**Philosophy of the I-brane**

**21 January, 2013**

*L. Edgar Otto*
We tend to reject
interpretations that are ambiguous in the ultimate context of a non-necessarily
characterized space. In particular the distinction between wave and particles
if reasoned to a more general context or analyzed to the explicit contents are not
seen foundational in depth locally or generally as a unified synthesis qualitative, fundamentally different in the quantum world than say our
experience of classical physics. The
same interpretation applies to ideas of space as physical effects of reference
frames related to what we assume a matter component or gravity component or not
if we unify to a more foundational system be this an objective or subjective
basis of phenomenon (a general phaneron that in effect is multibrane
spacetime).

As we gaze into the
I-brane (I for illusion as in illusion of perception) the primacy of integers
slice or fall into the cracks of the default triviality equations where the
structures of an algebra would otherwise extend to the generation of primes (in
the factorial space) otherwise as part of such space for a complete sequence
induced. The number 41 is the usual case
given as significant. This does not mean
we cannot find a general algebraic or geometric theory, nor that arithmetic is
ambiguous or unintelligible in its logic of consistencies.

In the span or
compass of the smaller primes this atomization happens in the pair 17 squared
and 19 squared where by theory as well as construction some intuitively limit
the division of angles in spiraling for the four space objects become
quasifinite or discrete and stand out in what is a general, technically
crystalline, array of all the dimensions.
The properties of irrational space as in the golden ratios can act
independently from prime constructions as if irrational space may be divided
within a conductibility of dimension into distinctions of space made as if a
concrete choice- as so such choices or working and evolving ambiguities occur
in the omnium of general nature. But
this may become part of a more general nonnecessary theory.

The effect of our
gazing from our independent game of orientation is to perceive the I-brane as
if a spherical mirror surface, thus the idea of imagining spheres in nature in
an I-brane quasic reduction wherein it is analogous to a light cone of
imaginary number space with the vertical invariants or event influence out from
us and some spacetime volume as in the hyperbolic case. Limitations or slices, or our ideas of
partial derivatives are a natural property (flange) of what is a more general
space as if we can generalize some Alph transfinite number as parabolic or flat
where we imagine such an extension into natural Euclidean dimensions.

Whether other minds
(what we project out from us to infer at least one other center) exist or not
in this general context is transitive over such entities. The null or zero wild cards as expanding or
linear powers or not may act as if a constant.

Mass then, (as well
our ideas of force as inertial and gravity) as prime mathematical physics in its
basis from a quasifinite view, odd or evenly neutral, is a method of
understanding and unification deeper than arithmetic. In this context we may derive or define
methods and interpretations of the physics.
We may organize beyond our perceptions the forms of information or
meaning where there is general unity in our experience of this world.

We have several
methods or approaches to try in dealing with information, shapes and colors, kinematics and so on, all of these in resolving the approaches of Kant-Locke
vs that of Leibniz as inquiring systems to find a certain truth, evaluate an approach of such stings of
ideas and numbers- all of which seems to need the inquirer as part of system foundation-ally- not just a matter of if or how, in a world that cannot be
reduced to simple exercises in logic where induction or deduction in general
does not hold as the only possible system distinction or where what follows or
is preceded by what is not grounded necessarily in strictly defined causality
(that is the core philosophy lacks a teleology or a way to compare clock time
ultimately with high accuracy as experimental proof.

Of these methods the
idea of matrices has been very fruitful or any theory that may translate into
sequences as in game strategies. While
it seems true, the inquirer may not understand things as of higher qualitative
nature mysterious so more so than a classical formulation but a ground such as
said of the quantum formulation, this is not the phenomenon of mystery on that
level of physics, it is a further generalization to which we may discover and
eventually understand as experimenters and inquirers, as sentient beings, that
cannot be a matter of twisting matrices around to describe particle nature
against the vague background. This could
be the classical and logically quasic plane of similarities and differences
that goes deeper into the null that what on the surface we see over the logic
within itself.

The argument here of
crossed eyes and that part of the geometrical approach my merge the right or
left entities of the visual field and can do so in the matrix manner- in which
case, as in at 45 degrees, we may add one to the array in question in such a
way that the factoring of what is seen is a different representational count of
objects. For example to 10x7 we may add
7 for 77 yet on the diagonals we may see the array as 56 or 7x7 plus the 7 equaling 56. As these different
perceptions may be considered different together paradoxically in our inquiry
into this Ibrane illusion space we nevertheless find 21 as part of the Pascal
triangular level of dimensions of the system.

Clearly in just the
abstract count we can see the higher dimension as effects for the mind's
eye. And in the seeing what precipitates
out as intelligible and sound in an inquirer is the truth of a system or
method- by these standards the previous post on Athenation seems a door into
this principle where we risk the board of our n- or one player game. But I have not tried this for decades... I
mean it has been clear to me it is not just about individuals, even species in
sentient perception for some deep influences can be very powerful influencing
the world on some level although very rare.
But just the logic or coincidence of this even higher level of mystery
should be seen as but one among a sea of pointless choices that on that level
makes little difference philosophically.

God in this respect does not an intervene as the executive designer, for we are not to believe that
such an intelligent and powerful being, at least as creative as would be that
realm of vacuum, for if anything like us He would soon grow tried of moving
meaningless objects indefinitely around such an infinite room. He must be more then, perhaps so are we.

* * * * * * *

## No comments:

## Post a Comment