Leons and Lionessence

I know more formal science types occasionally read this blog but today after a sweaty night of on and off toothache I present a poem and a little bit of the germ of a four space structure matrix (that is Felix) theory. Sometimes, deep computation if deep enough can allay minor pains that actually opens up even deeper results. This has resulted in a few discoveries involving things like the Soma Cube in those rare bouts of waiting and dealing with the presence of pain.

(A Poem of Sorts, or where some poetic dreams meet mathematics. Of course there is comic relief at times and poetry seems to balance science if I dwell too far into one or the other. My wife noticed once that when I did math only over a few month, being Pe Sla or Old Baldy, that I grew hair, but in periods of poetry I lost it :-)

Leons and Lionessence L. Edgar Otto 04-06-11

*1 - A lepton may change generations as a measure of its mixed mass, but with respect to lionessence its mass is opaque and its spin is absolute

*2 - A quantum leopard may change "flavors"

*3 - A quantum leopardon may not change flavors or colors

*4 - A leopardon contains an intelligible number of leons

*5 - A felix of leons may decay or combine

*6 - Felices of leons may combine opaquely

*7 - Leons obey partition theory across the span of a quasic field of so many binary subcells

*8 - Leon prides vary over local regions of the calicontinuum

*9 - Prides may connect or leap opaquely such that lionessence and essense globally work together

*10 - A constant or invariant value in the uncertainty of the quantum cat may vary values and structures by Tabbylation (quasi-contiguity flows both ways across and between virtual and opaque mirrors)

*11 - A quantum cat has nine lives and always lands on its feet if falling

*12 - A quantum cat may vanish int a black hole of itself reduced to hair ball catastrophies as there are no paths but cataracts

*13 - Quantum cats tangle balls of string theorists

*14 - "Cats have fleas with little fleas and little fleas upon them and so on, ad infinitum . . ."

* * * End of Poem


[7 white and yellow x 16 white and yellow = 112 which = 2 x 56]
A Technical Note regarding the accompanying illustration of "felix algebra" -


Kea's update of theory today refers to papers that discuss some of the considerations I have thought about and store into stray thoughts. In the poem above , item *6, the thought behind this was from one of her papers where these methods as matrices together may show symmetries where the individual ones do not.

I am impressed that theoreticians like Motil can stand so strong in defense of the older physics view, such a position has an impressive body of reinterpretation and reconfiguring the theory- if it remains a fundamental and final theory it certainly does not seem to solve the growing complexity of things needing to be revalued. There is Resistance as usual to foundational changes of paradigm. The EHJ as a real particle certainly makes the Higgs mechanism or particles, if they exist and on values Lubos was insisting as more correct, these but one of a further series of such.

But Kea points out today that this does relate and involve "renormalization" which has come to be a respectable method now. My stray thought was that when we have a wider freedom of representations (perhaps we should take a look at the idea of spinors after all to see where it fits into all this but it is enough with theory to point out what areas are not considered for a paper- tachyons and Rowland's for example), so, the Jordan view of the matrices feels to me a little like whatever is on the diagonal in a sense can be exploded or mirrored in the rest of the matrix. In the richness of higher space we would be surprised not to find new surprises there.

So, and I praise those who have written on Euler as to the rightness, albeit intuitive and inductive, of certain of his solutions that on the face of it do not make sense. For me I have "normalized" by assuming the diagonal had some sort of zeros (if we take a stance of absolute positive notations that we can find the justification for complex duplication of the count of some array of particles or numbers in real as well as abstract virtual space.) Kea sets the diagonal at a series of 1's, an implied renormalization that makes fundamental scaling of whatever constants and measures there be. It is the same thing in the black k and white w of it for any hidden symmetrical structures and processes that are real in the physicality of it all. The series of 1 and -1 is as ambiguous as to the interpretation of zero as that concept can be related to some unitary or infinity of values. Euler.

When we think of a matrix 4x4 and add the mirror or hidden symmetries implied as physically relevant, the count of course of 15 *'s wildcards from one perspective or another involve the usual (and revisited) Dirac ideas for it sums to say 60 potential objects or infinities. It sets the question of what time-like vectors of dimensions are added to make the background some binary number like 64 or in the general concept of viriality squared we encounter the recondite 4n again of which between the lower dimensions at least we may so duplicate as if complex numbers equal to some group whose generalization may have physical consequences despite these being a background as opaque or dark in concept. Would the vacua all be filled as to their negativity if we had for example the TGD multiple h effects and could this be done in a more specific p-adic array of things real and virtual?

* * *



A Metaphysical Interlude:

And where the world is intelligible this applies to organic systems too. Yet it remains to be seen (if we get beyond the useful metaphysical principle of trying to relate all of physics as chirality in terms of weak force muon levels and so on...) If the little leons and other jaguars are full or empty in context and can leap between such higher symmetries so as to store at least information on the level of the very wide complexity of our accumulated experience.

In a vague sense thermodynamics meets our ideas of mass-gravity in some place where these may or not be easily distinct, real or illusion from some views even. Do things evolve in this matter indefinitely? But that is a question of perhaps an even wider physics and a wider background coming full circle to metaphysics or not.

* * *