulation of the Heisenberg uncertainty ignores the relativistic aspects of the quantum phenomenon being measured. My paper shows that integrating the relativistic aspects into the mathematics reveals that the measurement error or uncertainty is caused by the destructive nature of the classical measurement method of an inherently relativistic phenomenon. Hence, the uncertainty is inherent in the measuring method and not in the nature itself.

In summary, incomplete mathematical formulations ignoring the wholesome physical effects could lead to incorrect conclusions regarding the true nature of reality. Similarly, mathematical conclusions leading to multiple universes and dimensions are artifacts of incomplete mathematical formulations ignoring relativistic effects.

Best Regards

Avtar

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christain,

Good to meet again here on the FQXi contest,

While reading your essay I had the following remarks and questions:

Quote “the foundation of the BH information problem is that BHs seem to do not obey Schrödinger equations, which would allow pure states to evolve only into pure states.” Unquote. The Total Simultaneity Interpretation”, as I introduce, states...

view entire post

Good to meet again here on the FQXi contest,

While reading your essay I had the following remarks and questions:

Quote “the foundation of the BH information problem is that BHs seem to do not obey Schrödinger equations, which would allow pure states to evolve only into pure states.” Unquote. The Total Simultaneity Interpretation”, as I introduce, states...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Dear Wilhelmus,

I am happy to meet you again her in FQXi.

Concerning your remarks and question, I do not know what you mean with "Total Simultaneity Interpretation". Maybe I will discover it when I will read your Essay. In any case, in quantum mechanics pure states are states which can be described by a single ket vector, while mixed states cannot be described with a single ket vector. I do not understand why you claim that an electron's excited state is just a time-less moment. Instead, we can localize it in a particular instant of time (in my Essay I implicitly used the Schwartzschild time). The time-dependent Schröedinger equation governs the time evolution of the jumps among the various "electron's excited states".

I am honored that you learned a lot my Essay and that you valued it high. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Maybe it will help me to better understand your above comments. I wish you good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

I am happy to meet you again her in FQXi.

Concerning your remarks and question, I do not know what you mean with "Total Simultaneity Interpretation". Maybe I will discover it when I will read your Essay. In any case, in quantum mechanics pure states are states which can be described by a single ket vector, while mixed states cannot be described with a single ket vector. I do not understand why you claim that an electron's excited state is just a time-less moment. Instead, we can localize it in a particular instant of time (in my Essay I implicitly used the Schwartzschild time). The time-dependent Schröedinger equation governs the time evolution of the jumps among the various "electron's excited states".

I am honored that you learned a lot my Essay and that you valued it high. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. Maybe it will help me to better understand your above comments. I wish you good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Thank Christian.

Indeed you need to read my essay to understand the "Total Simultaneity Interpretation".It is a new interpretation that I introduced in 2012, and that has evolved through thinking.

I hope you can value the new insights that I am trying to introduce.

I await your comments.

Thank you very much.

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Indeed you need to read my essay to understand the "Total Simultaneity Interpretation".It is a new interpretation that I introduced in 2012, and that has evolved through thinking.

I hope you can value the new insights that I am trying to introduce.

I await your comments.

Thank you very much.

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Ch. I have added 3 posts to the thread of your comments on my essay. I think you will find them interesting and (perhaps) useful. John Crowell

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian

Reposting:

Thanks for the excellent question regarding the absoluteness of mathematical reality. I have answered your question under my essay. I would appreciate your fedback on my answers.

I would like submit my essay to the JHEPGC. Please advise how to proceed. You can email me at avsingh@alum.mit.edu. I am attaching two other papers for possible submission to the journal and would like your feedback.

Thanking you in advance,

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

attachments: 1_Published_Paper_in_Phy_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_2_4Singh.pdf, 1_Published_Paper_in_Physics_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_1_14Singh.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Reposting:

Thanks for the excellent question regarding the absoluteness of mathematical reality. I have answered your question under my essay. I would appreciate your fedback on my answers.

I would like submit my essay to the JHEPGC. Please advise how to proceed. You can email me at avsingh@alum.mit.edu. I am attaching two other papers for possible submission to the journal and would like your feedback.

Thanking you in advance,

Best Regards

Avtar Singh

attachments: 1_Published_Paper_in_Phy_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_2_4Singh.pdf, 1_Published_Paper_in_Physics_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_1_14Singh.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian Corda,

Very happy to see you again. I have downloaded a number of your papers, including your 2018 GRF essay, and find your proposal of quasi-normal modes fascinating. Several years ago I derived the key results of Verlinde’s holo-model by discarding the idea of ‘information’ and deriving Bekenstein’s “area quantization” based purely on energy. The addition of photons distributed over the black hole change as the hole grows, and the computation is simplified by adding photons in the right order. Nevertheless, they could conceivably come in any order, and this would be expected.

After reading your work on quasi-normal modes, I think this approach is compatible with your theory, and realize that emission as well as absorption occurs, and particularly, as you say:

“*The emission of a particle...causes a decrease in the horizon..*.”

and, more specifically, that:

“*The correspondence between emitted radiation and proper oscillation of the emitting body is a fundamental behavior of every radiation process in Science*.”

I have not tied my results to your equations, but if I manage to obtain anything that I think you might be interested in, I will surely contact you.

Meanwhile, I invite you to read my essay, Deciding on the nature of time and space, and welcome your comments.

Warmest regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

Very happy to see you again. I have downloaded a number of your papers, including your 2018 GRF essay, and find your proposal of quasi-normal modes fascinating. Several years ago I derived the key results of Verlinde’s holo-model by discarding the idea of ‘information’ and deriving Bekenstein’s “area quantization” based purely on energy. The addition of photons distributed over the black hole change as the hole grows, and the computation is simplified by adding photons in the right order. Nevertheless, they could conceivably come in any order, and this would be expected.

After reading your work on quasi-normal modes, I think this approach is compatible with your theory, and realize that emission as well as absorption occurs, and particularly, as you say:

“

and, more specifically, that:

“

I have not tied my results to your equations, but if I manage to obtain anything that I think you might be interested in, I will surely contact you.

Meanwhile, I invite you to read my essay, Deciding on the nature of time and space, and welcome your comments.

Warmest regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

Dear Edwin Eugene,

Thanks for your interest in my FQXi page. I am honored that you have downloaded a number of my papers, including my 2018 GRF essay, and that you find my proposal of quasi-normal modes fascinating. I am interested in your approach to black hole quantum physics. Thus, yes, please be free to contact me if you will tie your results to my equations. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. In the meantime, I wish you good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Thanks for your interest in my FQXi page. I am honored that you have downloaded a number of my papers, including my 2018 GRF essay, and that you find my proposal of quasi-normal modes fascinating. I am interested in your approach to black hole quantum physics. Thus, yes, please be free to contact me if you will tie your results to my equations. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay soon. In the meantime, I wish you good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Christian,

Your essay did hit to the main problems as of black hole physics. What I am worried about is that your excellent points will not be understood mathematically by much of the FQXI community as they involved actual foundational structure of space-time issues. I will off this forum raise them privately so I am certain I understand them fully as well

report post as inappropriate

Your essay did hit to the main problems as of black hole physics. What I am worried about is that your excellent points will not be understood mathematically by much of the FQXI community as they involved actual foundational structure of space-time issues. I will off this forum raise them privately so I am certain I understand them fully as well

report post as inappropriate

Great work on statistical work on blackholes.but is there a human element to measurement and how empirical units came to be.please read/rate my essay here https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3525.thanks in advance.all comments will be appreciated

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian:

Great analysis and you take on hawking radiation is pretty good,

Please take a look at my essay A grand Introduction to Darwinian mechanics

report post as inappropriate

Great analysis and you take on hawking radiation is pretty good,

Please take a look at my essay A grand Introduction to Darwinian mechanics

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian,

I'm glad to see you here again! I enjoyed very much your essay. I liked that you take a positive attitude, to restore predictability, rather than focusing on results which seem to provide limitations. Nature has its ways, the limitations are in our understanding.

Black holes seem to many people like a good opportunity to break general relativity and replace it with whatever pet theories they have. I like that you approach the problem in the spirit of both Einstein and Bohr. It is difficult to know exactly what happens in the black hole, but mainly because whatever falls can be any matter. However, since it's a bounded quantum system, held in place by gravity, it's a very natural idea to approach it as it is, and treating it like an atom-like Bohr model is a great idea. I have a paper, which is a critical review, of some of the misguided ideas and what may work Revisiting the black hole entropy and the information paradox. I'm happy to say that in that paper I cite 3 of your papers, as an example of a well guided approach. Thanks again for your essay, and I wish you all the best in this contest!

Cheers,

Cristi

report post as inappropriate

I'm glad to see you here again! I enjoyed very much your essay. I liked that you take a positive attitude, to restore predictability, rather than focusing on results which seem to provide limitations. Nature has its ways, the limitations are in our understanding.

Black holes seem to many people like a good opportunity to break general relativity and replace it with whatever pet theories they have. I like that you approach the problem in the spirit of both Einstein and Bohr. It is difficult to know exactly what happens in the black hole, but mainly because whatever falls can be any matter. However, since it's a bounded quantum system, held in place by gravity, it's a very natural idea to approach it as it is, and treating it like an atom-like Bohr model is a great idea. I have a paper, which is a critical review, of some of the misguided ideas and what may work Revisiting the black hole entropy and the information paradox. I'm happy to say that in that paper I cite 3 of your papers, as an example of a well guided approach. Thanks again for your essay, and I wish you all the best in this contest!

Cheers,

Cristi

report post as inappropriate

Dear Cristi,

I am happy to meet you again her in FQXi. Thanks for your nice judgement on my work, not only concerning this Essay, but for my approach to black hole quantum physics. I am honored by it. You could be interested to know that, together with a young collaborator, we recently found some new interesting result, kindly see this paper. Thanks for signalling your critical review on the black hole information paradox. I am very curious about it and I will read it with great interest. I am honored that you cited 3 papers of mine.

It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and voting your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

I am happy to meet you again her in FQXi. Thanks for your nice judgement on my work, not only concerning this Essay, but for my approach to black hole quantum physics. I am honored by it. You could be interested to know that, together with a young collaborator, we recently found some new interesting result, kindly see this paper. Thanks for signalling your critical review on the black hole information paradox. I am very curious about it and I will read it with great interest. I am honored that you cited 3 papers of mine.

It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and voting your Essay soon. Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Hello again Christian,

I am pleased to come back and offer my rating. I found this paper well-written; your point is well-explained, and it does address the question. I find some of the other papers do not clearly articulate a stand on the subject. I continue to find value in your model, and I admire as Cristi says above, that you have avoided some of the wilder assumptions that dominate the conversation about black hole entropy and horizons.

You have clearly shown that at least some of the uncertainties can be managed.

Kudos,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

I am pleased to come back and offer my rating. I found this paper well-written; your point is well-explained, and it does address the question. I find some of the other papers do not clearly articulate a stand on the subject. I continue to find value in your model, and I admire as Cristi says above, that you have avoided some of the wilder assumptions that dominate the conversation about black hole entropy and horizons.

You have clearly shown that at least some of the uncertainties can be managed.

Kudos,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jonathan,

Your good judgement on my Essay is a honor, as well as your motivations of such a judgement are quite correct. Thank you very much. I do not like the wilder assumptions that dominate the conversation about black hole entropy and horizons. They do not help in solving the real problems.

Cheers, Ch.

Your good judgement on my Essay is a honor, as well as your motivations of such a judgement are quite correct. Thank you very much. I do not like the wilder assumptions that dominate the conversation about black hole entropy and horizons. They do not help in solving the real problems.

Cheers, Ch.

Dear Christian,

I read with great interest your essay with extremely important ideas, a clear approach and well-grounded conclusions aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation, restoring unity in the philosophical basis not only of physics, but of knowledge in general. I consider these conclusions to be very important not only in the epistemological, but primarily in the ontological sense:

“Hence, the states are written in terms of an unitary evolution matrix instead of a density matrix and this implies the fundamental conclusion that information is not loss in BH evaporation. The result agrees with the assumption by 't Hooft that Schrödinger equations can be used universally for all dynamics in the universe and dismisses the famous claim of Hawking in."

"Therefore, we have shown that BHs, which are considered the fundamental bricks of quantum gravity, are well dened quantum mechanical systems, having ordered, discrete quantum spectra, which preserve physical information by restoring predictability in gravitational collapse."

I hope that physicists, mathematicians, and cosmologists will gradually, overcoming the crisis of understanding and mutual understanding, develop an ontologically and gnoseologically sound picture of the Universum as an holistic process of generation of meanings and structures. With such a picture of the world, it will be easier for us, Earthlings, to overcome the growing existential threats and risks together. I wish you further success in your scientific research and invite you to see my ontological ideas. In search of truth, we all must always remember the philosophical covenant of John Archibald Wheeler: “Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers”.

With kind regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

I read with great interest your essay with extremely important ideas, a clear approach and well-grounded conclusions aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation, restoring unity in the philosophical basis not only of physics, but of knowledge in general. I consider these conclusions to be very important not only in the epistemological, but primarily in the ontological sense:

“Hence, the states are written in terms of an unitary evolution matrix instead of a density matrix and this implies the fundamental conclusion that information is not loss in BH evaporation. The result agrees with the assumption by 't Hooft that Schrödinger equations can be used universally for all dynamics in the universe and dismisses the famous claim of Hawking in."

"Therefore, we have shown that BHs, which are considered the fundamental bricks of quantum gravity, are well dened quantum mechanical systems, having ordered, discrete quantum spectra, which preserve physical information by restoring predictability in gravitational collapse."

I hope that physicists, mathematicians, and cosmologists will gradually, overcoming the crisis of understanding and mutual understanding, develop an ontologically and gnoseologically sound picture of the Universum as an holistic process of generation of meanings and structures. With such a picture of the world, it will be easier for us, Earthlings, to overcome the growing existential threats and risks together. I wish you further success in your scientific research and invite you to see my ontological ideas. In search of truth, we all must always remember the philosophical covenant of John Archibald Wheeler: “Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers”.

With kind regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Christian, Your essay seems well-informed with current thinking about BH physics. So I’m eager to ask:

How does a quantum of Hawking radiation escape from the event horizon when the gravitation just above the horizon is only a tiny bit less intense than that which can capture light? Is the necessary escape velocity considered in the calculation for Hawking radiation or is it, as it seems, ignored?

Why is the loss of information when mass falls within an event horizon considered a paradox when any decay of an atom anywhere in the universe will produce particles with universal properties, and when with the expansion of the universe ever-greater portions of the universe go beyond informative? And presumably, from the time of the Big Bang to some time after, there was a vast increase in information created as different types of particles formed, as atoms and molecules combined. Isn’t that a problem for the “conservation of information”?

How does mass infalling past an event horizon not disintegrate, having entered an elevation with gravitation so intense that light cannot escape, with tidal effects so severe that atoms and even nuclei would be spaghettied? And if c goes to zero going out doesn’t v go to c going in?

Thank you for any assistance.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

How does a quantum of Hawking radiation escape from the event horizon when the gravitation just above the horizon is only a tiny bit less intense than that which can capture light? Is the necessary escape velocity considered in the calculation for Hawking radiation or is it, as it seems, ignored?

Why is the loss of information when mass falls within an event horizon considered a paradox when any decay of an atom anywhere in the universe will produce particles with universal properties, and when with the expansion of the universe ever-greater portions of the universe go beyond informative? And presumably, from the time of the Big Bang to some time after, there was a vast increase in information created as different types of particles formed, as atoms and molecules combined. Isn’t that a problem for the “conservation of information”?

How does mass infalling past an event horizon not disintegrate, having entered an elevation with gravitation so intense that light cannot escape, with tidal effects so severe that atoms and even nuclei would be spaghettied? And if c goes to zero going out doesn’t v go to c going in?

Thank you for any assistance.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

Christian, Your essay seems well-informed with current thinking about BH physics. So I’m eager to ask:

How does a quantum of Hawking radiation escape from the event horizon when the gravitation just above the horizon is only a tiny bit less intense than that which can capture light? Is the necessary escape velocity considered in the calculation for Hawking radiation or is it, as it seems, ignored?

Why is the loss of information when mass falls within an event horizon considered a paradox when any decay of an atom anywhere in the universe will produce particles with universal properties, and when with the expansion of the universe ever-greater portions of the universe go beyond informative? And presumably, from the time of the Big Bang to some time after, there was a vast increase in information created as different types of particles formed, as atoms and molecules combined. Isn’t that a problem for the “conservation of information”?

How does mass infalling past an event horizon not disintegrate, having entered an elevation with gravitation so intense that light cannot escape, with tidal effects so severe that atoms and even nuclei would be spaghettied? And if c goes to zero going out doesn’t v go to c going in?

Thank you for any assistance.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

How does a quantum of Hawking radiation escape from the event horizon when the gravitation just above the horizon is only a tiny bit less intense than that which can capture light? Is the necessary escape velocity considered in the calculation for Hawking radiation or is it, as it seems, ignored?

Why is the loss of information when mass falls within an event horizon considered a paradox when any decay of an atom anywhere in the universe will produce particles with universal properties, and when with the expansion of the universe ever-greater portions of the universe go beyond informative? And presumably, from the time of the Big Bang to some time after, there was a vast increase in information created as different types of particles formed, as atoms and molecules combined. Isn’t that a problem for the “conservation of information”?

How does mass infalling past an event horizon not disintegrate, having entered an elevation with gravitation so intense that light cannot escape, with tidal effects so severe that atoms and even nuclei would be spaghettied? And if c goes to zero going out doesn’t v go to c going in?

Thank you for any assistance.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jim,

Thanks for your interest in my work. Concerning your questions:

You wrote:"How does a quantum of Hawking radiation escape from the event horizon when the gravitation just above the horizon is only a tiny bit less intense than that which can capture light? Is the necessary escape velocity considered in the calculation for Hawking radiation or is it, as it seems,...

view entire post

Thanks for your interest in my work. Concerning your questions:

You wrote:"How does a quantum of Hawking radiation escape from the event horizon when the gravitation just above the horizon is only a tiny bit less intense than that which can capture light? Is the necessary escape velocity considered in the calculation for Hawking radiation or is it, as it seems,...

view entire post

Christian, I believe invoking quantum tunneling in low-energy situations as possible at an event horizon is symptomatic of a focus on mathematics at the expense of physics. A related idea is that a BH might thereby dissolve away into its gravitational field from a barrier even light cannot overcome. Others include the idea that an inflalling object will appear to slow as it approaches a horizon (a simple conflation of relativity: clocks slow as bodies accelerate, not the bodies themselves), and the idea that an object will appear to freeze at the horizon (first, the wavelength of the image there will already be way below the visible spectrum, and second, the last photon emitted by the object will fade from the eye of the observer as the object falls through the horizon).

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jim,

Sorry but the creation of a horizon is NOT a low-energy situation. My recent studies show that quantum effects become important BEFORE arriving at the gravitational radius, see here.

Cheers, Ch.

Sorry but the creation of a horizon is NOT a low-energy situation. My recent studies show that quantum effects become important BEFORE arriving at the gravitational radius, see here.

Cheers, Ch.

Christinel.

I wrote the following on my blog area:

Thanks for the boost. Try to read Szangolies’ essay on a related development, and Palmer's on the fractal geometry.

Your paper works with the connection between Gödel theorem or self-reference and consciousness. I have thought that consciousness is a sort of epiphenomenology that is an illusion having an illusion of itself. I have not read it in its entirty, and I do see you connect with what look like fractals.

I have been slow. I have had Covid-19. It hit me at the 3rd week of March and lasted about 10 days. It relapsed in April and the fatigue part of this was serious. I still sleep more than I used to, but the most pernicious aspect of this has been dogging me. It is as if my brain has been rewired, or maybe hormone setpoint levels changed. I am not quite the same person I was; I feel as if I am an abruptly changed person. The worst part of this change is that I am more depressed and irritable than I was. It has been hard for me to participate much in this contest.

Cheers :LC

report post as inappropriate

I wrote the following on my blog area:

Thanks for the boost. Try to read Szangolies’ essay on a related development, and Palmer's on the fractal geometry.

Your paper works with the connection between Gödel theorem or self-reference and consciousness. I have thought that consciousness is a sort of epiphenomenology that is an illusion having an illusion of itself. I have not read it in its entirty, and I do see you connect with what look like fractals.

I have been slow. I have had Covid-19. It hit me at the 3rd week of March and lasted about 10 days. It relapsed in April and the fatigue part of this was serious. I still sleep more than I used to, but the most pernicious aspect of this has been dogging me. It is as if my brain has been rewired, or maybe hormone setpoint levels changed. I am not quite the same person I was; I feel as if I am an abruptly changed person. The worst part of this change is that I am more depressed and irritable than I was. It has been hard for me to participate much in this contest.

Cheers :LC

report post as inappropriate

Dear Professor Christian Corda!

Today we reviewed your text. You dare to compare Microcosm and macrocosm - a black hole and an atom! It's great! Your work is grand in design. We are in awe! Your essay makes think. It has promising thoughts that we liked. In our opinion, modern physics should move in this direction, trying to cover conceptually real information processes in the Universe.

Thanks!

Sincerely yours,

Pavel Poluyan and Dmitry Lichargin,

Siberian Federal University.

report post as inappropriate

Today we reviewed your text. You dare to compare Microcosm and macrocosm - a black hole and an atom! It's great! Your work is grand in design. We are in awe! Your essay makes think. It has promising thoughts that we liked. In our opinion, modern physics should move in this direction, trying to cover conceptually real information processes in the Universe.

Thanks!

Sincerely yours,

Pavel Poluyan and Dmitry Lichargin,

Siberian Federal University.

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christian,

Glad to read your work again.

I greatly appreciated your work and discussion. I am very glad that you are not thinking in abstract patterns.

While the discussion lasted, I wrote an article: “Practical guidance on calculating resonant frequencies at four levels of diagnosis and inactivation of COVID-19 coronavirus”, due to the high relevance of this topic. The work is based on the practical solution of problems in quantum mechanics, presented in the essay FQXi 2019-2020 “Universal quantum laws of the universe to solve the problems of unsolvability, computability and unpredictability”.

I hope that my modest results of work will provide you with information for thought.

Warm Regards, `

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Glad to read your work again.

I greatly appreciated your work and discussion. I am very glad that you are not thinking in abstract patterns.

While the discussion lasted, I wrote an article: “Practical guidance on calculating resonant frequencies at four levels of diagnosis and inactivation of COVID-19 coronavirus”, due to the high relevance of this topic. The work is based on the practical solution of problems in quantum mechanics, presented in the essay FQXi 2019-2020 “Universal quantum laws of the universe to solve the problems of unsolvability, computability and unpredictability”.

I hope that my modest results of work will provide you with information for thought.

Warm Regards, `

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Dear Vladimir,

Thanks for your message. It is my pleasure meeting you again here in FQXi. I am very honored by your good judgement on my work and discussion. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay this morning. I will also read your article on coronavirus. Good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Thanks for your message. It is my pleasure meeting you again here in FQXi. I am very honored by your good judgement on my work and discussion. It will be my pleasure reading, commenting and scoring your Essay this morning. I will also read your article on coronavirus. Good luck in the Contest!

Cheers, Ch.

Login or create account to post reply or comment.