Sunday, June 12, 2011

New Physics and Beyond

* * *
Kea said...

If this asymmetry is real, then the configuration of the LHC will fail to see this discrepancy between ATLAS and CMS. It will be one of humanity's most humbling experiences of the century.

Now this is a brilliant genius quote of the day!

I begin today's post after reading Kea's remarks on her blog today and trying to communicate what is difficult in comments to Ulla's blog and all her good work lately especially where it applies to our biological perspective which stands in the disputes above those in the physics, potentially after all other parties have retreated into there own perspectives.


Why would there be a difference in matter and antimatter and could it be a matter of positions or some sort of division of space where those divisions also make sense or add up.

Do we embarrassingly divide a circle into three or perhaps treat is as pi- some quanta of difference? What are we to do if we find that in some respects nature says 2+2 = 5 ?

Neither Pitkanen nor Kea have a theory (to the point I understand them) that is as simple as M theory or phase space in their probing of a new physics greater than such usual spaces. I still feel it deeper than our ideas of a quantum theory hmmmm. This is a little hard to explain in a comment but something like loop quantum gravity is a constellation of vague ideas and words.

We are gazing into an aquarium, you debating me in what amounts to my thoughts on philosophy, and seeing the life there swimming in loops, schools if greater than two or three, Siamese fighting fish who best work alone fighting their reflections in a mirror assuming they are real.

With short memories the world of those fish is very wide to explore, but at least in our corner of the coral we might define life as that which is greater than itself. Such is the tidal pond we gaze down upon seeing our own reflections, specters on the mountaintop to which we confuse what they are and us.

It makes sense to balance things as both sides of the reality you mention- but all that is contained in the pond and its paths and loops. Some of the freedoms of this higher motion we cannot yet show is intelligible.

Is that gravity when we walk thru some terrain and feel the objects, the fact they are there and take up space to the point some unstable minds sense spirits naturally or with keener eyes hears the memories and echos of radio waves in the granite echoing thru time?

The PeSla (whom influenced by your reply will have to address this in a post as speculative I feel some of the concepts where which I was not going to include in the general post as only vaguely intelligible.)

* * *

New Physics and Beyond L. Otto 06-11-11

This meant as some minor thoughts for a simple post but seems influenced by the exchange of information with others and their subjective positions in our time and space, synchronicity where timeless also, and the wisp of a dream at the heart of what we mean by intelligibility- if I can handle the depth of that dream in its interpretation. Then again who knows what is going on in someone else's dreams and minds? Can we be them without being them so lost in our selves our poetry?

What stubbornness, what commendable persistence, that "It is no will-o-wisp that we follow here". If the universe acts this way and its laws apply on say the level of economic theory- a few become richer but this the more are poor as if the stars and black holes compete for the whole- well, we might say we are in a depression of sorts in our inflationary era of big science experiments and theory- I mean the arguments for a more fair distribution as being Christianity seems to me to be turned around as mirrored evil in the world that justifies fundamental suffering of the masses.

Life said to begin at conception (not that the candidate today in stating his political position he has one on such choices by woman) so he would prosecute the doctors who perform abortions as murder... But before a certain point we cannot say that a conceived individual has rights under the LIFE, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness(property?) Liberty sometimes takes power over Life and happiness- but logically although we admit human tissue is involved here- could they not be tried for mass murder? Are these not metaphysical (still) issues like the questions of multi-verse and many-worlds and logical similarity at the heart of physics (today)?

In the distinctions of the hologram and fractal views, the depth and span of grids we can have weaving of the grids that work or not together- but these are still but part of the overall pictures that transcends our present most general ideas of space.

* * *

*That the depth and span seems relatively invariant (both are not dynamic in accelerations together) the universe(s) balance singularities establishing time directionality and the physicality of position as the intelligible ground. This assertion does not preclude things beyond the new physics.

*Intrinsic curvature and intrinsic computation at some general place are equivalent concepts or are the same freedom-wise.

*The abstracts or summations of deep ideas and connections in physics and mathematics as popularization simplified propagates the core issues where the unification of physics is unresolved and forms the basis for new misleading speculations and fresh starts with more or less a delay greater than the delay between the writing and the publications.

*But instant publication, while encouraging more prolific speculation also works at the back to the drawing board to drown in a sea of information, or expediency that leads to unresolved despair of meaning and thus abandoned projects to keep the threshold of understanding informal and delay development. (My current energy is now for a possible answer to approach this learning and communication problem which does utilize these principles of new physics in a virtual space).

*We evolve and grow to perceive the Quasic limits of our perception of singularities, to learn to solve them and internalize them relative to us.

*Is the OMNIUM necessarily intelligibly (and as an open question everlastingly) permanent? What does it mean (for me) to ask this question, some ultimate ambiguity of color and existence or the reaching of some limit of understanding and imagination, or something I cannot experience at all or only vaguely?

* * *

We see, as absurd as it sounds, the the power continuum is greater than the continuum, a part greater as least on the lower levels than the whole.

But is this not the case that if some things are equivalent they do not add up and form then the laws of distribution, the adding of some constant when the fundamental law of the calculus is so mirrored in directions? Why in such partitions by nature do we add more than what is surely there or assume in the lack something physical if in fact nature may be quasi-intelligible, her algebra does not add up given her raw materials and processes of distribution and manufacture, but mostly does.

This difference can intelligibly be seen as symmetry breaking and partition theory but as the epsilon-delta grid a weave of another one is possible which is a complete or comprehensive theory and realm of debate that hardly touches the power set continua - so we do not address in that debate balances or imbalances of systems on the wider scale of the properties and use of mathematics, numbers nor find the way to pin down the resolution of singularities, the large and the small, as a world closed to that which is intelligible. Otherwise in the wider freedoms of geometry and such there would be no one to try to tidy up the incommensurable and transcendental notions of the world or think it a possibility to do so in existence.

So, how do we keep in mind given two neutral mirrors which is the reverse of things? And if we add some idea of a reverse force, is it real or a lack as if we might gain some work from the vacuum? Einstein is said to be obsolete as in he string theory for his Lambda addition he called his biggest mistake. Either way his theory wins, the grounding of strings or not. But some of you, right or wrong are no Einsteins who pull him like quartering in the commons some four horses without the horsemen. His synthetic achievement is the fifth of beings and behaviors so involved here- and whatever the theory or nationality and race, both ways you lose if in the debates you cannot transcend and see this.

Yet the quantum ideas also derive from him, the lamda to the lambda where the power set continuum somehow has to find some sign and add a one in the indeterminacy of scales or multiple scales or mirrors seem the mistake to those of a more kinematic dynamic persuasion as to what unity of the distributive and division algebra they promote and aspire.

* * *
Later that day:

Ulla has a hot series of posts here worthy today of my comments:


interesting but somewhat dated yet a little evolved.
"(Hamilton proved that singularities do not arise in three dimensions when the Ricci curvature starts out positive.)"

"The study of manifolds of dimension n=3 and 4 is quite different from the higher-dimensional cases; and, though both cases n=3 and 4 are quite different in their overall character, both are generally referred to as low-dimensional topology."

Surely by now you understand very much of this if only to highlight and quote intelligently.

People make money from this? amazing!

I still think Kea (I see no problem there and do not understand why you asked) and Pitkanen with different approaches are way beyond this despite the standard methods and terminology. Based on that alone the methods may appear limited to that terminology.

I see no problem with Lubos stance either (I mean the terms do not show what is in TGD by sounding the same- so is string theory needed in the mix after all?) Lubos boldly claims today that quantum theory is all of physics! While that can be seen true in some logical results to absolute theory- (an Otto-Motle statistics of sorts, more like Cantor dust) there is still more to the quantum theory as we do not have all of it.

What would his post today say about how we should see the life processes if it the only fact and model?

Would it not follow also that in an infinite honeycomb flat space after all the resolved manifolds of whatever dimensions that no singularities would arise either? And if the hyperbolic geometry in such field resolutions can be seen in a view positive are they important on their own?

Maybe you and the reductionist see philosophy as now irrelevant but I still need it and think they do.

But what does it matter when we are trying ignorance again in the gold silver and bronze of Plato so failing the Teachers, Farmers, and Business Middle Class... the healing arts? Will we ever go back to the Golden Age without the cross of the Gold standards?

The PeSla

* * *

No comments:

Post a Comment