Saturday, January 15, 2011
There comes a point in a story or textbook where we pass into the realm of speculation. A sense of an ending to a thesis. But those who have dabbled in creative writing know one cannot really say when a work ends, nor when it begins, save we arrange it into our artistic styles.
I have reached such a point where the next phase of the physics calls out for a view to the foundations and frontier of the state of the vision. As science we can only take an overview at first, as human are wont to do, dreams and clouds, gleaning intelligible truths, dawning. This is ultimately how it should be as philosophy of science, otherwise where would our edifices of systems have to go after the last of falsifications- for things are then verified in a most isolated and self-centered sense, or much of the metaphysical grounds is opaque or left as mystery. Again, this is where the reality of this world meets and deals with creative thinking.
I do not find, so far, the teleology of things in this speculation, nor causality, or even senses of the flow of time other than by some sort of diffuse default- that of space itself. The idea of dimensions is close to that of our ideas of a progression or series, steps that have the feeling of certainty of proof. Close also then to whatever idea we have of focus and spatial compression, density, in general any vague sense of the perpendicular as otherness to call it or think such an idea of transcendental is that of God for example, expressed as gravity or energy or even the nothingness that somehow shows in releif what is in interacting with the real as so many at first blush seem to shout out as a realization or revelation to convey to others their sense of being and need to apply to belonging, to communicate to that personal in others.
Yet, such a concept, as if an idea of dark matter, our creative place in the entropy, the why and measure of mass itself in the flanks of field and mass itself, the equivalence of rotations and reflections,in the chaotic vagueness everywhere as if a sea of singularities, is a concept that undermines the very idea of a dynamic and evolving world to which we can claim the obvious of experience because of our anthropocentric chance situation. Every place in the fact of what is, that it is mysteriously also as intelligible as reason when we contemplate the whole, that place can produce quite beside our initial excitement of the structure and fractal nature of such things, anytime baby universes so it seems without the immediate if ever it is recovery of the high level classical events and whole.
* * *
[This is a work in progress still as I add things this morning- now we get to the more technical parts]:
On general conclusion I may make is that some of our mathematics- none of it really to be taken as a fundamental description of reality beyond our too narrow applications and interpretations, nevertheless has its place as a method and higher level language- just as physics can describe some things on such a leap of intellect to have a sense of understanding beyond that of the average thinkers sense of the rightness and intelligibility of life- even in times of chaotic circumstance- is that what we apply to lower level languages as math too soon, and as an overview it does have its sense of certainty and logic in a more constrained compass- that we can recover such notions and methods again but in the context of higher space levels. Among those, seems to me, our ideas of the calculus and differentiation, that otherness of the world as statistics and higher uncertainty, the recovery of the distributive law in the algebra, and most importantly the exponentiation by the natural base for the representation as done now on a lower level of so many of the equations of quantum physics and other disciplines. In this view efforts of the so called surrealistic calculus, a higher view of number theory, makes that a steppingstone only to more familiar and classical ways to put the world into equations.
* * *
I then, by simple counting and imagining quasic space- a problem I noted early on which I ignored for the sake of what did work in consideration of abstract motion or was inspired to see what might be there as other forms of number in the perpendicularity of the otherness- as transcendental or finite rungs of a hierarchy of spaces. So, beyond the restriction to the analogs of tetrahedra, and the orthogons in five or more spaces I have to ask myself if even in the sense that quasic grids can map higher dimensions is there an intelligible space that not only exceeds quasicisity but our notations we might be able to make to so describe this?
To coin an old word used with deeper scope I call this hyperquasic space (hqs). What we need to see here is the idea that to some quasic state level of some group natural or exponential dimension the abstract motions may shift into connections- which I feel here two are or for all practical purposes are linear. (what after all is intrinsic curvature really?)- such abstract or realized motion may shift in the analog other space between cells that are not strictly in only one quasic space of the state or dimension level of the subcell orthogons in that space. But we need not assume things are non-linear or uncertain nor intimate with only a quantum formalism to describe say the scattering or location of say photons. These could so be described as such in partially selected structures of all space regions. On the other hand if we can so measure the influence of these hyperquasic topologies we may find closer reasons to consider this in the perpendicularity as the Dark Matter-energy (which the ratio is of course involved in the binary inverses of subcell motions) or something like it- certainly gravitational lensing fits the description of regions more or less arbitrary as if self contained baby and vague universes.
[I may add some diagrams of the space if it cannot be imagined or if it can only be found after extensive searches of the quasic space proper in my postings of which I meant to post refresher reviews. One possible new way to handle the notation is to do something with the spaces between the pixel regions, quasic themselves in a quasic region. One can of course imagine as illusions of our higher level concepts such as time or time future only recovered as time past, we live in a diffuse and scaleless and dimensionless hole (seen continuous, quasi-linear, empty, or not) as if it ultimately nothingness for some concept of the otherness also.]
* * * *
Note: Pitkanen comments on the water again and certain low frequencies (could a change in that disorient the black birds?) But is it not already a useful fact for Chinese medicine at least in the early 80's of Pearson who gave out Nobel Prizes who wrote textbooks on things like the blood vessels as a cable system of electric fields also? Of course we can put anything we want in a textbook. Nevertheless, because of the application of such frequencies- it discovered when applied a severed limb would grow the bones and muscles and veins and nerves three inches- does it really matter what the theory was if in fact because of him thousands have been able to reattach their legs when otherwise too much of the tissue was missing? The idea of strings and dark matter is key but inadequate terminology here where we need a wider view of topology in such opaque and seemingly not material forces. In the obvious application of this conception Lubos faith may be justified in the application of M or any other higher level dimensional theory (and I do not mean vague things that may be imagined like gravity waves, Higgs as fundamental and so on) for from my view, and perhaps with a little more theory to back it up, the experimental evidence is all around us as if the air we breathe. But so are hints of other things to view eventually, to stumble upon only maybe in tomorrow's wisdom thus explain. There seems to be still a difference in fundamental and high level theories of everything in how far the human mind can reach concretely and abstractly thinking about such things.
The value and strength of a theory, with common sense restraint as if we mimic whatever nature does herself in the clothing we design for her nakedness, is that with or without intelligible embedding of such abstract dimensions or mapping of order and events- the statements building a view or theory creatively grow so as not to saturate our hallucinations of what strays from the real- I mean, it is here that tomorrow's wisdom holds promise over time and survives as a human enterprise of enquiry. If one wants to open his thoughts to the world in the expert detail of things it can end at times as concrete speculation where we reach out for what is original and fundamental knowledge to add to the shared whole- otherwise of what profit is the harp in clouds of philosophy, or robotic rusty gears of science?
* * *
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-01/miot-mne011311.php from new things on philosophychatforum.org
While in the end I see the nature of memory as involving the topology of the vacuum which in a sense has structure- and this article does say some things are still a mystery- this idea does seem to relate at least tree structures of the nerves as a physical grounding, arbitrary in the confluence of events and time short an long term... but although the materialist grounding has to be there, at least initially, more is going on than the thrill some feel as we map such structures by mere reductionism. Ideas like possible organic structures seem to periodically arise and vanish. Ultimately, the creationism and evolution debate is still a (higher level) issue. But if restrained somehow in our view of something like the default programming of time and precipitation thresholds of something like mass and entropy do not such laws quasi-invariant and quasi-universal arise everywhere and every when diffusely as if a high level language(so should be better explained) whether some sort of imaginary field that only is tangible as vibration in and out of existence or as a zero state relative or not)? Where do we get memories back when they seem to vanish awhile (some multi-fractal curves nature decides to discretely encode as if confluence in some subspace of consciousness?) And when the twists and mirrors reconstruct these lost things again how much error of false memory can the system take to remain a coherent and intelligible structure much as cancer and the chromosomes?
* * *
Here is an example where the topology makes solid sense when considering quantum ideas:
Here in this advert on the sciencedaily site the buzz words to the uninitiated are misusing the quantum concepts as well that of other ideas of dimensionality (pseudoscience is alive and well).
* * *