Thursday, June 28, 2012

Quasomnium (Qsom) and Atom Structure

Quasomnium (Qsom) and Atom Structure

L. Edgar Otto   27 June, 2012  11:56:57 PM

In view of these quasicity of principles involved in regard to the elements we ask if we can apply them to a new form of the periodic table.  I find this new problem difficult so as to put them in a quasic grid similar to that for the gene code.  But one key solution occurs to me beyond the haunting similarity to string or other theories such a my earlier attempt to take the Z number of the elements in a sort of quasic and natural order beginning with H.  This seems to show some properties of which the theories of Pitkanen on numbers hints at.  Also involved is all the consideration of group theory and its abstract algebra.  How do I distinguish my own take on fundamental numbers where they apply?  I almost wish I had collaboration on this problem which causes me to doubt today the value of my explorations.  But this shows a sort of progress of our intuitions facing the foundations to be known.  I, however, designate this with my -om suffix as a philosphic continuum rather than a synthesis of ideas from some other approach.  Certainly, the problem is one of expanding or generalizing the new physics.  I find it significant the alternative theoreticians are most helpful in the fresh look for a more unifying view of that level of physics.

*In the quasi-finite universe we echo on all levels the idea that the laws of physics across the span of known  and accessible space is or averages as uniform.  But keep in mind this may not be a necessary condition if or theories of everything find wider depth among the uniformity.

*It is clear that there are layers but of unclear number or alternatively a series of shells in a creative and quason like object akin to periodic table models that use the notation with the noble gasses as the kernel for successive shell filling.  The insight is that we risk the general view for the sake of discussion or clarity along some model path  choice[  as to the rigidity of a theory or object of contemplation as is the idea of natural dimensions.  I quite imagined that all the higher dimensional matter would collect into the quasar objects much like some imagine extra dimensions is a matter of compactification.  But I see this needs not be the case nor that the quasic space is in its own sense limited as rigid. 

The idea as space can be a sea of quason singularities across dimensions on any scale dimensionless or not from one theoretical view suggests a sort of hierarchy of such kernels or planes (of which we gain little toward this theory to assume things like branes or even stars can be thought to be charged.)  For to the electron configuration if we call it three space harmonics then the nucleus would be a higher dimension and its sub components higher still, and the principle is that these interact within the quason and between quasons.  Such analogies, while intelligible and even thought a super reductionism of physical principles nevertheless preserves its quasifinite aspects, a natural quantization that as groups also interact the idea of all continuous phenomena only will not necessarily lead to a unique unified view, but partial ones are also in the mix of the mathematics.

*In the general quasomnium it is crucial to ask a principle more relaxed that the hard logical choices as the axiom to one that asks can we choose elements from a quasifinite set.  At what actual place or time can we say a choice is made in a process of developing mechanism if that choice is more than the beginning of something at the foundations or the limit of something as the end in a wider span of what we say is the idea of an atom or quason.  I imagine as a sort of neutral relativity of the abstract particles and the count of them as if imaginary or even dark particles, quasi-bosons perhaps as a vague term, to be part of the count in which case in the general symmetry these rather than time like or space like can be considered particle like (of course also wave like).  The numbers come up in standard models in physical equations such as 480 and so on, and of course the idea of Euclidean ten or Einsteinian four space.  Yet the issue even here is but the next higher dimension, let us style it as the fourth, to reach deeper into the symmetries of the nucleus (greater than 248 of binary 256) is in a sense to deal beyond our long time questions of the nature of the sub-nuclear forces.

*In a sense the three forces are already unified and the place or processes of a choice, and one that progresses and endures and is unique to a general aggregate actuality of view depends on he quasic idea that what in the maximum change of binary coordinates would appear at rest in one dimension may be an abstract motion one in the dimension higher.  To add gravity or other forces seems to me a little beyond the dimensions we now investigate or that in a sense it is identical in matter-gravity equivalence on the same general dimensional span of which we should not expect vast differences of these values if viewed in the higher dimensions, this is not a necessary state of things and on a general level also may be accessed by statistical methods provided we keep the general quasifinite principles in mind.  In effect we redefine force and the underlying geometry in these quasic (alternatively TGD) models and phenomenology.

* * * * *

For one thing the 2 electron shell or a single electron to the noble gas atom of the period over the Z span accounts for 16 atoms of which we can make an analogy (that the chemistry evolves at least within the structure if not the atoms themselves) and this makes a quasic grid as if our DNA code once had a two base system and the several kernels or dimensional membranes continue to the 64 then 256 levels of inter-dimensions.  We can have sets of 64 of those between this all or nothing quasic motion filling states by electrons.  Also the 36 comes up and several considerations to make a multilevel quasic count of the real or perhaps neutral or dark complimentary atoms (and I do not mean something as simple as the essential quantum assumption that there are complex space counterparts that essentally adds a perpendicular direction as in y iy x in three space.

In Pitkanen we would expect by a simple quasic ordering code the prime or phi related number 89 as an element to have some relation to the general atomic structure, for example, as well as the exceptions to the periods that have atoms essentially radiation.  It is remotely possible that some of the 120 on deeper mirror levels are not observable, a sort of reverse island of stability akin to some quason like particles.

But from the center it seems the bonding and dark bonds are only properties to observed in the main on the surface of the period in question.  This raises interesting questions on the nature of the structures of government as decisive and evolving in a structure or not as is the case today for the USA issue on health care, at least in the short term.  The court holds that we can tax people differently while not discouraging interstate commence.  Mandates have been called a long time as efficient, mandates that solves the indecisiveness of democracy when the checks and balances exceed their own coherence and people believe some theory of doom and gloom or scarcities (false ones usually the short term case).  From the quasic view as the nodes of information each period has its value in an economic sense.  Hydrogen, and the so called Carbon tax which is apparently now constitutional.  Beyond that is the tax of the precious metals themselves... and so on.  Each element could be construed in the evolving of a social and political system as a tax node.  In the process the three way troika quark like complication suggests that without better understanding (XeF4 bonding in inter-dimensionality should not be a surprise) our medicine with rising market costs with degrees of freedom or not will not get to the medical issue at hand- what we can save and who we can save by fundamental cures and not gross level addressing the symptoms mostly in our cut, burn, and poison expediency as to the traditional way to do medicine that does not know it can break what it cannot see to be fixed to so do harm. We would do well to show more respect for fundamental science.

* * * * * * *

No comments:

Post a Comment