Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

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

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

B N Sreenath: on 11/3/09 at 18:12pm UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Christian Corda, Thanks for your good and easy going ( but with...

Lawrence B. Crowell: on 10/28/09 at 2:30am UTC, wrote Christian, I was wondering if you had any comments on Bell's theorem and...

Lawrence B. Crowell: on 10/23/09 at 13:41pm UTC, wrote Any paper which has the author name Ephraim Fischbach on it should be...

Marcel-Marie LeBel: on 10/23/09 at 2:57am UTC, wrote Comment to Corda There are two groups of researchers showing scientific...

amrit: on 10/14/09 at 20:15pm UTC, wrote Christian I publish my articles on viXra that is alternative to arXiv ...

Lawrence B. Crowell: on 10/14/09 at 0:44am UTC, wrote The paper by Arun and Sivaram is interesting, but I think there is a...

Christian Corda: on 10/13/09 at 9:26am UTC, wrote Dear Lawrence, short wavelength gravity waves could be also from other...

Christian Corda: on 10/13/09 at 9:21am UTC, wrote Dear Amrit, actually, high-impact factor peer-reviewed international...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Agnew: "There are some questions that do not seem to have answers in the classical..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Agnew: "Yes, there are two very different narratives. The classical narrative works..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "lol no indeed it is not a lot,like I said I liked your general ideas.I have..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Steve Agnew: "There are three assumptions...is that a lot? The aether particle mass, the..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Steve Dufourny: "Joe,so lol you speak to God or it has send you this information lol ?..." in First Things First: The...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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

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

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

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

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


FQXi FORUM
October 14, 2019

CATEGORY: What's Ultimately Possible in Physics? Essay Contest (2009) [back]
TOPIC: Interferometric detection of gravitational waves: understanding if Einstein's General Relativity is the correct and definitive theory of gravity will be Ultimately Possible in Physics by Christian Corda [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Christian Corda wrote on Jul. 21, 2009 @ 07:56 GMT
Essay Abstract

It is well known that Einstein's General Relativity (GR) achieved a great success and overcame lots of experimental tests. On the other hand, GR also showed some shortcomings and flaws which today advise theorists to ask if it is the definitive theory of gravity. In this essay we show that, if advanced projects on the detection of Gravitational Waves (GWs) will improve their sensitivity, allowing to perform a GWs astronomy, understanding if Einstein's GR is the correct and definitive theory of gravity will be Ultimately Possible in Physics. For this goal, accurate angular and frequency dependent response functions of interferometers for GWs arising from various Theories of Gravity, i.e. GR and Extended Theories of Gravity will have to be used. The papers which found this essay have been the world's most cited in the official Astroparticle Publication Review of ASPERA during the 2007 with 13 citations. This essay is an improved and more detailed version of the one which recently won an Honorable Mention at the the 2009 Gravity Research Foundation Awards

Author Bio

Christian Corda received his Ph.D. degree in physics from the Pisa University, Pisa, Italy during the period from 2003 to 2007. During 2007, he became the world's most cited author in the Official Astroparticle Publication Review of ASPERA, with 13 citations. He is the Editor-in-Chief of "The Open Astronomy Journal" of Bentham Science Publishers and an Editor of "The International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences" of Hindawi Publishing Corporation. In addition, Corda is the Scientific Director of the Associazione Scientifica Galileo Galilei, Prato, Italy.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Doug Huffman wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 10:55 GMT
Please, how can Dr. Corda's assertion be falsified? If it is not falsifiable then is it 'scientific' and, if not, can it be physics?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Jul. 27, 2009 @ 15:13 GMT
Dear Mr. Huffman,

thanks for your interesting question.

My point of view is that only the gravitational waves scientific community could confirm or falsify my assertion. I strongly hope that during next five years a gravitational waves astronomy will be performed. In particular, if my assertion will be falsified, i.e. if gravitational waves signals will be totally different from the ones that we predict at the present time, this could mean that there is something which is deeply wrong in our understanding of the Universe.

Thanks again and best regards,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 18, 2009 @ 17:29 GMT
For a perturbation expansion of the Einstein field equation in string theory,

R_{ab} – 1/2Rg_{ab} + O(α’R^2) + … = 0

the correction to the classical result should then show up in the third polarization term. Of course this will be a very very weak signal as α’^2 ~ G/c^2, and would be about 10^{-10} smaller than the leading post-post-Newtonian term for a pp-gravity wave.

Over all this looks like a pretty reasonable paper.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 11:14 GMT
Dear Dr. Crowell,

thank you for your good judgement and for the point that you raised.

I agree with you, the third polarization is present in string theory too. It is a particular case of Scalar-Tensor Gravity.

Thanks again and best regards,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 29, 2009 @ 12:27 GMT
I will have a paper up here soon on the role of a quantum phase transition with respect to "braney" dynamics. The quantum critical point has a bearing on Loop Quantum Gravity as well, suggesting a possible tie between string and loops. At any rate, I am going to reread your paper this weekend, which is one of the better ones posted so far, to look at the 3rd polarization. Maybe this can be used to tease data about deeper foundations of the universe.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 30, 2009 @ 20:40 GMT
The third polarization accounts for information beyond the standard GR derivation for a gravity wave. This could correspond to the Dicke scalar-tensor theory (the scalar being the departure), it could be due to string-M-theory deviations from classical gravity, gauge ambiguities in LQG or some other source. These are smaller than the standard general relativistic result, which is what LIGO and the future LISA are meant to detect. In principle these should be observable, and if some rather exceptional event occurs the 3rd polarization might be detected. This could be something such as the collsion of a large mass with the galactic black hole in the MIlky Way center.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 09:45 GMT
Hi Dr Corda ,

Very relevant ,it's foundational ,basic ,rational it's the most important I think .

The spherical waves ,the general relativity ....the spheres and their rotations linked by so much constants in the quantum and cosmological dimensions .The reality and its objectivity show us the truths of our Universal dynamic in building .

I learned with your essay ,thanks for that and congratulations for this pragamatism.Sciences need that .

Best regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 10:06 GMT
Dear Lawrence,

thanks for your intersting comments and for appreciating my essay. I am going to read your paper on black holes.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 10:16 GMT
Dr Corda ,

What do you think about my quantum spheres ,the cosmological spheres,and the universal sphere in building and their rotations with frequences and rules ?

Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 10:44 GMT
The mass id directly linked with the rotations of quantum spheres ,a big sin velocity implies a weak mass ,simply ,all these rotations of spheres imply all .

It's evident .

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 10:46 GMT
Let's discuss about fundamental and the gravity ,the mass ,the rotations of spheres .If it's possible of course .

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 10:46 GMT
Dear Steve,

thamks for your good judgement on my essay. Concerning the spheres, I think that they could be fundamental in our Universe. Did you write something on this issue? I discussed an oscillating, spherical Universe in Gen. Rel. Grav. 40:2201-2212,2008. The pre-print is here:

http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0802.2523

Thanks again.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 11:03 GMT
Dear Dr Corda,You are welcome ,it was with pleasure and with sincerity ,

Thanks for your answer ,it's nice .I liked your essay .

About my theory ,In fact no ,I haven't any certificate ,any paper ,I am too isolated ,I ceased all my studies in Belgian Universitis ,medecine,geology ,agronomy ,horticulture .Even my enterprize was a chaos due to the Belgian system ,I like my country but really it's bizare here for the entrepreneurial mind .

But I continue to class all and I try to link with the spheres in this spherical Universe in building .

At this moment I try to find the number of cosmological spheres,centers of galaxies,stars,planets ,moons ....but my mathematical method is not good it seems to me .I am persuaded that this number is the same in the quantum and linked with the rotation like an universal constant.It's difficult to find this number .But I continue to superimpose some methods .Ray helps me with some ideas but it's not easy .The walls are far of us and it's logic ,the probability is not my force and the computing too .

Thanks for you arxiv link ,I am going to read it .

Best Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 5, 2009 @ 17:11 GMT
Dear Steve,

my best wishes for your research on the spheres.

If you will write some research paper, I will be pleasured if you will update me.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Florin Moldoveanu wrote on Sep. 6, 2009 @ 01:05 GMT
Christian,

Thank you for your reply and sorry to get you involved into this matter. By the way, congratulations on a very good essay, I wish you good luck in this contest.

Cheers,

Florin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 6, 2009 @ 08:38 GMT
Florin,

thanks for your good judgement on my essay, I am going to read your essay.

Good luck to you too!

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 6, 2009 @ 11:39 GMT
Dr Corda,

Thank you very much ,I will tell you ,I d like write this paper in team in fact .

Best Reagards

ps ,good luck to both of you

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 9, 2009 @ 09:44 GMT
Dear Dr. Corda

Do we have any experimental data that matter emits GWs ?

As far as I know we do not have.

It was measured that neutron double stars speed of rotation is slowing down.

This is not a prove for existence of Gws.

According to my research speed of rotation of neutron stars slows down because matter of the stars is transforming into quanta of space and so diminishing, see article on file attached.

yours amrit

attachments: 1_4._ATemporal_Gravitation_And_Hypothetical_Gravitational_Waves__EJTP.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 9, 2009 @ 10:16 GMT
Dear Dr. Sorli,

thanks for your comment.

I am going to read your paper and I will bring back to you with my considerations.

Best regards,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 10, 2009 @ 16:53 GMT
Dear Dr. Sorli,

I read your paper. Here are my comments:

1) The hypothesis of A-Temporal Gravitation looks interesting, but, in my opinion, you should demonstrate your assertions in EJTP 7-10 (2005) with mathematical computations.

2) I think that the potential presence of gravitational waves is not totally banned by A-Temporal Gravitation. Actually, the motion of very large objects could generate linear perturbations of what you call "shrinking force". Such perturbations will be gravitational waves in A-Temporal Gravitation. It could be interesting to indagate in this direction.

Best regards,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 06:22 GMT
Dear Christian Corda,

As per your article I think there is probability of concluding a Coherent cyclic universe model by Lagrangian mechanics on exploring the Gravitational waves by Interferometry.

With best wishes

Jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lev Goldfarb wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 14:24 GMT
Dear Christian,

Why do you claim that "understanding if Einstein's General Relativity is the correct and definitive theory of gravity will be Ultimately Possible in Physics",

when, already many decades ago, with the development of quantum mechanics, it became clear (including to Einstein himself) that general relativity is *not* a "definitive theory"? Wasn't that the reason why Einstein spent the last decades of his life looking for a new unified field theory?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 17:31 GMT
Dear Leshan ,

Why did you say that ,I don't agree ,read with more analyzes .

The critic are not a play of business but must be pragmatic and fundamental .

Thus now you must detail a little I think .

The cyclic Universe and finite is evident and all evolves towards a perfect harmony between mass systems ,spheres .

The gravitational spherical waves due to the rotating quantum and cosmological spheres are fundamentals .

The superimposings are so relevant in the two sense .

The information in this case is relevant ,the idea of Amrit is very interesting too about the transfert and its velocity .

We can't deny the evidence, all goes to the sphere .I have many works to do still but it's the universal road ,any people ,any system ,any idea will change this reality ,The spherisation by rotating quantum and cosmological spheres .

The strings ,finished,the extradimensions ,error ,the inutile extrapolation error and lost of time .

If the scientist global community don't accept this reality ,thus I understand the H BOMB ,the multiverse .....and others .

Can we live in autarcy ,yes ,shall accept the autarcy ,no evidently.

Yesterday I bought a phone ,an apple ,and boom ,it's beeter to buy a microsoft thus ....and after the codes shall return in a closed party of son of Princeton .

Here is the truth .

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 17:44 GMT
The two main problems of our Gaia Earth ,you know this beautiful spheroid in rotation in the solar system .It's weapons and its business and the monney and the computer check thus the monney and capital .

They wan't loose their advantages since many years and the entrepreneurial mind in harmony is evidently a dream ....thus we understand our actual global results .

The truth is like that ,they don't make a succes in this strategy because the time and our young evolution is a reality and the universal truth is everywhere .

Thus in conclusion ,some silly human inventiona are dedicated to disappear in Time space evolution ,the weapons ,the monney ,the differences ,the borders ....shall disapear ....on the other side the universal creations ,were ,are and shall be with their agreement or not because the universal ideas rest and increase their forces .

It's like that ,

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 14, 2009 @ 09:46 GMT
Hi dr Corda ,

I have seen your physics departments and the link of GR19 in Mexico .

It's very interesting .I am going to try to go there if it's possible with my economic situation .

The gravity is so important ,Copernic ,Newton ,Galileo ,Einstien ,Kepler....all is there in fact .

Kinds Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 14, 2009 @ 14:58 GMT
Dear Jayakar Johnson Joseph,

thanks for your topical comment.

Actually, I discussed a cyclic universe model by high order Lagrangian in Gen. Rel. Grav. 40:2201-2212,2008. You can find the pre-print in

http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0802.2523.

I agree with you that exploring the Gravitational Waves by Interferometry could give us informations on this issue. In particular, with some colleagues, we are trying to compute the Gravitational Waves that could have been produced by various "bounces" that are typical of such models.

If you have some ideas on this point, be free in contacting me if you like.

Thanks again.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 14, 2009 @ 15:33 GMT
Dear Lev Goldfarb,

the point that your raised is, perhaps, the greatest controversy in the History of Science.

Actually, Einstein believed that Quantum Mechanics, like non-deterministic theory, was incomplete, and he tried to find an Unified Field Theory from a deterministic point of view. In his research, he proposed a theory that he called “Generalized Theory of Gravitation”, but he said that mathematical difficulties precluded him to obtain the final equations. I suggest you to see the beautiful book on Einstein's life written by A. Pais: Subtle is the Lord - Oxford University Press (2005), for details on this point.

On the other hand, at the present time, there are scientist who tell that Gravitational Theory has to be quantized to be merged with Quantum Mechanics. In that case, some theorists believe that General Relativity has to be extended before the quantization with the introduction of scalar fields and/or high order terms in the gravitational Lagrangian while other theorists believe that General Relativity has to be directly quantized without any extension. But there are also other theorists, like the Nobel Price Gerardus 't Hooft and the Gravity Research Foundation's Winner Steve Carlip, who think that gravity, and perhaps the whole physics, has to be deterministic and gravity cannot be quantized! Even in this case, people ask if General Relativity is definitive concerning the gravitational interaction, or if it has to be extended. Thus, it is clear that the detection of gravitational waves could give us precious information on this very burning debate.

Thanks for your comment.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Sep. 14, 2009 @ 17:14 GMT
Christian,

Why is it that we are looking for GW by measuring space, which is excruciatingly difficult.

Why not measure the local variation in the rate of passage of time

as the wave passes us? Some desingrating nuclide could be used as

a perfect clock while a alpha or beta emitter avoid the artefact of coincidence of the wave causing the same effect on the timing instrumentation at the same time...

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Sep. 14, 2009 @ 22:46 GMT
The quantization of gravity is one of the holy grails. There are a number of ways it might be quantized. The loop variable people stick pretty closely to general relativity. There is string theory which expands the Einstein field equation in a form

R_{ab} – 1/2RG_{ab} + αR_{ac}R_b^c + … = 8πGT_{ab},

where the Einstein field equation is a low energy term in string excitations (gravitons etc). Sacharov proposed that gravitation was only quantized in pregeometric terms, or according to "atoms" or sorts which on some coarse grained sense gave rise to geometry. So general relativity in some sense is not quantized, but its underlying "atoms" are.

I am less certain about ideas about deterministic physics under QM. I think it is unlikely these ideas will go far. It would also strike me as strange if gravity is not quantized, even if in some pregeometric sense.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lev Goldfarb wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 02:10 GMT
I want to mention one point regarding various ‘quantizations’, including quantization of gravity, which is, unfortunately, not understood at all, except possibly by Einstein, Schrödinger (see their quotes on p. 2 of my essay) and several other scientists.

My point—which was also the departing point of my research work during the last twenty five years—is that, as Einstein intuited, ‘physics cannot be based on the [conventional] field concept, i.e., on continuous structures’. Why? Because classical mathematical models cannot be *properly* discretized: the continuity is built into their *underlying* formal structure, including their geometry (and topology). After studying the situation for a number of years, I came to the conclusion that, if we wish *properly* ‘quantized’ formal models, as demanded by much experimental evidence, the only way out is to start developing fundamentally new mathematics and from the very beginning (although I know, these days this is probably the last thing people want to do ;-) ).

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 02:42 GMT
Lev,

I don't include this in my essay, but what I have generally been laying down is a sphere packing or quantum code model where spaces in various dimensions are cyrtallographically discerete with various polytopic tessellations. The vertices of these are quaterions or roots of exceptinal or sporadic groups. So I think in some manner one needs to have a discrete system as an integral aspect of quantum gravity.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 07:52 GMT
Dear Steve Dufourny,

thanks for your interest in gravitation.

If you like, let me updated on your studies concerning spheres and cyclic Universes.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 08:02 GMT
Dear Marcel-Marie LeBel,

thanks for your comment.

Actually, we measure exactly the rate of passage of time.

In particular, we measure the variation of the flight-time of a photon when a gravitational wave is present, in respect to the flight-time of a photon when a gravitational wave is absent.This is performed by using interferometry.

Can you give more details of your idea on disintegrating nuclide?

Thanks again.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 08:05 GMT
Dears Lawrence and Lev,

thanks for your topical comments that are realizing an interesting debate on the quantum gravity problem.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 09:29 GMT
Dear Dr Corda ,

Yes of course I will tell you ,the complementarity is essential .I am persuaded what all is linked by these rotations of quantum and cosmological spheres.The rotating spheres imply all for me in a universal sphere in complexification.

Congratulations for your works ,it's very interesting .

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lev Goldfarb wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 13:44 GMT
Lawrence,

I guess I should have also mentioned that practically everything under the conventional adjective 'discrete' is not the 'discrete' we need, since during the last century a lot of 'stuff' has been labeled discrete (e.g graphs). We need a new 'discrete' formalism for *representing* physical processes.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 21:34 GMT
Lev,

I am not sure what can be more discrete than say the integers. So anything indexed by integers is also discrete, at least in the standard sense. Tessellations of manifolds with polytopes is a discrete structure, at least for something with an overlying continuum structure. If the vertices or subcells of the polytopes correspond to root vectors for different groups, say the Gosset polytope for E_8, or the 120 cell for "half" of E_8 ~ H_4 then the root space defines a discrete structure to a manifold. The half E_8 is reference to the Weyl group W(E_8) ~ diag[H_4, H_4] plus some combinatoric stuff.

Much of mathematics is really an interplay between the continous and the discrete.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lev Goldfarb wrote on Sep. 16, 2009 @ 12:10 GMT
“Much of mathematics is really an interplay between the continuous and the discrete.”

Lawrence,

This popular statement, which I used to like, actually hides the main reality of the applied mathematics: the absolute dominance of continuous/spatial considerations over the discrete. Take for example integers: their discrete, or counting/cardinality, role plays much less important part in applied math., including physics, than their role as imbedded in the real numbers (e.g. note the noun ‘space’ in ‘the root space’ in your message). So the *spatial/measurement* considerations for quite obvious reasons dominate all other considerations, especially in an applied setting.

What I was suggesting in my message (and in my essay) is that we need a fundamentally new, non-spatial, representational formalism, which is a *relational generalization* of integers. It appears that such generalizations cannot be properly attempted without some commitment to the primacy of a particular side of ‘physical’ reality: e.g. in case of our generalization, we view all objects as processes that are composed of (temporally) related events, and thus commit ourselves to the primacy of the purely relational/temporal side of reality.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Sep. 16, 2009 @ 18:39 GMT
About the closest there is to a purely nongeometrical system of relationships is number theory. In what you are saying it appears there persists one continuous space called time. You figure #2 looks similar to a logic diagram of C-NOT or Hamamard gates. In that sense what you write about is not that far off from some theory of quantum computation.

Of course for my self I am not particularly out to rewrite the foundations of mathematics to be employed in physics. There have been a number of ideas like this in the past. I am not sure I could rise above what has already been done.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


LEBEL wrote on Sep. 17, 2009 @ 02:42 GMT
REPLY I TO CORDA

CORDA: Actually, we measure exactly the rate of passage of time.

In particular, we measure the variation of the flight-time of a photon when a gravitational wave is present, in respect to

the flight-time of a photon when a gravitational wave is absent.This is performed by using interferometry.

Can you give more details of your idea on disintegrating nuclide?

LEBEL: The idea here is to measure the actual variation in the rate of passage of time as the wave passes us. Gravity is a differential in the rate of passage of time..(W.Unruh, not verbatim) so a GW would be like a traveling wave of variation in the rate of passage of time??

For this detection, I suggest radio-active nuclides which disintegration rate should fluctuate as the local rate of passage of time varies.(how much?) It would act as an impervious clock except to time itself (like the relativistic half-life extension of mesons). But because this local variation of the rate of passage of time would also affect in a proportional way the timing/detection equipment, a delay between the emission and the detection is introduced to avoid this coincidence. This is done by specifically using nuclides producing alpha or beta disintegration which particles time of flight produces the required time delay between emission & detection. This delay could be adjusted to the expected wavelength (tunable) by the distance source to detector. An actual local fluctuation in the rate of disintegration can be ascertained by coincidence detector and two sources. Now, are we better at measuring small time interval than small distances? Could we even have directionality with a proper configuration of sources and detectors?

Thanks,

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Sep. 17, 2009 @ 03:00 GMT
Marcel,

A very precise form of a quantum clock is an atomic fountain. It might be possible to do exactly as you say here, where the atom in motion define a sort of interferometric-clock apparatus. Atomic clocks separated by a single story in a physics building will register the time change in the gravity field. So it should be possible to directly measure a time variation as a way of detecting a gravity wave.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 17, 2009 @ 11:00 GMT
Dear Steve Dufourny,

thanks for kind congratulations.

Let us keep in touch: maybe it will possible a future joined collaboration on cosmological spheres.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 17, 2009 @ 11:02 GMT
Dear Marcel,

thanks for your comment.

i will bring back to you after carefully reading it.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 17, 2009 @ 17:47 GMT
Dear Readers,

I am going to discuss the Research Issue in this Essay at the Symposium on gravitational waves that I have organized during the 7th International Conference of Numerical Analysis and Applied Mathematics, at Rethymno, Crete (near to Chania), Greece, 18-22 September 2009.

Regarding all informations on the Conference you can see

http://www.icnaam.org/index.htm

regarding the Symposium on gravitational waves you can see

http://www.icnaam.org/Sessions_Minisymposia.htm

Symposium number 19.

I will bring back to you next September 23, in particular, I will be pleasured in continuing the interesting discussion with Marcel and Lawrence concerning the possibility to detect gravitational waves by using disintegrating nuclide and atomic fountains.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 21, 2009 @ 10:59 GMT
Hello ,

It's so difficult to find these gravitionals waves due to a lot of superimposings and our relativistic perception.

The stars with neutron ,found by Hewish in 1967 peritted to know the pulsars and their regular and speedly oscillations.The periodicity is variable between about 0.001 to 10 seconds .This periodicity increases logically due to ther rotations in time too

If...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 21, 2009 @ 11:18 GMT
Error of posting,

It's relevant to see them if we know our topology and the dynamic where somes fusions are a fact .

Thus we could extrapolate their locality and thus see the variales of the signals during a specific period in our Universe ,probably too what the symetry ,spherical is relevant too for the locality of these fusions of binars systems .

The interferometry thus is...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 24, 2009 @ 08:59 GMT
Dear Marcel and Lawrence,

concerning the interesting possibility to detect gravitational waves by using disintegrating nuclide and atomic fountains, I think that we need some formulas interacing with the proper time in the frame of a local observer where a gravitational waves propagates, i.e. the frame where we will measure the proper time with disintegrating nuclide and atomic fountains.

I invite you to see my paper in http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.2412

Do you think that equations 42, 43 and 46 could be used for the proposed goals?

Thanks.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 24, 2009 @ 10:31 GMT
Dr Corda ,

Yes perhaps we could collaborate in the future ,I like the complemenatrity ,it's the key in fact .The time will tell us .Simply .

About the desintegrating nuclide ,it's interesting ,but of course we are going to have the same problems due to our limits of perception .

In the two senses ,quantum or cosmological ,it's very difficult .

The serie are evidently an...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Sep. 25, 2009 @ 02:11 GMT
For an idea of what atomic fountains are you can look at:

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/clockworks.ht
m

This is used to eliminate the effect of Earth's gravity in the synchronization of clocks. We might think of just one atom being tossed in the air as being a bit like a particle on a Bohr-like orbit. Along the arc the wave length of the atom is adjusted in manner similar to the Pound-Rebka experiment with light. This is measured to give a real time adjustment of time change in Earth's gravity.

If the trajectory of the atom(s) is parabolic classically then it will have some integral number of wave lengths in it path. Then what is observed is the Fourier transform of the solutions to eqn 42&43. It is also possible that atomic interferometric systems might be set up as well, where the experiment would measure slight deviation in the interference between atomic or molecular beams due to gravity waves.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 25, 2009 @ 09:25 GMT
Thanks Lawrence ,

It's relevant all that .

Could explain me the rule of the probe laser with a cesium fountain and the microwave cavity ?

Thus in fact it's about a synchronization for a time clock .

The fluorescence thus in the maximum ??

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Sep. 26, 2009 @ 12:50 GMT
Steve,

The idea is that atoms thrown upwards by a laser force will exhibit changes in their electromagnetic spectra as their velocities change, due to Doppler shifting and the like. So you can measure a local gravity very precisely this way and account for local gravitational redshifting.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 29, 2009 @ 07:30 GMT
Dear Steve Dufourny,

the real motivation of difficulties in detecting gravity-waves is the very weak perturbation of space-time that they generate. This perturbation is of the order of 10^-21 in terms of amplitude of gravity-waves or 10^-18 meters in terms of test masses motion. In this way, we try to detect them by using interferometry.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 29, 2009 @ 07:35 GMT
Dear Lawrence,

I think that solving the Fourier transform of the solutions to eqn. 42&43 will be possible by using the Fourier translation and derivation theorems.

What do you think on the possibility of writing a joined paper?

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Sep. 30, 2009 @ 02:15 GMT
Reply II to Corda

I do not really understand these equations 42, 43 & 46.

I think (?) that these equations use the measurement of time, which is the integration of the passage of time. In the universe time “passes”. Time duration is what we measure by making the integration of the passage of time. That was the double edge sword of calculus. It allowed us to write down equations...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Sep. 30, 2009 @ 10:19 GMT
Dear Marcel,

as we try to detect gravitational waves in a laboratory environment on heart, we have to use the coordinate system of a local observer. In this frame the physics results almost Newtonian and this approximation is excellent in case of gravitational waves because we are in the weak linearized theory of gravity.

Then, equation 46 represents the connection between Einstein's General Relativity and linearized theory which is expressed by the connection g00 = 1 + 2V between the first coefficient of the line element and the Newtonian potential, while equations 42, 43 represent the expression of Newtonian potential in terms of the amplitude of the gravitational waves in the frame of the local observer.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 30, 2009 @ 12:52 GMT
Hello Dr Corda ,Lawrence ,all ,

Thanks both of you to detail a little ,it's likeable .

I wish you all the best to find these spherical waves .

I invite you to write the paper with a team like for exemple of course the two mavericks Lawrence and Ray ,Florin ,if you focus all on the same problem ,of course the results shall be correlated ,the complemenatrity will improve your papper ,and will optimize your datas ,evidently .

Good Luck in your extrapolations and experiments ,superimposings .

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 1, 2009 @ 00:51 GMT
I would be willing to work together on some of these problems. It has been a while since we discussed things. As I recall we were talking about using atomic systems to detect gravity waves.

Back in 2007 I did some calculations on what happens to atomic spectra in a strong gravity wave environment. I attach a write up of notes on this. This may or may not be of some interest. The idea...

view entire post


attachments: ppwave.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Oct. 1, 2009 @ 09:48 GMT
Hi ,

Just a suggestion ,

You can superimpose the different ideas and experiments ,the add of systems ,always increase and optimize the complementarity on a problems .

About theses gravitational waves ,I think what the problem is our youg technology ,thus for some people it's a lost of time to focus on these researchs ,furthermore it's expensive .

I think what the gravitational waves are like an axiom ,but of course our perception is limited.

Your ideas dear Lawrence are very creatives and interestings .

What do you think about the sound which is too an energy ?

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 1, 2009 @ 12:19 GMT
Steve,

Gravitational waves should exist for a similar reason electrogmanetic waves exist. Suppose there is a charge with radial lines of electric field at a point in space. You then move that charge to another location. Those radial lines of force don't move with the motion of the charge instantaneously in space. The field lines respond by moving with the charge close in, and then similar to a wave on a string or chain they shift to the new radial configuration in a wave that moves outward, with the generation of a magnetic field as well. This is an electromagnetic wave.

A gravity wave in a weak limit is remarkably similar to this. There are some departures, such as gravity waves are not dipolar, but quadrupolar. The quick and easy way to see that is the dipole is a charge over some distance d = q(x - x') this can change with electromagnetic field. For gravity we have to replace the charge with a mass. A change in mass-dipole amounts to some displacement of a system without momentum transfer --- or a violation of momentum conservation in a sense. So gravity waves are not dipolar and are quadrupolar.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Oct. 1, 2009 @ 16:37 GMT
Dear Lawrence ,

quadrupolarity ?? I don't know ,could you explain me please ,is it a relation with the senses ,for me the polarity is correlated with the rotations and its different paramaters .

About the similiraties ,indeed I think the same with different waves lenght ,but it's finite I think a max and a min is probable even with our waves .

Thr rotations are essentials in my opinion too for the different poles.Let's imagine the combinations and superimposings.

Could you resume the quadrupolar in 3D please ?

Best Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 1, 2009 @ 18:23 GMT
Quadrupole means four poles. A magnetic field is always dipolar, with a north and south pole together. A quadrupole magnetic has two north and two south poles. Fields are usually expanded in monopole, dipole, quadrupole, octupole and so forth terms.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 1, 2009 @ 19:45 GMT
A matter of clarification. I said a magnetic field is always dipole. What I really meant to say is there are no magnetic monopoles (ordinarily in classical EM) and the magnetic field is dipole or higher,

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Oct. 2, 2009 @ 11:17 GMT
Dear Lawrence,

I am going to read your notes on using atomic systems to detect gravity waves and I will bring back to you. Thanks.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 2, 2009 @ 22:05 GMT
Take your time. If you find something wrong of course I need to know. This is an idea which ended up being stilborn, but maybe there is something in there of use.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 4, 2009 @ 18:26 GMT
Dear Dr Corda

There is no experimental data that mass emit or absorb some hypothetical gravitational waves in a similar wax as electromagnetic waves. Dr. Loinger from Milano considers that gravitational waves emitted from mass are fictitious entities:

Loinger A. The gravitational waves are fictitious entities - II

http://arxiv.org/vc/astro-ph/papers/9904/9904207v1.pdf (2004)

yours amrit

attachments: 4_TIMELLESS_QUANTUM_SPACE.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 06:38 GMT
Dear Lawrence,

I think that your idea on using atomic systems to detect gravity waves is interesting. In next days I am going to contact you by email to discuss on the possibility on a joined paper on this issue.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 06:49 GMT
Dear Amrit,

actually, the Scientific Community thinks that the Hulse and Taylor Binary System is a strong evidence that mass emit or absorb some hypothetical gravitational waves in a similar way as electromagnetic waves.

On the other hand, the paper by Dr. Loinger from Milano has not be published in a peer-reviewed international journal.

Best regards,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



amrit wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 07:55 GMT
Dear Dr. Corda

Clocks measure a frequency, velocity and numerical order of change. Experimental date confirms that changes and clocks do not run time; they run in quantum space only. Time is not a part of quantum space. Quantum space itself is timeless. In the universe as a whole amount of matter energy and amount of quantum space energy tends to be constant. Density of mass and density of quantum space in a given volume of quantum space tends to be constant. Mass here is considered as a compressed energy of quantum space. Presence of mass in a given volume of quantum space diminishes its density. Massive objects move always into direction of lover density of quantum space. Gravitational motion of massive objects is result of change of density of quantum space. In space with no change of density massive object will not have gravitational move as in centre of stellar objects or in a flat quantum space where massive objects are far away. In General Relativity change of density of quantum space is described with change of its curvature. Lower is density of quantum space bigger is its curvature.

Mass does not emit or absorb some hypothetical gravitational waves in a similar wax as electromagnetic waves. Gravitational waves emitted from mass seem to be fictitious entities. Gravity does not work between stellar objects on distance. Gravity is result of change of density of quantum space generated with presence of mass.

Gravitational wave as a ripple of timeless quantum space is a change of density Ds of quantum space. It happens by transformations mass-space and vive versa and expands through quantum space with a light speed. Astronomical observations of diminishing of speed of rotation (orbit time) of binary neutron stars PSR1913+16 is here explained by transformation of mass of stars into quanta of space. It is not that mass transforms into gravitational radiation. Mass transforms into quanta of space that creates increasing of density Ds of quantum space. This ripple of increasing density Ds moves through the quantum space with a light speed as a “gravitational wave”.

yours amrit

attachments: QUANTUM_SPACE_DENSITY_CHANGE.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 02:08 GMT
The Hulse Tayor observation of the increased frequency of the double pulsar does pretty clearly indicate gravitational waves.

I attach a nother set of notes on entanglements and gravity waves. I did some of these calculations which I have banged out in these notes.

Cheers, LC

attachments: ntglmentgrwaves.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 07:35 GMT
Dear Amrit,

I suggest you to send your paper to some high-impact factor peer-reviewed international journal. Science has to be peer-reviewed by experts in the research field of the considered issue before being accepted by the Scientific Community.

Best regards,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 12:24 GMT
Christian,

Sorry for the brief post above which gives little explanation of the attachment, There was a televised biography of Charles Darwin which I was intent on. This does spell out some of the fundamental basics of entanglements and gravity waves as I think they work. This is curiously not just about gravity wave detection, but additionally about quantum fields in curved spacetime. This might be considered to be almost a graviton detection system. Indeed this approach to detecting gravity waves might be best applicable to short wavelength gravity waves, such as what might be expected from quantum gravitons which were spread out into gravity waves during cosmic inflation.

This does not discuss an explicit system of atoms or quantum systems for such detection. There are also considerable issues with noicse. Clearly there will be competing issues of thermal noise and stochastic processes in information channels here.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 12:50 GMT
Dear Christian

High-impact factor peer-reviewed international journal for now will never publish idea that physical time is run of clocks in timeless quantum space and that change of density/curvature of quantum space generates gravity.

For them space-time as a fundamental arena of the universe is a foundation (1)

I send similar article published here above to International Journal of Theoretical Physics.

Just to remind them that (1) might be wrong.



yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Christian Corda wrote on Oct. 13, 2009 @ 09:21 GMT
Dear Amrit,

actually, high-impact factor peer-reviewed international journal will publish idea that physical time is run of clocks in timeless quantum space and that change of density/curvature of quantum space generates gravity if these statements will be proved by mathematical formulas and if they will provide for observations. I strongky suggest you to improve your paper in these directions.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Author Christian Corda wrote on Oct. 13, 2009 @ 09:26 GMT
Dear Lawrence,

short wavelength gravity waves could be also from other sources.

I suggest you the paper arXiv:0708.3343 by my friend K Arun.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 14, 2009 @ 00:44 GMT
The paper by Arun and Sivaram is interesting, but I think there is a problem. A thermal source might be thought to emit this radiation, but there are a couple of things that are troubling here, which might be how I am reading this. There is the quote

Putting in these values we get the power of thermal gravitational waves emitted as, E ~ 10^9Watt at a frequency of ~ 10^{17} Hz . The flux of thermal gravitational waves from the sun, received at earth is of the order of

half a watt.

For one thing if this power is what is integrated over the surface of the sun, then this is reduced by 10^{-16} per unit area out to the Gaussian sphere the Earth's orbit sits on. So I would think this power would be far smaller than a watt. I presume this is a watt receieved over the whole earth, so the gravi-radiance (w/m^2) would be very small.

To be honest we could conduct direct experiments with this! I am not a big upholder of nuclear weapons, and have spent some time and energy trying to reduce their numbers, or maybe eliminate them. However, casting those concerns aside, a nuclear explosion is a 10^6K temperature and the major departure from the main sequence case is the volume. So rather than being a volume of ~ 10^{15}km^3 a nuclear fireball is ~ 10^3 km^3, this might seem to reduce the energy by a factor of ~ 10^{-12} or more, but the detector can be placed close to the nuclear event, so there is no 1/r^2 reduction. So just ballparking numbers we might actually be able to detect a few microwatts of gravitational radiation in the 10^{17}Hz range. These are very small wave length gravity waves, in the submicron range.

Maybe my approach with using quantum devices and atoms could be used to detect this sort of gravitational radiation.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 14, 2009 @ 20:15 GMT
Christian I publish my articles on viXra that is alternative to arXiv

Amrit S. Sorli, Mathematical Space-time, Neuronal Space-time and Timeless Quantum Space,

http://vixra.org/abs/0910.0004 (2009)

Amrit S. Sorli, Density/curvature of Quantum Space Generates Gravitational Motion

http://vixra.org/abs/0910.0007 (2009)

Amrit S. Sorli, Einstein Curvature Tensor And Density Tensor of Quantum Space

http://vixra.org/pdf/0910.0014v1.pdf (2009)

Amrit S. Sorli, Consciousness as a Basic Frequency of Quantum Space

http://vixra.org/pdf/0910.0018v1.pdf (2009)

If you want I'm ready we write article together and send it to high-impact factor peer-reviewed journal. I have math description for density of quantum space. It is 1/G where G is Einstein curvature tensor.

my mail is sorli.bistragmail.com

contact me if you are willing to publish together

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Oct. 23, 2009 @ 02:57 GMT
Comment to Corda

There are two groups of researchers showing scientific demonstration of

unknown influences on the rate of radio-active decay of various nuclides.

----------------------------------

Evidence for Correlations Between Nuclear Decay Rates and Earth-Sun Distance

Jere H. Jenkins,1 Ephraim Fischbach,1, ∗ John B. Buncher,1 John

T. Gruenwald,1 Dennis E. Krause,1, 2 and Joshua J. Mattes1

1Physics Department, Purdue University, 525 Northwestern Avenue, West Lafayette, Indiana, 47907, USA

2Physics Department, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana, 47933, USA

(Dated: August 25, 2008)

Unexplained periodic fluctuations in the decay rates of 32Si and 226Ra have been reported by groups at Brookhaven National Laboratory (32Si), and at the Physikalisch-Technische- Bundesandstalt in Germany (226Ra). We show from an analysis of the raw data in these experiments that the observed fluctuations are strongly correlated in time, not only with each other, but also with the distance between the Earth and the Sun. Some implications of these results are also discussed, including the suggestion that discrepancies in published half-life determinations for these and other nuclides may be attributable in part to differences in solar activity during the course of the various

experiments, or to seasonal variations in fundamental constants.

PACS numbers: 23.60.+e,23.40.-s,96.60.-j,96.60.Vg,06.20.Jr

Keywords: alpha decays, beta decays, solar activity, fine structure constant, neutrinos

------ AND -------

Realization of discrete states during fluctuations in macroscopic

processes

S E Shnoll, V A Kolombet, E V Pozharski|¯, T A Zenchenko, I M Zvereva, A A Konradov

----------------------------------------

Both are arxiv articles.

I think that the influences described by both group may be related to gravitational influence.This influence is taken as support for the proposed method of gravitational wave detection. A wave of time rate variation for the gravitational wave is my own interpretation for GW.

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 23, 2009 @ 13:41 GMT
Any paper which has the author name Ephraim Fischbach on it should be automatically considered wrong until demonstrated otherwise. I took classes from this guy. What amazed me the most about him is how a person who is so consistently wrong about physics can become a full professor of physics at a fairly well rate university.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Oct. 28, 2009 @ 02:30 GMT
Christian,

I was wondering if you had any comments on Bell's theorem and gravity wave detection that I sent you a couple of weeks ago.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


B N Sreenath wrote on Nov. 3, 2009 @ 18:12 GMT
Dear Dr. Christian Corda,

Thanks for your good and easy going ( but with deep implications)article on the detection of GWs. I wish all success in your endeavour.

According to me there are 'No' gravitons (you will come to know of it, if you go through my article on Quantum-Gravity in "http://www.sreenath.webs.com".) But there could be GWs like sound-waves but without any medium to traverse or even like light-waves as thought in 17-19 century without carrying light quanta.

Had there been gravitons,they would have asserted their existence by now like photons.As to which theory stands the test,out of the 3 theories you have proposed,for me it is Einstein's GR (what else?).

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.