Thresholds Of Sufficiently Metaphorical Systems

Thresholds Of Sufficiently Metaphorical Systems L. Edgar Otto June 25, 2011

The new physics has two approaches to go beyond the standard theory and shore up the nature of particles for such things as the supposed phase angles of neutrinos or that as the gauge rather than a start from electrons and all the classical flat cosmology of an infinite universe and its background radiation values, the classical radius and so on as extended geometries of arithmetic and algebraic topology. Until then it is futile to try to force these concepts into what is beyond validity and syllogism where the logic connects or not as do the interactions of particles. That is gravity or mass is just beyond and yet can be contiguous with the theories as formed. Where they are fractal in the patterns of numbers as we suspect of the masses as powers of two in the ratio of generations or where they deny this extension of low group properties, the holographic and fractal depths and spans do not give us all the picture- in our recent physics this is equivalent to the problem of general unification and is a very difficult thing to understand without the primacy of this threshold of systems metaphor.

It follows that what we have not been able to do with our mathematics we will not be able to force some lesser theory of it on the results of our atom smasher machines.

* * * (To be continued with the paper proper:

At this point I have either reached a level of understanding the insights of others implied by their notions and notations or perhaps have independently found such in a parallel presentation, or have found a new level of quasi-physical insights. It is not clear which systems and methods are subsets of "whom".

The informal system I use itself as beyond the hints of new physics as a metaphor to be worked out or explored in formal detail between intuition and more concrete insights.

In metaphorical space as a touchable physicality the recovery of dispersed photon paths from some general view may allow "seeing behind objects".

We cannot shore up the standard theory by K group (sphere) or phase methods ultimately. So variations in lattices and diagonals of matrices are but quasi-relevance.

Unitary (N) N a natural dimension is quasi-certain. Thus systems of physical unity are metaphorical in intelligibly mathematical computational methods. That is, the vagueness and questioning the ideal dream in practice of U(5 or 10)- so the total metaphorical system to the level of our understanding or learning is the interpretations some offer as based on mentality.

The many speculations, to some matching degree or not, in the explorations of the hints and anomalies or systems aberrations of the new physics is worth the effort but is more like competent engineering rather than creative systems origninality.

No LHC projects then can give us physics beyond the not greater than 24 dimensions as more than engineering.

The singular primes are mapped on the Conway Matrix, there being thirty so as to orient the six sided things coherently for the diagonals are considered outside the metaphor space where the genus of tori lattices may apply as if outside the epsilon delta honeycomb lattice as a grounding reference innate to framing and changes in the nature of space and perhaps the creative aspects of vacua.

Ramanujan patterns do not reach explicitly to aberrations of the system greater than the 24, implicitly in (charge) and better understanding of CPT structures, where the metaphysics (assumed foundational under TGD) is like the coincidences cosmologically, a framework within infinite by creatively quasi-discrete bounded (for the stepwise generations as computed in sheets beyond the 24 system modulations is akin to a breakthrough as important to physics as the discovery of the Balmer series and its remaining doable as classical as well as quantum in formulation as we imagine abstractly or literally some neutrino or electron gauge transitions and foundations of our various running or given scales and frames.

(I guess I saw it all much clearer than the way I have finally written it down- Here I add a point that the patterns of 24 in numbers that recently are discovered for surprise patterns in number theory as a fractal like system or property are nevertheless short of a comprehensive metaphorical theory that would seem to contain and limit everything. Thus it is with all such complimentary theories that may emphasize only the holographic or the fractal HFX approaches.)

As such the distinctions I have made between singularity and singularity complex apply to the general notions. We can exceed the metaphor from only reference within itself in a sense we can make molecules of atoms in a quasi-foam idea upon unity systems (Q4om) which is to say that unity, complex numbers and signs are in a sense deeper concepts in what is computational and stereonomic principles thus our notions of conservation are also a quasi-conserved uncertainty. An intelligibly unique order if such sign changes can be solved or is solvable in principle at this metaphorical frontier of the nearly disembodied unitary.

This Conway matrix system, which may transcend through greater spaces beginning with the 25th unit as metaphorical may indeed carry the low Galois dimensions upward and the unitary sign changes describe higher mod spaces or fractal like cycles which will exceed perhap even the idea transfinite number systems Q#\^R R=endless binary powers of powers if this generalization = or not transfinites to the transfinites or some analog to them in a super-metaphorical system. Of course in the reduction of logic via the signs or the order of things, or the dimensions of power sets and sub groups which only by shear accident can be broken or partitioned to the one way this world or any world may be so physically based, leaves at least the sign changes of say the 8 time like dimensions of the 248 maximum symmetry group.

Some systems, even as the powers of things added (yet 3, 4, 5 as a triangle of course does not exceed 25 when we compute the primacy of the lower legs for that is after all a difference in the 2brane as a unit or unity less than the 24. If we imagine this as 2 to such powers in the Pythagorean equation at least the manifold case on the micro-scale, we have a difference of 8 from the expected 32 as -24.

Yet if particle mass is seen as symmetrical and discrete in the sense of say some unit or units like charge as its measure, we note that there are differences that are close and some not so close and some remain undetermined. All of which within the 24 or less space should be intelligibly determined. In a sense we compute what is not in the representation of tori as a third of the possible arrangements of representations of such discrete units, say pairs of 3 and 3 points of a hypercube with one in the center for the +1 where need 12 + 12 + 1 is 25.

The Higgs and its mechanism is of course already assumed a metaphorical particle which may in a sense be outside the realm of particles as much as our gravity concepts but this we mean (as does the clarity in Rowlands statements of the issues) what is meant more by the idea of "inertia".

In the illustration there are 6 Buddhas (really Five as the sixth quark is a different animal of sorts in the counting of symmetry systems and their quasi observable breaking) that is the 8 and so on--- the ways we imagine such combination's and perturbation and tangles of random as spherical or directed or knotted directions (that is real or unreal or virtual like vectors in the vacuum and so on). All of this seemingly applies to the compacting or condensing the metaphorical and not the physical space.

Thus the quasi-unit of physical and cosmological theories as creative vacua and symmetric thermodynamics leaves speculations metaphorically open as to deep transcendence or creation - a real not just relatively virtual mechanisms for material and mental systems of the Soul. But what sort of theory is intelligible that exceeds deep validity and uncertain implications with vanishing directions and measures- vanishing vectors in all space and all time?

* * *

Footnote:

Finally, the answer to some questions especially around Conway. I now have found references to the "Supersingular Primes" having know this as a gap in my reading. Yet it seems rather familiar turf. Guess I have a lot more to learn in this area.

http://www.math.uic.edu/~ronan/story_in_100_words I found especially lucid.

Still, I do think mathematics for itself eventually becomes something that finds application - Only, if I may say it, the time from such esoteric and pure theory to something applied is shorter and shorter, that is almost now something in real time and the climate done on the way to give us a cathedral of its design and modeling.

The other intuitive lack I felt was that of different directions of dimensions say along cosmic strings in the string type theory- the why and how of it.


Happy Enquiring!

* * *
Next day- from that site this was especially interesting:

The rational numbers extended by the square root of -n do not normally admit unique factorization; it only happens when n is one of the following: 1, 2, 3, 7, 11, 19, 43, 67, and 163, which makes 163 rather special.

It is odd that the formula up to 40, via quadratics we have known since at least my high school generates primes- but this begins to tell us why and that such almost formulas for generating them algebraically have some uses and mysteries. In what sense might we fill a vacuum if it is an imaginary one indeed?

* * *