Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Comment to Gupta Theory Stance

Comment to Gupta Theory Stance

L. Edgar Otto      19 March, 2013

At first I found the ideas behind the words to read and I could not see the ideas of your work as deep or useful science.  Did you place it here to show a wide Theory of Everything ?

I am just a visitor here and my comments are my own, like so many well trained young scientists there is less room to work, but we are in the shadows and good hands of wise ones of genius like Einstein and Ramanujan - that all in solid dreams feel worthwhile happiness that many find first with sound dialog and thoughts within themselves in lonely work for all of us.  For the works sake let us hope we can keep on our work without our decay in time as we age and no song is lost into the darkness our life becomes.

As with the front of new theory, of truths or myths, each soul may have a special view of which ideas come close to the same higher or distinct view.  This is unclear as a principle like Plato, or Narajana as to how our thought processes work.  When two solid worlds touch we do not know that they can and still not find these have layers of smaller parts as these wise ones said long, long ago.

Your half dot of dust, K, is like so many ideas of what are half things like spin or Penrose zigs and zags he said we may as well call particles.  This comes from the way we use higher ideas of space and numbers to show how the world may work in many levels of searching or seeing.

I have lately seen the value of the zero double Platonic solid of two faces and no volume (the dihedron) and its unfolding as part of this similar picture- energy by math description or not in a balance of forces.  Of symmetry in our reckonings or in the yet not answered questions as to how it relates to heat.  This too is at the front of our ideas on what is the use or trend in string or membrane theory.

My second detection (guru) of your ideas does give me a unified view (unary your poetic word in translation if I read it right) and it is science in its formal sense where the wide ideas of Hindu civilization meets the half Buddhist wisdom. So as Unary, your system as so many offered as a unifying or practical physics is a unified view that covers all things.

But in such a description as if a great building as we rise high from the ground, turn the Euclidean near plane on edge to balance the tensions and compressions of force, the Pyramids or the Flying buttresses of Cathedrals in our seeking of balance in real time testing as we build ideas and things- seems to me more like the Gupta architecture which have hidden things carved to be seen by the gods- but such a building is really a quite detailed sculpture in its unity.  This kind of unified theory is worked also now in the science from the West that we wonder if there can be a theory of everything or vast ideas like arithmetic may have mythical or deeper foundations.  Perhaps some things are koans after all and out of our reach of doing if not thinking.

So we ask of some smallest measure, such as Planck action or volume that fits well where the theory can be observed.  I am not one for such measurement that drives the sense of proof of physics as science, it is half truth also.  Either Ramanujan sees it or not, proof or not.  It could be that seeing things on a smaller level, your pico level resolution could solve things better in the unity - I would have to see the math and learn to read it better.

But as science that in the end is proof by doing, experiment, I ask you this- more of a question than a challenge- I accept all inputs of theory yet we all have the job of how to value them from a more democratic view (of which that element is alive south of the Himalayas).

Can we print things in three dimensions at the pico level? Can this be done behind the scenes as if it would need more than say two photons as in the nano level?  Done maybe by the programming that resolves to a unified and possible object from our normal size view?

I have tried to write closer to the way one would write in basic English for the sake of clear words.  I could have used the more Biblical or Shakespeare versions as the subcontinent is well versed in the tongue and even more than England presents the bards plays.  If I failed in this, typos and spellings are after all relative even if not poetry, at least we had a good run- this time around or if the world is a sort of free lunch of energy or our cup of being as a soul is no deposit and no return...

* * * * * * *

Note: the illustrations are there for my working use to formally present the informational aspects of the wider abstract motion theory of the quasic view for off line drawing. I use them here with little relation to the theme of this post at hand due to the challenge and interruption in time by a fellow inquirer.  Figure 2 has the germ of my response to him in side sentences on the margins.  These symbols are not meant to be complete nor always have explicit meaning as to my use of the color theories.

No comments:

Post a Comment