Sunday, July 18, 2010

Double Implosion Mass Defect Principles

Double Implosion Mass Defect Principles
the rewards of understanding abstract systems such as the standard model, plus
alternative interpretations for the so called "Higgs mechanism".

[I will be posting more here on all this today...]

Well, the sciencechatforum com religated me into the blogosphere so I gave them a blog (all such internet chat sooner or later reaches some sort of entropy of the unfolding of moods and bad hair days) so I gave them a blog. Anyway here is a new youtube link to linford86 - I still have hopes for this boy, that is if he can understand that popularization intrinsically should have a little social poetry and realization on what metaphysics our science rests before we raise the hammer to nail the coffin closed of that philosophy:

* * *

What I am about to post I thought rather speculative over the last couple of days of normal dreams and reading old Zane Grey novels found at a rummage sale. This morning I am not so sure it does not have concrete applications.

Topons and Toponinos - why not still another general word as abstract as anything they have, especially Higgs and so on? But it is a holding word for the concept, one that may exist in the literature already or the obscure mathematics. Yet I feel this perhaps is describing, and indeed measuring the dark mass rather than the various ways some such Higgs mechanism may describe the normal mass- for if we accept the numerology of 11 unfoldings of the octahedron and cube into two space as a general number of string dimensions, then (and it is a good thing there may not be unlimited higher analogies to say the icosahedron) instead of a ten or so fold ration of virtually dark matter to matter we have, 43380 unfolding's of the icosahedron and maybe the same number or a fraction of it for the dodecahedron. Now this is well under the maximum 248 symmetry group at least for four dimensional matter- but as a natural dimension over these various matter theories the 5th degree is to be reckoned with more as a grounding dimension. Thus these theories involve the orthogonal and anti-orthogonal aspects of physics over n-dimensions on which we in our dimensionality try to analyze and ground physics as concrete.

* * *

July 17 and July 18 , 2010

On the Rewards of Understanding Intelligible Abstract Systems:

As far as historical continuity we can moderate the influence of relativity. For the excess influence of quantum theory it will take us a little while longer.

This can be done without the assumption of an influential Deity, but the denial of such influence is an influence vaguely divine that limits our understanding of deeper abstract systems of the vacua quite independently of that assumption.

You do not know of me, but will have to deal with my contemplations independent of my existing popularity and historically or not- this occasionally in relation to evolving enlightenment gives me personal satisfaction provide my work as results as well as gives me despair over the pace of progress of our collective intelligible enlightenment.

The satisfaction of understanding the world (or of some system that focuses a connection with our subjective reality) is also the reward of knowing oneself.

Geometric orthogonality precedes complex analysis in principles involving rotation.

The measure of inertial mass and not just the mechanisms of "fields" like "Higgs" or "double implosion density of space or charge over some unit of the classical electron radius or Planck radius) is explained by discrete measure of integer and fractional quanta over dualism of topological "points" and connectivity between the dimensions.

The universe cannot divide totally into unfolded or enfolded space (even if the formalism of absolute values results in all positive algebraically only as a justification of the finite mass and corresponding discrete potentials of the vacuum for renormalization, quark confinement, and so on) Nor in subjective space not exists all relativistic or quantized in the storage of free states of historical causation and dark mass-vacuum structured memory.

A toponino may or may not (as irreducible) mutate to sub fractal systems as quasi-finite. One can ask but not isolate the principles of metaphysics grounding physics. Even one such principle assumed for these are transitive across all fields.

The expression of this is evidently by such principles only and indirectly observed in the still regarded distant particle resonances states as a general system (of which the issues of supersymmetry needed or not can be asserted intelligibly as well the concept of what exists as higher physical dimensions than three.

To say null space quasi-includes concrete existence rather than in concrete (physical) space as either-or for what is or what is not, is a gray group logic in virtuality. After all this is a realm logically of principles metaphysical.

A moving point (abstractly or in perception, and not necessarily in kinematics) in a still plane between continuous curves is the prime model for topons or geometrical particle physics.

If we accept 1 + 1 = 2 as consistency derived from numbers then the abstract consistency of discrete measures in the structured absolute vacuum systems can be accepted on a foundational level.

Imagine then the 9 cubes of the tesseract, the 9th as in the virtual superposition or identity is made from 1/6th of the unfolded cubes. Imagine then as a tesseract that we have six mirrors and not five, or two fives as cubes stuck together and a central light source- can we actually see virtual light sources beyond the group symmetries? Would this not be equivalent to six mirrors in six mirrors of the eight cubes unfolded of a hypercube where in the center of a cube the surface has a reflection? I would be surprised if this were the experimental case but as a concept of what perhaps we cannot see we certainly find some in between step of understanding the complexity of general topological spaces of symmetry when in fact the five or six mirrors to reflect the source of light so many if not infinite times already.

We have in a sense the extension of Pascal's triangle not just to the negative and thus alternating signs as Newton did, but he quasic idea of the extension to null as a generator and thus the difference between the simplexes (1+1)to the nth and the orthogons (1+2) to the nth. These can be non-linear zeros as well as they involve the last face of concrete folding of cubes and this extends to say the folding of the balanced 4 edges of a cube and its 1/4th x 4 fifth cube of which of course in 2 space it takes five objects or squares to match the centered variations on all possible axes, in three space seven and in four space 9 (but in the ninth dimension the spherical volume already exhausts to the orthogonal grids) and of course 11 dimensions as the limit to five space- all such grids of geometric density thus determined by matrices of dimensional labels by the knight move. Again is 11 the limit or is there more than the new string theoretic physics approximations? In general by the way plane lattices of cubes balance the topon numbers. But what of taking it to infinite dimensions?

What after all does 1 3 3 1 count of the triangle? and of the square where is the one that seems to apply as nothing at all to the polygon structure?

In this sort of quasi fermion space (even more intrinsically the role of chirality than say as in Rowlands) is the metaphysical idea that: There is something between, a rather grayness of logic, to what can exist as an excluded middle and unresolvable superimposition of 0 and 1. This as a monad window that attaches to the measured values of mass like things where by absolute exist or not distinction these are unmeasurable (as not quasi-finite). This question then of why the world is rather than why it is not has a connection to our subjectivity and ultimately our identity as sentient beings.

I considered Boltzons Zaneons Boltzinos Boltzanes as alternative to simply topons although it rhymes with tampons (as we prime the cannon of new physics).

Of course the idea we see only three of the present 9 space dimensions becomes a little more credible- and that we see it as nature does, expresses it.

I also made two more alternatives for the 50 star flag, one a medallion of 10 10 10 and 20 stars expanding outward and one of 5 x 10 stars in a group with 5 in the center of the various golden ratios.

I have not made it clear and did not write the poem due to social obligations and a sore heal from so much walking and worn shoes of the sense of satisfaction and peace in the understanding of not only how some see the physics in terms of their fanciful names and concepts of things but the idea of our being as quasi-existing and not- that virtual gray but concretely intelligible grouping that in a way allows on many levels the freedom and certainty of our subjective self in relation to the world also as quasi-existing rather than either extreme of metaphysical stance as to the value of and reason for our existing. The uncertainty principle is useful but not quite enough to make for most of us the world intelligible enough at the foundations to define ourselves as theoretical physicists and not just experimental engineers with no control of our scientific progress.

* * *

I forgot to add the quantum theory thought for virtual particles that these may arise not forbidden and so influence the mass calculations. I feel this is a general working principle on shaky grounds as best that can be done for now. Yet this same concept could apply to higher symmetric spaces as a working principle but ultimately we have to realize such virtual spaces and vacua are quasized or in a certain sense quantized such that there are limits to what is the perhaps unseen structures and influence of the vacuum, at least to where we meet the flatness of infinity and discount the possibility that such vacua have no restrictions on structure. But does it not seem to make more sense that such influences if they are concrete would be in the gray area of the quasi-real and somehow there be the freedom to change states between that continuous and discrete as absolutes? Still the standard model is a rather thrilling model to grasp, especially the philosophy under it and the physical interpretations. It is further comfort and satisfaction to see similar or equivalent principles developed outside of the academic mainstream and most of it well before reading. Let us not forget the concerned individual when we commit to the notions and terminology of our established collective institutions. The town as well as gown is the source of enterprise in that to some extent, in a gray area of political subjectivity as if seeing only the chiralities and asymmetries of the weak muons and what is everything else we dynamically relate and restrain the creativity and advance it collectively. That some notion is new does not mean it is original, if original not necessarily the source and origin to which so many individually and justly are proud to discover as if they were not part of the awakening of a wider social and mental space.

* * *

This was a rather full post for the notes and drawings casually put down the last couple of days but One more thing I might add just reading Lubos and feeling I am on a similiar topic (although my comment before this may have refered closer to his earlier post than the general topic at hand, at least not easily seen related save by the blogger himself maybe):

Synchronicity after all may have something to do with physics but other than one blogger I follow Intangible Materiality I am not sure this much is a part of physics even if some like Jung relate it to a thermodynamic mental model.


I am not one of the emergence thinkers you critique. I see the wisdom in your caveats. Yet, I disagree on many of the fine points of this post and in effect posted today on this matter. Only, in this unsolved problem of quantum-gravity (after all mass can be discrete storage of information against a background of say what is not the muon) which I regard as a dead end btw, we have to take in to account things a little deeper than the quantum theory. Yes the apparently discrete nature of an atom is associated with a frequency on some level. Yes, we cannot write it all as zeros and ones... but we can have a third situation, at least virtually which first of all solves the issues of superimposition (is the quantum cat alive and dead at the same time, for example?) Even if we could, and the nature of memory is important here and the more energy needed to recover it than set it down, there is no general model that suggests it leads to emergence in some of the ways you describe it. There is more to the world than the general configuration and Hilbert spaces.

The PeSla

* * *

No comments:

Post a Comment