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.

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: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

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 • winners

**What Is “Fundamental”**

*October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018*

*Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Current Essay Contest

Previous Contests

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

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

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**Steven Oostdijk**: *on* 10/15/09 at 20:47pm UTC, wrote Dear Ryan, I think your premise does not hold. The universe cannot be...

**Terry Padden**: *on* 10/13/09 at 10:23am UTC, wrote Ryan I know you are right because you know you are wrong. PS Take no...

**Uncle Al**: *on* 10/6/09 at 17:38pm UTC, wrote 26 parameters jury-rig the Standard Model, ...

**Ryan Westafer**: *on* 10/5/09 at 21:52pm UTC, wrote Uncle Al, I'm familiar with the limiting result for the N-ball, but I'm...

**Uncle Al**: *on* 10/5/09 at 15:37pm UTC, wrote You say, "must see processes cascade as series of opposites (or duals)" ...

**Ryan Westafer**: *on* 10/5/09 at 11:28am UTC, wrote **Essay Abstract** This short letter claims that the whole of physics...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**Georgina Woodward**: "Cf. Lion Location Probability Field and lion entity trapped- with QFT type..."
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Georgina Woodward**: "Further about the lion representation. To show how it is similar to..."
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Stefan Weckbach**: "Hi Lorraine, in the case of the crashing twin-towers, the term “top-down..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Stefan Weckbach**: "Hi Steve, take also care Steve, and may the force of the three spheres be..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Jim Snowdon**: "Since evolving on our rapidly rotating planet, we have used it`s rotational..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

**Steve Dufourny**: "a general universal clock of evolution irreversible correlated for me with..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

**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.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

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.

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

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

FQXi FORUM

September 18, 2021

CATEGORY:
What's Ultimately Possible in Physics? Essay Contest (2009)
[back]

TOPIC: The Zero-sum Game of Physics by Ryan S. Westafer [refresh]

TOPIC: The Zero-sum Game of Physics by Ryan S. Westafer [refresh]

This short letter claims that the whole of physics comprises the predication of trivial exercises. The premise is metasymmetry, a self-consistent and unassuming notion which yields only trivial zero-sum statements. Therefore a theory of everything (TOE) also defines a theory of nothing (TON).

Ryan Westafer is.

You say, "must see processes cascade as series of opposites (or duals)" Create a multidimensional opposites space. Choose a variable, normalize it on a scale of 1 through zero to -1 inclusive. Love thy neighbor, kill thy neighbor. Each normalized line is assigned its own dimension and is appended orthogonal to all prior lines. The zero centers of all lines coincide as a common origin. N variables then create a filled N-dimensional unit hypersphere, a closed N-hyperball, with each line being one of its diameters. A hypercube with edge length 2 and volume 2^N circumscribes about any unit N-hypersphere. The ratio of the N-hyperball's volume to its circumscribed hypercube monotonically decreases as the dimension N, the number of independent variables, increases. Before you accumulate a useful number of opposites your overall collection implodes.

Failure is not a bad thing. Failure tells you to do something else while you can still crawl out of the hole.

report post as inappropriate

Failure is not a bad thing. Failure tells you to do something else while you can still crawl out of the hole.

report post as inappropriate

Uncle Al,

I'm familiar with the limiting result for the N-ball, but I'm not sure what you're implying. I wouldn't think of an asymptotic approach to zero as implosion. Can you clarify your reasoning and its relation to the quoted statement about causal cascades?

I'm familiar with the limiting result for the N-ball, but I'm not sure what you're implying. I wouldn't think of an asymptotic approach to zero as implosion. Can you clarify your reasoning and its relation to the quoted statement about causal cascades?

26 parameters jury-rig the Standard Model, http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/constants.html

"Processes cascade as series of opposites" obtains a 26-ball volume of considered combinations versus a circumscribed 26-cube space, (V_n) = (C_n)R^n/2^n, (C_n) = [(pi)^(n/2)]/[(n/2)!] (for n= even); [(pi)^13]/[(13)!], (V_26) =4.663x10^(-4) with R = 1. [4.663x10^(-4)]/2^26 = 6.95x10^(-12). Sampling seven trillionths of a total space as self-imposed limit could miss the answer.

No theory with c=c, G=G, h=0 has testable predictions. Compare Euclid's triangles to any triangle on a two-sphere (great circle geodesics as sides). Defective founding postulate! Physics demands parity symmetry: the universe and its mirror image are identical; then it waffles. Noether's theorems exclude parity. Quantum field theories with hermitian hamiltonians are invariant under the Poincaré group containing spatial reflections. Parity is a spatial reflection but parity is not a QFT symmetry. Covariance with respect to reflection in space and time is not required by the Poincaré group of Special Relativity or the Einstein group of General Relativity.

Vacuum isotropy has only been tested with massless photons. Nobody knows if the vacuum is isotropic to opposite parity atomic mass distributions. If not, the whole of physics is reduced to a (very good ) heuristic. Religion need only inculcate its defective methods. Somebody should look (my essay, fourth from the bottom), testing a loudly defective founding postulate.

report post as inappropriate

"Processes cascade as series of opposites" obtains a 26-ball volume of considered combinations versus a circumscribed 26-cube space, (V_n) = (C_n)R^n/2^n, (C_n) = [(pi)^(n/2)]/[(n/2)!] (for n= even); [(pi)^13]/[(13)!], (V_26) =4.663x10^(-4) with R = 1. [4.663x10^(-4)]/2^26 = 6.95x10^(-12). Sampling seven trillionths of a total space as self-imposed limit could miss the answer.

No theory with c=c, G=G, h=0 has testable predictions. Compare Euclid's triangles to any triangle on a two-sphere (great circle geodesics as sides). Defective founding postulate! Physics demands parity symmetry: the universe and its mirror image are identical; then it waffles. Noether's theorems exclude parity. Quantum field theories with hermitian hamiltonians are invariant under the Poincaré group containing spatial reflections. Parity is a spatial reflection but parity is not a QFT symmetry. Covariance with respect to reflection in space and time is not required by the Poincaré group of Special Relativity or the Einstein group of General Relativity.

Vacuum isotropy has only been tested with massless photons. Nobody knows if the vacuum is isotropic to opposite parity atomic mass distributions. If not, the whole of physics is reduced to a (very good ) heuristic. Religion need only inculcate its defective methods. Somebody should look (my essay, fourth from the bottom), testing a loudly defective founding postulate.

report post as inappropriate

Ryan

I know you are right because you know you are wrong.

PS Take no notice of Uncle Al whenever he uses numbers; he is only a chemist. Ask him what happens to the volume of a cube as a proportion of the circumscribing sphere ? Don't do it publicly. He is the last person we would want to upset, in case he gets angry with us.

report post as inappropriate

I know you are right because you know you are wrong.

PS Take no notice of Uncle Al whenever he uses numbers; he is only a chemist. Ask him what happens to the volume of a cube as a proportion of the circumscribing sphere ? Don't do it publicly. He is the last person we would want to upset, in case he gets angry with us.

report post as inappropriate

Dear Ryan,

I think your premise does not hold. The universe cannot be based on symmetry, otherwise physical manifestations would not exist. Also it cannot sum to zero, it can only sum to an infinite number times unity if you know what I mean.

There is another way to describe the universe assuming is consists of smaller elements (quoted from KVK Nehru):

In a closed group of operators, like [1 i j k], the result of the combination of any number of the basal elements is also a member of the same group. The result of any such combination can be known only if all the possible binary combinations of the elements are first defined in terms of the basal elements i, j and k themselves (besides, of course, the identity operator, 1). Let there be n basal elements (excluding the unit operator 1) in a group. Then the number of unique binary combinations of these elements, in which no element occurs twice, is n(n-1)/2. We can readily see that a group becomes self-sufficient (finite) only if the number of binary combinations of the basal elements is equal to the number of those basal elements themselves, that is

n(n-1)/2 = n.

The only definite solution for n is 3. (Zero and infinity are other solutions.) Therefore if we regard space (&time) as a group of orthogonal rotations, its dimensionality has to be three in order to make it self-sufficient dimensionally. Otherwise the number of dimensions either has to shrink to zero, or proliferate to infinity.

Good luck with the contest!

Steven Oostdijk

report post as inappropriate

I think your premise does not hold. The universe cannot be based on symmetry, otherwise physical manifestations would not exist. Also it cannot sum to zero, it can only sum to an infinite number times unity if you know what I mean.

There is another way to describe the universe assuming is consists of smaller elements (quoted from KVK Nehru):

In a closed group of operators, like [1 i j k], the result of the combination of any number of the basal elements is also a member of the same group. The result of any such combination can be known only if all the possible binary combinations of the elements are first defined in terms of the basal elements i, j and k themselves (besides, of course, the identity operator, 1). Let there be n basal elements (excluding the unit operator 1) in a group. Then the number of unique binary combinations of these elements, in which no element occurs twice, is n(n-1)/2. We can readily see that a group becomes self-sufficient (finite) only if the number of binary combinations of the basal elements is equal to the number of those basal elements themselves, that is

n(n-1)/2 = n.

The only definite solution for n is 3. (Zero and infinity are other solutions.) Therefore if we regard space (&time) as a group of orthogonal rotations, its dimensionality has to be three in order to make it self-sufficient dimensionally. Otherwise the number of dimensions either has to shrink to zero, or proliferate to infinity.

Good luck with the contest!

Steven Oostdijk

report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.