An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out and that the growing generation is familiarized with the idea from the beginning: another instance of the fact that the future lies with youth. Geheimrat Max Planck (Max Planck, Philosophy of Physics, Norton, New York, 1936, p. 97) ==================================================================================== Subject: Re: Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:56:44 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Patrick Das Gupta , Benjamin Canuel , Robert M Wald , Norbert Straumann , Laszlo Szabados , Karel V Kuchar , Adam Helfer , Robert Geroch , Jörg Frauendiener , Chris Isham , Piotr T Chrusciel , Kip , Sascha Husa , David B Malament , Gabriela González , Alessandra Buonanno , Alessandro Teta , Bruce Allen , Bernd Brügmann , Bernard Schutz , Oliver Jennrich , James Ira Thorpe , Richard Price , Rainer Weiss , Alan Weinstein , Luciano , Paul Tod , Gary Horowitz , Paul Steinhardt , Hans Peter Nilles , Joseph Katz , Rituparno Goswami , Salvatore Vitale , Henk van Elst , George Ellis , esa.conference.bureau@esa.int Patrick, In the second version of your paper, arXiv:1604.00951v2, you did not address the problems of energy transport by GWs, although you said in your previous email that will read my paper. Again, check out Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/gwa_rip.pdf See an excerpt (attached) from my online paper above. As you acknowledged in Sec VI in arXiv:1604.00951v2, "energy certainly has to be at the expense of the energy carried by the GW", so how would you solve the task shown in Fig. 1 in my paper above? The same question applies to MIGA, since Benjamin Canuel claims in arXiv:1604.02072v1 that "differential phase fluctuations may arise from strain variations of the space-time metric induced by GWs": see Fig. 1 in my paper above, and you will read there a quote from your arXiv:1604.00951v1. Hermann Weyl invested many years of his life to couple gravity to electromagnetic field, and of course failed. Gunnar Nordström first tried it in 1914, and of course failed. Joseph Weber never detected "ringing" of his aluminum bar. LIGO and VIRGO did not detect GWs either: GW150914 is a fraud. Let me say it again: F R A U D . NB: You may not couple the spacetime metric *directly* to phase differences, as Rainer Weiss proposed many years ago. Differential geometry cannot act on matter. You need an entirely different coupling of gravity to matter: read 'The Spacetime' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf No need to invent the wheel. D. Chakalov chakalov.net -- Attachment: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/excerpt.jpg ================================= Subject: Re: Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:21:09 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Patrick Das Gupta Cc: Robert M Wald On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Patrick Das Gupta wrote: > > Dear Dimi, > > I have gone through your article. But I did not agree with your > interpretation about how GWs produce stresses in matter. It was Bob Wald. No, you didn't read my paper. > As I have mentioned in my article (around eq.(49)), the effect of GWs is to > change the proper distance between any two events. Did I talk about "proper distance" or energy transfer? > The same thing will happen for every molecule of your bottle in Fig 1, > causing it to get stressed. What can deliver stresses? Ghosts? See above. Get professional. You aren't a kid. I extend this suggestion to Bob as well. D. Chakalov chakalov.net --------------- NOTE Do you read English? http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/excerpt_p3.jpg D. Chakalov April 9, 2016 ===================================================================================== Subject: Re: [LDG #8859]: Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 20:26:58 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: losc@ligo.org, alan.weinstein@ligo.org, Kip , Rainer Weiss , Steven Weinberg , abbott_b@ligo.caltech.edu, anderson_s@ligo.caltech.edu, barish_b@ligo.caltech.edu, sarah.gossan@tapir.caltech.edu, gustafson_e@ligo.caltech.edu, JulieHiroto LIGO , Kenneth Libbrecht , Bob Taylor , yamamoto_h@ligo.caltech.edu, zweizig_j@ligo.caltech.edu, swang5@caltech.edu, zhang_l@ligo.caltech.edu, Mike , Emanuele , David Reitze , Bruce Allen , Karsten , Bernard Schutz , Clifford Will , Oliver Jennrich , Joan Centrella , Gabriela González , Jose Geraldo Pereira , Alessandra Buonanno , esa.conference.bureau@esa.int, Salvatore Vitale , Chris Van Den Broeck , Richard Price , Hamish Johnston , The Editor , Nature_Physics@ealert.nature.com, Marco , Adrian Cho , Mark Hannam , Pedro Marronetti , Bernd Brügmann , Lee Samuel Finn , Beverly Berger , Luciano , César García Marirrodriga , Paul McNamara , Ian Harrison , Damien Texier , Charles Dunn , Philippe Jetzer , Eric Plagnol , Martijn Smit , Carlos Sopuerta , Ira Thorpe , Benjamin Knispel , Martin Hewitson , SciTech.Editorial@esa.int, Templeton Foundation On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:34:58 -0500, RT-Ticket: LDG #8859, Message-ID: , Alan Weinstein via RT wrote: > > According to our records, your request has been resolved. If you have > any further questions or concerns, please respond to this message. No, Alan, no. You have no "records" whatsoever. The only record you have is that you and your LIGO and VIRGO colleagues have committed a FRAUD: Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/gwa_rip.pdf (March 12, 2016, 825,463 bytes, 10 pages + more) Don't even think that I will let you and your colleagues slip away from your responsibilities: you are are deliberately wasting BILLIONS of euro and dollars, and have committed a FRAUD. Do you read English, Alan? F R A U D . See an excerpt (attached) from the link above. D. Chakalov chakalov.net -- Attachment: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/excerpt.jpg ===================================================================================== Subject: Mu-Tao Wang: Energy, momentum and center of mass in GR, Jan 8, 2015. Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:23:32 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Mu-Tao Wang , Zhaoyan Wu , Wei-Tou Ni , Lau Loi So , Miao Li , Yongge Ma , Sijie Gao , Xiao Zhang , Shing-Tung Yau , Po-Ning Chen , Po-Ning Chen , Hitoshi Murayama , Hitoshi Kitada , James M Nester , Jörg Frauendiener , Laszlo Szabados , Gary Horowitz , Chris Isham , Robert Geroch , Robert M Wald , Karel V Kuchar , Adam Helfer , Greg Galloway , Jeffrey Winicour , Piotr T Chrusciel , Niall Ó Murchadha , Paul Tod , Ezra Newman , Joseph Katz , Richard M Schoen , Sascha Husa , Robert Beig , Domenico Giulini , George Ellis , John Baez , Josh Goldberg , John Stachel , Pankaj S Joshi , Jayant Narlikar , Sergiu Klainerman , Demetrios Christodoulou , Roger Penrose https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6P3lOj8jbI -- Můdŕo: I have attached a snapshot (Mu_joke.jpg) from your video lecture: can you count the errors in it? Check out p. 18 in my paper 'The Spacetime' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf The proposal above is directly related to your statements that "there is no mass density for gravitation" (Po-Ning Chen, Mu-Tao Wang, Shing-Tung Yau, Conserved quantities in general relativity: from the quasi-local level to spatial infinity, Comm. Math. Phys. 338 (2015) 31-80; arXiv:1312.0985v2 [math.DG], p. 1). If nevertheless you and your colleagues insist on "Wang-Yau quasi-local energy", check out Sec. 3 in 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/gwa_rip.pdf Why is this important? I know that you and all your colleagues don't care about GR. You all live in total socialism: your pay check is secured, your pension is secured, you enjoy conference tourism, so why should you care about the "mass density for gravitation" and get serious about GR? Because of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster five years ago. Because of the horrible smog in China. Because of the imminent problems from the global warming. We need ecologically clean energy source, and we have it: see p. 18 at the first link. The proposal is from Plato, some twenty-five centuries ago. Only now this energy source is dubbed "dark". I know that you and all your colleagues will again decide to keep quiet, but be aware that this is your personal free-will choice: you can help, but you do *not* want to do it. There is nothing more that I can do. My first proposal was from January 1990, and for 26 years I cannot name even one physicist who has shown a slight curiosity about it. None. Zilch. I wash my hands and leave. D. Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net -- Attachment: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Mu_joke.jpg ===================================================================================== Subject: Re: [moderation #162391] arXiv: submit/1485723 removed Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 19:10:46 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: moderation@arxiv.org Cc: arXiv Help , Karen Vogtmann , Jennifer Ross , Eberhard Bodenschatz , Ralf Bundschuh , Paul Ginsparg , Daniel Gottesman , Steven Gottlieb , Joseph Halpern , Greg Kuperberg , Shude Mao , David R Morrison , Yuri Tschinkel , Bruno Nachtergaele , Andrew Connolly , Jacques Distler , Cornell University Library , Kip , Rainer Weiss , Steven Weinberg , abbott_b@ligo.caltech.edu, anderson_s@ligo.caltech.edu, barish_b@ligo.caltech.edu, sarah.gossan@tapir.caltech.edu, gustafson_e@ligo.caltech.edu, JulieHiroto LIGO , Kenneth Libbrecht , Bob Taylor , yamamoto_h@ligo.caltech.edu, zweizig_j@ligo.caltech.edu, swang5@caltech.edu, zhang_l@ligo.caltech.edu, 11zekim , Emanuele , David Reitze , Bruce Allen , Karsten , Bernard Schutz , Clifford Will , Oliver Jennrich On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:45:16 -0500, Message-ID: , arXiv Moderation wrote: > > The moderators determined that your submission was in need of > significant review and revision before it would be considered publishable > by a conventional journal. Do you speak English? Your arXiv.org is not "a conventional journal". Fact: Your arXiv.org has provided cover up to a FRAUD. Do you speak English? Do you know what is a FRAUD? All papers by those "GW astronomers", which you already posted at arXiv.org, are FRAUD. Check out the FACTS in my paper 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP'. If you have deleted my submission, it can be downloaded from my website at the link below. I urgently require to identify yourself: give me your names. Don't try to hide behind "arXiv Moderation". Who are you, arXiv talibans ? Do you now how much money -- taxpayers' money -- have already been wasted by those "GW astronomers"? Paul Ginsparg: Will you assist me in finding the names of those arXiv talibans? If you decide to keep quiet, you too will be responsible for the cover up of this enormous FRAUD. NB: This warning applies to all recipients of this email. All of them. Do not even think that I will let you slip away from your responsibilities -- you must not support FRAUD, in any way, shape, or form whatsoever. Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, D. Chakalov chakalov.net ===================================================================================== Subject: Re: NATURE: Thank you for your submission to Nature Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 13:10:13 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: decisions@nature.com, The Editor , Nature_Physics@ealert.nature.com, nature@nature.com Cc: David , David Brown , John Stewart , Karel V Kuchar , Alan Rendall , Adam Helfer , Laszlo Szabados , Jörg Frauendiener , Piotr T Chrusciel , Anthony Lasenby , Charles Torre , Greg Galloway , Jeffrey Winicour , Chris Isham , John Baez , Lee Smolin , John L Bell , Lluis Bel , Waldyr A Rodrigues Jr , Robert Geroch , Robert M Wald , Bernard J Carr , Carlos Kozameh , Paul Tod , Ezra Newman , John Friedman , Helvi Witek , Mike Hobson , David B Malament , Erik Curiel , Niall , Kip , David Reitze , Malcolm MacCallum , Roy Maartens , Jose Geraldo Pereira , Angelo Loinger , Hamish Johnston , John Stachel , Pankaj S Joshi Ladies and Gentlemen, You must never support FRAUD. Check out 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/gwa_rip.pdf As I stressed in my previous email from Fri, 4 Mar 2016 17:08:45 +0200, my paper at the link above can be reduced, and it must be published in Nature *precisely* because of the errors in your 'Grave new world' from March 1, 2016, which provided cover up to those "GW astronomers". You must never support FRAUD. Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 17:08:45 +0200, Message-ID: , Dimi Chakalov wrote: [snip] -- Attachment: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/nature_video.jpg ===================================================================================== Subject: Nature Physics | 01 March 2016 | Editorial Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:34:34 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: The Editor Cc: Nature_Physics@ealert.nature.com Dear Sir or Madam, In my opinion, your statements in 'Grave new world', Nature Physics 12, 197 (2016), are wrong. Please check out the facts in my online paper 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/gwa_rip.pdf (March 1, 2016, 454,775 bytes, 8 pages) Please do not ignore the facts. If you do not wish to mention these widely known facts, I trust you will give me the opportunity to explain them at your highly respected and trusted Journal. Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net ================ Subject: Re: Your Nature Physics submission NPHYS-2016-02-00530 Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:38:51 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: The Editor Cc: Nature_Physics@ealert.nature.com Dear Sir or Madam, On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 07:54:55 -0500, Message-Id: <99145692329516@ejpwww4.nature.com.nature.com> , you wrote: > > Dear Mr Chakalov, > > Thank you for submitting your manuscript "Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP" > which we are regretfully unable to offer to publish. > > It is Nature Physics' policy to return a substantial proportion of > manuscripts without sending them to referees. Decisions of this kind are > made by the editors of Nature Physics according to the demanding editorial > criteria of the journal. Please provide the full list of "the editors of Nature Physics", who made this decision. > In the present case, while your findings may well prove stimulating to > others' thinking about such questions, we regret that we are unable to > conclude that the work provides the sort of firm advance in general > understanding that would warrant publication in Nature Physics. May I offer my corrections: 1. I do not offer "findings" but facts: check out the online paper 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/gwa_rip.pdf 2. These facts are not intended to be "stimulating to others' thinking", but to correct your (Sic!) errors in your latest Editorial 'Grave new world', Nature Physics 12, 197 (2016), dated 01 March 2016 and posted at http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v12/n3/full/nphys3698.html If you or any of those "editors of Nature Physics" disagree with the *facts* in my online paper, please explain your objections. NB: I hope you will agree that Nature Physics should never provide cover up to those "GW astronomers", and will always present all facts, including the errors your Editorial 'Grave new world'. This is exactly the scope of my online paper 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP' at the link above. I believe it must be published in Nature Physics precisely because of your errors, which provided cover up to those "GW astronomers". Please do not even think that I will let you slip away from your responsibilities as the Editor of Nature Physics. Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net ==================================================================================== Sherlock Holmes: How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Sherlock_Holmes -- Subject: "Marco Drago saw the first gravitational wave on 14 September 2015." Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 23:34:00 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Marco , Marco , Adrian Cho , Bruce Allen , Rainer Weiss , Kip , David Reitze , Gabriela González , Bernard Schutz , Joan Centrella , Mark Hannam , Pedro Marronetti , Bernd Brügmann , Lee Samuel Finn , Beverly Berger , Luciano , Jose Geraldo Pereira , César García Marirrodriga , Paul McNamara , Ian Harrison , Damien Texier , Karsten Danzmann , Charles Dunn , Oliver Jennrich , Philippe Jetzer , Eric Plagnol , Martijn Smit , Carlos Sopuerta , Ira Thorpe , Benjamin Knispel , Martin Hewitson , SciTech.Editorial@esa.int http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/here-s-first-person-spot-those- gravitational-waves http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/gravitational-waves-einstein-s- ripples-spacetime-spotted-first-time -- Hello Dr. Drago: May I ask a question. Today many (otherwise smart) people speculated that about 1.3 billion years ago (perhaps between 600 million and 1.8 billion years ago), 3 solar masses converted to gravitational radiation, and proclaimed that what you "saw" on 14 September 2015 was not "vibrations such as the rumble of seismic waves, the thrum of traffic, and the crashing of waves on distant coastlines", but a genuine GW signal. David Reitze excluded the possibility for "a malicious hoax", as he and his colleagues "spent about a month looking at the ways that somebody could spoof a signal," before deciding it was "impossible". It was not "blind injections" either: http://www.nature.com/news/einstein-s-gravitational-waves-found-at-last-1.19361 "In the past, a few senior members of the LIGO team have tested the group's ability to validate a potential discovery by secretly inserting ‘blind injections’ of fake gravitational waves into the data stream to test whether the research team can differentiate between real and fake signals. But the September detection happened before blind injections were being made, so it is thought to be a signal from a real astrophysical phenomenon in the Universe." Q: Can you exclude the possibility for a different type of "injection" from senior members of the LIGO team ? Before replying, read carefully the text at the links in 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/gwa_rip.pdf Looking forward to hearing from you and your colleagues, Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- EXPLANATORY NOTE Check out the official paper by LIGO and VIRGO, about "the first direct detection of gravitational waves", Fig. 1 in arXiv:1602.03837v1 at http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.03837v1. No word about GRB detection to crosscheck their "discovery". The Fermi-LAT telescope, for example, can detect GRBs (e.g., Imre Bartos et al., arXiv:1602.03831v1, Sec. 5, p. 6, Eq. 13). Strangely enough, nobody from LIGO and VIRGO mentioned such mandatory crosscheck. Even more shockingly, nobody mentioned the insoluble problems of detecting GWs, which are widely known [Ref. 1]. Do you smell a rat ? Read closely http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/gravitational-waves-einstein-s- ripples-spacetime-spotted-first-time "The observation provides the first evidence for black holes that does not depend on watching hot gas or stars swirl around them at far greater distances." It's a double miracle: (i) black holes that emit GW signal, but (ii) without "hot gas or stars swirl around them at far greater distances." According to Bruce Allen, "For a tenth of a second [the collision] shines brighter than all of the stars in all the galaxies. But only in gravitational waves." "Other stellar explosions called gamma-ray bursts can also briefly outshine the stars, but the explosive black-hole merger sets a mind-bending record, says Kip Thorne, a gravitational theorist at Caltech who played a leading role in LIGO’s development. "It is by far the most powerful explosion humans have ever detected except for the big bang," he says." Q: How come this "mind-bending record" of "the most powerful explosion" (Kip Thorne) - 5.4 x 10^47 J - was NOT detected as gamma-ray burst on 14 September 2015 AS WELL? Consider, for example, galaxy cluster MS 0735.6+7421: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/blast-from-black-hole-in-a-galaxy -far-far-away.html Its gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) were duly detected, but "the most powerful explosion" (Kip Thorne) did NOT produce anything but a quiet "signal" that Marco Drago saw on September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC. No GRBs were detected on 14 September 2015. Just a quiet sneaky GW "signal". All previous cases of immensely violent GRBs did NOT produce any GW "signal" whatsoever. Yet "the most powerful explosion" (Kip Thorne) produced only a quiet GW "signal" -- nothing else. NB: How can you TOTALLY separate (i) immensely violent explosions producing ONLY GRBs but no GW signal from (ii) immensely violent explosions producing ONLY one GW signal but no GRBs, as claimed by Bruce Allen and Kip Thorne ? Are these "senior members of the LIGO team" (see my initial email above) stupid enough to announce a fake "discovery"? No. They simply had no choice. Why? Without such "discovery", LIGO, VIRGO and the like will be dismantled and thousands of people (see their arXiv:1602.03837v1 [gr-qc] above) will lose their hobby and will have to get serious about GR [Ref. 2], which they will hate. They will have to seek new jobs and get professional, which they will hate even more. They absolutely needed a new fresh "discovery" to secure more cash and prolong their spellbinding hobby. They had no choice. Needless to say, nobody can define "event horizon" viz. "black hole" in the first place [Ref. 3]. Nobody can "isolate the features that cause a naked singularity to arise" [Ref. 4], so if you believe in "event horizons" and "black holes", your first task is to eliminate timelike naked singularities, because even one such beast will immediately wipe out the entire universe. As to the "discovery" of GW signal on September 14, 2015 (see above), there is one simple reason why it is fake: there is no spacetime WITHOUT matter. If you could somehow suck out all matter from a spacetime region, you will NOT end up with "bare" spacetime without any matter whatsoever, like the grin of the Cheshire cat WITHOUT the cat. But this is exactly what the "academic scholars" at LIGO and VIRGO are "measuring": BARE spacetime defined ONLY with size, which they monitor with laser beams! http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.jpg Why? Because they cannot define the transport of energy by GWs, to compute the STRESSES in the material substrate, produced by trespassing GWs. So they decided to "bypass" this problem, as there can be no stresses induced in/on a light beam. Just "pure distances". Read 'Gravitational Wave Astronomy: RIP' at the link above. These are the bold facts known to "GW astronomers". They had to tell the truth, at least once, and finally they did it, but in August 2002: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Schutz.pdf Now they desperately need fresh money -- billions of USD and EUR, from your taxes. And they are safe, because nobody will ask David Reitze and his colleagues any questions about these "senior members of the LIGO team" who made "blind injections" (see my initial email above): who are they, where is the 'control center' to make such "blind injections", how can you take control REMOTELY and insert custom made "injections" without being present there, etc. No, nobody will ask any questions. More from Sherlock Holmes above. D. Chakalov February 14, 2016, 19:14 GMT -- [Ref. 1] Jose G. Pereira, Gravitational waves: a foundational review, arXiv:1305.0777v3 [gr-qc], http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.0777v3 See an excerpt from p. 8 at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Jose.jpg [Ref. 2] D. Chakalov, The Spacetime. Online paper, February 11, 2016, 20 pages, at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf [Ref. 3] Matt Visser, arXiv:1407.7295v3 [gr-qc], http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.7295v3 "Mathematically, one needs to know the entire history of the universe, all the way into the infinite future, and all the way down to any spacelike singularity, to decide whether or not an event horizon exists right here and now." [Ref. 4] Pankaj S. Joshi and Daniele Malafarina, arXiv:1201.3660v1 [gr-qc], http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.3660v1 "We can now say with confidence that one cannot formulate censorship in a rather general way such as, ‘Collapse of any massive star makes a black hole only’, or, ‘Any physically realistic gravitational collapse must end in a black hole only’, as there are now many counter-examples to such statements. (...) Specifically, one must examine the collapse scenarios carefully and isolate the features that cause a naked singularity to arise." =================================================================================== Subject: Ettore Minguzzi, arXiv:1603.08190v1 [gr-qc], p. 2 Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:57:26 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Ettore Minguzzi Cc: Piotr T Chrusciel , George Ellis Ciao Ettore, You touched an issue which I was never able to understand. May I ask you and your colleagues for help. How do you define time-orientability in Lorentzian manifold? Please see an excerpt from an online essay by Piotr, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Piotr_p247.jpg Such "locally defined" time-orientability has to be "defined globally in a consistent way", say Piotr. Fine, so we need to understand those "conjugate points on any null geodesic". To quote from your latest paper, "The condition of absence of lightlike lines is is (typo - D.) implied under the null genericity and the null convergence conditions by null completeness (as these three conditions together imply (Sic! - D.) the existence of conjugate points on any null geodesic [1,10])." -- [1] J. K. Beem, P. E. Ehrlich, and K. L. Easley. Global Lorentzian Geometry. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1996. [10] S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis. The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973. Q: Can you prove that you have *global* definition of time-orientability on the set of "conjugate points" on any null geodesic? It's a bit like this. You enter a tunnel with diameter, say, 3m. As you walk inside the tunnel, you realize that the diameter of the tunnel shrinks by 0.1m every 10m of your trajectory, so at some point you cannot move further, but you are dead certain that the tunnel has a limit at which its diameter is zero, so you can calculate its limit viz. the length of the tunnel, and claim that you know its global properties, from the beginning of the tunnel to its end with diameter zero. But this simple analogy doesn't work for the case mentioned by Piotr (see the link above). So what would you do? All the best, Dimi P.S. Piotr's essay is ref. [22] in 'The Spacetime' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf D. ======================= Subject: Re: Ettore Minguzzi, arXiv:1603.08190v1 [gr-qc], p. 2 Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 14:47:02 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Ettore Minguzzi Cc: Piotr T Chrusciel , George Ellis , Jörg Frauendiener , Robert Geroch , [snip] P.P.S. Once you or some of your colleagues define time-orientability globally and "in a consistent way" (see Piotr below) throughout the entire "tunnel", please don't forget to install GW mirrors at those "conjugate" endpoints, to make the entire "tunnel" gravitationally closed system. Then please install the same GW mirrors at space-like infinity (Jörg can help you), and make sure that the set of endpoints at [omega] = 0 (Penrose's conformal completion) belong to Spi U Scri (Bob Geroch can help you, if needed). I will take it from there :-) D. On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:57:26 +0000, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Ciao Ettore, > > You touched an issue which I was never able to understand. May I ask > you and your colleagues for help. > > How do you define time-orientability in Lorentzian manifold? Please > see an excerpt from an online essay by Piotr, > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Piotr_p247.jpg > > Such "locally defined" time-orientability has to be "defined globally > in a consistent way", say Piotr. Fine, so we need to understand those > "conjugate points on any null geodesic". To quote from your latest > paper, > > "The condition of absence of lightlike lines is is (typo - D.) implied > under the null genericity and the null convergence conditions by null > completeness (as these three conditions together imply (Sic! - D.) the > existence of conjugate points on any null geodesic [1,10])." > -- > [1] J. K. Beem, P. E. Ehrlich, and K. L. Easley. Global Lorentzian > Geometry. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1996. > [10] S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis. The Large Scale Structure of > Space-Time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973. > > Q: Can you prove that you have *global* definition of > time-orientability on the set of "conjugate points" on any null > geodesic? > > It's a bit like this. You enter a tunnel with diameter, say, 3m. As > you walk inside the tunnel, you realize that the diameter of the > tunnel shrinks by 0.1m every 10m of your trajectory, so at some point > you cannot move further, but you are dead certain that the tunnel has > a limit at which its diameter is zero, so you can calculate its limit > viz. the length of the tunnel, and claim that you know its global > properties, from the beginning of the tunnel to its end with diameter > zero. > > But this simple analogy doesn't work for the case mentioned by Piotr > (see the link above). So what would you do? > > All the best, > > Dimi > > P.S. Piotr's essay is ref. [22] in 'The Spacetime' at > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf > > D. > ==================================================================================== Subject: The 800-pound gorilla in the room Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:18:15 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Stephen Green , Robert M Wald , Paul Steinhardt , Thomas Buchert , Rocky Kolb , Malcolm MacCallum , George , Alan Coley , Paul Tod , Robert Geroch , Chris Fewster , Piotr T Chrusciel , Jörg Frauendiener , Greg Galloway , Jeffrey Winicour , Matt Visser , Laszlo Szabados , Helmut Friedrich , Helvi Witek , Adam Helfer , Domenico Giulini , Claus Kiefer , Alan Rendall , Harvey S Reall , Lars Andersson , Karel V Kuchar , Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Bernard J Carr , Ettore Minguzzi , Demetrios Christodoulou , Sergiu Klainerman , Richard M Schoen , Steven Carlip , Zhaoyan Wu , Marek Abramowicz , Roger Blandford , Jirí Bicák , John Friedman , Bernd Schmidt , Joseph Katz , Chris Isham , John Baez , Charles Torre , Stanley Deser , David B Malament , Eric Gourgoulhon , Erik Curiel , Řyvind Grřn , Ronald J Adler , Anthony Lasenby , Tim-Torben Paetz , Daniel Baumann , Gary Horowitz , Xiao Zhang , Daniel Gottesman , Carla Cederbaum , Catherine Meusburger , Thomas Thiemann , Cecilia Flori , Joan Solŕ , carlo rovelli , John Stachel , Richard Price , Michele Maggiore , Jose Geraldo Pereira , David Garfinkle , Steven Gottlieb Dear Dr. Green: May I ask the '800-pound gorilla in the room' question. You and Dr. Wald assume in your latest arXiv:1601.06789v1 [gr-qc] that "the matter in the universe is described by a stress-energy tensor T that satisfies the weak energy condition", Eq. 7. Surely the matter density is always non-negative (otherwise we won't be around), but you "have no hope of ruling out objectionable global features", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_condition such as *global* gravitational energy, as explained by Paul Steinhardt, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjmNW3mlisE Q: How can GR handle perpetual and unlimited influx of positive matter density, the '800-pound gorilla in the room' ? Please reply professionally. I extend this question to all your colleagues. If you cannot reply, check out my website below. Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net ==================================================================================== Subject: Jolyon Bloomfield (June 27, 2015), If gravity isn't a force, how does it accelerate objects? Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 13:07:37 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Jolyon Bloomfield Cc: Hyun Seok Yang , William G Unruh , Eanna Flanagan , Anthony Zee , Alan Rendall http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/physics/140-physics/the-theory-of-relativity/ general-relativity/1059-if-gravity-isn-t-a-force-how-does-it-accelerate-objects-advanced -- Jolyon: Would you like to correct your explanation at the link above? Do you know the pitfalls in the geodesic hypothesis? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic_equation#Affine_geodesics For a start, check out Hyun Seok Yan, ref. [37] in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf (31 January 2016, 16 pages) All the best, Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE If gravity isn't a force, how does it produce "the accelerating expansion of the Universe" ? www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy To explain the "dark" puzzle above, suppose you have only a few drops petrol in the tank of your car, but you bravely run it and push the accelerator. As your car accelerates, you obtain more and MORE fuel in the tank, and at the instant you are reading these lines, the "dark" petrol has increased to nearly 68.3% of the total petrol in the tank (see the second link above). Such perpetual energy non-conservation is not included in the geodesic hypothesis, as the current GR textbooks need to postulate energy *conservation* to define the geodesic hypothesis: see the link from Wikipedia in my email above, and Alan Rendall at http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2005-6&page=articlesu38.html More in 'Paul Steinhardt explains energy conservation, 17-03-2011' below. D, Chakalov January 31, 2016 ==================================================================================== Subject: Paul Steinhardt explains energy conservation, 17-03-2011 Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:41:27 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Paul Steinhardt https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjmNW3mlisE ---- Paul, can I have a word with you in private? I wonder if you have any ideas about the solution to the puzzle mentioned in your 2011 lecture. You suggested that there could be two forms of gravitational energy, positive and negative, due to which they are "conserved" (whatever this means), and made some very specific statement: see 01:24 - 02:00 from the timeline (link above). Do you have any specific idea regarding this hypothetical mechanism? I mentioned in 'Relative Scale Spacetime', p. 23, some possible applications of the same hypothetical mechanism: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/p23.jpg But these all are speculations based on the theory explained in 'The Spacetime', http://vixra.org/abs/1601.0209 Again, if you have any ideas about the solution to the puzzle mentioned in your 2011 lecture, please let me know where I can read them. We do need spacetime engineering, and I believe we can make it. I trust you are fully aware that there are people (for the lack of a better word) who practice spacetime engineering, although they are not humans. Please be assured that I will keep all information from you private and confidential. Needless to say, I will never ignore your ideas, if any, and will always quote you, in case you have something to say. If you have nothing to say, please ignore this email. For the record: I sent my first proposal to U.S. Department of Energy in March 1994 (yes, 22 years ago), but it was rejected in April same year, without any explanation, by Mr. Walter M. Polansky (then Director of the Laboratory Technology Research Division at U.S. DoE). Perhaps there are *very* influential people who don't need unlimited clean energy, but prefer to burn oil and make wars, killing hundreds of thousand people, including women and children: only in Iraq, at least 133,000 civilians have been murdered between the U.S.-led invasion on 20 March 2003 and early May 2014. Since March 1994, not even one person has sent me any comment on my proposal for clean energy. None. Mr. Walter M. Polansky (see above) only suggested in April 1994 to "read physics textbooks" (exact quote). I follow this unsolicited advice, write papers which nobody reads, and sometimes watch people at YouTube. What else can I do? All the best, Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE Check out some of our guests (they look just like humans) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UzjpPwQxNw Of course, you always have the choice to disregard these facts as "illusions", as insisted by your beloved government, and have a beer instead. Cheers! D. Chakalov February 4, 2016 ==================================================================================== Subject: Brutal communist CENSORSHIP. Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:30:43 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Hermann Nicolai , Helmut Friedrich , Domenico Giulini , Claus Kiefer , Alan Rendall , Harvey S Reall , Lars Andersson , Luciano , Paul Tod , Karel V Kuchar , Robert M Wald , Greg Galloway , Robert Geroch , Jeffrey Winicour , Jörg Frauendiener , Adam Helfer , Laszlo Szabados , Michael Banks , Wei-Tou Ni , Hans Peter Nilles , Xiao Zhang , Matt Visser , Carlos Barcelo , Chris Fewster , Piotr Chrusciel , Gary Horowitz , Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , George , Bernard J Carr , Ettore Minguzzi , Demetrios Christodoulou , Sergiu Klainerman , Richard M Schoen , Steven Carlip , Zhaoyan Wu , Marek Abramowicz , Roger Blandford , Jirí Bicák , John Friedman , Bernd Schmidt , Joseph Katz , Chris Isham Gentlemen: I was not allowed to speak at "Relativity and Gravitation: 100 Years after Einstein in Prague" (June 25 - 29, 2012, Prague), where Hermann Nicolai presented his ideas, published later in arXiv:1301.5481v1 [gr-qc], http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.5481v1 He also gave a long lecture on 9 April 2015, "Approaches to quantum gravity - a brief survey", published at YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PonCfe98hiM and speculated extensively about Einstein's field equations (cf. EFE.jpg attached). Yet he never mentioned Einstein's opinion, which he should know very well, being fluent in German: see ref. [18] in my paper "The Spacetime" at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf He did not mention the problem known since 1911 either, although he and you all know it very well: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg Do you understand why I was not allowed to speak at Einstein's Conference in Prague? It's called censorship. Brutal communist CENSORSHIP. Don't ever claim that you knew nothing about it. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE Professor Dr. Hermann Nicolai, Director at Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics and Head of the Division Quantum Gravity and Unified Theories at The Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute) in Potsdam-Golm, is not stupid. He knows theoretical physics. Almost twelve years ago, on April 26, 2004, I watched a talk show with him on SAT 1, called News & Stories, which was intended to the general audience. At some point he stated (I believe around 12:25 AM) that the quantum world is the true world from which the classical world emerges. He of course knows the pitfalls in this speculation, encoded in the phrase "to a good approximation": see Albert Messiah, Quantum Mechanics, Vol. 1, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1970, p. 215. I expected that he will elaborate, but he choose to speculate about Feynman path integral! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation That's the true story, according to Professor Dr. Hermann ... (see above): the classical world emerges from Feynman path integral. How? Well, I sent him many email messages, but never heard from him. Again, he isn't stupid and knows theoretical physics, so why was he talking moonshine on German TV? See the problem from 1911 in my email above, Fig_8_small.jpg. I suppose Professor Dr. Hermann ... (see above) simply didn't want to hear my very simple questions. And when he learned that we may meet in Prague in June 2012, he "advised" his colleagues to ignore my intended talk on Einstein's GR. Hence nobody could find out that Professor Dr. Hermann ... (see above) is full of hot air. Or maybe of something else? D. Chakalov January 19, 2016 =================================================================================== Subject: Ettore Minguzzi, arXiv:1601.05932v1 [gr-qc] Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:00:13 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Ettore Minguzzi Cc: Robert Geroch , Paul Tod , Piotr T Chrusciel , Jörg Frauendiener , Jeffrey Winicour , Adam Helfer , Greg Galloway , Laszlo Szabados , Harvey S Reall , Gary Horowitz , Chris Isham , Tim-Torben Paetz , Karel V Kuchar , John Baez , Charles Torre , Stanley Deser , David B Malament , Eric Gourgoulhon , Erik Curiel , Řyvind Grřn , Ronald J Adler , Anthony Lasenby , Josh Goldberg , Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences Ciao Ettore, I wonder how smooth is your "smooth atlas". Please define *rigorously* the acceptable error margins of 'spacetime smoothness', and explain what makes you feel that such error margins are acceptable. Bob, Tod, and the rest of your colleagues can help you, I suppose. If you can't, check out my website below. Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net --------- NOTE Check out p. 13 in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. D. Chakalov January 26, 2016 ===================================================================================+ Subject: Quantum and Beyond, Växjö, June 13-16, 2016 Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 12:55:43 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Sven , Stefan , Nicolas , Teo , Renato Renner , Anton , Brukner Caslav , Nicolas Gisin Cc: Andrei Khrennikov , Claus Kiefer Dear colleagues, I have been trying, for many years, to explain a simple fact from 1911 to Andrei and Klaus, but they never acknowledged it: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg Please don't behave like Russians, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/russian.html Erwin Schrödinger explained the problem in 1935. No need to invent the wheel. More at my website. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ==================================================================================== Subject: Corrections Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:24:39 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Daniel Baumann , Daniel Baumann Cc: Christoph Raeth , Paul , Domenico Giulini , Claus Kiefer , Harvey S Reall , Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Ivo , Chris Isham , Karel V Kuchar , Robert M Wald , Greg Galloway , Robert Geroch , Jeffrey Winicour , Jörg Frauendiener , Adam Helfer , Laszlo Szabados , Michael Banks , Wei-Tou Ni , Hans Peter Nilles , Xiao Zhang , Matt Visser , Carlos Barcelo , Chris Fewster , Piotr Chrusciel , Gary Horowitz , Paul Tod , Erik Curiel , Eric Gourgoulhon , Leonardo Patino , David B Malament , Jessica , Carla Cederbaum , Catherine Meusburger , Thomas Thiemann , Cecilia Flori , Andreas , Anthony Zee , Theory Department CERN Dear Dr. Baumann, Our students are kids, and kids have the right to know everything we know. It will be utterly unfair to feed them with a cocktail of disinformation spiced with wishful thinking and ignorance. Regarding your lecture notes aimed at grad students [Ref. 1], you wrote: "Please email me questions and/or corrections". On p. 105, you wrote: "In the absence of a fundamental theory of high energy physics including gravitation, we can still make progress." Maybe, but iff you or any of your colleagues solve the most widely known, ever since 1911, public secret in physics: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg First things first. And on p. 153, you wrote: "The standard approach to study inflation is to assume the existence of a fundamental scalar field -- the inflaton -- and postulate a specific form for its action." Postulating some "fundamental scalar field" leads inevitably to reductio ad absurdum: "Why is the universe larger than a football?" http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/van_Vulpen_p40.jpg More at my website. Please let me know when you publish the corrected version of your lecture notes: kids have the right to know everything we know. Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net -- [Ref. 1] Daniel Baumann, The Physics of Inflation. A Course for Graduate Students in Particle Physics and Cosmology, 20 October 2011, http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/db275/TEACHING/INFLATION/Lectures.pdf =================================================================================== Subject: Joan Solŕ, Running Vacuum in the Universe: current phenomenological status, arXiv:1601.01668v2 [gr-qc] Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:32:21 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Joan Solŕ Cc: Ivo , Anthony Leggett , David J Miller , Peter Woit Dear Joan, Thank you for your beautiful paper. The Higgs boson cannot be fundamental particle, but a "template" for a new family of Higgs-like bosons, including a new one with spin-2. It's a bit like http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/unspeakable.jpg Explanation at my website. Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net ==================================================================================== Subject: arXiv:1601.03355v1 [gr-qc] Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:06:55 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Deloshan , Matt Visser Cc: George , Jörg Frauendiener , Ben Whale , Bernard J Carr , Ettore Minguzzi , Demetrios Christodoulou , Sergiu Klainerman , Richard M Schoen , Steven Carlip , Zhaoyan Wu Hi Deloshan, You and Matt wrote "mechanix" (p. 6), which I believe is a typo. If you wish to "bootstrap the standard model of particle physics into the realm of semi-classical gravity" and eventually speculate about "global stable causality", check out the most widely known public secret in physics: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg As to the two textbooks quoted in your arXiv:1601.03355v1 [gr-qc], refs [18] and [19], check out a brief intro at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf Details at my website. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE Matt Visser claimed in arXiv:1601.03355v1 [gr-qc]: "apparent/trapping horizons are good physics, whereas event horizons are [in a precise technical sense] not physically observable [1]", referring to his essay 'Physical observability of horizons', arXiv:1407.7295v3 [gr-qc], in which he wrote: "Mathematically, one needs to know the entire history of the universe, all the way into the infinite future, and all the way down to any spacelike singularity, to decide whether or not an event horizon exists right here and now. This makes event horizons unsuitable for empirical testing in either laboratories or telescopes. In contrast, apparent and trapping horizons are defined using local (or at worst quasi-local) measurements, meaning that they are at least in principle suitable for testing in finite-size laboratories or telescopes." It's like Matt Visser is suggesting how to cook Andean Flamingo with Jabuticaba: instead of Andean Flamingo, use a large broiler, and if you can't find Jabuticaba in your local grocery, replace it with cabbage and then cook it as 'chicken with cabbage'. Only event horizons/Andean Flamingo cannot be replaced with anything. Forget it. D. Chakalov January 15, 2016 ==================================================================================== Subject: Leonardo Patińo, Jessica Söhle , About the tensorial nature of the Christoffel symbols, or lack thereof, arXiv:1512.05760v1 [gr-qc] Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:31:13 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Leonardo Patino Cc: Jessica , Robert M Wald , Adam Helfer , Laszlo Szabados , Gary Horowitz Dear Dr. Patińo, If possible, please send me the English version of your paper. I hope to learn what contradictions will be reached if the Christoffel symbols were tensorial. Have you also examined what contradictions will be reached if the gravitational energy density were localizable at a point (MTW, p. 467)? The opinion of your colleagues will be highly appreciated as well. Kind regards, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE We know what contradictions will be reached if the wave function in QM were physical object viz. what contradictions will be reached if it were some pure "imagination" or "knowledge", so the two questions above challenge the assumption in GR textbooks that the theory of gravity were "classical". If some day I have a professional response to my email above, I will post it here. Check out [MTW, p. 467] at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/MTW_page_467.jpg D. Chakalov December 19, 2015 =================================================================================== Subject: The dynamics (if any) of GR Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 16:22:35 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Karel V Kuchar Cc: carlo rovelli , Chris Isham , Lee Smolin , Thomas Thiemann , John Stachel , Stanley Deser , John Baez , Kip , Carl H Brans , [snip] Dear Karel, Perhaps you may be interested to see a quote from Carlo at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Rovelli_p84.jpg It is ref. [30] in 'The Spacetime', http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf (15 pages, 24.01.2016) You intended to deliver a talk 'Canonical quantum gravity: Einstein's posthumous anathema' at the Einstein Conference in Prague four years ago, but didn't attend the conference. If your manuscript is available, please send it to me, and I will gladly quote you in my paper at the link above. All the best, Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net ============================ Subject: Re: The dynamics (if any) of GR Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 17:39:38 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Karel V Kuchar , Carlo , Chris Isham , Lee Smolin , Thomas Thiemann , John Stachel , Stanley Deser , John Baez , Kip , Carl H Brans , Laszlo Szabados , Adam Helfer , Jörg Frauendiener , Robert Geroch , Piotr T Chrusciel , Domenico Giulini , Norbert Straumann , Robert M Wald , Anthony Lasenby , Greg Galloway , Paul Tod , Ezra Newman , Graham Nerlich , Roger Penrose P.S. See ref. [40], p. 18, in 'The Spacetime', http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf (18 pages, 656,220 bytes, 7.02.2016) Thank you all, you've been very helpful. D.C. On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 16:22:35 +0200, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Dear Karel, > > Perhaps you may be interested to see a quote from Carlo at [snip] =================================================================================== Subject: Christopher Isham - The Rise of Scientific Atheism Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 14:19:16 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Chris Isham Cc: Albrecht von Müller , Ernst Pöppel , Dieter Kotschick , Tejinder Singh , Domenico Giulini , Thomas Filk , Dustin Lazarovici , Hartmann Römer , Michael-Andreas.Esfeld@unil.ch, Michael.Drieschner@t-online.de, Angelo , Basil Hiley , Harald , Stefano , Matt Visser , Carlos Barceló , Larry Ford , Frank Tipler , Robert M Wald , Chris Fewster , Adam Helfer , George , George F Smoot III , Miguel Alcubierre , Steven Carlip , Karel V Kuchar , Piotr T Chrusciel , Greg Galloway , Gary Horowitz , Robert Geroch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ils9zNWaaw Published on Sep 28, 2015 -- Chris, how did you manage to keep silent about *everything* you've learned from me since we met in your office on November 13, 1998 ? Was it difficult to "forget" about physical theology? See the shortest explanation at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf Sorry for repeating it all over again. Keep forgetting it, when needed. You can read this email also at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE Perhaps the worst brainwashing religion is anti-theism. People who practice it call themselves "scientists", but cannot even try to think on physical theology, because their brains are deadly blocked. It would be like accepting only 'quantum particles' and denouncing 'quantum waves' (see spacetime.pdf at the link above). Ridiculous. D. Chakalov December 6, 2015, 21:25 GMT =================================================================================== Subject: On Thinking (ISSN 1867-4208, Springer 2015) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 02:04:02 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Albrecht von Müller , Ernst Pöppel , carsten.freitaeger@parmenides-foundation.org, Dieter Kotschick , Tejinder Singh , Domenico Giulini , Thomas Filk , Dustin Lazarovici , Hartmann Römer , Michael-Andreas.Esfeld@unil.ch, Michael.Drieschner@t-online.de, blanchard@physik.uni-bielefeld.de, Angelo , Basil Hiley , donadi@ts.infn.it, gabriel.leon@ts.infn.it, ferialdi@ts.infn.it, Harald , Karel V Kuchar Dear colleagues, On p. 178, Tejinder P. Singh wrote: "We hence conclude that there should exist an equivalent new formulation of quantum theory which does not depend on classical time." Welcome aboard. This new formulation of quantum theory was proposed in January 1990, based on well-known facts since 1911: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg Hundreds of theoretical physicists and mathematicians were informed by email, many times indeed, but nobody responded. Compare it to the case mentioned in Tom Filk's paper, p. 69: "Between 1715 and 1716, a famous exchange of letters took place between Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) and the Anglican clergyman Samuel Clarke (1675-1729) [13]. Actually, both participants addressed their letters to Caroline of Brandenburg-Ansbach who then put forward the letters to the other partner." In 18th century people were far more interested in science. Caroline of Ansbach, for example, knew about Leibniz' solution to the mind-body problem: the brain and its mind do not act upon each other, but act separately in pre-established harmony. The result is a new kind of causality, which was suggested in January 1990 -- see above. As expected, it leads to new formulation of quantum theory. And new Mathematics. And perhaps much more. Details at my website. Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE Domenico Giulini wrote on p. 115: "No external notion of time enters the picture at this stage. This, clearly, is for good reasons: Spacetimes do not evolve (in "time" external to them); they simply are!" Perhaps Domenico Giulini has never heard of Plato's proposal: see Fig. 1 in rs_spacetime.pdf at my website. D. Chakalov 29 December 2015, 03:48 GMT =================================================================================== Subject: S. Liberati, Do not mess with time, arXiv:1601.00785v1, p. 3 Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 12:53:18 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Stefano Cc: Matt Visser , Carlos Barceló , Larry Ford , Frank Tipler , Robert M Wald , Chris Fewster , Adam Helfer , George , George F Smoot III , Miguel Alcubierre , Steven Carlip , Karel V Kuchar , Chris Isham , Piotr T Chrusciel , Greg Galloway , Gary Horowitz , Robert Geroch S. Liberati, p. 3: "substantial quantities of exotic (specifically null energy conditions violating) matter" -- Stefano: NEC violating matter would be needed iff time were defined only and exclusively only by Type I matter & fields, which is wrong. Besides, 'NEC violating matter' is an oxymoron, because it cannot be matter, just as the omnipresent object violating SEC is not matter endowed with "dark energy". We can overcome the phenomenon producing inertia by switching to "free fall" -- fact. It is called Reversible Elimination of Inertial Mass (REIM), and does not involve "levitation" nor any "fundamental scalar field" or similar parapsychology. It's all about Macavity (Adam Helfer can explain) and the mechanism "restricting the production of negative energy densities, their magnitudes, durations, or interactions with other matter" (Adam Helfer, arXiv:gr-qc/9709047v1). NASA tried for many years to work out some "propellant-less propulsion" and of course failed miserably. The same applies to all people who have been trying to speculate about some physical "dark energy" ever since 1930s, after Einstein introduced the cosmological "constant" in February 1917. I know that you and all your colleagues don't care about GR, so I will stop here. I raised this issue in September 2001, in my email from Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:28:18 +0200 to Larry Ford and many of his colleagues, but nobody showed any interest. The only reaction I received since 2001 was from Miguel Alcubierre, who banned my email address as "spam". So be it. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE The self-action of matter on itself and Leibniz' pre-established harmony (see my email from Tue, 29 Dec 2015 02:04:02 +0200 above) are not cased by any physical stuff. If it were physical, it will have to be "dark". Plato has suggested the solution twenty-five centuries ago. Nowadays it is "spam". D. Chakalov January 6, 2016, 21:10 GMT ================ Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure) Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 10:53:19 +0000 Message-ID: <001a11330c948856f10528a829a4@google.com> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem To: dchakalov@gmail.com X-Failed-Recipients: malcubi@nucleares.unam.mx Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: malcubi@nucleares.unam.mx Technical details of permanent failure: Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the server for the recipient domain nucleares.unam.mx by athena.nucleares.unam.mx. [132.248.29.9]. The error that the other server returned was: 550 5.7.1 : Sender address rejected: Spam ----- Original message ----- [snip] =================================================================================== LISA Pathfinder is a scam! http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.pdf http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.jpg http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Schutz.pdf Don’t ever claim that you knew nothing about it. Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================= Subject: Gravitational-Wave Astronomy: RIP Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2015 11:59:14 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: abbott_b@ligo.caltech.edu, weiss@ligo.mit.edu, anderson_s@ligo.caltech.edu, barish_b@ligo.caltech.edu, sarah.gossan@tapir.caltech.edu, gustafson_e@ligo.caltech.edu, jhiroto@ligo.caltech.edu, kgl@caltech.edu, taylor_r@ligo.caltech.edu, yamamoto_h@ligo.caltech.edu, zweizig_j@ligo.caltech.edu, swang5@caltech.edu, zhang_l@ligo.caltech.edu, zucker_m@ligo.mit.edu Gravitational-Wave Astronomy: RIP by D. Chakalov Abstract As an epitaph of the project for so-called GW astronomy, I suggest the famous saying by Confucius: "The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat". Specific examples are drawn from LISA Pathfinder, to explain why the so-called GW astronomy was born dead from the outset. Manuscript in preparation, available in February 2016. ---- Interested? Check out http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.jpg Explanation and references in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.pdf Don't ever claim that you knew nothing about it. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================== Subject: Re: Gravitational-Wave Astronomy: RIP Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2015 22:10:08 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Eric Gustafson , abbott_b@ligo.caltech.edu, weiss@ligo.mit.edu, anderson_s@ligo.caltech.edu, barish_b@ligo.caltech.edu, sarah.gossan@tapir.caltech.edu, gustafson_e@ligo.caltech.edu, JulieHiroto LIGO , Kenneth Libbrecht , Bob Taylor , yamamoto_h@ligo.caltech.edu, zweizig_j@ligo.caltech.edu, swang5@caltech.edu, zhang_l@ligo.caltech.edu, M Zucker , Alessandra.Buonanno@aei.mpg.de, Bernard Schutz , B S Sathyaprakash , Valerio Faraoni , Eanna Flanagan , Kip , Clifford Will , Richard Price , Michele Maggiore , Jose Geraldo Pereira , Warren Johnson , Robert M Wald , David Shoemaker , David Garfinkle , Harald Lück , Luc Blanchet , Masaki Ando , Edward Porter , Hartmut Grote On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 12:47:41 -0800, Message-Id: , Eric Gustafson wrote: > > Dimi, > Please remove me from this email list. You are not stupid, and you know damn well that all this "GW astronomy" is crap. The same applies to all you colleagues. So don't try to play stupid and talk about "this email list". Check out the facts. If you cannot understand that your "GW astronomy" is red herring, I will gladly help you and expose your ridiculous errors even before my paper is published. Go ahead. Make your best shot. D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 11:59:14 +0000, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > >> Gravitational-Wave Astronomy: RIP >> by D. Chakalov >> >> Abstract >> >> As an epitaph of the project for so-called GW astronomy, I suggest the >> famous saying by Confucius: "The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat >> in a dark room, especially if there is no cat". Specific examples are drawn >> from LISA Pathfinder, to explain why the so-called GW astronomy was >> born dead from the outset. >> >> Manuscript in preparation, available in February 2016. >> ---- >> >> Interested? Check out >> >> http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.jpg >> >> Explanation and references in >> http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.pdf >> >> Don't ever claim that you knew nothing about it. >> >> D. Chakalov >> chakalov.net > =================================================== Subject: Re: LISA Pathfinder is a scam! Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 01:22:08 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Warren Johnson , César García Marirrodriga , Paul McNamara , Ian Harrison , Damien Texier , Karsten Danzmann , Charles Dunn , Oliver Jennrich , Philippe Jetzer , Eric Plagnol , Martijn Smit , Carlos Sopuerta , Ira Thorpe , Benjamin Knispel , Martin Hewitson , Bianca Hurlemann , Claus Lämmerzahl , Dominik Schwarz , Claudia Mignone , Kip , Bernard Schutz , Hamish Johnston , tushna.commissariat@iop.org, louise.mayor@iop.org, pwld@iop.org, Michael Banks , David Charlton , alexandra.saxon@rcuk.ac.uk, Sushma.Tiwari@rcuk.ac.uk, kim.burchell@stfc.ac.uk, iain.cameron@rcuk.ac.uk, communications@rcuk.ac.uk, Robert M Wald , Gary Horowitz , Laszlo Szabados , Adam Helfer , Karel V Kuchar , Chris Isham , Charles Torre , Domenico Giulini , Claus Kiefer , Steven Weinberg , Jeremiah P Ostriker , SciTech.Editorial@esa.int, john.g.baker@nasa.gov, Joan Centrella , Mark Hannam , robin.t.stebbins@nasa.gov, Karen Smale , Blacks in Government NASA Goddard , Stephen Merkowitz , Meredith Gibb , LSC Spokesperson , David , Gabriela González , Curt Cutler , Valerio , Jiri Bicak , Pedro Marronetti , Clifford Will , Josh Goldberg , Bernd Brügmann , Lee Samuel Finn , Beverly Berger , Luciano , Jose Geraldo Pereira , Malcolm MacCallum , Eric Gustafson , abbott_b@ligo.caltech.edu, weiss@ligo.mit.edu, anderson_s@ligo.caltech.edu, barish_b@ligo.caltech.edu, sarah.gossan@tapir.caltech.edu, gustafson_e@ligo.caltech.edu, JulieHiroto LIGO , Kenneth Libbrecht , Bob Taylor , yamamoto_h@ligo.caltech.edu, zweizig_j@ligo.caltech.edu, swang5@caltech.edu, zhang_l@ligo.caltech.edu, M Zucker , Alessandra.Buonanno@aei.mpg.de, B S Sathyaprakash , Eanna Flanagan , Richard Price , Michele Maggiore , David Shoemaker , Harald Lück , Luc Blanchet , Masaki Ando , Edward Porter , Hartmut Grote On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 09:39:34 -0600, Message-Id: <5238BB76-F3ED-4E0D-88EA-534E52A05606@phys.lsu.edu>, Warren Johnson wrote: > > I have looked at chakalov.net, and find that you have a new theory of space > and time (and everything ?). > > I am sure that it contradicts everything (facts and laws) that physics and > chemistry have learned about this world. Warren dorogoi, As I told you before (see my email from Sat, 18 Apr 2015 18:53:38 +0300), you ate totally Russian, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/russian.html The subject of this email is GW "astronomy": see my abstract and the two links below. Since you're Russian, you cannot think anymore, so you cannot even look at the FACTS explained in the text at the links below. Is it too painful, or are you just drunk? Or maybe both? I hope your colleagues can help you understand the FACTS. I can help you as well, and will gladly expose your ridiculous errors even before my paper is published. D. Chakalov chakalov.net > On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 06:15:54 +0200, Dimi Chakalov > wrote: > > Gravitational-Wave Astronomy: RIP > by D. Chakalov > > Abstract > > As an epitaph of the project for so-called GW astronomy, I suggest the > famous saying by Confucius: "The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat > in a dark room, especially if there is no cat". Specific examples are drawn > from LISA Pathfinder, to explain why the so-called GW astronomy was > born dead from the outset. > > Manuscript in preparation, available by February 2016. > ---- > > Interested? See the links below. > > D. Chakalov > chakalov.net > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > P.S. Check out > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.jpg > > Explanation and references in > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.pdf > > Don't ever claim that you knew nothing about it. > > D. Chakalov > chakalov.net > =================================================== Subject: Re: Question Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 23:49:18 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Paul Tod , Richard J Cook , David B Malament , Charles Torre , Tim-Torben Paetz , John Baez , Anthony Lasenby , Karel V Kuchar , Robert Beig , Piotr T Chrusciel , Chris Isham , Erik Curiel , Eric Gourgoulhon , Niall Ó Murchadha , Waldyr A Rodrigues Jr , Laszlo Szabados , Richard Price , Josh Goldberg , Ezra Newman , Adam Helfer , Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences , Greg Galloway , Jeffrey Winicour , Gary Horowitz , Robert Geroch , Jörg Frauendiener , Sascha Husa , Ettore Minguzzi , Merced Montesinos Velásquez , Ronald J Adler , Řyvind Grřn , Harvey S Reall , Dupre Maurice J , Stanley Deser On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 20:52:34 +0000, Paul Tod wrote: > > I'm expecting to be away from email until Thursday. Fine, no rush. Here's the context of my question. Given that "the gravitational field can do work on matter and vice versa", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor#In_general_relativity_2 is it true that in General Relativity 'distance' depends on the energy of gravitational field ? If you say 'no', please explain why. If you say 'yes', check out http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.pdf http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.jpg Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net =================================================================================== Subject: arXiv:1510.02089v2, "the possible paths of no physical system" Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 12:07:38 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Erik Curiel Cc: Piotr T Chrusciel , David B Malament Erik, since you postulate "a four-dimensional, paracompact, connected, smooth, differential manifold" that is also "simply connected" and "temporally orientable" (p. 3), don't forget the spacelike "directions" of "the possible paths of no physical system" (p. 2): Plato has suggested such "directions" twenty-five centuries ago. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- NOTE Erik Curiel wrote in 'A Primer on Energy Conditions', arXiv:1405.0403v1 [physics.hist-ph], p. 32: "We do not yet have indubitable evidence for the existence of a fundamental scalar field in nature. (The recently discovered Higgs field is without question phenomenologically a scalar field, but the jury is still out on whether or not it is a composite, bound state of underlying non-scalar entities.)" Welcome aboard, Erik. If you replace "Higgs field" with 'Google', check out "a composite, bound state" of *physicalized* shadows of 'Google' at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/unspeakable.jpg The "fundamental scalar field" itself is UNspeakable, being 'potential reality'. You will again see a whole family of *physicalized* Higgs-like bosons, including those with spin-2, engaged in self-interaction at around 14 TeV (CERN) and contributing to the cosmological constant problems: "Why is the universe larger than a football?" http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/van_Vulpen_p40.jpg More on p. 10 in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.pdf D. Chakalov December 14, 2015, 11:15 GMT ==================================================================================== Subject: STOP wasting taxpayers' money ! Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 04:48:15 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Theory Department CERN Cc: Lionel Cons , cern.courier@cern.ch, postmaster@cern.ch, cds.support@cern.ch, David J Miller , JOACHIM.MNICH@desy.de, LOHSE@physik.hu-berlin.de, KATSAN@admin.in2p3.fr, JoAnne Hewett , DYREKTOR@ifj.edu.pl, MANFRED.KRAMMER@oeaw.ac.at, Karlheinz Meier , THOMAS.MUELLER@kit.edu, Kerstin Borras , Halina Abramowicz , CLAUDIA.WULZ@cern.ch, MKRAEMER@physik.rwth-aachen.de, RAFFELT@mpp.mpg.de, MARKUS.SCHUMACHER@physik.uni-freiburg.de, ACHIM.STAHL@physik.rwth-aachen.de, S.BENTVELSEN@nikhef.nl, N.DEGROOT@hef.ru.nl, T.PEITZMANN@phys.uu.nl, BOSMAN@ifae.es, JOHAN.RATHSMAN@thep.lu.se, E.W.N.GLOVER@durham.ac.uk, MKLEIN@hep.ph.liv.ac.uk, Fermilab Talks , ferminews@fnal.gov Ladies and Gentlemen, Since January 2012 (no typo), I have repeatedly urged CERN scholars to face the facts about the so-called "Higgs boson". No reply has been received so far. Even worse: the talibans at CERN have recently blocked my email address as "phishing attack": see p. 10 in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/scam.pdf I never did any "phishing" and never will. If the talibans at CERN believe otherwise, they must prove it ASAP. Keep this email safe in your files, because you will need it. Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net ==================================================================================== Subject: Re: Submission to CERN Document Server Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 19:48:45 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Lionel Cons , postmaster@cern.ch, cds.support@cern.ch, th-unit-secretariat@cern.ch, cedric.delaunay@cern.ch, Gian.Giudice@cern.ch, Oliver Buchmueller , Jean-Pierre.Delahaye@cern.ch, Jurgen.Schukraft@cern.ch, JAMES.WELLS@cern.ch, Andrea.Thamm@cern.ch, ivo.van.vulpen@nikhef.nl, Georgi Dvali , rolf.heuer@cern.ch, Fabiola Gianotti , Ignatios Antoniadis , Joseph Incandela , Susanne Reffert , Philippe.Bloch@cern.ch, Anne-Marie.Perrin@cern.ch, Arnaud.Marsollier@cern.ch, Julien.Lesgourgues@cern.ch, James Gillies , Richard.Brenner@cern.ch, Sergio.Bertolucci@cern.ch, gilad.perez@cern.ch, Dave Charlton , george.zoupanos@cern.ch, Geraldine.Servant@cern.ch, christian.thomas.byrnes@cern.ch, Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , paolo.giubellino@cern.ch, press.office@cern.ch, David J Miller , JOACHIM.MNICH@desy.de, LOHSE@physik.hu-berlin.de, KATSAN@admin.in2p3.fr, JoAnne Hewett , DYREKTOR@ifj.edu.pl, MANFRED.KRAMMER@oeaw.ac.at, Karlheinz Meier , THOMAS.MUELLER@kit.edu, Kerstin Borras , Halina Abramowicz , CLAUDIA.WULZ@cern.ch, MKRAEMER@physik.rwth-aachen.de, RAFFELT@mpp.mpg.de, MARKUS.SCHUMACHER@physik.uni-freiburg.de, ACHIM.STAHL@physik.rwth-aachen.de, S.BENTVELSEN@nikhef.nl, N.DEGROOT@hef.ru.nl, T.PEITZMANN@phys.uu.nl, BOSMAN@ifae.es, JOHAN.RATHSMAN@thep.lu.se, E.W.N.GLOVER@durham.ac.uk, MKLEIN@hep.ph.liv.ac.uk Dear Mr Cons, I regret to inform you that the talibans at CERN have blocked my email "due to phishing attack": http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/CERN.pdf Again, let me stress that I am totally against wasting BILLIONS of euros and dollars -- taxpayers' money earned with hard labor by millions of people -- for chasing the so-called "Higgs boson". It is not 'physical reality' and cannot be detected, ever. The facts are widely known ever since 1911, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg If the talibans at CERN ignore the facts, they will never be able to understand "the tantalising signals observed in season 1", http://home.cern/about/updates/2015/11/lhc-collides-ions-new-record-energy Erwin Schrödinger explained the problem in 1935. Details at my website (link below). Could you please tell the talibans at CERN about the difference between science and phishing ? After all, your pay check is also paid by taxpayers' money. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration. As always, I stand ready to support my accusations with FACTS. Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 20:07:53 +0300, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Dear Mr Cons, > > Thank you for your prompt reply. > >> We can't verify and can't upload this file if it's not accepted >> by physics department. > > As I stated in my previous email (printed below), your colleagues and > I have conflict of interests. Only they can resolve the issue by > accepting my paper, so that I can upload it at your CERN Document > Server. Hence they all will have to read and think on their "Higgs > boson", going back to the most widely known, ever since 1911, public > secret in theoretical physics. [snip] ---- NOTE According to Wikipedia, "Phishing is the attempt to acquire sensitive information such as usernames, passwords, and credit card details (and sometimes, indirectly, money), often for malicious reasons, by masquerading as a trustworthy entity in an electronic communication." Read the facts in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg and check out http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/CERN.jpg You will see there a giant female tarantula (Theraphosidae family of spiders) ready to jump on you, so close your web browser immediately and report my email address as "phishing attack". Good boy, now you're safe. D. Chakalov November 29, 2015, 18:44 GMT =================================================================================== Subject: Consciousness: Why bother? Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 15:34:29 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Sarah-Jayne Blakemore , Chris Frith , Karl Friston , Karl Friston Cc: Susan Greenfield , Michael Levin Dear colleagues, An answer to the question in the subject line is offered at my website (link below). Back in November 1998, I emailed Chris Frith and informed him that I am leaving soon for London and will be happy to take part in their fMRI volunteer program. No reply. In the following seven years, I emailed him and many of his colleagues -- no reply. I even attended one of their seminars at the Institute of Neurology and personally met Chris Frith and his colleagues, and informed them about my work. No reaction. It's like talking to a brick wall. Are you really interested in studying the human consciousness? Sincerely, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St SW1V 4JU chakalov.net =================================================================================== Subject: "How can one bring in something far away? By a conformal transformation." (Bob Geroch, p. 105) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 02:33:36 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Robert Geroch , Robert M Wald , William G Unruh , Karel V Kuchar , Gary Horowitz , Greg Galloway , Adam Helfer , Chris Isham , Jeffrey Winicour , Laszlo Szabados , John Baez , Piotr T Chrusciel , Tim-Torben Paetz , Hermann Nicolai , Bernard J Carr , Carl H Brans , Charles Torre , Anthony Lasenby , David B Malament , Erik Curiel , Helmut Friedrich , Paul Tod , Norbert Straumann , Ezra Newman , Alan Rendall , Lars Andersson , Carlos Kozameh , Roger Penrose http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Geroch_p105.jpg Can you count the instances of poetry and wishful thinking in the excerpt above? Mine are recorded at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/CERN.jpg http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt D. Chakalov chakalov.net ================= Subject: Re: "How can one bring in something far away? By a conformal transformation." (Bob Geroch, p. 105) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 14:17:30 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Robert Geroch , Robert M Wald , William G Unruh , Karel V Kuchar , Gary Horowitz , Greg Galloway , Adam Helfer , Chris Isham , Jeffrey Winicour , Laszlo Szabados , John Baez , Piotr T Chrusciel , Tim-Torben Paetz , Hermann Nicolai , Bernard J Carr , Carl H Brans , Charles Torre , Anthony Lasenby , David B Malament , Erik Curiel , Helmut Friedrich , Paul Tod , Norbert Straumann , Ezra Newman , Alan Rendall , Lars Andersson , Carlos Kozameh , Jörg Frauendiener , Roger Penrose P.S. Do you believe the excerpt from Bob Geroch (cf. Geroch_p105.jpg in my preceding email) explains how to define the spacetime globally (Malament.jpg) and "in a consistent way" (Piotr_p247.jpg)? http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Malament.jpg http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Piotr_p247.jpg Do you believe in the recipe of conformal completion by Penrose-Norris? http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Penrose_omega_zero.jpg http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Chuck_Norris.jpg If you do, I have a bridge to sell you. D.C. On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 02:33:36 +0000, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Geroch_p105.jpg > > Can you count the instances of poetry and wishful thinking in the excerpt above? > > Mine are recorded at > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/CERN.jpg > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt > > > D. Chakalov > chakalov.net > =================================================================================== Subject: Re: Gerard 't Hooft, arXiv:1511.04427v1 [gr-qc], "... but many questions remain." Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 21:29:43 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Hooft, G. 't (Gerard) On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 15:10:23 +0000, Hooft, G. 't (Gerard) wrote: > > Thank you for your kind question. Ma pleasure :-) > As long as there are all these idiots around who think they can > answer my questions, I'll hang on, to see what I can do myself. Check out the excerpt dedicated to your arXiv:1511.04427v1 [gr-qc] in rs_spacetime.txt at the link below. The only thing you could do is to keep quiet and play Sergeant Schultz, "I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing!" In my humble opinion, you should completely and irreversibly retire, ASAP. D. Chakalov chakalov.net > On 16 Nov 2015, at 03:15, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > >> Sure. Question No. 1: When will you retire, irreversibly? >> >> More questions in >> http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt >> >> D. Chakalov >> chakalov.net =============== NOTE Today, November 16, 2015, I emailed 't Hooft [Ref. 1] and politely asked him when he plans to retire irreversibly. He knows bloody well (i) the problems with the "radial coordinate r" in Hilbert-Droste-Weyl solution, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/horizon.pdf http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Geroch_p526.jpg http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/WH_BH.jpg (ii) the problems with his "understanding of quantum mechanics [3]" [Ref. 1], http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg and (iii) the problems with transport of energy by GWs [Ref. 2]: check out Fig. 11 on p. 13 and ref. [17] in 'Relative Scale Spacetime' http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf and Paul Steinhardt at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjmNW3mlisE But since he lives in total socialism, like Clifford Will and his colleagues (see below), he doesn't care about FACTS. Which is why I think he should completely and irreversibly retire, ASAP. More from Max Planck above. D. Chakalov November 16, 2015, 22:06 GMT [Ref. 1] Gerard 't Hooft, Singularities, horizons, firewalls, and local conformal symmetry, arXiv:1511.04427v1 [gr-qc], p. 2, November 16, 2015. http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.04427v1 p. 2, footnote 1: "coordinate singularity, much like the north pole of the Earth. It is the black hole horizon." p. 2: "point r = 0 is a real physical singularity." p. 2: "According to the present author's understanding of quantum mechanics [3], however, all states in which the Hawking particles fluctuate differently, are different ontological states of the system, and they should be treated as different quantum states as well. Thus, the vacuum state, which is a single quantum state, emerges at the horizon as a collection (superposition) of infinitely many ontological states, and it should be treated as such." -- [3] G. 't Hooft, The Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.1548v2, to be published, and v3, to appear. [Ref. 2] G. 't Hooft, STRANGE MISCONCEPTIONS OF GENERAL RELATIVITY http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gravitating_misconceptions.html =============== Subject: Re: Gerard 't Hooft, arXiv:1511.04427v1 [gr-qc], "... but many questions remain." Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:09:31 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Hooft, G. 't (Gerard) > I don't know why you so desperately want me to retire. You are producing too much garbage and polluting my space. > Apparently, you don't like my research. Wrong. I don't like your pollution. You are not doing research, because you ignore FACTS: see the link in my previous email. > Well, history will prove it either right or wrong Done. The first facts you ignore are from 1911. > For your information: I am indeed retired Then try growing home tomatoes for your grandchildren. Can't do much damage. D. Chakalov chakalov.net =============== Subject: Re: Gerard 't Hooft, arXiv:1511.04427v1 [gr-qc], "... but many questions remain." Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 02:03:36 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Hooft, G. 't (Gerard) >> Done. The first facts you ignore are from 1911. > > Ah, FACTS. Yes, FACTS: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg You can say nothing, which is why will keep dead quiet. Better grow home tomatoes for your grandchildren. Can't do much damage. D.C. =============== Subject: Re: The pure quantum world Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 13:42:25 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Klaas Landsman , Gerardus Cc: Christian Beck , Joe Polchinski , Roland Omnes , Petr Hajicek , Jeffrey Bub , Gian Michele Graf , Domenico Giulini , Claus Kiefer , Ghirardi Giancarlo , IGUS Jim , Jürg Fröhlich , Paul Davies , Frank Tipler , Renato Renner , Roger Colbeck , Antoine Suarez , Arati Prabhakar Klaas: I haven't heard from you since July 2005. May I ask you and your colleagues to help Gerardus understand the most widely known, ever since 1911, public secret in theoretical physics: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg Back in 1970s, Gerardus had great luck with QFT, for which he was awarded Nobel Prize, which unfortunately turned out to be very dangerous for his intellectual abilities, as he now believes that can solve the most widely known public secret in theoretical physics at the link above, and continues to publish all sorts of red herrings. The only possible solution to the problem identified in 1911 is explained in my paper on so-called relative scale spacetime (cf. my website), and I will be happy to give you and your colleagues the reference again, in case you have missed my previous email messages. Good luck. D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 15:51:45 +0300, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Dear Professor Landsman, > > I'm reading your "Between classical and quantum" [Ref. 1] > with immense pleasure. It is just a joy. Thank you! > > You stated [Ref. 1, p. 76] that "neither decoherence nor consistent > histories can stand on their own in explaining the appearance of > the classical world." You also stated (quote from the abstract) that > "classicality results from the elimination of certain states and > observables from quantum theory". > > May I ask you and your colleagues for help with elucidating the > following issues. [snip] =============== Subject: Re: The pure quantum world Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 20:16:24 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Hooft, G. 't (Gerard) , Klaas Landsman , Christian Beck , Joe Polchinski , Roland Omnes , Petr Hajicek , Jeffrey Bub , Gian Michele Graf , Domenico Giulini , Claus Kiefer , Ghirardi Giancarlo , IGUS Jim , Jürg Fröhlich , Paul Davies , Frank Tipler , Renato Renner , Roger Colbeck , Antoine Suarez , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Chris Isham On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 16:32:42 +0000, Hooft, G. 't (Gerard) wrote: > > Perhaps your question was your "professional" way to raise the collapse problem. Not at all. And it is not about "decoherence" either. Erwin Schrödinger explained the problem in 1935: see ref. [7], [8], and [29] in rs_spacetime.pdf from my website. Klaas, could you please help Gerardus with the basic basics of QM? I extend this request to all your colleagues. See again http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 15:34:15 +0200, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:22:20 +0000, Hooft, G. 't (Gerard) >> wrote: >>> >>> You think there is a contradiction there? >>> I'm not following your genius mind (not that I care about that) >> >> Klaas, could you please tell Gerardus to get professional? >> >> I extend this request to all your colleagues. See again >> http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg >> >> D. Chakalov >> chakalov.net >> =============== NOTE The *intact* quantum state (cf. ref. [29] in rs_spacetime.pdf from my website) does not "collapse" nor "decohere", and is not "uncertain" but *flexible*: God casts the die, not the dice (Einstein). Schrödinger and Heisenberg were only able to explain what the *intact* quantum state is _not_. In the framework of KS Theorem, see Helena Granström in ref. [85] therein. With the current QM, you cannot employ three consecutive "collapses" or "decoherences" of the same quantum particle, produced by energy exchanges over a finite duration of time, as read with your wristwatch. It will be like the trajectory of a bullet shot in a pool, only you cannot see the bullet itself, only the bubbles in the water. If you nevertheless wish to explain it with QM, you will match the quantum time of one single quantum particle with the time read with your wristwatch and produce some brand new time operators, and will ultimately demolish QM. Even our Gerardus (a.k.a. Gerard 't Hooft) would hesitate to try that. More in my email from Sat, 10 Oct 2015 15:01:39 +0300 to H D Zeh below, subject: 'Red herrings by H. Dieter Zeh et al.' All my email messages to CERN are tagged as "spam", so the "academic scholars" at CERN can keep wasting BILLIONS of euros -- all taxpayers' money -- for chasing their "Higgs boson" and won't have to think. But the so-called "Higgs boson" is the *intact* quantum state, which is _not_ physical: the chance for its physical observation is exactly ZERO: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Derendiger_23.jpg Check out the explanation from Henry Stapp at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFkaGlrBJR8 If the *intact* quantum state were 'physical reality', it should be "dark", which automatically leads to "the worst theoretical prediction in the history of physics!" http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/the_worst.jpg People either refuse to think and keep dead quiet, or refuse to think and reply like Prof. Dr. Maurice de Gosson (email from Mon, 21 May 2012 18:47:46 +0200): "Buzz off, idiot!" BILLIONS of euros -- all taxpayers' money -- are already wasted and much more are scheduled to be wasted for chasing the so-called "Higgs boson". As Johann Makowsky pointed out (The Jerusalem Post, 19 April 1985), "Overfunded research is like heroin: It makes one addicted, weakens the mind and furthers prostitution." More from Max Planck above. D. Chakalov November 21, 2015, 23:30 GMT ==================================================================================== Subject: STOP wasting taxpayers' money for chasing ghosts. Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 02:14:43 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: th-unit-secretariat@cern.ch, cedric.delaunay@cern.ch, Gian.Giudice@cern.ch, Oliver Buchmueller , Jean-Pierre.Delahaye@cern.ch, Jurgen.Schukraft@cern.ch, JAMES.WELLS@cern.ch, Andrea.Thamm@cern.ch, ivo.van.vulpen@nikhef.nl, Georgi Dvali , rolf.heuer@cern.ch, Fabiola Gianotti , Ignatios Antoniadis , Joseph Incandela , Susanne Reffert , Philippe.Bloch@cern.ch, Anne-Marie.Perrin@cern.ch, Arnaud.Marsollier@cern.ch, Julien.Lesgourgues@cern.ch, James Gillies , Richard.Brenner@cern.ch, Sergio.Bertolucci@cern.ch, gilad.perez@cern.ch, Dave Charlton , george.zoupanos@cern.ch, Geraldine.Servant@cern.ch, christian.thomas.byrnes@cern.ch, Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Fermilab Talks Ladies and Gentlemen: Regarding the most widely known, ever since 1911, public secret in theoretical physics: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg See an excerpt (CERN.jpg attached) from http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt STOP wasting taxpayers' money -- billions of euros -- for chasing ghosts. See again the most widely known public secret in theoretical physics above. D. Chakalov chakalov.net -- Attachment: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/CERN.jpg =============== Subject: Re: Problems with arXiv moderators Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:22:10 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Karen Vogtmann , Jennifer Ross , Eberhard Bodenschatz , Ralf Bundschuh , Paul Ginsparg , Daniel Gottesman , Steven Gottlieb , Joseph Halpern , Greg Kuperberg , Shude Mao , David R Morrison , Yuri Tschinkel , Bruno Nachtergaele , Andrew Connolly , Jacques Distler , Cornell University Library , th-unit-secretariat@cern.ch, cedric.delaunay@cern.ch, Gian.Giudice@cern.ch, Oliver Buchmueller , Jean-Pierre.Delahaye@cern.ch, Jurgen.Schukraft@cern.ch, JAMES.WELLS@cern.ch, Andrea.Thamm@cern.ch, ivo.van.vulpen@nikhef.nl, Georgi Dvali , rolf.heuer@cern.ch, Fabiola Gianotti , Ignatios Antoniadis , Joseph Incandela , Susanne Reffert , Philippe.Bloch@cern.ch, Anne-Marie.Perrin@cern.ch, Arnaud.Marsollier@cern.ch, Julien.Lesgourgues@cern.ch, James Gillies , Richard.Brenner@cern.ch, Sergio.Bertolucci@cern.ch, gilad.perez@cern.ch, Dave Charlton , george.zoupanos@cern.ch, Geraldine.Servant@cern.ch, christian.thomas.byrnes@cern.ch, Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Fermilab Talks Cc: Jake Weiskoff , arXiv Help , moderation@arxiv.org Dear Colleagues: I hope my email from Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:23:24 +0300 has been safely received. To understand why the submission of my manuscript to arXiv.org was rejected with brutal censorship, see http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/CERN.jpg It is an excerpt from http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt NB: I am totally against wasting BILLIONS of euros and dollars -- taxpayers' money earned with hard labor by millions of people -- for chasing the so-called "Higgs boson". It is not 'physical reality' and can never be detected: see CERN.jpg and rs_spacetime.txt at the links above, and Ivo van Vulpen at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/van_Vulpen_p40.jpg If my theory is correct (details at my website below), all people at CERN and their advocates in the U.S. will have to get professional, and the party will be over. Thus, we have a sharp conflict of interests. In my opinion, this is the actual reason why the talibans at arXiv.org (a.k.a. "moderators") removed the submission of my manuscript without any argumentation whatsoever. Should you have any doubts, please rise your questions and I will elaborate immediately. Please act responsibly. All it will take for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing. Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:23:24 +0300, Message-ID: , Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Dear Colleagues: > > Please excuse my unsolicited email. > > I would like to inform you about my problems with arXiv moderators, > who rejected the submission of my manuscript to arXiv.org: please see > their email from Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:28:33 -0400 below, in which they > "determined" (Sic!) that my submission were "in need of significant > review and revision before it would be considered publishable by a > conventional journal", yet did not provide any evidence in support of > their decision. > > I take their action as an INSULT. [snip] ----- NOTE: My email was again automatically rejected by the talibans at CERN: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/CERN.pdf One day I will catch them all. D. Chakalov November 22, 2015, 13:54 GMT -- Never give in. Never, never, never, never. Sir Winston Churchill, Harrow School, October 29, 1941 ==================================================================================== Subject: Re: Twelve years ago, ... Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 11:00:45 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Henry Stapp Cc: Karl Svozil P.S. I mentioned your name in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt More at my website. D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 04:50:42 +0200, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Twelve years ago, I was willing to make the trip to your lab, remember? > > You were also suspecting that I could be some "amateur magician" and > warned me that if I cheat you will catch me, remember? > > I have not yet received your apology, Henry. [snip] =================================================================================== Subject: Red herrings by H. Dieter Zeh et al. Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 15:01:39 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: H D Zeh , Erich Joos , Erich Joos , Carsten.Balleier@dfg.de, Andreas.Deschner@dfg.de, Frank.Kiefer@dfg.de, Johanna.Kowol-Santen@dfg.de, Stefan Krückeberg , Bernhard Milow , Claus Kiefer , Domenico Giulini , Hermann Nicolai , Steve Adler , Chris Isham , Wojciech Hubert Zurek , Helmut Friedrich , th-unit-secretariat@cern.ch, cedric.delaunay@cern.ch, Gian.Giudice@cern.ch, Oliver Buchmueller , Jean-Pierre.Delahaye@cern.ch, Jurgen.Schukraft@cern.ch, JAMES.WELLS@cern.ch, Andrea.Thamm@cern.ch, ivo.van.vulpen@nikhef.nl, Georgi Dvali , rolf.heuer@cern.ch, Fabiola Gianotti , Ignatios Antoniadis , joseph.incandela@cern.ch, Susanne Reffert , Philippe.Bloch@cern.ch, Anne-Marie.Perrin@cern.ch, Arnaud.Marsollier@cern.ch, Julien.Lesgourgues@cern.ch, James Gillies , Richard.Brenner@cern.ch, Sergio.Bertolucci@cern.ch, gilad.perez@cern.ch, Dave Charlton , george.zoupanos@cern.ch, Geraldine.Servant@cern.ch, christian.thomas.byrnes@cern.ch, Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Henk van Elst , Ghirardi Giancarlo , Roger Penrose The Emperor has no cloths, Dieter. Get real. And professional, as much as you can. I extend this gentle suggestion to all your colleagues. Check out the most widely known, ever since 1911, public secret in theoretical physics: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg Your poetic expression "classical behavior in quantum mechanical terms" [Ref. 1] and explanation of "decoherence" as "unavoidable entanglement with the environment (that defines the true border line (Sic! - D.C.) between micro- and macrophysics)" [Ref. 2] are red herrings: see the link above. You cannot apply Ehrenfest theorem which "formally connect the time dependence of mean values of canonically conjugate observables with the Hamilton equations of classical mechanics" [Ref. 3]: see the link above. The "time parameter" in Schrödinger's equation does not refer to some "background Newtonian time" [Ref. 4] either: see the link above. You and all your colleagues are persistently ignoring the basic facts stressed by Schrödinger and Heisenberg: see p. 2 and refs. [7], [8], [9], and [29] in Paper I at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf You and Erich should send back all money (in euros) to Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), which supported your 1985 essay [Ref. 3], and get professional, as much as you can. Your CERN colleagues should immediately stop wasting taxpayers' money for their "Higgs boson" and get professional, as much as they can. Nobody, all your colleagues included, should ignore the facts known since 1911. Enough is enough, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.txt D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- [Ref. 1] H. Dieter Zeh, Comment on decoherence by time dilation, arXiv:1510.02239v1 [quant-ph], p. 1. [Ref. 2] H. Dieter Zeh, The strange (hi)story of particles and waves, arXiv:1304.1003v14 [physics.hist-ph], p. 15. [Ref. 3] E. Joos and H.D. Zeh, The emergence of classical properties through interaction with the environment, Z. Phys. B - Condensed Matter 59, 223-243 (1985), p. 237. [Ref. 4] C.J. Isham, Prima Facie Questions in Quantum Gravity, arXiv:gr-qc/9310031v1, p. 14. ================================================================================== Subject: Re: WER? Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 11:21:56 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Clifford Will , Kip , Norbert Straumann , George , Mike Turner , Chris Isham , Karel V Kuchar , Charles Torre , Greg Galloway , Xiao Zhang , Niall Murchadha , Laszlo Szabados , Adam Helfer , Jörg Frauendiener , Jeffrey Winicour , Piotr T Chrusciel , Carl H Brans , Richard M Schoen , Paul Tod , Ezra Newman , Sean Hayward , Malcolm MacCallum , Robert Geroch , Robert M Wald , Abhay Ashtekar , Helmut Friedrich , Alan Rendall , Jose Natario , Tom , Federico Piazza , Xin Zhang , Miao Li , Zhaoyan Wu , Luca Lusanna , Sanjay E Sarma , David Wittman , Craig Copi , Dominik Schwarz , Hans Peter Nilles , Romualdo Tresguerres , J Anthony Tyson , Henry Ferguson , Robert van den Hoogen , Andrzej Soltan , Michal Chodorowski , William G Unruh , Yuan K Ha , Anthony Zee , Anthony Lasenby , Domenico Giulini , Claus Kiefer , Gary Horowitz , Lluis Bel , Friedrich W Hehl , John Stewart , Luciano , Thomas Thiemann , John Baez , Lars Andersson , Roger Blandford , Joseph Katz , Hermann Nicolai , Jorge Pullin , Jeremiah P Ostriker , Evangelos Melas , Robert Beig , Günther Hasinger , Richard Price , John Friedman , Paul K Townsend , Miguel Sanchez Caja , Helvi Witek , Jonathan Thornburg , Bernard J Carr , Tim-Torben Paetz , Timothy Clifton , Sergiu Klainerman , Ettore Minguzzi , Sascha Husa , Roger Penrose C. Will, arXiv:1409.7871v1 [gr-qc]: "Throughout this article, we ignore the cosmological constant C. We do this despite recent evidence, from supernova data, of an accelerating universe, which would indicate either a non-zero cosmological constant or a dynamical "dark energy" contributing about 70 percent of the critical density. Although C has significance for quantum field theory, quantum gravity, and cosmology, on the scale of the solar-system or of stellar systems its effects are negligible, for the values of C inferred from supernova observations." -- Clifford: Despite being involved with GR for nearly fifty years, you relentlessly publish all sorts of essays and books that ignore one simple fact: you don't know how gravity contributes to the physical world at a point (MTW, p. 467) nor at large distances (see the quote above). You know nothing. So before asking questions like "Was Einstein Right?" (WER), you should at least try to understand Einstein's "total field of as yet unknown structure": check out ref. [9] on p. 37 in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (8 November 2015, 44 pages, 1,133,533 bytes) You will find out that Einstein tried to explain the problems with his GR on 29 November 1918 (no typo). His "total field of as yet unknown structure" could be a magnetic-like Coriolis field of fictitious forces, which are not related to "distant stars" (Mach) but to Plato's proposal suggested some twenty-five centuries ago. It should have two opposite gravitational components: "attractive" (including "dark matter") and "repulsive" (Mike Turner called the latter "dark energy"). But like your colleagues, you too live in a total socialism, like a lion in a zoo, with your monthly pay check, medical benefits, and pension secured, and you need not to *think* anymore. Is it fun to live in a zoo? D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Fri, 28 May 2004 14:28:29 -0500 (CDT), Clifford M. Will wrote: > > Please remove me from your mailing list. > C. Will > cmw@wuphys.wustl.edu > ================================================================================== Subject: Karel Hrbacek, Thomas J. Jech, Introduction to Set Theory, 3rd ed., Marcel Dekker, Basel, 1999, p. 269. Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 20:10:12 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Karel Hrbacek , Tomás Jech Cc: Andrew Waldron , Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Henk van Elst , Karen Vogtmann , Jennifer Ross , Eberhard Bodenschatz , Ralf Bundschuh , Paul Ginsparg , Daniel Gottesman , Steven Gottlieb , Joseph Halpern , Greg Kuperberg , Shude Mao , David R Morrison , Yuri Tschinkel , Bruno Nachtergaele , Andrew Connolly , Jacques Distler , John L Bell , Charles Parsons , emily.carson@mcgill.ca, Michael Potter , Jean Paul Van Bendegem , thomas@cc.umanitoba.ca, robert_thomas@umanitoba.ca, jburgess@princeton.edu, p.ernest@ex.ac.uk, Juliet Floyd , emlandry@ucdavis.edu, Robert L Hale , Steve Awodey , Simon Hewitt , Wolfgang Mückenheim , Guy Consolmagno , ggionti@specola.va, info@vaticanobservatory.org, Templeton Foundation , Jack Lee , mincomplexit@naver.com, c.pimienta@unsw.edu.au, Peter May , Johannes Heidema , izak.broere@up.ac.za, Peter Koellner , John R Steel , Hugh Woodin , Ilijas Farah , Qi Feng , Paul Larson , Martin Zeman , Matthew Foreman , Dieter Kotschick , Bernhard Leeb , Fabian Ziltener , Hartmut Weiß , Carlos Ramos-Cuevas , Hans-Dieter Donder , Wilfried Buchholz , Helmut Schwichtenberg , Peter Müller , P.H.Haynes@damtp.cam.ac.uk, J.H.Coates@dpmms.cam.ac.uk, J.Rasmussen@dpmms.cam.ac.uk, Nick Woodhouse , Naomi Kraker , ross@math.osu.edu, Akihiro Kanamori , Matthew Foreman , Philip Welch , Stevo Todorcevic , James Cummings , Tony Martin , Michael Rathjen , Laura Crosilla , William Tait , Joel David Hamkins , Edward Witten , jaffe@physics.harvard.edu, Andrew Wiles , feferman@stanford.edu, admin@claymath.org, Asaf Karagila , Hans Ringström , Yvonne Choquet-Bruhat , Andrzej Mariusz Trautman , David Robinson , Xiao Zhang http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/p_269.jpg -- Karel and Tom: Check out the explanation of your problem on p. 30 in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (4 November 2015, 38 pages) Please do not procrastinate. It's about Mathematics. I extend this gentle suggestion to all your colleagues. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Neil Turok, 09/05/2012 - "From zero to infinity, and beyond!" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 00:05:09 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Neil Turok , Paul Steinhardt , Luxi Li , cori.bargmann@rockefeller.edu, jwootten@rubenstein.com, office@breakthroughprize.org, sen@hri.res.in, seiberg@ias.edu, tongj@mcmaster.ca, origins@mcmaster.ca, pudritz@physics.mcmaster.ca, chenal@mcmaster.ca, cburgess@physics.mcmaster.ca, goldrd@mcmaster.ca, Brian How do we know that Father Christmas has a beard? We know it, because snow falls when he shakes his beard. Explanation of your "snow" at my website. D. Chakalov chakalov.net -- It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. Upton Sinclair ================================================================================== Subject: Daniele Oriti, Wednesday, 28-10-2015, If space and time are emergent (in quantum gravity), what is cosmology? Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 23:55:12 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Daniele Oriti Cc: Claus Kiefer , Domenico Giulini , Paul Steinhardt , Jeremiah P Ostriker , Saul Perlmutter , Joe Silk , David Spergel , Frans Pretorius , Michael Strauss , Neta Bahcall , James Peebles Relative Scale cosmology, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (27 October 2015, 36 pages, 863,563 bytes) Will you again ignore the facts and keep playing Sergeant Schultz, "I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing" ? D. Chakalov chakalov.net =================================================================================== Subject: Euclid Consortium Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 04:40:38 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Valeria Pettorino , Y Mellier , O Le Fevre , H W Rix , R Bender , H J A Rottgering , G Meylan , M Cropper , R C Nichol , J Rhodes , Jan Wörner Dear Colleagues, The so-called "dark" manifestations of gravity may be something totally unexpected: see 'Relative Scale Spacetime' at my website below, Fig. 14. As your colleagues acknowledged (arXiv:1206.1225v2 [astro-ph.CO] 22 Oct 2015), "it would be totally premature to claim that we are close to understanding the ingredients of the cosmological standard model." I will be happy to elaborate, if needed. Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Alex Dolgov, "one of the greatest mysteries of Nature" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 04:13:57 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Alexander Dolgov , dolgov@itep.ru Cc: Paul Steinhardt , Adam Helfer , George , Anthony Lasenby , Laszlo Szabados , George Efstathiou , Mike Hobson , Mike , Gary Horowitz , Jörg Frauendiener Alex dorogoi, The solution to what you called "one of the greatest mysteries of Nature" is at my website. Since you're Russian, like all your colleagues, I don't expect from you to say 'thank you'. But it would be nice if you break your rule, just for a change. D. Chakalov chakalov.net http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/p23.jpg ================================================================================== Subject: Snogshibatelnie oshibki: Misha Katanaev, arXiv:1311.0733v2 [math-ph] Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 20:54:31 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: steklov@mi.ras.ru, M Katanaev Cc: Andrei Khrennikov , A Novikov-Borodin , Dmitry Slavnov , Stanislav Babak , Mukhanov Alex , Igor , Alexander Dolgov Misha dorogoi, Regarding your errors in Ch. 1.1, 14, 20.8.3, 20.9, 20.10, and 21.8, see http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (8 November 2015, 44 pages, 1,133,533 bytes) None of your colleagues from Steklov Institute have paid attention to my criticism. Hope you will. Sincerely, D. Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Andrei Linde, A brief history of the multiverse, arXiv:1512.01203v1 [hep-th] Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 02:28:49 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Andrei Linde , Lenny , Andrei Khrennikov , Alexander Vilenkin , Mukhanov , Paul Steinhardt , Frank , Don N Page , Alan Guth , Frank Tipler , Max Tegmark , Neil Turok , A Novikov-Borodin , Dmitry Slavnov , Stanislav Babak , Alex , Igor , Alexander Dolgov , M Katanaev , Steven Weinberg Andrei Linde (1982): "There is an infinite number of causally unconnected mini-universes inside our universe, and life exists only in sufficiently suitable ones." Eh ti, staruha Izergil', who let you leave Russia. BIG mistake. Here's why: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg The problem is from 1911, and you bloody know it. But you all will keep dead quiet, since you're all Russians, even if you don't speak the language, like Lenny. D. Chakalov chakalov.net =================================================================================== Subject: Carlos Barceló et al., Where does the physics of extreme gravitational collapse reside? arXiv:1510.04957v1 [gr-qc], 16 Oct 2015 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 13:51:09 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Carlos Barcelo , Raul Carballo-Rubio , Luis Garay , Gonzalo Olmo , Beatrice Bonga , Aruna Kesavan , Abhay Ashtekar , Matt Visser , Malcolm MacCallum , Robert M Wald , Steven Weinberg , Steven Carlip , Robert Geroch Carlos: You are indeed Russian, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/russian.html No, you cannot define "event horizon" in principle. Nobody can. All mathematical facts were known by 1922. Check out my website. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ---- Note: In addition to the unsolvable problems known since 1922, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Geroch_p526.jpg one cannot in principle define "endpoints" at 'spacetime at infinity': http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/horizon.pdf http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf D. Chakalov 19 October 2015 ================================================================================== Subject: [moderation #153337] arXiv: submit/1364555 removed Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:28:33 -0400 From: arXiv Moderation Reply-To: moderation@arxiv.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: RT-Originator: jsw73@cornell.edu To: dchakalov@gmail.com The moderators determined that your submission was in need of significant review and revision before it would be considered publishable by a conventional journal. Please note that arXiv moderators are not referees and provide no feedback nor detailed reviews with the removal of submissions. Please submit instead to a conventional journal to receive the requisite feedback. For more information about our moderation policies, please see: http://arxiv.org/help/moderation -- arXiv moderation ================ Comment: The talibans at arXiv.org (a.k.a. "moderators"), email jsw73@cornell.edu, removed the submission of my manuscript rs_spacetime.pdf without any argumentation. Shame on you, arXiv "moderators". You are total disgrace to Cornell University. D. Chakalov 11 October 2015, 21:27 GMT ================ Subject: Re: [moderation #153337] arXiv: submit/1364555 removed Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 01:43:25 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: moderation@arxiv.org Cc: arXiv Help , Jake Weiskoff , kst32@cornell.edu, fhr2@cornell.edu, Charles Walcott , vp_research@cornell.edu, jim.alexander@cornell.edu, physics@cornell.edu, Eanna Flanagan , Peter Stein , Saul Teukolsky Dear arXiv moderators: If you insist on your insulting "determination" (see my previous email messages below), but do not wish to exercise brutal communist censorship, why don't you allow my manuscript to show up at arXiv? You may add any comments of your choice, and then people will read my paper and decide whether it is "in need of significant review and revision" (cf. your email from Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:28:33 -0400 below). Check it out at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (16 October 2015, 33 pages, 805,633 bytes) Notice that I endorse Einstein's "total field of as yet unknown structure" (cf. ref. [9] on p. 28 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above), so if I am on the right track, you and all your colleagues, included Dr. Saul Teukolsky, will have to study my theory very carefully and try to prove it wrong. I have already explained how you can prove my theory wrong: see Fig. 11 on p. 13 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above. Of course, feel free to offer *any* other theory and/or experiment to dismiss my theory. Let me summarize in plain English: Do you have the guts to publish my paper at arXiv.org ? Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 23:54:54 +0300, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:03:49 -0400, > Message-ID: , > arXiv Moderation wrote: >> >> Dear Dimi Chakalov, >> >> We usually suggest authors to review our documentation regarding >> our mission, policies and procedures before using this resource. It >> is arXiv's policy not to provide any feedback and not to give any detail >> reviews of the removal of submissions. > > Do you speak English? > > You offered an unsolicited *determination* by an unsolicited > *feedback*: you "determined" that my submission were "in need of > significant review and revision". > > Yet you failed to provide any evidence whatsoever in support of your > unsolicited "determination", offered as unsolicited "feedback". > > This is an INSULT. > > NB: Who is your supervisor? Please provide her/his name and email > address, and I will proceed further. > >> This is the final decision, please note that you agreed to follow our >> policies and procedures when registered to arXiv. > > I never agreed to accept INSULTS from arXiv -- see above and my > preceding email printed below. > > Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, > > Dimi Chakalov > 35A Sutherland St > London SW1V 4JU > chakalov.net > > >> On Sat Oct 10 15:08:01 2015, dchakalov@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> Dear Sir or Madam: >>> >>> I wish to file an official complaint against arXiv "moderators". >>> >>> In their email from 8 Oct 2015 printed below, they "determined" that >>> my submission were "in need of significant review and revision", yet >>> failed to provide any evidence whatsoever in support of their >>> unsolicited "determination", offered as unsolicited "feedback". >>> >>> Therefore, I consider their action an INSULT and wish to file an >>> official complaint against them. >>> >>> If arXiv "moderators" did not provide any insulting "determination" >>> but simply removed my submission, I would have accepted their actions, >>> as conforming to their moderation policies. >>> >>> But INSULTS I cannot and will not tolerate. >>> >>> Please let me know the name and email address of the person, who is >>> supervising arXiv "moderators". >>> >>> If they are not accountable to anyone, please confirm this in plain >>> English, and I will proceed further. >>> >>> Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, >>> >>> Yours sincerely, >>> >>> Dimi Chakalov >>> 35A Sutherland St >>> London SW1V 4JU >>> chakalov.net >>> >>> >>> Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:28:33 -0400, >>> Message-ID: , >>> arXiv Moderation wrote: >>> > >>> > The moderators determined that your submission was in need >>> > of significant review and revision before it would be considered >>> > publishable by a conventional journal. Please note that arXiv >>> > moderators are not referees and provide no feedback nor detailed >>> > reviews with the removal of submissions. >>> > >>> > Please submit instead to a conventional journal to receive the >>> > requisite feedback. For more information about our moderation >>> > policies, please see: >>> > >>> > http://arxiv.org/help/moderation >>> > >>> > -- >>> > arXiv moderation >>> >>> ## Keyword: submit/1364555 ## >> >> =================================================================================== Subject: Problems with arXiv moderators Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:23:24 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Karen Vogtmann , Jennifer Ross , Eberhard Bodenschatz , Ralf Bundschuh , Paul Ginsparg , Daniel Gottesman , Steven Gottlieb , Joseph Halpern , Greg Kuperberg , Shude Mao , David R Morrison , Yuri Tschinkel , Bruno Nachtergaele , Andrew Connolly , Jacques Distler , Cornell University Library Dear Colleagues: Please excuse my unsolicited email. I would like to inform you about my problems with arXiv moderators, who rejected the submission of my manuscript to arXiv.org: please see their email from Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:28:33 -0400 below, in which they "determined" (Sic!) that my submission were "in need of significant review and revision before it would be considered publishable by a conventional journal", yet did not provide any evidence in support of their decision. I take their action as an INSULT. If arXiv moderators did not provide any insulting "determination" but simply removed my submission, I would have accepted their actions, as conforming to their moderation policies. But INSULTS I cannot and will not tolerate. My manuscript is available at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (16 October 2015, 33 pages, 805,633 bytes) Please notice that I endorse Einstein's "total field of as yet unknown structure" (cf. ref. [9] on p. 28 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). If I am on the right track, all your colleagues will have to study my theory very carefully and try to prove it wrong. I have already explained how they can prove my theory wrong: please see Fig. 11 on p. 13 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above. Needless to say, you and all your colleagues are welcomed to suggest *any* other theory and/or experiment to dismiss my theory. In my opinion, I speak on behalf of Albert Einstein, as suggesting a possible candidate for his "total field of as yet unknown structure". I don't believe the arXiv moderators are qualified to deliver any bold "determination", and I consider their action plain censorship. Please look at my paper at the link above, and judge for yourself. Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net ---- Subject: [moderation #153337] arXiv: submit/1364555 removed Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:28:33 -0400 From: arXiv Moderation Reply-To: moderation@arxiv.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: RT-Originator: jsw73@cornell.edu To: dchakalov@gmail.com The moderators determined that your submission was in need of significant review and revision before it would be considered publishable by a conventional journal. Please note that arXiv moderators are not referees and provide no feedback nor detailed reviews with the removal of submissions. Please submit instead to a conventional journal to receive the requisite feedback. For more information about our moderation policies, please see: http://arxiv.org/help/moderation -- arXiv moderation ==================================================================================== Subject: Potential Reality I: Relative Scale Spacetime Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 02:58:20 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: John L Bell , Charles Parsons , emily.carson@mcgill.ca, Michael Potter , Jean Paul Van Bendegem , thomas@cc.umanitoba.ca, robert_thomas@umanitoba.ca, jburgess@princeton.edu, p.ernest@ex.ac.uk, jfloyd@bu.edu, emlandry@ucdavis.edu, r.hale@sheffield.ac.uk, Steve Awodey Dear Colleagues, I am taking the liberty of sending you my manuscript (cf. rs_spacetime.pdf attached), which can also be downloaded from http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (11 October 2015, 31 pages, 859,145 bytes) The target of 'Potential Reality I: Relative Scale Spacetime' is philosophy of mathematics. To the best of my knowledge, it offers a new approach to point set topology, set theory, and number theory. The core ideas belong to Plato, Heraclitus, and Aristotle. As far as I know 'Philosophia Mathematica', you will never publish it, in no circumstances. If correct, please explain why. Thank you for your time and consideration. Yours faithfully, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net ---- Attachment: rs_spacetime.pdf ================================================================================== Simon Hewitt, When Do Some Things Form a Set? Philosophia Mathematica (2015) 23 (3): 311-337. ---- Subject: Re: When do some things form a set? Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:36:33 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Simon Hewitt Thanks a lot, Simon. Your paper is very interesting. Since we think with sets, we cannot define set with itself. It will be like defining heat with some tiny little and very hot particles. The very fact that we can think of 'everything that is On' or 'everything that is Inside', etc., shows the sets of ordinals. But the 'set' itself is undefinable 'totality of things' (Cantor) coupled with what this 'totality of things' is *not*. It's all relational -- see the paper at my website. Best - Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Simon Hewitt wrote: [snip] ================================================================================== Subject: Sometimes Hilbert's counting beyond the infinite comes to a hold Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:40:41 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Wolfgang Mückenheim Cc: [snip] http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadID=3D2724788 -- Dear Wolfgang, Back in the last century, I contacted you regarding your essay on negative probability, remember? I found you recent posting quite messy, as you stated that "the natural numbers count themselves, and there is nothing larger than all natural numbers in the natural numbers" (typo corrected). Wie viele Sandkörner passen ins Universum? Die messbare Unendlichkeit: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (3 November 2015, 37 pages, 985,075 bytes) All the best, Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net =================================================================================== Subject: Hyperimaginary numbers Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 21:35:24 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Think deeply of simple things , Clay Mathematics Institute , Gregory Brumfiel , Yakov Eliashberg Dear colleagues: I need new Mathematics, as explained in 'Relative Scale Spacetime', http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (8 November 2015, 44 pages, 1,133,533 bytes) Perhaps you may be interested. Details at my website below. Sincerely, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ==================================================================================== Subject: Jürgen Renn, The Genesis and Renaissance of General Relativity, June 2015 Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 20:42:03 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Jürgen Renn Cc: Norbert Straumann , Angelo Loinger , John Stachel , John Norton , Claus Kiefer , Domenico Giulini https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj8rZnOUjWU -- Dear Dr. Renn, I watched very carefully your lecture about Einstein's GR, and noticed that you did not mention the crucial help he got from Levi-Civita prior to 25 November 1915: the trace term. Grossmann knew nothing about it, not to mention Einstein. Check out ref. [74] in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf Regarding the last question at 1:03:47 from the timeline, which you didn't answer: don't you think that Einstein would be very concerned with the gravitational energy density at a point (MTW, p. 467)? My proposal in explained in the paper above. Sincerely, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ==================================================================================== Subject: Re: Submission to Foundations of Science Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:53:08 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Sandro Sozzo , Diederik Aerts Dear Dr. Sozzo, Thank you for your reply. > Unfortunately, your manuscript is too specialistic and its content falls > outside the scopes of our journal - please have a look at the webpage > http://www.springer.com/philosophy/epistemology+and+philosophy+of+science/journal/10699 Let me quote from the text at the link above: "Foundations of Science focuses on significant methodological and philosophical topics concerning the structure and the growth of science. It serves as a forum for exchange of views and ideas among working scientists and theorists of science, and promotes interdisciplinary cooperation. "The journal presents foundational issues of science in a way that is free from unnecessary technicalities, yet faithful to the scientific content. Its aim is not simply to identify and highlight foundational issues and problems, but to suggest constructive solutions." Could you please show me at least one issue in my paper, which is "too specialistic" and/or falls outside the scopes of your journal, as defined at the link above ? Please download the paper from my website (chakalov.net) or straight from http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf Looking forward to hearing from you or from Dr. Aerts, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net > Il 08.10.2015 17:45 Dimi Chakalov ha scritto: [snip] ================================================================================== Subject: Submission to CERN Document Server Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 17:50:26 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: cds.support@cern.ch Cc: th-unit-secretariat@cern.ch, Fabiola Gianotti , Oliver Buchmueller , Susanne Reffert , SERGIO.BERTOLUCCI@cern.ch, ANDREA.THAMM@cern.ch, ANNE-MARIE.PERRIN@cern.ch, Arnaud.Marsollier@cern.ch, CEDRIC.DELAUNAY@cern.ch, CHRISTIAN.THOMAS.BYRNES@cern.ch, GEORGE.ZOUPANOS@cern.ch, Georgi Dvali , GERALDINE.SERVANT@cern.ch, James Gillies , JAMES.WELLS@cern.ch, JEAN-PIERRE.DELAHAYE@cern.ch, GIAN.GIUDICE@cern.ch, GILAD.PEREZ@cern.ch, Ignatios Antoniadis , Ivo.van.Vulpen@nikhef.nl, Joseph.Incandela@cern.ch, JULIEN.LESGOURGUES@cern.ch, JURGEN.SCHUKRAFT@cern.ch, PHILIPPE.BLOCH@cern.ch, RICHARD.BRENNER@cern.ch, ROLF.HEUER@cern.ch, dave.charlton@cern.ch Dear Colleague, I'm experiencing difficulties with submitting my manuscript to CERN Document Server, entitled 'Potential Reality I: Relative Scale Spacetime'. It is available in pdf format (rs_spacetime.pdf) at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (7 October 2015, 30 pages, 65 refs, 741,858 bytes) In my opinion, the manuscript may be very important to CERN, as it elaborates on Einstein's "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf) and explains the problems with what people call "Higgs boson". No feedback from the Theory Dept at CERN has reached me so far, although the problems with the so-called "Higgs boson" were communicated to them at least three years ago. One of your colleagues, Prof. Dave Charlton, automatically rejects my email messages, after I tried to explain -- based on facts -- why his efforts are doomed to fail. Obviously, your colleagues at CERN and I have conflict of interests, and I would very much like to submit my manuscript to CERN Document Server, so that they can read it and explain their professional objections. Notice that the unsolved problem of localization of quantum particles is known since 1911, thanks to Charles Wilson, http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg Please let me know how I can submit my manuscript to CERN Document Server, so that it cannot be ignored any more. Enough is enough. Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Sincerely yours, Dimi Chakalov 35A Sutherland St London SW1V 4JU chakalov.net ========== Note: Since 2013, Dave Charlton is Spokesperson of the ATLAS Collaboration at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. I emailed him on 4 June 2015 (see below), after which he rejects my email. D. Chakalov October 9, 2015, 01:44 GMT ========== Subject: LHC experiments back in business at record energy, 3 June 2015 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 03:38:09 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: David Charlton Cc: [snip] Dear Dr. Charlton, I just saw your PR statement on Euronews, and would like to set the record straight. To quote from your website, "more than 3000 scientists from 174 institutes in 38 countries work on the ATLAS experiment", yet nobody has acknowledged the most widely known, ever since 1911, public secret in theoretical physics: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg You do not have any theory to help you with your "mission", as you proclaimed on Euronews. Check out 'the proof of the (Higgs) pudding' (attached), from http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/horizon.pdf Please don't reply by email. Do your homework and report your 'proof of the (Higgs) pudding' at arXiv.org. I'll take it from there. Sincerely, Dimi Chakalov -- 3 Attachments ========== Subject: Re: Submission to CERN Document Server Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 20:07:53 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: cds.support@cern.ch, th-unit-secretariat@cern.ch, cedric.delaunay@cern.ch, Gian.Giudice@cern.ch, Oliver Buchmueller , Jean-Pierre.Delahaye@cern.ch, Jurgen.Schukraft@cern.ch, JAMES.WELLS@cern.ch, Andrea.Thamm@cern.ch, ivo.van.vulpen@nikhef.nl, Georgi Dvali , rolf.heuer@cern.ch, Fabiola Gianotti , Ignatios Antoniadis , joseph.incandela@cern.ch, Susanne Reffert , Philippe.Bloch@cern.ch, Anne-Marie.Perrin@cern.ch, Arnaud.Marsollier@cern.ch, Julien.Lesgourgues@cern.ch, James Gillies , Richard.Brenner@cern.ch, Sergio.Bertolucci@cern.ch, gilad.perez@cern.ch, Dave Charlton , george.zoupanos@cern.ch, Geraldine.Servant@cern.ch, christian.thomas.byrnes@cern.ch, Lionel Cons Dear Mr Cons, Thank you for your prompt reply. > We can't verify and can't upload this file if it's not accepted > by physics department. As I stated in my previous email (printed below), your colleagues and I have conflict of interests. Only they can resolve the issue by accepting my paper, so that I can upload it at your CERN Document Server. Hence they all will have to read and think on their "Higgs boson", going back to the most widely known, ever since 1911, public secret in theoretical physics. Please cite my manuscript as D. Chakalov, Potential Reality I: Relative Scale Spacetime, viXra:1410.0194 [v8] http://vixra.org/abs/1410.0194 With all my excuses to not being able to help you more, D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 17:50:26 +0000, Message-ID: , Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Dear Colleague, > > I'm experiencing difficulties with submitting my manuscript to CERN > Document Server, entitled 'Potential Reality I: Relative Scale > Spacetime'. It is available in pdf format (rs_spacetime.pdf) at > > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf > (7 October 2015, 30 pages, 65 refs, 741,858 bytes) > > In my opinion, the manuscript may be very important to CERN, as it > elaborates on Einstein's "total field of as yet unknown structure" > (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf) and explains the problems with > what people call "Higgs boson". > > No feedback from the Theory Dept at CERN has reached me so far, > although the problems with the so-called "Higgs boson" were > communicated to them at least three years ago. One of your colleagues, > Prof. Dave Charlton, automatically rejects my email messages, after I > tried to explain -- based on facts -- why his efforts are doomed to > fail. > > Obviously, your colleagues at CERN and I have conflict of interests, > and I would very much like to submit my manuscript to CERN Document > Server, so that they can read it and explain their professional > objections. Notice that the unsolved problem of localization of > quantum particles is known since 1911, thanks to Charles Wilson, > > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Fig_8_small.jpg > > Please let me know how I can submit my manuscript to CERN Document > Server, so that it cannot be ignored any more. Enough is enough. > > Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, > > Sincerely yours, > > Dimi Chakalov > 35A Sutherland St > London SW1V 4JU > chakalov.net > ========== Subject: Undeliverable: Re: Submission to CERN Document Server Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:07:54 +0200 Message-ID: <7dfff89a-b10c-4f6f-a943-b18bb52fa784@cern.ch> From: To: Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups: Dave Charlton (dave.charlton@cern.ch) This message was rejected by the recipient e-mail system. Please check the recipient's e-mail address and try resending this message, or contact the recipient directly. ================================================================================== Subject: Physical theology Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 22:58:13 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Guy Consolmagno , alessandro.omizzolo@oapd.inaf.it, ggionti@specola.va, Gabriele Gionti , vernieri@iap.fr, Templeton Foundation Dear colleagues, Please check out p. 11 in 'The Spacetime', http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/spacetime.pdf (24.01.2016, 15 pages) Your feedback will be greatly appreciated. Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ======================== Subject: [John 1:1 & Luke 17:21] as mathematical object Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 12:31:55 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Guy Consolmagno , ggionti@specola.va, info@vaticanobservatory.org, Templeton Foundation Dear colleagues, Please check out Table 1, p. 8, in 'Relative Scale Spacetime', http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (7 October 2015, 30 pages, 65 refs) Your critical comments and suggestions will be highly appreciated. Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Beyond Matter: Physical Theology Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 15:53:12 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Roger Trigg , Andrew Pinsent , Alister McGrath , Byron Johnson , Rodney Stark , Thomas Farr , isr@baylor.edu, Dirk Evers , Hubert Meisinger , Knut-Willy Saether , Lluis Oviedo , Robert John Russell , Harvey M Friedman , Templeton Foundation , Michal Heller , Albrecht von Müller , carsten.freitaeger@parmenides-foundation.org Dear Colleagues, I think you may be interested to check out the project at my website (link below), which was initiated by Plato. Your feedback will be appreciated. Kind regards, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net =================================================================================== Subject: Karel Hrbacek, Thomas J. Jech, Introduction to Set Theory, 3rd ed., Marcel Dekker, Basel, 1999, p. 269. Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:55:28 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Karel Hrbacek , Tomás Jech , Cc: Jack Lee , mincomplexit@naver.com, c.pimienta@unsw.edu.au, Peter May , Johannes Heidema , izak.broere@up.ac.za, Peter Koellner , Charles Parsons , John R Steel , Hugh Woodin , Ilijas Farah , Qi Feng , Martin Zeman , Matthew Foreman , Dieter Kotschick , Bernhard Leeb , Fabian Ziltener , Hartmut Weiß , Carlos Ramos-Cuevas , Hans-Dieter Donder , Wilfried Buchholz , Helmut Schwichtenberg , Peter Müller , P.H.Haynes@damtp.cam.ac.uk, J.H.Coates@dpmms.cam.ac.uk, J.Rasmussen@dpmms.cam.ac.uk, Nick Woodhouse , Naomi Kraker , ross@math.osu.edu, Akihiro Kanamori , Matthew Foreman , Philip Welch , Stevo Todorcevic , James Cummings , Tony Martin , Michael Rathjen , Laura Crosilla , William Tait , Joel David Hamkins , Edward Witten , jaffe@physics.harvard.edu, Andrew Wiles , feferman@stanford.edu, admin@claymath.org, Asaf Karagila , Hans Ringström , Yvonne Choquet-Bruhat , Andrzej Mariusz Trautman , David Robinson , Didier Sornette http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/p_269.jpg ---- Check out the Thomson's lamp paradox, pp. 14-15, in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (7 October 2015, 30 pages, 65 refs) Or simply ignore the facts, stick to ZFC or ZFC_ (whichever you prefer), and keep playing Sergeant Schultz, "I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing!" The choice is yours, thanks to your undecidable free will. D. Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: The centenary of Einstein's General Relativity Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:25:16 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Wei-Tou Ni , Yongge Ma , Sijie Gao , Miao Li , Lau Loi So , Zhaoyan Wu , Mu-Tao Wang , Xiao Zhang , Shing-Tung Yau Dear Colleagues, I have written a paper dedicated to the centenary of Einstein's General Relativity: please see http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (7 October 2015, 30 pages) Would you agree to endorse the submission of my paper to arXiv.org, sec. gr-qc? I can send you the link to endorse it right away. Please notice that I am speaking for Albert Einstein, since it is all about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Re: The history of the cosmological constant problem Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:00:37 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Norbert Straumann Cc: Gian Michele Graf , Jean-Pierre Derendinger , Henk van Elst , Eduardo Guendelman Dear Professor Straumann, I quoted from your 2013 textbook in General Relativity and from your article "The history of the cosmological constant problem", gr-qc/0208027, at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (7 October 2015, 30 pages) May I ask you or any of your colleagues to endorse the submission of my paper to arXiv.org, sec. gr-qc. I can send you the link to endorse it right away. Please notice that I am speaking for Albert Einstein, since it is all about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). Looking forward to hearing from you and your colleagues, Sincerely yours, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net On Wed, 14 Aug 2002 18:59:58 +0300, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > Dear Professor Straumann, > > I quoted your recent article "The history of the cosmological constant problem", > gr-qc/0208027, at [snip] ================================================================================== Subject: The explicit but unobservable, non-dynamical time Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:14:00 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: William G Unruh Cc: Robert M Wald , Robert Geroch , Karel V Kuchar , Gary Horowitz , Greg Galloway Re: William G. Unruh and Robert M. Wald (15 December 1988), Time and the interpretation of canonical quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D 40 (1989) 2598-2614. -- Dear Dr. Unruh, Please see my interpretation on p. 15 and in ref. [29] in http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (6 October 2015, 30 pages) May I ask you or any of your colleagues to endorse the submission of my paper to arXiv.org, sec. gr-qc. I can send you the link to endorse it right away. Please notice that I am speaking for Albert Einstein, since it is all about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). Looking forward to hearing from you and your colleagues, Sincerely yours, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Kids have the right to know everything we know. Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:15:04 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Claus Kiefer Domenico Giulini , Sergio Doplicher , Andreas , Dorje Brody Dear Dr. Kiefer, Our students are kids, and I believe kids have the right to know everything we know. I hope my critical comments on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd editions of your monograph 'Quantum Gravity' have been safely received. Beginning 19 October 2015, you will be teaching 'Relativity and Cosmology I' (winter term 2015/16). I have an alternative theory: please see http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (6 October 2015, 30 pages) Would you agree to endorse the submission of my paper to arXiv.org, sec. gr-qc? I can send you the link to endorse it right away. Please notice that I am speaking for Albert Einstein, since my paper is about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net =================================================================================== Subject: An alternative to arXiv:1510.01190v1 [gr-qc] Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 10:27:16 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Saul Teukolsky Cc: Stewart Shapiro Dear Dr. Teukolsky, Thank you, once more, for sending me the preprint from your paper, co-authored by Dr. Stewart Shapiro, in the autumn of 1991 (S. L. Shapiro and S. A. Teukolsky, Formation of naked singularities: Violation of cosmic censorship, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 994-997). I read with great interest your recent arXiv:1510.01190v1 [gr-qc], and have an alternative theory -- please see http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (5 October 2015, 30 pages) Would you agree to endorse the submission of my paper to arXiv.org, sec. gr-qc? I can send you the link to endorse it right away. Please notice that I am speaking for Albert Einstein, since it is all about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Yours sincerely, Dimi Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Angelo Tartaglia, arXiv:1510.00807v1 [gr-qc], cases (i) - (iii) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 10:04:49 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Angelo Tartaglia Dear Angelo, I read with great interest your recent arXiv:1510.00807v1 [gr-qc], and have an alternative theory regarding cases (i) - (iii) in it: please see http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (5 October 2015, 30 pages) Would you agree to endorse the submission of my paper to arXiv.org, sec. gr-qc? I can send you the link to endorse it right away. Please notice that I am speaking for Albert Einstein, since it is all about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, Dimi ---- D. Chakalov chakalov.net ================================================================================== Subject: Re: The riddle of space Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 01:39:59 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Bernard Carr Cc: Timothy Clifton , Richard Nelson , d.burgess@qmul.ac.uk, d.mulryne@qmul.ac.uk, j.e.lidsey@qmul.ac.uk, r.donnison@qmul.ac.uk, s.j.paardekooper@qmul.ac.uk, r.ribeiro@qmul.ac.uk, Rupert Sheldrake , dl@scimednet.org, info@scimednet.org, Claudia Nielsen Dear Bernard, Please see my latest paper (final version), dedicated to the centenary of Einstein's General Relativity: http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf (7 October 2015, 30 pages, 65 refs) Please notice that I speak for Albert Einstein, since it is all about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link above). I wish to thank Mrs Claudia Nielsen for her kind invitation to present my theory thirteen years ago (30 May 2002, Denning Hall, London). You attended my talk, and I hope you'll find far more substance in the latest paper at the link above. Pity I couldn't attend your seminar talk on the mythical "black holes" (Wednesday, 30 September 2015), but everything I wanted to suggest about gravity in cosmology, astrophysics, and particle physics is at the link above. Of course, there are no "black holes" in Nature, for reasons explained above. Best wishes, Dimi -- D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:37:18 +0000, Bernard Carr wrote: [snip] ================================================================================== Subject: Re: László B. Szabados, Living Rev. Relativity 12 (2009), 4, p. 31. Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 23:47:31 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Laszlo Szabados , Catherine Meusburger , Adam Helfer , Jörg Frauendiener , Chris Isham , Karel V Kuchar , Charles Torre , James M Nester , Niall Ó Murchadha , Greg Galloway , Piotr T Chrusciel , Jeffrey Winicour , Tim-Torben Paetz , Paul Tod , Sascha Husa , Lau Loi So , Zhaoyan Wu , Xiao Zhang , Mu-Tao Wang , Richard M Schoen , Shing-Tung Yau , Robert M Wald , Robert Geroch , Ted Jacobson , Lee Smolin , Carlos Kozameh , Timothy Clifton , Bernard J Carr , Robert Beig , carlo rovelli , Stanley Deser , Charles W Misner , Bill Bonnor , Jack Lee , John Baez , Alan Rendall , Anthony Leggett , Carl H Brans , Carl Hoefer , Christian Wuthrich , David Charlton , David J Miller , Demetrios Christodoulou , Dorje Brody , Edward Witten , Eric Gourgoulhon , Erik Curiel , Ettore Minguzzi , Gary Horowitz , George , George F Smoot III , Jorge Pullin , Klaas Landsman , Steven Carlip , Kip , Lars Andersson , Gerardus , Gerardus , Halina Abramowicz , Hans Ringström , Harvey Reall , Helmut Friedrich , Hermann Nicolai , Jose M M Senovilla , M J Luo , Malcolm Fairbairn , Malcolm MacCallum , Marvin Weinstein , Matt Visser , Miao Li , Miguel Sanchez Caja , Mike , Norbert Straumann , Oliver Buchmueller , Roy Maartens , Ruth Durrer , Sean Hayward , Sergiu Klainerman , Tom Kibble , Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga , Tom Thiemann , Wei-Tou Ni , Caslav , Christof Wetterich , Anthony Lasenby , Richard Price , Luca Bombelli , Luca Lusanna , Luca Fabbri , Gabriela González , Carla Cederbaum , Cecilia Flori , Tejinder Singh , Naresh Dadhich , Alessandro Teta , Fermilab Talks , Fernando Quevedo , Angelo Loinger , Angelo Tartaglia , Bob Coecke , Brian Greene , Brian P Dolan , broedel@itp.phys.ethz.ch, Charis Anastopoulos , Dadiv , Daniel L Stein , David B Malament , David Brown , David Krakauer , David Spergel , Susanne Reffert , SERGIO.BERTOLUCCI@cern.ch, winter.school@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de, John Klauder , John L Bell , John Norton P.S. Would you or any of your 116 colleagues agree to endorse the submission of my paper to arXiv.org server? I can send you the link to endorse it right away. Once the solution to your problems (see my previous email below) is published there, we can engage in professional discussion, and you and all your 116 colleagues could explain your professional (not emotional) objections. Notice that I am speaking for Albert Einstein, since it is all about his "total field of as yet unknown structure" (ref. [9], p. 25 in rs_spacetime.pdf at the link below). Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, D. Chakalov chakalov.net On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:11:49 +0300, Dimi Chakalov wrote: > > On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 02:49:13 +0100 (CET), Laszlo Szabados > wrote: >> >> Let's do our job, science ... > > Check out the solution to your problems > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/Szabados_p31.jpg > > on p. 15 in rs_spacetime.pdf: > http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf > > Don't ever claim that you know nothing about it. > > D. Chakalov > chakalov.net > ================================================================================== David Charlton : From: Mail Delivery System To: dchakalov@gmail.com Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender Message-Id: Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 00:47:40 +0100 This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: dave.charlton@cern.ch SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: host cernmxgwlb4.cern.ch [188.184.36.53]: 554 5.1.0 Sender denied ------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------ [snip] ================================================================================== Subject: Potential Realty I: Relative Scale Spacetime Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 14:09:02 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Abraham Harte , ACHIM.STAHL@physik.rwth-aachen.de, Adam Helfer , Alan Rendall , ANDREA.THAMM@cern.ch, ANNE-MARIE.PERRIN@cern.ch, Anthony Leggett , Arnaud.Marsollier@cern.ch, Bahram Mashhoon , Ben Whale , Benjamin Knorr , Bernard J Carr , beverlyberger@me.com, BOSMAN@ifae.es, Carl H Brans , Carl Hoefer , Carlo Rovelli , Carlos Kozameh , Carlos Vega , CEDRIC.DELAUNAY@cern.ch, Charles Torre , CHARLOTTE.JAMIESON@stfc.ac.uk, Chris Isham , CHRISTIAN.THOMAS.BYRNES@cern.ch, Christian Wuthrich , Christina , Christof , CHRISTOPHE.GROJEAN@cern.ch, CLAUDIA.WULZ@cern.ch, d.burgess@qmul.ac.uk, d.mulryne@qmul.ac.uk, David J Miller , Demetrios Christodoulou , Dorje Brody , DYREKTOR@ifj.edu.pl, E.W.N.GLOVER@durham.ac.uk, Eduardo Guendelman , Edward Witten , Eric Gourgoulhon , Eric.Laenen@nikhef.nl, Erik Curiel , Ettore Minguzzi , Ezra Newman , Fabiola Gianotti , Frank Tipler , Gábor , Gary Horowitz , George , George F Smoot III , GEORGE.ZOUPANOS@cern.ch, Georgi Dvali , GERALDINE.SERVANT@cern.ch, Gerardus , Gerardus , GIAN.GIUDICE@cern.ch, GILAD.PEREZ@cern.ch, gravityschool@uniandes.edu.co, Greg Galloway , Halina Abramowicz , Hans Ringström , Harvey Reall , Helmut Friedrich , Hermann Nicolai , holger.gies@uni-jena.de, huangp46@mail.sysu.edu.cn, huangyue@itp.ac.cn, HYUN.MIN.LEE@cern.ch, Ignatios Antoniadis , Ivo.van.Vulpen@nikhef.nl, j.e.lidsey@qmul.ac.uk, J.MULVEY1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, Jack Lee , James Gillies , James M Nester , JAMES.WELLS@cern.ch, Jean-Pierre Derendinger , JEAN-PIERRE.DELAHAYE@cern.ch, Jeffrey Winicour , JOACHIM.MNICH@desy.de, Joanna.Iwanska@cern.ch, JoAnne Hewett , JOHAN.RATHSMAN@thep.lu.se, John Baez , John Ellis , John Stachel , John Stewart , john.swain@cern.ch, Jörg Frauendiener , Jose M M Senovilla , Joseph.Incandela@cern.ch, JULIEN.LESGOURGUES@cern.ch, JURGEN.SCHUKRAFT@cern.ch, Karel V Kuchar , Karlheinz Meier , KATSAN@admin.in2p3.fr, Kerstin Borras , Kip , Lars Andersson , Laszlo Szabados , Lau Loi So , Lee Smolin , Leonard Susskind , linan@itp.ac.cn, LOHSE@physik.hu-berlin.de, M J Luo , Malcolm Fairbairn , Malcolm MacCallum , MANFRED.KRAMMER@oeaw.ac.at, marcel.weber@unige.ch, Marco , MARKUS.SCHUMACHER@physik.uni-freiburg.de, Marvin Weinstein , Matt Visser , Miao Li , Miguel Sanchez Caja , Mike , MKLEIN@hep.ph.liv.ac.uk, MKRAEMER@physik.rwth-aachen.de, mulders@few.vu.nl, Mu-Tao Wang , N.DEGROOT@hef.ru.nl, Niall Ó Murchadha , Nick Huggett , Nikolai Mitskievich , Norbert Straumann , Oliver Buchmueller , Paul Tod , Peter Jenni , Peter Milonni , PHILIPPE.BLOCH@cern.ch, Piotr T Chrusciel , Press.Office@cern.ch, r.donnison@qmul.ac.uk, RAFFELT@mpp.mpg.de, rdb@ph.ed.ac.uk, Renilde.Vanden.Broeck@cern.ch, Richard Blythe , Richard M Schoen , Richard Nelson , RICHARD.BRENNER@cern.ch, Robert Beig , Robert Gompf , Robert Hogan , Robert M Wald , Roger Penrose , Roland Triay , ROLF.HEUER@cern.ch, Roy Maartens , Ruth Durrer , S.BENTVELSEN@nikhef.nl, s.j.paardekooper@qmul.ac.uk, Sascha Husa , Sean Hayward , SERGIO.BERTOLUCCI@cern.ch, Sergiu Klainerman , Shing-Tung Yau , Sijie Gao , Sorin Paraoanu , Stanley Deser , stefan.lippoldt@uni-jena.de, Stephen Barnett , Steven Carlip , Susanne Reffert , t.clifton@qmul.ac.uk, T.PEITZMANN@phys.uu.nl, Thomas Thiemann , THOMAS.MUELLER@kit.edu, th-unit-secretariat@cern.ch, Tim-Torben Paetz , Tom Kibble , Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga , URS.WIEDEMANN@cern.ch, vincent.lam@unil.ch, vsharma@physics.ucsd.edu, Wei-Tou Ni , winter.school@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de, Xiao Zhang , Yongge Ma , Zhaoyan Wu Abstract Ensuing from first principles, a new theory of spacetime has been suggested, called ‘relative scale spacetime’. It denounces the absolute size of objects at different length scales, thanks to which the phenomena known as quantum state ("just in the middle between possibility and reality", Heisenberg) and Einstein’s "total field of as yet unknown structure" are unified as potential reality of quantum-gravitational origin (dubbed causal field), endowed with relative-scale metric. At macroscopic scale, it produces what is known as gravitation, without any "dark" matter nor "dark" energy. Read an introduction (13 September 2015, 12 pages) at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf D. Chakalov ---- The right side is a formal condensation of all things whose comprehension in the sense of a field-theory is still problematic. Not for a moment, of course, did I doubt that this formulation was merely a makeshift in order to give the general principle of relativity a preliminary closed expression. For it was essentially not anything more than a theory of the gravitational field, which was somewhat artificially isolated from a total field of as yet unknown structure. Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, ed. by Paul A. Schilpp, Tudor Publishing Company, New York, 1951, p. 75 ================================================================================== Subject: Potential Realty I: Relative Scale Spacetime Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 14:45:26 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dimi Chakalov To: Zeh , Domenico Giulini , Brukner Caslav , christof wetterich , Anthony Lasenby , Claus Kiefer , Richard Price , Andrew Waldron , Luca Bombelli , Luca Lusanna , Luca Fabbri , Gabriela González , Carla Cederbaum , Cecilia Flori , Catherine Meusburger , Jorge Pullin , Klaas Landsman , Ntina Savvidou , Anton , Antoine Suarez , Fotini Pallikari , Tejinder Singh , Naresh Dadhich , Alessandro Teta , Fermilab Talks , Fernando Quevedo , Angelo Loinger , Angelo Tartaglia , Bob Coecke , brain_mind@epfl.ch, Brendan , Brian Greene , Brian P Dolan , broedel@itp.phys.ethz.ch, Charis Anastopoulos , Dadiv , Daniel L Stein , David B Malament , David Brown , David Krakauer , David Spergel , David.Miller@arts.usyd.edu.au, John Klauder , John L Bell , John Norton Abstract Ensuing from first principles, a new theory of spacetime has been suggested, called ‘relative scale spacetime’. It denounces the absolute size of objects at different length scales, thanks to which the phenomena known as quantum state ("just in the middle between possibility and reality", Heisenberg) and Einstein’s "total field of as yet unknown structure" are unified as potential reality of quantum-gravitational origin (dubbed causal field), endowed with relative-scale metric. At macroscopic scale, it produces what is known as gravitation, without any "dark" matter nor "dark" energy. Read an introduction (13 September 2015, 12 pages) at http://www.god-does-not-play-dice.net/rs_spacetime.pdf D. Chakalov ==================================================================================