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

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

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

Amrit Sorli: on 3/6/20 at 4:19am UTC, wrote Dear Gupta, BB cosmology is not "scientific theory", this is a silly...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 3/6/20 at 4:05am UTC, wrote Dear Amrit ji, You caught a wonderful point in Bigbang ...."To reach the...

Wilhelmus de Wilde: on 3/1/20 at 10:52am UTC, wrote Dear Amrit, Thank you for a short but very clear essay that explains your...

Amrit Sorli: on 2/28/20 at 16:12pm UTC, wrote According to Einstein vision on time BB cosmology is dead.

David Brown: on 2/26/20 at 10:42am UTC, wrote Are we in agreement on at least 2 points? (1) Empirical evidence shows...

Branko Zivlak: on 2/26/20 at 7:30am UTC, wrote Dear Amrit If you order the essays alphabetically by author last name I am...

Lachlan Cresswell: on 2/26/20 at 5:53am UTC, wrote Dear Amrit You didn't answer my objection. I agree with your statement...

Amrit Sorli: on 2/25/20 at 19:27pm UTC, wrote Branko please send me the link to your essay. I cannot find it. Please...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Janko Kokosar: "I propose a simple addition for more honest voting: 1. FQXi will find a..." in Undecidability,...

Sue Lingo: "Dr. Sloan... Although no longer temporally relevant, and I am not..." in Consciousness in the...

David Sloan: "Hi all, Please refrain from insulting one-another. This thread has drifted..." in Consciousness in the...

Satyavarapu Gupta: "What should be the Foundational basis of an Alternative cosmological theory..." in Alternative Models of...

Catalina Curceanu: "I would like to inform you that next week, starting 30th March, we shall..." in INSPYRE 2020 -- Please...

Jochen Szangolies: "Hi there, I'm not sure it's such a good idea to make current votes visible..." in Undecidability,...

Joe Fisher: "Unbelievable, after failing to build a visible computer containing visible..." in Think Quantum to Build...

Joe Fisher: "The only reason it would be physically impossible to manufacture a visible..." in Think Quantum to Build...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Think Quantum to Build Better AI
Investigating how quantum memory storage could aid machine learning and how quantum interactions with the environment may have played a role in evolution.

Outside the Box
A proposed quantum set-up that could predict your game-playing strategy resurrects Newcomb’s classic quiz show paradox.

The Quantum Agent
Investigating how the quantum measurement process might be related to the emergence of intelligence, agency and free will.

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.


FQXi FORUM
March 28, 2020

CATEGORY: Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest (2019-2020) [back]
TOPIC: Measurability and Computability of the Universe by Amrit Srecko Sorli [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

This essay's rating: Community = 4.5; Public = N/A


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 23, 2020 @ 17:37 GMT
Essay Abstract

Measurability and computability of the universe show that Big Bang cosmology is in serious troubles. It is time to re-examine Big Bang cosmology and solve the troubles that the computability of the Big Bang cosmology has shown.

Author Bio

Amrit Sorli is founder of bijective research methodology. He has published around 100 articles and 10m books.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 23, 2020 @ 18:34 GMT
I think BB cosmology might be good 50 years ago. Today seems it is more a history of physics. Thank you to FQXI to publish my idea. Physics needs progress. Together we can manage it.

Yours Amrit

attachments: Black_Holes_are_Rejuvenating_Systems_of_the_Universe_.pdf, 1_Integration_of_Life_and_Consciousness_into_Cosmology_.pdf

Bookmark and Share


David Brown replied on Feb. 26, 2020 @ 10:42 GMT
Are we in agreement on at least 2 points?

(1) Empirical evidence shows that the Lambda-CDM model is wrong.

(2) Someone needs to find a new concept of time in order to correct Big Bang cosmology.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 24, 2020 @ 08:06 GMT
Stephen Hawking and J.B. Hartle published an article in 1983 entitled "Wave Function of the Universe" in the renowned journal Physical Review D. In this article, they say that the universe began from a mathematical point. In 2014, however, NASA measured the universe as infinite, taking the form of Euclidean space. The first thing we need to understand is if the universe is infinite today, it has been and will be infinite forever. Another thing is that if a thing starts from a mathematical point and spreads at any speed, it will always have a finite dimension. Something that has a finite dimension can never evolve into something that has an infinite dimension. These are basic scientific facts, no one disputes them, or yin can deny. Another proof that the Big Bang theory is wrong. Proponents of the Big Bang will say that in the first moments, the universe was expanding at infinite speed, which is mathematical philosophy, not science. The term "infinite speed" cannot be used in science because we do not know what it means. The terms "infinite distance" and "infinite volume" of the universe, however, can be used because it is based on NASA measurements.

Bookmark and Share



David Brown wrote on Feb. 24, 2020 @ 13:06 GMT
"... Big Bang model does not fit into the mapped universe. ... It is time now for the re-examination of Big Bang cosmology." According to Famaey and McGaugh,

"Either (i) there is a vast amount of unseen mass in some novel form—dark matter— or (ii) the data indicate a breakdown of our understanding of dynamics on the relevant scales, or (iii) both."

Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND): Observational Phenomenology and Relativistic Extensions, Living Reviews in Relativity, volume 15, 7 September 2012

Please consider 4 questions:

(1) Does MOND have many empirical successes?

(2) How likely is it that dark-matter-compensation-constant = 0 ?

(3) How likely is it that dark-matter=compensation-constant = (3.9±.5) * 10^–5 ?

(4) How likely is it that dark matter particles exist?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 24, 2020 @ 14:01 GMT
David your questions have nothing to do with my essay. I just pointed out BB cosmology has troubles. It is too small to fit into the existent universe.

Besides that NASA has measured the universe is infinite.

I discovered the universe does not run in time, time is just numerical order of events in the universal space which is time-invariant. Nothing ever happens in time. These are facts we have to incorporate in cosmology.

attachments: 3_How_many_Models_of_Time_do_we_need_in_Physics_-_personal_copy.pdf, Minkowski_Space-time_and_Einsteins_Now.pdf

Bookmark and Share


David Brown replied on Feb. 24, 2020 @ 14:28 GMT
Consider this question: Is there a maximum wavelength in the physical universe?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Lachlan Cresswell replied on Feb. 25, 2020 @ 02:28 GMT
An equally interesting question is: Is there a maximum frequency in the physical universe?

The highest energy cosmic ray ever observed was around 10^20 ev.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 24, 2020 @ 14:35 GMT
David, I'm a physicist, not a mathematical philosopher. Stick to the subject. So we can discuss it.

Bookmark and Share



Lachlan Cresswell wrote on Feb. 25, 2020 @ 03:01 GMT
Your 'computer program' is assuming the Big Bang started off at a point. This assumption is probably wrong. What if the "BB" occurred when the Universe was already flat and a substantial size as a result of a 'phase change' in the primordial energy? Or maybe we should assume the "BB" started after inflation, not before. Both these scenarios do not require an infinite steady-state universe.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Amrit Srecko Sorli replied on Feb. 25, 2020 @ 05:24 GMT
Do no see the universe as a system that exists in some physical time. Time is just the numerical sequential order of events running in universal space. There is no physical time in the universe. This is what Julian Barbour calls "The Third Revolution of Physics". Universal space and cosmological principle are time-invariant. Black holes are rejuvenating systems of the universe which is eternal and non-created.

Inflation is not falsifiable. Read articles on the inflation of Dr. Alan Guth on arxiv. He says that "gravitational energy" is negative and the energy of matter is positive and the sum of both in the universe is always zero. This model is not falsifiable and is against common logic. Read my article attached: Black holes are rejuvenating systems of the universe".

BB cosmology has serious problems that have to be solved in order to remain the leading cosmology model. We have to push physics forward together. FQXI is the right platform for this.

attachments: 2_Black_Holes_are_Rejuvenating_Systems_of_the_Universe_.pdf

Bookmark and Share


Lachlan Cresswell replied on Feb. 26, 2020 @ 05:53 GMT
Dear Amrit

You didn't answer my objection.

I agree with your statement on time, which you can see from my own essay discussing presentism. I also agree that inflation theory is not falsifiable.

However that doesn't mean I believe in a steady state universe, especially when the observational evidence indicates an expanding and accelerating universe.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 25, 2020 @ 17:59 GMT
Dear Amrit

I do not agree with your next view:

“It is time now for the re-examination of Big Bang cosmology. If the troubles willnot be solvable, we have to be open to accepting a Stationary universe without begging and without an end is a good model.”

For the one who respected real philosophers of nature, the stationary model was always the right model. It is also the result of my calculations, some of which you can see in the essay.

Regards Branko

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 25, 2020 @ 19:21 GMT
Dear Branko,

this is great, we are already two having the same view. I also think BB cosmology is not right. But you know it will take time to fix this. I could not publish my articles on BB trouble in important journals. We have to be very exact and taking into account the falsifiability of our work.

BB cosmology is not falsifiable.

I'm deeply thankful FQXI for giving us the possibility to present our ideas. My plan is we end BB cosmology in 2020.

Yours Amrit

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 25, 2020 @ 19:27 GMT
Branko please send me the link to your essay.

I cannot find it.

Please send me your email.

My mail is

sorli.bijective.physics@gmail.com

We can work together.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 26, 2020 @ 07:30 GMT
Dear Amrit

If you order the essays alphabetically by author last name I am always on the end.

My articles you can find here:

https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals-Papers/Autho
r/145

1/Branko,%20Zivlak

Regards Branko

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Feb. 28, 2020 @ 16:12 GMT
According to Einstein vision on time BB cosmology is dead.

attachments: 4_-_Einsteins_Vision_of_Time_and_Infinite_Universe_without_Singularities_The_End_of_Big_Bang_Cosmology.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Mar. 1, 2020 @ 10:52 GMT
Dear Amrit,

Thank you for a short but very clear essay that explains your position towards the Big Bang.

I know that you are able to write books about the subject, and also I agree with you.

You read my latest article in "Conscious Exploration & Research", in this essay I am still more clearly trying to explain "intellectual try-outs" like the BB.

Good luck in the contest.

Thank you for taking the time and making comment on it.

best rgards

Wilhelmus de Wilde

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3411

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 6, 2020 @ 04:05 GMT
Dear Amrit ji,

You caught a wonderful point in Bigbang ...."To reach the size of today’s observed and mapped universe, according to the Big Bang model, the universe should expand since its beginning with the speed of 1,02∙109??−1 . The velocity of light is 3∙108??−1?. To reach today radius universe should expand with the velocity v which should be 3,34 times bigger than light speed."

There are 100 more well publicized problems of this theory, like Dark matter, Dark energy, blue shifted Galaxies, Blackholes....... etc..... This 101th.

Then how Bigbang is surviving?

Just only because of UNLiMITED FUNDs availability. Scientists, Authors and researchers were not given freedom. I dont know why?....

I am also a against Bigbang person,

I just elaborated what should be the freedom available to an author when the “ real open thinking” is supported. Have a look at my essay please.

“A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory’s Philosophy”

=snp.gupta

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Mar. 6, 2020 @ 04:19 GMT
Dear Gupta,

BB cosmology is not "scientific theory", this is a silly idea. It is not falsifiable, it is not bijective, this is a fairy tale.

I work that in 2020 BB cosmology will become a history of physics.

Nothing in this model works, incredible how still they teach it at universities.

If we will get the support of FQXI than the BB cosmology abolishing process could start. But I hardly believe in their support. At the end of this essay story, they will ignore us and give awards to other researchers. They do not dare to contradict BB cosmology. Today in science you have to follow the mainstream, otherwise, you are out of the game. The game of money and success.

attachments: 5_-_A_THREE-DIMENSIONAL_NON-LOCAL_QUANTUM_VACUUM_AS_THE_ORIGIN_OF_PHOTONS.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.