Monday, December 3, 2012

Quasic Sub-Manifold Stereonometry and the Time or Tachyon-like Dimensions

Quasic Sub-Manifold Stereonometry and
the Time or Tachyon-like Dimensions

L. Edgar Otto   03 December, 2012

Essential illustration added... and too it I put a note on an article I cannot access today on newscientist where someone says its about time we answered the question of origins from something or nothingness of the universe... still, this was the thrust of the theories investigated and for our day it seems good enough... also an article that the evolutionary trade off (science daily) of multi copies of genes that is the price we pay for greater intelligence but is the same source as our mental illnesses.  How do we organize and understand our multi layered selves while the existing at least?  My point is that from a little higher perspective where we do not explain things based on say the relation of something or nothingness as say mirrors and chirality or even the joint action of things that in the action make the greater part of our vague and poetic idea we call mass, it computes also, is that the question as we have framed it is not essential on the face of it in order to make progress in new physics for it should not be a closed question nor one that vanishes or depends on fluctuations as its scientific grounds of laws and predictions only.

* * *

Ulla pointed out on facebook an article in Scientific American that was titled "What is Dimension..."  Of course this has been my long term concern and in fact even Cantor did not succeed in defining them rigorously.  Their answer was the natural and the fractal types of dimension.  For me, considering the aspects of unfolding things that can be done in different ways long ago this translates into the two major physics, the continous classical and relativistic on one hand and the discrete classical and quantum on the other hand (Ql and Qm, to which I added a more unified yet separate case Qs for quasicity).

I downloaded Pitkanen's post of yesterday where he discusses the evolution of his theory.  I find it a very deep intellectual effort, one that strives to work within known traditions, one that breaks into ongoing and dawning ideas with theoretical as well as experimental evaluation of errors and directions.  While our viewpoints may disagree from one of the prime physics perspectives at some points to which we share independently so many similar conclusions being aware of the current state of the problem under consideration- this a rational and scientific honesty that grouds our sound intuitions although it is quite a climb to discover such things synthetically and hard to give meaning to them if pure calculation analytically.

My points of disagreement are foundational or philosophic to which I may question such things as the only and not the more unified theory such as Noether's what amounts to a teleology of symmetry and energy or Poincare in his assumptions about topology.  Being more prone to the acceptance of all inputs concerning methods of enquiry I do not make assertions lightly as to what is a corrective error of theory or intuition at the surface of some other theoretical framework. 

All too often (even though we all can feel our own evolving intuitions sound in the direction of form if not the stumbling blocks of error for in general the dynamic gives new direction and freedoms of possibilities in the compass of self reflection criticism that leaves behind the empty shadows that new discoveries may arise) even from imperfect application of concepts based on perhaps (and our language while informal should tend to be carefully used or intelligible) misinformation.

We may stumble on the right answers as if in the sub-manifold at the speed of light as metaphysical awareness in a classical manner we appeal to a subconscious process of calculation.  The right answer from the wrong reasons of which we may not be aware there is a problem and before falling off the cliff into our self evaluation despite the traditional paradigms we depend also on the less clear and wrong way these traditions apply so as to limit our taking off into real flight and Jesus Bolt logic in our gliding.  The quantum theory for me is a little too confining when we enter the wider world of dimensional theory.  It is not clear for example where the fractalist ideas meet that of quantum theory in the complex space world of fractional dimensions.

From my informal view what after all theoreticians are looking for and thus what they cannot presently understand explicitly is the idea we find the grounding if not the hints of new concepts that evolves to the quasic theory and then onto more general things I and Penrose dub the Omnium.

Formal education is as much an impediment as the refining of a language of better symbol design and the design of our logic systems where we reasonably feel these are viable.  What I do not understand about TGD is the nuts and bolts of the arithmetical calculations which seems to be universally accepted as a given, an axiom, something which the scientist as engineer strives to affirm a theory as a fact of the consensus found for a dogma.  Consider the endless strife over the evolutionist and Creationist positions.

But I do not see the conceptual formulas as more than synthetic of Penrose either, where Pitkanen puts such equations in his essay it looks much like the formal way the mathematical physics is done but not in a direct symbols but the use of different symbols and the same patterns used to mean different things- or even for Penrose other exotic and simplified notations suggestive of underlying process as simple as the Feynman diagrams to which the tradition and learning gives us the context as well the descriptive dynamics imposed by them in the structural calculation.

So I present today, discovered half in mathematical recreation only to which there are many fine new games to be found for those so inclined, not seeking these things before the fact yet they do precipitate out of the language and pictures, a better way to explain such arithmetical calculations to myself analytically.

What I have come to realize, and what this has been leading up to as I stay close to the logic of Paint and global or local symmetries is that while doing this encoding and drawing I have found it a great form of pattern recognition as if the quasic plane is a higher form of a colorized calculator.  It is quite likely that humanity over the ages has used these primitive petroglyphs to express things concerning the mathematics of symmetry and supersymmetry.  The fylfot for example suggestive of motion such as with the seasons subtracted from the 64 I Ching hexagrams of lines 384 (that group of four space orthogon rotations and inversions).  This thought to be perhaps the symbol of an ear as well, that is we hear the inner voice of the pinwheels and axes.

All of this researched as well after the alphanumeric age awakens over the world in the form of some enduring storage of energy and information over the then recorded history.  This is true if we imagine new existence possible as well as the vanishing of old existence that some say makes it possible in all such necessary views of life as a the game.  Thus good and evil, albeit these relative from a philosophic view, play the role of methods to analyze our reality in terms of what is the good and evil, the neutral, and guaranteed conflicts. 

In the West as well as the East we find this preoccupation with at least four fold symmetry.  Things can be centered or progressively moving outward with grounding ideas of what is the count in natural dimensions as to the superimposing even or odd the structural center as 0 or 2, or 1, of Euler's equation of the subcells of graphs.  So on one hand we have in the three space (which by the way quasics in a sort of generation idea in string theory does explain the deeper nature of three space and why nature needs more and that one in particular of the lower dimensional levels- see this concern in Pitkanen's paper also) the variation of the four winds or the cross- these become variants such as the hammer of Thor or the fylfot to which in our time we may neutralize the negative association with that of the Third Reich but not remove its senses.  I will say this, it is clear that in the three space perspective the swastika and the shield of David can fall out of the same patterns as to what is the centering and evenness. 

But in such Judaeo-Christian ideas of the unification of such physics as in the considering of mult-sheet geometry (decidedly not of the Riemann variety yet part of a more unified or TOE-like TGD system) that if in the sense of a 2D surface as if a brane on the grounding level, that is a quasic grid and plane, we justify also the Islamic-Christian conflict of geometries where the projection (mother-child, Father-Son) is reduced abstractly to issues of tiles and the crystal forms.  So the first unification of the three physics does seem to arise in the terminology of the People of the Book, but this is not the only tradition to so discover the way philosophically.

In this looking back at my own work (and how can such ultimately simple things be worth the spending a lifetime and the sacrifice if not some deep election and insight that may be real or not for anything we desire to become or do?) In the everyday business of living people are interested in the origins and the cosmos no matter how low or high in place the status of their day jobs.  We dwell and buy and sell dreams as much as any reality or myth or tolerance of disasters as our cost and tithe of living.) Pitkanen in the article in the interest of communication to Hammed so looking back at the leaps and evolution in his work as a cue to reply with the same, I too realize some things that rather than undermine the Einstein like program is the understanding that it (as well as Feynman's diagrams) endure in higher forms of generalization. 

So too Lubos in his usefulness in some future of the string theories.  For what I propose had a moment of epiphany of the sixteen places in the 4 space matrix of his ten as assumed at rest and possibly interpreted as gravitational and the six as electromagnetic thus a magic square unification of which today this array is to the higher symmetries as perhaps we regard the squares and square roots of multilayers intelligibly connected to classical mouths or wormholes or not, as we regard the diagonals of matrices so to show the forces and physics.

With the caution of Liebnizean infinitesimals as an antidote or different view of things I learned at the same time this epiphany extend the scope of my theory again from the childhood consideration of all the stars mapped on a celestial globe although if hung from a rope going on forever we can hold up the moon from one view.

These then in review of essential steps (and really we impose on our discoveries, especially the generalization of the number line and extensions of number definitions a sifting and sorting of order not necessarily in chronological sequence.) I find this one of key significance:

*1 Establish an intelligible general ordering and magic loops if any.

These controversial ideas (what is magical thinking or not as in the universal topology of Rene Thom applied to life sciences and human behavior and so on) do seem to descriptively and synthetically discuss the pattern recognition programs in terms of what system of topology and general geometry is embedded in what other different or similar system.

So from the artful or poetic informal view I propose (and to some people the gloss of exotic symbols may detour them from the grasping of the beauty of the whole much as equations in a text can loose many readers from a single one) is not really necessary, an aid to memory perhaps, but like a poem a cultural or individual thing, tradition.  Not only do we have to study on our own we have to practice a lot to get the band in sync that the music integrates them in their perfections and creative improvisations more or less successfully.

Yet from the purely artistic view this question of what sort of geometries or dimensions are "embedded" in others is intelligibly suggested as just art at least.  That is we can take the four fold or five fold symmetries and distinguish that contained surrounded by various zones of what also separates them.  And so on to higher spaces...

The penni symbols of Finland or the Slavic one as an ancient sign said then to contain in themselves the grid or to contain the embedded grid.  In particular we find the Sudoku as Lubos claims it a puzzle founded in Czechoslovakia and later adopted by the Japanese surrounded by higher grids of the 10 , 11 , or 12 dimensional systems - which by the Knight move theories can go across all the odd dimensions this way and form a duality within a given contained set of systems between them on the same level.  Perturbations a the ground of things as a view is not quite deep enough as a system to build geometry upon nor physics explicitly for the conceptual leap to a well ordered non-linearity trumps the trivial cases.

This idea and that of the many-fold sheets can be incompatible in the applications and conceptions.  It follows also we have to extend the Diracian like algebras.  It follows also that of the Otto-Conway embedded and extended matrices of color matching. It follows also a more general stance to the nature of discrete numbers and classes of numbers themselves and what are their nilpotent shadows of which it seems to me an error (yet not as we may apply the in the real sense as in TGD as substances) to make claims yet not see the reality of such supersymmetries or some physical corpuscle to explain away anomalies of dark matter.

For those enamored with puzzles such a the Sudoku in my use of the abstract suite symbols what sort of interesting puzzles may we find by assigning them specific integers that add uniquely in different ways across the two directions of the quasic grid?  What other interesting linear balances of them when we represent these in other ways, other dimensions or between dimensions and can this be used to solve better or even program what for us seems easy but is long winded and hard for present computers of pattern recognition?

* * * * * * * 

Interestingly, many continue outside academia as if to compensate for some misstep in time, or perhaps dropping out... and these exceptions may be driven once the obstacle to a true love is there to keep things in motion or to find vindicate the ability to reach the goal redoubled.  It seems the very best, once in a decade of students are too far from the mainstream and for some reason not as likely to achieve a place in the world that the yearly scholars who excel do by the tenacity and trudging along. Or some rise Jungian like above the fray and somehow stay alive yet invisible in the process.  

We alternative townie in doing philosophy and physics from our armchairs or in the streets, the hungry poet, know of fear a world were we may loose this desire for we have glimpsed the chalice or goal and know what it can mean- this is the truer measure of genius I suspect as perhaps those of us who vanish no matter the quality of our work or the effort- those who also criticize the exotic surprises and thus find the world and themselves too fixed and embedded in restraints fearing perhaps atrophy or awakening to pointless existing or worse- becoming obsolete to what need not have been a decaying world.  It does no good to throw good money after bad, that is a few states here will extend the school year 300 hrs to see if it makes a difference in our children keeping up with foreign ones- well, this is quite different from the Finnish system- oh we do not learn from history I suppose...  

Let us not get sick over our fading assets, but let us also never give up the idealism hidden in our expectations. I can comfort another, commensurate, decry and say desist to those who test them to the point of breaking- and we will find a way that our small voices they put to the side of editorials branding the role in the essential free speech exception will make a difference after all.  All you gods of theory as the reach to some Olympia, we look around in the best of times and worst of times and find our king among the gypsy dancers and the hunchbacks- we should be careful whom we pour down through the gargoyles the hot oil in defense of the cathedral.

* * * * * * *
In response to reading Pikanen's post attempt to awaken us to the TGD vision:

This post is an excellent attempt at trying to communicate these frontier ideas.  I downloaded it in hard copy of 8 pages and read it carefully.  If you are interested in my impressions where we may share some evolution in our approaches I have stated it there.

Professors, like Hoyle when I had tea with him- well he said students are always coming to him to comment on their theories-of course we talked about other things, down to earth and I mentioned supporting him briefly if I did not have other directions but certainly not the new Big Bang cosmology.

Still feel free to comment on my system if I have in discussing yours made it a little easier- then you can get down to maybe something more useful from my own.

I mentioned the Scientific American article ulla had posted in facebook- there was a time when I did break from just those two ways to apply and see dimensions and it was an awakening moment.

I think your more careful formal approach is much more difficult than freely allowing the intuition and poetic magic to flow.

But where you say you cannot understand some things even in the asking clearly that is an achievement and perhaps some things in the context were not an error (holographic stuff and surfaces for example) but the context is such an error.

As to why the advanced culture of Finnish science does not support your project that is like some form of economics it would take another Gauss to begin to phantom although I made meager suggestions.

All in all a great posting, thank you.  I do wish I had the training in the exponential type notations but perhaps they slow us down.

The Pe Sla

* * * * * 

No comments:

Post a Comment