Monday, January 3, 2011

Modern Phenomenological Numerology

Modern Phenomenological Numerology
( Perhaps numberology should be coined for this variation on the concept- apparently the term does not exist on google.)

Again, not much on my mind but a few stray thoughts. But I thought a little about Kea's observation on the number related to pi/81. Reading Rowlands, I may add rather slowly as it seems to be a picture I can not only grasp at once but the more I stare into it I find a wider span and depth. Anyway, some of Kea's matrices begin to look familiar to me involving those like in the book on things like M-theory.

As I said yesterday sometimes we look into the coincidences of numbers and try to find some reasons in the vagueness. I called it an up to date or modern numerology to which I add phenomenological in a vague sense of how Rowlands uses the term in particular to these issues of point charge mass values. I must say the informal and messy incursion into this sort of numerology I should intellectually regard more as part of the creative process than some wishful fudging of errors in values. In such an interpretation of thinking about such things it does resemble issues of intuition, but this is hard to do with things seemingly as rigid as numbers.

Intellectually the intuitionist view can be a sort of discrete view of God made the Integers, and all that- but we may see a slightly higher level of this notion where God made the algebra and all that- not necessarily a world of differentiation- and who knows maybe some analog beyond that- we are a young species in science and philosophy enquiring and creating.

Clearly, considerations aside from complex or even negative numbers, the analogs to Pascal's triangle are rich in suggestions of fundamental ideas. Now it seems there is a sort of vague idea of mixing of the values of such particles, at least in the first few such as the lamba that can come out exact provided we assume that the proton is a sphere.

But I am not sure in the general rotations and twists of things in the widest of mutual and averaged angles- a sort of quantum theory cloud notion and mass mechanism, that there cannot be a pure cloud space independent of all lesser models.
In terms of arithmetic, we can have a Triangle (3+1)^n which numerically at least is equivalent (but not necessarily isomorphic in breakdowns of model spaces) to (2+2)^n but the later does generate by successive multiplication by 4 of the quasic grid numbers. We of course may break this down further using integer and algebraic values in the derivation of the Pythagorean theorem. (which I tried to investigate but was making too many simple errors to continue at that time, due perhaps to dry winter, and poor light and thus eyesight). Note, keep in mind Rowlands concept of symmetry breaking ++-- that is things reduced from 4 to 2 dimensions by (2+1)^n in the 3+1 symbolism.

To start with- describing the point charge proposed number of a "Higgs" particle Rowlands describes this as a reverse process of mass creation. But then again the idea of asymmetric rotations, momenta and so on, bespeaks of "broken symmetry". Let us note then the number 2592. Clearly it is a product of 32 and 81. 2^5 and 3^4 !
This number is divisible by 81. Now is there a geometric model for this seeming combination of fourth and fifth powers (perhaps as dimensions)?

Now in Rowlands, some of these early values come out 1/128 which is suspected as exact and of course is 1/2^7 for such mixing or not mixing in a way that gives values that are far from those of experiment.

Now, I tried my hand at a little modern numerology:

As I noted in the comment to Kea that 256/81 was a crude approximation to pi. I noted also that 81 was the number of subcells of the hypercube of 4 space. I note now that 256 would be the points of a 2^n eight dimensional n-cube. Somehow we can imagine these sets dividing into each other or mapping into each other, but it rather a 4D into 8D situation, perhaps quaterion algebra into octonian... (and by this we suspend the equivalent models of spaces Klein and complex in the view). By division into 2^8 we can imagine the 81 of the hypercube subcells being 3 x 27 of which the center 3x3x3 cube has elements a dimension higher than the other two.

Now, let us define pi as 256 degrees (actual I will call these desgrees from dime and disme spellings, s at end is multiple x and at beginning super-x).

But from the 3+1 formalism we can have 3x128 quadrants of a full circle of 512 desgrees and these equal 384. This number, 2^4 x 4! is significant for the rotations and so on of the 4D hypercube.

The right angle, by arithmetic alone, is 128 and 2pi is 512.

Part of me would like to image a circle as 384 desgrees where the right angle is 96 as a teacher once said this would have been a better number. In any case the 384 is part of the 6 x 64 lines of the I Ching. Of course the numology here reduces things to 60 x 6 with 4 seasons or 24 lines. Note: 9 x 16 = 144 ... here we find the symmetries of 12 again as perhaps in the Dirac algebra.

Rowlands notions of vireality of 2 and 1/2 values also involve that of 1.5 and .5 on certain zeta function points of the number line when viewed in this way.

A Few More Stray thoughts:


4/3 256 r^3

([m^2 - n^2]^2 + [2mn]^2 )^n , m=2, n=1 analogs to Pascal's triangle...

(2+2)^n in pure 4space formalism:

= 1, 2 2, 4 8 4, 8 48 48 8, ... = 1, 4, 16, 64 ...

* * *

(1 + 2+ 3 + 4)^n

(2 + 3 + 5)^n

* * *

From the quasic states or levels view the division 256/81 amounts to 8D/4D division. Which is also in line with ideas of n-adic information theory, integrally of course.

* * * *

1 comment:

  1. What are thinking about this kind of numerology?