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

Lucy Davitson: on 11/8/16 at 13:36pm UTC, wrote great essay..many thanks for sharing..I'll definitely going to use it next...

Joshua Levin: on 3/16/11 at 1:26am UTC, wrote The vibrations are frictionless. If left alone, they would be eternal --...

Peter Jackson: on 3/12/11 at 16:33pm UTC, wrote Joshua Excellent and intruiging essay. Worth a high score. There are some...

Paul Halpern: on 3/12/11 at 1:45am UTC, wrote Dear Joshua, Fascinating to ponder that "the laws of physics might be...

Russell Jurgensen: on 3/1/11 at 19:54pm UTC, wrote Dear Joshua, Hello and thanks for writing this essay with your ideas. I...

Joshua Levin: on 2/20/11 at 1:43am UTC, wrote Although the analogy of Gravitons to Archimedes' Screw is interesting, I'm...

Alan Lowey: on 2/18/11 at 13:45pm UTC, wrote Hello Joshua, I like your methodology of trying to find a common...

Joshua Levin: on 2/17/11 at 8:41am UTC, wrote Essay Abstract The question is to argue whether physical reality is...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

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

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer to Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar assertion: ..." in First Things First: The...

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

Robert McEachern: "In the case of a polarized coin, the "matched filter" detector simply adds..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

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

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Robert, thank you. I now understand the difference between decisions and..." 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 15, 2019

CATEGORY: Is Reality Digital or Analog? Essay Contest (2010-2011) [back]
TOPIC: A Common-Plinth Approach to Relativity and Quantum by Joshua Zev Levin [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Joshua Zev Levin wrote on Feb. 17, 2011 @ 08:41 GMT
Essay Abstract

The question is to argue whether physical reality is analog (smooth) or digital (discrete or granular). Einstein's Theories of Relativity (smooth) and the Quantum Theories (granular) are the two pillars of modern physics. This paper argues that physical reality is one-third smooth, and two thirds of it appears to be granular due to resonances between vibrations in different sets of dimensions. Rather than trying to reconcile the two sets of theories, I am endeavoring to describe the common foundation of the two, as if there is a single stone plinth (foundation) that underlies both stone pillars.

Author Bio

Joshua Zev Levin received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Physics from Queens College, City University of New York in 1971; his Master of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from New York University in 1974; and his Ph.D. degree in Computer and Systems Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1980. He has worked most all of his career as a computer programmer. His current project is the LeviCar transportation system.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Alan Lowey wrote on Feb. 18, 2011 @ 13:45 GMT
Hello Joshua, I like your methodology of trying to find a common foundational reality. Have you ever considered the Archimedes screw as a model of the GRAVITON, as an alternative to a 'gravitational aether'?

Kind regards,

Alan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Joshua Zev Levin replied on Feb. 20, 2011 @ 01:43 GMT
Although the analogy of Gravitons to Archimedes' Screw is interesting, I'm trying to simplify things by doing away with Gravitons, as well as Higg's Bosons, Strings, and Branes. I want to simplify fundamental physics to the bare minimum. I guess you could say that this theory is a no-Braner!

Particles of all sorts are reduced to being self-sustaining resonant waves of space, in which spatial dimensions dilate and contract in regular rhythms.

Bookmark and Share



Russell Jurgensen wrote on Mar. 1, 2011 @ 19:54 GMT
Dear Joshua,

Hello and thanks for writing this essay with your ideas. I like the idea of trying a completely new model to see how it explains things. Your 9 dimensions in 3 groups has a nice symmetry. Dimensions to me have such a variety of meanings and it is interesting to read your concept of dimensions. I also am interested in your concept of "self-sustaining resonant vibrations of space" Do you think that ultimately there is some principle in one of the aethers that provides the motivating factors to make the waves vibrate? I am always looking for deeper levels and how far we can go. In my own essay I hit the limit at the level where something drives the wave motion like a motor. So I'm curious of your thoughts on a motivating factor.

Thanks for your interesting essay!

Kind regards, Russell Jurgensen

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Joshua Zev Levin replied on Mar. 16, 2011 @ 01:26 GMT
The vibrations are frictionless. If left alone, they would be eternal -- but they interact with each other and change form. The origin of the vibrations might be something left over from the Big Bang, or, as noted in the essay, may be a fossil of the previous universe before the Big Bang.

The vibrations of different aethers can resonate with each other to form a self-sustaining set of stationary waves that constitute an elementary "particle". The amplitudes and relative phase shifts of these waves define the charge, spin, and other fundamental properties of the particle. The waves are stationary in the particle's own reference frame.

In one form of Common-Plinth theories, the pythagorean sum of the motions of all the dimensions is the speed of light exactly, and the local "energy" at that point is dependent on the aggregate amplitude of the motion. In another form, the pythagorean sum of the motions is less than or equal to the speed of light, and the local energy is dependent on this sum of motions.

If the wave set is in motion in the first aether (ordinary space), according to some other reference frame, then this is a moving particle. If the sum of motions must be equal to the speed of light, then the motion through ordinary space requires the internal vibrations to slow down, causing time dilation. Of course, the time dilation is identical to that described by the "Minkowski blackboard". A photon has a fixed wave pattern moving at the speed of light, with no movement of the wave components relative to each other, because time does not exist for a photon -- in its own "inertial frame", it is created and absorbed in the same moment in the same place. I'm not sure how this would work if the sum of motions could be less than the speed of light.

These vibrations also generate fields that propagate, as waves, throughout space. These fields can only interact with "particles" at discrete energies, but the fields' strengths can have any value. This is because the "particles" are wave sets with discrete vibrational modes.

As noted in the essay, these resonant motions create a contraction of the hypervolume in the second and/or third aethers, causing a dilation of volume in the first aether (ordinary space), causing Einsteinian gravitation.

Bookmark and Share



Paul Halpern wrote on Mar. 12, 2011 @ 01:45 GMT
Dear Joshua,

Fascinating to ponder that "the laws of physics might be different inside a black hole," as you speculate. It is interesting to consider the extremes of nature, such as a black hole's cloaked interior.

Best wishes,

Paul

Paul Halpern, The Discreet Charm of the Discrete

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Mar. 12, 2011 @ 16:33 GMT
Joshua

Excellent and intruiging essay. Worth a high score. There are some good paralells with mine (and Edwin Klingmans compatible 'cfield'). I hope you have a chance to read and score it before the deadline. It needs good dynamic conceptual visualisation skills to see a clear solution to SR/GR. I've just posted a 'logical anlaysis' which also supports your ether based theory. http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/803

You also match a short 'logical extension' paper in saying;

"In fact, the Big Bang would not have been a singularity, but rather when one growing aether switched places with one shrinking aether, possibly leaving some fossil of a previous universe." Do also look at http://vixra.org/abs/1102.0016 if you're able.

Best of luck

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lucy Davitson wrote on Nov. 8, 2016 @ 13:36 GMT
great essay..many thanks for sharing..I'll definitely going to use it next time I write my essays on relativity and quantum

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.