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/discusswinners

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

James Putnam: on 5/19/20 at 3:36am UTC, wrote Someone from the public gave me a rating of 7. Whoever you are, thank you...

Vladimir Fedorov: on 5/16/20 at 13:03pm UTC, wrote Dear James, Glad to read your work again. I greatly appreciated your...

James Putnam: on 5/7/20 at 19:25pm UTC, wrote I stated in another contestant's comments section that theoretical physics...

James Putnam: on 4/28/20 at 22:24pm UTC, wrote Dwear Edwin, I learned and understood, from reading your essays, posts,...

Edwin Klingman: on 4/28/20 at 21:57pm UTC, wrote Dear James, Like you, I view fqxi as a chance to get things ‘on the...

James Putnam: on 4/28/20 at 2:43am UTC, wrote Dear Edwin, Thank you for your cordial and wise comments. There is a...

Edwin Klingman: on 4/25/20 at 17:57pm UTC, wrote Dear James, We certainly agree that the Universe is fundamentally unified....

James Putnam: on 4/25/20 at 1:32am UTC, wrote Essay Abstract Natural Unity is fundamental unity gained by...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "That is about the 'anatomy"" of spacetime." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Lorraine Ford: "So what exactly is WRONG with physics, apart from the fact that physics..." in The Present State of...

Georgina Woodward: "The perception generated of time difference relates to the potential..." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Steve Dufourny: "Hello Jim, yes indeed in a sense we have these motions and we have invented..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Jim Snowdon: "Hi Steve, Clearly we have motion in our Universe. It is not..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Steve Dufourny: "You are welcome, thanks too for your words. I have never lost the faith..." in The Present State of...

Georgina Woodward: "Thank you. Good luck." in The Nature of Time

Lorraine Ford: "Rob, As you have not replied, I take it that you now concede that the..." in 16th Marcel Grossmann...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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.

Can Choices Curve Spacetime?
Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

The Quantum Engine That Simultaneously Heats and Cools
Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

The Quantum Refrigerator
A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.


FQXi FORUM
September 17, 2021

CATEGORY: Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest (2019-2020) [back]
TOPIC: Natural Unity by James A Putnam [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author James A Putnam wrote on Apr. 25, 2020 @ 01:32 GMT
Essay Abstract

Natural Unity is fundamental unity gained by maintaining strict dependence upon direct empirical evidence and learn from it how to define properties and their units. At the time of the introduction of f=ma, when mass was not defined, it was made the third indefinable property of mechanics. That act caused the immediate loss of fundamental unity from all of physics that has since followed. The only remedy for the return of fundamental unity is for physicists to go back to f=ma and formally define mass. There are just two physics properties that are permanently indefinable. They are length and what physicists call ‘time’. All other physics properties must receive formal physics definitions in the strict historical manner of expressing the property as equal to a combination of other properties that have been previously introduced to us by their direct empirical evidence. This must be done at the time that they are introduced. The units of defined physics properties must be defined in the same manner. All properties are represented in physics equations solely by their units. It is the units that tell us what it is that physicists are really measuring. The return of fundamental unity will return the science of physics to the science of measurements.

Author Bio

I have a BSEE 1969; I am the author of http://newphysicstheory.com: Age 77: Married 55 years in August; Have been writing about physics on the Internet since 2001.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Apr. 25, 2020 @ 17:57 GMT
Dear James,

We certainly agree that the Universe is fundamentally unified. And I like your statement “Force cannot be first because it represents cause.” Feynman agreed that f=ma is circularly defined and he said it tells us to look for a ‘force’ or cause of acceleration. Your first equation reminds us that inertial mass is proportional to inverse acceleration.

I am not sure that your remarks about light are empirically based. As far as I know no one has measured the one-way speed of light. Only round trips are measured and that leaves some ambiguity in the situation. I agree with your equation (16) that the speed of light is a local phenomenon and with your equation (27), in which gamma multiplies mass and velocity in the definition of momentum.

My own essay centers on equation (27) and particularly on whether gamma is to be associated with the mass term or the velocity term. It’s a significant choice. I choose to associate gamma with inertial mass, which increases with kinetic energy as the ‘equivalent mass’ of the energy must also be accelerated by whatever force is in play. This inertial mass is compatible with Galilean transformation in 3-space plus time. The alternative is constant (‘rest’) mass and Lorentz transformation on 4D spacetime.

It’s amazing that we still argue the nature of mass and space and time in 2020, but that’s where physics is today.

My warmest regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Author James A Putnam replied on Apr. 28, 2020 @ 02:43 GMT
Dear Edwin,

Thank you for your cordial and wise comments. There is a perspective that my essay represents, it may not be written clearly. It was purposeful on my part to write half of the essay without math, and, then to construct the second half out of somewhat skimpy mathematics. My intent was to put answers on the record. The perspective is governed by the idea that all of physics,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share

Edwin Eugene Klingman replied on Apr. 28, 2020 @ 21:57 GMT
Dear James,

Like you, I view fqxi as a chance to get things ‘on the record’ and to benefit from the many views exchanged in these forums. And I certainly agree that ‘empirical’ evidence is subjected to interpretation according to not-necessarily-correct assumptions about reality. Also that objects don’t affect time in any way. The clock slowing that is interpreted in relativity as ‘time dilation’ derives from Einstein’s assumptions and the associated Lorentz transformation, which is discussed in my response to you on my thread. I see the process as due to increased inertial mass associated with kinetic energy in a local absolute frame defined by local gravity.

I believe the most empirical experience is direct experience, and the only thing that I do and have always experienced directly is gravity, which has units of acceleration and acts on mass. I see light pseudo-directly via chemical transitions in my eyes, but as far as physics goes, I have found light to be hardest to understand, especially with all the recent evidence that light has ‘orbital angular momentum’ in addition to spin. So for a number of reasons, I simply view light as disturbances or stresses propagating in the always present gravitational field. Support for this view is found on pages 22-25 in

Everything’s Relative...

So even what we take as rock-solid fundamental is not free of our assumptions. Nevertheless we do learn from our colleagues in these contests, and I see progress every year. I’ve learned some interesting things this year, or at least found new ways to consider some things.

Warmest wishes,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author James A Putnam replied on Apr. 28, 2020 @ 22:24 GMT
Dwear Edwin,

I learned and understood, from reading your essays, posts, and links, much of what your original work accomplishes for physics. Since what I wrote makes sense to me, it is valuable to have you, with your strong source of physics knowledge and experience, point out the strengths of taking a different approach.

Thank you for your kind response,

James

Bookmark and Share


Author James A Putnam wrote on May. 7, 2020 @ 19:25 GMT
I stated in another contestant's comments section that theoretical physics is not the foundational science.

I answered a question today at Quora.com. My answer included Some Reasons why theoretical physics is not the foundational science that physics should be.

Bookmark and Share


Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on May. 16, 2020 @ 13:03 GMT
Dear James,

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author James A Putnam wrote on May. 19, 2020 @ 03:36 GMT
Someone from the public gave me a rating of 7. Whoever you are, thank you for reading my essay and your kind vote.

James A Putnam

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.