**Anthos (Nonlocal Quasic Field Conservation Symmetry)**

*L. Edgar Otto*16 May, 2012

In this example (of a general principle, a lampion) I consider four fold symmetry on a plane of indefinite boundary and up to our usual topology it can connect as a square torus.

The metaphor here is like an unfolding flower, anthos, or like in the vision of Stan Tenen of the tent and the flame something like a spinning smoke ring. Thus in the imagined structures and generalization of space there are deep connections of which our partial principles as something we sense but are not aware is itself evidence of flowering overt or hidden forces or structures and possibly the substance of our sense of geomety as intimate to the idea of the sacred.

But formally in these generalized Euclidean spaces the principle can be stated from the view of questioning if in the even natural dimensions the central point of such flower like structures, the bud or the dynamic organs of pollination, we find the sum of substructures not rigidly equal to two as if we count a central point as doubled in our representational models. Nor for that matter in the odd dimensions as 1 or 0.

So on a very fundamental level we can consider distinct approaches to symmetry systems involved. In an expanding system (of indefinite boundaries) and in it we place some arrangement of objects such as he stars on the US flag we have the choice of several classes of arrangements. These can be shifted as rows in the various count in a union or part of the overall proportions of the banner such that if the stars were spread uniformly, as here 53 rather than 56 in this cylender connected extension we can consider six half stars implied but never clear in the expanding boundary. In his example the Fibonacci proportions of the total lattice of objecs in the union and fly would be the ratio 13 to 21.

Moreover, as a square form, literally, we can add quarter stars in the corners for a total of 57 or these shadow like stars can be completed a the boundary various ways where the distinction is not rigid as to the type of geometery represented as torus, cylender, Mobius and so on by several ways to make an intelligible count of 60, and even abstractly the petals she loves me loves me not to some intuitively bifurcation of an end of counting the power continuum of which as an ongoing process there is no clear answer even if we use negative values.

We can say for every symmetry principle there is one of conservation but this is not necessarily the case in all the abstract instances. In fact physics as primary over the topological and arithmetic approach would see the physicality as that which causes or induces the resulting structures as symmetry. In any case across the general quasic field it is not just the balance of forces or vectors, information leaving or entering the boundary for as a general principle even in one level or dimension of space such an entering or leaving is a conservation of intelligble principle across the entire expanding quasic field at any indefinite place.

If we hold this law as one of boundaries distinguished by the dimensions, thus the idea of multi-ply reentry of polytope densities or the abstract mathematical but indefinite principle of some peripheal forces, continuously or discrete, these can be seen as symmetry as primary and the physicality of the interpretation pushed into the virtual vacuum as if compacted dimensions in the breaking to return again to a philosophy of what is hidden in nature as a dynamic mechanism that science over the alphanumeric age tried so hard to open and explore. The string or loop concepts are played in this conflct as to the primacy of the realty of what in the background is considerd artificial or natural in this natural or artificial distinction and not on the level merely of the perceived truths of these schemes as true or false alternatives of the subjects in themselves.

For fractal or other schemes to fill the vacuum as if some principle is the change as dynamic and primary or not the situation is the same information wise as with the mysteries or illusions of indeffinite emergence as the holographic principle. The distinctions made or imagined as a principle in view such as the halving or doubling of complex spaces or the for the balance or explanation of virtual extensions of a field of counting or space representation, or the jump to a filled vacuum by some end of the covering of a plane of by some fraction of the dimension over a measured or indefinite cell, in a ubiquious gauge or origin for for such expansion is after all what makes it possible to extend our mathematics and symbols systems to better model our ideas of science. Both of these more recent applications can also work together, and may do so within their separate but complementary levels of a view and discipline in peace time anyway between them as a clash of our intitive core principles. This is the origin also of our sense of a possibility for a unity of the physics or deeper generalization of its principles and laws as well as questioning if such possible.

But let us also realize that the count of things may be limited to some form of ordering such as the stars before he patterns and proportions of the flag was set, even fossilized by the refinement of an established body's treatment of its governmental laws. This occured when the count of stars reached 48 here these were set as 6 x 8 and not the shifted rows as seen in the first world war of that number of stars just like the proposal for the flag of the first 20 so set in the phalanx pattern by Pesident Monroe over the more Phoebe snow variation.

Let us not forget that we do not know how the original US flag of 13 stars were arranged and the arrangement was legal. Each naval vessel could have its distinct arrangment of colors, proportions of stars and stripes. It would be a legal flag to arrange as letters for say a ship company. The arrangement could be in an overall star form, or in a series of circles called a medalion. The phoebe snow arrangement contains after all the cross of the Confederacy in its later flags. This suggests to me in the anthros (trying to reseach reasonings and trends in the past or future as anthropology) that as a counting principle, as with so many letters that can represent words and then ideas when combined, when we reach some number such as 32 a bifurcation is reached artifically and physically over the span, that is, a civil war. We know also that some people have limites to raw numbers in sequence memoried or that we seem to be able to send and receive no more than 9 or so Morse code messages at one time- how might this realte to the merging or breaking down into sines of one such message of that finite totality?

We know also, as with the vulture or eagle, apollo or Zeus in the constellations, or the Lyre this "new constellation" over our part of the globe high in the summer sky could have been and likely was the original proposal where we make on our banners tokens in the natural colors. And let us not forget that like the sesame or scattering of seeds the placement of stars were also quite random.

If in the study of chaos we can have a predictible and sustained balances of parties such as superpowers, being four which surpresses the rise of new mutations what would the fifth or greater symmetries mean, hidden, if not the possibility of new growth and freedom in general but chaotic systems? How can the usual 4 codons in growth, within a contained system, in vast numbers not find lesser mutations than in individual cells in the wild, and how can not such systems in the context of natrual cosmic principles not be an issue of dealing with mutations as if driven to dynamically do so?

The interpretion of cancer as a quasic system shows there are exceptions in the mathematical background to all of our medicine and analysis in the confusion of various contexts or theories of the causes or the mysteries of regeneration as a spontaneous error correction. This of course in the dynamics of the general Omnium system extends the particles (molecules) and events as if part of the lifespan important in the descriptions of such cell entities with nuclei, physical or biological. These are at least stringly or loopy rays or points as one usually considered inductive object which extends these question of what makes an individual or a totality. It is a link to make more of a science in its flowering as a science of antrhopoligical or sociological natural extension with all the same paradoxes of systems as finite, contiguous, or continuous open or closed dynamics. This perhaps grounds psychology and that as a grounding for our soul searching concepts of what makes the self or its expression of consciousness with some deep connection to our natural and artificial laws.

The nature of the self and of its sensing of unique coordinate systems, of rest and motion abstractly in a quasic manner, can be considered a substance at least on this general level of the rise or breaking down of symmetry and the generl conservation, or it can be viewed as a nonexistence, a vacuum. Can we in the higher caves and wormholes of such generalization distinguish even there what is real or is illusion or hidden principles as we dream?

* * * * * *

## No comments:

## Post a Comment