## Friday, February 17, 2012

### Replete Super Holofractals

Replete Super Holofractals

L. Edgar Otto 02-17-12

The substitution of groups of three and two done in concert over the gender quasic grid shows that the idea of fractals can also be combined with the idea of holograms by these same principles.

This may make possible a better resolution of the patterns of n-dimensional fractals. Clearly the golden ratio is the slowest irrational number before the stop of numerical properties goes beyond first quasic plane as stops and initiators in a quasifinite depth-span that is these super-symmetric fractals can be seen as continuously filling such space from one view the holofractal is quasi-invariant in terms of the measurement of chirality and phase space.

Each individual can be a unique design save by distinct duplicates by accidental evolution, conceivably, by this information mechanism

and its holofractal teleoscoping as a product and division of choices, as well as a willful choice to bring into the world a new duplication from a unique existing individual of which some degree of cultural or trait tendencies persisting unto the distinction quasi-invariant in non-local totality over spacetime- otherwise the paradoxes of what is distinct or not as a non-necessity would not be a possibility of determinism or free will in our choices over quasi-infinity. Nor would anything evolve and move while persisting at the deep foundations at a half or doubled singularity.

As such the content of uniqueness, the content of quasi-conjugate information and meaning of an identity or of an entity abstract or materially concrete can be in a quasifinite form that may leave a durable imprint on the fabric of the universe over the effects of noise if it is to be a transmission signal over general new physics spans and depths in the quasic plane.

* * * *

Blog comment to Pitkanen:

Matti,

I see a little bit of quasic thinking and concerns here. I do not know if you checked out my last few posts but free will and determinism is an acid test of philosophy, and I suppose science. We touch on so many things near the same. My last post was rather hasty but I found some very old photos in the computer I bought- took a lot of eye ware and sore fingers. Some of this came from the sciencechatforum - and I guess they did not try to understand there either- and the founder a biochemist!

I do not know the names you link to in this post. But I did have a question because an old comment to explain things on 89 I saved from you is still a little far from my understanding how you see things.

That is a most interesting number with a fractal pattern .2358 as the inverse of 89.

What makes something begin and end even in the virtual world but something much more fundamental and philosophic, the coming into our out of existence as 0 or 1 ? This is a quantum problem too. It is also a problem of a purely 4 space view, the quadrupole and octopole of my vision of the universe as yours in the higher reaches of our explorations. If things are gray in their existing how do we in free will discern what is a more unified model?

Let me know, if you have time, what you think of these speculations... I feel lately that we both would gain by a sharing of concepts- and to hell with the rest of our so called judges. :-)

The PeSla pesla.blogspot.

*****

If in a holofractal model we have points of beginnings and endings, my 25 and 37 in the codons... and these are in four space the isolated units to join into packets as a restriction on the background, then this model grounds such a phenomenon as well as gives free will possibility, at least while the existing. Of course their sum is 63. I wonder what the TGD take on this would be? The gender or packaging of the binary numbers in twos and threes as a quadrupole product over the number field of the quasic plane is of course 6 which relates to the Meresenne primes as I see in the p-adic system concerning the irrational numbers and so on. I do not know where I saved that picture of the pattern of 5's in the partition numbers, but of course in quasics it is a fractal pattern of 5's in 5's and so on. I hope newscientist does not mind I used that diagram (I am a lifelong reader of that most excellent sci mag and wish I could subscribe) but it must be there as I labeled it newscientist jpg but it was way back in Dec of 08 I think...) Of course the original gene table goes way back to my earlier work in 95 of which I may have access to again soon from storage.

I am not sure I am using the word covariant in the diagram in the standard sense, but rather a pattern of such in Eddington's cosmology, the Uranoid. However, synchronously, in the real world of physics research I found this just now that comes close to the frontier of our deeper cosmology explanations: Hogg a blogger I admire and follow. I quote: "One thing I need to work out (for my own good) is how inverting the inverse covariance matrix relates to marginalization. The diagonal elements of the inverse covariance matrix are like the inverse uncertainty variances holding all other parameters fixed, whereas the diagonal elements of the covariance matrix are like the uncertainties marginalizing out all other parameters. That's all cool. But inverting the inverse covariance matrix is something any responsible frequentist must do; marginalization is only permitted for Bayesians. Do you see why I am confused? I am not confused about the math; I am confused about the meaning."

* * * * *

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

## No comments:

## Post a Comment