Heat Transfer in Dark Hierarchy Spaces L. Edgar Otto May 17, 2011 Eau Claire, WI
The issues for my post today is more toward new technologies rather than new theories. As nature uses at least a triplication of her generations, this layering of space on several levels of scale should be kept in mind when we apply some of the more traditional methods of mathematics that only applies to single generation space.
*1 In halo space, the heat transfer my generation-ally vary such that patterns may average or be exchanged, or may locally vary only.
*2 There may be a loose hierarchy of wave nodes and cancellations.
*3 The general universe does not necessarily reach past or present divergences with respect to a single generational concept of entropy.
*4 (Perception and memory or sensitivity to dark space is felt, literally and intuitively. That is a shell or limit of time as anomalous or false memory or perceptions)
*5 (Hawking E=mc^2 reference as an example of intelligence as a danger to species that may discover it- that cliche idea as a popular one- is not the major discovery that may change or threaten a civilization that also as Hawking maintains may not be qualitative different and more technically advanced but somewhat dark space different and not as simple analogs to primate intelligence.)
*6 Where there are halos the flow of "heat" has explicit analogies in subatomic particles and black holes well beyond the concept of molecular (noise) vibration.
*7 There may exist a lasing like levels for neutrinos in these generational thermodynamic states which we may use for control. We could irradiate halos or transfer "heat" in the quasi-determined locations in space (as in the cosmic background or the detailed explosion of a nova) between fields and entities that tend to exist only in the lower generations.
*8 We can reduce a singularity complex to a point singularity, a duality of sorts generation ally of orthogons around event horizons. Do neutrino pairs decay across the same event horizon as say electron pairs of but one generation?
*9 In a sense we may physically divide or even tack against the flow of time.
*10 The difference of neutrinos is greater than that of photons and the heat content then of the absolute number differences of particles is greater also.
*11 A triple quantum computation (thermodynamic) over that conceived quantum technology.
*12 A possible control by such spatial and generational methods, information-ally and of structures, of hot fusion.
* * *
Matti's blogspot is interesting today (if we live in a TGD universe there are whole scaled up versions of such particles- he says)
Well, such particles seem to relate to this posting in that if we live in a Quasic universe- well, this whole level of new particles but not described in the way Matti suggests- was a prediction which on the face of it was hard to see as not trivial.
Thus at lease two of our new physics have reached the same conclusions and the reality of the world looks a lot like we have striven to see it.
I see the idea in Mattis post of the derivation of mass as 2^127 - 89. This is my view too in a quasic sense that in that region of a quasic space the materal count is greater... the quadrant of CCC rather than GGG glycine in the genetics. The difference in our theories seems from what end of a series we start the measure.
* * *
For those into the maths, my post today suggests we should apply Fourier analysis in such things in a more complicated way than we now do, especially in the general analysis of a unit and sub units of space, and what we imagine we do in the generation triplication in separating the real and imaginary parts of complex functions.
* * *
Footnote:
This post started as some stray ideas from last night and part of the previous day so are not presented in a smooth way. I am not sure just how it relates coming here to the Pamela info Pitkanen posts about today. So as a general concern or background I report that I was considering the heat phenomena of the link yesterday and thinking this subtle effect of heat, and the new transistor architecture, might go a long way toward a neutrino tele(or micro)scope rather than observing them from a one generational reductionism only.
I am not quite clear on how Pitkanen derives some things- bits and pieces generally come through the blogging. I see the 128 as a number- a reduction perhaps of the 136 dimensionless constant comes up in ideas such as Rowlands, and the equations. While we may imagine by the simple 2^binary formulas analogs to such constants generaltionally, I think that twice 64 is 128 (or 127 if we do the Eddington insight on the counting from initial conditions) which would hold twice 256 for Pitkanen's 512 as an eight dimensional concept or my twice that or 1024 as a quasic two player game concept which is of course 1/4 of the quasic field and is the qm 32 x 32 formalism and involves at least 16 dimensions. (or 17 in the spirit of Gauss...)
It is not clear that such theories, especially applied to life sciences, can be accepted by the mainstream as containing any sort of validity. It is not clear that Pitkanen and my ideas, and of some others who recognize where the new physics is sensible, are competing ideas- for there might be someone to arise, with perhaps the power of Conway to see say in 24 dimensions and actually have the details a more unified theory. As these ideas converge we clearly see fine differences evolve that perhaps are not that different- as if we measure the ability of some systems or organizations such as Christianity in its breaking down into sects as a general measure of the systems propagation and not a sign of its decline.
In any case we need more thought on thermodynamics and I am interested in what Pitkanen means when he touches on this area of physics.
Yet, issues of multiverse aside, and other issues also, the three levels of which Pitkanen seems to intuit requires stages or action constants, I find it a little trying in what may be considered observable or visible even if not a concrete form of dark matter in the various representations of theories as say octonions and so on when in the demonstrations these facts of a wider group theory even not so remote beyond the generations are thought to be simply one way to view things and not more- this is no way to find some sort of unity or say a clear explanation of how in the multiplicity of such things we reach a little more unity as in gravity theories.
Beyond this it really is not so far in the complicated notions and papers from some rather basic and obvious things, even from the mathematics viewpoint. That long coming but minor step from Pythagoras to Einstein...
* * *
In a lighter vein, some rather randomly arranged artwork (a sort of including of other symbols perhaps for the 30 cubes and so on). From yesterday afternoon while deciding to rent or not in this city. One can only drink so much coffee and find new things with a lot of time on the computer, even on facebook.
* * *
I tried some comments on more popular oriented discussion groups- but I will post it here considering Lubos with such a negative view of Greenes work today:
What do we gain by replacing Creationist mysticism with Quantum mysticism? In the multiverse it is obvious that Hawking has taken the wrong but certain path from his perspective. What is science that but objective honesty? Why do we think we know everything at certain times? Do we dare fly before we learn to walk? What is the first element of the world? Is it not water to make a conscious connection to the earthbound deaf and blind? Science will make the idea of Heaven a lot easier to believe that the notion of God the Creator Himself. All who comfort themselves in dealing with the spook of mortality do not partake of the attributes of God as their most creative self in the original form in a multiverse of paths solving the time paradox.
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/09/01/5028472-hawking-says-gods-not-needed-so
It is not that QM is wrong but the statistical interpretation cannot stand alone in philosophy or science- unless we want to stay with it as a measure of ignorance and forbid any human originality. Bohr, well he was just a steppingstone with a rather geocentric view of things.
Also this (although I do not join to post something in steps when it says one more step another time. It is not about discussion really but private stances and advertisements I guess- that or cyber war that leaves us in the middle.)
On the Decline Effect:
Posted by: L. Edgar Otto May 17, 2011 - 10:12AM
Eau Claire, WI
Yes, there is a lot of philosophy here. But considering the latest science, the new physics really, has reached a lot of foundational problems and unexpected directions- this author has made some brilliant deductions that seem to have relevance to our daily lives and honest experiences.
Those who say this is not science from my perspective are declining into an old school and are getting rather obsolete. I would as the author this: If my roommate takes Prozac and it has diminishing effects and he has a mental problem with diminishing effects then, although things can be cured and not grow worse it take infinite time to do so.
The author btw made no claims this was a formal scientific theory. But deeper questions have been presented and looked at by scientists who should know better than to show decline on what they think they know is not there when they feel they know everything.
* * *
http://uduality.blogspot.com/2011/05/harmony-of-scattering-amplitudes.html
Perhaps someone will see my earlier postings on how some of the information is obscured by the Feynman diagrams as far as theory goes. Now, while I do not claim any credentials I cannot help but wonder how those with such reach the same conclusions. In the indecision (on the part of others and circumstances more than my own) as to move or not I thought about going to UWM as the law says they have to readmit me. But what is the point? especially when it is the old tie things up with financial aid (that is the veterans problem not solved nor the problems with the state at the time that made things a mess again) In this country if certain groups of people do not flunk out the first semester (and I mean blacks in UNC) I have heard the admin officers discuss this while serving them in the steak house- that "we will get them by tangling up financial aid"). Well, Wisconsin, ask me again how I will pay for it? It would be nice to at least flunk out under my own steam and see a text book and not explain why my exams rated among the highest in years there.
But I mention this because I am really wondering now why New Zealand and Finland have treated obviously original and brilliant bloggers here so illy.
* * *
No comments:
Post a Comment