Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Analogical Reductionism and Empirical Holism

Analogical Reductionism and Empirical Holism

Here we will look at the differences in the geometrical and algebraic reading of the gene code and other concepts of linkotron (cernon) particles and their dualities. Clearly 1 + 3 + 6 + 10 = 20 which is to say as a combinatorial analog to
Pascal's triangle (1 + 1 + 1 + 1) are four elements, GUAT for example on a general tetrahedron GGG UUU AAA TTT of twenty points. This follows Gammow's algebraic system proposed to read the gene code. But his viewpoint is a conjugate mirror of the natural code reading (or my quasic code reading). In particular the mirror image of a Rubiks cube is not just as if we made the inversion of face colors and this applies when we take seriously the corners of a cube as quark like as Rowlands et al feels comfortable to assert in what was considered speculation heretofore.

In general the new scientific paradigm simply states analogical reductionism and empirical holism are new science, but analogical holism and empirical reductionism may border or be more of a new age science.

There are many things to explore in terms of the number line in quasic space. I came across the ideas in this post last night thinking it could be used in general as a computational graph but it led to a generalization of twists and polarization and the chirality of the abstract particles as if a quasic string theory I call linkotrons or cernons, of which there are 15. It is interesting to see how they relate in three space representations.

I find also that though rare there are theories as in new scientist yesterday that state the quantum world can defeat gravity in what I find the general realm of creativity of space in say the collapse of neutron stars (more empirical reductionism here born out by empirical holism perhaps). The quasic world is also one of the creative mechanism by which we derive the patterns or geometry of the univese by analogical reductionism- including theories of past history of evolving or simultaneous events (much like Rowlands and the initial DNA, the valences some of which were in a gaseous environment, and forms of tRNA more complex than DNA and the alternative stacking structure of three stranded DNA and so on which are not clearly decisively new science or new age science- yet his x-ray mind understands the frontier of possibilities that answers some of today's questions.)

Perhaps my biggest disagreement is why the limitations to three and four dimensions when there is a wider and important theory, but as this post develops I will show why we can have a sense of this grounding as the more real in three space alone.

I also think given the neutron collaspe theory the question of why we do not create some sort of runaway space in the colliders needs a clearer answer including a quasic one rather like the scale and limitation by the division by three space. I do not agree with Rowlands either that given a structure of 20 we simply can multiply holistically by j throughout in the algebra but must see it in detail.

When I post the cernons I will do so abstractly in labeling to break them into 9 and 6 of the 15 but these can be labeled in a mirror image of 6 and 9. Now of the 36 I designate by six colors we see them as being in three space whereas the 64 has to use the black and white of the remaining cells (which Rowlands considers) but does not see on this abstract level it involves Conway's matrix (of which I worked on it independently) NOTE: Rowlands and I are not in an ongoing deep correspondence which is to say I hope I do not misrepresent any of his theories but I have to go beyond Zero and Infinity, literally.

I will post the patterns in three space, and the 15 cernon labels and their chiral forms on a cube, and the original lead illustration for this post of Gnesh and the square QRST and Z which as general quasic ordering can take on the GUAT labels or in general KLMN meaning the information 00 01 10 11.

(More Forthcoming after a day of nothing to post or think about)

* * *

No comments:

Post a Comment