Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Preternatural Intelligibility and the Poetic Quotient

PQ (poetic quotient) - a measure of culture, aesthetic sensitivity, coherence of inconsistencies of a system or system view especially those of physics as geometry. Two words can sometimes make a meaningful metaphor that transcends the meaning of its parts (in what I am more clearly seeing as in the "corpen" manner, to be more relevantly defined later.)

We will look back one day at the issues of physics and philosophy to realize how simple and resolved some things could have been with a simpler view and the reasons for the questions in the first place. Those who do not see this now will in retrospect be embarrassed at their presumption of understanding (not to say this is a final formulation but certainly a more productive and creative method for the philosophies of science.)

A design can be logical and intelligible to the degree it can be real and have structural possibilities of "quasic" freedom as a "generational" measure of "energy" as well as ideas of awareness. Modern physical laws work on the lesser levels than the reality of the natural level that does not depend on consciousness or material interpretations that (as far as to what we can see, the "phaneron" of the phenomenal world, needs no explanation beyond this complexity as a realm of the unreal supernatural.

We cannot define such a level of naturalism as the decisive reality by mind or matter metaphors together or separately- no higher substance, no mechanistic personality.

The concept of particle generations is one of quasic and natural dimensions and sequences (decoherence is a quasic phenomenon first and foremost as is the degree of freedom in entropy and the threshold of quantum photon numbers in jets or emissions.) The philosophy questions will also seem simple in retrospect as will these principles of physics- not the least of which we have a substantial sense of the reality of such interpretations of applied abstract groups as in the quasic manner that physically defines the near history of partical decay and structure so as for example to limit the order of tetrachords to twelve and their mirror symmetries. (in general the issues is one of the reversible and irreversible as to what is math and physics).

To ask if there are more fundamental particles (such as twinks or preons or whatever) is to take a stance on what is fundamental as a relative thing while things like "iotas" can be seen from some view as pointlike and stringlike and in that sense over an averaging of the fixed and changing metaphysics as fundamental. Of what do you drink the water or the wave asks Fowles the Heraclitean in the Magus? Evidently some can taste the wave as wall as the water but between lesser views each can question this of the other's point and view.

That we look for a smaller particle or level related to generations suggest the three generations can imply also a trinity of big bang origins more or less synchronized and basic in group structural geometry. Thus such chromatic and haydron like ratios tell us something directly and on all scales of the state of things now and uniformly everywhere of the initial origins in a matter that is geometric and abstract but natural PQ as say we think of or imagine as force and the strength between diverse forces. To think otherwise is to build the standar model on matters of opinnion to which no experiment can act as evidence to so change a fixed view, perhaps to great levels of complex theory. Between elments of a more general view arbritarily applied by the current reductionist emphasized falsification definition of science is while intelligible a blind spot to unresolvable inconsistencies and downright contradictions if you do not fill the "gap noire" to keep the views supposedly separate even to infinite refinement (which eventually resolves by the standard group theory say as in the 136 square root differential operators of Dirac.

Now pure math needs not be a disembodied realm only, Beyond the ideas of symmetry breaking generational concepts of physics can be fundamentally quasi-reversable in any indefinite extent of some idea of physical scale. The casmir effect is not just a quantum one as if two solid plates magically generated force- this magic if we say there is not assumed limited corpen quantum foam space as a given but a space of pure vacuum or void as a possibiltity (indeed ideas of dark fluid make some sense in this regard and we can see star burning and formation in this creative light which of course may ground in shells the idea of a charged surface as if consciousness.)

The pixel or atomic view can be seen thru a sort of stress space which may not merge the fundamental colors save to their primary number and gap noire between them. Despite this assumption we can see a change of color from a distance the atoms will not disclose directly nor thereby describle reality at low or high energy stress manifold space descriptions.

That is the philosophic question as to why math intelligibly applies to the physical world and is answered PQ metaphorically in this more unified theory- not from lesser sides only of debates of what is the physicality or what is the abstraction.

NOTE: I may post page two here. Now, it does feel good to just write and edit the underlying thoughts without worring about how some (todays BS degree was yesterdays High School yes in the dumbing down crowded inflation of credentialed wisdom as a tool for control of the evolution of human research and enquiry). This much down and as a reference I will be free to discuss it with anyone and explain if I can the concepts if they can be understood by the readers.

No comments:

Post a Comment