Higgs Particle - The Planet Vulcan of our Era
L. Edgar Otto September 21, 2011
We are in a situation today where the Higgs particle is debated if seen as the planet Vulcan, now thought a sun grazer, was before the era of relativity.
Nothing much last night so I explored the notion a little more of counting the possible connections between space structures of the orthogons. But from this I found some more general notions of how we could represent and experience space. For one thing much of this depends on idea of how we color certain graphs and that I understand is still a wider area to be solved and explored. My friend K. Martin had a way of viewing space which no one commented on I imagine because they did not understand- but that system was able to answer questions with the answers I had expected when one tries to work the structures in a more classical way. But we could not call it Martin Space so he called it Regulus Space.
Because certain aspects of his system involves the duplication as well as a projection of points or lines I regard it as the principles of one color. So this new idea I dub "Vulcan Space" (hey I am out of terms and polymultitranstopotrishedraltope - well even I have to look some of those various named things up. 5-cell is easy for me but what does that mean- perhaps it is a little better than something like gluon- yuk- still the next level of naming could well be "crazy gluon" - In any case this is our era of culture in the speculative fiction of which many know the notions and terms- otherwise we just divide things in some sort of imaginary space- I call this procedure "Clingon Space" -
you see they have two hearts (I knew a lady once whose brain told her she had two hearts when she had one- what could I say but too bad one of them was not for me. Let to myself I would have this structure a "variably perceived quason" or a quasiquason, don't like that combination- more relaxed quason for the role of probability is as essential here as in any other part of the underlying philosophy of reality.
Well, the vulcan planet and higgs particle quote actually came to me in a dream as I was waking up this morning- anyway, Martin if you are reading this remember our days on the philosophychatforum when we talked of a higher level of the relativity's I called Exxene? That name out of the air, you know it seems to me a few people are toying with that idea now.
Anyway, multiple branes and membranes aside the structure I present here is concrete in that it touches the deeper mechanisms of what happens beneath the quantum view and in the lower dimensions at least it translates all this into a dynamic shell structure like of course that of the electron configuration of atoms and atom-grazers. It is simply not all of logic for the context of space or numbers not to resolve or leave the remote aspects of time as indeterminacy to ask exactly where and when something is emitted from an electron. Perhaps in the end what we can discern as mass, be it quasi-unstable or not, is this very probability difference over time to which there does seem to be expected exceptions that surprise us as if the grounding or underlying substance of the universe is "all is anomaly"
* * *
*0 From a quasi-finte view for the topological concept of distance let us include structures whose difference is the square root of n as a more general scope of polytopes we can define as "regular".
*1 Lt us also include phi and certain if not all quadratics or some irrational numbers if not all as also "regular".
*2 Perhaps we can intelligibly go beyond these for certain numbers making for regular and symmetric structures including those in a relaxed sea of transcendental numbers or even absolute probabilities.
(Because a particle may arise in the vacuum in the context of all that is not that particle, it does not mean that in general the arising of them will be a constant regardless of considerations of entropy.)
*a Unit (distance) for f of 2^n construction principles - that is we extend an orthogonal element by doubling it- a square becomes two squares thus a cube- but on the way it may just extend the four or less linear elements of the iota point-string.
*b Regulus space is the duplication of a single color in this Superreguluspace SRS.
*c Quasic shell theory - where the structure of a quason can be centered hyperorthogons and the intelligiblity of such counting is chromotropic SRS. The relaxed concept of a Big Bang is such a view of the quasic shell structure of space.
*d Between shells and intelligible binary number of iotas may make jets or condensed adsorptions of particles as to when and where and at what shell level or its inverse imaginary shadow a particle may be quantumly emitted. (*g imaginary shadows Clingon Spaces)
*e An iota itself may be self dual (merge qm theory with quasic structure here) in that it has a shadow like porjectivity and
*f We need at least delta-4 honeycomb 5 cycle in supervulcan hyperspace but an iota may emit energy quanta from the SVS structure by these mechanisms... the iota itself may virtually duplicate or condense the flange of the adjacent dimensions so as to measure mass or gravity (as well the idea of the internal abstract motions and whatever instability we so imagine there) beyond its own self containment and duality. [There are more things this general concept will foundationally apply to in philosophic and scientific issues.]
Part of this relates to the culture of our time where there is an adjustment between what is hardware and software as disconnected shared methods- that is we have to understand where our world and our bodies and thoughts are truly digital or analog, finite or continuous or intermittently so as this shell quason shows when we combine the point or line (and beyond) aspects informationally of the coordinate iotas.
*h This general 6D like configuration may alternate (vibrate) into the linear one - a "superwave" on iota like subparticles. Where the time of decay, adsorptions, is uncertain in this sense the shell quason can act as the mouth of a wormhole. Purely viewed as points and not purely as stings this aspect of the iota is a sort of absolute zig zag penrose type particle of intermittent vibrational potentialities.
*i There is a class of vulcanization where the orthogons can make simplexes if the end point of an iota ray is shared by two suborthogon elements- in a sense this solves the looping problem in the Feynmann diagrams and such problems in general when we compute nodes upon themselves.
*j Given a set of iotas in a quason, in motion, rest or relative structure, any of these may form constellations. If the four hypershells of a quason donate one if their 24 squares we can have an emission over this get arrow between them that outside the events of the quason it is itself a four space orthogon as a particle.
* * *
I posted this if she accepts it on Kea's blog: My hopes we raise the bar on the debates- certainly to insist a chirality difference in neutrino speeds as tachyonic or not is to try to analyze things from Peter Rowlands foundational metaphysical existence principle that explicitly stated it does not address tachyons. So these issues can be resolved many ways, but to observe such interesting anomalies in the neutrinos should not be surprising to the extent our ideas of a high level chirality is said to exist as to what is relevant to the structures of the energetic world. So I note the count of the iota points in the diagram above is 192, and one can find the old 136 around there also as if to state the idea of such cosmological related dimensionless constants. This suggests to me of this illustrated structure we need to make it wider in its duplications to explain particles simple and compounded to begin at least into some sort of 16 dimensional deeper structure. The title of Kea's post could also read- "The great rumor of the last century in physics."
* * *
Kea, Mitchell,
The big bang concept or expanding of the universe (inflation) is a useful concept but only one part of a more general view that explains mass and energy for example. So the question of if there is a steady state or big bang cosmology is but one of perspective. Nature is not so confused. For that matter we can say that indeterminate past and present time is also a limitation of our perspective.
There is no good general reason to assume that on some other side of a mirror we find negative values that are physically significant- it is but a convention.
I do like the idea more like Weyl of the historical significance of mass in the variations.
In my view the creative focus of what can be changes of our physical constants due to our units of measure only like h or c, this can be creative as in Leo's or Frio's creative cosmology as to what is foundational in physics.
The structure I present today takes account of such views as relative and if we want some idea of reversing but mere formality of signs or complex dualities as if the notion of tachyons. The post is called:
Higgs Particle - The Planet Vulcan of our Era
In this reaching for new physics in such matters we are were we where a hundred years ago- before the concepts of relativity.
The PeSla
* * *
I should perhaps point out- as this quason representation can be represented as if a 6D object of the 2^6 arrangement into a cube of which its four slices in one linear 3D axis are hypercubes, that the notation of the coordinates as a structural analog bitwise to 1 and 0, the KLMN for 00 01 10 11 as if a doubling of the dimensions in question information wise, in some quasic but variable ordering, is essential for the concepts involved in the perception and dynamics such a structural approach suggests including the recursion of this dynamics between the various spaces and views of what makes a negative or complex space. In these matters is seems a given to me that it is not only what is on either side of such a mirror but what is on the mirror itself that bedevils our concepts of where the continuous and discontinuous meet and in what sense that which is real in the physicality persists. Alas, the level of the arguments are way beyond some debate of this seemingly complicated exploration of but two generation like dimensional contexts- as some begin to discern beginning with the ideas of 8 space (the E8 group ideas) - but these are only a beginning of what is needed to explore general omnic effects and dimensions. I also realize that we will find intelligible results from interpretations and things like value mixing as a matter of statistical spaces- this should not be such a surprise as it is part of the overall creative and scientific picture - that too perhaps a beginning beyond the realm of what seems a comprehensive and secure view of physics describing the natural world. But by itself any such one sided descriptions without stating its limitations cannot be a theory of everything as we imagine we want to know it at least in what is useful in our experience of reality.
* * *
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110920161546.htm
Can we not explain this by seeing a creative object like a black hole observing the general structure of a Quason? - but I am not clear that it is more than the intermittent instead of all at once reduction or exclusion of excess energy in the structure- that is to what extent we imagine more emptiness created in the process that may result in the existent's of something from absolute and timeless pure nothingness. It is clear however that we certainly may find an intelligible general system to generate higher atomic matter (beyond the supernovas) by this process which some in their raw intuition may connect with the idea of dark matter or dark energy and so on- a vague but intuitive step in the greater picture as perhaps this analog to such a vague question of conserved quantities but on a deeper level.
I should mention also, again, the center or not of such an object and the nature of the several concepts of singularity as simply connected centers in any dimension or a few of them is the open question as to what is surface or not- such singularity as a complex or some sort of point like absolute or as even absolutely empty is the next level of exploration of physics to which for now it is a matter of philosophy.
Those who say that energy comes from a parallel universe and debate as if it is immoral are really still talking vague ideas of speculative fiction to make a myth to explain how something may seem to work or convince one of some reason it does.
* * *
No comments:
Post a Comment