Thursday, December 23, 2010
Lampion V What Gravity Is !
Lampion V What Gravity Is !
Do not have time to explain due to festivus, but will try to be here in the morning. So I post the notes where the idea of my last quasic metaphysical lampion for the touching of surfaces dawns on me as an explanation for gravity and any other natural philosophy unification of forces. All you Einsteins here is the framework into which you can make your computations!
Lampion 12-23-10: This morning I think what we call creative falls in that already vague difference between the null and the zero. and before that the possibility of contiguous "quasons" which are separated yet in a sense are touching relative to some quasic view.
* * *
I recall when first reading Aristotle in the original how much of what seemed physics, number, cause, space and the like were in a book of philosophy and that was so long ago to our era. I got the same feeling yesterday when finally understanding the deeper philosophy that underlies the Buddhist tenets and their counters to other concepts of the time. But why does this sort of framework remain a deep interest to sentient beings to the point it has launched religious wars over concepts of substance? I must conclude, from the perspective of the average person, that some of the core ideas in metaphysics may be very uncomfortable or threatening to their sense of being- something I observed in my Buddhist roommate for some ideas like if the universe was once a small space as large as a grapefruit. I just have never really been uncomfortable with such ideas- save maybe one idea of absolutely caused all that is in reality in all its levels and detail- total determinism which for some seems to be a view of comfort. In any case these feelings are used to defend or challenge some other philosophic view. But today, nothing in my understanding seems that alien between people or cultures. We are doing philosophy, in fact one could suggest we all are doing something like Buddhism- the same intelligible results under one sky of which we put great emotional energy into the specific heritage and names for things- after all, humans are at heart poets too.
* * *
My second sheet on what gravity is raises perhaps more questions than it answered, that is as a frame or reference for how we do things like write the equations that are useful in the world of measure, be they finite or diffuse inertial or not. Or maybe as Rowlands observed that such equations are not everything or the only way.
* There are ideas that when we reach some nadir or zenith of number if not time and space the cycle and relations repeat again. I assume this is what some of the theoreticians posting I have read mean by different levels of Planck's constant Pc^n.
* For whatever reason some ideas seem to be quantized, integer like in action and numbers- at least from one way to view things that matches or not to an evolving or descending continuous view. Clearly we have questions of entropy and energy on the surface say of black holes where these physics concepts seem to be intimately related.
* I would say that at a certain surface or volume things are generally quasi-discrete but all that means is we have a certain hierarchy of things like mass which seem to vary slightly, like sizes of bricks but we add on each level the mortar. This sort of idea was around before we made headway making sense of the particle zoo.
* Let us say between two quasic surfaces- that is the connected surfaces of spheres at some vacuum or Zeno distance from one view- that the "evaporation" or emitting of some particle or of some information, that dimensionalized we can lose the volume in integers of Planck units (perhaps the sub-Planck levels are like vacuum mortar, of course such mortar has to be adjusted to the commensurable or Archemedian questions [darn, I wrote Aristotle and the Roman centurion when I should have typed Archimedes in an earlier post- sometimes pictures can interfere with words]).
* Now between to surfaces so to speak, as if two spheres or stars, there is a connection where the forces between them can be exchanged. Indeed, in general this is how something positive connects with something negative in an atom, not at an action at a distance so much as a action at a quasic distance- and it describes a general idea of both the force and the measure or count of nodes we call mass.
* In general this mechanism, and nothing as crude or simple as magnetism suggested as all there is left to explain it by default, that black holes consume momentum of things around them.
* This "gavionic" exchange gains or loses dimensionality but is adjusted to creative energy or space as the natural information vanishes, one Pc place converted into another. (there is a certain conservation of intelligibility in this world and one that moreover can measure the differences between vacuum and matter- why if the maximum entropy is reached at a planck level of zeroless dimensionality can there even be an emission of engergy? Are mini-black holes in that sense immortal?
* In the east there is a preoccupation with fiveness, in fact fiveness in fiveness and so on- and this is structurally relevant despite the crude metaphors to which the algebra is illuminated. But this seems to me a useful paradox of Tarski where in the abstract we may divide a sphere then reassemble it to make two spheres. The point is that we divide it into five (like the plane of the four directions and the central kingdom which can be an empty element) but on the micro level where these regions meet we do not show how they mesh- but his is a background for creation fields and particles. I note here that in this dimensionless (zeroless) subspace with structure and potentiality although uncertain has structure and potentiality as an objective principle (for even the measure of flatness inertia systems)
* The totality of a "spherical" surface of a black hole (or other creative object) cannot evaporate beyond some integral number, say 120, that is do so "spontaneously".
* The symmetry of such sections and its information and complex-real bundling thus restricted to "reflections" in an area of thermodynamic and micro roto-centers of simply connected regions.
* Two such mini-regions may combine by a series of surface curved to flat mappings such as lunes in the harmonics of spheres.
* Can a solitary BH be a minimum area or energy at maximum entropy? This dynamic duality is after all the fulcrum of conversion between the line and point duality.
* There may be some merit to the idea of 2^ 2/2, that is 2 and 2^1/2 in questions of particle generations and the potential/kinetic quasic fields. can there be a ttt that is not in a sense some structure with the same problems of 5ness of groups with no possible quadratic like group formula? Are there in a sense only five quarks?
* * *
Now, some further explanation of yesterdays page Quasigenesis of Gravity:
By holofractor I mean a machine of sorts in the making of candles with multicolored layers. There is the difference and yet some idea of equivalence between a pipe that constrains fluid flow and a pipe as an infinite series of holes.
We built prototypes which consisted of a series of cans with holes over cans with holes the water blocking the wax in the final bottom fractal like layer. The idea for this was to make a lot of pouring in a small space (for the spectrum of the colors of the layers were like a star and although mass production was not considered an art so said those on the hippie commune to me, I replied but I was making a quasar.) Alas, the holes in the cans as small as they were had way to much variation in the ten or so seconds to pour 343 candles (or any number) that some candles were but a layer high and some overflowed. Eventually we had to learn to use the pipes in a variation really on the siphon which can pour accurately to the drop. Such mundane ideas, even taken from the design of nature, seem to be similar problems of measure to apply this creative geometry to concepts like quanta. By analogy the beer cans to which the candles were poured represent a vertical or five space like concept in the literal Euclidean model and machine in this age of fluid models for cosmology. Of course the simple idea of n-cans of many circular wax areas for computing the input of volume of wax to the top of the machine was equivalent to the area of the wax compared to the area of water between the cans- a general idea of a diffuse concept of what is part and what is whole.
* Clearly it is established that proximity of objects with gravity affects the total energy of a system even if this is not apparent from the equations- and the aberration of gravity and light differences, the rotation of the frame around something like spinning black holes, can be explained by this quasic idea of gravity.
It is a convention to say, in the idealized n-body problems and even by brute counting of the linear matrices we may imagine philosophically as Will- although it not certain if this corresponds to mind or spirit! these as quasi-linear matrices,
that we regard forces between bodies to be directed to a center. It is precisely this sort of difference between a classical radius and a central real or apparent singularity that these questions of force between 0 and 1 are to be resolved.
* * *
Posted while uploading photos to facebook in the album festivus 2010 in the Joynt last night.
I note a post on the blogs after this worth reading- in it we are cautioned not to confuse the additions and multiplications in e^z number representations which of course on this level of physical topological interpretation these are the same sort of raw induction to be intelligibly distinguished this side of heaven.
* * *
Ulla also posts on things like plecebos with links to Pitkanen on homeopathy- how is it the effectiveness of medicine is influenced by aromatherapy?
The gist of all this is that we are all more or less enquiring into the same questions of reality and some of the ideas are concrete and some are sugar pill or coated- but in this fine space of depths into our understanding of number for all practical purposes much of what we regard as something like new age is real and our ideas or even the "ritual of taking the medicine if we believe this while known in suspended disbelief even beyond awareness" can in a sense heal- but the reason must be a little deeper than mere conventional material reasons, structures and reasons-that these influence our ability to perceive what is wholesome in our own spacetime and cultural perspective.
Ulla, I could have gone to meals and family things- and to pass time I decided to post for the sake of the festivus last night and excitement I felt I had a new insight or basic normal comprehension of what gravity may be- but in my solitude today and tomorrow- I am really taking a little time off for myself. I find no sense of isolation at all. I am optimistic next year will be one of my peak ones- and I hope that I will continue to grow beyond what I have this year and perhaps find something even more startling new. Love knows no limits in its dimensions.
* * *
Resolved: not to spend money at Culvers next year because they are raising money for Hope Gospel mission and the Salvation Army- now if you give the Salvation Army is truly a good force in our community- but other than the gain we may have for our sense of giving the money to Hope Gospel goes into their pocket only and destroys more lives than they proclaim to help. Any benefit from faith in healing should not be a matter of propaganda and hidden agendas- in man's eyes if not only to Gods.
* * *