Thursday, April 25, 2013

Matter, Antimatter, Mind a Comment to Pitkanen

Matter, Antimatter, Mind   a Comment to Pitkanen

L. Edgar Otto  April 25, 2013


I did not think the ideas in the wiki link to this book were very clear at all... as if the authors method were defining his own vision of his state of mind or entropy syntropy or so on...

I still think such debate, especially on the nature of consciousness is much too limited by the physical like effects of our quantum terminology.  Maybe not the hints of profound ideas pointed to.

I presume this applies to you disquis link to dialogs of eide on the note there today on matter antimatter difference  LHC and all. But has this not been the case for particles in decay for a very long time now?

They have just made the explanation more complicated, so too how to fit it in to any alternative physics but a matter of following suit and catching up.

Consider this:  abstract idea that shows time flow or the usual basis of it as evolving complexity, time from and not part of the idea of entropy (or in systems theory the term life as anti-entropy): we can take three distinct things at a time from four things- but what would it logically imply in a reverse if we abstractly allow three things taken four distinct at a time?  In abstract thought, a ground in wormhole like connections or not, the vision or his virtual model tries to guarantee by itself its structures so as to make sense in some world or level as meaning.  Nature in fact is wiser than this and for us and her particles she is not so biased as all that- four things like say the DNA grounding taken three at a time is the abstraction that does not make sense.  But it is neither a both way or all one way vision only- I think it is more like the new conjunction slang term  "slash" where experiencing the web the kids pic up unaware the sense of the logic.

On the other hand there are some really great applications as if we actually dwell in a virtual cloud that the touch screen is three distinct things of four space.

It could be that the narrow view of dimensions even in the higher maths like p-adics corresponds to a narrow view of what I think you mean as is TGD integratable when we consider a multiverse tangle of quantum tunneling wormholes.

I will post this comment on my pesla blog now...  you never engage me in dialog there and many I talk to do not respond or freeze us out if they don't like the comments  (Lubos )  this drive to state a case persists but is it grounded like this idea of slash time?  Are we victims of physics or our own growing need for theories to persist against the entropy of our conversations as our ideas that do not adapt become obsolete and decohere?  I know you think if we have not seen or understood, don't get the idea, it is a defect that one cannot see something or has any idea as original   I mean after awhile it is the same old style and argument (Lubos perhaps)  it grows stale on its own as thought and physics runs into its brick walls of vanished equilibrium.

* * * * *

In a sound new vision the abstract symmetry of the physicality of such thought, our sense of the solidity of consciousness, the very definition we look for is this asymmetry the real illusion and not that of the universes time...a measure not of our quantum ignorance but of a lack of vision to which we are not aware- at least directly in some mirror of our consciousness, a vague dream of evidence then balanced by our narrow vision and how we desire to leap there even if a fearful dream... fall or rise into some tunnel  skip the need for a very long clock thus go directly to the end of time- all this in our vertigo with thoughts on four space.  The causal diamond is as profound an idea as the question what do the steeples point toward if in all the spheres they seem to point toward each other... just as we can imagine a fourth axes and angle to our familiar space all these diamonds have such an analogy off the brane flatland- and that more complex world beyond the quantum space, may have such an abstract geometrical analogy again.  True comprehension does not take forever to see all the cases, nor as in the primes do we jump over, make mistakes in the list, as we search and apply them.

A link to Matti's site.
* * * * *

Also later I posted this comment on the dialogs of eide  as issues have come up linking these two bloggers I follow who I had not seen communicated before---of course in the synchronicity of this and my new understanding of what can be done in the new technology, the cloud, smartphones, things that would have improved communications in the old pc days can still apply in the new forms with astounding results that make all these slow dawning of the inadequacy of quantum based discussions a little obsolete and a little beyond the proof save in the actual practice.  I may set up a domain for this new technology- who wants to hear about new physics anyway as theory?

To Plato:

The ideas linked to from this page are essentially correct but contain caveats about how much may have to be known first- and it will not be  just a matter of simple magnetism, we can go beyond that.  We can even imagine such structures  like dark connections along Pitkanen's other bloggers lines as well what might make them physically impossible technically (namely photon multiplication collapse of the shells of a wormhole where tachyon theory applies.)  Of course there can be a virtual level beneath what nature allows as real that is logically there (no matter how long some future technology develops along these suggested lines)- so the issues are still more matters of a higher level philosophy to solve even more than some supposed unification needed first.     The Cern link also contained another discovery by a cited flock of researchers that showed star to polyhedral surface vibrations (now as a pot lid banging child I noticed this with some water and some rather loud sounds striking it- that is not all science has to be big to put into a breakthru learned paper- this works too with smoke rings in terms of more foundational geometry related to gamma bursts and so on.  But what of antimatter of which current research is still 
baffled including directions or illusions of time?  How long have they but dreamed of harnessing the energy of the charged atmosphere over the sky of the earth?  I begin to understand these some visions or mechanisms is how our more than quantum affected minds makes it difficult or impossible for us all to communicate to each other what should be possible if there is 
anything real in these rumors of theory at all- but they will not believe it even given all the relevant logic an facts.  In some systems of physical law the resolution was there all along so it is actually a period of theory that will let us advance further.

* * * * * 


  1. Maybe you should publish his answer too? Also I have difficulties understanding your language.

    1. Nod

      Other than our world biochemical notation what language can we share (I was actually considering Portuguese when I signed on this finally warm day - the winter was long enough to be inside and struggle with the lag and chaos, the alliances, misunderstanding and struggle with the technology. Endorsing each other even just on principle is not enough- how we see the mind is critical if we are to have healthy and productive inquiry.) One would think mathematics was the universal language but we are still stuttering in its methods.

      I linked to the answers- linking makes things potentially there and it too is out of the timeline as the bits and pieces of conversation sent thru virtual space or thru time. And this has nothing to do with the personalities mentioned here- perhaps my own, perhaps secrets you and I have shared and respected in each other- I am trying to figure out a problem is all- one of not just encountering learned people on line or very creative people- but those close to me who will one day but not now understand the world or those around them. Surely all of this can make sense.

      Still, one thing, I assumed when he offered congratulation, published (so called) here in a rare comment to this blog - for one idea in particular... I assumed and still do not know what of the exchange was really understood? The frustration with not being able to communicate what should be a profound change in our world view and a benefit to all of the people remains the private language between the distant gods of theoretical physics. This is not a problem as a hobby, it is one in our real daily life encounters.

      I may think more on this... I am considering a new post "Dream Sharing and the Hacking of Beautiful Minds" I do not mind critique or censoring but am surprised as isolated as I have made this blog that in the many posts you still find the right link to share a comment... thank you. The Prophet instructing children or the geometer drawing circles in the sand, fingers of man and god on the skin of the world, suffer for their imprudent remarks to some sentry- "know ye not I am about my father's business...?" But in the real world I find it hard not to take a more humanistic approach to language, one I fancy we all can recognize.

      Our minds, consciousness, are not as simple as we imagine understanding them can be and that view taught in our schools regardless of what quantum effects or quantum put downs to a theory entangles the dusty light and the soul... but what is the Emperor to the King but isolated penguins in a frozen Continent to which it is as dangerous to huddle together as spread apart like confused magnets should the sky fall or the wounds of mountain building plates burst in toxicity the Earth's hot blood.

      I know too that you are not appreciated in your day either- even by the much to busy theory gods.

      The Pesla We need to know more about known mysteries rather than teach we are stuck in our upbringing for otherwise we make real that the nature of time and memory things are overwritten yet not fundamentally changed.