Thursday, July 21, 2011
Island Hopping and Cargo Cults of Physics
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.
* * *