Tetrons

Tetrons Leonard Edgar Otto July 15, 2011

I thought I might shore up some of the ideas involving phi(or tau) as far as foundational structural things are concerned, and abstract motion.

Basically, the structure involve four space with the five points of the five cell analog to the tetrahedron having these usual coordinates: 0001, 0010, 0100, 1000, and (tau,tau,tau,tau) tau being a key length in considering four space.

Imagining then (the ground of simplexes as sort of forming a general subspace in the world of orthogons, - the Celesticontinuum CCm in my terminology.) But these structural considerations are not all to that celestic space conception as it has evolved in my contemplations.

We imagine abstract quasic motions between the points where the f is the movement thru points, edges, squares, cubes... and so on and the reversed 6 is the number of coordinate changes. Thus we map orthogonal space onto the simplex space.

We note that there is no motion thru three space as cubes and that four space is at global rest of no change of coordinates and changing four coordinates is a linear or diagonal motion (according to the concept of quasic motion).

Beyond this we can imagine (by the rule of the uncertainty of motion in a finite system such as only eight points making a discrete cube) a mirror of this figure where the center is a singularity -symbol ng sub tau (its mirror is of course a singularity complex -symbol ngx sub tau) and in my system we have a distinction in the inward and outward directions- moreover, I wish to interpret the mirror motion as a vibration or an absolute value of such a motion.

Clearly, on this foundational level and here at the simplest case of three and four space, this represents a "minimum quasication" much like the path as a baseball shape represents the minimum quantization of the electromagnetic field.

This simple model suggest also that these have there mirrors as a conceptual aid to what explains certain structures space related such as of particles. This continues to other strictly self dual figures such as the 24cell (and the torus principle in general of pairs of faces or sides).

Also, continued on the other side of this photo of a page is he idea that these general foundational principles should be thought of as alternative ways to view concepts in the philosophy-physics as to terminology to explore how close the meanings. I might consider the cylinder ideas (like mine in the paper pdf I linked to yesterday) as if the idea of wormholes with some sort of wave guide structure and so on for other topological ideas that distinguish the mouth, or the discrete tori that appear beyond invariant ideas of distance that seemed fixed on some sort of relation to what is unique in a range of numbers, Pitkanen's use of primes comes to mind. Also the link on the comment of yesterday to "No Body" who also considers the range of such things where they relate to the group numbers such as the monster group. For in a sense the simple connection between the orthogon and simplex above of abstract quasic motions is a very intricate and general inclusion of the relevant information that can naturally evolve dynamically grounding our ideas of chirality and what is open or not from some view and what is multiplicity or singular in values or not, between the singularity and singularity complex excluded in the background on one hand, fixed and centered points or not, and what might be distinguished in the enhancing or reduction of combining directions at a point as to the splitting or combining of global and local directions of general time.

* * *

A remark after hearing the BBC this morning on Hindu texts (of which I have included certain symbols in the illustrations- that and the Buddhist texts- as a metaphor for some philosophic views such as our sense of some of the quantum implications) which explains God as the creator, who sustains or is the destroyer of worlds. But in a sense we are beyond the useful world as explored and experienced in that many problems of physics is that of what happens at the remote singularities.

Yet from these recent contemplations (such as a higher view of time directions, such a Hindu god identifies with time- offers to free us from the cycles of many lives, a problem of cyclic universes also in their foundational models) Theirs a more inclusive thus more general view of the possibilities of nature and spiritual stances.

But one thing occurs to me (a question that used to come up on the philosophychatforum ) is there a personal God? These recent thoughts in the deeper relation (than QFT) as to what might be a more general view of consciousness, the interplay or necessity of good and evil and so on in the world as signs and imaginary signs and so on, suggests that to the extent we are individually personal the communication with said personal gods establishes our grounding better than simply an idea that supplies meaning. The universe, as existing, even as random and mechanical and uncertain of its purpose, may in a sense identify to us as a personal relationship- one that by the way transcends the issues of an anthropic principle.

In any case we most likely experience something like this in our conscience and intuition as guides a little beyond the reasoning so a little alien- only there may be a voice behind the influences of the said gods and not just the finding of our unique directions and being. But even this is useful information outside the scope of the singularities and paradoxes of nothingness, save maybe that the vague understanding of our awakening and learning in this world goes a long way to explain the contrasts of things like size of particles and entropy in that conjugate relation of information and meaning (Shannon) or the algorithmic and global approach. After all what can we do otherwise with an idea I saw posted yesterday for a Turing machine that could be read all at once? Is that not such a metaphysical problem?

One stray thought was- and for Ulla and Pitkanen's discussion of DNA (again something of the gods more an avatar than some being made strictly flesh or matter as in the powerful Western faiths) as to what is the external or direct way to view the organism as matter or field of usually rejected influences, I tentatively suggest the Mitochondria are analogous to stars and the DNA and its varieties are analogous to black hole like objects as consumers of entropy (Penrose). But beyond these singularity ideas (with the exception that by the principle of uncertainty of what is inside or outside as to undermine the ideas of expansion and inversion that we do find certain hyperbolic descriptions for the interconnection of organic entities in a complicated structure) we have the cell and tissue system of the organism as that covered in the bilateral symmetric creature with a relation to time omnically as far as relative and indefinite life span of the said discrete and conscious universe. But this speculation while novel needs much deeper treatment.

* * *