Monday, October 24, 2011
The Crucible of Stars (Neutrino Shape Shifting and Hot Fusion)
The Crucible of Stars ( Neutrino Shape Shifting and Hot Fusion ) L. Edgar Otto October 24, 2011
With the new data on neutrinos and that muons can be uses as a catalyst for fusion, and that we understand a little better the nature of dimensions and symmetries and the apparently hidden nature of energy and mass, and the hints in many places of an ordering or asymmetry where numbers apply at the ends of braids and strings for some reason we imagine needing a theory to show why there is more matter than anti-matter in the universe, I speculated that the following links could be closely related leading to not only faster processes but clear control of the process.
I came today with not much consciously in mind to post so do regard this as a pure speculation - but is it not a worthy one to explore technically?
I also note Lubos has an interesting post on compression and information. That was perhaps the one stray idea on my walk here- that in the Riven code of base 25 the symbols (see earlier posts) have to be represented by 9 distinct symbols in a 5 x 5 grid with a possible symbol for a zero. Now this corresponds to my Sea Dice game which is much like the Conway matrix of 25 elements which if distinct involve then letters or faces of colored cubes (and their inverses excluding the main diagonal) and this game I came upon while thinking about Hessian polytopes but the connection is not as clear as it was to my calyptic cubes. Yet this certainly involved triality.
From the knot ideas I imagine a knot of three crossings has to be embedded in at least a four dimensional matrix. Now information is a powerful word with great confusions like is the word dimension. We can for example imagine information as a physical situation, or even systems that act as if they are physical such as the interpretation of warped space acting like a force on some material object. In the algebraic topology of things in a further generalization these ideas carry over with greater balances and orderings of symmetry.
But Lubos cites Shannon and entropy as the idea of information (and certainly we have a lot to learn about things like we only hear half of what is said and most things probabilistically occur in the first few letters or the brain can fill in some distinctions in the sound of words even with the am radio not clearly making say p or b, voiced or unvoiced.) When I use the word I mean more like how assembly codes might apply to some structure but I use it also in the abstract such as the use of labels or colors.
But I did have the thought that to claim a new class of knots (quasic) which at this point may already be there in the literature as I continue to grasp the new complexity of topology (and yes find new simplicities). There is a ghostly idea of information in such a supersymmetrical world perhaps somewhere in between and as we push the envelope of structure it is not clear, as usual, if the total theory is balanced and closed- so to even locally we may or may not regard the ends of strings or braids so with the ideal points to infinity as projections. So the question is the nature of physical information for a system, and if the meaning of that information conveys something of the context of an intelligible theory and not necessarily more.
But what of Shannon's insight that meaning and information are conjugate If there is in a sense more or what seems more in a wider theory of the universe as a quasic knot of many dimensions- if we compress information do we release some sort of magic in the crucible, some sort of dreams ro cognition? (but this speculation goes too far at this point other than to show that there could be more general consequences than given in the entropy formulas when at this point we cannot tell if such raw but brilliant information is magical or not in the thinking or writing of a position.) At the surreal ends of knots and braids it is not clear that things will always be duplicated in the manner many seem to do with applying complex number spaces, at least for a set group or dimension. What happens at such a conception beginning with quadraphonic music of which we take any musical scale to interpret by laws or random notes what is the beautiful and meaningful in context, the question of order in the system- indeed if there is not a given asymmetry of matter and not matter in the first place, is a general question of what defines information- in a world perhaps a little more anthropocentric seeming because of universal laws of neutral and dynamic meanings- that is we understand it at least intuitively. Does the order beyond surreals correspond to the order we find unclear in complex locality? While there can be the identity of some ideas of complex spaces and others such as quantum fields or configuration spaces at what point if ever does the information make a decisive turn and case?
But let us not forget the contribution of Shannon, that in the fuzzy world of noise in transmissions he found a different way ignoring them and defining things less continuously and more digitally that worked to transmit signals much as some of our finite methods of calculation do work to model vast areas of science and mathematics.
So, it may be a matter of taste if there are gray groups to expand or seem to generalize things when it all can be reduced to a few concrete colors and symmetries. But is there in the higher spaces, say in the Hilbert space of shifting fractal paths, some clear rules for a gray code? It is these very common sense concepts albeit them rather esoteric to our normal ways of living and thinking that cause many to imagine that these things are not important or deep enough to challenge the established powers of the new physics- the claim in particular that if it goes against such progress it is a return to old eras of naive and magical thinking of which sometimes as Penrose sees the past and the future may be the same in the remote considerations of what we can really see from our present state of entropy.
I am indebted also for Kea's post today in which she mentions the dipoles that connects then in my mind to the Dihedron (two faces without volume) of Coxeter.
* * * *
Ms Frio see the Capitol Dome post has a post today - really, from some view it is not clear the universe is spherical and even finite- it has been a long time since the Euclidean view and a flat universe is popular again. The truth is it is both and a little more otherwise the various models would not make sense when we emphasize them. What is a higher knot as so defined but spheres running thru Euclidean planes? And this does not forbid our models like the Whitehead knots or all the wormholes and so on.
"Nature is an infinite sphere of which the center is everywhere and the circumference nowhere," wrote Pascal. Which comes as a generalization of Agustine (I think, one of the school men) saying "God is the center of a circle whose center is everywhere and circumference is nowhere."
And Poe, I am not sure his view was one of a spherical universe as such- His is said to be more of a Buddhist like idea which the cosmologists were considering fit uncannily for awhile- more like many little bangs or spheres from some such mystical or inductive geometry from a point.
Now I am not sure what publication means by the bloggers as in Gibbs on peer review today- but in the long range truth of things it hardly matters. BTW Ms Frio, not so sure the half sphere or dome impresses me much anymore- but out blogger ladies are very sexy :-)!
* * * *