Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Time and Individual Creativity
Time and Individual Creativity July 5, 2011 L. Edgar Otto
"Time dissipates to shining ether the solid angularity of facts."
Ralph Waldo Emerson
"Now, in atomic processes, the notions of space and time are no more than statistical notions: they fade out when applied to individual phenomena involving but a small number of quanta. If the world has begun with a single quantum, the notions of space and time would altogether fail to have a sensible meaning at the beginning; they would only begin to have a sensible meaning when the original quantum had been divided into a sufficient number of quanta. If this suggestion is correct, the beginning of the world happened a little before the beginning of space and time."
Quotes from Time and Its Mysteries 1962 Collier Books A62-8730 ( With Introduction by Harlow Shapley )
* * *
I am behind on posting, three more articles from over the July 4th Holiday.
"M" is for Metaphysics
Di-Viriality of the Dark Aether
* * *
A Comment to Pitkanen today: And it applies just as well to Kea and Rios with their powerful considerations- all this relevant to the above things to be posted- and our struggle with what differences there is still between the mathematical and more physical models as foundations such as Jordan algebras (and in general, and information-ally, what we really mean by R^n or R^(n+1) and so on. But the problem of uniqueness (not just the ground of vector-scalar planes and algebras of identity and idempotent forms) that perhaps modeled by primes and super-singular prime groups and beyond seems to relate to our ideas of time and order, and ultimately to the justification of certain physical entities M theory cannot abandon without the M meaning metaphysics! Between our quaint ideas of three forms of Riemann logarithmic plane manifolds and the so called 11 or 12 dimensions is a vast landscape a little lower than the observable multiverse as that one stance of science- we probe what heretofore was thought the obvious.
I am not impressed with the meeting of string theorists- it reminds me of the failed attempts at an artificial language at the beginning of the last century.
The question for me now is the deeper nature of time- and what do we really mean by solving an equation fundamentally?
Our physics and idea of space and dimensions is not what they now think in following the old pre-string party line of what science is. As long as they use these methods there will really not be anything original or a breakthrough in theory- no matter how clever and long winded the formulas.
Information, even integrated in an ideal line (string) can get lost in the loops. And Braids may do a good job of this idea of twists and momenta over an ideal frictionless surface and a plane of all possible directions like trees in a forest after a tornado.
I doubt anyone there can understand the greater context of your and Kea's methods.
In 9 dimensions your quantum cat knows it has 9 lives and Ido replaces the European Esperanto as a mongrel language fit only for Clingons with hairy tongues.
Few realize the reference frame requires two hearts.
* * *
"Is this idea just a passing daydream? Or morning dream- my hungry cat forced me to wake up at 3 a'clock so that I might be hallucinating in half-sleeping state. A specialist could immediately tell where this crazy idea of Europe's (if not World's) worst Feynman diagrammatician fails." Matti concludes his post with this I quote as a reference to the cat and its 9 lives in my comment.
Still, Matti, it is a long gap to fill between your advanced concepts and QFT. I am wondering what leads you to embrace the more traditional qualitative and less mechanistic directions of science- yet by this standard M theory seems to be a disembodied mechanism that cannot even claim certain measurements as qualitative physics. Then again, this is not about the old idea of "Force" or is it? I mean in our alternative systems (this time around as the pendulum swings and we independently design a clock mechanism from different starting points) do we find something innate and internal or something coldly solid and indiscernible? This is the price we pay for dynamic and adaptive systems which Dewey says is that which actually extends our experience of life as if the literal but relative lifetime of a cosmic ray muon. Just how far can we take the essential idea of stable orbits of Planck's constant analogs? How can we not see this also as part of physics?
* * *
The quasication of the complex aspects of the quasic and Cartesian planes in which there can be seen a special difference between such coordinate arrangements of spaces.
* * *
* * *