* * *
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/11/maxwells-demon-cannot-do-useful-work.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29
http://pseudomonad.blogspot.com/2010/11/theory-update-20.html
Phoebe Snow Primes & Third Psychology Revolution
After reading the two links above I decided to post some really simple ideas of which I was not going to as I did not consider them very deep. I rather thought I would take a day off- but then decided to post one on the current state of psychology in view of wide speculations and counter claims by competing physicists.
Maxwell's Demon and (what was that great Jewish author's name with his engine derived from that idea?) I mean if the case is that the demon would add to the entropy by his intelligence, his knowing and placing the molecule in the right box, then obviously we should accept the proof that such people in their thinking cannot do useful work!
On the pseudomonad blogspot post from the link above I am out of my league in understanding the significance of it. I mean, what work I did last night I may have well have doodles for some sort of art therapy- yet, as beautiful as the page was and as pointless the simple concepts that could be zillions of others- I find the pseudomonad post or links to it really as fanciful, limited, and of questionable work and interpretation.
I wrote on the paper in the spirit of a new sense of my own and human psychology- that I intended to write about, informally, today if I did anything, that we should consider this a simple game and I do not know what I am doing yet but I will! A sort of precognition time travel foresight. But I did see I made an assumption very early on in my physics hobby career- there there was something greater than instantaneous (let alone action at a distance)- the light can be received as place B before it leaves place A! How do we resolve this without some sort of teleology or tachyons and it make scientific sense?
The third revolution in psychology had not come, first psycho-dynamics, then behaviorism, and now the vague use of drug therapy- a sort of interim for advancement. We could say, if the science were more exact- that the drug revolution was a third psychology one- or we could make a synthesis as some do to make a combination of talk and drug therapy and that the third or fourth one. So by my vague teleological symbolism of 0 1 2 3 4 and 5 vertical bars I am really talking about the problems of unifying physics, a fifth revolution in psychology if we look at it that way. But such a unification is way beyond the questions raises by any of the old physics- should we have a 3+1 or a 2+2 formalism or both? String or space centered topological- quantum or general relativistic? Indeed, it takes no work at the origins if they do not exist thermodynamically, nor need for some one god general conservation of such energy- one consciousness can change their world and all the world such that they are near or in such a world where their theories will seem if not totally become true. We live the song we sing. Moreover, our soul in the mind of God or not outside the "centers around some big bang on the WMAP"! if it vanishes then the whole universe does.
Why would we insist on health care, the problems of lack of faith in faith healing aside or the vagueness if not impossibility of healing at a distance, if in what will seem a more awake and sane person who is damn sure of some future state he can choose to be that he knows he will not be sick anytime soon- for him the idea of a statistical world view of insurance is a little less that true and honest. Now this is especially true in the development of language as recent science daily com articles say about mapping the brain (of which it would really help us to have such maps as best we could from the material and neurological view, still a great frontier to explore regardless of the so called nature of the mind itself) for the article shows extensive connections of brain regions far apart and all involved in things like spatial orientations and the aspects of language. This mapping will of course prove to be more grounded as we understand better the mechanism of such a survey- much as that of the genome.
* * *
Phoebe Snow Algebra:
There exists five prime natural dimensions 7 13 17 29 31 but this linear measure on each dimension can collectively be squared into a p-blend (and this theory is not more p-brained than what the fancy other one says but her I am making simple integer substitutions to test the algebraic formula with specific cases.
Now the order of multiplication is important for the counting (and he general idea is that the exceptions to some formula that fail at some place to generate primes is an advantage for it defines certain focused topological structures).
Of course where we have squares on these finite things we can erect ideas of the inverse square laws. We can in fact write a paper that as if the post modern generator sounds like it says something when it says nothing- and worse we may have a paper that appears to be such a paper but it says something true yet trivial or little at all so to make a big hullabaloo over such a simple grounding of ideas.
Nevertheless, the factoring as the difference of squares or squaring and so on, that is Pascals triangle seems the highest yet the simple grounding for all general physics.
Here when I use standard terms some of which we almost define clearly, like dimension, do not read them as such (otherwise I would have to label them like pseudo-dimension or something. I mean will I make an analogy here to super-symmetry upon the structures or some sort of other symmetry, even dark symmetry as geometrical?)
*1 - there exists eleven dimensions where each dimension has a value in some complex of prime numbers that when squared exhausts a four space of the 11 or 12 dimensions(twelve is possible because 13 x 13 combines with itself as its own inverse, so we can use it 4 times compared to 2 times in the 11 space of the other primes.
*2 - In the first particle the axes are 7 13 29 31 of these 13^2 + 29^2 = 7^2 + 31^2. In this particle we exclude the 17
*3- In the second particle we have 13^2 + 17^2 = 29^2 + 31^2. In this mirror particle whose sums are "heavier" than the first one we exclude the 7
*4- In the third particle we have 13^2 + 13^2 = 7^2 + 17^2 a sort of particle that may be thought of as a mediator to the others excluding 29 and 31 which are both included in the particle and mirror particle.
*5 - again, we are talking raw algebra of the difference of squares or in the factoring the + or - 2xy .
* * *
There is no global warming- it comes in cycles- announced this morning on the shepherds chapel from Gravette Arkansas- (tele was on when I was making coffee on this cold morning) Because: he believes in the Word of God and in Genesis after the flood the rainbow is a promise that God will not destroy the world again!
Can it be this the God's truth in his world as well as mind? Maybe his is a theory of nearly everything (after all independent values of a circuit can read individually greater that the computed values as the source seems complex numbers much easier to show than the old cosines and so on.)? If not then just as the time and space in general relativity is constant but each may vary in rotation or velocity and so on- how does a mind engaged with the world discern truths in the schizophrenic and half evolved theories of our physics? Even the consensus as if prayer changed the world and caused earthquakes and so on... it is hard for each of us to know ourselves and true faiths and philosophy of science if indeed each of our votes are really counted and not some sort of spin or trend projections. Free will is in many ways harder to deal with than absolute determinism.
* * *
here are some science daily links for reference for sultan's and my linguistic dialog:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/search/?keyword=language+and+brain+structure
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101116205012.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101116093546.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101122152040.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100601171848.htm
* * *
OK, so we have two boxes and one molecule and it fills the box in Maxwell's Demon problem (interesting to know Lord Kelvin called it that). But what happens beyond 8 dimensions when the orthogonal space is full of the spherical space?
OK, in the matrices presented, again the image of a pair of rooms or spaces that relates to whatever is the surrounding spaces or pairs in say four space, that in the 3 x 3 times 2 (much as I double the 256 units to 512) how do we take into account that such Latin squares may be shown in some matrices impossible?
OK, if there is an Intelligent Designer who is omniscience does He by knowing everything add infinite disorder to the universe, a sort of inversion of Maxwell's demon? Would an intelligible design in the universe not be subject to the same question if the intelligibility is a matter of thermodynamic randomness?
Emergent properties may only exist (in the sense time said to be an illusion) only on a slightly higher level on the skeleton of simple ideas of arithmetic. Certainly Weyl had a good sense of what was of value or not in intuitionist theory. But this idea does not resolve things by this difference if over time it persists on all scales and all senses of time direction. What, at any point of beginning initially in the universe determines really a unique ordering of successive dimensions as if they actually evolve? It only solves locally the arrows of time paradoxes and so the thermodynamic explanation of the arrow of time is certainly not a complete theory nor the Penrose ideas of twistors done only from the quantum viewpoint deep enough to show how things are done or perceived- as if the materialization of the emergence as if gravity as a pervasive force without at least a deeper explanation of what it means in such orientations as a twister formalism in terms of topological principles- as in one of the sciencedaily com links above we have evidence that how our brain organizes color and space in distinctions suggests perhaps in our brain development with the proper frequency underlying our perceptions we make the world intelligible if not we adjust to theory of which in lesser awareness we adjust to it and color it- even in the fifth psychology make it real and our gray matter arranged so as to do so- or again in these world we choose to make find them intelligible and as convincing as our natural environs of our DNA expressed. Why then do not those with less than stable minds- or who hear disconnects and confabulations of voices who are not aware, make things more disorderly for the rest of us? But this perhaps is a multiverse of multiverse question to which we see a unity of the resolution of this paradox again.
No comments:
Post a Comment