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

Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 11/4/09 at 4:36am UTC, wrote Hi Ernst. In your essay, you said: "But redshift is not the result of a...

Ernst Fischer: on 11/1/09 at 11:44am UTC, wrote Dear NN, Yes, I am optimistic that we can solve the mysteries of the...

NN: on 10/31/09 at 15:01pm UTC, wrote Dear Ernst, i admire yoour optimsm in solving the myteries of the...

Ernst Fischer: on 10/30/09 at 15:48pm UTC, wrote Dear Professor Narendra, Indeed the ideas proposed in my essay do not...

Ernst Fischer: on 10/30/09 at 14:41pm UTC, wrote Dear Steven, Thank you for your comments. First I must apologize for not...

Narendra nath: on 10/30/09 at 12:44pm UTC, wrote Dear Ernst, i was surprised to see your essay posted on 20 August to have...

Steven Oostdijk: on 10/16/09 at 19:50pm UTC, wrote Dear Ernst, What a great paper! It is very clearly written and right on...

Ernst Fischer: on 8/20/09 at 13:54pm UTC, wrote Essay Abstract In ancient times people tried to explain phenomena,...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Robert McEachern: "Coins always have two sides. Always. The fact that some observer has..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Georgina Woodward: "Robert, Re.measurement being considered the cause of subsequent effect; I..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Eckard Blumschein: "Steve, Darwin contradicted to the view of Parmenides, ..., and Einstein..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "Joe,do you understand that the universe is finite like our series of..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "this second law is so important,my theory of spherisation and these quantum..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "I must explain what is the real meaning of Spherisation in my theory.It is..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

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...


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 16, 2019

CATEGORY: What's Ultimately Possible in Physics? Essay Contest (2009) [back]
TOPIC: The Return of the Gods - Cosmology at its Limits by Ernst Fischer [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Ernst Fischer wrote on Aug. 20, 2009 @ 13:54 GMT
Essay Abstract

In ancient times people tried to explain phenomena, which they did not understand, by the action of gods. In a similar way modern cosmology tries to explain observations by new physical principles, which can neither be proved nor falsified, like the big bang singularity or the existence of dark energy. But alternatives are possible within the well tested scope of general relativity, if we abandon the idea that a global time scale exists and that consequently space should be expanding. Maybe we are closer to the limit of completely understanding the physics of the universe than most people think.

Author Bio

Ernst Fischer, born 1938 in Stolberg, Germany. I have studied physics with the main topic plasma physics. My main professional activity was research on light sources. But in my spare time I was active also in astrophysics and have published some papers in this field.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Steven Oostdijk wrote on Oct. 16, 2009 @ 19:50 GMT
Dear Ernst,

What a great paper! It is very clearly written and right on the spot. You just stopped short of writing Unified Field Equations. I think the last questions you consider (about dark matter) could be solved by considering that photons have an actual mass.

Good luck with the contest,

Steven Oostdijk

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Narendra nath wrote on Oct. 30, 2009 @ 12:44 GMT
Dear Ernst,

i was surprised to see your essay posted on 20 August to have remained unobserved/ commented thus far, one exception. i decided to go through the same and found your appraoch at variance with today's popular Physics/ Cosmology. Just because you have questioned some established concepts, yet you did not introduce new ones and simply worked your way in an alternate approach. Yes, it is difficult to make observations in cosmology that are reliable and precise. However, some isolated measurements have been attempted on the constants like c, e/m from light signals coming from distant objects around 12 billion years away. It is seen that c had a larger value than accepted presently. Similar is the story about the ratio e/m. In fact if we accept the Big bang singularity for the universe initiation, the conditions close to those times are bound to be too turbulent and extraordinary to match the times in which we have developed and tested our present day Physics.

i am by training and experience a low energy nuclear physics experimentalist and have never had any formal learning in Cosmology or Astrophyics. After retirement from University service , i started on my own to try to look at cosmolgy, a natural interest. i find that in fact it holds the secrets starting from Particle Physics upwards to nuclear/atomic and solid state physics. Even the modern field of nanostructure materials may have had a place in the evolution of the universe somewhere that we may have missed!

In my essay on this forum this year as also last year ( different title ), i have given vent to my opinions based on such self- studies of available literature. i agree that alternate avenues exist to understand both Physics and Cosmology and i hold Cosmology to provide all the hints for such future developmants in Physics. I for one feel your essay has a high degree of originality and innovation that may not be easily appreciated in view of 'established' concepts and human prejudice towards biases we develop during our training/education.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ernst Fischer wrote on Oct. 30, 2009 @ 14:41 GMT
Dear Steven,

Thank you for your comments. First I must apologize for not having reacted to your post earlier, but I was absent from home for some time. I hope that my essay will give some impulse to the astrophysics community to look for possible alternatives to the currently favoured concordance model.

I do not agree to your suggestion that the mass of photons might be a candidate for dark matter. If photons had mass in addition to their energy equivalent, this would long have been recognised by experiments. To my opinion, of all known constituents of the universe fully ionised matter is the most probable candidate for dark matter. Though it is not completely dark, the emission of bremsstrahlung of a very diluted and unstructured plasma is extremely weak. The observed x-ray background radiation, if attributed to such a plasma, would be sufficient to close the universe.

A more detailed discussion of this topic you can find in my paper ‘An Equilibrium Balance of the Universe’ (arXiv:0708.3577 ), where I have tried to show up ways to an alternative cosistent model of the universe.

Best regards,

Ernst Fischer

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Ernst Fischer wrote on Oct. 30, 2009 @ 15:48 GMT
Dear Professor Narendra,

Indeed the ideas proposed in my essay do not propose any new physical effect to understand the physics of the universe. But it just this fact, which I wanted to show: that it is likely that no new physics at all is needed for a complete understanding of the universe, if we only give up the idea of an unidirectional evolution and replace it by a model of fluctuations around a global equilibrium. All these questions about constancy of c or e/m become superfluous as well as those of a breakdown of physical laws close to a singularity.

Unfortunately big bang cosmology has reached such a status of religious truth by now that anyone, who dares to question the basics of this model, will be punished by continuous disregard.

Also in your essay in this contest you repeat the basics of the concordance model apparently without any doubts on their truth. But I hope that my essay will contribute at least to the result that some people begin to think about basically different alternatives, which allow a consistent description of the universe.

Best regards,

Ernst Fischer

Bookmark and Share



NN wrote on Oct. 31, 2009 @ 15:01 GMT
Dear Ernst,

i admire yoour optimsm in solving the myteries of the universe, without using any new ideas in Physics. Just by ignoring the Big bang start and say taking its existence to be continuous and accompanied by some fluctautions about a constant base, is what you envisage. However, what about the dark matter/enrgy and the explanation for black holes, as per our ideas?i will e obliged if you let me know about the Concordance model, as i have not studied cosmology professionally. i will appreciate much your elucidations.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Ernst Fischer wrote on Nov. 1, 2009 @ 11:44 GMT
Dear NN,

Yes, I am optimistic that we can solve the mysteries of the universe, or better to say, find out the rules, how the interplay between its constituents works. It is not just ignoring a Big Bang, what I propose, but what I want to show is that all the observational facts, which have been adopted in favour of the Concordance model, like red shift, microwave background and the chemical...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Nov. 4, 2009 @ 04:36 GMT
Hi Ernst. In your essay, you said: "But redshift is not the result of a mysterious new effect driving expansion. It is the natural consequence of the Lorentz invariance of gravitational interaction."

How exactly do you view this in keeping with the following?

Note the transparent space/sky around the larger and red [setting] sun.

(Telescopic/astronomical observations make the objects larger, or they could not be seen at all.) Importantly, isn't the increased transparency/invisibility of space, in relation to the blackness of night/outer space, the requirement of seeing farther?

Of huge importnce, isn't the increasing transparency/invisibility of space

the reason for the redshift?

My essay is the fourth from the top. I would appreciate it if you would rate it and comment on it as well. Thanks. Frank

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.