Tuesday, May 22, 2012

The Golden Ratio and Natural Dimensions

The Golden Ratio and Natural Dimensions

L. Edgar Otto   22 May, 2012

In the vexillogic (the arrangement of structure and area as in the minimal art of flags and banners as symbols, of colors) we observe this (British tradition) sub-regions that contain separate senses of information as to the effects of proportions.

This is basic to the visualization of higher dimensional space where in the combinations or algebra or distinct views as to what is grounded or centered or not easily seen in the algebra as reduced structures from the greater complexity and possibilities of design in higher dimensional spaces to which we should not say such spaces are simpler than three space.

Psychologically, our development as to core logical views also has this structure of what is the union and what the fly as well the integration of the elements of products or additions to changes and dynamics of space.  I suggest it is more likely that as we learn and our thinking mechanisms develop as if this unfolding and enfold of abstract dimensions it is more likely that for a given theory from first or initial impressions the result is changed in directions that fix on that core stand established.  To begin with ideology a a stance for theory as only union or only fly is to limit the chance for a change in core view or unification of generalized mathematics of space beyond their asserted description.  Thus we encounter such stances with the null.

The flags of the confederacy above tend to keep the union as a square when issues of proportions of the symbols as to what they may mean (ie the stainless banner) or were used (in effect the 2 to 3 ratio a national flag due to the 1 to 2 length tangling on ropes and such on ships).  But we find also, and in the proportions intuited in the USA flag the overall lattice of the Fibonacci numbers.  That is 13 states. In the union of the adopted (3rd CSA) the law determined the rectangle from the successive design ratios from before and from the overall proportions.

The people and the flag manufacturers made banners that tended to keep the union square and not divide the horizontal and vertical white portions as equal and thus equal to the added red stripe width for a lack of confusion with the token of surrender on the battle field.  Part of this is the insistence or tendency to choose alternative designs for changing the vertical or horizontal count to so obey such rules and it can be done if we understand (in brane area at least) that we are dealing with the properties of Golden ratios for such choices in relation to limits.

* * * * *

I was a little droggy this morning and wonder if the difficulty in understanding my above post is as difficult as it was to write it.

I notice this morning some activity on the blogs I have not seen for some time...  Lubos seems confused over a Hawking paper (but this is nothing new to my methods nor how I see the grounding for such a negative expansion as in Pitkanen  or in this better unification of the algebra and topology philosophic concepts I have long discussed here.)  I notice U-duality has news (oh that is keenmo...)  Dark matter in or out of the roller coaster?  In these matters I feel a lot less droggy than what the state of theoreticians seems all about.  Anyway, how we interpret the union or fly can be a question of political sides, right or left and so on.  But let the reader in the archaeology should it occur of these data blogs see from the careful digs how this all connects as the streams and lava seems to have flowed underground.  If you sense the connections but are not sure of what you are connecting then is what you see a living theory or some fossil of the empty unknown- it is not an easy thought to keep in mind we can be so learned and not be aware that our views and understanding may be in total error compared to more complex or simpler theory.  After all Lubos, is not the spirit of the way to explore things by the Englishmen not the similar intuition- they cannot use the holographic principle and stand on it on their own or - in the union- generally an introverted right wing conception of righteousness we cannot imagine boundaries that from your point should not be negative (De Sitter?) anyway.  And by what continuity can you state in string theory the number of electrons and protons-  that was done differently and better before you were a twinkle in your parents eyes by Eddington- your really should learn to count better.

* * * * *
 * * *

No comments:

Post a Comment