Orthogonal Superhyper Colour

Orthogonal Superhyper Colour
(How can we know if the observed Particle is the Higgs?) L. Edgar Otto August 23, 2011

*1 - 1, the prime Pascal orthogonal singularity-generator.
1,2 the duality principle, viriality in space
1,4,4 two finite planes can intersect in a point-field entity

*2 - 1,6,12,8 Higher three space ensembles of points my exhibit structural duality, synthesis of balance, and asymmetry.

*3 - These colour labels are inductive-deductive to higher spaces.

*4 - These are integrally intelligible in the count of abstract and real objects.

*5 - Differences of such duality polytopal spaces are orthogonal and "quasic" may compute local groupings in a range of natural dimensions.

*6 - These make for the divisions of coloration and vectors as an intelligible count on surfaces, centers, and the condensing or crystallization by parallel (flanged) dimensional effects.

*7 - In one part of the duality colors may only there be transitive.

*8 - The grounding for particle mediators and structures is the intelligible defaulting to different dimensional centering.

*9 - In the "weight" of particles an ordering if privileged can be so grounded, where the hidden parallel forces and labels are needed to solve the physicality.

*10 - There may exist higher analogs to or of superhyper symmetry including finite (at least) field effects of implied division algebras, including grounding for an infinite collective of prime number intelligibility.

*11 - The decay products and paths, 1 to 1 bijective or intelligible otherwise by statistical observation and careful defining of layers of quantum mixing in a range of dimensions are clues.

*12 - There may exist a level where the assumption of sub-symmetries as the internal or the apparent hierarchy of them is virtual but influential.

*13 - Such ideas require a deeper understanding of time and coherence (decoherence).

*14 - This virtually hidden symmetry structure may be neither fractal nor holographic.

*15 - These inferred particles (depending on our lesser interpretations so far) as in momentum, say for neutrinos, are quasi-physical and quasi continuous frontiers of (phoenix) mechanics.


* * *

Somewhat related to these issues today is a post by Lubos on the relationship of gravity to entropy... In my opinion both papers cited leave a lot to be desired and are a little less than a deeper understanding of this creative approach and debate.

http://motls.blogspot.com/2011/08/once-more-gravity-is-not-entropic-force.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29

That is, some such relation may certainly be involved here but our science does not seem to have caught up to certain core issues, times arrow and thermodynamics and symmetry itself, other things such as decoherence, and an ultimate idea of some sort of absolute indeterminacy, and so on as really a matter now of creative philosophy.

In the illustrations above the script part is the sheet following the one typed at the beginning of this posting. From this I will extract the philosophic speculation which if one is to look deeply there is a wealth of the geometrical part of this better written page on superhyper symmetry as it should follow from things that seem to be happening in science in our time- things of course well beyond the propaganda from the post-modern accepting of a new age of awakening of an interconnected world view. What after all is the long term investments while the short term fluctuates?

Of course, in that this relates to particle physics or any sort of intelligible treatment of what are distinct inertial systems as if mass or gravity and so on, I tried to answer Tomasso's question on how can we know if such and such a particle is the Higgs or something else? I am not claiming to answer this directly and after all my position is more that of Pitkanen's insights, given him a little evidence of what else could something be from these geometrical groundings. But a bigger question than say supersymmetric particles as such would be in this higher generalization of dimensional space are there some particles or reactions possible in the background we could not really infer at all or observe yet they are real at least as we can reason them out even if actual energy concerns are still remote? There should be intelligible analogs to what SUSY suggests but in superhyper levels.

Philosophy where some physics principles are at bottom still metaphysical (in Peter Rowlands' sense which after all does assert a role for the muon and the paradoxical rest of the universe as an entity that creates is own vacuum.):

The "purpose of life" is not that it can stand out from the universe to become a self-reflection on itself or on the universe. It is (at least) in the evolution as grounding, that the evolving itself stands out as an open purpose and directed end, to define in our own lives what is unique so standing out as intelligible.

I have at times often wondered about what the birds were on about as if they really had a purpose and some control of their own world. But can we not ask this question of ourselves from perhaps a little higher perspective? The purpose of a photon as Noether suggests, is light to find the path of least action over the widest freedom of symmetry- an still we have not placed the lowly photon in a greater physics context in our own search for the truth or not of unified theories.

* * *



Preface here to today's
Comment to Pitkanen:

We have made a great fuss over what may be these particles- I agree that the cosmic and nuclear string ideas still have validity even if the faery fields and standard strings fail- I have shown the way from the very beginning that the duality between the Platonic like or regular structures imply a sort of vibration and mediator particle and as with Pitkanen not something deeper- and yet there are more complicated particles than what we observe or can today, even beyond the idea of Higgs in the vast sea of singularities. That would be quite a discovery and more to the engineer's taste. So why not look at the alternative logics and theories so we can say rather easily if such and such is a Higgs then how many and so on. But until we grasp the wider ground of as yet undefined dimensions and can stare at the obvious and that not be invisible and ambiguous in the counting, we cannot agree on the value of and soundness of such a universe that must just sense its total grounding. There is still room in this world for reason and imagination.

The Comment:

Matti,

back to the logic questions.

Lately, in seeing more of the extent and depth of your reaching I suspect that you would benefit from my so called quasics view as well I would benefit from the more Lie group ideas of the topologies.

We can of course default it all to binary- for that after all is the structure of such Boolean logics and yes beyond a quantum aspect of it or parallel the (finite or Klein) geometry can revert in the end to more classical logics and not these intermediate steppingstones.

You see, at least we have the sense of beauty in these rarefied realms of physics while it seems that so many play without the reach of Chopin play chopsticks on a grand piano - or sing along to the great karoke in the sky until the drink kicks in following the bouncing ball faster than the jittery film in their own heads as if he scroll of he player piano were their own.

Are we the designers of such logic systems or within the sense of its design? What of uniqueness as determined by primes as in Godel which is after all a metalanguage rather than say a statement of physicality? But can the same subjectivity of notions not be said of Boole?

Now on newscientist today an article that crudely suggests that most of mass, and the new data may have to redefine mass radically anyway, is in the black holes (the cosmological editor there). But this may be the case in a sense if he means structured singularities.

One does not have to be perfect to recognize perfection in a world where the old logic does not apply and (Ulla) you would like to live in a TGD universe you say- but well, you may be surprised somehow that you already do.

The signs of things simplify equations, the bad or good emotions are merely that and have no ultimate reality fixed beyond the local time of solving things. And the game is that the voiceless and deafness do speak to us as we are driven to hear, discern the message.

ThePeSla

* * *