Saturday, May 12, 2012

Shadow Reference Frames

Shadow Reference Frames

L. Edgar Otto 12 May, 2012

I see no good reason we cannot regard the empty shell in the computation as contributing multiple influences as if for example instead of one shadow empty shell there were two or more. In that case we could imagine as this is after all the computation of geometric things where the ideal or actual invariance or conservation laws may indeed loop so as to on a quasi finite path integration, in repeated depth of loops or once around (which is in a way the same indefinite concept) of the patterns in the five honeycomb cycles of the planes which then relate physically to the focused but less general narrowing in flatland of the Galois idea where roots are limited and as they are when extended into greater dimensions.

Can there be higher analogs to relativity where the computation of all these things is intimate to the gravity as a quantization after all? Would it not be clear then at least in the solution of the quadratic equations that while the Lorentz type groups are not obsolete this sort of way of looking at the quasic branes by virtue of forces resolving to equivalence or unity as the invariance view and conservation vector flow in the orthogonality a precipitation out from a more general Lorentz theory. Furthermore, when we assign the negative values to the forth shadow shell can it not be negative as well as all axes are positive as a description, or the vital mirroring of such descriptions that would interchange space and time at some horizon of focused unity? Also when we add the fifth shadow shell is this not also considered a negative axis? Just as a linear situation the ratio is 2 to three and thus we begin the concept of Fibonacci symmetry breaking concepts of the physicality or primacy of numbers as a tendency or definite unity.

This would intelligibly look a lot like the extension of our theories of physics to the methods of string theory as it seems all such physics converge to parallel ideas of a common state or even truth of similarity, perhaps beyond. Alternatively, we could imagine and infinite descent of such primes but in truth it is our view of things that suggest that higher dimensional, the fourth, is less complicated than the third. With this in mind it is obvious that we should at least generalize the insight of Riemann a bit insofar as how the dimensions interact and not just one higher or lower and how things beyond four space are to be considered in the five fold symmetries, and that in the mirror where the internal or external directions of a fifth shadow dimension things cannot simply reduce to the Pythagorean theorem as the bottom of curvature and so on...

Is it not obvious in shadow structures of which we debate if they have an inside to which our equations cannot go even if we reduce gravity to it being the center in effect, if there is such a center or pea and it is only a point or a dimensionless ray and not a tension of complexity of higher dimensional material spaces- or that we can entertain we in a complimentary inversion are inside such a black hole as the universe to which in the standard theory we imagine magnetism the only mechanism left that lest such holes consume and transfer momentum- that there can be two distinct black holes in its hyper volume as shadow of which these may not locally be congruent in extent or in a sense even there at all in the effects which certainly suggests acceleration is but another in a series of steps that in a quasifinite way generalizes analogous effects but can vanish in the uncertainty and actuality?

Alternatively, astronomical structures may pulsate, or contract or exchange trapped neutrinos of mixed flavors as generations. Perhaps in general we have to have that intelligible process in the flesh to materialize new atoms although these can evolve in theory in the present shadows.

Beyond this it is still beyond the realm to claim one way or the other creation in the religious sense exceeds all things even if in the universe there are steady state or endless cycles which automatically require further consideration as to their mechanism as if an ultimate expression of everything.

But if God does not exist here this logic breaks down and the physics is in a sense absolute and a certainty that He thereby for we lesser dancers of the dust makes the universe and why it is here all the more real

Between objects of whatever level of intelligible structure, an abstract material and physical encoding in its own right as if in distinct regions of perception in the splitting or breaking of general space defined as coordinates over some brane situation or combinations of superposition (which amounts to the use of generalized quantum terms used here) and in the non-necessity dynamic of the truth or not of technical rules like the law of excluded middle or mathematical deduction (induction) or between objects as an actual dynamic physical process in the span as well as depths of relative symmetries, we can imagine a tension or force between them of several interpretations as to its nature and its scale of strength, its locality or action at a distance or beyond, its instantaneous as a dynamic or beyond as ambiguous teleology as if a flow or rest of a time or entropy concept as a completion or looping by potentially infinite expansion or descent, the exchange on the same level of abstraction as computed by considerations of what seems part of the shadows, by a default of condensing or compression, possibly creation, a wider theory of such relations as mechanism or as statistics that can be calculated by such considerations of the multiplicity of the empty or null elements that clearly defines the continuum in relation to binary powers and the tension too add or subtract as if a spin or motion between them to tap that place we can define as termination or origin in which we find the general invariance expressed within a point or limitless expanse of initial condition, the quasifinite event where something clearly yet in nil uncertainty begins that far from the skirting of absolute laws from shorting to some center as relative to a location as an otherness- an intelligible process on various scales within and around a location with a lifespan or half life equal to all such measure of limitless time as if a continuum, that the count of things considers this binary property of numbers between such subsets hidden or overtly and complimentary such quasifinite continua by the nilpotent and nullpotent spaciously quasi-filled empty elements that still or leaking in diffuse or coherent directions establishes the ground of flat measure as a reference for greater variations from it as an intelligible higher ground in which to continue the distinctions of our conceptual hierarchies of theories of everything.

At this place of what amounts to controversial states of understanding, what makes the wildcard solid yet wild, we have the quasi-logic we experience as if intuition wherein any theory in its tweaking as intelligible can seem to us an absolute truth and totality of unity in the abstract in which humans and sentient things hope to ground their enquirey and learning so to organize their own system of view and reason with some control of possibilities, even if these are at first but a wild dream- that and such uniqueness a door to reasonable stability of their actual existence beyond these parts of the general theory now defined along these lines- that we can still find greater things, know ourselves and wildly engage in the knowing and fellowship with others.
Not to so dream imprisons us in lesser science as technology to which in retrospect we might wonder if future generations so feel the joy and sorrow and crazy as technology to which in retrospect we might wonder if future generations so feel the joy and sorrow and crazy dreams of discovery why we in our time did not try to escape and apply the cures that then will seem so simple when the turnkey merely kept order and the power to deconstruct the diverse and wide society of people put from some span into one space that they should not think for themselves as it is there behavioral nature to so be in a clash of conflicts. Or in our time we drown out the sense of pain or despair at the fear to exist or to not exist the fear, with the light joy of anodynes only too confining after the fact of such addiction that is the facticity of uniqueness above the resolution of structural vacuum informational singularities. Wildness is a craving that we anticipate if not gain by the fulfilling that the world is and remains as interesting as it a mystery.

Information flow between such objects one way or between each other at this metaphysical plane that seems illogically to be blended as one thing yet as intrinsically separate things as the general condition establishes beyond the great reduction to zero or one a wider expressing, time like, of the same patterns after a transfer over time as if a physical situation making the generalization of the values we imagine or impose on a singularity coordinate, a general flow that in the reversal we weigh as greater than half- and this principle applies in turn at least to the structures such vacua of the real or imagined higher dimensional physics and its symmetry that ends or not in the light we so organize at we first behold it then walk upright to say, "Let there be Wisdom."






    Lynn Picknett & Clive Prince The Forbidden Universe

    and compare to TGD

  2. Thanks Ulla,

    My post her was not intended to assert something about a decision as to the nature of God, more than perhaps a metaphor. It could be in some better understanding of the concept, a dynamic pantheism or something like that. In Leo's link he mentions a dynamic idea of geometry beyond the Cartesian of which I also concluded early on- and I see it as a future direction in general as we face the flatland (directly or indirectly as if the face of God we can only half see in say the Jewish mysticism with the tree of life as the ten emanations- or some such intelligible visions of a more centered view, and Newtonian numbers as dimensions that rather resembles the ten or eleven of string theory! After our soul searching twists and turn in these long neglected decades of topology the geometry can be dynamic--- that is TGD.

    I do not know if there was such a conspiracy or when as I am pretty sure I was not there no close to those ideas of history in which we can revise it or resurrect it as we can do to try to retro-engineer by imagination alone what humans used to be thinking for want of any other tool. What we forbid becomes enticing sometimes and again as goes the saying, in quantum theory what is not forbidden could be mandatory... A god of the universe or as the universe in our confusion and learning and unintended consequences of some purpose or proof for or against a god is perhaps the same higher general concept, at least as we can try to perceive or reason it out.


    The PeSla