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

Anton Biermans: on 2/24/11 at 4:02am UTC, wrote Dear Daniel, In your very lucid essay you write: -"According to one point...

Alan Lowey: on 2/10/11 at 15:06pm UTC, wrote Hi Daniel, thanks for your essay. I wondered whether you have considered...

Lawrence B. Crowell: on 2/5/11 at 13:19pm UTC, wrote Noetherian currents are described by continuous groups and their...

Edwin Klingman: on 1/30/11 at 1:34am UTC, wrote Dear Daniel Cannarutto, I enjoyed your essay and have a few remarks. Two...

Robert Spoljaric: on 1/26/11 at 5:06am UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Canarutto, I fully enjoyed reading your essay, as my essay...

Cristinel Stoica: on 1/25/11 at 20:21pm UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Canarutto, I was charmed by your short and clear, but deep essay....

Daniel Canarutto: on 1/25/11 at 12:57pm UTC, wrote Essay Abstract I bring forward some arguments to support the thesis...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "I suggested the turnstiles separate odd form even numbered tickets randomly..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Georgina Woodward: "Robert, I'm not sure that the 'thing as it is' is irrelevant. I can..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: "Eckard, "You referred to..." I was referring only to my final comments..." in First Things First: The...

Robert McEachern: "Eckard, One Objection. Don't blame Fourier: his original series is..." 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 17, 2019

CATEGORY: Is Reality Digital or Analog? Essay Contest (2010-2011) [back]
TOPIC: Nature's Software by Daniel Canarutto [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Daniel Canarutto wrote on Jan. 25, 2011 @ 12:57 GMT
Essay Abstract

I bring forward some arguments to support the thesis that nature is fundamentally discrete, and present my own thoughts about the direction in which one could look for a possible, consistent "theory of everything" describing gravitation and quantum particles.

Author Bio

Daniel Canarutto is a researcher in Mathematical Physics at the Faculty of Engeneering of the University of Florence (Italy). His main research interests deal with the geometric structures underlying physical theories. He has published papers, on various international journals, on spacetime singularities, spinor geometry, and the geometry of distributional bundles applied to quantum physics.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Cristinel Stoica wrote on Jan. 25, 2011 @ 20:21 GMT
Dear Mr. Canarutto,

I was charmed by your short and clear, but deep essay. Although my essay argues for fundamental continuity (in relation to singularities in General Relativity), I must say that your arguments for discreteness are probably the most convincing I saw so far. I think that the image of a quantum world you presented captures some essential aspects, which indeed can be related to General Relativity in the way you said. As a matter of fact, my own vision of unity is somehow similar, but backwards than yours: I see the same kind of network of particles, but obtained from the topology of spacetime (probably the simplest idea of this kind is represented by the topological charges - Einstein-Rosen, Wheeler). Nevertheless, I am not able to tell yet how this relation is obtained.

Best regards,

Cristi

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Robert Spoljaric replied on Jan. 26, 2011 @ 05:06 GMT
Dear Dr. Canarutto,

I fully enjoyed reading your essay, as my essay supports your thesis and Penrose's comments! In it is derived 'the Light' which cannot be differentiated, thereby showing calculus may be of limited validity when applied to certain physical concepts.

Hopefully, you will have time to read my essay.

All the very best to you,

Robert

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jan. 30, 2011 @ 01:34 GMT
Dear Daniel Cannarutto,

I enjoyed your essay and have a few remarks.

Two of your references are Penrose and Verlinde.

Your interest in Penrose, if I understood you correctly, is his focus on angular momentum. I tend to agree with you on the significance of this, and invite you to read my essay, in which the C-field (my name for the Maxwell-Einstein gravito-magnetic field) is seen to be closely related to angular momentum.

You did not employ the ideas of Verlinde, but you do reference him as indicative of approaches being taken in the direction of discrete physics. You do not seem to actually use his work, so this remark may be inappropriate, but I have commented on my page and elsewhere about the assumptions that Verlinde need to 'derive' Newton's gravity. He makes 19 assumptions, some of them very questionable, before 'deriving' Newton's law.

In contrast, I make one assumption, that a universe consisting of only one (continuous) field can only evolve by interacting with itself. Applying Maxwell: energy=field squared, and Einstein: energy = mass, my master equation immediately reduces to Newton's law, then produces many other physics results. The details are on my comments page, if you're interested. I think this is an indication of the work necessary to impose a discrete interpretation on a continuous universe, as opposed to the ease of a continuous description. [Of course it may be easy for us only because of hundreds of years of mathematical development, who knows?]

You also state: "Furthermore, we may note that saying that the foundations of physics are continuous implies seeing the real numbers as a primitive concept."

I am not sure that this is the case. Mathematics is a descriptive language, and the language used to describe reality does not, in my opinion, influence reality, only our perceptions of reality. Nor is it necessary that reality enforce conventions on language, though that may be the case in practice.

Finally, I found your Feynman-like diagrams interesting, and wonder if they might not apply to a continuous world as well?

Good luck in the contest,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Feb. 5, 2011 @ 13:19 GMT
Noetherian currents are described by continuous groups and their representations. It is not possible to have these conservation laws in a completely discrete setting. One can construct conserved charges though. The question here is funny, for in a way I fail to see how one can construct a consistent theory of physics based completely on continuous or discrete settings. Quantities that we measure, which are bits or quantum bits, are discrete. However, there is an underlying continuous formalism required to adequately describe conservation laws.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Alan Lowey wrote on Feb. 10, 2011 @ 15:06 GMT
Hi Daniel, thanks for your essay. I wondered whether you have considered the Archimedes screw as an analogy for the geometric structure of a particle/wave duality? T

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anton W.M. Biermans wrote on Feb. 24, 2011 @ 04:02 GMT
Dear Daniel,

In your very lucid essay you write:

-"According to one point of view, particles are an "epiphenomenon" and the fundamental theory is one of fields. [..] What is a quantum particle? "-

This suggests that the field is the primary phenomenon, the cause of the particle. In my essay I start from the assumption that in a self-creating universe particles have to create...

view entire post


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.