Metaphysical Speculations on Tachyons

Metaphysical Speculations on Tachyons 
L. Edgar Otto   25 June, 2012
      [the last five posts form a set on the particle theme and the LHC]:
Within the scope of concerns focused in our scientific era the connection to the bosonic theory and tachyons suggest that such a quason, the reality of an illusive particle for lack of a general name in its evidence it has some reality, the Higgs of as yet indefinite definition and that it is thought such a boson or that in relative considerations we see a shadow of some theory that stars can be older than the universe or neutrinos appearing to exceed the speed of light as light can so appear, that in the early string theory tachyons of some description were part of the picture, this time like sequence of the phenomenon to resolve paradoxes of singularity and nothingness as the higher or Omnion idea of particles, in our contemplations, in sentience, we find in the actual world an analogy to theological concerns such as predestination or the grounding of forgetfulness in the philosophies of karma and so on...

This seems intelligibly a consequence in our slice of focused spacetime general or absolute in the background of the equivalence of our ideas of looping, or openness of sequences as one description.  It may explain a lot in terms of choices of the 'best of possible worlds' or how we invent or discover ideas and processes intuitively, and within some range uniquely for it is an issue also of originality in that the fundamental and original is creative thus new.  If such a process or mechanism of time as real, or suggestive of the idea of resolving the quasonic multiverse even of spontaneous events of sources or sinks appearing, of a quason as an organic being, we find also the grounding of something that could be enduring to which we have vaguely called soul or spirit in our world or imagined beyond it.

Was my life, anyone's life pre-existing in the nothingness or perhaps the mind of our idea of a God?  Or does it exist beyond the ideas of space and time yet only the truth of this unfolds after the fact of existing grounded in the objectivity of space and time such motes of light and matter?  Do we not so travel into a sort of shadow time before the world will be? On this level of speculation we may ask how it is we can imagine some endless future of indefinite extent to which we as once alive pin our hopes and fears for the idea of the eternal and yet rarely contemplate the eternity of nothingness that has gone before our birth.  Given the idea of something solid and of substance in matter made from space and nothingness could this not have an analog in ideas of mind and soul that is not an illusion?  An illusion more so that establishes illusions or in the establishment of the real restricts in the variable moment that repeats endless times but is the precipice to a new state beyond restrictions.

In any case this area needs more consideration but the natural resistence to speculation so restricted in grounding will perhaps explain and make real concrete progress in the sciences and explicit power as we print things so to speak or speak things so to print in vacua beyond the nth dimensions.

* * * *

Beyond and Between the Creative Teleomnium

L. Edgar Otto    24 June, 2012

What then if from our cathedrals of science,  in our day the collider we view as if made of stone or our first great attempt made of forming staves of wood bedecked in this year of the dragon that our creativity proves but a lesser copy of some idea of this world as perfection or perhaps but a pale dream of such absolutes of thought that our results of experimental toys of wisdom proves there is no greater thing of mind and life than we like the lichens making footholds and cracks in pointless rocks of which we move meaningless things from within our room in hopes we find some degree of mastery, God-like but so much the lesser gods, whatever we may imagine in this universe we can probe and discover its secrets including the mysteries and image of the eternal we sometimes despair of or harbour within ourselves?

Can we in thought or creativity make but a pale copy of such a vision of unity and birth of what Nature has already done herself?  If we steal from her as if to face a punishment from the gods for our gift, discoveries as the deed is done and someone eventually will find and not take it back who with lesser humanity turns to ignoble use of fire its own punishment and cyclic debt of increase or decrease that just perhaps nothing cares, we or the universe or gods, what the entropy does.

That said I come to the point in a mature theory and text to which authors speculate on the achievements and prospects, the possibly with new light taking into consideration the consequences, with a new and raw sense of poetry again in our curiosity and desire for new possibilities and first blush risks of consequences aware or not if we are foolhardy in the tinkering.

Let us not hide our heads in the sand in the facing of unknowns, try for the positive and abundance staring into the emptiness around us and the shadows we see of our own faces in the mirrors.  Development and progress need not be the source of evils, of fear so as not to gaze, nor be the source and sink of explosive false dreams that unravel us for in the equifinality of our journies in the life of the mind on the whole with new power and responsibility where the good or abundance has the edge and the ground is vigorous, alive, and while perhaps but everlasting is an era of security in peace.

I begin to understand now that my own concerns and contemplations on the cosmos has reached a certain level and I have been made stronger by the normal trails of life as if a fine edges sword with keen edge made strong by fire having survived but not of the expectations of some arbitrary shape but then, and not looking down upon those in lesser dreams of life I know the sense or hint of purpose has sustained me at the core survived while close to accident and with a few scars and still hurting wounds receding, the dreams I have encountered of others of which I could not share the sense of their joyful vision.


The obvious conclusions of theirs beyond me having reality if we break though what they present as if only on the surface that seemed to me too far into some world of fantasy and dreams- my friend galatomic comes to mind and all who set up against the flow of standard dreams an alternative for time flow and creation or of pointloop who saw the obvious need to show how things move from place to place and are the same yet change in terms of geometry and physics- each retiring from their dream back to the normal retreat of living fully in the end times- yet they are if not known a household name in their exuberance and I miss them in my tenacity of awakening vision- but that is the general state of all of us who care about these cosmic things, we apes full of new cosmogony.

In the building of the great cathedral of our time one aspect of discussion is the sense of mystery that we might cause a reaction that consumes the world that to some justify some completion of knowledge at presumed end times or that in our looking for such wisps of light nature conspires to keep us in ignorance.  Science quells many fears and gives us new power to responsibly shape if not create new worlds if we believe without clear reason they can spontaneously arise in laws of matters at the remote influences or those hidden within of extremes.  New definitions and understanding of energy and even organic structure may give us new uses, new capacities for work and poetry, new lesser purposes in our lives existing in this world.

A new problem also with a refreshing if daunting expanse of new horizons to generalize and view, for those who are in yet watch from afar the dream perhaps some higher unity or wholeness of what we vaguely describe as our spirit or souls.  Our theories of everything, our resolution of singularities into variations philosophically of the Omnium as familiar yet new grounding is unified in that things are intelligible- and there is new work to be done all many useful and rewarding levels as we build with flying buttresses that beyond our down to solid earth dreams of pyramidal compression.  I am closer myself to admitting that there was the hand of something higher still than all the speculations we long sometimes to encounter and obey, perhaps God in some sense of promise and repay for wisdom, He beyond our creative dreams and beyond creativity itself.

If I have laughed at the closed wisdom of your visions or that they seem absurd in retrospect as I recall the respect some dreams have in a cult or culture of a party line, it is not so as to deride but to smile in joy at life and its awakening and choices freely made in each own path that in a sense can be part of all of us.  Let no one steal your prayers and dreams. Arise, my child of Earth!

* * * * *

Did the LHC Discover Quasons?

Did the LHC Discover Quasons?

L. Edgar Otto   24 June, 2012

Sometimes a kaon is just a koan or conversely.  In view of my principles and objections to the nature of particle theory at the foundations and the synchronicity of the issue I reconsidered in the last couple of posts with the announcement of results on July 4 from the LHC on the nature of the Higgs.  Inspired by the excellent commentary of Gibbs as to what the results mean or will come to mean I have a position as to the value of that great experimental enterprise.

Does it really matter that on the level of what a Higgs boson is supposed to do that it is many or one such particle?  Does it matter if we limit our interpretations to the evidence of the nature of its spin or other ideas confined to quantum theory?  In the caution of what the results can reasonably mean the question asked is "How we can know it is the Higgs?"  This reads to me as if it asks can there be some lesser particles that are yet greater than those in the standard theory?

I suggest that what is discovered is a particle (or some aspects of the particle depending on the possibilities of decay, the energy inferred if missing, variations in the observed energy contained in the decay pathways, and possible observation of influences over a  tunneling or action at a distance between mass like transfer of such particles.

I style these quasons for they are as if a singularity of vacuum but with complex structure.  In a sense they are to be scaleless as well as scaled and may go deeper than zero as a null or negative polytope level containing the compass of our observations and the apparent consistency of physical values.  Thus an atom as in the maximum symmetry of the electron configuration and of course more complicated in the idea of the contained shells of the nucleus is a quason as the universe itself conceived as quasi discrete maximum symmetry along the lines of monster groups and string theories.  The nearly point like thing, an iota is not a string but analogous geometrically to the universe itself and there are analogies in between that have physical effects.

What this amounts to can be claimed not just the discovery of a particle or mechanism in the Higgs model but a confirmation of higher dimensions, variations over historical time and cause evolving between them;  the idea of higher symmetries and its operations, supersymmetry without the expected shadows interpreted as a multiplicity of sparticles; and this alternative supersymmetry the grounding for supergravity ideas; and in terms of current understanding and conceptions the discovery of black hole (clear holes as the meeting between such diversity to include under the umbrella of the refined term mass-energy, actually) structured vacua objects which lead to mass distinction we imagine as the theories of dark or other hidden styles of matter, although it has been a matter of speculation that the types of normal and dark matter may derive from one more unified theory especially in terms of particle decay observations which can suggest this is the case or near it.

So, with a sober caution contained in my own views to the extent it claims to be more science than mystery of speculation what the discovery and contribution of the LHC has done, especially in our awakening to new physics of whatever description, has been grossly underestimated.

* * * * *

Eternal or Everlasting Particles

Eternal or Everlasting Particles

L. Edgar Otto   24 June, 2012

The more general idea of symmetry, beginning at the concrete sense of particle location as a four fold dialectic, asks over an interval or perpetually it projected, what is the grounding for the possibility of discrete dynamic translation?

Nature non necessary in its self characterization and unbiased finds a wider definition of what we mean by an abstract coordinate especially within an abstract space structure system.   These may be distinguished within a theory by labels and rules of notation to some degree of confidence and observation that grounds geometric analogy and prediction.

The objects so designated can be concrete or represent an abstract or virtual location (in space time, in quasic brane coordinate cells of multiplicity and so on).

From the viewpoint of being within a generalized mutidimensional and supersymmetric totality as from the outside is a discrete view the reflections where coordinates have symmetry of identities as if quasi identical or half shared the scope or span of the reality of the points of reflection may shift to any point as the real center, intelligibly and quasi independently.

Between the quason totality (as if a black hole type object containing the questions of where information goes and how as related to the geometry of thermodynamics) and the boundary beyond the finite but bounded horizon exists the dynamics that philosophically does not distinguish what is beyond that horizon into ideas of a coordinate adjacent dimensional totality a state relative dynamically yet absolute of the equivalence unto the boundary as central to the dynamics in what may appear multiversal of some existential or intrinsic form of general expansion that subsumes these questions of energy or entropy and local coherence as well the chance grounding by uncertainty of models as non necessary consistence, objectively and at a distance that acts as a unity or unity among unities, intelligibly.

The concept of regions in some general space of different if directed states of entropy is such a non necessary law wherein in the span of the concept we need a wider grounding as it goes into symmetric spaces beyond the conceptual horizon as if to also be homogeneous but diverse in the expression or expansion of energetic backgrounds.

The discrete dynamic translation-location is a foundational and traditionally assumed or even metaphysical principle to which the bias of nature may or may not always be chosen but such a principle or mechanism is needed to put on a more rational basis what we mean by sequences or causation in any of the physics including natural vibrational ones.  What appears a still string or even a multi brane sheet in one theory can vibrate beyond its own horizon but this needs not be a mirror world nor an added dimension or dimensions of higher spaces or time.  Such vibrations may be fundamentally unobserved in the eternal aspect of a particle.  This also grounds our concepts of tachyons if not the existence of such particles themselves, these too can be quasi everlasting as particles (or ground non necessary physical effects within and embedded totality but with intermittent predictability.

A number, especially conceived as eternally prime can be seen also as everlastingly prime in the sense of the consequences of a path that least to a many world multiplicity, fractally also but beyond ideas of complex space as a simple particle between real and virtual mirrors, can obey the idea of some series so as to "seed" the next phase of a cycle such that from a steady state maintained what we may consider as a third of the totality over all the series will resolve to the compliments of a half of such totality to assure the seed crop is maintained that experiments and states of matter and geometry, and living things, may not slowly become unsustainable.

In the singularity physics of such a phoenix (energetic and cyclic physics) world to define a count or number of a particle as if some sort of class concept or condensing of discrete singularities into the super-duper symmetrical dimensions as the usual but non necessary inverse compliment there is no ultimate distinction between the information or its mirror of open or closed strings even when adjusted for multiple closures across the totality of logical and thus binary possibilities.  Such a fixed everlasting coordinate is self moving as fixed between its evolving and expanding grounding of dimensions and makes the usual dialectic of our concepts of mass and gravity on the gross conceptual level.

But it does not mean anything necessarily that we suggest the totality of reality is open or closed as such a singularity center or complex as to if such super abstract data, the information, loops back or goes to some vague higher level or state to exit the reality, or actually vanishes even as an omnium dynamics from the viewpoint of the symmetries that we may style in theories of entropy or time.  This seems to begin to describe the rise of coherent sentient structures also.  If by this we mean the concept of soul it is an idea that is not necessarily contained yet intelligible at least within the realty of theories with wide depth and span of totalities and point like focus.

* * * * * * * *

A Cherokee Brave Looks Down on String Theory

A Cherokee Brave Looks Down on String Theory

L. Edgar Otto (ThePeSla)   23 June, 2012

What I have read on string theory comes from the time before the ideas of Membranes.  So I looked into the wiki articles for the discussion and other types of string theory.  It is as if from quasic theory that predates strings I am looking down rather than building up and unifying parts and hints of a general theory.  I do not know how these things were derived or interpreted by the usual math but the problems and conclusions in the article were my problems and conclusions and with some of the ideas I have disagreements in the paradoxes of the theories.  It seems though that as the theories have developed there are hints of higher unities between the types of string theories themselves.  I find it interesting that on certain interpretations certain conclusions are made for what measures we seek in the physics.  Certainly each of the sub theories has a place as a description of some phenomena of physics.

I will now list the points on what I see differs or agrees with the quasic view:

*The question of stings being grounded in a brane and that these are open or closed thus a closed string can travel the various brane spaces is thought to represent gravity mediators does not stand up to the idea, clearly, that such a theory of branes are no more a rigid or absolute concept than the idea of natural dimensions themselves.

*The methods of imaginary analysis can only suggest the mirroring of spaces of various interpretations.  We do desire to assert a space beyond the octonions and to suggest in the bigger picture it is at least sixteen dimensional.

*That in the inverse compliments, of things conceived as the radii of a circle, these are equivalent at the Planck level raises the issue of what is a paradox of unity as well the multiplicity of things.  That this is not the case as a reductionist simplicity is hinted at in the concept of analogs in the 'low dimensions' of which such unity differs from the Planck value (thus Pitkanen is justified from the analogical stance that such a value can be expressed in higher depth and levels in a more general form of space- granted the views between TGD and Quasics in this more general level of physics echos the hints of unified string theories in whole or in part)  For intelligible experiments that act as if these are the most fundamental of theoretical physics or for the explanation of some organic effects this seems obvious, yet my view leans toward the formalism in the faith in mathematics over the vague ideas that tend to be Platonism but this is a matter of taste.  Today, in fact in discussion with a computer student on some hardware issue his remark echoed his teacher that physics was primary over the math.

*I find the debate on if tachyons are part of the theory or not as the general problem of symmetry and the paradox of the discernment of indiscernible as foundational as the distinguishing of indistinguishable like the arrow of time or the idea of the chiral nature of handedness.  We cannot simple assert the grounding relations without reason in depth.

*That part of the explanations involve compactification and the enfolding of regions around tori (it was not clear that the holes in the higher dimensional ones were those of genus in the simple sense.

*If not I imagine an new super blackhole entity that is of course but speculative on an intuitive level that needs clarity yet less than my informational conception of quasars.  I am amazed so many people worked in these developments of the last couple of decades of years in the area of theory.  Pitkanen asks deeper questions in his view of space than what I would expect high positioned and brilliant people to have seen in their contemplations- but if as in the tachyon idea we have a deeper imbalance then that may explain the difficulty in finding an idea that on finding it in retrospect it appears all to obvious.

*I very much agree that the boundary or interface between what were considered brane or superstring supergravity models is an important concept to pursue further, only that boundary theory for me is of the quasic view.

*We cannot simply reduce the idea of a string to point field quantum like levels of derived triviality, not as a definite and rigid theory nor clearly as a default of ideas of probability.  If we could it would have unified the physics long ago.

*I have already stated my foundational position on a geometric and quasic idea of projective (a quasic plane involves or contains the idea of projective planes btw) as well as other concepts of duality which perhaps if we use the matrices we have to modify the mechanism by deeper number theory.  That the symmetry and asymmetry may act on different energy levels is not foundationally a general theory of which as the grounding we should expect that it will fulfill the idea of predictions or perhaps discovery to be found in what we actually can observe in our experiments on any level.  In a sense the difference is everywhere as is the principle that distinguishes (Boson string theory not able to) bosons from the fermions which structurally is obvious.  Some, like Kea were able to discern the idea of this on a level worthy to explore.  That, and as we string along SUSY their are other ways to see supersymmetry sometimes it takes human insight and intervention to prevent the night parrots of New Zealand from going extinct due to the expansion of human environs.

*It seems to me also that the need for a time dimension in the several theories is certainly a false need of distinction, even in four space relativity we can imagine it all as just space.

*In a theory that as of 1995 could not handle weights how can we say that branes have more weight or in general that in some higher dimensional domain there is more energy of which we see but part of it?  Even Einstein considered things differently toward the end in his more cyclic cosmic views.  This is a problem of the limitations of our calculus.

*I have this looking down sense, if I can find the right and unique words and meanings of the geometric and algebraic structures (Einstein said it likely would be a algebraic view and solution) as a sort of deduction- but to raise the idea of Occam to find the simplest hypothesis by induction seems to me an intuitive error in a necessarily complex universe or gene codes beyond our expectations so far (but not too far for the permutation ideas of say Kea will certainly have vast applications to the gene code levels of processes even if these have but impotent identity as indifferent physics paths cosmic code wise.)  We know now, philosophically, that something can exist between induction and deduction as suggested by the teleportation of matter in experiments.

*The analogy with water, water drops, irreducible or discretely composed objects (molecules) is OK in the crude sense (consider dark fluid ideas) which involve no explanation (says the article) of evaporation.  This problem of the one and many, of the connected or not,  multiply.

*In division itself some sting theories rely on zero divisors which is OK when understood but does not seem to be understood dynamically, that is connected and so on is a quasic issue of similarity and the mirroring of some idea of subdivision of a solid. recent suggestions of a particle as having an extension that extension is not as if a point extended into a string- the dimensional terms here read to the layman at least as unclear.  Such an idea of extension is on a higher than string model of particles.

*In the simple understanding of space structure (stereonometry) by condensing to a center rather than to see things in compactification or knots to explain them away, in what is real even as if in four space as a sort of mirror of things, fourth dimension 101, few seem to be able to visualize the quadruplification here involved so how can such artifacts of sign be understood and not be invisible from the equivalent notation of the algebra.

*The proof of reduction of topologies by circles as the conjecture is one of the things while true is not part of a much wider picture where the proof or not is an issue lost in the generalization (again we have to understand what the nature of infinity is as a mirror to the longer time said to master the discrete).

* * * * *

Gene Code Beyond Maximum Symmetry

Gene Code Beyond Maximum Symmetry

L. Edgar Otto   23 June, 2012

Within a unified field or general abstract structure of space we can imagine a triplet codon to contain stereonomic sub structures that as a generalized field exceeds maximum symmetry, that is in the standard terms to be beyond the idea of octonions as the exceptional group that resolves the said limitations of bosonic string theory.

The shadows, without this concept of a more general idea of symmetry, 'hypersymmetry' to coin a working phrase, has to go beyond our ideas of complex space or the application to higher dimensional resolution of spinors and vectors and the approach of pertubations and permutations that present a possibility of diversity of path developments including those that resolve a particular organic structure.

The totality of an organism may have several global permutation states realized, all at some level viable. In a sense the octonions as such factor informationally as a system or theory into the quaternions so we are not simply limited to a fixed or dynamic idea of vagueness in the application of information in the depths or surface of holograms.

From my time of sleeping homeless by the river but keeping watch, all that developing symbolism of which the physics of it was an influence but hidden as part of the poetry, my idea was to imagine what we know of the general ideas of string theory explicitly applies to the reading of the gene code as well the concept that at certain descriptions the idea of black holes also applies to the structures.  But that this may be like or subtly different from my recent reading (that is for me to understand something beyond at least one exposure to the information, to understand it at the level it applies in depth, I in effect must independently discover the concept in myself) of Boson ideas of string theory (I googled the wiki article yesterday and the haunting similarity since I am familiar with my own language I can see the points missed where the use of what appears shared terms may say something quite confusing or different to other thinkers.)

The mechanism envisioned, and the promise of greater and wiser control of our tinkering and establishing this complexity of organic code is beautiful of course but it seems that we can have higher stages of beauty to which perhaps this idea like symmetry resonates with what is so aesthetic of such arts and structures felt or seen within us.

At this stage of our scientific and theoretical enquiry it is perhaps too soon to explore these regions of which I can come close to describe as that beyond maximum symmetry at least to the next level- but I think there is good reason to take the exploration seriously even if it is controversial and more abstract than the mathematics of which we try to establish physics as string theory... lesser theories that are too conservative in my view as if in a mirror seems to become the anomaly in the face of more unified and general views rather than a sea of such impinging on the physics game of our era.  The physical discovery of quasi crystals for an example or that we still find fundamental new and surprising things in chemistry bonding's, as with Boron.

So the new and naive generation of mystics and scientists may toy with the idea of E8 and such, the teratogenic monster groups as if the ground of the world were a more complete and unique symmetric heaven- or they may realize the simple extensions into the five fold symmetries of the icosahedron- all to create in their great grand speculations and just beyond as if their own discovery that comes with education or understanding. 

From the great cosmic library (which has works stored more in a cylinder or helix form as I once dreamed as a youth and read a small fraction of them) I wonder at some who steal the books therein without realizing that should they visit the library again they will not be able to access a volume.  Now while one my justify the most stolen book, the Bible, as some act for faith that is given away anyway I find it rather low class for those who tear pages out of books- worse are the antique dealers who break a book apart and sell the maps individually.  Scavengers who auction what they do not even care for of contained wisdom.

Now it may not be that these higher symmetric realms do any better a job of explaining things like the nature of our consciousness although that is a noble goal to explore yet is most likely even more complicated than the gene code, but I do have a sense that while the metaphors of so much of my poetic work gone that the universal structure ideas survived in the influence- some things survive the loss of love that changes with its own rules as does the wind- a certain sense, vague, of what is conserved in the chaos of symmetry of our thoughts and dreams.

* * * * * 

 

Crisis Flight and Fleeing Fighting Souls

L. Edgar Otto   23 June, 2012

Not always one with the unity of our hearts

That our understanding heals us incomplete in fits and starts

Time is not the precious moment, pearls we cannot waste

We reflect in pacing back and forth our loops, walks in space

Save who decides what is smarts, street wise tastes arise

Imprisoned by ourselves or chains,  faith in fear of guards

Thankful for the brief golden sunlit hours, castle prison yards

Between cities alive while flight, sleeping in waiting rooms Dreamless nothingness, wedding guests, best men, grooms

We celebrate our mirror souls still shards confined to wombs

Praise the solitude but cannot cross some bridge

Stand by heights even in solitude knee shaking brow ridge

Castles staked out as well our isolation or with our kind

Of the same flesh or uniform, known sheep, of like mind

Why read cross road signs at some edge life's fruit but rind?

The now, chains past, false futures promised, dreams to last

Hard time and pardons, worn cards consumed, four in bridge

Hearts and spades, luck of those enslaved, by our universe,   dream watch we cannot win, soul unkind its dress rehearse

Golden spiral whelk shells unwind, leaving its Devil's purse.

* * * * *

The Foundations of Particle Physics (Projective Color Iota Dynamics)

The Foundations of Particle Physics

(Projective Color Iota Dynamics)

L. Edgar Otto     22 June, 2012 

We say a picture is worth a thousand words, but here I offer you a picture that links to thousands more where those pictures show the path to a more unified view of particle physics and explains general structure with our haunting sense of model errors along the way. 

It also raises new possibilities of speculation.  The general idea I concieved in 1964 of smaller particle like parts to an electron  I called iotas with my so called "Omnium Properties" as if a dynamic dividing by zero. In 1968 I concluded there were 8 of these for an electron which of course was beyond the pale of current thinking and remained a vague and doubtful intuition.  Today I encounter the idea again.  Among other things it suggests the diagrams I drew can be see as our first level of a particle table.  The three colors alternating (and it is the alternations that seem to shift and give us a sense of oscillation) are echoed in the quark as a point like electron of so many iotas.

The duality between a point and an edge of a polyhedron seems to me complimentary to that of a point and a face.  We can also expand the spectral ordering or looping in a color wheel by the permutations of a set of colors.  The sense of symmetry of where these are balanced constitutes a form of what we tend to suggest is a particle.  We immediately find the Fermion and Boson division, and the grounding for exclusion or union of the dynamic sets of so many quarks regardless of our conventions of signs.  This duality I imagined as geometry back and forth between a proton and a neutron in a nucleus  (rather than just the exchange of a mediator particle in the models of those years).

We also see reasons that things are conserved more or less within a measure as if particle decay.  Now others have understood or suggested the pattern of Feynman diagrams to so generalize, but clearly there are at least two ways to do this.  One coming from the continuous view and one from the more discrete view.  It is a matter of taste as well as ammunition for debate as to what starting point we begin to reach some sort of neutrality and final unification of all the forces of known physics as we now know it.  The fundamental view over these plane graph generalizations shows a central view and count- or one from a more flat view as if we see an atom from outside.  This is the question of what role such expanded symmetry plays (as complicated as the graphs may seem it is only about the next layer of four space matter and the theory can be vastly expanded in the count even if it is iotas as the points of still higher polytopes that we vaguely confuse or look for as some form of super symmetry) in the idea of holographs and energy conservation of Noether depends on the idea of what sort of centered thing belongs in what sort of natural space dimension.  So too a wider understanding of all these views for ideas of coherence intimately tied to thermodynamics.

I use the color notation here for the Otto-Conway matrix of six colors (8 would be four space and so on with conceptual restraints as to what we mean by higher mass structures). Clearly we have a count of wholes and halves to form that essential difference at the lowest super symmetry, the kinetic and potential difference, in the count of the iotas with or without a more complex (Kea like) center.  It is not just a matter of 0 or 2 as the count of all orthogonal sub elements as an (Euclidean) grounding law of odd or even numbers or dimensions. 

We can have the duality between the octahedron and the cube of the same oddness or evenness but over the "quasic" field we have something akin to the ancient idea of numbers with gender.  This will appear naturally as if the logic diagrams of general and Aristotle's validity and implication directions.  We can make among other interpretations and hidden assumptions a rule that no two iota octahedra share the same plane or space.

The grey cube iota-plexes in the lower right corner of the illustration in black and white can be said to represent the muons ( the generalization of generations requires a better integration, known, with the standard physics and my quasic plane, something similar to branes, view).  The triads of colors  ABF represent moreover the faces of an icosahedron an also from some view the 30 edges.  These are the quarks.  The 30 color combinations of three or 60 with four space inversion symmetries, would suggest various possibilities for a higher structure (albeit a geometric analog) of the symmetries of life space (including DNA coding in all its permutations of a mere generational like color shift). Or I can imagine in higher physical space these may constitute a whole class to add to the particle zoo (Is the inside of a quasar not potentially a place for even higher dimensional matter?).

If nothing else comes of this it is a visual aid to the ideas of combinations and the algebra (here on the lowest level of exploring things orthogonally).

Enjoy.  Your central perspective is as intricate as mine and together each and every iota as if a singularity (monad as a physical word would not be bad for this phrase especially as it concerns mirrors and windows) is such a perspective in a fractal manner in a much wider universe.

It is worth noting that in an array of these cubes in a cube of these seven objects as in the jack-stone that the diameter is 5 of them presumably cubed for a centering of three layers but if we say there are two in the center than 8 x 27 = 6x6x6, this requires accounting too of a small part that seems hidden or perhaps a door or window for decay fluidity. Or we can find surpluses,  5! does not equal the 9x9x9 of space but again there is a straightforward measure of numerical excess.

* * * * *