Saturday, July 9, 2011
Minimum Entropy & Duration
Minimum Entropy & Duration L. Edgar Otto July 9, 2011
This adds a few thoughts to the last post on the Chiral Anomaly. I note that Lubos has a relevant discussion on black holes and such and the nature of the universe with some very strong positions- I cannot see where he gets such certainty on some of these issues nor how it is much different from my enquiry into such a direction as speculation and philosophy in the honesty of it all but not necessarily the science. So do we disagree in the realm of physics or of metaphysics?
I can intellectually consider if I am wrong on some issues- fundamentally wrong. I imagine the ability to do this and be aware of it to some extent is good for scientific pursuit and the progress of discovery. I will not make a statement that the world is continuous in such a limited sense (the full radiation spectrum of black holes and so on...) Anyway, perhaps I will read the relevant links and comment on Motl's hard post to sort out later. For not the crisis at the front of thinking about these things have a realm of their own that seems to leave so much behind as issues- myself may be included in some of these cherished beliefs and positions.
I find this morning a vague dream with the sense of thoughtful calculations and deep images upon awakening yet they are hard to interpret or make little sense. Easy to recall. I think the very subject of these last posts is the source of the theme of the dream- of which it has to be some sort of foundational change to , well, awaken us to our dream while the dreaming. One message is clear is that among the growing arsenal of my methods and principles I understand that I should consider this problem from the organic or biological hints and sense. For the continua involved were as if a tissue on some level in which the dialectical principles of heat and time and discreteness flowed to the focus level of the depth of field to which I could imagine them intelligible and continuous. If this were not enough (and alas some of the details of the more mathematical formulas written on something like foam covered in vinyl or tattoos on skin, warm soft and moist skin without blemishes) I imagined or sensed something that carried over for an after trail of thinking in my awakening- above all this metaphysical and physics speculation and growing past or imagining we can grow past taking it in in totality- there is another level of understanding that even surpasses our more new age magical sense of the spiritual in this world. Such concepts, as a matter of structure also in this world, would be the result of taking seriously some of these hard thought out philosophic principles but would transcend them. In which case we can all feel we live in a time of very backward physics and are obsolete but in what can be a good way. By the way, my concept of time already hard to relate like my fellow men at least what they say about their experience of it- is even more shattered and alien lately, yet all the more real.
The math like aspect of the dream (which I was the active thinker and writer (holder of the stylus) in my dream is roughly, if I found the terms (of which some of the recollection seems the recovery of a memory but once. Is simply in a sort of minimum S or entropy we imagine in a region of such directions as if time a change or flow from A to B for some position or B to A and these possibilities which are on the discrete face of a plane or region (I mean in one view it makes no sense to discuss some ideas of the infinite as if that can be a totality and continuous- it may just as well be bounded in a pixel and certainly (Lubos) as quasics and as topology and as particle weights we understand the binary inverse powers as numbers involved in our solid calculations. The concept of the quasi-finite is greater than these primitive stances which should be part of a more unified total picture.) that the AB,BA is to be related to or multiplied with IO,OI... that is by the discrete principle the inside-outside or outside inside uncertainty of such creative objects which btw strike me as a system where things are transparent in normal full space or are so depending on the velocity of the continuous ray without general group action purpose, Nother's idea of photons with such a minimum action purpose works only in a continuous setting for the not jittery conception of symmetry. I rather imagine there not so much a Triality, or perhaps even a Quaternity of things on this level but at least a step further- all those 5 things you see- like Lubos and his Higgs.
* Floxidrome - as the plane can be filled by a Fx fractal and on the sphere will it fill all of space of a dimension (as if we do distinguish the even and odd ones as structurally important) Or wil it sort of spontaneous break in the depths and spans as if we can realte the entropy to the statistics of some objects imagined therein?
If this the case then certain patterns of the subcells of a shadow polytope may be of other dimensional levels wherein the multi-Ply return has still further complication of effects and regular N-ality symmetries. It is also clear that the order of the minimum fractals or durations or the nth pixel region on the surface of a creative object so to speak, abstractly like living things independent- including some of our ability to hold a black hole background of absolutely empty thought encompassed- that we should see these sorts of ordering are more fundamental than the resultant probabilities or the basis and relevance of chiral properties conceived as a creative force.
Yes, our minds can find intelligible explanations and patterns to find and codes if not a message then a process of the exercise of so doing. Thus this process of imagination in a sense exceeds in depth the sciences and mathematics so far despite all the vagueness- it is the fertile ground of great religions and yet the survey of the terrain possible where it does not exceed the intelligible real and possible in the universe in the details of things. I must say, when some of the more vague ideas such as the direction of time in general as relevant to these anomalies and to the experience of them in their greater compleixity and ideas of directions of decoherence- after all in a quasic plane it can be seen but a relative think to ask or even show that the universe on some level can actually expand- as some say on a more naive level- into where? or What is the end wall of the universe?- that I can see better now the concerns and sensibilities of the cosmology of "galatomic" in our long discussions on the sciencechatforum. I am wondering why, I not knowing any better really, no one challenged my alternative theories.
Well, some of this may become better sorted out but I think I have posted and recalled everything so far- I hope the new general principles to solve some of this is not so far above us in that wider realm (but not as radical as our idea of heaven) where our fractal like minds make good and recursive analogies concerning the finite and the infinite. (So the illustration is that in a common sitting so uncommon its explanation of time and creativity of this higher realm, do we hear the conversation and is it more than what we are in our daily mundane life of concerns? If we deny the discrete and he absolute boundary, the nothingness, then we open up the unity with spirits that are not allowed to so move on. And when the inevitable disasters happen we may find that we have not divided up the air space with other species here any longer in peace as outside our plans of peace and harmony one kind of he winged ones fell forever from our sight and skies. Or we endure here forever as a concept not really understood for both the infinite and the finite.
* * *
If we live long enough, and from the greater perspective any duration of life is long enough, we may find several layers in the here and now as well as perhaps the beyond of what we are and what separates our living against its remote and chance disruptions, our several lives and incarnations of which we can be once or twice removed from the reality that seeps in of a realization. Of life and death our cocoons and wings of metamorphosis in the seeking of deep human bonds.
In our imperfection or perplexity in dealing with the sensed or absolute unknown, as in the speculation we make something like a black hole that eats the world, and try to explain or give examples as to why this is possible or not. You see, if we insist on too rigid a concept of the real so as to deny the very metaphysics that allows us to say such and such is a misinformed if not crackpot way to imagine the world- that in a sense is the source of the problem where we invent the very ghosts we try to banish with reason from our proofs as to what is and is in the world.
Have you tinkerers with the germ of life not heard- the old gods are dancing in the clouds and throwing bolts of thunder down again to the superstitious in their denials- and you have unearthed them and given them life again...?
* * *
For what it is worth my references to Lubos here is because of the synchronicity of the chosen topics of concern- not that some of the issues in the article referred to
The link to here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.5894 I quote:
"And this constraint comes from first principles of quantum physics of any Poincare-
invariant asymptotic background and is independent on particular short-distance prop-
erties of the state. Black holes, and classicalons in general, are no exception from this rule."
In the posting of the photo of the pages or typed- say essentially the same thing and similar conclusions as my informal treatment.
In particular: (although nearly continuous is not a clear enough concept to base many conclusions 0n)
"We shall summarize our argument is one line. The key point is Poincare invariance
of the asymptotic background. On such a background, any |in> and |out> states in a scattering process can be labeled by quantum numbers describing irreducible representations of the Poincare group."
That the Poincare conjecture as proven I take issue with in its applications to space as it is and not what we imagine it is in our more limited math and physics. Why indeed to I make these rather mathematical issues like connectivity and phase space ideas and n-ply regions and so on a topic before the fact of other posting along the same lines- and if some if this is too fanciful how is it I make the same connections?
... Well, I suppose these current speculations by an outsider and amateur poet is a little more solid today as math or science even if with what I feel all the ingredients the combination needs to be analyzed a little better in the details to show clearly how these fit together- enough perhaps to convince myself more. But we all seem to have this problem of showing a final decisive concluding picture. Who knows, what is off base among all of them perhaps is the just claim such brilliant thinkers are crackpots (how we we more common sense earthling reckoner's know one way or the other what is nearly to us an idiot or near genius?) Well, I suppose I am in good company as far as we can expect to go in our day and age of science.
Sensible conclusions are those perhaps that light the way as well as the breakthrough general theory one may grasp over his fellows at the time or of that see of connection at the frontier of thought with his fellows. It seems the more one has to take on faith some idea to grasp it in the end as a scientific truth the more it is defended as a faith and not in the details to explain- nor the value as a personal contribution. There is no point really in doing homework for others, nor debating whose work is unique and comes first, or what institution or project in competition, for there are no standards that stand if the claims are shared in the times or have to be defended and asserted on such faith alone. Nor is there much point really in teaching what we have been taught as if that does more than inspire a new generation unto enquirey, who want to show of their mastery which really has no original contribution beyond what we have already shown and known.
Yet, we must stand in awe and amazement at our ancients who did so much and dared the greater flight to what we now make such a cliche and big deal of to the point we reduce some notions to simple schematics as if in a very complicated space think we can shrink things down to some point, some singular singularity point at that.
* * *