Friday, January 21, 2011

Hidden Structural Trivialities

Hidden Structural Trivialities

Reading some of the links posted today, and some earlier, I have to say that I am not that impressed. With Witten for example, or the use of associahedra in the link called thesis on Kea's blog.

Lubos posts on Gordon Kane on tests of string theory- a paper living only on hope for the hope of a new ultimate theory- He makes the analogy of Newton's mechanics and Hamiltonians of quantum mechanics for the role of compactification. For first I have the utmost respect, the second is interesting but now obsolete in its grasp of the scope of space and physics structure (indeed, one should distrust publications that enhance their thesis by claims it is quantum theory- is that theory not in all its variations incomplete?) and as far as compactification goes- it is a trivial understanding of higher dimensions at best- at worse is downright wrong. It could make a model of physis- but that would not be the real world.

Good for Pitkanen, perhaps there is hope in new journals that would let us wade through the maze of this issue of consciousness and DNA objectively and scientifically. Humans are inspired by recognition (not so the Jungian prophets that have left for the mountaintops or craving a little conversation begin their Zarathusian downgoing- perhaps to rant and raise hell, to be there the isolated monk, on the social nets). He needs his own journal and there is funding for that or used to me in the USA. Let me say though, that I would not post there and I can say the same thing for certain other such projects like the one that rejected Rowlands.

I remark also that an adequate living encourages research and results giving the tools they need for the ones truly interested in her field of enquiring. In a world made possible for enquiry, part of that possibility is not to waste human genius.

But today I come here not that impressed with myself- for my work too seems rather complex and difficult to read, rather elaborate for the trivial and simple ideas- one in particular today of imagining analogs to Pascal on cubes and tori and so on. As an 8 x 8 quasic square of 64 things (like the codons) we can reduce it to 4x4 or 1 3 3 1 x 1 3 3 1 which gives 36 in the center (four nines) and 28 on the outside much in the same way I organized the Conway color cube matrix and the DNA in regards to topology. Duh, is all this hubbub just a vague and coincidental and trivial idea of counting?

Lubos remarked on the consistency of things in the string theory (and the "hierarchy problem" and infrared problem... and the link had the "cosmological constant problem" of which in a more general theory these are hardly problems but things to think about- and I did. Of course mine is not a string theory.

The assembly code from my perspective as an informational theory is isomorphic to the machine code- The first is analogous to mathematics (logic) and the later to physics. It is in the higher levels- the so called preoccupation with the metalanguage of things (perhaps the postmodern lingo of things) confusions arise. But why not if consciousness can still be seen as mechanical or some sort of vague emergence perhaps even fundamental? In a sense the maze or labyrinth of quasic ordering can come from any cell in the quasic grid for its syntax- the semantics of the higher language- but is this not what life does over the materials that make it or what would be required for an intelligible emergence of mind?

We can also suggest the two codes relate to both the concept of paths in the syntax and to which is the long term or short term memory. Looping self awareness does seem to be (in its inelegant recursive concepts) a question of proofs or discernment of errors- are we aware even trivially of the intelligibility and reality of our thoughts and the paths languages and theories have taken us down in the maze of things?

On the other hand such a sense of these differences of codes, a sort of being in a dream and watching ourselves in a dream, makes it possible to discern what we perceive or comprehend as the higher meaning in the higher language that is very significant and not trivial- although these things, and the extent of our genius to go down either extreme, are conjugate for any reasonably unified theory or personality of a meta-theoretician.

We who do, automatically at times, sometimes casually, sometimes with a sense of urgency or even from boredom, addicted to the moment not thinking about survival and the consequences like Archimedes drawing in the sand ignoring the Roman centurion to finish his drawing first so he was killed (and the soldier who did it I think)- we the prime movers as authors who perhaps by default become known should also ask ourselves as those now the mentors and poets of articulation, why should we be surprised that we find something overlooked and taken long fore-granted or ignored. a discovery even on a trivial level which to all the world becomes a shared thought of original and fundamental significance?

* * *

A couple of things I will briefly touch on in my manuscript of last night- it is minus 18 degrees F here even without the wind chill so I got up awhile rather chilly.

The first is the iota singularity concept and the otherness of the grid (epsilon honeycomb) in relation to the quasic abstract motions where f0 change 6n that squared results in the same value... that is in a matrix of 4 x 4 seven of them contribute nothing apparent to the structure or motion of the "moduli" (field or particle see Green's link). What this may mean is that for a plane of the four coordinates as a tensor it can be a vertical or horizontal row- that makes no difference (perhaps to the idea of a certain quantum uncertainty of order where this uncertainty may have an effect of making an order. In any case, the z-code as a matter of self reflection is known to be able in the initial cases of running a program for a computer simulation to predict errors much further along as the data grows and is interpreted in some project.

The other what I call Diablo ex (Idiot) Box where I laughed when some fundie hippy Christ freaks in the 80s would not have television on because "evil spirits could come thru it and enter the house and even affect the children watching it. Well, in many was the internet and computer for all practical purposes seems to have fulfilled their fanciful dream. :-)

* * *

Sometimes the Experiments outpace the theories (Which one article ends by suggesting the speculations on the frontiers can at time advance science.)

Off the top of my head (noting the most interesting observation these electric and magnetic effects can happen in a neutral description or of things hidden to what we know about such electromagnetic structures) I notice as far as the periods of these "metal phase" elements go it follows the order 1 2 3 5 8? which I suggest is the all important Fibonacci numbers evidently important for ideas of symmetry breaking and these elements would then be H B Al Yb Uut? but this intuitively is a trivial view of a more or less limitation at 8 things just like the limitation of 5 for Boron as if somehow we count it as 5 nucleons of sorts- again Yuri's post on such things asking for a comment on his 3 to 1 (holonistic or quasic conception) and of course the assertion of mine that we have 8 periods of 120 elements. Thus there is a distinct global structure which is observed in the evolution of the cosmos as these elements are made (or perhaps created over time, maybe in the Weyl like affine but not observable background) so we have the fermi and boson ideas meeting as some mysterious metal (not ceramic or plastic) event frontier of atoms. In of course trivial "nucleation or compatification-as-shadowtope inversions" If there is in a sense a 9th period, an analog to hydrogen is possible or 121 for singularities with structure for all further potentially realized dimensions (quasic not necessarily natural ones- thus we try to sort out 10D + time. But for me we have to at least go to 16 or seventeen dimensions that preserve such schemes of space and cosmos and particles.) Interestingly the Al B lattice is over the Yb lattice as if duality. So what further properties might we find at element 113 if it can be superimposed on the lattice intelligibly?

But again, I am not sure we can use the quantum terms to suggest clearly these are large scale effects so might we conclude the same for a biological theory... More is happening here than meets even the mind's eye.

I find it interesting btw in the highly trivial remark Kea posted where someone said 3^2 is not 2^3 - but is this highly significant? Well, in the 3x3 121 x 121 square the sum is 16 of the coefficients. So in a sense (the neutral and scaleless abstract motions aside by such qutrit-qubit reductions) 3 @'s add up to 16 which is a virial doubling (and quasically so) such that 3*^2 = 2*^4, after all a cube with 8 quadrant points is but 8 1's. So in a crude sense 3^2 is 2^3 conceptually. But consider this
the Series of 1 -1 1 -1 -1 can equal 0 or 1 depending on how we group them, but also series starts 1 + (-1+1) + ... can be seen as summed to 1/2.

Another thought last night, revisited, was that these quasic motion notations tell us things like if we combine two motions thru an edge f4 we get a product that states it a motion in 4space thru a square f4 change6 of2.

It is worth mentioning two that when we have f or 6 either 1 the other 0 the interpretation in the hidden background (if I recall the f and 6's right) result in the what I call Punch and Slice functions. After all a change in the totality of the coordinates is a linear diagonal function of motion.

But at neutral or hidden trivialities (and may all your reduced theories prove as much significant to physis as the doubts that haunt us after the babble there is only a duh triviality that tells us little of the mystery of life and physis and how we think on all this with or without a real grounding of evolving belief) that in the case of a 3 x 3 set of boxes it is trivally true that in the upper right to lower left diagonals the various gnomons of the dimensions all are of the f4change(6 reverse symbol)2 motions regardless of dimension as four space motions. This diagonal comes up on all quasic scales as perhaps distinct from the main matrix diagonal in some of our understanding of matrix properties.

* * *

No comments:

Post a Comment