Saturday, January 26, 2013
The Chbrane Space Insight
The Chbrane Space Insight
L. Edgar Otto 26 January, 2013
Shapes or patterns, as in the creation of fantasy literature, and exotic names, have a parallel to what we may consider as logical, necessary thus objectively independent in stance, and real used in computation and theories of natural philosophy.
As the Aegyptians had wheels and axle toys long before carts replaced the looping of rolling logs I asked what toy may be around our culture that has future or novel uses. I chose the Soma cube of Piet Hein who got the idea, so says the instruction manual that came with the plastic set of cubes, while attending a lecture in quantum mechanics. Conway studied the solutions this puzzle extensively, enumerating the possibilities.
Interestingly, the research coloring these, the T tetracube piece his green, persisted a long time in the memory of those so coloring them- this confirms the idea of a learned synaethasia in recent sci mag articles showing a connection between such association of colors with children playing with refrigerator magnet colored plastic letters (of diverse colors). I find it interesting also that in the actual testimony of natural synaethesia these colors are not say in any particular choice of ordering. Feynman remarks that he saw his formulas in color- that actually we see such things in both colors as if these a parallel abstraction of dimensions. Why would we not match this phenomenon with that of shape space as seems evident in the brain regions?
I chose a more spectral coloring and in particular the third soma piece was orange rather than green, green and blue although close instructive in chiral symmetry with inversions for the colored Soma cube. The translation from Conway's to my (eventually tempered system in analogy to music, the analogies important also for good fantasy writing) gave me no end of problems slowing down some comparisons between our structural results from the shear effort of repeated writing- I understand Conway feeling the need to abandon such puzzles as works on models or just paper).
Still, I felt something may be lost without the sense of touch, the physical act of pen and paper, even bleeding ink from the raindrops writing outside in the open. I do not know if this synaethesia was useful and influenced some of Feynman's ideas on the physics, but fantasy or real, that is what may seem mystical to some in that physics, but I suspect it so. In any case I think Conway must understand this area of interest for he has books using color code to make clearer the presentation of things like number theory after all. I remark also that the other puzzle was closely related, those like the Rubik's cube and of course the synergetics ideas of Bucky Fuller which in a sense these abstract shapes are still regarded by some as mystical as Kepler's Platonic solid arrangement of the solar system (in mere three space).
Ch or C-brane also in the tradition of what M means in proper brane theory as a mystery can also stand for Coxeter who in the Euclidean n-dimensional pattern recognition understood the role of reflection in arrays of volume sections of a cube as a general space filling principle with its extensions and restrictions of symmetry and count for the regular polytopes.
I present a crude illustration in my trying to draw these space structures on a plane symmetrically, finding over and over again diapering patterns in these simple paint program logical operations. Again, I offer a sketch of a drawing far from perfect as it has to find cube drawings that respect what happens when we reverse a parallelogram that while in C space of a higher natural dimension there may be no distinction of the right or left handedness of it all with inversions. Yet on the brane or plane level this very distinction is foundational as if leading to spiral symmetry that persists to one handedness as if the shells of snails mutating are the usual example of the branching of species.
Whether in our models of space or in the logic of our stances and methods we may say there is fallacy in the merging of disciplines is itself open to a nonnecessary or intuitive stance to our thoughts, perceptions, and observations. Can a computer system generate more and easily recognize such patterns evolving them in itself or of such machines with no assumed given executive a priori of an emergent or transcendental substance and not be a lesser creation as a program only of fantasy?
Is this not the case then that in such fantasy true to its inner logic so that it can remain intelligible and predict outcomes as if into the future of the scenarios, one principle of the real as a part of scientific method, even if we as executive act as a human intervention in a program to try to let it create and think for itself?
Now I never found out what was in the lecture Heins saw that suggested to him to make this puzzle but I know he had done more than recreational work in mathematics as in the absolute curves of circle like generalizations. It is clear to me also in this Coxeter insight of space there there is a tablecloth fractal like coincidentally or recursive hierarchy of such cubes within cubes. As this considers the electron configuration space of atoms we again find a general number where we may in the squaring of the 240 solutions and its position in some counting algebra with other operation counts that we find again the touchstone number 136 of the fine structure constant.
Such interrelations may have specific nodes and branching of cube patterns yet these may be seen from a more general stance as a possibility of stacking them together in space that is grounded on what may seem an artifact or coincidence of numbers when the parts can extend or compress (compact, condense) into their own rest dimensions. Again, this may mix the metaphors of inquiring systems between disciplines where there are deep parallels or deep unities in a different language- that is perhaps some total artificial language of which the style we learn and name things only hints of it as a fantastic symbolism. We may debate where these are fallacies as logical arguments so to sell an idea or just grounded in matters of self deception.
* * * * * * *
Logging on just now I notice Pitkanen has tried to see this question of gamma rays from pulsars in the light of TGD- of which this is in the diagram I posted yesterday on such general structures, and relates to the chbran theme here today. After all both of us started with more foundational ideas of what a particle is, at least in this sort of shell model in which as quasifinite the space may be in a sense quantized- that is "quasized" in the dimensions of discourse and context. We note also the "lines of such force exhibits the same general properties of the new physics.
I evolve crudely to write and yet to accompany my work with illustrations which used to be maining 80 by 80 pixels on the philosophychat forum days. I would like to at least draw a movie from just the placing of pixels if that is ever possible- my experiments to make a video as if to animate the screen (sort of a bouncing ball to accompany the music as the words change color while the singing) had color problems more technical than my modest instruments can work out. In that sense a modern movie with sound effects and hundereds of people adding parts and supporting it is a little discouraging as overkill compared with just text or my illustration. I do not mean to say we can create images of people from scratch although that an issue to consider where after all our experience of being in real space is much richer still than in the movies. I wonder if the escape into such entertainment is in general good if taken so far into fantasy, issues of quantum looping and tacyonics in paradoxes of time travel and so on...as it affects the thought processes of a generation.
* * * * * * *