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 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.

Forum Home
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

Eckard Blumschein: on 1/27/10 at 15:37pm UTC, wrote In my essay 527 I already pointed to the possibility that some oddities of...

December 6, 2022

ARTICLE: Through the Looking Glass [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Eckard Blumschein wrote on Jan. 27, 2010 @ 15:37 GMT
In my essay 527 I already pointed to the possibility that some oddities of QM can be ascribed to mistakes in the philosophy behind application of mathematics to physics. I apologize for possibly having overlooked groundbreaking experimental results. Maybe, I am wrong. You will judge my findings rather disappointing:

- Due to unilateral restriction of measured time, complex description does not at all offer an additional degree of freedom as compared to the real-valued one, cf. my essay 369.

- All important experts in mathematics and philosophy before Dedekind, e.g. Aristoteles, Euclid, Newton, Leibniz, and still including Weierstrass, did not interpret numbers as points on the line of numbers but as distance between zero and the limit from the left to the point. Maybe, Dedekind mislead us?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

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