Saturday, July 16, 2011

The Phyllotactic Omnicontinuum

The Phyllotactic Omnicontinuum L, Edgar Otto
July 16, 2011

Last night I considered the concept Rowlands remarked was excluded from his work on foundational physics- the idea of Tachyons. But I am considering this as something fundamental in the nature of time itself in view of new thoughts, especially the role of the discrete and discontinuous probabilistic grounds as part of the bigger philosophic picture. The others as if also a driving force - an explanation to the question why is there motion and rest in the universe, being and change. But I ask this on a slightly higher level than say the origins of such real and abstract motion from the core divisions of philosophy: metaphysics, epistemology, and for some a motive in itself: Logic. Somewhere a unified theory should combine the chance, mechanism, and yes the teleology of the vision.

Yet, beyond what is or what we can imagine, there may be other core philosophies beyond the three as with the three divisions of the continua of physics and as with the quadrature of fields and boundaries and the quasic field and other intelligible arithmetical relations in physics. Phoenix physics I call this for now if it exists and is always our pointing with but the slightest clue to a fifth-ness of things such as dimensions and force. This of course involves further analysis of what we mean by the concepts of infinity as well as the discrete. In the indefinite subtraction of say two potential infinities we observe not a problem or a BS as Lubos colorfully expresses the breakdown of equations in the remote conditions, but that such concepts, driving ones really for the math and the mystical, is indefinite in the quasi-indefinite sense also.

For if we take some of these principles on this blog into our hearts, if we can say something like a negative particle can be described as going backwards in time- then we certainly can have models that can be described as mirrors of this process unto even the complex spaces and beyond- that is like a mirror to the special relativity only -and I note without reading the article on Kea's blog today the idea of a cyclic universe and two senses of time- an old idea like of Bergson as not considered so deep a philosophy or what its interpretation for duration as it relates to a mental phenomenon. Or to the idea that there is an overall balance to the strength of the force on particles and the number of them and that idea expanded for example with Penrose and others that the stars and blackholes balance entropy.

I do not mean to disparage such ideas- to say at remote regions or initial or ending remote conditions and states of the world we never realize such limits is after all no better than to envision the Omnium extending indefinitely and infinitely so as to evade such foundational questions.

Part of the lack of understanding is the trying to fit the universe into the quantum wave function mold- it is not quite strong enough to accomplish this. We need a little more generalization of notions. This approach only results in the explanation of what we might consider happens outside the light cone in imaginary time.

So, we can state, as if there are things like tachyons in the sense that these are at or exceed the velocity of light, that somewhere we can tenably hold that there is greater than instantaneous possible. The light arrives at a place before it is sent. The motion in the world, its measures and differences, is that of the change over indefinite reaches of the whole between these what seems varieties of time and its directions. Quasi-definite time does apply a freedom of chance and structure as to at least locally, and over some wider region, non-necessity is the grounding.

* * *

Not so long ago I tried to develop my myth, Olney, the SphereDream, a fifth of some higher godhead... His walk along the endless beach to Far Rock-a-bye. But even this attempt to form a popular myth to explain science is not good enough to reach the depths of what we now see. I feel we also have surpassed what was ever the wisdom of our ancient philosophy's and religions where they talk about the universe. Of course we might keep in mind some grounding beyond all of these thoughts from our speculations and modern science- but our work is in its own time frames after all if that work is to matter and be of lasting use to the world.

"Olney met a pilgrim coming back from the city after consulting the priests of theory high in the towers at the university in Far Rock-a-bye and the pilgrim told him of his quest and what happened to him- he so desired to tell his story to the stranger be he philosopher or fisherman.

"I have thought I may be a prophet, sir, but now I do not know which way to go along the beach so as to minister unto the world, I do not know if I see the past or the future. The priest there questioned my sense of good and evil and indifference and mocked me with arguments I could not deny in my reasoning."

"Pilgrim," Olney understanding his perplexity and churning heart of sorrows, and in the white noise of the sea the confused and enhanced voices out of time and echoing in his head, "I do not have time to teach you nor do I want a follower, I had a nightmare last night which is very rare and I do not want to explore its meaning least I somehow predict things that will happen should I take thought on them. If you do not know the value of what you are saying how can you trust the words of others, even the priests in the far pavilions?"

Whereupon the pilgrim seemed even more perplexed and hung down his head to walk away in some chance direction- perhaps like a new born turtle instinctively down to the sea recalling as he did some origins where his kind returns to make their egg nests.

"Pilgrim, I will give you this and it is a great secret: There is no Universe!"

* * *

Omnicontinuum Notes from last night:

*The universe has an indefinite but unique lifespan.

*The differences of time directions vary uniformally as if diverging yet connected across the Omnium (the sum total).

*We can interpret this difference, driving the motion of systems, as greater or less than instantaneous and these act as if each others mirrors, quasi-dialectically, thus omnically and abstractly.

*In that statistics grounds the actuality and reality of consciousness a wide and deep statistical ground may be interpreted as the possibility of a greater or ultimate (omega omnium) universal consciousness qualitatively and quantatively more than what we now think, or can imagine of our explanations.

*This concept meets our paradoxes of describing or experience consciousness again as if that in an open or closed-loop like, even cyclic system of indefinite continuity.

*We can imagine a prophylactic cylinder integrating as an arrow given translation but the spiral or helix inscribed on it expanding as if Fibonacci numbers which are equivalent form any number so centered as to the scale and expansion of things. Yet such a thing seen from the end discs (or wormhole-like mouths) are spirals and as such exceed the quasic quadrants in their jumps past phase space excluding negative values to zero but these remain continuous as if in the plus or minus expressed the arrow of action, of time with respect to translation is integrated as if continuous and sets the reading possible for the direction of spirals.

(some things added here to try to make the concepts clearer. In the illustration of the hedges where the discs show the cuts of gnarly branches- yes a crude lesser dimensional analogy- I see the appearance as if spirals, galaxies. I find it quite remarkable the question of evolving galaxies in the sci mags yesterday not two types after all, the elliptical and spiral but by the tricks of light all are spiral.)

Of course, it makes sense to use such a difference in the omnium as a model of fixed and evolving differences of the physicality that generations of particles would have such and such lopsided values until they reach some quasic phyllotactic general system in the expression abstractly and indifferently of even more general ideas of determinate's than say Clifford's ideas, or Dynkin Diagrams of space structures.

Still, it is hard not to think that when the ancients in Babylon or Egypt saw some numbers as sacred, 240 or Plato's 192... it is hard not to imagine they had some good reason and knowledge- or that maybe they foresaw things so far in the first awakening of reason so as to put the enquiry into a reasonable model by their sensitivity as sentient.

* * *

From a higher perspective, analogous to the fact beneath how we imagine the galaxies develop and differentiate- the more general background to some point where we are lucky to distinguish, discern the view... all the twists and turns and jumps of light, some particle we imagine deeper in the super-symmetric worlds but not what we thought with our narrow vision- still, we may praise the dawning of a wider theory of the world even if our expected denizens of the particle zoo were not what we expected- then again, is not such discovery fresh and exciting- especially for those who imagine such things before the fact or even those who would try their hand as retro-engineering a theory to fit the facts?

Can it be that in our simplified maps of particle interchanges and their mediators- not that that they are one of a standard unified system as much as when we probe the complexity at the foundations that we find what we think as an observed particle decay explained say in the simplicity of particle diagrams as the possibilities- that in fact there is an uncertainty as to what particular possibility we are observing, and even independent of our observations we may see different particle tracks and so register the events when all along these are the same interactions no matter what the size of the collection of data, a certain independence in any particular observation or experiment as to which of the simplified models and names in the bestiary we happen to see distinctly at the time?

* * *

What then do we mean by the contribution of all paths integrated when such a quantum sea and flux are embedded deeply into greater uncertainty and greater questions if the sunflower spirals fall out of the context or are dynamically causative in all the paradoxes of time and times and their directions under the same questions of where the physicality begins, and the intelligent beings, in the greater uncertainty that grounds the Omnicontinuum?

* * *

As the number of primordia increases, the divergence angle eventually converges to a constant value of 137.5 degrees and thus creates Fibonacci spirals. However, this model is simply that: a model. "Consequently, the phyllotaxis rules I have described cannot be taken as applying to all circumstances, like a law of nature. Rather, in the words of the famous Canadian mathematician Coxeter, they are 'only a fascinatingly prevalent tendency"

But this issue might be questioned as dynamic rather than a tendency, the old paradox of a theory as if vegetation. Particles too, as if an inert law of nature my be a sort of tendency with no clear underlying topology- save to get to some such paradoxical theory- Even if we resurrect the boson only like ideas when the world itself seems to consider particles of half spin as well, and clear zero. Should we be surprised that theories of condensation and symmetry breaking may have deeper meaning especially in relation to what is and how things in the super-spaces relate to tachyon-like concepts of which these with imaginary mass are not stuck in just what we think of as space of the natural dimensions having understood what happens when we cross some horizon to unify something like space and time?

* * *

Wow, I just came across this 1999 paper:

Of course I have read the old and classic books- yet for you algebraist and others who can see the math you will probably enjoy this- and the sense of ideas in it reassure me my independent paths are sound in the results of the intuitions for I see similar ideas and new areas for research. As Rowlands said, paraphrase, the new age and sacred geometry people do not have a monopoly of something that may be of use in the sciences.

* * *

No comments:

Post a Comment