Monday, January 14, 2013

The Quasifinite Omnium

The Quasifinite Omnium

L. Edgar Otto 14 January, 2013

"How is it that the human mind can reach so far into the scales of the dream of universe by imagination? There is more than what at first glance appears than we or the universe first seems, even blind in seeing ourselves yet seeing beyond totalities in double explosion of possibilities." The Pe Sla

Of course I have built on the reflections of others for insights of some key ideas and am aware of the influences that hone my intuitions touching gold in a world where the myth of gold everywhere renders it useless. Especially to Coxeter and his reflections, his boxes full of mirrors, his childlike explorations for us a story in the tradition of the Looking Glass with independent research carefully reasoned- so too the lesser than this guru, Fuller as all who contemplate the planes of flatland and the Platonic polyhedra.

But unseen hands would seem an explanation, by it is not clear what, that puts the magic in the mere touch. Oh, of late the scrying into some dream may be artistic and sketchy, an illusion of some outline pointing to dead ends or the way. Some wish beyond the need for wishing that we do not disturb our dream fulfilling with dream food our hunger- driven by the digestion in fast from yesterday.

In the delayed posts and with further recreations of color and illustrations I put an idea in retrospection did not seem to me a clear principle of which one may follow if it is communicated. That is sometimes ideas are so foundational we only glimpses them briefly, and sometimes like memories of our parents before our memories are focused and fixed the picture or spirit of it comes back again- but one thing is for sure, the question of if there is a finite or infinite, or the compromise but paradoxical models of an oscillating universe- that too is but a stepping stone to the wider question as to what is the cosmos.

There came some clarity, in this middle of winter post as the light begins to return like old friends or lovers the gods seemed to send to me to comfort in crises of the heart what may disturb my quest, undermine my desire to continue the journey, exchange the outlines with the paint by number art adding, in at least the doing, to the heap of knowing a little more- returns as if a cyclic season were we may jump thru time as if the universe requires of me to give comfort in return. But in that choices are mine, in the ultimate creativity nothing is futile for these are the knowing we share.

The clarity is inspired, gray groups or not, shadows or not, a futile quest or not repeated again or forgotten, when I look deep into the zero and infinity for the ongoing unity of existence. Nature despite patterns lost in the detail in the scale of space and time gain insight from its assembly codes.

This gives our knowing a freedom to explore in the shadows that do not necessarily connect or see beyond the state of our wisdom or of the instar of this world for all groups may only be gray and nothing else as real in some meaningful distinctions. The delta 4 honeycomb polytope of Coxeter and those before him strikes me as part of the general explanation for what in these abstract dreams I feel the intuition has a parallel or a better grounding. Five of these with duality that cycles as if these as quasic branes so cycle to describe all totalities yet all things still possible beyond- that is, the quasifinite not necessarily distinguished from the quasi-infinite core stances and views.

Can such mirroring duality (and higher forms like this emphasis on the prime number two) not skip thru cycles as five (or all the mirror possibilities where groups are not necessarily so strict in its projections nor unrestricted) that the simple density can be imagined different, say of the folksy pentatonic or that of blues, the other side of what is the rigid rotations of the dodecahedron, that we find the other order that skips and instar in the plane as if all cycles may be contained within the stepping stones of them?

Do such branes not also present intelligibly their teleoscoping friezy patterns if we could get our head around them as if from a God's-eye view and would I judge my work so imperfect if I could wrap my dreams and head around myself in its growing myths and memories and steps likely to return or be still born and forgotten, at best a few embers or sparks as with all our dreams still there so to light the tree for the forest fires in the silence of no seen inquirers?

I offer again the COBE to illustrate this concept of which in truth it is just a radical conjecture yet a little more comprehensive and imaginative than those of which we seem so proud of as radical breakthru discoveries. We have for a long time based on our experience of being down on earth that we distinguish the shadows of the moon or other planets as the seas. So too the depths and patterns of which we try to impose or observe in the patterns of the hills and valleys of the early universe.

Yet from natures view, especially if there are cycles of ages at least, which is the hot and cold, which the mountains and the valleys. In the imagined symmetry then we can divide the cycle of five, and most likely explicitly if we research it, into what is all sea, what is all land, what is the marsh between them, and what may be exchanged on some level of cyclic groups on higher mirrors between them- even in the wider view some ultimate mirror of reality of it all itself.

* * * * * * * 
Footnote not posted today:  within some totality of view, a slice of some general stereonomic structure, there may be a multiplicity transitive throughout as to how we partition things like axes or vectors as to their sign in a more explicit and local way than mere ideas of their reversal.  This suggests that between the instars of the honeycomb and thus flat brane grounding dualities the order of such views of which are which signs may have a general effect of the group interactions between the fivefold levels--- in general we do not always separate the rigid rotation groups from more general groups, nor it seems does general nature rigidly.

* * * * *


No comments:

Post a Comment