Wednesday, August 6, 2014
Spacious Singularity (comments on backreaction blogspot)
L. Edgar Otto said...
Sabine, the term singularity certainly needs to be better defined. I myself use the term "spacious singularity" which I now imagine makes little sense to readers. I need to follow your links to know what your take on it is as I do not find it apparent as in "No one these days imagines there is a singularity inside a black hole."
A simple analogy is the Earth with poles. To ask what came before the North Pole is a meaningless question. The archaic word Loxidrome where a map projection path never reaches it but spirals into it expresses one part of the problem. Do we not say the same thing for an ideal absolute zero? That a vague law as is what not that long ago the idea of Projective geometry was once thought the generalization of everything.
The Agyptians thought that one could go beyond the North pole into some idea of higher space, a spiritual journey to pass thru it at the top of the world. The built the architecture and aimed it to the North star, although those stars shifted in cycle. In the astrology it seemed as clear time of birth, position, and which star repeated like history between spirals set the word patterns from the fixed stars of the heavens.
The Greeks also knew the Earth as round and measured its curvature. Their careful technology concluded the stars were fixed, a false conclusion similar to Gauss who instruments of the time could not match the velocity of light with his concepts.
An ideal point in the landscape, regardless if there is spin and that corresponds to some classical radius speaks for an apparent or illusion of a difference in a limiting velocity or fixed light frame reference. Yes, the singularity if an isolated object may be outside the black hole or something of illusions if our universe stands outside it may seem reasonable.
It is especially not clear that we can compactify things or make them dense and that the only description of how we might move from A to B in space by the illusions or changes to the velocity of light. It could be a combination as in the speculation of code reading DNA with several genome functions.
L. Edgar Otto said...
Zephir, one does not need to say high or low dimensions for the illusion of event horizons and singularies. It can be a shifting of adjacent dimensions in these matters of continuity and discreteness, for Newton defined continuity as continuous, contiguous, and consecutive. So things can be superimposed or totally separate or "touch" in a sense. Not all of the connections may be realized and all present of paths. I had a sailor friend who saw Star Trek as a sci fi analogy to a submarine under water where there is a wider freedom of motion as if gravity is not the main sense. Of course in earlier times crossing the equator was a big ritual deal for we discover the opposite change of seasons and do not fall off the flat earth.
Xerxes, to put GR+SM in the same bundle is not the only way to view possible overall structures of a vacuum which may have physical laws at some moving scale zero point. We can arrange a programming of matching dominoes but there are no equations that work unless we see a difference in the numbers. So condensing or expanding beyond a certain perceptual scale may not have a total end or omega point that tells us a difference in AI or something vaguely conscious as something else. Such programming may have diminishing return and the fire walls or boundaries if reached may begin again if transparent and neutral. The Omega concept has been used for spiritual eras predicted also, or for some end of knowing or for a state of the world in some ideological history. It is possible to orgainize the sub parts of a hypercube varying Euler's formula as to what adds up to get the numbers involved where we distinguish rest and motion abstractly as GR or SM.
This issue as the adjacent dimensions of surface and volume a holographic idea where the paths on the surface are fractal and all is seen more or less as linear (non-linear is a vague term as is uncertainty, especially if what emerges or is given of sentience matches the combinations and computations of intellect with what is applied singularity theory.)
12:44 AM, August 05, 2014
L. Edgar Otto said...
Zephir etc al,
perhaps a little humility is in order for scientists still learning, especially where physics comes to the frontier of issues we call non-linearity.
For me questions of arithmetic and visualization of geometries seem all important but even this may be too simple for new generalizations. Praise then to whom may stumble on new deep yet simple foundational principles by speculation.
Zephir, there are ideas and formulas that on water surfaces tending flat and ignoring parameters that fade exponentially into depths. If there is something to your aether vision it escapes me or is not conveyed clearly. Are you making an analogy to something like string tension in the sense "gravity waves " in there well measured circularity relate to "capillary " waves? Einstein remarked that physics in 4D is in a sense simpler than in 3D, but evidently he considered going beyond this case.
QM issues aside fluids and magnetism as in MHD have interesting zero points that fix the fields to the flow something pre-Maxwellian.
An old visualization analogy to a hypercube asks in effect does a half of a 4D hypersphere give us half a worm if we bite into it. For it would eat the volume of the 3D projected down apple, come fi the surface then eat as much volume again, then the surface itself.
Is there a central singularity, in which volume?
Complex analysis can be but part of a bigger picture. Boundaries can be quadratic at least. These 2D x 2D as in recent visualizing H bonds by microwaves.
We can simulate naked singularities as at the poles of a spinning star.
A 2D snapshot of equations of unity by powers of absolute values without a moving picture misses point exchanges between curves and isolated regions.
Sabine is right that initial and end points are essential to the big picture.
Best, humbly yours, this singular lifetime at least.
11:40 PM, August 05, 2014 Delete
L. Edgar Otto said...
Also the idea of chaos where the laws of algebraic operations break down. Where is the chaos in QM theory? Can we observe or explain plasma pinching when the helicity is neutral and successively circular.
MarkusM perhaps the ambiguous statement is not strong enough. Stars and planets have shell structures as if the crystalline structures have successive total phase changes.
A BH in a sense a hyperbolic crystal where the center is not a point as Newton for forces spacious or at a point for outside finite measuring, but a limit boundary of some hyperbolic grid like an incompressible liquid.
So what of the air above the water? Riemann 101 Removes thee singularity and the negative real axis that paths cannot cross over. Controversial.
Can a QM cat riding a wormhole path inside? A black hole notice no change or half alive vanishes into the singularity?
6:02 AM, August 06, 2014