Quasics and the Discrete View

Quasics and the Discrete View and more commentary on the word of Peter Rowlands and Lubos


Tommyhoi of sciencechatforum com posted links to this most interesting article:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100720101349.htm

and today thereference frame of Lubos has an instructive article on the prospects of supersymmetry or further dimensions and that it may exceed the standard theory but that theory would be included in it- such is scientific paradigm progress of gains.

But in both articles I see echos of Peter Rowlands on the foundations of physics. For one thing in his system, 3+1 and he primacy of three space (after all a simple knot possible in three space does tie into the five fold symmetries) suggests that even if an electron has no spatial dimensions the classical radius becomes useful again as a foundational concept- so why not, as in the first article above, accept that electrons can have the property of being irreducibly a dipole? In any case Lubos of the reference frame who also seems to be addressing the visibility aspects of dark matter suggests some links with the weak force- but this is after all Rowlands position and we do have this issue of what are the higher quarks and neutrinos and for me if they are as mixed as thought in this realm we infer to see.

But today I had no new ideas, a situation from my posting over the last few years rather rare- but not like I face writers block on a blank page- sometimes the blank page is most welcome. I rather feel like I am just beginning schooling again rather than the BS degree syndrome of school is over and I assume the role of expert. This feeling is especially true in these recent posts on the compactification of virtual points in the vacua as structured and visibly affecting observed matter from the frame or rim of higher spaces, my flangelation.

I note also that early on I assumed an alternative to the relativity as I understood it and where there is some sense of motion, a displacitivity- a word I no longer use yet seems to contain the ideas of many who look into the more linear view of motion, especially the common sense kinetics of discrete particles. So taking a rest from a long walk before another long walk I cut out a small cube from cardboard with the extra face and found it to be rather stable when physically taped togeher. OK for study rather than manufacture it will be a good model that is not so flimsy but what do I put on the face of this one cube. It is then that I did have what turned out to be a small and uncertain idea- what if in the labeling of the sides I used the alphabetic notation, that is CHL instead of the six colors separately. what would a cube specifically mean if the x y z had opposite sides with the C H L hypercolors? In simple surface of two space I found the roygbv on the triangles of the equator and two other points the gin and bkd half and tri colors.

Of course this sort of duality where the same color used twice for the twelve 1 1 and square root of two sided triangles has its higher analogs in four space where things like Conway's stellated polytopes have such a symmetry of measure- after all it only took the reversal of a star to form the congruence of the 50 star medallion, that is a wide view of the natural dimensional field is obvious and not all the orientations of the stars are to be thought to be taken separately.

But now on each of the six points that color the equatorial triangles we find the exclusion of one or two colors, these are the alternative axes say H. Again we generate Conway's matrix. We also have thirty of cubes colored this way. I am intersted in the ten triangular faced deltrahedron very much as Rowlands is in the stacking of DNA bases- but we can make a sort of fat vector diagonal of the octahedron with two tetrahedra on opposite faces such that the internal faces vanish and some of them on the outside become rhombuses anglewise. But what if we treat them as a ten faced deltahedron (and btw the lack of an 18 faced deltahederon becomes clearer now for the reasons why- I suspect, intuitively)? We have an alternative design based on the alternative in literal construction of such objects idealized from the geometry of space.

If by the way this direction of speculation proves to have value one related thought on my mind was just what it means that the tauon and muon levels of generation of neutrinos and the use of such in describing representational models of quarks etc and not treating them on equal footing means- an issue which after all strikes me as the frontier of such questions as to on what level the intrinsic asymmetry of generations of particles have real effects. Surely we may assume this sort of counting carries over to all the dimensions of orthogons if not into some supergroup space of the other sorts of polytopes.

* * *