Friday, October 21, 2011

Fizzics Slepton

Fizzics Slepton L. Edgar Otto October 20, 2011 has a YouTube up by Don Lincoln whom I have mentioned from time to time on this blog and whom I had have several dialogs and debates with on the

My thought today was to continue the survey of what knots- but I had some basic new ideas on how some of the topology would apply to what is the physicality of mass.

*1 Dark Matter is Uncrumpled Knots in that physical in the vacuum.

*2 Fluid concepts and the turbulence's involved, including that of recursive tori, is the faerie ground for the concept of strict faerie fields. It assumes that there is no direct observation of SUSY possible, nor a relation in scales to Dark Energy.

*3 A star in a sense is a crumpled knot. We imagine an exploding star as becoming uncrumpled- and the same general mechanisms apply to black hole like creative objects.

*4 Topologically, we can imagine an expanding point or condensing to a point from expanding space as the same concept. But we cannot describe the physics of space only by levels of dimensions or by the idea of ideal points at infinity. Nor can we subdivide the intuitions of the reverse where such infinities become finite spheres when the inversion and concept of inside is appealed to.

*5 An algebraic representation of a knot reduces to a number- but this is a reduction that has to be better defined, say as class or set, complex, and so on. Also these can in a sense be prime into higher informational based space but this does not explain things outside the compass of inversions of elliptic and hyperbolic models.

*6 The question remains given these principles over a quasic dimension and dimension plus one field as to how to distinguish the right and left from a simple knot if these are intrinsically distinguishable at least at a certain level of complexity of directions and cells making a knot. This over generational-like concepts of space and particles extends the invariance of unknots to physical and half-physical (that is the adsorption into a black hole) levels of pair production- or as the case may be the observed values of one sided and one handed intrinsically oriented knots.

*7 Again, exponential values in formuli are equivalent to line or point singularity values from some higher perspective- asymptotic freedom as if unbounded but trapped as if an inversion or multiplicative inverse in a shifting scaleless super-field.

*8 Since distance itself is not clearly defined it cannot be used as the sole preserved or invariant concept for topology- nor the invariance of knots the only way to imagine analogs of things like knots in higher space.

* * * *

So, last night I heard the guest speak on this show and it was rather dramatic. I think this shows what can happen when we do not have a better vision of the physics. If either side of these conspiracy ideas are true- someone should be arrested. Also it takes away from those phenomena which are authentic yet only approached by "sacred geometry." Now, because of vaccines say Hep C the population is curbed and it can lead to Lew Gerick disease- lime disease for example cured by forms of silver compounds- (Thing is I talked with a lady yesterday who says she had lime disease but cured herself with colloidal silver so was surprised at the show for the last I heard such a substance only made some people develop gray skin tones.)

Anyway, I have noticed certain aspects of tuning beyond the tempered scale and am not sure it is a return to more traditional ratios. But I did not make a big deal that it resonated with our body centers and psychological sense of well being- for that matter to claim that water itself is alive seems to me even a cruder example of a faerie field than that analogy to the Higgs.

* * * *

Comment on Matti's blog today to Owen after this introduction posted now here-

Given the reality of the big bang and a way to orient time and to sort out what is natural order or not in the various spaces such as the complex ones and so on- this would be an interesting paradigm shift from an experiment. But is it deep physics for it is not clear that the big bang or even inflationary cosmology is the given.
So the earth sky article lists the great problems to be so solved as the idea of higher dimensions dawns on us and we whisper they so evolve in our minds (if not a four dimensional precipitation out of the foundations already). How can we not see that the rays from some observation in the particle physics could speak for that problem of explaining a Higgs that can obviously be observed by the return to the lesser scales of dimensions, that this is a problem of higher topology of such dimensional even Fizzy structures? Why assume in a world with indeterminate time direction (or space direction, even the pair problem on higher levels, etc) that all reactions take time and this time cannot be different on general scales- and not just limited to our narrow view of what we think relates to physical matter or for that matter what variation needed or not for some view of what frequency is and what we have naturally evolved to see or react to. That for example in my quote from the pseudo-sacred geometry view here (likewise a limited but hopeful paradigm) that some frequencies do in fact regenerate tissues- the lower ones actually as a medical fact but the cause is not the frequency but the general dynamic view of an Omnic universe well beyond our simple ideas of what is continuous and how then to explain the finite:


I saw your comments on earth sky. I have imagined all along, and not necessarily from some cosmic origin, that dimensions as such dynamically unfold and evolve.

The information in a 2D "plane" of sorts- such as a brane can be seen as of any dimension. Scale, plus the assumption of a fixed zero or relatively negative influence- would speak of a new physics of higher symmetries- both of the holographic and the fractal natures.

In which case, beyond quantum of the square roots of an area there is not reason to expect evidence of gravitational waves observable even at the lowest dimensions. Did the universe start from some sort of string? Is the totality of dimensions not in a sense present over all of dynamic time?

Parton ideas are part of the picture and in more ways than just the combination's as if quarks and we cannot simplify things without losing the context of the information for part of the picture of physics unification.

The praise in that article- I think there is a long way to go to grasp the new physics- and much of it in one part of it or another we of these blogs have discussed all along. To say it involves projective geometry- or even the hyperbolic aspects puts our understanding at the turn of the last century- or worse as the other commenter into some vague idea of electromagnetic's over the universe.

All of this will be simple and clear if we understand just how we apply coordinates in what is the reality of space and dimensions, that coordinates are homogeneous does not solve their set or class views but seems to reduce things to a rather partonic view of a logically limited totality.

The PeSla

* * * *

Of course it is not clear that as our new paradigms emerge and the new speculations at the university that those responsible for such work are expanding in their grasp of dimensions as evolving or are simply loosing the dimensions as if a neutron core a blue star has taken away save some outline- and that paradoxically crystalline, as if mass transfer like momentum and black holes needs have a physical path or time between such companion stars. Apparently the only constant is the resistance or delay of the solid and complete publication of ideas, a relative invariant that depends on the apparent lifetime of the rebirth or decay of funding.

* * * *

More is added to my post below on the Survey of Knots. When I can have the time and place to write I will post a formal theory as a separate post Quasic Notation for a Better Classification of Knots.

* * *

Taking a hiatus as if we are talking to the air, instead of assuming no one reads or that there is someone needed or worthy of dialog- as I have said periodically and my blogger on intangible materiality posted today - I too feel the need to do it yet it usually leads to a breakthrough and mine is not for the same reasons. So too long on line again as I have to wait for a ride to move some small things, checking the awaited mail, I had a thought to post to TGD diary again-


3 or 4 jets or dimensions?

Why just octaves or half octaves?

Why not some other factor like 1/3 and so on?

Anyway, an octave according to what of the possible scales (spectrum)?

512 + 16 = 528 maybe those strange whole number ration scales have some physics value after all. After all 192 was Plato's sacred number applied to music.

Anyway, when I asked about 2^137 I was thinking about such a mixture of levels of p-adic number systems but I did not think to ask to divide it all by half.

All this new particle zoo seems to me a little daunting- not very elegant and parton like- yet if there are three quarks in a proton why not three decay modes as a possible structure- or better a fourth hidden. After all you asked if matter could be 4 dimensional after all and I do think that the first step in understanding higher symmetries.

The PeSla

* * * *

No comments:

Post a Comment