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

Rodney Bartlett: on 10/12/13 at 13:29pm UTC, wrote Developed from my entry on this page is a 2013 article I've called "Albert...

Rodney Bartlett: on 5/30/11 at 9:19am UTC, wrote “SPECULATING ON SELECTED SENTENCES FROM STEPHEN HAWKING’S BOOKS IN THE...

Rodney Bartlett: on 5/5/11 at 14:12pm UTC, wrote If Galileo was with us today, he'd agree that logic is capable of revealing...

Rodney Bartlett: on 4/22/11 at 10:27am UTC, wrote Particle spin, F=ma and black holes revise gravity, unify gravitation with...

Rodney Bartlett: on 4/12/11 at 2:09am UTC, wrote Pages 50-54 of the book I'm working on (yes, there's life for curiosity and...

Rodney Bartlett: on 3/31/11 at 6:52am UTC, wrote Combining Newtonian and Relativistic Gravitation with Quantum Mechanics’...

Rodney Bartlett: on 3/16/11 at 5:36am UTC, wrote COMBINING NEWTONIAN AND RELATIVISTIC GRAVITY WITH QUANTUM MECHANICS’...

Rodney Bartlett: on 3/8/11 at 3:46am UTC, wrote BREAKING THE SOUNDS OF SILENCE BY TALKING TO MYSELF - CONTINUING MY...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Eckard,you seems persuaded by your Words and thoughts.I don t understand..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "In Darwinism/Weismannism there is no first cause, just a causal chain...." in First Things First: The...

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:...

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 14, 2019

CATEGORY: Is Reality Digital or Analog? Essay Contest (2010-2011) [back]
TOPIC: Steps Resulting From Digital Reality by Rodney Bartlett [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Jan. 19, 2011 @ 15:31 GMT
Essay Abstract

This essay has its beginnings in cellular automata (in mathematics and computer science, collections of cells on a grid that evolve through a number of discrete time steps according to a set of rules based on the states of neighbouring cells) and grew into a belief that the universe (electromagnetism, gravitation, space-time and, as we’ll see, 5th dimensional hyperspace) is not analog in nature but has a digital (electronic) foundation. This belief can be supported by 11 steps that begin with an experiment in electrical engineering at Yale University in the USA. These steps logically lead to assertions of instant intergalactic travel, time travel into the past as well as the future (neither of which can be altered), of unification of the large-scale universe with small-scale quantum particles, that the universe is a computer-generated hologram, that everyone who ever lived can have eternal life and health, that motion is an illusion caused by the rapid display of digitally generated "frames", that the entire universe is contained in (or unified with) every one of its particles, that the terms “computer-generated” and “computer” do not necessarily refer to an actual machine sending out binary digits or qubits, that we only possess a small degree of free will, that humanity could have created our universe and ourselves though unification physics says a being called God must nevertheless exist and likewise be Creator, and that Einstein's E=mc squared equation could be modified for the 21st century, reflecting the digital nature of reality. Though these things may be unbelievable in 2011, we should not ignore the possibilities of their being true or of their showing that reality is indeed digital.

Author Bio

G´day from the Land Down Under! To be exact: from a town called Stanthorpe, which is in the southern part of the state Queensland, in Australia. I´m a guy who was born in this town in 1956. At age 15, I left High School to become an apprentice printer at the local newspaper. I've written 3 little paperbacks that have also been published as ebooks - "Rod's Room: A New Earth And A New Universe" (2006) + "A New Earth and A New Universe" (2009) + "Humans and their Universes" (2010).

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Israel Perez wrote on Jan. 23, 2011 @ 20:56 GMT
Dear Rodney

I would like to make some comments about your work.

You: science is investigating time travel and unification, the notion of motion has been suspect to some ever since the ancient Greek philosopher Zeno of Elea (490?-420? B.C.) argued that motion is absurd, and many religions worldwide speak of God and have some concept of survival of bodily death.

Time travel is not possible for several reasons. First because time is not a line or a thing that is flowing, like a virgin film rolling and waiting to be filled with events. If this were the case one should have to explain the grandfather paradox. If time were a line we would have observed travelers from the future.



To my knowledge all the Zeno's paradoxes are easily resolved once one acknowledges that lines (space or time intervals) are not made of infinitely many adimensional points but made of a finite number of (length or time) intervals. A length interval is not constituted of points but of infinitesimal subintervals, this is so because a point has length equal to zero. Similarly, a time interval is not constituted of subintervals of zero duration (instants). For instance in the arrow paradox, the fallacy resides on considering that each instant lasts zero seconds, as if the instants were snapshots in which time freezes, the fact is that in each snapshot there is implicit a time interval different from zero and moreover time is continuous, otherwise motion would not be possible.

With respect to God you may be interested in watching the documentary: “The atheists tapes”. They explain why people speak of and believe in God.

Good luck in the contest

Israel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Rodney Bartlett replied on Jan. 24, 2011 @ 04:46 GMT
Dear Israel,

Thank you very much for replying to my essay. Ever since it was posted online, I've had the feeling that it might just sit there in obscurity, without anybody taking the time to read it. Having said that, I must say this - I get the awful feeling that you haven't read my essay. I really hope I'm wrong, but just in case I'm not, here are a few comments on your comments -

Your statement "Time travel is not possible ..." My essay's reply -

Let’s return to Relativity’s statement that space and time can never exist separately, therefore warps in space are actually warps in space-time: Eliminating distances in space also means “distances” between both future and past times are eliminated - and time travel becomes reality. Can anything more specific about the mechanics of time travel be stated here? If we get into a spaceship and eliminate the distance between us and a planet 700 light-years away, it'll not only be possible to arrive at the planet instantly but we'll instantly be transported 700 years into the future. On page 247 of "Physics of the Impossible" by physicist Michio Kaku (Penguin Books - 2009), it's stated "astronomers today believe that the total spin of the universe is zero". This is bad news for mathematician Kurt Godel, who in 1949 found from Einstein's equations that a spinning universe would be a time machine (p. 223 of "Physics of the Impossible"). Professor Hawking informs us that “all particles in the universe have a property called spin which is related to, but not identical with, the everyday concept of spin” (science is mystified by quantum spin which has mathematical similarities to familiar spin but it does not mean that particles actually rotate like little tops). Everyday spin might be identical to Godel’s hoped-for spinning universe. If the universe is a Mobius loop (a Mobius loop can be visualised as a strip of paper which is given a half-twist of 180 degrees before its ends are joined), the twisted nature of a Mobius strip or loop plus the fact that you have to travel around it twice to arrive at your starting point might substitute for the lack of overall spin. Then the cosmos could still function as a time machine. We've seen how it permits travel into the future. We can journey further and further into the future by going farther and farther around the Mobius Universe. We might travel many billions of years ahead - but when we've travelled around M.U. exactly twice, we'll find ourselves back at our start i.e. we were billions of years in the future … relative to that, we’re now billions of years in the past.

REGARDING TRAVEL BEYOND OUR START AND INTO THE PAST

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Jan. 24, 2011 @ 05:30 GMT
Sorry, I pressed the wrong key and posted before finishing writing. Now I'll continue -

REGARDING TRAVEL BEYOND OUR START AND INTO THE PAST

... it can’t be denied that these paragraphs imply the possibility of humans from the distant future time-travelling to the distant past and using electronics to create this particular subuniverse's computer-generated Big Bang. Maybe any limits...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Jan. 24, 2011 @ 06:03 GMT
I just read, in Discover’s December 2010 issue, about Sean Carroll's video-blog on Cosmic Variance dealing with “Stephen Hawking Settles the God Question Once and for All”. I couldn’t find the video, but I don’t agree that the God question has been settled and will use some lines from my entry in FQXi’s latest essay contest ( http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/814 ) to briefly...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Jan. 25, 2011 @ 12:27 GMT
I just realised something that a short paragraph in my essay has been trying to tell me.

That paragraph is -

Another way of stating the previous sentence is: just as E=mc2 means energy must contain particles e.g. electromagnetic energy is composed of photons, E=m^1 plus 0 (see #12) means a computer in the hyperspace of the universe which is projected onto space-time must also be contained in the hyperspace of each particle and projected onto the space-time of each immaterial particle i.e. the entire universe is contained in (or unified with) every one of its particles.

My realisation is -

If strings exist, cosmic strings would too.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Jan. 26, 2011 @ 02:12 GMT
I recently fell in love with using my computer's Windows Movie Maker to express myself. This is in addition to my entry in the FQXi essay contest for 2011 and its associated posts. You've heard of "Star Trek" - now meet my film "Time Trek" (also called "2011: A Space-time Odyssey"). This movie on Amazon Studios (you can choose between a 28-minute version and a 73-minute version) has 2 purposes - 1) to be an outlet for some ideas I have about science in the future and how its reconciliation with religion will be achieved, as well as 2) combination of those serious ideas with pure entertainment and a good story. To watch it now (for free), go to

Please visit the Amazon Studios site



and scroll halfway down the page. Hope you like it!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 2, 2011 @ 03:32 GMT
I know I can't submit another essay. I don't plan to - these are just some comments that came to mind after thinking about my essay. They don't seem very relevant to the topic "Is Reality Digital or Analog?" but writing them has given even more satisfaction than writing the essay, and I'm in the mood to share them with the whole world. So if you've got time to read them...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 7, 2011 @ 03:05 GMT
According to the Community Ratings, my essay in the 2011 Essay Contest is sliding further down the ratings each day. But I'm having more luck with a science journal called General Science Journal - comments of mine inspired by the essay (which are nearly 20,000 words long and include comments about "The Nature of Time" as well as "Is Reality Digital or Analog?") were published in the Journal on Feb. 6 and may be viewed at http://gsjournal.net/ntham/bartlett.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Philip Gibbs replied on Feb. 7, 2011 @ 16:45 GMT
Don't worry about the rating. The important thing is to have your work online for others to pick up on if/when they see something in it. Keep learning and developing your ideas, then try again.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Rodney Bartlett replied on Feb. 9, 2011 @ 02:45 GMT
Hi Philip,

You're right - the important thing is to have my work online. I won't stop trying ... not ever! I often want to, because I don't enjoy controversy at all. But I always end up finding another place where I want to promote my ideas. I guess human nature makes it impossible to give up when a person has no doubt he or she is on the right track.

Sometimes, what science accepts as fundamentals have to change. People once had a fundamental belief that the world was flat - and that space and time were absolutes which could never vary - and that traveling to the moon was simply fantasy. All those fundamental beliefs changed though, understandably, not without a fight (change is never easy). Now it's time for some more fundamental beliefs - both public and scientific - to change.

best of luck,

Rodney

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 8, 2011 @ 18:33 GMT
Rodney

Gud on ya mate! I think you have it all sorted. Though just a few loose ends to tie up before you have to fly over for the Nobel prize.

I do have to admit there are a couple of bits I'd like to see a bit more falsification of, but I do have an analogy for your mobius loop that works for me.

It's a Tokamac. If you've never heard of one think continuous loop double helix. This is a real animal, from atomic physics up black holes, it's a toroid that spins on its (donut) planar axis but with a twin 'solenoid' em field that moves round the 'body' in both directions as it spins - a bit like your loop, but with a different purpose.

Don't laugh.. it eats galaxies and spits us out again, (in both directions) recycling us as plasma. Forget the re-ionisation epoch, and chiral polarisation problems this resolves them all. Now of course if we go bigger still, it does bear some resemblance to this big bang we all heard a while ago.

So there it is. Before the big bang (or 'whoosh!) was our predecessor universe. we've all done the Star Treck thing as we've been recycled and spat out at 7c at least once already (5bn years ago), and there must be life after death as time just flashes by once we're dead, and eventually our ionised bits will be part of some other organism! (if time is eternal). And all because light changes speed between 'discrete field' inertial frames. [the paper with lots of falsification has just been submitted].

And don't panic, we don't get we don't get eaten again till after lights out, in about another 5bn years when the sun's about dead. So are we crazy or is it them? Do you think some of our imprinted data didn't get fully wiped on recycling?

Best of luck

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 8, 2011 @ 18:35 GMT
Forgot something;

I've been playing with video's too, but this one has almost all of science packed into less than 2 minutes - including time dilation and lengthe contraction!

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/1_YouTube
__Dilation.htm

p

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 9, 2011 @ 03:47 GMT
Hi Peter,

I'm really glad you liked my essay and video. I liked your essay too - I haven't been able to watch your video yet cos each time I've tried, my computer told me "an error occurred". But I'm sure it'll be just as impressive as the essay when I finally am able to watch it.

Going back to that email you sent me, I have to agree that I've "assembled some key parts of the space ship of the future, then gone and jumped off the Eiffel tower to see if they worked." I can be rather impulsive sometimes! That's the way people tend to be when they have no doubt they're on to something big. Today it's the Eiffel Tower ... tomorrow I'll jump right out of our planet's little patch of space and time. Before I go though, I'll wait around for that Nobel Prize (they'll have to mail it to me, cos I don't have a passport). I'm sure you could help me curb that impulsiveness. I'll add my 10 to your 10 and we'll make your essay (2020 vision) as well as my essay shoot to the top of FQXi's Ratings overnight!

Rodney

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 9, 2011 @ 17:13 GMT
Rod

I'll see if there's a video problem Georgina saw it ok. Thanks for the support. may be too obvious right this mo so I'll revert shortly.

I thought they were letting you guys out for good behaviour these days lol! I can pick it up and fly out with it if you like.

best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Rodney Bartlett replied on Feb. 11, 2011 @ 02:53 GMT
Hi Peter,

Still can't see your video. Maybe it just doesn't like Aussies.

Sure, you can pick up my Nobel and fly out with it. That'll save me from having to buy a penguin suit, and from giving a speech, and from attending a formal banquet (I'm no good at any of those things - I'll stay in my room with my books and computer). You might have a hundred more birthdays before they decide to hand it over, though.

Rodney

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 18, 2011 @ 01:25 GMT
CONCLUSIONS DERIVED FROM MY ESSAY AND POSTS (CLAIMING ESP IS POSSIBLE IN A UNIFIED UNIVERSE, THE LAW OF CONSERVATION HAS CONSEQUENCES FOR HUMAN BABIES, HOW HYPERSPACE COMPUTERS MAKE REALITY'S POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS, AND RETHINKING BOHR'S ATOMIC STRUCTURE)

At the end of #8 in the essay -

Change "Our brains and minds are part of this unification too - which must mean...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 19, 2011 @ 02:56 GMT
I have more conclusions derived from my essay, this time regarding General Relativity's mass increase and Lorentz contraction and time dilation. To make things more easily readable (if anybody ever reads this), I'll post most of my conclusions in one essay instead of referring readers to different...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 21, 2011 @ 10:37 GMT
I found a few inconsistencies and unclear sentences which I corrected this afternoon. I know submissions to FOXY (FQXi) have closed - and anyway, I can only make one - but my curiosity about nature's workings is still alive and well. This article addresses Einstein's Relativities (GR + SR), Bohr's Atomic Model, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Negative Energy And Modern String Theory/Unification In The...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Mar. 5, 2011 @ 11:54 GMT
A REVISION OF GRAVITATION THAT, USING POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ENERGY, EXPLAINS DARK ENERGY AND OFFERS A REINTERPRETATION OF MATTER'S REFRACTION OF LIGHT

If everything is a union of positive and negative energy, gravitation would be too, and could thus either repel or attract like magnetism (causing either the accelerating expansion that occurs on a cosmic scale or the attraction within the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Mar. 5, 2011 @ 12:50 GMT
Special Relativity In The Light Of The Concept of an Electronic and Holographic Universe Shaped Like A Mobius Loop.

A real-life Mobius is by no means a featureless loop, however. If, contrary to our impressions, the universe is unified with each particle it’s composed of; the WMAP satellite’s findings must apply to the quantum world. The figures 72%, 23% and 5% would not only describe...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Mar. 5, 2011 @ 12:59 GMT
Niels Bohr's Atomic Model In The Light Of The Concept of an Electronic and Holographic Universe Shaped Like A Mobius Loop.

If everything is a union of positive and negative energy, every matter particle and force-carrying particle would be too. And the strings the Large Hadron Collider might detect (being the parts of particles’ Mobius loops it could see since those parts would be...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Mar. 8, 2011 @ 03:46 GMT
BREAKING THE SOUNDS OF SILENCE BY TALKING TO MYSELF -

CONTINUING MY GRAVITATIONAL HYPOTHESES BY EXTENDING THEM TO MAGNETISM, A MORE PRECISE ACCOUNT OF PHOTON-GRAVITON INTERACTION, AND EXPLANATION OF THE FAILURE TO DATE OF LIGO ET AL.

Here’s a way to visualise gravity causing cosmic expansion while, at the same time, pushing together planets in a star system (combined with this...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Mar. 16, 2011 @ 05:36 GMT
COMBINING NEWTONIAN AND RELATIVISTIC GRAVITY WITH QUANTUM MECHANICS’ PROBABILITY WAVES

Here’s a way to visualise gravity causing cosmic expansion while, at the same time, pushing together planets in a star system (combined with this push, their orbiting speeds stabilise the system and produce the solar system we know). Imagine the universe to be an ocean and each star system to be an...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Mar. 31, 2011 @ 06:52 GMT
Combining Newtonian and Relativistic Gravitation with Quantum Mechanics’ Probability Waves

(A New Theory of Gravity and a New Physics)

Yes, I know many people won't regard this as a theory because it does not include mathematics. But if maths was infallible, science wouldn't be in the mess I see today (and many will say "What mess?")

By Rodney Bartlett

This reply to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Apr. 12, 2011 @ 02:09 GMT
Pages 50-54 of the book I'm working on (yes, there's life for curiosity and imagination after FQXi) -

When a black hole is rotating; it might also stretch, twist and loop its magnetic field lines. The lines may penetrate into the hole and be lost, but in the case of star formation they'd be drawn out beyond the hole's event horizon (boundary) and compress clouds of dust and gas into new...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on Apr. 22, 2011 @ 10:27 GMT
Particle spin, F=ma and black holes revise gravity, unify gravitation with electromagnetism and matter, and eliminate the two nuclear forces

Say goodbye to the Higgs boson, a theoretical particle supposed to explain how other particles acquire mass. Gravity, together with electricity and magnetism (electromagnetism), is the origin of mass (we’re incorrectly accustomed to thinking the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on May. 5, 2011 @ 14:12 GMT
If Galileo was with us today, he'd agree that logic is capable of revealing things experiment and observation cannot. "Dialogue on the Principal Systems of the World" video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbxH0xHA_T8

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Rodney Bartlett wrote on May. 30, 2011 @ 09:19 GMT
“SPECULATING ON SELECTED SENTENCES FROM STEPHEN HAWKING’S BOOKS IN THE LIGHT OF POSSIBLE UNIFICATION”

Abstract –

Professor Hawking’s sentences appear first, in bold and underlined italics, together with their page number and the book they’re from – either ”a Brief History of Time” (published by Bantam Press, 1988) or the book he co-authored with Leonard Mlodinow,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Oct. 12, 2013 @ 13:29 GMT
Developed from my entry on this page is a 2013 article I've called "Albert Einstein deserves Nobel Prize in Physics 2013“ (http://viXra.org/abs/1310.0073). The inspiration for this article was an article called “Starting Point” by Steve Nadis – Discover Magazine, September 2013. “Starting Point” is about the life and theories of Ukrainian cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin. He’s responsible for introducing the ideas of eternal inflation and quantum creation of the universe from a quantum vacuum, and is currently Professor of Physics and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University near Boston in the U.S. My article concedes that the idea of quantum fluctuation in a vacuum is valid because those fluctuations can be defined as “the temporary change in the amount of energy at a point in space”. This temporary change can be enabled by the binary digits of 1 and 0 fluctuating between states and thus serving as Virtual Particles. This causes the universe to have its creation not in a quantum vacuum as an exclusively linear concept of time would require, but in a nonlinear aspect of time with the binary digits originating in human computer technology. Ensuing solutions of cosmological puzzles from this proposal refer to the subheadings

“Digital” String Theory;

Poincare + Cosmic Strings, Wormholes And Hologram;

Steady State Universe, Big Bang Subuniverses And DNA’s Double Helix;

Newtonian / Einsteinian Space-Time Warping;

Cosmic Rays, Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays & Today’s Speed Of Light;

Electronic Infinity;

Interstellar And Intergalactic Travel;

c^2 And The Atomic Nucleus;

Dark Energy And Fractal Geometry;

Dark Matter.

Bookmark and Share



Login or create account to post reply or comment.

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