Tuesday, December 18, 2012
The People's Particle Physics (A Packet for Yuri)
The People's Particle Physics (A Packet for Yuri)
L. Edgar Otto 18 December, 2012
I am pleased with the links to Yuri's pdf publications, the logic of it that strives for unification, the documentation of the spirit of how we think about such things as to the focusing of general ideas into intuitive models, the objective concern with ratios like the golden section as applies to the use and methods of mathematics, the conclusions with restriction of the grounds and scope of the discourse, and the verification that in the saints of established physics they cannot understand the simplicity and conjectures of the new order to which what we all have followed down to a clear path at least asks the questions at the foundations, at the frontiers the implications are hard to see in common sense and simplicity.
It is hoped that these illustrations, chosen from many variations and more geometrical (I need to learn more or find a good algebraist to actually be convinced of how to apply what for Yuri is the standard use of analyses and so on... So try to see what I am doing there as well as with arithmetic, check and forgive my typos or posting errors if any. In the great speculation on the Omnium I am in the camp that sees science as this attempt toward a unification, but not that view only to so define it,) may be of use to my fellow theoretician bloggers in their own search to reach the heart of physics and numbers that I add some order to the mix and hint of more things to come with inductive certainty so that in our thoughts that consider the same things like the Fibonacci numbers the details of the idea can be more explicitly presented to the world.
As some have imagined from simple and familiar models, this matter of taste as to the emphasis of one among diverse world views toward science that precipitates out our models in the end, a black hole can be fluid as well as solid in its physics as reported in newscientist com yesterday, so we may look back on intermediate models which are after all the starting grounds as scientific systems we have in this alternative view already and always have that in the desire for progression unto the new these are invisible and forgotten, even sometimes justly so to the dust bins of philosophy. One of the joys of the burdens and freedom of enquiry into the physics and mathematics is the finding of clarity in our thinking- clarity that does not consume us or isolate us from the wholeness we humans find in passion.
Wittgenstein himself had such a fulcrum or change of view over his path of work and lifetime, and this turned upon the idea of what is the representations in the representations like in pictures in pictures of art. But in the confusion of these times despite our great wisdom we should not have a civil war between the holographic and fractal views where both may contribute to the unity and what of principle may for all practical purposes be the possibility of a necessary fact. So we go back somewhat to the model of particles as if stacked bricks and tweak the value of the mortar between them.
Yes, the search for symmetry is a general direction and goal of physics- as well the irreversible and directed changes of state in the quasi-looping everlasting Omnium. But these are as much radial as parallel , and can be systems bilateral, to which in the descent to facts we make finer and wider distinctions including the quasifinite view of isolated or connected forms of universe- so mathematics can apply in the unbiased but not necessarily indifferent Nature to which we try to explain where and how our equations keep balance.
One quote in Yuri's paper I object to- that idea that further generations were "as if the experimenter and theoretical designer, God (whatever his relevant or not relevant nature to science existing or not) made the further generations of particles unimportant so they left over in the dustbin of Creation... This is too reductionist for my tastes- I react with perhaps an equally over imaginative and romantic view, that these higher principles of symmetry much as the vanishing ghosts of departed quantities and accelerations of accelerations are not to be characterized by us if nature does not as some absolute zero grounding. The generations are everything. To deny this, as well the better grounding of biology (for example we could have foreseen instead of stumbling on the new form of cell replication and the influences to an organism if on the chromosome level there are multiples as in some cancers.) The general universe is a beautiful and not redundantly complicated in its design, nor should we reduce it to a plane (brane) or sphere to simplify its properties as physics. To deny this is not only a disservice to the source of Design but to ourselves as well if we are to practice the reality and faith of science.
But my quasic planes are hard to see, and subtle, especially the pattern differences of what as vectors or pixels is the content of the grid and the grid itself (my epsilon-delta concept).
I suspect the best of Yuri's work is yet to come...
* * * * * * *