Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Super-Virial Proto-Grounding

Super-Virial Proto-Grounding
L. Edgar Otto June 15, 2011

I present here a rather simple description of the ground of being as physics, perhaps too simple as in the computations to be misleading or confusing. But it is a more relaxed view with greater ways to see the degrees of freedom and nature of symmetries.

Viriality is the what we call those spaces that consider duplications or halving of things for stable orbits that essentially establishes three space and the ways that forces and structures appear in the more relaxed physics of the world. It is the basis of our ideas of super symmetry, that is of a greater generalization of how the world works than just the low dimensions of three and four space. This is not to say that these dimensions do not have an essential role, but so do the higher dimensions. Thus there are analogs where they apply, and regardless of scale or what may insure a finite mass for some dynamic object, which are as simple as multiples of integers we regard as powers.

At first I thought I could map the double quaternion explanation of Rowlands to my quasic grid- but this is not simply the case. Nor can we accept but one form of the intelligible logic of things where a different form may conflict or be irrelevant to our comprehensive and thus exclusive system. The appeal to some such logic may break down even if it does not appear to do so- and where we may hold logic itself as only designed as intelligible the question of its general validity, of thought itself, can just as well be a reassurance of the freedom to explore by intellect our reality.

Some ideas we have heretofore questioned, in light of these expanded notions seem to have a solid basis after all- at least to explain why some idea worked but was not justified save only by explanations just as unclear or even bizarre.

If we have a quasic grid, with many states that we can interpret as fractal like, we can ask, as with computer drawing, what is the grid that underlies it all? That grid I have called the epsilon-delta honeycomb. It is there that we can map the 32 x 32 elements of Rowlands and Dirac's algebra. The order is strait foreward and linear as if the square roots, being equal of the quasic grid- that is all the Cartesian and ultimately Euclidean concepts we extend to ideas like holographics.

Of course we can just as well impose or suggest such ideas in either design or division of the space for the order is distributed over a plane in the quasic grid even though from some perspective the factors contain clear and equal binary information. It is clear, in many cases, that in physics, the essential viriality that doubles some things as they reflect the difference in potential and kinetic energy, or say the phase of spin of some objects, leads to some mistakes in the physical calculations- Consider the bending of light in a gravitational field by Einstein and the test of it at eclipse by Eddington to make this correction. It is moreover a core property of numbers that in the end justifies Eddington's Plus one Idea. Number theorists would do well to take advantage of the view presented here so as to double such values of corresponding orders which we can say is a match between these views of spaces- ones that may tell us something of number theory itself in terms of numbers as well of the general notion of dimensions and measure.

Poet that I have come to accept if not fancy myself to be I am at a little loss of clear terms here. So let us from one side of the mirror of notions imagine the two divisions of general space as the HF (holographic) and FX or (fractal) for now but that only a part of the picture (I mean one has to imagine a world of mirrors but there are more than two sides on which to be on a side of something). I suspect it turns our that the HF x FX related or divided into the general quasic field amounts to 2^2n +1 which is what we should expect applying this to a advanced numerical view of physics. But this is not general enough and does not take advantage of all that is so far known in number theory.

We can imagine terms like Ordinal and Anti-Ordinal, Cardinal and Counter Cardinal to apply as well to the general archetypal concepts here. While we say that even in Maxwell there can be residual neutral flow we can also say there is residual neutral fixed singularities or points of rest. Yet is not established that such singularity complexes or where they apply to a field idea has to be necessarily dependent on the general grand or great-grand ideas of unification theories. It may be that this too is a quasic relaxation as a relation in the general reality with its consequent restrictions and new freedoms for complexity and even transcendence of that now real.

So since there is no set epsilon-delta honeycomb all is a general grid of quasic space without the fixed quasicity. That is one can think of hierarchies or not or one can reject them. The same for ideas of universe and multiverse. So we can imagine a fixed complex of singularities when the quasic span around it expands in depth or we can imagine the internal states of such a singularity complex growing in a details and definition. Or in some cases the physical object may become its inverse just as surely as our notions may be limited or expand in the depth and span of our theoretical and perceptive views. A singularity may be a given or arise or it may be ultimately independent of the general states, intermittently a "creative" space.

An associahedron of simplexes seemingly limiting dimensions and as dynamic kinetically is like a rocket ship thru space and appears to self sustain in its motion. Of course the purely more fractal like spaces, more like falling and less like superficial surface quantum theory, can be dynamically seen as well. Our notions and the universe may have conflicting dynamics as well as where they meet in concepts.

Thus: And as formal as I now present the work done (the other work has applications hopefully soon to be on a domain somewhere and that can use these ideas in general as sets of color notations for the combined general idea of spaces and connectivity)

I suggest this simple relationship of integers of which I do invite exploration by others due to the snow blind simplicity that may occur in simple clear understanding.

16^2 or 256 is a natural addition in combining the HF and FX spaces into one unified space, (or rather recombining them). To this we add its virial doubling or 512. Thus we get 768 (that is twice the rotations and inversions of a tesseract)

BTW we can consider Galois and the equations of the fifth degree of icosahedra and the like and apply them to either space alone but this does not ground the total physics in ways that justifies the lack of or existence of hierarchical ideas. Not to say these theories do not have a place or use as part of the bigger picture.

Now we add to this 256 not just the virial doubling but binary powers of it to get these analogs to virialty:

256 + 1024 = 1280

256 + 4096 = 4352

256 + 16384 = 16640 and so on...

which makes the sequence when summed or divided 2 5 17 65 257 and so on.

Now 768 + 1280 = 2048 which is a binary number in the low viriality levels. We of course can divide numbers by the group numbers and keep such things in mind also, for example 1152 + 128 = 1280, 1152 being the group of the 24 cell in 4D.

* * *
Philosophic Musings just before this Post:

An essence or substance cannot be deduced as existing reality by assumption it a given or emptiness, nor a necessity by chiral or other distinguished contrasting mechanisms, where it can be a "gray" blend unclear as 1 or 0.

Yet, at least by experience and observation we can make the case so assert partial substance as a totality in relation to the obvious being or something neutral as comprehensive over reality.

The physical difference between exist or not exist may be ambiguous (as if a higher uncertainty or as problematic in an intelligible way or not.) and still be generally absolutely neutral as a vacuum or field, independent of the reality as a fact or persistence both pragmatically and non-necessary- thus a working resolution of paradoxes.

To the existent some essence does not exist (including the virtual multiverse- things that may exist may be unified higher or be independent in diffuse unity and freedom unto transcending of known systems.

BTW we can map the epsilon delta notations on the grid as powers of 5 (thus in groups such powers relate to more general spaces and polyhedral or group structures)
As a single quasic order (much like certain fractal fillings of a plane.

For example: 1,1 ; 1,4 ; 4,1 ; 4,4 ; 1,7 ; 3,6 ; 4,7 ; would map to 0 ;5; 10; 15; 20; 25; 30; ...

In the Condenser Mechanisms the color shift may interchange 0 and 1, that is a wild card * can equal 1 or 0 in all its meanings such as exist or not, possible or impossible... This may also explain beyond the color shifts and ideas of creation and annihilation in quantum theory hierarchies of light and knowing (in some interpretations) a much clearer grounding of this experience of consciousness.

As far as the use of color goes, the combining of primary colors in say the hex notation is intelligible in the 3D;4D grids but its use as a labeling has a relaxed way of applying the same symbols if we keep it in mind where distinctions are meant.

Footnote: Of course computer graphics have a new depth of applications of numbers and are thus intelligible- it strikes me that my habit of utilizing the 80 x 80 gif range as a limit to drawing avatars on the philosophychatforum was useful in the greater understanding of such numerical and digital relations in what at first may appear as non-linear and so diffused levels of mathematical explorations.

* * *

Footnote: It would appear (in the reply to Ulla's p-adic question here) that some answers are there to expanded the grounding of Pitkanen's and other ideas including the relation to things in braid space formalism, and especially spinor theory, have anticipated his post just after mine. Of course it would have been better to talk directly instead of interpreters pro and against between us. So may all the theoreticians come closer to the general breakthroughs needed for this enquiry. I continue to post because of the frayed ends and stray statements needed for closure and a conclusion.

* * *

No comments:

Post a Comment