Friday, January 25, 2013

Vulcan, Xena and Gabriel, and Other Flying Dutchmen

Vulcan, Xena and Gabriel, and Other Flying Dutchmen

L. Edgar Otto   Friday, 25 January, 2013

In the outer ring of the sun in the debris of confusion, the Oort belt, Pluto dethroned as a planet or by size to come back again periodically, all such classical radii a matter of  refinement and debate, we find orbs like Eris as much a ghost of our theoretical dreams to view, test our ideas of dark matter.

Even as an airy spark some say their super-particles, twice ghostly, are designated with names that speak for our universe so close to holding to the idea of dust, so the fanciful gravino and the graviton- this correct in the spirit of it but still not a surprise to the new philosophy- not so much a radical idea although a radical effort of speculation in what seems in our cautious climb a breakthru, new idea.

Yet in the general scheme of super-particles that they underlay the fabric of the world, half real, half dreams of abstraction, ghostly the balances of equations of momentum beginning with neutrinos, the design mechanism, the dynamics, would not work to so describe if such particles could explicitly be seen, SUSY verified - that world would be outside the scope of our present inquiry in a sea of yin-yang of the general Omnium, system open yet closed, moving yet still.

But it is simply not for the credit or gifts of discovery and discoverers that we embellish some structure with our own sense of design and names, nor the drive for legacy and the meaning of life if that means much over wider time spans, the ideas distinct in what we glen of some design and how we may think of them.  Our names and symbols endure, we aware of them or not, more than about anything else, not even our institutions, says Santayana.  In these brave and golden times in retrospect of science or perhaps what seems its swan song, what is the difference to the design structure and the Zen like embellishment of the gifted dishwasher, Wilbur, or that of the Diracian doubled arrays of the complex number natural codes by Rowlands?

Certainly we can extend, at least in our reasoning, the analogies to simpler spaces while knowing what is but imagined on the frontier if we are clear and careful thinkers, such thoughts not abandoned to philosophies of chaos, luck.  Octonions arise as some idea of limits, the awakening of hypernumbers of positive roots of one that is not one- why not ask then of the roots of imaginary numbers beyond what seems a reasonable extension of the fact of logical form, the quasic quartering of possibilities, that are not necessarily an imaginary number, so to for the idea of null and nilpotency and its mirrors beyond infinity?  Alas, in the fundamental theorem that things change yet remain the same on what can we base such a limit, on what aether may we define or experience reaction to our action?  An uncharacterized universe in a sense weightless.

Sometimes, for awhile at least, there is a Vulcan to be seen, and in the indifferent purposes of this world, of action and causation, a real particle such as a comment to which it is a synchronous coincidence over some range to which we get results but really do not find foundational some perturbations.  The unseen supersymmetry does have its principle of potential contiguity yet division of such real effects.  In the idea of what is forgotten before the Big Bang a mechanism may so be described that experience is passed on thru some nonnecessary realm of what our forefathers at a distance learned in their colors, marks and symbols as if magic in the synaethesia that begs for imprints behind an infants smile should we grow wiser as a species. 

The chemists and the neurologists hope to find some ghostly magic bullet so reassure them of real ground, but that proves nothing anymore than the coincidence of what we try to measure in probabilities, that we more readily learn a human traditional language in the teleology, in the resolution of the chicken or the egg, than in a new and artificial design.  Can such be observed or scanned tho the brain in its geometry does partition its parts intelligibly?

If one of our interpretations is that of charge as fundamental, or any such ideas on what is the substance of a force say distinct from gravity that eludes us, and if the insights of Einstein stand then we have also a higher relativity, we call this Exxene physics by the way, this as he knew an incomplete unification to which, beyond the political stance and myths of genius, the logic of it makes a target that so many ask if he was wrong- this I offer to explain the why always Einstein so challenged asks my chat friend on the science forum who works in Fermi lab.

Can we not see, or at least deny, a higher equivalence principle on this issue of what is at rest of what in SUSY space (and by now my readers should realize this sort of space a given, a priori, and not really opened to debate despite the dearth of proofs by discovery) if we are to probe deeper into the physics and metaphysics of the standard theory, charge itself on this level has its weightless falling that is acceleration.  Beyond this what is something at rest so seen on this level full of zero points and singularities?  Charge then a working hypothesis and an embellishment.

I concur with Churchman, having independently found such design structures myself, that there is a forth and fifth box (indeed a generalization that seems open and closed beyond these).  What I think this amounts to in the new philosophy is that beyond Mechanism, Chance, and Teleology we add at least two others, as with this structure method in the new physics, Tachyonics, then Transcendence to the frontier of what are the possibilities of design structure beyond the Omnium if there is such a place.  But this has to exceed the intelligibility of our current mathematics if possible that it is not a loop to the same design structure in reality and theory as an unresolvable case.

For at the existential core of things as we see them, experience and experiment with them physically and subjectively,  Aristotle's and Plato's stance still suggest there may be some unity in principle between what we see as that contained or what is as if some real or reversed idea of action directed out from our own singularity center.

This idea perhaps grounds our intuitions on gravity, and thus the higher form we interpret as charge and even mass, that direction aside, the logic of what three things together by be conserved or combined two by two, or how we feel these can somewhere be unified without contradiction, sometimes, while we fall into a black hole without noticing the change of horizons, the identities of our own projected or parallel similarities or differences,  we find a hint of hidden or magical unification.

But these abstract motions between things in the general structure can be described by our existing mathematics even if we have to assume for the same of the idea of balancing series and equations that beyond the surface mirror ground is half real or unreal.  That is true of the applications of groups and the count, as well that in one dimension of rest it can be a quasifinite or discrete motion in adjacent natural dimensions.

The ideology of the day does seem to color its times as in the golden age of feminility as a philosophy and its one sided application to the core idea of gender and species evolving discernible indiscernible ground states of differences.  Other groups may desire to break thu the certainty found at the tachyonic box to which chaos theory suppresses effectively any such usurpation of mutations, the age old comparison on a philosophic level of the diversity of the right or left hands in our bilateral symmetry.

We then find the usual partisan division that claims the out groups as part of the same unification movement in diversity while denying their own double gender or double chromosome drive as resulting in the philosophy making them still the out-group to suppress into the evolved consensus as only dogmatic truth of whole teleological creatures into its organizational outreach and hegemony.  This by nature not suspected to last save that those who imagine it may not and take or just find, the opportunity to extend the life of it in the moment.

But Xena and Gabriel, from that show of our powerful amazon warriors if they can handle the tests for the expediency of combat, to that end the removal and great ritual of sacrifice of their breast so to carry their arrows, two lovers by the swampy lagoon waters in respite and mock replication from the world and its wars, from the judgements unto equal opportunity in paradox with the hierarchies and ceilings of glass, containers still sensitive to touch holding hands like school girls thought nothing of where the slap on the rear of quarterbacks is accepted in the name of war and power games and other prisons.

I would have preferred those names for the exoplanets even though it is dated to a time and classically replaced by words still long forgotten and unclear in the collective memory of dating... we could not have extended the periodic table of elements with just the planet names- and the great saints of science so honored become just touchstone names the personalities forgotten- so many gravestones so little family living history. Flying Dutchman is romantic too and keeps raw friction innocent and virginal.  But to continue the elements with mere numbers only and not the wealth of names, that is not what my system of numbers should be seen to do.

By sea of yin-yang I mean a sea of singularities with symmetry.  We while intensely alive and creative do not quite resign ourselves to a limited, quasifinite, and identity vanishing life space...and in the face of a wider design generalization of philosophy and physics some explanation or intuition say of what is God or heaven with a little "h" in its rise of mind in possibly measurable intelligence in a universe diverse and pregnant with creativity set in motion toward the new and some end again, the rebirth of passion, these do not necessarily satisfy us, we creatures still with great promise and in that sense open ultimately and incomplete.

* * * * * * *

No comments:

Post a Comment