Wednesday, April 14, 2010
An Autopsy of the Pleiadian Mind
An Autopsy of the Pleiadian Mind
Perhaps a true measure of creativity in a scientific theory, in particular those scientists who have to work inductively to explore and confirm an hypothesis or observation for the shear joy of curiosity and speculation toward some future- almost science fiction as a possibility; in order to bring some unity in knowing and a reasonable guarantee by our cautious methods of breakthroughs pursued or stumbled upon at the frontier of anomalies, for example to have a standard that simplifies and makes sense at least for its era of dominance, of the particle zoo; is just how far we can find novel originality, the stuff of our more modern sci-fi, rather than the space opera of rehashing the learned familiar models for those in the know and who enjoy at least entertainment for the the most of us where doubt meets dreams suspended in disbelief. Also, we seem entertained by agendas that summarize and conclude the story with an authors moral message.
The again some of us seem born with an idea of a Platonic given whole a priori to deduce the workings of the world. Perhaps the most unifying archetype for physics is that primitive distinction between potential and kinetic. Yet, some have said that the idea of "beam me up, Scotty" ever becomes a reality (which it apparently has) that induction and deduction are pushed aside for "abduction" and this relates more than ever to questions of locality and non-locality. To quasars in particular as something I believe much richer in themselves that the idea of black holes or such vaporous structures of final and initial places as universal creation.
My roommate, drawn to meditation and medication, seems convinced I am a Plaiedian. I do not know that much about them save they are rather Nordic and far above the gray lesser demons in the outer space bestiary continuum. But the poet in me will try to reach for novel metaphors. Yet in the flux of the blogosphere- chaos may be constrained but I suspect it can never reach artificial collective consciousness and certainly not outrun our dreams. I told my roommate this morning not to tell anyone that because they will think him crazy- and well, I don't want them to know!
Imagine then the scandal of the two men on the net and national radio who are modern new age sacred geometers. Two sides of an interesting coin and each in his way addressing some issue of our thinking concerns.
The first in what seems reasonable geometry writes of the application to theory beyond our resolution of scale of DNA structure, that the Plaiedians from the center of our galaxy affect our emotions by the mechanism of variably stacked and influenced dodecahedra in the double helix strands. He writes as if a textbook of facts without a hint of caveats.
The other stumbles upon a truth of alphabets and language, for me a deeper geometry that can explain this exists, for him a driving mystical experience. The two working once together now fight over who was the owner and prior in the discovery of their various ghostly dreams.
I think I might conclude that if in a sense the foundations of space has codes similar to DNA for physics and cosmology then we can imagine stereotypes and archetypal ghosts within or beyond our minds current architecture. But if we take that step surely we might find more perfect or something a little beyond and new to the familiar model structures of our spirit and souls- at least we can consider this intellectually.
Perhaps a measure or confirmation to myself at least of the intelligibility of my own work is not so much the books and people I have given as reference- but the very things not in the general literature where I cite my own work.
I came across a line in Peter Rowland's book which I did not understand. When I did I imagined original and new speculative implications I style the Plaiedian Mind. Surely, some years back, if indeed there were physical grays found- the claims made for their anatomy at an alien autopsy could be empirically intelligible. Some even suggest it seems like they could be a future version of us and this could have been staged and the documentation forged. On the other hand as posted in the sciencechatforum yesterday I find the claim that the quantum theory has little to do with the workings of biology as rather mystical statement of faith- chemistry is at least the quantum theory. But I do not doubt that faith intelligible and reasonable to some minds. How can we see beyond our own epistemology and sincere sense of sanity?
The logical presentation in books such as Rowland's and indeed some say we do return to a more classical logic eventually, admits a wide view of a calculus of many views. It looks at the design of our axioms and logic systems. I came tho the question for now my extension and labeling of quasic binary notation as maybe loading the dice for the conclusions I made. It could be intuitively right. The holonistic holograms and fractal kinetics and potentials meet somewhere independently and in nil spaces for consideration. Yet the Plaiedian mind suggested here is not a ultimate architecture for the idea of spirit and soul proper but one consequence is some further generalization and complexity between here and that possible there through the long string plateau.
But to the point! The line states (and I must mention here I understand by way of computation numerically and quasically, that five fold patterns within patterns are an informational distinction for living things- but as space considered topologicallly and in the whole I could not have seen the our hearts as a more than miraculous pump as the authors suggest it more as a little locality in our organic systems)that in the Quasicrystals the icosahedral symmetry is not periodic in three space but is so in six dimensions of a three space and a complex mirror three space. (I am not that fond of the level anyway of the periodic wave analysis as less than fundamental physics or what can be told using it in some Fourier division of cosmic space scales.) Do we not intuit this looking at Escher's drawings of water cycling up hill? Maybe the accounting of just two three spaces in a two player duality game is not enough.
The quasic grid of 64 codons, 2 to the 6th in a sense can be seen as six dimensional. I certainly discretely understand such geometry when we say make the 32 cubes of the 8 tetracubes and the imaginary mirror to make 64 and all the other sensible group numbers of cubes not spinning diagonally to suggest we dig deeper in the structure. Consider also the pentacubles made of cuboid shapes 2 x 2 x 3 that form the 12 x 5 or sixty of twelve pentacubes. When we consider the Rubiks cube as suggestive of the fractional charges of quarks a 6 cubed systems of 216 is useful and symmetrical for such symmetry study of five foldness that reduces structurally to flattened symmetries of solids based on the square root of two from phi.
So what topological structure (note here distance is not preserved as an axiom nor can as the brane universe two spaces of the same dimension said to intersect at a point a the axiom) allows for a higher frame of envisioning beyond several shapes, polytopes, in the higher dimensions. I imagine as analogs to them with such things simply connected, Euclidean and not so, "Regular super- or ultra-topes without holes- not supersymmetry necessarily but the whole range of dimensions beyond our enumerated groups and maybe we can construct new material things from space itself but by this I do not mean drawing in four space can make a real three space materiality. Thus we can imagine even further shapes and evolutions for our mental spaces.