Sunday, May 15, 2011

Halo Shadow Codes

Halo Shadow Codes

Some relevant issues for my rather philosophic posting today continues in the comments on Matti's blog. These certainly strive of a more formal scientific analysis which becomes or seeks awareness of the more halo like issues of viewing things by which at least from a mystical stance the current science shy away from, with good reason really, or are not aware of such connections and influences at the heart of the issues of what is science and how is it intelligibly done- can we expect the laws of nature especially in the background to be or become in some sense immutable? Can we say in a world of intelligible contradictions or paradoxes that a new step in philosophy will render less depth in our science and personal understanding of a particular notion, other than its emotional and metaphorical entertainment value, such that our age will appear much as we see previous eras as less advanced. But these are the unanswered questions of origin, and remote breakdown of laws (and even experiments and observations shielded from the pure subjectivity in the background as a philosophy of modern science) in the multiverse, return or not of looping and the irradiating of decoherence including that idea as a speculative ordering of ultimate physical law as well as the cloudy possibility of radiations of decoherence.

An example would be the story line of how nature conspires that we do not discover the Higgs. Rather, what the collider may teach us is some philosophy, that in the observation the thing has lost its power to be observed, to exist in a sense, other than with experiments over time to be like a powerful drug that becomes a plecebo, or that the collective results of the ground of all human peers, no longer see symmetry as a sign of beauty or for healthy mating- but a little asymmetry up to a certain threshold is ignored or considered a difference as enhancement.

While I have pondered these ideas long, at the foundation, synchronously as I had left the radio on public broadcast I awoke to a most interesting discussion along these lines. I will try to find it on line and link to it here:
The 'Decline Effec't and Scientific Truth

(although it is not as deep as my long term contemplations which as all actions of love seem to add to the order and understanding of things, build up even to higher complexity what does not subjectively grow to a vanishing or an incoherence as perhaps some things come back in cycles subjectively (like the tangled but symmetrical bush branches in an illustration on my last post) in what seems in our ability to predict things or not a controversial gestalt ideas of influences on our bodies and life, considering the endings of things also.

* * *

Some more obscure principles from the page last night to be posted here later today:

*2 (*0 and *1 are formula suggestions in the illustration above) The same coordinate numbers as 1's or 0's in the quasic state depth of abstract motions reduce the coordinate dimension number with respect to unity or coherent intelligibity.

*3 A tree times the quadrants make loops with Dihedral flip symmetry matches of the complex roots of unity.

*4 The absolute value of *'s = 1 V 0 is the absolute structure of wildcard singularity complexes, ngx or ng.

*5 Maxwell super dark (in its two usual formlations) express the quadratic reciprocity as 4n (or 2^2n) dimmers, in the grounding symmetry of organic structures.

*6 Two vectors may connect a Maxwell Dark field, or distances between them (distance more generally defined) or energy can be virially less, or zero, for one or both.

*7 In this Mx Dark distance a connection may exist (if quantumly once there) only in the Dark.

*8 Can we organize the variation of absolute wildcards that vary interchanging the 1's or 0's ? (in this sense what but general context what determining 1 direction or the other could be a QM vibrational model, but Cw^Cw^n conway matrix analogs and ambiguities of action is that order and rotation as in spinor concepts, momenta and chirality, are equivalent discriptions in the halo spaces.

*9 The color code of the 30 cubes, 15, occurs as ordered only on the virial Cw" and Qs state level (Psi^2 as boating trident symbol sub n) where the Boltzman, Bose and Fermi statistics are differences among them of absolute coordinates on the same level also. (the more observed the less predictable or certain the data and interpretation, notes begin here the next day after the encountered radio show).

*10 Other things have variations in the fundamental laws as Omnic Teleology where the observational diminishing returns possibly as radiating and looping precognitive past observations aware or revised to the observe returns, to guarantee invariable laws and utility of diminished control resolved over several levels of quasic analogs of "halos" of meso-cosmic mentality. Thus "subjective" forecasting consensus or concretion is the issue observable over time as focusing in dimming experiments. To what extent, paradoxically, does Nature conspire against such subjective observation as consciousness above the subjective and objective of experience as this explains more clearly what are initial conditions local and remote of infinity, conservation laws, and the role of entropy?

Note: the Halo shadow code in a sense connects some of the arithmetic with the basic number roles of 20, 24, 40, 120, 65, 196 and so on to be worked out. This has not looked at the Three or more player games intelligibly implied (Trinx)and questions if with this idea it is needed with this halo method formalism.

* * *

The nature of the singularities in a so called Ylem or big bang (where that is part of the picture), the creative quasar era, and the star like black holes (and perhaps more varieties such as mini-black holes) have been for me distinct states of such creative entities as if these two have a generational aspect to put into the quasic notation grid and numbers like the partition one of 4 and 5. Leo does work on this idea in a field where few are dealing seriously with such complexes and singularities and I see no difference really where the study of them is not equally important as seeing the universe, and the issues of multiverse as Lubos says for the movie Big Bang that it is about "particle physics".

Thus, the cherub holds the model of what is said could be 4 or 5 interactions of our universe with so many others (suggesting of course the finite dodecahedral model or perhaps the Diracian five fold extended thus where Leo sees the ends of a distant multiverse inflation like theory- he comes closer to an Omnium dynamics of space and time...) But from a wider view of patterns and so on- in a perceptible inverted fashion as if we live inside or on one side of such a hole, are we not talking about the physics of halos if the generations cross over by one physics or an other? Who with this vision can say that such a frontiersman close to the lightening is wrong?

And BTW Lubos makes much of cosmic rays and clouds, but this idea has long been around where the solar system experiences cycles of such rays as we go in and out of the galactic plane- again, some early experiments on climate and the world's end mentality in a conspiracy that is made legitimate by dishonest scientists.

* * *

Comment to Ulla and Pitkanen again:


If we have a little more complex geometry such as some sort of fundamental sheets of the topology very much of what we think as non-linear becomes linear in general or tendency or behavior (I assert) much as some have pictured the transition from zero to then dimensions as three generations of point line curve perhaps ending in point again.

BTW Leo's work has its own take on things and seems to miss the ground of or have some black hole physics ideas that are sound- I am surprised he has so many articles posted where the blogger publish on line if not in journals. I have thought a long time of varieties of black holes- and their behavior is akin to little oily spheres as much a our idea of billard balls and varieties of spin.


especially for students in a subject I usually look to the original sources behind the popular magazines so they can cite it as a better reference- as in linguistics.

Are you sure if given a better theory in the details that genes although more complicated than we imagine are not reliable in themselves?

Wish we could talk somehow together and clear some of these loose ends up- seems a lot of new physicists are close but not quite there yet.


* * *

Not to say I do not have sins of my own and regrets even trying to live an honest life and thrive on stress that by the job service profile I should have died years ago. We can eat each others sins to a great degree if such things are edible, the old myth of the sin eater and we are what we eat- but there are places where some things are eaten and some are not. So to the myths or facts of salvation of the world or of paths and loops of theories and ideas- and universes of the continuum which in my pantheon of physis are hedgehogs, haloed by the infinite perpendiculars reaching their halos into the quantum seas.

* * *

1 comment:

  1. We can eat each others sins, yes, and those sins are simply energy we can give to mother Earth. Or transform it into a new consciousness. Also the forgiveness works marvelously well, but is not always possible, may need long time.

    Memories are not always good energy.