Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Perpendicularity and Lateral Unity Sacred and Mundane
Not that much on my mind today- and what a great day to be alive. These days come up somewhere in the angle of the amber sunlight of morning, warm looking at the first thin layer of snow here and there left on the ground. Maybe it is because we forgot many things, like after the sacking of Alexandria by the Romans and Christians and Moslems so much was lost- and so much more if the Moslems had not ordered the old books recorded- they would have been lost forever. Each of us in theory wants to start new in the wake of a sea of great books that take a life time or the thought that ones view better for another children's book than the classics.
But what we forget that does not shadow and tangle us, baggage and lack of laughter that comes later for superstition, monsters in the closet and under the bed- well, the whole world is new again with promise, a book no longer one you regret there no more for you have found even the lesser works of some vanished author.
Time as a subjective thing, a sacred geometric thing, time as the fourth dimension as a philosophic statement rather than thought a scientific one. That lateral is after all indicating of the otherworldly sacred. For it took awhile to accept that the complex or imaginary numbers represented perpendicularity and of course rotation- of which the wave mechanic Hamilton did not accept this number as such although he later worked deep on what it meant for three space. This does not strike me as a hypocrisy but a question of the magical depth of insight and grounding into what is real and what is sacred of which we cannot make clear statements about it if any at all, such is the uncertainty of thinking on the frontiers for those with uncommon genius of which this perpendicularity is in a way the same problem we still do not see- despite the experts in the applications of its insights. For this problem is more one of dimension and its definition than that of how we define the lateral or negative numbers.
So after these centuries we find Hawking saying the real time and the imaginary time are different in that what is finite in real time is not so in complex time- for example. Is this not just a question of our concepts of such basic numbers? Is the wave equation of the universe dependent on such numbers not only as good as our conception of them?
Positive and Negative unity, or lateral complex unity is reasonable a philosophy to say that negative is the real past, positive the real future, and the lateral is after all the present, imaginary above and below the real. Or as others said we can magically in our mental process just make an algebra of positive values so to define what we may separate (actually in a tekrim manner) for vector or other representations and multiplications.
Surely it is indeed at least a matter of flange and rim around the wheel of reality. For although it only takes a single dimension to say compute the complex powers of complex numbers- not even two let alone three or more- we note in the realm of prime numbers as the sieve of ancient Greece and Euclid's proofs of infinity of primes or even questions of Hilbert on prime pairs and Riemann's hypothesis, that these intrinsic unities represent an archetype of discontinuity. For the natural base raised to minus i2pi can find any integer solution and then with successive multiplications arrive at e to the 4pi with only zero as a solution.
For the first is a series flange or stretch, and the result is the series rim, where what is the potential infinite in a sense is the finite zero and vice versa.
* * *
It seems to me that your commenter is not the only one reaching the wall of their intellectual abilities. Surely as scientists we do this occasionally and realize it for the sake of progress yes?
The overview of data on Lorentz is universal so that tells us as little about the CPT as anthropocentric global warming reasoning.
Neutrilinos do not exist in the sense that God does not exist?
Look, take a vacation and play nice (especially to your young allies)- who can stand an arrogant genius anyway? Of for that matter an arrogant nationality or race?
The PeSla (but why post this on his page, certainly our disagreement and confusion is after all the nature of the topic of this paper on these deep but simple foundations of the math of physics of which I only carefully make assertions.)
* * *