Friday, January 20, 2012
Exploring the 2592 Zeros of 25 Standard Particles
Exploring the 2592 Zeros of 25 Standard Particles L. Edgar Otto January 20, 2012
"We are not always aware of our creative and intuitive artistic accentuation's or when they connect over general time or when for the why of causality, that if lucky, our unique thoughts intelligibly and meaningfully cohere with the totality."
"A given dialog in its time reaches an entropy where nothing new can be said or resolved beyond blind shouting. A given theory system ages. It brought back from some hibernation or coma awhile and from a futuristic view all such systems decohere."
Quoting from myself while the writing...
The Source, Weight, & Uniqueness Problem Remains (of thoughts on the Good or God, this equivalent question remains analogously also)
Emphasis is give to "symmetry breaking" over some more foundational aspects of the mathematics and physics, such as an emphasis (and say privileging- even the assumption that duplicated structures are presumed to be the field of gravity or certain coordinates at rest-) of groups and invariants over the physicality of substance, contents.
The source, weight & uniqueness may not always be part of one symmetrical problem, as a quasi-unfied total theory. Thus, in a sense this is a symmetry breaking within thought itself. Clearly consciousness as such is suggested, but not necessarily part of the same unity of descriptions, Love & gravity as haunting 5th elements.
So we infer or even place into our mathematics & logic, science and its philosophy, creatively, some obvious fact or statements of axiom that is the stable & unique case, the Being given, the convincing but doubted obvious even if by hidden reasons.
(in the informal mix up in dim light, useful errors and free hand sketching of the graphs and nearly illegible symbols, I had my doubts that the explorations found anything reliably useful although I have been know to appreciate the necessary abandonment in the short achievements of the Rubik's cube for later solutions.
Part of this, even in string theory, is the incorporation of ideas like symmetry into the subject of thermodynamics beyond its development of its first two laws.
It is the case, by natural or deep observation (some shadow thoughts are taken seriously as an explanation for the accounting of mass by conservation laws and methods- namely, that last one standing of energy.) experiment and its variations, with our without underlying laws, that particles exist, sources and patterns persist and obey some laws, and weight measured that can be "verified" unto the abilities and depths of observation, including principles of exchanges assumed always present and ubiquitous between entities, even the questioned conservation laws and minimums of mass-energy & vacua, and entropy is linked conceptually to passing time as source.
But the totality itself can be, ultimately, unproved such that it can independently be "falsified" - open and symmetrical as thermodynamic scientific systems, as well thought's mirror inversions.
We are free to assert a philosophy, even incomplete in general senses, within a context. Yet, even within irreducibility and complexity of our systems, what guarantee have we for a general unique theory of the Everything?
If such laws are exact we could create matter from a pure vacuum, worlds. Fields of pure vibration but a stepping stone this is perhaps another way to state the theme of zombies and faeries raised with this problem that remains.
* * *
I notice that in the realm of evolution and structures of inheritance that the assertion of Darwin as the fact (natural selection) is modified in wider contexts of information such that some totalities do influence the evolving patterns, as well the first but not only pattern from bean traits and how they are passed on.
Some laws are assumed too specific, like Bode's Law, specially created and improbable for solar system structures. Is ours the best of possibilities as the unique idea on which its matter finds the perfect centering. So it is like Kepler a scientific systems (if we take falsifiable as the benchmark even when the idea moves on and fades at least partly into mysticism. For such a law is after all conceived in three space and inverse square viriality considerations. If we imagine things like planets in pairs and laws for some of their orientation in concert we should at least stack the 4D polytopes as the underlying seemingly hidden geometry to which any system should resolve to the general case of system structure- conditions favorable to earth-like life for example. But it is clear also that even further generalizations of dimensions are needed- a third realm at least descending from the size of Pluto. Here we can imagine the need for discrete and continuous, closed and open views to find at least being partly resolved but applying throughout a stereonomic structural system.
Such theories may need to arise again with new hindsight as with any experiencing of time, subjective or objective.
I asked myself, as the doubts though lesser are periodic- why do we do this blogging of the promotion or understanding of ideas, sometimes only half aware of their uniqueness or originality- I usually find even the random jottings at least as an example of simple but expanded arithmetic or counting of grids- and the flying in the vastness of higher dimensions, having something to post worthwhile after all. But then openness is my game in the freedom of speech in a world that keeps its freedom of enquiry open and with due consideration for merit and mature uses of finances and distribution of resources for all peoples. But if I had known this blogging would continue so long- if monetized, I could have afforded pen and paper.
* * * * *
Of course the four generation case for particles (so called exotic hadrons) is the subject at hand for such levels of quasications. That the four implies in a sort of time direction as a fifth for a source like current or motion is a key point- that and we examine the 4th and 5th inter-dimensional groups and systems. But so far I have not in the playing with numbers found systems beyond the squaring of the 5 patterns (that is 5 x 5 x 5) that is encompassed by these higher generations (that is my symbols in my script of G sub n. On which ground we stand in these issues is the foundations of the foundations we begin to find with certainty of our physics systems.
* * *
From yesterdays post on Sudoku a comment from Scott on my facebook: I find Scott most interesting in that once a game is played he can recall the moves and show us possible variations- would this ability be as exacting going forward as well.
Scott Curler Mr Otto.... solving Sudoku is like trying to solve chess mathematically.... in many cases the numbers may work out, but there are exceptions to the "rule" that keep the mind entertained and the beauty/joy is in the blurring of the math/numbers of what should theoretically work and what actually does. Puts a different perspective on it though, thank you for posting
L. Edgar Otto Scott, very astute points- glad we discussed the psychology and mathematics of the chess game over the years- especially useful from our best chess player in the coffee shop.
* * *
Relevant from Sci Mags: neural-network-gets-an-idea-of-number-without-counting
* * *