Sunday, October 23, 2011
Calligraphy and Catalysts (Handwriting Analysis)
Calligraphy and Catalysts (Handwriting Analysis) L. Edgar Otto October 23, 2011
To start with, the blog links and posts on Penrose in the attacks on his character and theory show a lack of understanding of how reason and physics compete at the frontier of theory - this shows to me not only a lack of imagination, but of that higher syntheses of innovation in the sciences to which our inventions must deal with and transcend. Is this because of positions in a global theory one holds, or is it that our core problems in understanding physics as geometry is now limited and lacking?
True, we can feel our reasoning sound at the foundations if we base it on say group theory and point out that connection underlying some mathematical method or interpretation as a physical phenomenon. We can also have a general view where to the extent this is true we are all pretty much saying the same things in any approach, at least as far as the invention of a theory. It is not enough, for example, to develop a theory of knots and the like based only on restatement into say the group theory of rigid rotations or twists of geometrical objects or abstract algebraic ones- nor where these ideas are applied in the new physics can the older physics see where there is a great and insightful advantage in the methods of applying them- as if ideas of Kea et al cut through the Gordian Knots and more will see through the problems of physics as if an X-ray vision.
But I can see, that for some one would have to learn from early on to be able to sort out the world of knots, and if the theory ever was complete (but it certainly applies on some level- maybe not enough to save M theory as envisioned) we would find knots easy to see and trivially interesting as if a fixed and simple reasoning. So we see that on the surface few can acknowledge the innovation as other than a surface phenomenon they resist in probing to new depths and higher symmetries that really apply to our cosmology.
I include an illustration in this post of some first impressions 101 on the knot and braid issues. I might have chosen separate titles for this post- originally meant to be on the thoughts behind the taking script writing out of the public schools in the USA. A linguistic post perhaps so far beyond the alphanumberic age - that is the news said we had a choice of teaching script or print or computers and for most of the states it is the script that has to go. But I looked a little deeper from the linguistic view as to what all this could mean.
For one thing I imagined an illustration of an ape that begs for finger paints sometimes more than food- and their work is usually like rays from a sunrise- but for some reason it seems to me as if in their branching and reaching of sentience they hypothesize the fan vaulting as at least a decoration of cathedrals free from the compression of space, that ziggurat of the said first and universal language so many became confused of tongues and branched out only to be culled at some point, before our cathedrals as if spaceships and maps of the heavens found flying buttresses.
Let is keep in mind Steve Jobs who was inspired by a course in calligraphy and made an innovation with computers that presented better type. His direction seems to be more toward the touchscreen in organizing information on the web. In this sense it is a more analog like approach as if the infinity of curves is greater than the infinity of linear thinking on a plane or screen. But it deals with the digital also.
I myself have books of my early poems in hand print at a time when it was not popular and I adopted from my friends but in the interest only in readability. I had standard and fancy scripts in cursive- sometimes at the cost of slowing down the gains in speed of writing as well. I did not like doing script at first in the grade school- but after all one should, at the fulcrum of this computer age and how we compute things, sort out the discrete and the continuous as far as it goes into the physics. I wonder in fact if the difference in Greek cursive and Roman styles of the more rune like variety for say the Arab script that can act as a shorthand be an advantage in seeing the world. For that matter the tables of knots of so many crossovers seems to me on a higher (whole word)level of so many Chinese ideographs- so it is the view of the physics and not the variations on language that may be historically encumbered or fossilize leaps in technology and scientific thinking. I wonder also if my flexibility in the use of writing has contributed to my own balanced views of the physics. In any case, if we are to print we can go to the extreme of staccato black letters too or some flow so far between the units of keeping intuitively on a page between the all important spaces of silence. For as we learn to enjoy the continuous swirls symmetrical and of indefinite time on the page, this much we should at least teach- hand and eye coordination (in the brain) we also learn to fill in the blanks. Perhaps to fill in the spectrum of things caught between the general relativistic and the quantization of ink and light and color.
In TGD Diary today and interesting reference to 9 jets- well of course we can extend triality in space this way and more than that- as some of the bloggers have here long known- and for those who do not give credit for such work- shame on you, you are late for the race and cannot yet find but the suggestion of innovation for what you think is your invention but all your own. We admit defeat when we take the language of our invaders- or we blend the scripts and print at the beginning where some civilizations merge, fresh after the loss of writing only put into stained glass windows after some plague, we the illiterate find a stronger alloy. Why else would, as in a random drawing of scribbles as if knots or Chinese, hidden from awareness of our writing as if it seems automatic, that in review of the "words" or letters patterns repeat with remarkable frequency. Surely there is something to the description of cosmology beyond just the gathering of such continuous or discrete and handed branes ( that is the gravity and weak branes of Lisa ) than the probability of finding a graviton so that we can say closer to the gravitonic 4D brane in five space we are not as likely to find one- a sort of unification of the physics at a distance of remote cosmologies that assumes such a unification.
How hard it was for the doctors to write prescriptions clearly; how artful the graffiti, symbols signed for collectors of the popular in our culture. How so difficult for the computer to simulate such a human signature- and in the development strive to return to a simple pen and paper that we can draw directly on line or speak without errors. Technology can come back around again as if the closure of a knot- but note: not all are so closed as the spectrum within it is not for only in the possibility of closure do we find the magenta of linkages and rainbows. Yet, these jumps and twists are very good now in that part of geometry we throw to the distance or near some local phenomenon- dynamically hidden or not. After all, one might conclude that the probability of not finding say a graviton is in a sense the measure of mass- or look for the mass elsewhere for that for most who do not see more deeply into the program of the ancient Greeks for making these hidden things of the world unmasked- that there is nothing grounded there.
* * *
Note: In braiding Triality in the 3 space 6 unique crossings require 9 colors- this I intuitively feel related to the 3 or 9 jet interpretations today mentioned. In fact here we discern the variations to include 25, 26, or 27 cells in the mix.
I did a little on the quasic notation and the 4 crossover knot was my favorite to put into a more orthogonal artistic arrangement- the 5 crossover of course is like five of the granny knot. But my label notation is not as clear other than the concepts of what goes on here as one of several languages- that needs work- as well as to what more is needed to the concept of what is equivalent in quasic space to that of the configuration space of crossovers. Something is still there conceptually but it comes down to actual hard work of computation (and by hand).
As in the illustration a note as to an unsolved problem in general and in string theory and presumably in all the super-symmetric M like theories- that of the photon affecting the field and the photon being affected by the field (gravitation shifts the spectrum also in GR and for most questions of frequency and color it is really not too far in algebraic and geometrical terms from a classical view). In the projective style topologies knots seem to have the +++-- or ---++ ordered crossovers so as to distinguish these knots and to relate this to the sequences of five when we can set the order for a physics object or where we cannot clearly as into the reading of the braid order.) TGD for example points out the nearly Pythagorean point as to the mouths of wormholes as a sort of zero or balanced condition and how it (quasically) may relate to the continuum of duality values and our ideas of exponentiation and hyperbolic cases in general (or the clear and simple formulas of Rio Frio which rationally we have to resolve the whole and the transcendental spectrum to understand how we mean such unification in such a dynamic cosmology.)
But can the dimensions, and matter, and universe so evolve as some say, and we sort out the natural mirrors and ambiguity? I find it hard to imagine wormholes or mini-black holes possibly still around near the so called "big bang" and while they are not forbidden how rare must they be in the here and now that they can exist?
Forgive me if I have left anyone out not knowing them perhaps- The idea of a charged brane is a little outside my cognition but the idea of Rowlands as to the philosophy of existence and non-existence involving the weak brane muons is instructive as far as such a low dimensional transfinite M theory goes. But at least the surreal number ideas seem to me to be related to a higher view of it all when we specify some range or position as if a zero point framework on which we need the mathematics that still can be seen or not by those in one of the main philosophic traditions.
For me I know again that pure information notation (to assign a symbol to what is generally meant by the conveying of signals or information- this is a hard term and not quite the same as Kea uses it applied to pure physics, I imagine) is what is needed for a beginning to clear up our understanding and presentations better- that is how I filled in the colors to a lot of outlines of physics from a more geometry and dispense with the other maths ways to do it that for long ignored the geometry, especially of Conway and the great Coxeter.
* * * *