Teleologic, Mathematics and Scientific Philosophy

Teleologic, Mathematics and Scientific Philosophy L. Edgar Otto 11-18-10

This morning I see that other bloggers and Scientific American are starting to catch up with these new concerns in scientific philosophy. In my small sphere of blogging far from the given B+ of the engineers in my high school era who went on to Harvard, or those with more within than these young pre-nerds with slide rules who beyond the shelter of over-dominant mothers had to survive freshman year nervous breakdowns, I have to hold Ulla's contributions as a matter of teaching and reasonable speculation as ahead of the others in the discernment of scientific truth. The connection of dark matter and anti-matter is after all a human contemplation on the idea of perpendicularity awaiting only human verification as a scientific theory- much like the demeaned Kepler whose ideas that some hold as hard science required a more mystical if not platonic view- is the sacred geometry of his work with the divine proportion a god-given thing to discover, or the creation of a living mind along with its dawning formalism?

I ask child questions, really more fundamental that perpendicularity and its sense of the magical traditionally and recently in this world. I asked this as a child and it caused no end of debate with the teachers: "Is the south pole of a magnet not as strong as the north pole?" Or for all you string savvy- what would the octonian look like if we imagined rigid rotations with complex numbers of say the right dimensional object- presumably four space- and if this does not apply globally then why not? Again we have a problem with what is rim and flange, what is the design of a general space, finite or not, as to the consistency or completeness of our logic on some level of local or general self-creative and self-referential reality.

Today, I have little to say again, thought I might continue with yesterday's post, now the teleological ts symbol (I may go back to the single base line as a zero theory as a later post- I may go to the three and four lines even though the problem is one of our mental stance and state toward such things as dimension and if there is a realization of any theory to which we can adsorb it without a succession of further looking and growing awareness regardless if the world is or is not such a mental given- for now we can reasonably be sure it persists albeit mysteriously if we think about it- as our inmost soul seems to persist despite circumstances short of death- our intuition is such that in the complex analysis there has to be a logic of at least the possibility in the background of teleological prediction, variability, and a wider but intelligible world of right and wrong, false and true in a greater arithmetic that in modern terms has to be described as best with something like "precognition". But what we are sure of in the sciences, say in the quantum theories, is not necessarily to be taken locally as the super-natural.

Now the achievement of Godel is impressive and influential, so too the stance of Hilbert whom it is not clear is out of the running. He may be, but not before we show one way or another if we can the pointlessness of skirting around the issues of Godel, a mystic and Platonist, because of the tools and assumptions he used of which it should be clear to anyone who understands complex numbers that his meta-language has not been analyzed from the viewpoint of what such advanced mathematics has done with what we know of prime numbers. Other than Peano's axioms can be made differently in ways that do not necessarily apply to any axiomatic system- zero is always a problem if it even as a physical illusion can have a predecessor. Yes there is a corresponding sense of division in the uniqueness of Godel numbers. But the notation is finite while it talks about set theory. These issues of the finite and transfinite can be resolved a lot better than our first blush theories do today.

Zero can be a place of discontinuity in a more general range of formulas that describe greater or lesser than leading up to 2pi... and we can imagine the jumps between integers, in fact primes in relation to generating pi. But the very idea of a prime number on some level between jumps is the hallmark of discontinuity. One can easily debate or replace the cosine terms with those of pure imaginary numbers but such forms are both useful if we have a sufficiently general scientific philosophy and a free and open solid foundation of arithmetic with a sound teleology in the chance and mechanism of systems- short of the ultimate explanation of what is real.

Still, there is a moderated view as to what actually is the best description of physics when it reaches the three or four level symbols of local or general references in the view of the cosmos. It is both string like and topological like theory- and most likely the topological at this point is more intelligible.

* * *

NOTE: Due to the coffee shop computers down the other day I did not check the last post http://matpitka.blogspot.com/2010/11/octonions-at-institute-of-advanced.html
not scrolling down so I did not mention Pitkanen and his fine work in this post but found it through another blog I follow just now. I made a comment for what it is worth:

At 11:01 AM, Blogger ThePeSla said...

Matti,

I just found this posting thru another blog. Now, I posted today more along crude thoughts on complex numbers and logic. This octonian and quaternion relation I have long considered. Today I asked a rather childlike question. I can imagine the rotations in three space and actually hold a model in my hand- is there some sort of model for a four space orthogon that applies to octonians?

This probably A4 but the "quasic" plane for me was always n-dimensional.

ThePeSla pesla.blogspot com
* * *

You can regard what I say as nonsense, or you can claim that you know it already, but you cannot make these two claims together.

About this quote Matti, I think it makes sense at first blush and simple beginnings (but is the author aware of the doubts this raises in an ordinary audience?)

So I must add to my posting - It does seem indeed that the upper echelons of academia are catching up with you, Matti. We stand and fall together like a more general theory if not that of everything of the logic of non-euclidean geometries that stand and fall together. Of your vision and what I know of my struggle outside and on my own- I have no doubts! :-)

L. Edgar Otto

Perpendicularity

Perpendicularity and Lateral Unity Sacred and Mundane

Not that much on my mind today- and what a great day to be alive. These days come up somewhere in the angle of the amber sunlight of morning, warm looking at the first thin layer of snow here and there left on the ground. Maybe it is because we forgot many things, like after the sacking of Alexandria by the Romans and Christians and Moslems so much was lost- and so much more if the Moslems had not ordered the old books recorded- they would have been lost forever. Each of us in theory wants to start new in the wake of a sea of great books that take a life time or the thought that ones view better for another children's book than the classics.
But what we forget that does not shadow and tangle us, baggage and lack of laughter that comes later for superstition, monsters in the closet and under the bed- well, the whole world is new again with promise, a book no longer one you regret there no more for you have found even the lesser works of some vanished author.

Time as a subjective thing, a sacred geometric thing, time as the fourth dimension as a philosophic statement rather than thought a scientific one. That lateral is after all indicating of the otherworldly sacred. For it took awhile to accept that the complex or imaginary numbers represented perpendicularity and of course rotation- of which the wave mechanic Hamilton did not accept this number as such although he later worked deep on what it meant for three space. This does not strike me as a hypocrisy but a question of the magical depth of insight and grounding into what is real and what is sacred of which we cannot make clear statements about it if any at all, such is the uncertainty of thinking on the frontiers for those with uncommon genius of which this perpendicularity is in a way the same problem we still do not see- despite the experts in the applications of its insights. For this problem is more one of dimension and its definition than that of how we define the lateral or negative numbers.

So after these centuries we find Hawking saying the real time and the imaginary time are different in that what is finite in real time is not so in complex time- for example. Is this not just a question of our concepts of such basic numbers? Is the wave equation of the universe dependent on such numbers not only as good as our conception of them?

Positive and Negative unity, or lateral complex unity is reasonable a philosophy to say that negative is the real past, positive the real future, and the lateral is after all the present, imaginary above and below the real. Or as others said we can magically in our mental process just make an algebra of positive values so to define what we may separate (actually in a tekrim manner) for vector or other representations and multiplications.

Surely it is indeed at least a matter of flange and rim around the wheel of reality. For although it only takes a single dimension to say compute the complex powers of complex numbers- not even two let alone three or more- we note in the realm of prime numbers as the sieve of ancient Greece and Euclid's proofs of infinity of primes or even questions of Hilbert on prime pairs and Riemann's hypothesis, that these intrinsic unities represent an archetype of discontinuity. For the natural base raised to minus i2pi can find any integer solution and then with successive multiplications arrive at e to the 4pi with only zero as a solution.
For the first is a series flange or stretch, and the result is the series rim, where what is the potential infinite in a sense is the finite zero and vice versa.

* * *

Lubos,

http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/11/30-fold-improvement-of-bounds-on.html

It seems to me that your commenter is not the only one reaching the wall of their intellectual abilities. Surely as scientists we do this occasionally and realize it for the sake of progress yes?

The overview of data on Lorentz is universal so that tells us as little about the CPT as anthropocentric global warming reasoning.

Neutrilinos do not exist in the sense that God does not exist?

Look, take a vacation and play nice (especially to your young allies)- who can stand an arrogant genius anyway? Of for that matter an arrogant nationality or race?

The PeSla (but why post this on his page, certainly our disagreement and confusion is after all the nature of the topic of this paper on these deep but simple foundations of the math of physics of which I only carefully make assertions.)

* * *

Technoflange Arithmetic in the Fifth Degree

Technoflange Arithmetic in the Fifth Degree L. Edgar Otto 11-14-10

[Coffee shop computers down today, posting from library] I continue to have stray insights on the utility of this arithmetical view. It starts with the idea of how we regard the viewing of a surface or plane- there are several ways to set up a design of it, Euclidean, Whitehead, Complex, Lorentz group, Vectors and so on... In this sort of quasic view as applied to real life situations the techneflangelation applies well especially to the codes of life. We quite imagine the plane with various curves drawn on it as if held vertical we can actually represent something falling go a ground. Of course regardless of orientation the ground as the earth itself is rarely if ever absolutely flat nor are its peaks and valley always an algebraic sum unless we assume that over the cosmos but something hard or impossible to prove.

The gist of my proposal today in the literal reading of the quasic plane is that there is another direction to consider- for now I call it the height or q-height. This is not to confuse the idea with depth or span of regions in a quasic plane.

The holon model as other logic or philosophically interpreted models is rather like a window with four quadrants (for example Ken Wilbur's philosophy). But structurally it is an intelligible structure where the rim and flange (and it does not matter which are to be considered the outside of the structures, which is the skeleton and which the content of a subcell region- that to be further explored) that resolves to five squared. Again, this process may not hold beyond a few first levels and this general idea is about conceptual and physical constructibility of various geometrical objects.

But five and its symmetries are intrinsic and periodic to quasic space. For example in the field of 64 regions like a chessboard we can number the cells (in quasic ordering) such that the 25th cell represents the initiator codon in DNA and from the other direction find the terminators around 37. I ask then what is the underlying property where it has not really been considered before. The lower two cells are distinct from the upper two in the sense of more complexity in the Crick bonds of the DNA as perhaps a gain in evolving stability of organisms.

At the lower levels of technorim we find toroidal spaces or space of unfolding orthogonal units as pairs of the first subspace presumably connected in some space if not apparent in this disconnected view. We can alternative regard these pairs as holes in a topological space. Furthermore, from any such cell we can regard the others as containing negative axes of quadrants if not count and volume we tend to ignore. In the lower space we can separate two sub-orthogons as a possibility, but in a slightly higher space the separation leaves points out of the overall intelligibility of the count and contiguity but in an intelligible manner. To map these tekrim orthogons (and the "glue" between them) we have the problem of periodic ordering of things in a quasic plane where the standard orthogon structure is intrinsic to the quasic notation and logic of the quasic plane. If we have two adjacent squares the diagonal between them is the square root of five, from this we derive the realization in two and three space of the fivefold symmetries and in higher space as if five natural dimensions these orthogon-tek differences determine among other things that the cells of an organism (mammal) beginning just beyond 32 is and individual and not a set of independent possible clones. In space of course the flange and rim, log and harmonic. differences move up in the Pythagorean numbers to faster convergent or divergent irrationals, as if we start with the square root of 6, 10, 15 and so on... It has always seemed to me that in an intelligible way to classify the groups that the fact of the cyclic group is listed as an infinite case stands out suggesting a deeper theory for a totality- why the exceptions?

I add consider this as an equation where the integers represent natural dimensions:

(1 + 3) = ( 3 + 1 ) = ( 2 + 2 ) each to the nth, and = 2 squared and so on... when we are asked to choose one formalism or another when all are possible and intelligible and in a primitive right left sense there seems to be an idea of chirality when we simply add things as operation.

Cosmic Global Warming Explained Better

Cosmic Global Warming Explained Better

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20827865.100-quasars-fingered-for-cosmic-climate-change.html

Again, some of the simple models of the intelligible geometry and arithmetic can be used to get an new perspective on questions and answers one might ask as in today's post and his comments on 15 questions asked from Discover magazine. The lay has a right to question popular science- heck, even the journals. Now "Nude Scientist" is perhaps not of journal quality as some bloogers call it- but, really is not the nude a high form of art? Is not beauty in the eye of the beholder? Are were not all Columbus's in dead reckoning thinking we are the ones who have DISCOVERed the sweet hourglass form and curves and splines of our lovers for the first time as we take up the expensive carbon pencils and charcoal to make an image of her in art class. Alas beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and most of her represented on canvass are as far from her photograph as love is blind- here she is a collection of rocks, here splattering s of abstract color. For me who had coffee with her there was nothing that could be considered an invasion of privacy on the internet if posted.

OK- how do we talk about and explain better the above newscientist com link? What features in cosmology light up all at once and everywhere? The stars? Light itself when the universe cooled? What happened in this quasar era as if across the universe the dark light of fireflies doubled the temperature Kelvin of clouds around them 12 billion years ago? I am not asking to what purpose- that question is reserved for those only on the frontier and future frontier of as yet unknown new science.

Now this shift can be represented by some of our usual mathematical notions and rather convincingly too- if that were only enough! But there is the unintelligible or the seemingly as yet unintelligible where things do not quite add up neatly to the old 1 + 1 = amazingly 2. You could say there is an example of broken symmetry but it is a sort of super symmetry that exists in one and the same space and dimensions- nothing so otherworldly and exotic to explain the evolution of matter and the universe and forces as if super symmetry of strings and quantum things. Nor some assertion that there must be sterile neutrinos or for that matter ghostly dark matter hot or cold (but certainly hotter 12 billion years ago if the black hole like things we now imagine as quasars did their creativity up from the emptiness.)

That we can have so many pixels or squares in a checker board each contiguous to others or they can be somehow connected in some form of higher space is intelligible unless the numbers do not add up taken more than something in something else- but something in those still deeper again. The conceptual key is that in such a design we double things that are geometrically superimposed- thus to guarantee the intelligibility of such things in the world as shells of atoms and nuclei or ages of the layer of star chemical history, or global shared events of state changes across the universe constrained perhaps as if some implied analogy to the differences in the dimensions contiguous to counting to some higher or lower space.

Of course we still need ideas of what is the continuous, the purpose for example of Noether for light being a least action. Yet these principles of arithmetic suggest further structures possible here and now in the same universe. For at bottom in this familiar space as far as we can see now it makes no sense in the intelligibility to ask what pixel, really potentially a whole universe, it if is in a lattice as one universe or broken into a multiverse- and as if the stacking of cubes in a crystal, as I have stated, that is a measure of the entropy or in that view more rapidly growing order in a system. Indeed, sometimes a puzzle is so difficult at first but as we solve it more easily and rapidly the solutions come.

So the shell idea other than supplying us with mirrors for a shell which in a sense define by the electron spin the overall magnetism of an atom if the numbers are not matched, is also the guarantee of intelligibility as a system evolves including the delays that hold against decoherence stores awhile the integrity of an organic system. In fact such organic systems are in the main intelligible arithmetically and geometrically- not that we have different substances at bottom- one force was a good idea to attempt- but that as things move in a positive arrow of time or entropy the differences can be observed on some level especially beyond the constructable in some things connected as powers of the irrational series such as phi, their possibilities of dimensional lengths. One can say there are pure quadrupoles in this sense but not necessarily both be real matter or dark matter. The here and now but hidden on the other side of a quasic or quantum or relativistic mirror as far as matters of symmetry are after all explained by such ideas of combination of say two positive faces or sphere of a torus in four space and two more of dark but not imaginary space- all of course partially and conveniently written in five space. The red blood cell with its function of symmetry four fold for holding oxygen comes to mind- as perhaps the way the ends of the DNA use the bases to hold the spiral which can also be seen as a higher four space solid, together.

* * *

Intelligible Arithmetical Geometry

Intelligible Arithmetical Geometry

Some of the most simple ideas of yesterday led to much deeper notions- it is as if learned men around a table drawing hieroglyphics to each other with great big words all grew silent because physics grew so simple even a child could see it and speak it.

Facebook status today: L. Edgar Otto Nature is not in the business of making vacuums. On both sides of some disconnect, real or virtual we observe a change for love and losses as life expands creatively filling the voids.

As I have pointed out before, very young and with nothing else to do at the time I spent an evening late into the night counting- making it to ten thousand I simply counted by thousands, millions and so on with a better idea of large numbers.

Watching the meters on the gasoline pumps I had the ability, before things were changed in grade school with counting by adding place holding zeros and trying to compare apples and oranges take away this or that- I learned to count more closely with my fingers and could no longer add a column of the phone book of the time to which adults had me do then for a half hour add by pencil and paper disputing the sum between them until they found out I was right.

I mention this because how we teach to children counting should be looked at more closely, and in at least these two ways- ways that also command the attention of how we see space. Of course the description can be in pictures or formula and someone proficient in one form or another- even a computer in computation lost in the vision of its stream of numbers but lost more than humans in self awareness in sorting patterns. I know there are formulas for all this number theory- some of which are algebraic obviously. But the discovery as a child I could count the number of stars on the flag by multiplying the x and y.

more later neighbor needs computer:

back. Now in Pascals triangle we have a description of the parts of simplexes (things based on triangles, tetrahedra, five-cells in four space... and so on) if we are to picture the numbers as space structures and the sub-cells that make them. A triangle has three points three edges and one area (and one null) to equal 2 to the nth when we sum them from the expansion of (1+1) to the nth. One can also find the stacking of cannon balls in a given dimension.

If we espand (2 + 1) to the nth we get all the square shapes, square, cube, hypercube in four space... and so on and the sub-cells that compose them, provided we also multiply by the numbers in the 2 to the nth triangle honeycomb.

A level in such Pascal like triangles is a power of things... the sum of one of those lines say 1 cube 6 faces 12 edges 8 points would be (2+1)cubed = 27.

This much is commonly known as a way to see Pascals triangle. But what I have realized is that this also applies in some form to a honeycomb of such triangles or squares stacked in a dimension.

In the simplex or triangle case the numbers from one dimension to another in two space sum to the difference of consecutive cubes, 1,7,19.37,61... and so on

(I had drawings of this but the other computer lost data with its new trojan)

Take the case of a square divided into four quadrants. We have four squares, 12 edges, and 9 points. Any of these can add to consecutive odd number cubes between the dimensions- in that case it would be five cubed.

If we disconnect the 4 sub-squares we also get an intelligible arithmetic across the dimensions. In a sense we are dealing with primitive ideas of what is the nature of continuity and consecutive count and the contiguity of abstract or real entities- for we are talking at a very simple level about what in defining ultimate continuity as Newton did, the notions of solid, liquid and gas and asking as in the idea of two lead atoms smashed in the LHC what is the nature of the quark-gluon plasma. From this arithmetical and geometric analogy it is clear there there be a wider conception of the metaphor of glueon- that is, crazyglue, muscillague and so on... of which our stance toward how we see the possibilities define density in physics and the idea of transfinite s in number theory.

Of course these primitive methods to enable better counting and pictures will also show better the next level of how to picture algebra (which is) as geometry. The laws of factoring taking less counting on our fingers piece meal. We can also image a wider space of the rim-flange, iota point-string, to picture even hyperbolic space.

Techneflangelation

Techneflangelation

Having reached a plateau of physics and philosophy thought lately, last night in play I found a very simple theory I am justly proud of. It follows from a remark in my last post of certain figurate numbers- an arithmetical form of geometry really-. I am amazed and satisfied mainly when I find some novel idea but not usually proud. I imagine, since it is so obvious that it must be explored somewhere with the equations of number theory- but I have never seen it and it may have been overlooked and in a few times even over a millennium some such theories are overlooked. No matter, part of the pride is that it is original for me- in fact raised issues of how I saw a couple of things at certain times in my childhood.

I even tried to find and fancy name for it- the poet in me I guess- techneflangelation, which was an intentional thing to do although with more humble theories I try not to keep it more complicated than needed to convey an idea. Anyway as time went on this simple idea (and I have to do a lot more work in the detail so I give you hints for now, puzzles perhaps, a call for proofs if anyone wants to play that game. The term comes from German for arithmetic in the general notion, rimcraft...like in rime and reason in these questions of law and order. But rim is a slightly different word than flange. Technoflange or even Tekrim will do for some things I thought as this simple idea like many others at a later consideration proved to hint at vast new pictures of space and how we relate to it in the evolution and development of our learning and notions.

In these times, with principles like Pauli Exclusion, renormalization, asymptotic freedom coming under greater scrutiny we do perhaps need to ground these useful ideas better.

(darn, the coffee shop is closing in a few moments so I must add to this post later)

synchronously I just saw a good post by Lubos to which in the topic here a paragraph stood out:


http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/11/quantum-field-theory-has-no-problems.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29


The asymmetry between the two kinds of divergences arises because of a simple fact: the physics at long distances is derived from the physics at short distances - because you can build big houses out of small bricks and you can deduce a useful approximate theory for long distances from the fundamental theory at short distances - but the converse proposition doesn't hold. In quantum field theory, you can't deduce short-distance physics from the approximate laws for long-distance phenomena, just like you can't extract bricks from a photograph of a building (with a facade). Luboš Motl
Pilsen, Czech Republic

I have an issue with this concept as to with Riemann on the small we find the Pythagorean theorem- why can we not also build a theory of everything, or a TONE also from the small up? This needs clarification.

* * *

Theory of Techno-Rim : in any dimension one can intelligibly count the number of sub-cells of orthogons (and more) by taking the edge or rim and flange that is point and line, and taking the nth power in an n-space intelligible honeycomb of them. (yesterday in a hurry I only listed the three space case as the general theorem)

Continued in next posting:

Muon Sociobiology & Desosynthelation

* * * atiempology, detics
Muon Sociobiology L. Edgar Otto 11-12-10

*
0 - Three dice add up to 18, a 666 not 21 a 777, thus we regard an extension beyond structural limits of our notions of design that by continued order symbols are to be imagined otherworldly as if in right angles to the worldly directed everywhere. Nor can they sum less that three.

*
1 - The size of an individual ant depends on the hive's population.

*
2 - There is always ten percent in caste poverty even with individuals shift into different castes.

*
3 - Ten percent of humans have certain attributes like being left handed.

*
4 - In nature, occasionally, the spiral shells of molluscs exhibit the mirror symmetry of handed growth, one that at the foundation imposes sexual and natural selection.

*
5 - At a greater number of pips the flow of winner a greater than b greater than c greater than a can have a preferred direction. This the minus one or null law of thermodynamics.

*
6 - If the preferred amount of matter over non-matter by the spin of particles, as in muon chirality differences, in this organic analogy, light matter is a tenth of the dark substance. (but the explanation of this I have offered alternatives elsewhere).

*
7 - In a positive space with quasic teleoscoping shifts we can form an order of linear waves or braids, natures preference for energy transmission and structures by helices.

*
8 - On a plane before extending into powers, dimensions, series, the number of curves is an infinity greater than the number of lines (aleph 2). Such curves can match curvo-linearly such powers. Yet the difference in the transcendentals so mapped into a number line is more general and constrained such that the coordinates and limit points do not vanish as a matter of probabilities but have a sociobiological and open hierarchy.

*
9 - There are other curves,values and positions for differentiation at an instantaneous Zeno point of derivative motion.

*
10 - The excess logical space a tenth of the Teleoscoping upon transposing the base note key is the concrete substance left. The inverse of binary powers that as extended space is the principle of the last face of construction of cubes, or counting of the appearance in space of a cube of a hypercube.

*
11 - These can be further subdivided for counting effects and equations, a grid... thous the opaque matter to matter difference (also considering n-1 between the grid lines of surfaces beyond their contiguity.) Not just variance or other continuum motion averaging methods over a relaxed interval in the calculus.

*
12 - Dark matter/energy can be seen as an illusion from some perspective because it is quasi-substance (no DM particles as such necessarily)- thus matter even as quasi-virtual from such vacua can have quasi-substance involved with quasi-application of fixed and changing universal laws. In a sense quasics ground our reality and expericence (consciousness included) in a quasi-theory-of-everything, the Omnium.

* * *

We sometimes gaze into the Gray Box of ideas. I recall the intellectual shock early on of my first theories falling (hey I was only in high school one summer for algebra) that of the theory of Atiempology that became Detics. But in general these are the two forms of seeing the world. In a way I make a new word which combines them (the references in this post should be obvious including original ideas of fellow bloggers) an old word rather- Desosynthelation... a science of detics as in geodetic or geodesic, that is a return to topology in the sense of how it contains the idea of discrete yet continua of higher quasi-dimensions.

In the abstract plane a cubic for example may have two solutions (not counting the imaginary or negative ones as distinct) which more or less convert the linear into circular and vise versa in view of conversion of the continuous into discrete or vise versa.

I begin to understand, a little more deeply, things like the crystal groups and why there are a thousand or so NMR groups- and see the beauty of say series as not just an elementary function, and what I have said I have come to realize some of my ideas have implications that would challenge even the elementary functions- so it is a questioning of my or the worlds view on this

From the discrete view even the partial integration is intelligible but not quite enough so I will look into this some more- but I see the use now of elliptic curves to attempt proofs of Fermat's last theorem but in a simple and very elementary form of which I feel this now even more strongly and so make a picture- or find it may be easy after all to visualize hyperbolic space if we find he right picture.

* * *

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap101110.html

Need I say more? About time Fermi lab took a look at God's cyclotron.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19712-is-this-evidence-that-we-can-see-the-future.html

Was Jung right in his thermodynamic model of the mind, dreaming of the future at least for a few days- what a coincidence in details of one dream I had a year before in Madison then changed the reality (that when the fog horn warned of weather for small craft on lake Mendota and I walked around the corner of the bridge which when it really happened looks so familiar a little girl fishing with a cane pole did not fall into the canal- I stopped then carefully walked around not surprised I saw her then till later- but the intense rest of the dream there is no point in telling now)

Does this not give us pause to look at these teleological models- or at least to realize beyond the debate our scientists cannot really determine the truth of this article decisively in a world with time direction and dark matter mysteries, experiments like this quasi-replicable? Perhaps in the z axis to the disc of our chiral interactive brains the flow and dark flow are super-entangled but delayed and from some perspective there are real and virtual tricks of time.

* * *

DESOSYNTHELATION:

Roughly, a connection of functions (relevant series) which I see as(what I sense is the topological view of Pitkanen from a pure four space formulation) in more of a continuity view of whatever contiguous and consecutive forms of dimension act as if a constraint on the totality of shell like regions of which (my older term flagelation or rim) connects to higher dimensional effects in some natural dimension in that as a hidden background and finite view of an information surface as everywhere. A continuous contiguity and a diffuse transitive quasi-focused field which varies over an indefinite region of topology or finite sub-regions such that we more clearly define ideas of density and those related to it as physics terms; a rim or flagelation that as a foundation are steps higher than the linear such as surfaces with variable group centers not dependent on asserted ideas of dimensions.
Such a conception, here trying to describe it as best I can, fits better with the general idea of particles and their functions than over-restricted standard theory. Akin to the perception or not of velocity, acceleration and other similar ideas of physics we call gravity, dark energy proposed without that as a substantial or virtual field or particle. The key to this is the idea of a screw symmetry of Cartesian axes like in space of only the positive octant such that it makes braids and extends to the z direction crystal groups- and that I can imagine similar things from the more finite quasic space view. The difference as theories of space each a compass wide enough to claim as a theory of everything or unified field theory from a more general view (just as unified fields have to deal with the idea and fact of more types of forces beyond Einstein's program) in itself has an illusion of some sort of expanse of density (thus dark fluid at the beginning) but as relativistic at the orign we observe the information quasi-compactification as if over cosine angles as that essential informational difference of a relaxed sense of what is real in our space given functions, fields, and algebras of coordinate choices as relatively naturally preferred roughly and from a finite view of group arithmetic the doubling in particular of 4 dimensions embedded in the 8, that of the differences between the octonians and quaternions essentially free to occur or calculate or perceive some way the logical differences of arithmetic concerning the operations of multiplication where it is distinct and even ad hoc to addition. The analog and digital differences. Our problem not so much the nature of physics and its notions in itself but of the mathematics incomplete underlying it and perhaps the symbolism if we desire a possible unified view. With the new physics we also find new philosophy, and most likely a new philosophy of science.

But what guarantees that over the Omnium that we can assert a center of things (or other dimensional grounding) especially if such is outside of the great idea of time and the great idea of uncertainty of which this can still be a world view only this century's is that idea on steroids.

* * *

I toyed with the calculator last night and think it worthwhile to explore some of the simple patterns going a little farther in our listings of figurate and other finite numbers. Envision a literal set of cubes for example for analogs or meaningful residues of the Phythagorean theorem which in the quasic sense of space is a quasi-theorem even expressed in a single point or linear term so not a place to reduce a region too on the micro-scale where more than that grounding may hold. But the calculations are rather simple to include in this more difficult of postings. So many of our theorems are in fact quasi-theorems, grey or clear hole or boxes of consideration where some descriptions of reality while intelligible, even in this world, are still open to debate.