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

Lamont Williams: on 3/9/11 at 4:18am UTC, wrote Thank you, Peter. I will definitely take a look at your essay as well. ...

Peter Jackson: on 3/7/11 at 18:26pm UTC, wrote Lamont A very enjoyable read, thank you. I feel you hit all the pertinent...

Lamont Williams: on 3/4/11 at 23:38pm UTC, wrote Hi, Jim, I read your essay...very interesting. I think black hole and Big...

Lamont Williams: on 3/4/11 at 23:36pm UTC, wrote Hi, Jim, I read your essay...very interesting. I think black hole and Big...

Lamont Williams: on 3/1/11 at 13:14pm UTC, wrote Saw your message, Jim. I will take a look tonight.

James Hoover: on 2/28/11 at 19:46pm UTC, wrote Lamont, In my essay I comment on the principalities of black holes and the...

Lamont Williams: on 2/28/11 at 13:49pm UTC, wrote Thanks, Joseph! I appreciate the feedback and will take a look at your...

Joseph Markell: on 2/27/11 at 2:53am UTC, wrote Dear Lamont: I especially liked your last paragraph and cited is a...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Robert McEachern: "Stefan, Here is what I mean by the two terms self-determination and..." in Grants awarded for...

Stefan Weckbach: "Robert, thanks for the reply. I think until now we somewhat executed an..." in Grants awarded for...

country holidays: "After taking Country Holidays Inn & Suites , travel membership packageyou..." in Hyung Choi and the nature...

Lee Bloomquist: "Our understanding of wave function collapse uses the language of..." in Space-time from Collapse...

Lee Bloomquist: "Our understanding of wave function collapse uses the language of..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Robert Rise: "I have been interested in this topic for a long time. And I've wrote an..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Robert Rise: "I have been interested in this topic for a long time. And I've wrote an..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.

Constructing a Theory of Life
An all-encompassing framework of physics could help to explain the evolution of consciousness, intelligence, and free will.

Usurping Quantum Theory
The search is on for a fundamental framework that allows for even stranger links between particles than quantum theory—which could lead us to a theory of everything.

Fuzzballs v Black Holes
A radical theory replaces the cosmic crunchers with fuzzy quantum spheres, potentially solving the black-hole information paradox and explaining away the Big Bang and the origin of time.

Whose Physics Is It Anyway? Q&A with Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
Why physics and astronomy communities must take diversity issues seriously in order to do good science.


FQXi FORUM
December 9, 2018

CATEGORY: Is Reality Digital or Analog? Essay Contest (2010-2011) [back]
TOPIC: A Digital Solution to Cosmic Problems by Lamont Williams [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Lamont Williams wrote on Feb. 4, 2011 @ 12:15 GMT
Essay Abstract

In this essay, I argue that spacetime has greater detail than is being taken into account and that this limited view of the four-dimensional field has been hindering us from continuing to produce advances in science of the same power and utility as relativity and quantum theory. A number of the mysteries in science—such as what constitutes dark matter and dark energy—would likely be solved if we had a better picture of spacetime. I describe how space may be a fundamentally continuous physical system with information in a digital form, and how time may be a quantum-based physical system also with information in a digital form. I further discuss how our reality is likely digitally based and how a discrete model of time can bridge the gap between general relativity and quantum mechanics.

Author Bio

Lamont Williams is a science writer and editor originally from the Philadelphia/Southern New Jersey metropolitan area. He is author of “The Greatest Source of Energy--A New Theory of Time,” which describes a method of linking general relativity with quantum mechanics through a new model of time that emphasizes Einstein’s view that gravity is caused by the curvature of the time dimension of spacetime.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Member Tommaso Bolognesi wrote on Feb. 7, 2011 @ 11:24 GMT
Hi Lamont,

you write in your essay:

"It is difficult to imagine our space being composed of spatial atoms without also imagining a force between those atoms, holding them together".

May I politely disagree with you? Why should there be such a force? In my view discrete spacetime should be regarded as the ultimate bottom layer of nature, the most primitive physical concept, the structure from which everything emerges: we should expect it to justify the existence of particles and forces, that are manifestations of its dynamics, without need to go the other way around, and justify it, in turn, in terms of other particles and forces.

Good luck with the contest!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Lamont Williams replied on Feb. 7, 2011 @ 20:52 GMT
Hi, Tommaso,

Thank you for your comment. I agree with you that discrete space and time are the ultimate bottom layer of nature. Everything that you describe is what I talk about in my book in detail. I just do not believe space is 'fundamentally' discrete. I do believe time is, however, fundamentally discrete, as I describe in the essay.

I'm open to any further questions. This is a great forum.

Best,

Lamont

Bookmark and Share


Georgina Woodward replied on Feb. 13, 2011 @ 23:47 GMT
Dear Lamont,

I wanted to let you know that I have read your essay.

The most pertinent part for me was at the end where you said "We have gotten to the point where we are expending a great amount of effort and resources trying to resolve mysteries which are likely unsolvable without first understanding these components of the universe on a deeper level". Yes indeed.

I think many are content to assume that the matter was fully solved by Einstein. Or that space-time is irrelevant because experienced reality is the product of a mathematical quasi reality that exists without time and in a very different kind of space. Assuming the quasi reality to be the more real.

Anyway it was good to read your account and opinions.

Your presentation style, like a magazine article, was eye catching and immediately stood out for me as different from the other essays I have looked at so far. Best wishes, Georgina.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Lamont Williams wrote on Feb. 14, 2011 @ 06:46 GMT
Georgina,

Thank you for reading my essay and for your feedback. I agree: Spacetime is quite relevant, and we really need to understand it better to make significant progress.

Yes, I noticed my style of writing is different from many of the others. I tried to stay true to the contest guidelines, which called for Scientific American--type articles. This may be a blessing and a curse, in that the writing style is in agreement with what the contest called for, but many of the community evaluators may be partial toward more technical pieces like their own.

The contest organizers have some discretion, so hopefully, I can at least make it to the expert panel stage.

Best regards,

Lamont

Bookmark and Share


Author Lamont Williams replied on Feb. 14, 2011 @ 07:12 GMT
I feel I should clarify my point to Tommaso. I do believe that discrete space and time are the ultimate bottom layer of nature, but when I say 'nature,' I'm thinking of the universe as a working system, not its basic, fundamental components. Only through discrete space and time do you get matter, force, (relative) energy, and all the workings of the universe. However, on a fundamental level, I believe space at least is a continuous object. Its discreteness would come from particular one-, two- or three-dimensional regions becoming more 'timelike' in their nature, though they would continue to be space.

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Feb. 22, 2011 @ 23:18 GMT
Also, when such particles fall into black holes,

they and their information are fully absorbed by

the vacuum. Black holes do not contain matter

crushed to a small size—the matter in a black

hole is completely destroyed, leaving nothing in

the black hole but curved spacetime.3 Lastly, it

is widely accepted that some elementary particles—

called virtual particles—pop into and out

of space continuously.

Lamont,

Some say that information is not lost in the event horizon of a black hole -- the holographic effect. If you believe that the principalities of a black hole and the big bang are related, does that mean that the matter in the black hole is destroyed or that it recycles in a new universe with the big bang?

Your essay is quite impressive, professional and complex. Thanks for the read.

Jim Hoover

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Lamont Williams replied on Feb. 23, 2011 @ 02:18 GMT
Thank you, Jim! I appreciate the compliments.

I must say that I'm really impressed by your question. You really get what I'm saying.

My answer is that I believe the matter in a black hole recycles. I believe our space exists in parallel with another space and that there is a constant cycling of energy between the two. Matter would leave our space through black holes/singularities, enter the sister space, and reemerge in our space through white holes/time-reversed singularities. (The black holes and white holes would not necessarily be connected to each other.)

In my estimation, this sister space is what the Dirac Sea (and its quantum theory equivalent) attempts to represent. It is a negative energy vacuum, the presence of which prevents electrons, for example, from falling into the negative energy range. The space we live in is a positive energy vacuum.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Bookmark and Share


Author Lamont Williams replied on Feb. 23, 2011 @ 02:36 GMT
Hi, Jim,

One more thought: Note that by taking the loss/recycling of energy into account, you can eliminate, in a natural way, two types of infinities: (1) gravitational infinities at singularities, and (2) the infinite energies in quantum theory, which are usually removed, on paper at least, by the mathematical procedure of renormalization.

Lamont

Bookmark and Share


James Lee Hoover replied on Feb. 28, 2011 @ 19:46 GMT
Lamont,

In my essay I comment on the principalities of black holes and the big bang as twins. My idea of super-massive black holes recycling over billions of years into other universes might counter what Hawkings' view of black hole dissipating over time.

What do you think?

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joseph Markell wrote on Feb. 27, 2011 @ 02:53 GMT
Dear Lamont:

I especially liked your last paragraph and cited is a sentence from it.

"We have gotten to the point in which we are expending a great amount of

effort and resources trying to solve mysteries that are likely unsolvable without first understanding these particular components of the universe on a

deeper level.

I too think we need to question the universe in deeper if not divergent ways. Maybe a simple concept can lead us to different understandings and ways of thinking.

Good luck with your essay, it was interesting and enjoyable to read, (as is mine.)

Joseph Markell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Lamont Williams replied on Feb. 28, 2011 @ 13:49 GMT
Thanks, Joseph!

I appreciate the feedback and will take a look at your essay as well.

Lamont

Bookmark and Share



Author Lamont Williams wrote on Mar. 4, 2011 @ 23:36 GMT
Hi, Jim,

I read your essay...very interesting. I think black hole and Big Bang singularities are definitely sisters. I think of the BB singularity as the ultimate white hole. The singularities at white holes are time-reversed compared to those at black holes. I can't say I agree with the creation of new universes though, but it is an interesting idea. I think energy/information definitely exits our space, but only to cycle back.

Lamont

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Mar. 7, 2011 @ 18:26 GMT
Lamont

A very enjoyable read, thank you. I feel you hit all the pertinent targets spot on, which has not been that common. I agree you're on the right lines when you say ref unification;

"Time obviously plays an important role in both theories, so its disappearance is puzzling and has hindered efforts to create a unified theory."

I think you may like to just try the unification model offered in my essay, which seemed to me to parallel much of what you said. It's a little testing mentally (dynamic volumes and variables) but yields a very Occam's razor solution. There's no maths, so unfortunately few of the highbrow physicists here can understand the language! I hope you'll have a go, and do please give me your views.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Lamont Williams replied on Mar. 9, 2011 @ 04:18 GMT
Thank you, Peter. I will definitely take a look at your essay as well.

Best regards,

Lamont

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.