Sunday, July 31, 2011
Weight-Mass and Articulated Pentonimoes
L. Edgar Otto July 31, 2011
Here we have the general idea where extending units (cubes...) by one or in the subtraction of one describing dimensions that there is some point where the subspace is symmetric or the origin of what may be asymmetric from the Conway Matrix view of the kernel of a Quasic plane. Weight between entities has always been a problem in the string theory where in the remote it becomes the idea of inertia, that is mass or gravity. This seems to me another origin of the great question of why the fundamental dimensionless constants are what they are and perhaps are a literal count of integer quantum-like numbers of particles (with of course the adjustments or fine tunings we should not dismiss but calculate with unitary addition and subtraction.)
This view moreover relates to the Lie or continuous theories even at the remote if that idea is held as a philosophical rigid one- questions of origin and the unity of the idea of entropy in relation to time, that is that we find a distinction there ultimately.
Of course (as in the sequences in Kea's post today, 720 being the numerological significant value here of the 6! color faces of a cube) as complicated as this articulated space is it is the next from normal space and that considered concrete as at least a 3, 4 ,5 collection of inter-related functions of those natural dimensions. Here again philosophically we observe the series mentioned before that they ambiguously add to zero or one depending on how they are read in the "to be or not to be". But that is not the question as much as if we can ask that question as to why the world is here rather than not (Leibniz, and recently Hawking) why would one not want the experience of life? This question also of the fine tuning of the just rightness of reality to support life could compensate by quasic inversions of some entities presumed having an origin and some original but remote values like the point of the so called "Big Bang".
The applications of such theories as the octonions- clearly the inversion as a multiplicative inverse is the last property and beginning of quasics to which these variations in compensates of constants somewhere admits the lesser properties of such numbers and allows things like associativity in the mix relatively on some level as if in the remote (this being the real 1/2 authors describe including Kea today, and Rowlands, and somewhere in the posting but discovered later and independently, myself.) As far as counting goes in the roots of planes and branes it does matter somewhat if we start the count with zero or one. But what if in the epsilon x delta root linear binary notations we make the initial count start with either such that we sum the values- the result is a rater symmetric matrix along the diagonal from this shifted count asymmetric situation.
Well these are some of the thoughts on my mind as I pay a little more attention to the primitive paint program for templates (after all I live in the cloud not on my own computer)... Please, recall that I will be adding some relevant templates today and for the next few days or so to the last post- and if I seem to repeat alternative drawing methods it is to appeal to preferences of view, for example I find it easy to imagine things like jack-stones rather than represented as cubes. Some of these I used long ago and actually made rubber stamps which were eventually suggested later as use by the puzzle enthusiasts. The first one the hypercube but that posted so far is not the best example just a working one.
As usual I felt this post especially speculative until the next morning sleeping on it, it feels right and goes back a few decades to more intuitive times only now with meat and methods to make the case. Intuition just as brute experiment can go into regions where there is really no solid grounding or gain without a little reason.
* * *
By Articulated I mean the representations of the P U and Q pentominoes to generate the others in a sense- this is similar to the fast algorithms to solve such puzzles as the 12 x 5 standard two space "filpntuvwxyz" see
I wonder if these can be so easily programmed in the higher space perspectives.
* * *
This and the line drawings of a soma cube of 720 symmetries reminds me of some sort of type for a written language- after all the parameters are on the same scale as far as words and alphabets go... there just has to be a solid connection here.
* * *
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Example of the use of this Template:
* * *
Working Graph Paper for Reference:
Not much to report today but worked on graph paper for printing out illustrations. This post will contain several before it is over. I did some work with the pentaminoes as there are 60 of them and thought about how they fit into a 4 x 4 x 4 cube and many other things of which these seem to have been done by trial and error by the puzzle community- and yet some things, the unity of such puzzles could have had a more formal basis in theory or should have.
Note: Some of these are sketches and off a couple of pixels or so... Should you want more accurate frameworks...
* * *
Friday, July 29, 2011
Surus Cubes L. Edgar Otto July 28, 2011
A good theory and its language like characters in well written fiction takes on a life of its own. We are thus able to reach further than our abilities until we grasp hold of ideas, of motes of light and dust, of the skies. Perception, Foucault, is not necessarily semiotics, and the darling generalization of the day Ken Wilbur, finding a greater unity or not, is not the ultimate essence of God. As with postmodern inter-subjectivity, where we find Wilbur's quadrants times the trinity of Goodness, Beauty, and Truth- thus the twelve, nor more than quantum mysticism in search of the meaning of consciousness can such intelligible mechanisms contain the whole. So beware in the finite realms, although it seems to be compelling in humanity to transcend to godhood in the theory or society of the day, that these quadrants of square circles is not quasic mysticism either.
But I present to you today the Surus Cube (named after Hannibal's favorite elephant that survived crossing the Alps). In that things in quasic space are not as rigid as say any of Wilbur's quadrant philosophies of the I and it, we and collective society times what is internal or external, we have to ask how rigid is the intelligibility of all the mirror images of the eight resultant octans. The paper illustrated above is rather complex while looking for the right ordering of things but this simple cube puzzle goes far to make the more complicated ideas apparent. For while we can divide a plane or cube like this and hold the plane or brane (I should find the first axiom of such space) as a matrix or notation the subsections of that matrix may not be rigid in that they may also turn and twist- certainly like a Rubik's Cube with its Bucky Fuller inner mechanism.
(Two lines intersect into two points?) (If two lines intersect in a point they can intersect two higher space planes?) Maybe a better mathematician than I can narrow this down a bit.
Before this direction of the posts and theories I woke up from a dream of sorts in which I learnedly observed a cube with its colors and complexity so could see it from all sides and could go around it- and when seeing through it at the order of some colors on the other side I did not have the problem of occasionally confusing the face if facing me with the appearance its order was reversed- sometimes just as with sloppy lettering many such twisting around can be hard to keep track of if you are working fast- let alone decipher what you scribbled earlier. But this was not an intense visionary earth-shaking world-changing dream, just a sort of routine I am used to like Descartes to dwell awhile upon awakening.
Still, the question is why in these representations of three space do things have an intelligible ordering and direction - what decides the asymmetry or arrows? What moreover decides the reduction of this deeper information from higher spaces to the paths to get the simpler shadows. While Wilbur shows the errors of holography alone as the theory of everything so claimed by his review of authors not relying on the given alone, that is the monological monism (technically not a criticism of science as much as subjective and inter-subjective, modern-postmodern social issues: I did read his more integral method joint written book last night and I do rather accept his criticism of what is Buddhism as it blossomed in new age America as not quite right, but some things, spiritual things, have now a more scientific basis such as meditation and often a materialist one at that) verses post-modern pluralism.
So, as far as it goes on all levels of this ex-dishwasher's spectrum of growth and awareness (yeah, before I was a candle maker I was a dishwasher too!) his does aim at least toward a unity of diverse if not total incompatible politics and philosophies (especially I wonder if this is possible by those in the pre-modernist mind set who have a tenable position in no way backwards but especially conflicts with post-modern societies now that the modern monoliths like Marxism has fallen.) That in the holonism of the four quadrants he, as far as it goes, expects to inspire the seekers and perceivers to be aware of this level of spirituality. Let us hope in such an appeal to a relaxed unity we can inspire some to a higher level of science too.
It may be of interest that my encounter with Wilbur was more from his first book in which his tenets of Buddhism were a little closer to the original philosophy and mathematics than some popularization as a systems of spiritual practice of which half the draw and power is the ambiance and special rules and language.
The idea in the Surus cube is that from the 64 or 27 of three space (as a four dimensional representation) into the 16 or 9 of two space the structure of the 24 plue 3 colored units is preserved and the orientations are easily seen or implied.
For example in a 9 x 9 array we can imagine particles of three rings of layers as discs- this sort of thing continues naturally to higher spaces. We note that around the 3x3 soma cube in one of 8 corners to view or shift the remaining cubes of the 64 form 7 sets of 5 cubes (after all the pattern is quasic and symmetrical of the six given colors. We can of course extend the symmetry and combinatorial problems by these color changes alone.) Such a "condensing" calls to mind the current tables of the fundamental particles of quarks and such... which with the natural shadows needs not be limited to the standard theory of say 24 or 25 depending on what spaces we regard as rigidly centered.
I have chosen the my standard notation of color LHC on the ordered axis, that is yv,ob,rg and black for the three across one of the Soma cube diagonals. Note that in the Surus Cube these colored center cube faces of any of the outside 6 of 9 are in a sense invariant. But we can invert these. Still in the various versions of this puzzle we note that it has a symmetry as if a ring around an axis- vaguely suggesting to me something like aromatic orbitals and so on in such spatial tori like structures as say that around stars.
Now, in the illustration I will post at then bottom of this page I will color the first octant with the r y o and the g b v in the eight octant. But this does not have to be the only case. The interesting thing about this cube puzzle is that when turned some pieces can be made to vanish or if appear be jumbled into what seems the wrong quadrant in a face. In fact as in my bkd gin color theories we can hide the g b v colors from view always as we twist and turn the puzzle parts. I offer this game only for the addicted to such recreational puzzles and for those who may want to study these types of symmetry problems- and for our addicted mathematicians and computer wizards a good exercise as we extend it to still higher dimensions.
* * *
If it can be done, a clear version showing the octant cubes would be pleasing.
* * *
* * *
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Crystallographic Condensing L. Edgar Otto July 28, 2011
Here are notes for stray ideas of last night. Of course it can go even further into the higher space arrangements (if we keep things clearly in what set of viewpoints on things like dimensions.)
Also, upon leaving this morning for the coffee shop an idea returned nor written but related to this combination of types of spaces involved- That is if we apply the levels of the Conway Matrix 3n to life code reading it is clear that the general organism as if one organism may have different centers on which to condense a space or actuality or individual organism. That is such a space having more general properties at each point of manyworld-multiverse singularity complexes is a whole new area for some phenomena in physicality short of some more ultimate multi-level theory. If a photon in a sense is a result contained yet can move at seething near singularity by these multi-insights of geometry then in a sense establish that any such point of origin (as particle or universe) may arise anywhere in the creative sea of the firmament. These concepts are rather difficult as a universal view to grasp but once they do they answer things and make more sense than what we have now.
* * *
From a blogger friends fb album:
Hmmmm... Octonions anyone? Part of all this is after all the relation of the round pegs of pi in the square holes of various dimensions and the question as to with such geometrical differences are the inertial measures such as gravity and mass intelligible and fundamental or do they add some small modifications.
* * *
One possible consequence of these views from the creative field as generalized surquasic-quasic space is that we can make a metaphor analogy to cancer in an individual organism as to the origins of gamma bursts which are not necessarily as radical as the creation of new (big bang type) baby universes.
For outside a unique region or area (in a sea of such areas not quite a pure sea of singularities or of absolute nothingness) we imagine the era of the visibility of light in the separation or symmetry breaking like ideas as such variations that arise as if the evaporation in two directions to the center of structured black holes. We can imagine the confusion of the factual results of say cold fusion or of plasma leakage in fusion bottles, decoherence- that from the many world view that which falls into a black hole or is evaporated is such a property of condensed regions of space. In Hoyle's creation or C-field (and we have to imagine things above the simple equations that suggest time is timeless (a photon outside of actual time in a sense, a sort of invariant sense) or slows down in the continuum, that such formula are not written in stone despite the great achievement in finding them)
We cannot ground this on the relative drive from space energy regions as sparse. The steady state of creation idea and the big bang idea here reach an organic compromise. If in say cold fusion, can there be (and quantum mechanics does allow for the idea as a phenomenon) no evidence of radiation because it vanishes across these concepts of evaporation- or is not there at a timeless moment, or is virtual- or in a sense in the spatial balance of things goes in and out of the parallel worlds?
* * *
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
SOMAMore and the Foundational Theorem of Arithmetic L. Edgar Otto July 27, 2011
I have made some progress orienting these objects and discovered some interesting things along the way I shall present here today. My questions of uniqueness are fundamental and foundational in the sense of the nature of arithmetic and primes. But be warned- at this level I have questioned some rather fundamental things we have held to for a long time now and have accepted the authority of such proofs.
I quite imagine this will give some a sense of vertigo or perhaps make them question their sanity. Or in the case of Hawkings, debate in his wisdom the why of the universe- if there is M theory without strings then how can his string ideas think there is no God? Or is he looking again for one? But the field of exploring is now so wide that it will take us rather long and if we ask the purpose of why we are here, well that joy of exploration and struggle to know will satisfy that question of purpose for awhile.
* * *
Post to Matti having an existential moment:
The universe becomes more like the theories you imagine it to be.
I am just a pigment of your imagination in the landscape your are painting.
"He whom the gods would destroy they first make mad..." Seneca I think...
SUSY is not the zombie, just the zombie animates the SUSY.
Now, if someone asks what I smoke or did I take my meds - My first reaction is to let them teach me how such chemicals work- they do not have a chemical imbalance but an ontological zombie imbalance.
But symmetry is not the key to balance... we do get intoxicated from all the intense beauty and the depressive hangover that comes before the storm or breakthru.
Feel, feel the fragile flesh and drink in your reality and the actuality of others- hold a child for you are only trusted and gentle with it.
In half of infinity it is clear that where were are we can see things as half full or half empty.
Some here think they can put meat on the bare bones of symmetry group theory with magical incantations of five space and make the zombies walk.
Narrow minds are not even relatively prime in their constipated but half truth logic.
* * *
Well, I ran out of paper and have been putting things on whatever is blank - so things are a little messy.
*1 We all seem to have a SUSY of sorts but not in the standard description and it may not suggest there are s-particles for example. Then again we are on the border lime of octonion multiplicative inverses. That part of some of the theories are obsolete now does not mean they are wrong, they have their worth and place still in our quest for a unified physics.
*2 I imagine other ways we may find the reason for fractional charges than those suggested by simple mixing. It has to do with the 4x4 matrix and how we see it, a unification but not of the style envisioned by Einstein and 32 in group theory for electromagnetic and gravitational fields. Such complements or inversions are close to the inversion of the notions of such space and dimensions as notions, We fail to balance these notions- Thus we must unify the various approaches like that of braiding or the centering in a multiverse of Conway matrix Cw quasic positions.
*3 From a more modern view I find the Minkowski idea of the distortion of space by mass a little contrived and no longer exciting as a fundamental principle. Einstein pointed out the 4x4 matrix as having ten places of rest (presumed gravitational) of the 16 and did say the question of dynamos and spinning things were to still be answered. We should look deeper than imposing on some matrix these values that connect mass and so on- but we can also say that such values may be interpreted as zero plus or negative time in a different way than just the imaginary part of some sense of a light cone. Particles faster than light while not necessarily particles are an intimate part of this picture to resolve. How we treat these sixteen elements (and where I have used pixel unit cell or quasic region I now call them "elementals"(e:) for the span of things and "filamentals"(f:) for the depth of things in the "Firmament" (r:). Clearly the inversion of notions of the Conway Matrix Cw and the Kea type braiding is a sort of unification of very basic ideas.
*4 The universality of laws stand as a relativistic principle but only if generalized
to a elemental centered movable Conway Field where laws can be different and creative on the lower levels. If we rewrite or upgrade physics fundamentally we have to so do the mathematics too.
*5 The uniqueness and proofs of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic does not hold or is not complete enough to describe the nature of numbers. For at a zero elemental it is not clear ab-cd = 0 where things are "relativity prime". Co-prime is ambiguous at the zero elemental.
*6 Part of the difference between pi and e is seen in the fraction expansion to involve these general concepts of numbers and the quasic field as regards to the virial number two or four and the natural or the odd sequence.
*7 The quantum consequence of a series of natural numbers is not as deep as the structures of this new view of what can be deduced from the current arithmetic.
* * *
I am a little under the weather today, storms and hard to sleep with the thunder and other things so I should have posted the concepts here a little better. I may clean it up some later or make a new post. The comment to Pitkanen needs to see the post it applies to in order to understand the meaning better. That and Kea's terms like Zombie SUSY. But having to redefine on a page each time some term is as bad as having to use the standard terms as the truth which tells us nothing new. One thing for sure our alternative new constellation of scientists all have a SUSY of sorts and are all bothered by the situation as are the standard scientists- yet I see that again we have all made progress, in victory and the uncertainty of new views of a completion. I am very optimistic. Heck to question these fundamentals most certainly may invoke ideas of crackpottery but not if we are happy and wise to find the happiness in ourselves and not the confusions of others.
* * * More Comment to Pikanen:
Nice Poem Ulla :-)
As I said on a post- Matti- we all seem to have some form of SUSY but It is still not clear (to me) if there are say, s-particles as such.
We need a new concept of such things as mass and gravity- On the face of it your use of primes is rather far above the standard ideas which perhaps gets use sufficiently to octonions and mirrors if we consider real multiplicative inverses.
As I said, Victory all the way around including the established experimenters. Only now we have a little writers block some project of enquiry seemingly abruptly finished, chrysalis before our sprouting of new wings.
Or (Nice metaphor Ulla, Cicadas coming out of the ground and leaving so many skins of theory shed clinging to the trees.)
* * *
Interesting Articles on the Sci Mags
An interesting series which seems to make Hawking a sort of philosopher...surely he has insights that puts him forward into these long considered human concerns. What is on the other side of a black hole long after from all perspectives it has evaporated and yet persists? One thing for sure we are not finsished with knowledge only that of our day and a vast new awakening awaits us.
This alone should show us how much we need a slightly wider view of what matter is if we are to understand the why behind the technology that works and in its proof makes sense. An important article here if you read between the lines and non-linearity, after all it is not just a matter of choosing what entity needs be Majorana or not- but how we organize perceptions and information.
This is a cleaver yet retro idea and does ask us to define better what is an indivdual and species. Yet there are other ways the mutation systems are contained in an organism of so many cells. Applied biology would also benefit from more unified and system levels of theories on analogous scales. These distinctions cannot be the only model and may vanish after their assertions that give us a reality check for current models.
A little sociobiology here, the ten percent poor always with us- Perhaps the handedness of snail shell ratios, and just perhaps the underlying general direction into the idea of dark matter- energy. Well, 15% of the voting population did after all initiate the American Revolution.
Scientific truth is not necessarily the fad tipping point as consensus and peer review and in chaos-science some mutations or new species might try but not survive the organization of say four established powers short of a major disaster.
* * *
*8 Whatever the theories in view of the wider application of what we imagine as uniform laws across the universe but more general, the concept of limits as if two points are vanishingly close in the equations leading to a grounding that is in principle Pythagorean, assumes things that compacts theories to this narrower view before we cleverly modify them- this is especially true when we jettison the smaller values of higher differentiations in a world where our concept of distance at least from some central perspective is not as clear cut as we imagined- This is not to say that underlying all things is an ultimate Euclidean substratum although that is there- but the effect for awhile at least for this realization with the mathematical details of foundations is as if we once had to choose or discover if the nature of physics was Euclidean or non-Euclidean (which we do not as all geometries logically rise or fall together). Why does a spinning object spin the space around with it? You see, we need a more fundamental explanation than what is given if we chose to look for one. Such jettisoning works to some extent because (beyond the symmetry of equations implied but are really non-necessity in the general cases as we try to equate different representations and models) because of the 1/2 real limit of the unit or zero pixel (elemental unit) of the quasic field. Riemann turning the directions of zero and infinity on end in his sphere has also to reckon with the multiverse of such privileged centered or not centered space positions. While the math of say general relativity is cleaver in its use of analytic geometry to choose where something shifts axes and coordinates- it is not general enough.
If in our general concern with what is unique and if that uniqueness in meaningful or worth the saving then based on what other than a natural intelligibly of primes to which nature has no problem with large numbers and things do not loop or are inelegantly recursive iterated unto potential and perhaps actual infinity, then what defines uniqueness if primes cannot? If we say that any number beyond 2 can be the sum of primes it is a unique property but only a small part of the general picture of what could be unique yet in general uniform throughout the reality.
* * *
primes, what are they?
p-adic, l-adic, m-adic
so many different
forms and functions
giving us the structure
Maybe it takes a little madness to make us truly human?
To hear the song?
Humans are not gods, perfect
humans have emotions that guide us
I saw an old house
grey, with many failures
but so big
it contained many beds
I didn't know
The kids and their families
they told me without words
about their admiration
happiness and joy
joy, joy and happiness
and so much more
You were busy, meeting all those people, talking to them,
your friends, living in your heart.
* * *
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Split Infinity (Wildcards in the Soma Cubes)
L. Edgar Otto
July 26, 2011
It is clear to me that the ray-gun concept can generate a pattern wherein we solve a problem I posted here awhile back as an exercise in visualizing space. With such quasized charts we can find a pattern that generates the Soma cubes (240) by inversion rather than just the exploration of the surface. This of course continues into higher surquasic conway matrix systems of orthogons as n-ominoes.
But with about as much imagination as it takes to image abstract math systems as to be interpreted as particles, we can regard these as somewhere describing particle symmetries as particles, rays, or fields.
Of course the details are not given here but a sketch because there is freedom in the labeling so to sort out and find the best solution and notation or to set a standard.
As in Kea short post on embedding things recently what you see here is akin to braids in braids (and would that not better describe the resonances say of gluons...?) So these graphs as literal fields or particles are also matrices of which we have the various symmetries some as shadows or mirrors across the main diagonal. I find it interesting that we can have a matrix 3x3 of 1s and 0s, matrix theory 101, so that we can impose or mix with it a verticle column x y z of values. Yet, these raygun fractal maps suggest to me that from one view we can add x y z in the horizontal direction also- which leaves the wildcard for 9 then 12 (the abstract number here important in braiding) 15 then 16 elements again reduced we think to 1' and 0's.
As far as the Triality x Fourness I was going to call this post Triquarternity or Dodecality
But three or four quadrants of the quasic field is the name of the game.
In the center at split infinity is the wildcard which itself is a singularity complex of singularity complexes.
* * *
Potential Infinity / 2 ... duality In a way we exist as a wildcard in the center of time so it seems that half of infinity comes before and after us, indefinitely.
So for n-ality expressions like Pi/12 (see Kea on Phases, yet if a child can understand these things like she said- you see it is a subtle difference between the childlike views and the genius) But the ordering or labeling of the sub parts of the Triality's here in general quasic space have to be set to the general ordering of the quadrants... Kea seems to sense this in that in her last update she notes the embedding of a 2x2 matric (Dirac Operator level?) in the 3x3 in he first quadrant- whereas before she noted it in the last quadrant for some higher particle operators. If we do merge the idea of what is discretely circular or linear (or partially, that is raygun so) we can better orient such things in hyper (but unseen) symmetry (so in a sense to as a miracle raise the zombie of SUSY from the dead, to use her metaphor) Thus over these matrices and quasic (brane) fields we can apply group theory!
* * *
Monday, July 25, 2011
Ray-Gun Fractals L. Edgar Otto July 25, 2011
This started out as more of a puzzle to make for the recreational mathematics community but led to some interesting ideas on number theory. In the pages I posted are the germ of some old and new ideas- some standard and some novel to the best of my knowledge. It is not always in the play with shapes and numbers we need to think of it as a formal enterprise, and yet freed up intuitive play can lead to deeper concepts of math and physics. I invite the puzzle community to expanded in the ray-gun puzzle in this way, and the number theorists to take a good look too. I call these ray guns being right angles seen everywhere as in the artist who displayed them in Chicago I saw once.
The question is in the Soma cube we can have the 3cube piece as a right angle or as three cubes linearly- the remaining pieces (24 cubes) can themselves be arranged in a right angle. In this intuitive sense we use the word fractal here, a sort of embedded recursion. (And like Kea restates and points out today on her blog these sorts of ideas apply to the elements in matrices of which I see these quasic planes.)
In these considerations such objects as applied to say string theory as a matter of partitions must also include the idea of orientation.
Clearly there is an link to the concepts of complex numbers and modular numbers as both apply to the plane as far as order goes and not clearly linear where something is less than or more than or follows something else. The same for the set theoretic extreme limits, the idea say of the last infinity or last omega point. Kea in Motives where she intuitively considers surreal numbers (like mod numbers where some things add to zero so as to make loops and cycles, the little eta and little omega ordinals). On the other hand the unique properties of an open sequence (non-looping) cries out for a relationship of the properties of prime numbers as in Pitkanen's 2^n considerations as Mersene Primes.
If we in the absolute or relatively absolute concept of structure and space, perhaps a surreal calculus of sorts, and the square root of two thus treated rationally in the 2-brane or plane we can orient or make twistors out of partition theory as used in string theory and Keas use of combinotorics, these can be treated as abstract fields or particles where the little omegas and epsilons organize space into certain assumed orders as if an assertion of strict order at least in the plane if not the factors which again are not subject to the same idea of ordering, these abstractly as particles themselves- in a sense we have made a meaningful topological discovery of what one half of potential infinity means that is not infinity in the same way if we can so treat it as a number (which we can work out the results in the more standard notation.) Moreover, Is zero an even number? Is one in a sense a prime? and as such do we assert, as with many number conjectures the quasic grid shows the proof or the way to a proof, that say any even number greater than two is the sum of two primes? Or that there is a relative infinity of prime pairs? It is no longer acceptable to me to do physics as math and feel any certainty without the better understanding of these seemingly innocuous number theory concepts.
Now Kea says, when will we go beyond the QFT view of things and "fairy fields and all" and I doubt many can understand without a leap as sorts into the questioning of our most fundamental maths- it is difficult as with the significance of Pitkanen's ideas. To this we have to add the general take on things by Lubos, not so much the application of strings as his understanding of quantum and probability concepts. From my view the quasic and other newer physics ideas such as the little omega and epsilon points being zero or half-infinity or half of unity for that matter is the very underlying fact that gives the ground for random structures and phenomena. As with Rowlands we have the Nilpotency formalism that gives the ground also for articulation of structures in some natural background or framework.
Again, although in Kea's motives she pretty well surveys the complicated expansion of things to do with trying to compute braid and like methods in higher natural dimensions. Where these, say by octonions or other such counting of some region or scale of connectivity on all scales, apply to our ideas of Bosonic theory or say the reading of the gene code- no sooner we have a whole other level of reading the genome than there are levels beyond that- and we cannot casually reduce it to say quantum chemistry alone, nor ideas of say dark matter, sting theory, black holes and so on- from my view we need the next quasic level at least to understand the physicality of mind and organism. Closer to a more total theory of everything is closer to how the natural laws of the universe applies to living things.
We can of course erect great edifices on any of these world views- things like light in the background speeding up or slowing down as fundamental : Rio Frio, or the recent poster to Pitkanen's blog on radiation or heat as the source of "gravity." These may not be wrong as much as need to be integrated into other systems all of which for now seems to make thermodynamics still a frontier for concepts.
Certainly the new physics has a refined idea of what mass is. Victory, actually it is for all around. I am not that excited in the path to declare it for some particle thru the far reaching eyes of Matti and Motl whatever the nature of the particles or why anyone can with assurance dismiss the existence of some or if any combination mathematically possible is so discovered and worthy of Nobel prizes that the masses do not really understand idea to which we may begin to see (it should be made clear to the masses the importance of science and research- I have talked to so many who from the popular reading are capable of deep ideas that are popular along the line of "time is the fourth dimension" or "in the NP hard problem to solve the minimum circuit and path the mold eating various sizes of potato chips in a maze find it!" These kids are eager to learn so we do need better popularization- that or I do not realize that all is in a sense popularization with a sense of formality in the way we approach science and is anomalies at the frontier to which there is in education not just a qualitative and quantitative view of their education and expertise to some degree of relevance- but perhaps quasicalitative in a philosophic sense as well.
* * *
I changed the Illustration for a possible project and a victory celebration of sorts and for the sake of logo design- after all to say new science recalls newscientist yet I decided scientist was better than science society:-) July 26, 2011
* * *
I posted a comment to Kea (a link there to a very good paper from Australia BTW) and this to Pitkanen today:
Congratulation to you - I wish I felt the excitement and I do see those particles like you do even if we do not have the benefit of details of how you did the calculations- the theory is still too hard but we all win that these theories are there.
It is just that sometimes things have to get worse before they get better, or in matters of probability if we win a battle we lose the work, if we lose a battle then we win the war... But what of those who win the war or loose the battle,- as lonely perhaps as losing the war having won the battle.
There is a lot to be done and today's glory is tomorrow's broken toys where the child in the genius has room to grow and play - and when we open the presents after the rush to take off the ribbons and packaging- finding what we really need or want! Twice the warmth and joy, cutting and burning the wood for our hearths.
* * *
* * *
* * *
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Surquasicontinuum (Unique Intelligibility of Space and Numbers) L. Edgar Otto July 24, 2011
Just as I embedded the Conway Matrix of the 30 cubes in the 64 quasic grid such that the cells on the border of the 6x6 center of the 8x8 square, we have analogs in the phenoquasic (+ Arquasic) = a distinction of the quasicontinum we find that there are higher analogs in the sense of these centered spaces for an even more complicated form of space more easily seen in the quasic grid binary framework.
The illustration suggests a form of counting the regions involved. In the Phenoquasic we deal with duplication (the odd dimensions such as 2^9 = 512) for a pattern or series of 1x2 n dominoes.
Now Arquasically we do not have to consider the structures only asymmetric and one directional (the primes prime pairs never are on the other side of the main diagonal but other matrices and magic squares can have such mirror symmetric relations).
This Surquasicontinuum idea certainly has applications to genome reading and as laws of space and number seems to have unique paths if one to one in a succession, that is we can see a pattern in the numbers more directly related to primes- and I could have called this post The Unique Universe.
In the interpretation of our models, theories, part of the problem is keeping these facts of different representations and principles distinct where the definitions can become ambiguous.
All of this progress of my posting ideas will make sense to those whom have followed and grown familiar with the terms and notions- and be seen still a little wider space in which the quasicontinuum idea itself needs differentiation into a new class of what are philosophic and physical continua in my theories- but I am open to working with the names of things.
Part of a further comment to Pitkanen:
I upgraded the considerations of my post of yesterday to instead of a principle to a continuum, the Surquasicontinuum,(Srqs). We can see the center of such matrix-graphs have their own rules.
I suspect also the pattern of primes in yesterdays grid and in relation to the diagonal follows triangular numbers- but I have not looked at if these somehow can pinpoint primes in any region.
* * *
I might have made things more clear but just met my first grandson in the coffee shop:
* * *
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Surquasic Teleoscoping ( Symmetry, Space, and Primes) Leonard Edgar Otto July 22, 23, 2011
This page, a little messy with minor errors, was to take a more general look at the various quasic planes in terms of properties of numbers. If one looks and understands this method, ( teleoscoping- what preceded by what can be followed by what ) one may see a variety of principles as asserted by others- and with a little clearer understanding perhaps by the quasic plane picture. In particular I see links between say Kea's methods, My Methods, and Pitkanen's (to mention those bloggers which certainly link to many others- but I cannot tell if it is a vast thing even when I know the facts that I do not comprehend- that is I am aware for the most part of my own edifice of development although as I remarked to Ulla I may be above my own head here. I see the plane now as a literal thing, a wider idea of a matrix- perhaps a Jordan matrix or such within such. But clearly the symmetry involved from the factors of the plane is distinctly different in the alpha and beta or X and Y directions. So, Kea and Pitkanen meet in the quasic grid number system background... and that to me is the pattern many are looking for of which they may not quite comprehend. Not to say there are all the answers here.
But really this was a number theory cool and need way to picture things of which I did not expect to find this when I was trying to clear up binary teleoscoping a little better.
We can see the plane as symmetric from two ways, but what is that save a sieve of sorts squared- it really does not tell us much of directed asymmetric processes?
Of course a great deal of this explains a lot of particle physics for those who may want to look into it.
* * *
*Our comprehension and our knowledge, education of methods and facts. do not always correspond. Nor our evaluation of either aspect as fact or comprehension - even with insights and building of self-projects.
*The symmetries of bilateral organisms in the Surquasic plane is a choice of what in factors and multiplication is a distinction or not of the symmetric and directed asymmetric and these modes can each be seen as depth or span in the quasic planes.
*As a matter of notation perhaps, brute methods in isolation (linearly) of number crunching or polytopal extensions cannot decide if at some infinite or partially so power of two as a continuum to remote limits it is a prime or greater than primes.
*Finite quasic dimensions and 4^n powers may reflect this general paradox in structures of space (part of the quasic field or other matrices) as quasi-finite recursions (ie way to so define and map infinity).
*In the viewed arrangements of stacks of such parts or levels, and as such levels in levels we may limit physical descriptions to finite's in infinite's in group corresponding levels on many levels, to a few primes.
*In teleoscoping we can conceive, where two (duality) has no precursor, that what preceded by p can be followed by q in the case of primes we can imagine p one advancement only, and uniquely followed by q if preceded by o in a successive progression thus primes which at least ultimately not to loop.
One might ask questions like if there are pairs of primes like 11-13 in number and compute various numbers of primes in the various regions of the surquasic plane.
We should certainly understand the role of 2 as the even prime, and of 1/2 as the value of Riemann (here real) and the scaless aspect of unity as a not prime.
We should understand the idea of a prime being its own power or multiple composite.
That the checks in the graph form the odd composites but that these errode the distinction of what is odd and even, as well the possibility of what is addition and multipliction. We can see the patterns moreover to double any 4 or 8 based space, that is 2 8 32 128 512 of ideas along Pitkanen's p-adic considerations. The Y direction of quasic graphs is not the same as the X direction for number properties.
Again, these factors of binaries and the grid of binaries are structured such that the introduction of distinct combinations (say for u s b quarks) is understood in the representation to allow the wider freedom of the next higher dimension which without all these aspects of approaching quasicity (and we should include the random methods for we in doing so do find we can find certainty as well in viewing such graphs as well as relative views albeit limited) also the resonances are implied where we do not lose information but expand it in the teleoscoping.
* * *
Comment to Matti on this:
It is a victory for the human faculty of mind and yes we all have a certain vertigo at the foundations. And yes there is great joy after work of such discovery.
In fact I tend to see from our several approaches that combination of topology and numbers a link between my viewpoint, yours and Kea's. Yes, and Motl on the random aspects.
I tried to put this into a graph or matrix realizing that themes do not have to loop.
I hope this can be of use for clarity as we could further develop these methods so Please see it at www.pesla.blogspot.com under the post Surquasic Teleoscoping- in partial answer to how to find the integration of the factored roots of (ultimately binary numbers).
And you are so right once we get the implications of such theories, that the sitting on and the loss of these ideas is for science a great tragedy.
* * *
PS. I am not sure that Kea would welcome a notification of this unification of things but I must say the paper on motives read recently was a great part of these insights...
Friday, July 22, 2011
The Three Firmaments L. Edgar Otto July 21, 2011
Today, at the tail end of a normal dream I was concentrating on some general logic or philosophical thoughts and found three cases. As I awakened, in the dream I reached for my pen to be sure to write it down. "But what will I call the last and more abstract quasical framework in the dream?" The inner poet in me thought Quarski (Quarks and Tarski !). But I did not write it down until posting now.
I found a poem by David King this morning which seems to metaphorically relate. This gave me an idea for the illustration not finding one on the way to the coffee shop:
I also see this Post of Lubos I find exceptional in its feeling as if that dream, dreams perhaps as confusing as the data and interpretation on these particle issues, where I see he realizes the issue of where and when to apply things that may become negative. It is as if he is reading some of the other bloggers alternative thoughts as our issues often correspond even in general disagreements- Newton gave the key idea and the details of Dirac's negative counting may not show the conclusions we make of that bit of history as science more than philosophy- also while it is true most seem to see all as positive this is not necessarily a bad thing- or it can be considered bad should we say that physics itself is too focused and narrow in the firmament that includes limitations only- what is good intuition if questioned will also question such groundings for physics- short of non-existence or substantial transcendence excluded as 4th and 5th hints of extended firmaments (also quasi-phaneron or background for terminology.) All of these variations on the firmaments should be considered not just one or two together of them- but the extreme case can be radical uncertainty as well as non-existence (some idea of what the philosophy of vacua are). It is interesting and at least close to the psychological truth for Motl to see the charts and their interpretations as inference patterns with all the debate that may imply in the slit experiments- quite beside the issue of consciousness in the mix. These statistical charts as a metalanguage! One can note the parallels in the concerns of Lubos and some of my own in these many postings.
* * *
Touching on Kea's blog I find that Penrose whom I greatly admire is 80 now. Twistors of course intimate with gravity in his system from the start. What does it matter to come late in the game and explain polytopes although this view would greatly enhance the grounding of such theories- polytopes have no gender do they? I mean if this issue is what is keeping the talents of Kea isolated (justice delayed is justice denied) then what will it matter in a hundred years? I mean, it is true in general for whatever reason there is no progress on the number of ladies in science in the USA says the news. The feminist movement has hurt science- and maybe as with other conflicts of movement it did because it caused a reactionist backlash. Or do the particles have something like gender? Like the Higgs the ladies are evolving fatter and shorter and the males thinner until the equally super mom super symmetry is excludes equal burdens merits and pay. A few queen bee breeders have most of the babies and the sterile female workers trudge on in labor and careers. We would do well to promote the study of engineering and physics for our ladies and not pretend the professional degree prepares them for life or is but an illusion of unbalanced mass as a real philosophy, feminism as a major is feminility (which is an alternative word for feminism but to the poets eye female+senility!)
Oh, when they lay off so many at Cape Canaveral what do we do with such highly trained people who layed off will get soft- and take the lesser jobs that push those with them down to the streets as in the Nixon era and these trained engineers pushing me out of the sand candle business. Bring on the Violins and question if politics know what it is doing? Hey, send some great rockets to Somalia full of water and build a new thriving town, do something in the here and now so I do not have to watch the news and see thin children too weak to chase the flies from their eyes- why try to do things in the world at all if you do them half-assed. With such disaster in the modern world I do not want to hear your whining because you are given freedom of some region surviving the wounds still there of war and mass graves (hey is it not a war crime to have a government that results in the loss of so many people- let that environment climate change be acknowledged in the cap and trade of the cost of living or have the decency to put them out of their misery outright. There are worse things than death. Humans are not meant to be just meat in the equations of the market place with old ideas that amount to slavery.
* * *
Well, back to a less ranting mode:
In the second firmament case it is clear that the issue of Pitkanen, my teleoscoping theory, the information questions in hologram volume and surfaces and so on by many, that is the way to integrate and compute some values as the roots of numbers and so on--- But is this not a matter of addition, at least in the discrete or computational algorithmic view and case? So I think that I can sort of shift the factored half 4 base codes alpha and beta (epsilon-delta) of the quasic plane so as to add them with shifts thus store the information as if a picture in the quasic field and perhaps have a qualitative gain in information into a plane. But it should be readily evident that the quasic (or n-volume) is a much more complicated case in which to perform these additions with shifts in a wider quasized space and for that matter other spaces such as Fourier dividing and phase spaces etc...
Of course just like with the realization and designation of what is signed or positive such shifts as positive when absolute have to reconcile in which every firmamental view what are the twistors in a world where in some logical sense we cannot distinguish what is addition from what is multiplication. This asserted outright is a deeper idea than wading into the sea of countless currents and orientations.
* * *
! ! ! :
Octonions anyone? 256 binary code groups focused into the more general E8 rather epigenome space?
This may be important confirmation of some of he general mechanisms in which some of us have offered speculations.
But the issue or insight Lubos raises are maybe the deeper interpretation of this mornings dream- for these concepts are after all something which combines things in some philosophic level beyond the idea of relative positives or negatives if not concerned with some sort of algebraic formalism for such things as the underlying logic of it all. Then again it may be what are extreme views of a direction in the firmament as the underlying philosophy- the old chance, mechanistic, as as in the usual hopes in such poems as in the illustration, our perception of something indefinitely more yet limited to absolutes, the teleology. Here again we find the usual paradoxes in remote thoughts and places- can we really transcend the variegated systems that ground our reality? Can it be that in the vague concept of heaven it in the end is something to which we can approach and design its potential here and now on earth? But in a way, would even this not be a closed reality? One thing for sure, this issue at the frontier of applications to science seems to apply to philosophy also- or are these co-existent things like two substances, an interrelation we compute as to working together or making the other extinct by the usual considerations of evolution struggle and phase space on all levels, or that from the view of a possible totality in the reality of our experience of being that we are only beginning to understand the limits of transcending our physicality and the laws of logic and physics in our age still a child to what we may become?
Is the man, the primitive punch rather than slice at the core of what cannot be mirrored when there is but one element of a series of binary numbers, more of a visual creature than the yang mystique of woman? Do we as a life form choose that the cost of such differentiation of gender and replication is worth it in terms of ergonomic and economic sense- if in our myth of it all we can legitimately ask such a question and it have overall sound meaning? But why not this be part of an undifferentiated background or firmament in our dreams as well in our dust, inheritance? I worked some of his out in the dream with colored discs on a plane, and it is a reduction that retains intelligible meaning- these correspondences are after all the middle firmament, the functions and useful trends and information, the business of technology and science as a unique realm- and it thus is adaptable and indeed is firm as well. In simple counting and the sometimes magical manipulation and casting of symbols the myths compound if we pay attention to them as well as the nature of numbers as we encounter culture and that culture also finds correspondences in what we perceive, and what we envision, all the give and take of our sentience and physical development that responds to what we may find or even manufacture from design based on standard laws and first principles not yet encountered in space.
Perhaps, the issue of good and evil is not as distinct as in the drive for the separation in Western culture- or that evil cannot win so we feel immune to ideas we demonize our responsibility in our freedom for our actions. This bother is not good reason to apply our system models on others- nor a guarantee any such mixing of the firmaments when that opens up things way beyond the doorway into us of evil that the better in our human spirit can for long be subdued and contained, such is the frontier of the face of general space for the particles.
* * *
Just saw a follow up to Lubos post- excellent! and he made a connection which I do not think I posted but thought- the idea of memories as such and Bayesian considerations has to fit in to the general scheme somewhere. An informative post.
* * *
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Island Hopping and Cargo Cults of Physics
Nothing today, I put the illustration up waiting for an idea or so. Cool weather here at last.
So, some excitement about four, two, one lepton decay... how many heads are better than one? (see yesterday's post).
* * *
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110720121905.htm This was the relevant article for the last few posts as it establishes a mathematical model in physicality but this does not show the unity of biology and physics as a reductionism.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110720121905.htm this one too but more as the differential geometry of manifolds and internal barred galaxy structures.
* * *
Well, seems the new nucleon of the three quark s u b is of interest lately as if some rush to repeat or report the news - and it is said it helps us understand quarks and matter more- but it does not say how in these popular articles.
Of course one of the first uses of the quasic grid in talks to my string theorist friend in 1995 was these sort of resonances and permutations of the possible arrangements of quark generations- is the why that the quasic theory works here? Was my friend justified in asking me "What the hell matrix have you got- it took me weeks to find some of this stuff (on my 286)."
So, something rather more fundamental is going on (Lubos seems to mention this today in his post... a new physics).
For me it is clear that we are in a sort of analog to the days before the periodic table and are really trying to sort out the particles with a deeper analog to such a table. Of course there are discoveries and a few partial models along the way. The question is, and I mean it quite aside from say an analogy to nuclear resonances as a five-fold increase in complexity of say the crystal groups, both these on the lower level of electromagnetism (and yes the idea that electroweak mechanisms are not the irreducibly fundamental of physics processes)- what anomalies will be found as if the repeating of all known in physics historically to day equivalent in impact to nuclear radiation? We do need such a table for he particle zoo of these new exotic species qualitatively different from first vague generalizations such as the idea of asymptotic freedom, quarks Gell-Mann style, and so on. How far then can the hierarchy of such theories in these forms of physics go? Or, can we not see that the quasic approach as the third physics has foretold of much of this all along? That is if ultimately all theories that are general (and genequasic -GnQs) are not intrinsically vague at ground all along. But what might be the entity or element that would suggest weights for such a table if it is not just corpuscular or some form of combination's of energy measure? Is there on some level a reference in general that is a good foundation- some morally equivalent and compromise as if my iota particle point string ray idea? Or is there a level where these are in a sense expressed as composite relative to the general flux and being of reality?
* * *
The islanders may find mystery in the Island hopping and the aircraft's to lesser learned minds something worthy of admiration and sacrifice, appeasement to fears, a cult to worship... Still, the natives may ask- "Why do you have so much cargo?"
* * *
Some Current Topics in the Media relating to this concept of a wider view of time:
I followed today one of the futuristic blogs of someone who some time ago followed mine. The blogosphere is something I should really keep up with the mechanics of even though as with most people it is the content that is the more important. So some of my random initial joining of blogs have changed or evolved or are not there. I would edit them but I do not want to delete things by accident or ignorance. I also note that as far as traffic goes being on a site like Ulla's to the side is a source of views, that and google images in general. Of course from a public computer I cannot accept the cookies that would take away the viewing my myself in the posting.
Now the higher dimensional concept of the illusion of the uncertainty of the direction of time (if that can only be hinted at in words and is the case for time structure in physical as well as psychological reality) has consequences- some of these at least in the three dimensional sense of what are emotions, like, dislike, and neutral, have meditations to deal with the grounding of present memory and the forgetfulness of the progressive knotting and looping of past baggage. These primitive postulates of emotion (Spinoza) might be equated with uppers, downers and hallucinogens. And with all cases of trinity a fourth is implied but not considered necessarily real in the moment- as is the case with four-space as if a God's-eye view of quaternity and even more vaguely beyond...
So even in advanced Zen meditation there are ways to deal with things that are inadequate in methods compared to what we know so far in modern physics and the mechanisms of biology. In philosophy too some of these psychological ideas we vaguely or traditionally apply as principles to live by and as issues of mind and matter. Let us leave out the complicated issues of good and evil spirits and that lore for another time to analyze. But in effect these can be seen as limitations and loops as if time travel in the matter of what is actual if we are to descibe them as positions in some real much higher space where the mechanisms of direction are asserted but have really no certain explicitly demonstrated grounding.
One consequence is that we, when in these more complicaed mental processes than what is quantum or classical in our dealing with phenomena and awareness, is that we in recalling the paths and memories recall clusters of such so that to fight against them it only adds to the looping and knotting of choices- and may prevent higher emotional states or memories from overriding the structure of what is there.
Another consequence is that when such a state occurs- and recall that where there is a view of illusions these from a fourth and greater view are equally real psychologically if not in the fabric of physical reality, it is always a problem in the existential moment to distinguish the real and the virtual if there is a distinction in any context. So, as in the term flashback, be it induced by any chemical or aging process, those who experience it may actually be in that place in time. In contrast to Descartes some philosophers maintain that as long as someone has memories of a loved one they are in fact alive in the system of the world.
The Jewish tradition would say that if a person dies the whole universe dies. The Islamic tradition holds that if you save a life you save a life of thousands of others to come. Events are intuitively not felt as just of the decisions of the moment. To some degree we can have lesser solutions or systems- the contrived ideas of Dianetics come to mind- or perhaps what happens to the memory in shock therapy.
It should be clear also that the hinted solving of such things as in the neuro-network artificial imitation of memory on the small scale of neurons may not be at the general complexity or deep enough level to say program machines- short of perhaps being in the main a physical and organic component- thus organic that we can say in our present terms and models that such machines are indistinguishable from not only intellect but what we may say are emotions so programmed and the effects on a unified independent system among systems- that too a variable view where in the familiar world or level, meso-cosmic, observation of what we think of as natural scale (if indeed we can not surpass the general idea of scale as a not radically relative thing) that the interactions of more or less isolated objects can reach higher complexity- again philosophic and logical issues in the logical conclusions.
Certainly there has been models where the mass of objects in a sense depend on memory, Weyl suggested this and Einstein thought it a little too unlikely as to if it could be physics, but certainly if we have such a dynamic of memory then is it unreasonable to ask it there is a higher structure of space where the memories recalled in context with memories in loops and so on apply to what seems to be a simpler level than the biological, the fundamental physics? On what recurs in this case as our only and inelegant way to express some things mathematically are we not taking into account what may be or seem to be concrete or virtual in both the physicality of matter and the structured mirroring of theory and mental space?
I would think these ideas way beyond the reach of most people and some primitive peoples were it not we are so intimately aware of the rules and game of Love. For a lot of this model seems to correspond to how we deal emotionally with break ups. One thing that is suggested that rings true (from a discussion on public radio last week) that the correspondent lady seeing so much of the horrors of war, many wars, did not have Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. The article says that the awaken of such stress comes later triggered by similar or even lesser events such as in her case childbirth in what seemed a safe environment and the concern for if anywhere her child would be free from disasters in the world. Does this not say something about it being grounded in such a dream recalled in dream, memory in memory model of our mind.
But we are imperfect if that may have a clear definition, incomplete perhaps if anything can be more than relatively complete, for I must ask that even for those in the zen tradition that if they know so much about love why is there love life and relationships in such a cycle of mess in the moment- especially if the connecting to such emotional baggage is clearly not their fault and that when in such a bonding they are in some cases not bonding with the partner as much as being treated in a stressful response over even minor cues as if in reality the Ex-partner.
* * *
Why indeed would a primitive islander wondering what the need for so much is not ask the gods- why do you have so much cargo?
* * *
I should probably point out (after just looking over Kea's Motives paper) that the term quantum frame is better seen, especially for R at least, as quasic frame and the variations which follow. Now, clearly the forbidden - - - or + + + triangles are those that exclude conceptually the points on say a 4 space orthogon along the main diagonal, 16-2 = 14. But this concept also related to how we view what is the non remote limits, where she includes the very small and ultimate ordinal of which the excluded positions apply and in fact seem to be the method to verify Bell's inequality in experiments.
This of course would be a new physics, but from my view it does not forbid the idea of supersymmetry in itself as I have made clear- of course the extension into surreal numbers and the surreal calculus has to go even further into generalization of the binary powers idea and such patterns in numbers. I feel my recent posting on the identification of such "categorical" methods with this Arquasic space is saying similar if not the same thing and may conclude we all have terminology problems especially where we do not go somewhat deeper into how space and numbers and matrix methods are structured if not coincidentally working well as descriptions of physics.
But it seems to me a lot of experimenting to make much of a result like asymmetry in the top quarks, these in a sense are lesser shadows than the Higgs type shadows and what connects with the so called gluons anyway and how---this would require a view from higher physics to understand- as if some directed memory in the background of such possible particle positions. For the values in the field in general of space itself would show these shifting values somewhere and we should not be surprised at the finding of such quasi-ghost like particles on some dimensional level, nor that the deviations in some experiment in observing them could be rather low, at least in what we feel is our era of the general history of the universe. Thermodynamics may help some in understanding this quasi-phenomena if we have to do it the hard way. There really should not be much difference if we throw particles or anti-particles together for such results.
Of course in this early paper the speculation as to what to further research is rather a foreshadowing of recent experimental results. Taking it to a higher dimension for example- but why should we not in the exploration of trialities not expect the nucleons not only in a sense to be doubled (and certainly in such a more relaxed or quasi-idea of some property of math like associativity) You will find it posted here somewhere before I saw similar things mentioned in related papers and links I saw today, If somehow the nature of space is nine dimensional at least at any given position, a triplication, one of a quasic generations concept which apparently is defined or invoked at the "discovery" of this for each nucleon so as to expand the usual representations.
But by this I am saying if somehow the universe is intelligible and makes sense and I independently with less ability to express things in standard terms find the same sort of underlying new physics- why are these bloggers not treated with the respect for abilities they deserve and seen as a precious resource? Or do we have to think the truth in science and research is just a quasi-phenomenon and not much value really to whatever the purposes and aspirations of humanity, quasi-values in the nature of things social.
When the ancient texts we scribble down are translated one day among the denizens of this new world- posterity will see the truths in what we have said. But we should rejoice as the sense of wisdom and new and fresh creative wisdom found in our world.
* * *
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Science Truths Beyond New Myths of Science Fiction L. Edgar Otto July 20, 2011
* * *
Well, I will skip the sci fi for awhile as interesting as such speculation may be for the next generation- collect more ideas. Anyway some of it I discussed on facebook with my son looking for a job after his schooling. The social media can be distracting but that is how it has been in the succession of media, radio, television, LP's, computers, games, interactive games, social networks... all of them promising a more universal education but most we cannot resist for the virtual bubble, technical man.
* * *
There are several ways to think about movement through space and time, and where are in it that from our position and stance it is not clear which direction things seem to flow, this a principle as basic as Riemann we could expand upon a little.
* As a working hypothesis and experimental theory, for the sake of better understanding the deep connections and disconnects, the unification of at least other proposed frameworks, alternative ideas offered by those as new physics, that these may be primary to the actual reality of physics, or give us steps to a higher physics, these secondary methods and insights, or proven myth relavant only in useful metaphors for our time, I assert:
*1 In the quasic background, obvious and seemingly logically neutral, a debate as to what in it is related to arithmetical and topological backgrounds, we can say there is a unique and ideal, not necessarily scaled (quasic) ordering of positions and interrelated positions in general spacetime.
*2 These are related in the Arquasic (Arcadian view) as if embedded in at least nine natural dimensions as a TGD framework. The 14 points excluding the end and beginning positions of a four-space matrix of 16 positions is an "ideal" and dimensionally a unique Associahedron for the compass of said dimension.
*3 For obvious algebraic reasons related to absolute values, signs, complexification, invariants and determinants, we imagine abstract motions alternatively changing signs, such that when formally restricted (ideal) to a quasic region of so many dimensions, this represents the concept of a structure (regardless if we choose to distinguish the ideas of what are even and odd description of numbers and the connectivity of dimensions, 0 or 2 as sum of elements) these represent and motivated variations beyond the ideal for the compass of a field and dynamic expression, where the landscape of manifolds such as simple knots, the "crossovers" of braiding across the general 512 (p-adic?) Phenoquasic plane representation.
*4 If we accept as a quantum principle that a path integration (in an matrix of infinite extent) contributes to that observed, and the decay products are enumerated in formulas or as finite possibilities (super-symmetry at the foundations limited as if excluded beyond experimental observation), then the possibilities of what we may see of the occurrence of decay modes at random and relative to the state of the observer, these also are so limited.
As always one should ask the question even of crossover values if there are neutral states of zero crossover at some level of dimensions. Other than the deep philosophic problem of the identity of the many and the few we should ask if given an ideal model that so encompasses all logical discourse and at the remote values of things if contained by at least the idea of higher potential infinities- can we go beyond this system. This can lead to some rather interesting new physics and explanations that even surpasses what passes for the currency of ideas in the most advanced of our projects of science fiction.
* * *
This is worth reading today- I am not sure I can access the story- but yes, it is sad we are retreating from the era of space. If we can dare to lasso the moon then surely we are strong enough to survive the harsh weather when our vital theories dare being on a ledge.
* * *