L. Edgar Otto 17 July, 2012
From some view the universe seems a complete steady state or uniform in the concept of expansion. If it is represented as a Riemann sphere or plane this seems to exhaust the symmetry operations and gives us a solid ground of reality and a relation of irreducibility in our levels that seem multiple of planes in cycles of duality. In such a view it is easy to have the total theory so reduced that the idea of super symmetry or even higher dimensions are illusions and our physics does not progress since the 30's.
In particular, see Lubos recent posting of a video describing these current idea of continuous symmetry that involve the complex numbers. I see in Gibbs a guest reviewed as to intensive questioning of the nature of expansion- this as you have seen is a paradox and one of my concerns too. Dilatation is not technically expansion although in partial solutions to the coherence of general space structures. This, and the current mathematical physics under it, can appear so and can be concrete in the sense that the hierarchy of Euclidean honeycombs (be it a spherical or planar representation) has a natural up or down directionality a the simplest of 5 and ten fold shell structure (multi plane structure) including the symmetry ideas expanded in to the idea of shadows or mirror that is not simply the idea of inversion even up to octonions.
It is interesting that we imagine wobble of say muons or a single electron as evidence for other or parallel universes. We tend to treat these embedded shell systems as if they require a direction and a mystery of the dimensionless value differences as if requiring ultimately separate time and space (even unified in the spacetime sense) wiggle room. This idea is useful but not the general case. In the brane of one universe but multi layered and multi dimensional there is no preferred direction of the duality between honeycomb layers and in a sense a higher wiggle room will explain why flavors may shift or remain somewhat stable in the generations and number of neutral or mirror particles available ot stable structures.
This idea, where an organism is a quason would suggest that our lives are indeed a rising and falling dialectic that in the main is a limited lifespan and limited perspectives of contraction or expansion. But against this is still the idea of stem cells on the micro level, the nano bubbles and their physical processes that as with all things that do not mess with the drive for reproduction can reset the game quasifinitely. Obviously, higher ideas of the new supersymmetric physics of our age in our general statements of design of the universe has undergone a leap of our comprehension and wisdom. Even the unity, even if that a sense of grounding in mystery, of our tribal idea of Gods (the Islamic and Hebrew one the extremes of this idea of a grounding and complete universe in relative space) is not as wide as the concept of our being, universe, or Deity one or many fold, heretofore.
This issue came up in the 60's in the form of the question of the distance of the quasars as near or far, even as a return from a geodesic from beyond our view. So too the issue of how far away the gamma burst in our day, and other concepts that should appeal to foundational philosophy such as in an "expanding universe" as the stars (when the age of the universe or their evolution is made reasonable) we have the idea that the universe has a sort of reference of simultaneity as if an absolute after all or some center or axis in the totality as a reference frame ideal or illusion.
Do we not want to speculate on what is the imaginary time outside of light cones- or how real is the cement of something like the change of rate of c or other constants that may not directly or only in the default average keep a balanced state. For can things not expand together and it not be observable directly in the influences of higher physical properties we may infer into some reduced thus standard theory. Now the main viewpoints, of sensation and a Platonic ideal in a unified physics theory would by definition be a unified philosophy of science and epistemology would it not? Beauty of a theory also has depths to which we in our existing may respond to on even higher levels than what seems the ultimate in the hypercolor of abstractions.
The color matrix above is a sketch involving information contained in the abstract quasic motions and coordinates in binary (zero, one, and various wild cards) of several colors in the hierarchy and of possibilities of their arrangement into these causal or casual trails in loops or open sequences where the concept of multiplication and addition meet as one ground of the logic of operations.
* * * * * * *
Comment to Lubos: Interesting metaphor but the standard model is more like sleeping with a girl that is underage in every possible way... that or on the other end of the time scale reaching the menopause of theory all is a little chaos in the premature Higgsterectomy...
The simple model in the video a few of his posts back should ask what happens when the Riemann sphere intersects and passes through the plane (brane) representation. Perhaps ultimately, as if the distance from the plane is at infinity (or some constant Zeno like) the universe can be seen as steady overall again but for the real and working world these questions of the singularity of the Null polytope should not be dismissed. The nature of what is hyperbolic or elliptical, may inverse as the sphere slices at a disc in a higher symmetrical or nonnecessary directional view in that higher symmetry representation.
Let us also imagine the scale of things, dimension free, is that of gazing into a depth involving the golden proportion (illustration to be posted later) where at each level in the ambiguity of null direction the arrangement of the number of objects as a similar or identical set is congruently equivalent in scale.
From a creative philosophy of science view we are outside the bell curve in matters of expertise and native intelligence of which these mathematical ideas suggest a leap by which we as social and individual reach a higher state of awareness and consciousness to which those who merely question the nature of personal choice and identity, of who has the merit or not in such a closed but intelligible lesser system- appear to those passed to the next state of wisdom as petty larva fighting over some claim to superiority or facts to which it is not even comical to those who would do original and fundamental foundational research and theory. Part of the consequences of such work is to better understand our subjective nature and its great new possibilities as well as those facts of existence we have to accept as limitation of the real. I vaguely call this in my mythology, that is the sensitive to the poetic view, the fifth level, Spheredream, integration of the soul or self over time... and then?
If there is a reason and there is concrete evidence of the limit of action along the holographic and unitary view of the Higgs as to why it had to exist (what are tensors really in the context of singularities, what grounds the reality of the particles distinguished in the context and the context?) it cannot be simply seen from a partial view of the vertex methods and that give the span of a wider picture in the cement of detail, nor can say the inclusion of a distinct metal like Al in concrete not result in a greater concept of volume with its real air bubbles so as to make vast objects appear heavy but are rather light weight in the landscape. Again it is not argument from a unified (sphere like one God pantheism) that is at issue but how we limit the range of the topology even with the balance of absolute random chance beyond the implied limits of the bell curve of that which relates to the constancy, changes, and mathematical operations of light and other things to which we outline with our ideas of vectors as if to build it up from one unique vertext to infinity of which we know is the interchange of zero and infinity as a point on at least the simple model of Riemanns sphere.
* * * * *