Saturday, July 14, 2012
Holding Pattern Torus Trails for Kahler M theories
Extremes and Integration Beyond the Holding Pattern Torus Trails for Kahler M theories
L. Edgar Otto 14 July, 2012
Compactification is intelligible in its own phenomenology and in itself. It is obvious that the definitions involved may be examined in the light of my and others more foundational considerations of numbers. The theory is close to other similar theories which hint at a wider span of math and physics and a wider unification of the wisdom we have achieved.
Is this not, at least from the experimental verification a discovery worthy of such theoretical heights of human thought regardless of the specific details of the measure or processes of a discovered particle- and yes these can be wrong in the details- but if such particles are confirmed and we desire the claims for Nobel work would not the type of particles suggested by the methodology of some of our blogger not be as worthy of such a prize? In the moral spirit of it does it matter if the calculations by Lubos seem off target and he thinks the prize should go to others who may have predicted some such material value? Is it not possible although I cannot see clearly the relation to the general space of the p-adic that Pitkanen so made the prediction and in a way that could one day be sustained and not refuted?
And my quasons, I mean the compactification idea is complimentary to my condensing (not as in the condensate of early mathematical physics centered around Einstein) so today's theme is needed to explain the isolation of possibilities in color space (that deals also with absolutes and singularities) in the trail loops in the kernel and higher dimensional relationships of at least the first level of 120 atomic elements. (would it be so absurd to extend this idea to the ten and 14 shell levels once we have such higher color space?) Surely whatever the higher Higglets are these speak for a process for a whole new view of symmetry. It is as if to understand in four space as if we have six arms and then abstract again to structures even if beyond the idea of ten broken or compacted dimensions we cannot extend in the physical that we would have more arms so to speak when ten exhausted the general theory of those possible dimensions.
* * * * *
* * * * *