Saturday, August 27, 2011
Viriality, Physics and Alternative Quasi-calculus
Viriality, Physics and Alternative Quasi-calculus L. Edgar Otto August 27, 2011
these concepts derived from Deeper Thoughts on Triaconway and from still further reading passages in Peter Rowlands book on the foundations. To that end I use the term somewhat differently, There is no necessary phase space in physicality that can describe foundations below a certain point- one that perhaps is the limit we have reached in theory as if those of a speculation on so called "preons". I realize now how radical yet in the tradition of physics not much moved on really from Newton and the invention of the calculus my program of discovery and definitions is. Perhaps there are no new discoveries possible including the new physics as long as we cannot see this new view and others like it- such theoreticians save for the rare poetic few in the current regime are after all equivalent to rather good but overly complicated engineers.
Again I was handicapped by lack of access to my papers of 95 and before so had some problems recreating the solution to the elegant Triaconway problem- but in the search for it again, and even with doubts of what I had seen, I found some rather new and interesting ways to view these color cubes (dodecahedra) and make some new conclusions on the foundations of existing physics. Like Rowlands points out in his system that some of the problems as in the quantum theory cannot be solved globally I do recall in my lesser learning I did solve some of these problems locally. But we need a better and quasic distinction of all this. Perhaps the most interesting conclusion or suggestion found is that the tetrahedron in the vast sea of ways to color and unfold the structures can in a metaphorical sense be said to have a center but that center may be inside or outside.
My writing reflects also distractions and variations in light and diet lately, and odd sleep schedules because of it. But as a general principle while surprised that I have something further to write today as usual, one can reduce the symmetries of things and get greater diversity of structures as well expand the symmetries to find a greater simplicity. This is important when one tries to identify time and entropy with the idea of connecting colored cubes.
* * *
Comment to Santeri again on Pitkanens blogspot:
Yes, phase space concepts and even the idea of invariance where the coordinates relate or are independent of things like mass- is no longer able to give us a better and deeper picture of physics- nor for that matter is the quantum theory although as Matti points out it seems to change our view of core mathematics.
I begin to doubt that in these standard terms alone we can ever solve some of these issues we have imposed upon ourselves since Newton.
This is not to say that Matti's ideas are easily seen and to be promoted, nor that they are as simple as some seem to see or believe- they are transcendent and represent the more democratic view of access to learning- so as far as money and recognition go (the Swedish syndrome of the "dudes" notwithstanding) the net is after all the issue of popularity and such virtual reward.
What, I ask you, on the microlevel is such a quantum cat made of and where in the heck is any right angle in the linearity?
* * *
It seems clear to me by simple counting of finite possibilities that the whole enterprise of trying to relate things to but 6 natural dimensions when there can be a gauge that involves at least the 8, is an error on how we should see space as physics. As far as I can tell even our theoretician blogger here seem to make this error and persist with it. Of course if they do not realize it is an error there is a hope or chance that all things can be arranged in such formalism- but there is no way they can actually think that this will be as things turn out with any guess we can say to be an educated guess. Claims of expertise and priority and what seems reasonable criticism of other theory systems and their authors from my view looks humorous in retrospect. But sometimes the whole enterprise seems a futile fancy overrated as if I were not quite born in the right age even when a decision now implies that is one made in the future. Of course such criticism if we are honest and intellectual, the strength in questioning our own ideas and if such applies to our own experience and sense of self and being, should have each of us face that our theories may be unoriginal, not creative, and even irrelevant intrinsically. Then again the enterprise would not matter much anyway to the hopes and evolution of mankind.
Perhaps, like with any addiction prone person stuck in a limited path and view, there is in the superficial sense of purpose and even mystical destiny, something wrong with their brains. We have to be committed or addicted to something- and we can have a reasonable civilized control over it even if difficult. I have found myself much less tolerant lately of those who cannot think for themselves and are broken and expect me to tend to them even when they waste resources on say drink. But the tough love is justified only because they have taken away from the well being of the whole of society, not that they are criminals as much as they have wasted our lives and time when we could have done more to uplift them. Yes, there are exceptions- both those on the street and those in power as far as the actuality of sanity goes. The best government will judge indifferently its people and yet rely on them as to who in the end can determine the evolution of projects of enquiry- rely on what precipitates out as to the purity of the sane. All that is expected is that we have a say in the decisions before such mandate costs are imposed arbitrarily on the society. Democracy is not just a first blush idea of balances of power or terror that assumes the ultimate ideal is the Lockean enquiry system that requires a middle class.
* * *