Quasic Field Lensing

Quasic Field Lensing L. Edgar Otto June 30, 2011

I may come back for even more commentary on the last three posts beyond the photo of the notes. (or in the interest of my non-English readers type this out for easier translation.

Interestingly I conclude June's bout of creativity with Sn! and Sn!! my signs for speculation needed (and doubly needed) as is appropriate for popularization for the prospects as well as the achievements of the discussed publication of the enquiry.

The Depth Telescope... it is a surprise such devices as simple as they may be could be a physical reality as it is surprising to me the new principles of light and camera manufacture- no so the slow development of quantum computation a surprise to me without quasic creative principles of some sort- On the other hand, from a more philosophic view see the end of this post or the first July post on Multi-brane multi-polar intuition:

* * *
Thumbs for June Illustrations:



* * *

As a point of clarification the lens is here considered dark regions on clear regions which are transparent- of which I had planned to include a descriptive video of such nodes of focusing (sunlight). But the use of it for data and particle observation is to be done on a more abstract level- gravons or that effect for example will be much more difficult to construct as if some implied internal but opaque structure.

* * *



I may post this July 1st- Perhaps a related theme Dipolar Intuition more a look at what seems to be a better understanding of the reported phenomena of ESP (after all that has come up in some quantum interpretations) as this general philosophic idea of similarity of anything as division yet dynamic vibrations. But in view of the elusive persistence of experimental evidence as fundamental, or if it is in a sense a moving target, and that the connections if any are themselves elusive- this concept of space at once denies the mystery of such intermittent phenomena yet may ground it as a possibility as a science- that or to a deeper extent than we think- ground as well in the fixity of the genes for behavior, our intelligible ideas of physics including the structure of the vacuum is coextensive with the structures and evolving notions and coincident parallels of our minds. With at least a familiarity with the quantum world and questions in it (admittedly more intellectual) and perhaps the creative view offered herein, these things are not more of a mystery than the quantum view can seem. Yet with an incomplete understanding of these borderline and frontier logic's we will not make it a science in itself of which one can make any definite idea of a fixed and useful focus and the shoring up of personal identity or collective destiny.

Science, in my view, is in the same elaborate paradox where our core beliefs change but of which we are unaware- and as with ESP to be so aware at some place in time is to change the local scale observation at least. Yet it could still be that these connections even if they do not transcend the dimensional and energetic physics of the universe, could still encounter our intuitive folklore beliefs intelligibly and true to its own fictional inter-logic, the possibility of whatever this generations so called experience of internal or external spirits are. Or does it turn out that as a science these things do not become such a mystery either once explained and once focused on how we adapt and make coherent our own here and now structures of soul and mind. What are we that part of it all we experience intimately and at a distance the mechanisms of symmetry breaking? More needs to be considered here.

* * *