Chirality and Compactification

Chirality and Compactification

[The essential idea today is that our concepts of chirality in familiar space has to take in account a few of the lower dimensions at once- that out or into in some direction so defined as an orientation at the remote configuration goes into the depth and span of what is the surface and the internal geometry. This can result in a hierarchy of systems for example the nervous system of the brane as if it acts upon some degree of awareness to some higher generation of concepts and deeper looks at the foundations of physics where it has such foundations. How do we simply impose some group concept then in a model without this next level of complexity to take into account? If the twistor concept orients itself to the state where there is the definition of gravity then what do we do when this definition is reached everywhere as a topological given- a twistor theory without twistors? The complex notions can show some things intelligibly, at least on the next level beyond the paradoxes of those most fundamental. But an object, even asymmetric because of its fact of orthogonality in some general grid, a particle, does have to obey such things as that idea of string multi-rotaion 720 degrees and so on... But have we asked the possible ways it can do this? Can such an object bypass many of the issues of what is randomness? Can it obey a wider scope this uncertain measure has hidden from what the particles do and can do naturally? In particular may we assign the CPT concepts (as if already conserved in threes if not in some pairs logically)in Rowlands analogy to Dirac algebra in more ways than we now suspect or can see as we cannot sort out some distinctions and only see parts of the other ones without a clear foundation. Parity and Chirality is not just a matter of how we see them in three space, nor so seeing them that way do we not cary the problems to our visions of say compacted six spaces or any general multidimensional ones...posted feeling better and little more awake than the following:]

I have had a cold, a little better today. I had some stay thoughts- the idea of the surface 24 four color cube being the same with inversion apples to the turns and twists when we use the standard 24 group labeling.

In the fever of shivering and dreaming I keep coming back to some theme and it made more sense this morning (although I still feel a little weak). The question then is what do we mean by the flipping over via the D group in all these structures. I doubt that a treatment on CPT as in Rowlands is general or foundational enough to grasp what is happening in the turns and twists, the twistor idea of things.

Such considerations I feel contains a very profound key to some of the aspects of consciousness for those of you concerned about such things. I do not have the energy to make this clear today. That to be titled the Persistence of the Real. To what extent does such labeling matter concretely, say in the organization or self-organization of our brains? This idea is very much akin to that of the ambiguity of the crossing of knots in the remote infinity of the ideals. Our comprehension of some things seems a hierarchy of sorts that depends on the state or generation of our reach of awareness. This goes for the comprehension of or depth of a theory of physics. We cannot interpret some things without the sense of a core given or experience of such for that outside our zone of familiarity. We cannot see beneath the chaos likewise. What is off center, eccentric, is that we cannot hold to a center singularity or not- or some idea of compactifiaction or not as if we the center of a universe or not. Surely this applies to the idea of the infinitesimal too. I note that some posters today in one way or another are beginning to ask these questions.

The rest of the illustration above consisting of 13 groups of 7 things or 7 groups of 13 things is art- but it did come out of toy with numbers- not 1 iota identity 8 tau, 9 sigma, and 6 alpha that is if we square them: 1 64 81 36 summed is 192 or twice 91 of the art. But this path just rambled not going anywhere really. I thought Lubos would like this configuration, artistically of course.

With such ambiguity if one considers the infinitesimal of turns and twists- what grounds the spin network idea from the bottom up or top down? What actually guarantees the complex number duplication of things other than imposed theory and choice?

I thought of using these cubes in the illustration to investigate the tetracubes as a fresh way to compose them.

I almost posted yesterday for we are thinking of starting the candle company again with all the processes and designs involving maths and space. It was too much effort and would have been called the Metaphysics of Production.

I had a few stray thoughts on why there is no variable 5pt star mold.
I may do this here as it can be rather colorful including the color code of the twelve notes based on tempered music.

* * *



CANDLE PROJECT PANEL ONE

Making candles has led me to many considerations of space and combinatorial ideas.

The layering of colors was not cost effective on a massive scale- to that end I invented the holo-fractor. It is a series of special siphons that can divide a large amount of wax into multiple candles accurate to the drop. The idea of the multi colors was the guarantee in the shifting of colors in the manufacturing process that the layers come out interesting as modulated. When asked by one of the artist if this was not mass production I told her : "Just as each candle is like a spectrum of a star I am just making a one of a kind galaxy. In fact, because we have such little room the pouring of the candles is no longer back breaking for I have made the galaxy more like a quasar." 1973



CANDLE PROJECT PANEL TWO

* * *

I made a comment to Ulla on her excellent post on the nerves and so on. It may explain the subconscious concerns that recur recently which was worked out so much better in the dream as a paper had I not gone to sleep again soon after. It is part of the trying to understand those around me and how they see the world and maybe how they are ultimately different and on what level the expect things in their reality. I do not think consciousness can be described in the theories in fashion of this day, that is and be a higher theory. Nor that this is a reductionist thing were even the emotions can be put into some sort of material process or form. I do not know if such ideas of consciousness persisting can be the ground of our reality and not just its own ground. But this should be of interest to all of us if for nothing else than a clearer vision of what we are oh so easily manipulated- and perhaps how we might truly judge better the deep theories presented regardless of superficial differences between us.

Ulla,

You have so much in these two posts. Did you catch this result:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110217171344.htm

Interesting that the flies can distinguish Hydrogen and Deuterium- I never thought much of the idea it was simply the shape of molecules nor that artificial ones to mimic flavor could have not hidden ill effects.

I like the stages of deeper processing- the long and short terms memory of it all in terms of DNA and so forth. In the moment or brain cells light up at the hint of rumors and chatter like they crave salty sugar when in the guardians of the conversation, back and forth on the next deeper level they are saying " Never mind this, Let us all push the host to bring us a good steak!"

Now, there can be more levels beyond ideas of quanta and so on with some sort of laws that gives persistence of the real. Which on the average is our true center of consciousness?

Certainly we can look at disease as containing germs as the cause, or that germs only thrive in broken bodies. Too little is know about the end of cell life. While we may be able to extend it by repair of the teleomeres it may result in more tumor growth as a recent article said.

As in my last post, where I hinted as more ideas on the deeper nature of consciousness it came from a dream where the nerves said "you are sick, forget that and give us steak!"
And I realized that some of us think mainly on one of the other of these levels- and we cannot always understand even in ourselves what is on a higher level (say of theory) or if a dream makes sense looking down on it, always. But from all levels the theme and dream can persist as to some urgency or decision coming to consciousness. But what this means I am not clear other than it hints at a more profound level of being and perception than we now imagine. I doubt there is a simple magic fix that only communicates on the quantum level and not in our sense of self itself between all our levels. Synapses as the mediator are but the lowest level of what makes our mental effects.

The PeSla See

http://zone-reflex.blogspot.com/2011/03/neural-communication-outside-synapses.html?showComment=1299715901162#c5118730018896443729

* * *

The duplication of the DNA a most interesting discovery at the end of nerve life but they do not replicate. Here too a model of mirrors, a four way deal at least, seems to apply to more complex systems of our topologies and chiralities.