The SUSY of Space and Logic

The SUSY of Space and Logic

In reading articles today, Lubos and Motl's posts, I seem to have a little better x-ray vision because of my thoughts of last night on the meaning of numbers in the sense of the recursion in the planes in question and the depth and span of their application- especially in matters of the possible inevitability of our organism and the notions evolving in the structures of our minds. What the new understanding of numbers best applies to is the explanation of cell differentiation and integration a a little deeper mystery than we now think. Of course, Godel separated the idea of proof and truth which is a little vague say in matters of faith, but is good to keep in mind. In some sense linguistics can apply to what is the mathematical physics foundations.

[note added after last posting here and looking over the paper Lubos cited: that the ideas in the paper have merit but only begin to ask questions as to the more coherent role of the ideas of such four spaces- in fact at the conclusion of this intricate paper the questions hinted at are said beyond the scope of the authors. I suppose this is progress of a sorts- reminds me of enough of a paper to guarantee the next round of funding in an area of research. Why then is this paper intelligible at all? Why would it not try to address the problems of the issues it raises in the hard work of the details? Or is it just a metalanguage to which very few people even in a formal setting can evaluate where such topological statements are obvious even in the higher level language once removed from the notions? Oh, and in reference to the illustration on the weak self similarity of fractals and the probabilistic treatment there is no consideration of the possibility philosophically of a teleological treatment as that is beyond our conventional physics but can be that to which such symmetries are to be said to be broken. I find it interesting that the model of the hand, a biological model, was used here for it is highly relevant- but to say governments do this, Lubos, is a clever analogy of which I find it only partially relevant.]

Just as an electric clock can sometimes get out of phase when you plug it in (are any of them around anymore?) and go backwards- it is said that at a certain stage of embryonic development it is not clear which end becomes the head or the anus. That would go a long way in explaining why half of us seem to be speaking out of the wrong end of things with what we give the world.

I will come back to this shortly- including a commentary on gender differences of mind mentioned in the national news (well, we have to understand the truth of the media if we can yes?)

As I was saying, the news said that our neurons are firing and that there are as many of them as the stars in our galaxy. But the total that goes to the growing regions of complexity of the memory (and loops of addiction in the familiar experiences of early development) in women tend to come from both sides of the brain where with the men "it is more focused, more from one side." What, if true, is this trying to tell us? From my viewpoint the mind space is at least as complex as the depth and span of these self recurrence definitions of infinity which btw makes fine distinctions between what we imagine as finite and infinite, discrete and continuous. In our notions of the cosmos we are caught at least floating from some center of the idea of place and position, of self, in at least a four way orientation to such things like, in the span space we can follow that direction or reduction only so as to imagine a cosmology where most of the possible worlds are empty of dead ones where life cannot be found- or in totality the end of the world. We can imagine, for we have to redefine the ordinal concepts also, that such models have to have an origin or not, ending or not or even a compromise where time is infinite as imaginary space and finite as real space (Hawkings). This is true of some of the Inflation models. Alternatively, with a question to of a shifting as if quasi-finite of ordering upon the special cases of zero and infinity that the scale of things can be more relative and more steady state such that those worlds where we do not find life over a long time of adjusting laws rarely have empty worlds in the possibilities of the multiverse.

One should keep in mind these biases of gender. As with time, language a changing and imperfect tool that only partially obeys the conventions of grammar, our idea of the gender of words may have had a time where in specific cases at least the sense of this superfluous convention may have carried deep and influential meaning- or just a cultural meaning. Surely, in the dynamic of both models as gender, we can imagine- like Plato, of part of our totality in a sense half in the longing for another. That is the myth as an explanation had some degree of a reason for the notions.

These fractal like contexts of numbers do seem to reflect the recursive or even looping definition of the whole and part of one to one matching or mapping to a subset of itself. I suggest that it does so in more than one fixed way but these can be sorted out to raise for us deeper physics questions- in fact it can push the metaphysical questions to a new level- God as potential infinity is that beyond all concepts of cardinality and counting- in short beyond all universal things and nothingness. We observe at times, and in some of these papers, that some systems in investigating the possibilities of how say to arrange particle theories, or deal with when and where the equations break down- that renormalization can be intrinsic to the models or we can sense this. This is OK if it is a useful and comprehensive model and even if we accept some principle of normalization of the finite as a useful axiom that can be a steppingstone and itself intelligible physics.

But the imagination of such new spaces and symmetries (including the idea that we divide topology into spaces of sidedness and orientation as irreversible distinctions in delineating and enumerating higher spaces, and the concept that a string for instance has to have a real or virtual higher dimension in which to vibrate at least not longitudinally- for two microwaves can focus heating the atmosphere so as to create regions of visible light.) is at heart the same question as to what of these notions are commensurable and real, and what as ghostly seas of ignorance as a measure of the probabilities.

When it comes to primes we sense that on the lowest scales of things that there can be a sense of less than the aleph0 so as to exceed cardinality from the top down as well as our gazing into the imagined potentials beyond the immense.

This mathematics, the group and sets of it, the gauge and coherences of it, the possibilities of local and distant communication, cannot but be controversial when applied to evolving things and to the patterns of developing embryology. We can immediately see but not show that in mammal cells the individual becomes so at 2 to the 5th power. 32 cells can make 32 clones. more than that remove one and the embryo dies. Perhaps the legal rights as individuals begins not before the lower levels of such symmetry. Not in the logical problems at conception other than the abstract logical position that it is after all human tissue.

This sort of understanding of evolving systems in all species suggest that on some level the processes of genetic reading can sustain or reverse aging, in principle. We begin to see this by the relative matching of the reading and the reversal of more advanced states of a specialized cell in the early coherence influence of stem cells. But as the clone is as much analog as digital for the use of such technology we really have not appeal to a general theory as to how far the technology can go.

* * *

Today, many schools are closed due to protests for the budget cutting and bargaining rights suspended for state employees. This includes teachers, excludes fire and police. The have to pay more for medical and retirement. Some few who are incompetent cannot be fired. Not many graduate in some of our big cities so something is not working right.

I feel like the issue is quite outside of my interest or it is a complex issue that is not resolved by the logic of things- including the logic of economics that obviously could use a boost of mental evolution. I mean, the bureaucrats veto things really and skirt around the state statues and the constitution and there is only the due process in appearance only of appeal. What can I say? Let them apply for food stamps or jobs they denied others and find no such resources there. Why should I care for a hundred dollars more for health insurance for those making 40K a year as professors when they denied my future and schooling and could not understand some rather basic things as administrators. To make "professional degrees" to make childcare a matter of state oversight where those without the experience of being a mother tell the townies how to live and raise children (beyond a certain point of course of abuse, and yet this profession makes it impossible for the average townie to pay for daycare.) As far as I am concerned it would make no difference to me nor to many of our new veterans if we closed the county offices and limited entitlements, in fact it would improve a lot of our situations.

The right or left brains of all this, politically, really have no business stifling enquiry and science funding as if it a matter of any other social activity- nor can we say locally that we need the higher fees to attract new teachers to the point the competent and established ones make less money. Education should be more than money interests and business. The cosmology of politics and economics is still mythology.

* * *

Lubos just posted a brilliant position on some of the same ideas I have presented here (provided we actually understand and read between the lines). What are pathological ideas in physics (and this concern less than the Platonic vision of the continuous with the irksome intuitionist discrete?) Oddly, we can take some other position of others and it may or may not be a pathological description- we need to show some evidence more than just take a philosophic or political position. If you read between the lines, Lubos- interesting by the way the synchronicity of these posts or perhaps you are addressing these things after reading us. Thank you either way- I for one have not abandoned the utility of string theory as part of a greater topological picture. The paper he posted earlier tells me that in the face of the new LHC data there is soul searching as to what we mean by things like broken symmetry (especially if it is just a matter of Fibonacci numbers and not the more subtle sequences of the partition varieties) that is that paper listed as a problem in physics to be solved- as if they are finally aware this was a problem and now assert it as such.

From the alternative side here it is clear that (in theory or in reality) that we can discuss things like bosonic dimensions say on the not observed cosmic strings. The alternative answer to the broken symmetry issue is one of logic and counting and we know that in these matters of the fractals as used here that the idea of combinotorics is part of the description. Do we jettison combinotorics as a real mathematical tool- do we not imagine it in exponentiation and a skeleton of perturbation theory? Of what theories do we pick and choose?

Kea again in the casual comments states there are no "fairy fields". We I for one play what is called fairy chess or the chess of n-dimensions. Only unlike the nerdy game as shown in Star Trek I insist it has a logical basis in its representational analogies or it is just part of the picture of physics and notions, young men in exploration going where no boys have gone before on a space opera adventure. I suppose a more feminine stance for such business can be seen as pathological. I mean what is the Enterprise but a great phallic symbol, while in the smaller version we have Captain Janeway and her band of revolutionaries lost in some quadrant of the galaxy?

So what happens if that thin line of possibility of SUSY vanishes- what then at the zero point for the ideas and equations? Do we say that such ideas are in the background but not to establish the real where no man can go as voyagers nor no man has gone before? Does not the Platonic soul need its other half- at least the real values proof or not in the zeta function schemes?

We have new questions that will dawn on us as of yet we are not aware to ask. The ideas of supergravity and so on as I think they are discussed in matters of what is intelligible and I suppose normal in the maths is that where numbers contain not just some application to reference frames and particles and fields but our ideas of information and meaning where intelligible in the continuous- to start with we find that the octonion-quaterion (and perhaps a vague idea of dimensions a little further) is the idea of symmetry breaking that after all someone finally suggested but of which falls out of the consideration of the properties of binary numbers.

This is hard in the sense that we cannot choose really and yet we can choose from some set of notions or experimental situations of incompatible either or things being facts at the same time where our mathematical physics has a nervous breakdown if not go psychotic after the circuit breaker or fuses burn out at zero.

* * *

SUSY in the ideal is almost an unreachable love and you will be counting the rose petals to understand her eternally and in the diagonalization of your joint lives never fully find her not a little alien and different, a little crazy, a little stubborn to your right to possess her, to worship your God thru her nurturing against the cold of night and cycles of the moon there until the midnight sun returns again.

You can play the imperfect fairy chess with bravado and make bold calculations as to what angle to view her exotic dancing from a tantalizing distance. But beware, if you take her to your heart- she is very high maintenance.

* * *