Beyond the Field Communique'
"The whole sustains the identity of each particular part, while each part in turn confirms the manifested whole/"
"Since the field communique' gives each entity as communicated, knowledge 'of' appearance is inseparable 'from' appearance."
Tarthang Tulku
Tenative Tenets:
*0 - (a Lampionino 12-27-10) We can accept a fixed value on the Planck scale provided we accept a multiverse, or we can accept a universe provided we accept a hierarchy of such Planck scales.
*1 - In such abstract communication space, the source and sink, signal casual purpose of action (ie Tulku's from-to, my teleoscoping, galatomic's will, and pointloops motion and so on from the philosophychatforum) is scaleless or scale free across (for all measure purposes) all abstract dimensions and is not necessarily a shifting fulcrum of some "present" (Tulku's assertion or observation), spacious or otherwise. Tulku provides the ultimate source of motion in terms of the Buddhist philosophy of space, time, and appearance from knowledge (mind).
*2 - A "cubitoid" or "cuboid" (not to confuse with Q-bit for cubits in the concept of a heavenly city so measured in the Revelations. Alternatively a kaabe or pyramid.) that is an abstract quasi-measure generalized in spacetime from the Lampionino principle above- may communicate or be associated with other cubitoids of diverse dimensional sizes and scales. These may be intelligible as relations to their diverse Planck units.
*3 - Time is abstractly linear at some dimensionless surface for measure purposes. A cubical Planck volume of a unit edge may be that which appears as three-space full of more dimensions (shadow polytopes for example). Thus a Zeno length with high dimensions may contain length greater than the unit edge across the diagonal inside this cube. (for example in a cube one inch on the side one could lay across it inside it the length of a football field given the right number of unseen dimensions.)
*4 - The traversing of this length influences an innate particle lifetime. What after all is the Zeno length of the Universe? Of a proton? And if across such a length at some scale (after all this was how Dirac thought of spins and such when he introduced relativistic ideas into the quantum world) this Proton were equivalent to a universe beyond its bare charge scale and energy in this universe- would there be a concept of a Planck scale as small to the proton as to the radius of the universe it is within? Yet, we can imagine such abstract generality without only an appeal to higher uncertainty and randomness as grounding, nor some vague notion of non-linearity?
*5 - The concept of spin from a string or abstract algebra view, where we may resolve fixed frame (aether-like in both Newton's and Einstein's senses) or relativistic ascending unto c is such that a line to a circle, time too is holonic in the 3+1 formalism where as if on the quadrature of the quasic plane time as the working (but empty?) vector addition is such that west can touch east as if no space parts- the same as the spin or identity of some atomic particle in space, irreducible or not.
Note: I find the term field communique' one of the more clear and beautiful of Tulku's terms- as so the idea styled and expressed- so I adopt it. It also carries to me the poetic sense of knowledge in the commons, or commune, or even communion- but even with the hints of new metaphysics and the need to go beyond the encounter with new science to find new science- we much go beyond this still philosophic notion.
* * *
I just noticed an interesting puzzle post by Lubos. From what I understand of the spirit of it I find the mathematics sound but think the conclusions he reaches can even prove the opposite of what he claims- in particular the non-string theory context of "those in error wasting their time with such finite physics." Of course our diagrams and drawings can be misleading. Of course so can blind formalism of the equations. In any case the square root of three is a rather special irrational number and certainly has effects involving its use as complex number planes which would be the next step in such mathematical explorations.
Has he proven the only rigid case is the overriding quasic 2-plane of a more general and natural geometry? Has he shown that we can derive a higher space picture from the combination of small geometrical objects? Has he found and deduced general exceptions that these are after all a tetrahedral six? In the coordinates has he not shown that the 3+1 formalism and 2+2 formalism of the quantum physics are both applicable to a more unified theory? And what about things involving such angles as in the case of soap bubble planes between nail patterns that have no known answer to predict as a mathematically unique position?
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/12/big-book-of-brain-games-puzzle.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29
"The same thing holds in many other contexts. In particular, all people working on discrete theories of spacetime - or any quantum theory of gravity that is not equivalent to string theory - may spend lots of time (it's decades or centuries rather than hours in this case) by fabricating more convoluted models. "
"But it can be seen that there are no consistent non-stringy theories of quantum gravity."
"You need to add a new player - internal angles that are not multiples of 30 degrees, in this case - to have a chance to find a solution."
Of course we may rule out certain infinite (no-go) solutions and even if there is enough time "rearrange the flowers into a solution". But is it not enough to generalize upon the obvious Euclidean and Pythagorean model of relations between numbers in the trivial field communique' without generalizing the metaphysics of our position so as to look at the theories of space and number from a more general perspective. This is not to say that theories of loop quanta and so on, related to string theory or not, cannot eventually describe what gravity may be- only it is hardly the bigger and more detailed picture such brilliant minds skirt around without seeing the essential insides of the problem or where it is just a surface and come close but do not rise up to the level of science of space and gravity above our first blush of accepting the multi-dimensionality of abstract strings. From this view a totally string view as a theory of everything reflects our lack of awareness and so is a sort of negative reflections of what is essentially a core metaphysics. But I praise the interest in such games of geometry- it is perhaps instinctive as for example Penrose and all drawn to five fold tiles. Thank you Lubos for your proof, QED, that TGD and quasics are also still in the game.
The PeSla
* * *
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20827923.500-2011-preview-no-magic-element-just-yet.html
This certainly shows relevance to my concerns with Bicentinum, elements 120 and so on of which I came to these issues by intuition alone in 69.
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2010/12/periodic-table-written-on-a-hair.html
Now that our very hairs are numbered we seem to be doing that ourselves :-)
* * *
No comments:
Post a Comment