Friday, December 2, 2011
Superquasic Space and Dark Concepts
Superquasic Space and Dark Concepts L. Edgar Otto December 2, 2011
... Damn, left the two pages at home and did not take a photo- I will try to post this idea later today. In summary:
The quasic idea is that the surfaces of spheres are one continuous sheet which in the condensing into projects of shadow dimensions down appear discontinuous and there is no way to actually walk from say one planet surface to another. If this idea were not abstract enough it can be further generalized in that if such objects as if isolated but spinning, regardless of their number or spatial directions and ranges (for this grounds what in the observed physics of particles may seem invisible or transparent in a way that does not require and elaborate theory like scaled systems of acceleration or axiomatic explanations for the ultraviolet catastrophe), that which seems outside the aggregate of particle surfaces and spinning content in a sense spins if the internal motion of said particles is considered at rest.
But quasics is already a generalization of the quantum view and offers explanations for the Casmir force that are not like the wave theory nor the other explanations. After all, since in retrospect our models of dark fluids or matter or whatever, existing or not as spin or dragging the frames around them, could have predicted in retrospect variations over some regions as well as those of a more symmetrical variety around galaxies. I call this super- in line with the current use of the prefix rather than hyper- which would be ambiguous and may best be used for hyperbolic ideas of such topology (TGD?) But in the plenum of new physics papers as well the flurry of rushes to explain anomalies in the old physics models there is a divergence of our work and views which awaits evaluation. I quip: "Extraordinary evidence requires new extraordinary foundational theories."
I have not ruled out the more radical ideas of point-like uncertainty in the universe but is simply has to be understood on a leap to the quasic level and what is happening there with our ideas of super symmetry. Clearly there are confusions within the quantum theory beyond interpretations or the felt or real need to define how it may relate to more classical ideas. One implication of quasics is that we can hold finite things as spherical as much as flat, each of indefinite extent when we apply the structure of the cosmos to our concept of integral numbers and in a world rather than Cartesian rejection of all inputs (doubt) in principle how we treat path integrals as the sum of histories should be rather Leibnizean in spirit (that is an enquirubg system that accepts all inputs.) If physics is to be more generally intelligible and extend beyond the issues of locality or not.
In that quasics is very much a binary assembly code theory, we have to generalize the number systems involved beyond simple questions of duality and virial duplication in general where the issue is that of what seems transcendental and forces relying on curves or an Euclidean linear grounding. In this sense the appeal to duality and the group theory, to the cyclic group C sub-n times binary powers of 2 limited or not by say discriminate rotation (complex number grounding) or by the properties of numbers themselves, must also find generalzation to any binary power before we can apply it to the real- so I will discuss next what was not in the pages not at hand and thought about on the way to the coffee shop this morning:
Duality from a topological view as basic polyhedra may be further analyzed as the dihedron, the zero in the integral values possible of the platonic structures. But at zero this dihedron, composed of two faces without volume- we may state the further speculations:
*Just as there is an analog between the parallel postulate to higher super space which would involve points, spheres to a plane, brane; or even parallel branes and this a vague idea of a super-euclidean extension of geometry (this parallel idea mentioned in the papers not yet posted), we may say the following:
**A dihedron may be composed of two spheres or planes with no volume between them.
**A dihedron can have a certain abstract distance with a virtual volume between them if we view the plane as containing the hyperdimensional properties and these can interact.
**The dihedron can be a monohedron in that it may contain but one plane and no volume between or some virtual volume between an imagined mirror of itself.
**The dihedron, thus the C group, may be a nilhedron with no containing planes or spheres nor even virtual distance between them or by default such a distance.
**The universe and objects in it may contain combination's of these logical varieties to which various lesser physical laws may have an effect or explanation. For this involves ideas of renormalization, Pauli exclusion, and vortexs of real or abstract mirrors. (the perceptions and model the paper holds up as the states of the amoeba with its spherical wall against the unfavorable environs or its reaching out and physically sensing and engulfing things with its pseudo-pod's in favorable times.) Also the idea of measurable forces from some point singularity (or other relative dimension or number state) to a brane and the usual logarithmic or golden quadratic Fibonacci forces. Or
Compare the idea of two metal plates and the rest of the universe not such plates and the Casmir effect.
One significant point: The term Omniquasicontinuum does not postulate a primary continuum physical or philosophical but a direction and combination in a conceptual hierarchy. The Omnium is the principle idea here that contains the quasicontinuum.
* * * *
I must mention that Kea's posting today on the ideas of the old symmetry and the representations is right on- she understands the issues involved.
These issues of duality itself and not just of higher similiar relations to triality and beyond synchronously is the topic of Pitkanen's blog to which in that he has some quasic binary underpinnings these are not generalized in the sense of this posting above yet seems to be so from a p-adic view.
* * * *
Perhaps it is about time our theoreticians catch up with our engineers. Relevant to issues discussed here lately, Bucky Spheres are aromatic are they not- and all the issues of graphene and the like- and something in them spinning to the logic of it all in this switch.
* * * *
The two pages now posted from the coffee shop (and one that thinks a little more about what happens in the sort of dark momentum-like systems in superquasic spaces- certainly on these quasi-mirrors balanced on the continuous and discrete in a higher new physics we can observe deep variations even in the most fundamental decays and quasi-inductions across dark mirror fields (but a third page considers more what is happening and there is still more to come in this abstract idea. I note the resonances blog interprets things as indicating points for the standard model- but at the fundamentals, as in Kea's view, the new symmetries are very subtle yet streamlined as well note her contemplations on certain reductions to some topological models and the agreement with me we need a wider view of matrices- not to say matrices are not an essential step. I regard her suggestion of abstract induction of a triality unity analogous to neutrinos for the quarks as a very quasic if not superquasic grasp of the more solid physics. I am wondering if her post today on having a dream - well, it would make a good sitcom where the Sheldon Cooper character is the cute waiter next door and she the genius with her white boards- maybe a new reality televison show ?)
Pitkanen too as I understand it, imagines such higher phase or momentum spaces (as a quantum grounding) to do with color as QCD I think- and he has understood the inverse of things where they are distinct from a unitary number line regardless of the decimal when it comes to applying new physics to old or arithmetical formuli.)
I need more detailed contemplations on how this works between spheres and branes in terms of the information and types of interface dimensions and information involved, especially of the quasi-contiguous mirror natures, so the third page was an exploration into this- a suggested direction. Note that in a wide sense of what is perhaps in the superquasic background of what we mean by consciousness and the unity of our mental processes- the induced field (guage?) can be thought of as equivalent to the mental model of dream memory in the higher or neo-cortex.
* * * * *