Are You Theorists and Engineers in the Wrong Universe?

Are You Theorists and Engineers in the Wrong Universe?

L. Edgar Otto 02-10-12


From the view of significance in depth for what seems a trivial thing, this seems to apply to algebra too. I listed some simple additions without the benefit of the compressing of things into useful formulas of number theory. This certainly seems in my posting of physical laws as if they are simple addition of low numbers that I am not saying very much, at least formally and scientifically, but when we take those numbers which seem to put deeper laws into categories of these numbers or laws of physics as if not far from the trivial and obvious with some modifications in the higher concepts. But if you read these simple numbers with the idea of simple geometric ideas in mind as concerning the number of some dimension and concept then ever 2 +2 = 4 seems profound.

So, poetically I might say- as did those without the jail or straitjacket or bucket that can hold the waters of wisdom in the early days of algebra- all was words. If mathematicians are fond of inverses of things we can say:

Lampion - a number added to its inverse and that made into a heap then multiplied by that number is the number square plus unity.

Well, this is simply the equation n(n+1/n) = n^2 + 1. Now this seems we simplified the problem from some vague notion of measure- or we can make sense with the symmetries of trivial counting and structure of what underlies and is philosophically controversial or even illogical as to a quantum physics idea like:

Lampion - we get a closer value and accuracy for some physical values if we add the inverse to the measure of said properties.

In the first place can we put transcendental values into the number n without exceeding the idea of what makes the seeming certainty of an algebraic number? In the second place as in the unique case of n=3 the resulting number is split into two parts, both as if real, and one part results in the value of unity, three = three. The other part is a multiplication by triality which like duality is everywhere in the powers as dimensions. The idea of unity itself raises all the logical and philosophic issues such as of one thing but indeterminate in value such that we may say the same thing of scale not tied to a more reductionist and materialist bias to define physics.

What are we to make of things that are squared. The magic squares in particular as stable abstract designs for integration and a host of other deeper things like squared wave equation quantum field world of which now familiar we say if we say understand it we do not as the humor of the half truth joke goes? So we add the square part again to the grounding in the numerical value of this unity as if we ground an end of a line or string into some properties of a higher brane.

In still another place it is not clear that nature herself without explanation more deeply contemplated can say when we real some unity of being, total theory even if founded on the method of nothingness as in the nilpotent formalism once achieving unity connections and parallels, or evolution, or insights as to what is the actual basis to say which is the inverse and which is the real number.

In the next place- for with the idea of dimensions we can lose count rapidly, as rapidly in the patterns as formulas giving us high numbers that exceed our super computers - the string theory even if a successor to the quantum physics suffers from the lack of substance of what dimensions they reside within- and the loop theory itself when taken to the extremes of a total unified theory lacks the scaffolding of strings but relies on a disembodied field geometry of indeterminate but with a span of intelligible values for some ultimate explanation of what matter is with these very abstract ideas of universal backgrounds.

It is no wonder then that these world views come to head for some idea of unity, the Higgs particle of the standard theory- a unity that exceeds both the material count and the concept of geometric fields.
Even though we have the principle that these views are a dualism and can make an inverse of the other resulting in say higher masses of expected and looked for particles even smaller and more massive than our lowly level and grounding in the idea of a proton.

Although the numbers work to some degree, the models can make foundational and obvious assumptions like we divide the concepts of charge, mass, space, time as some sort of dialectic between the continuous and discontinuous once we designate some arbitrary sign in the physics for formula consistency, (as in Rowlands brilliant assignment of the concepts to Dirac and nipotent methods), nature is not characterized (as he says) in the process by such algebra and geometry that gives us a hint of what is foundational in physics and let the rest, the cart that brought us there, vanish in significance to the content of the cargo.

That said, these explorations and styles of reason and research at some unity with our experiments are the only tools, creative and imaginary or otherwise, we have to use. It is a good thing to be an expert in the languages if we do not become bewitched by the meaninglessness or emptiness of the models and methods in themselves such that we think we have the right answer- we often can see, and this is a property of modeling and computation that is reliable to great levels if not the absolute of calculations itself- that is a form of reliable mathematical induction like intuition raising awareness and making progress toward the unknown in the main.

The quasic idea, which I have long regarded as a third physics, of which I do not know just how much is new in the world or is just a fine juggling and juxtaposition of several existing ideas (as ideas, the scientist in me assumes the world is intelligible in its design) is after all about the quasic plane which seems to go beyond the generalization from those of Euclid, through the complex number plane, Lorentz invariance like ones, to Branes of various forms in our day. We evolve, and not always directly, an edifice of the number line- fractions are taught to us early but they came late in the literature. In the interest of national security after the world war there were several experiments in teaching our children- either the old way of geometry rather strict with no hint it involved a certain artful approach to the proof of Euclid or something a little more liberal and Aquarian even - some hippie view, an age singing of candles in the rain to the beat of the mellow rock of the Fifth Dimension. For there was the new math and new ways to teach reading, a concentration on the abstract operations before learning to reckon and to write, and it remains a matter of taste as to if these experiments failed. For this was the time of growing up while the death of Einstein, and the first Echo satellite, before the modern abacus of computers was widely available, and when so much of drugs and drink made as well - so in our day we may never know the results of such experiments.

How I looked back at the old biplanes thinking that was a rather backward generation all around- oh, it had its charm. But the other day reruns of the old Twelve O'clock High came on the new meTV channel (there are a lot of old folks advertizements on it) Nostalgia. Well, the B-52's in the show were once for me the most advanced things and it took years before I could see progress in jets and ball point pens. Without propellers it just did not seem like and airplane. Rockets were different until confused with the space shuttle- each generation has its confusions, where does the phone and television and computer begin or end as these converge?

How odd the events in time. I recall the first beeps of the Sputnik I tuned into on the large stand up shortwave. I saw the Echo wobble. In the middle of the night watched when the station turned on for the event the first hydrogen bomb. I said to my dad, he radioman in the Navy, "that is an awful lot of bomb for a ship." He looked serious and thoughtful and said "it is for cities..." After awhile what we hold as nostalgic collectibles that survived the junkyard becomes future generations forgotten junk.

But I have digressed. Even about our own theoretical models we do not always understand the significance and this is a natural problem of self communication as much as what we expect in the giving of our exciting finds to others that they will find the excitement and more go on to shared discoveries so to teach back again the guru or myth and legend of one, who denies he is one usually and that thought evidence, all perhaps for the understands of what is valuable (well, to see the heartbeat through the toy microscope I now mention after all, but it is a common thing, a potential and promise, life waits for a child what is hardly imaginable years for the return of the great Hally's comment only to find it not much really, not that it is less of the first video in for ages in the sky but a little lesser in the city lights and neon signs where we as humans command and contain the fire so much brighter from the violent but distant oasis of this Earth for all its chance disasters and our own, in time if we can live among ourselves without all sides of thought and madmen breaking the little bits some of us might add to the unity of theory and the world should they meet and both be logical in multiplications of no good compromise so as to welcome the balance of the books to zero sum.

It should be clear that in the hologram idea and the fractal idea, as positive and absolute values that the quasic field, in binary primarily, can be factored abstractly. If anything can give us the primes this may at any point in an evolving sequence- I suspect this lately as it seems to work from the digits themselves as to what is a prime number when in binary and read freely in all the bases and dimensions- but that is speculation of the nature of which the deeper question that makes it possible to ask deeper questions than we know at the earlier time for me vaguely and now the one of uniqueness in the world, its people, its stray falling of rocks into the planets formed in the sky. To say we lose or gain such information inside or outside the hologram should be a principle of method not some imagined restriction to model the world with to the point were time itself can be said an illusion that exists on no surfaces of things where the universe itself is imagined a quasic space without a surface. Is it not remarkable we can read the binary numbers and from their digits divide as if by decimal ones limited to zeros and ones? This is a property of numbers that are in such a squaring plus unity and goes a little beyond the idea of lower relations of quadratic reciprocity and such, and contains the idea of other forms of prime number systems.

Old plus one - Eddington, should not have been called that for his was a profound insight more than some greatest mistake of his career. Like some such mistakes over time, well, the Galois of it all in that I could understand it back when had me think there could only be five quarks- why would I think that? In a lot of abstract ways I begin to think it was not a mistake after all, and even then for my intuition they have been few. The universe is at least favorable and not indifferent to those who will dare and try to think carefully and clearly.

Who remembers Bicentinuum?

* * * * *


The Quasi-reality of Count & Structure in Trivial Data Interpretations

L. Edgar Otto 02-10-12

The sense we have within ourselves or how we may imagine others feel about our particular interpretations, or world view as to what explains ourselves and the world can seem like the coincidental or even most trivial, doubtful or irrelevant numerology in the counting or a geometry too obvious to be questioned where its physics and analogies may be seen as deterministic and necessary laws of the universe and of reason.

This is a part of the creative impulse to what we have not perceived directly that there can be progress and possibilities of growth and learning. The emotional view and the general accessibility to energy and memory of an organism over time, in ascent or descent of its complexity is not always connected to objectivity if there is an emphasis on the poetic mood- at least insofar as content is concerned. This I suspect is the echo of enactment of our mental design as in sync with the context of natural law independent in principle as to it being the source of such law as the laws can be grounded in non-necessity, paradoxically.

The mastery of new information can inhibit the expression of poetry although both are needed for creativity and even a the same time, both ultimately can be seen as a similar method at least for the intensity of thought, inertia also to continue or resistance to the effort required for a new poem or quest for something scientific. Over time then we may lose material as in a chess game while we gain strategic design. But nature is not forgiving of our blunders when she acts as if a machine most likely not aware of that beyond the context of her programming compass.

Some things are not forgotten in our laziness of method or simple act of remembering to pay attention to the design and emotional states. It is as if we grow more adept rather than get rusty- for example when I take up the guitar after a long time. This relation to music cannot just be some sort of body memory that is imprinted on specific brain structures.

For example, in my prime but in descent as to the amount of baldness and alternating over some months between poetry and massive eye straining calculations my wife noticed that in the poetic mood I seemed to grow hair but in the analytic mood I seemed to lose hair. (As I recall it but in thinking about this it could have been the other way around- after all with the same habits and objects memories seem to mix events around them. In any case doing both did sprout the number of hairs and length at the same rate.)

I am a fair chess player but trying the game- I mean I am not addicted to the virtual world per se although one could suspect otherwise from the amount of presence. Even the thrill of what we think we are doing, its urgency as if the reality has to be heeded for texting for example or the distraction when time seems to subjectively change and the clock or pot left on the burner is forgotten until it boils over. Or my young kids finally leaving the Mario game obviously needing to take a pee- yes, I heard that happens and there was first hand experience. The influence of violence was easier to deal with- I said if you fight over a game I will simply unplug all of it. That did well- I tried the game but I had to set it on "Daddy please don't hurt me" when I faced the sneaky well armed jackbooted enemy. It is humbling to not be as fast and quite amazing really how children so young can read the scrolling screen.

So, I tried the chess game that came with this computer and it gives me a sound thrashing most of the time- I mean part of it may be I have not played for awhile (well, even the best of internet drama can become boring, more like work one may not want to do or do for so long. Even the pretty gals that make most men stay on facebook a month if they see her picture- well, facebook has the population now just a little less than India or China- but it is not all just passion and hormones.)

So I tried the game, and when I do win , usually with some radical moves I am thrilled I trounced the machines programming (it must know the 200 or so openings that I have not memorized until the masters learning from each other settle down to endless draws.) But I think if I continued to play this game on line seriously- well we are only as good as our opponents so I think I would become more like the machine in play on any level. I just do not see why people enjoy playing these games which are so deterministic and rapid and said to be a measure of intelligence.

On the other hand, I think I have made inroads into what is the nature of the game, as I have posted. I do not see why the hints are there- I mean, are they needed, are they a gift or flirtation that addicts us in loops of false senses of power and weight? Will these principles which are much like the hints of what can be attacked or moved in the game be powerful enough to beat the brute calculator on the run? I mean I find no fun in setting games to a character that is immortal and has a stash of all the possible weapons so shoots everything, all the other players and even the windows and other virtual furniture- some young adults I have seen do this for hours and yet have no interest on what makes the game work. Perhaps there is something to be said for being a part of interaction with others, a dialog of sorts, a suspension of disbelief where the game like a sock hop teen dance is really just the symbolic ambiaince to prepare for awkwardness, to socialize I guess.

This post today, out of boredom and as a rest from all the learning of what to do between an off line and on line computer - I cannot say I like the cloud idea that comes to you even if what I have is pretty much an open book- was one of an art project as pure art really. I have been using the primitive paint program as it was closer to the logic and have used the last posts principle of the four way patterns. So I was surprised when stray drawings began to look interesting for arts sake alone. Take this post this way then- as an artistic thought experiment.

We are only as good in battle as our opponent- this came home to me caught between so many unwell or drugged up people and the bureaucrats I avoid - they do nothing but harvest the troubles of others and overstep their bounds for pennies really enslaving even those who would benefit to an ongoing industry to which there is too much because it seems they do not contribute to the wellness of our society, not that I say they are mean spirited- just that they have a world view and expectations as to what is their rights as in the judgement of others as worthless characters or undesirables who should have equal access to public institutions.

But in the deeper scheme of things one does not have to encounter and fight others to undermine and even redeem their hearts in the influence they have on the well being of our society. Well, even Leonardo had a life long fight with city hall. I will not make predictions about what is likely to happen in our society- not to put ideas in anyone's head- there is enough violence there already and it is intolerable on so many levels to put up with. Besides, no one heeded my warnings before and such unlikely happenings became the mainstream news. Let the senators die from cancer and I will not shed a tear for they did not support me and others in the general advancement of science when I had time to make a difference and the intense desire.

Nevertheless, the core work gets done and sustains us. Let us not be biased against the competent who have a high opinion of themselves where your loyal friends are dishonest and your honest friends are disloyal.

Then again I outgrew the whole shebang, but I have not outgrown what I expect of computers and society as for the most part it takes so long to catch up for this primitive world in my eyes- why do some want to stop designs even if theirs are lacking- but it is theirs at the cost of some power game to be ahead then to settle for less to be so of the other guy or gal. I hate to go Ayn Rand on you but many times I have thought to take the ball away when I leave the game- but all this, formally is asking a question that is not just pure art- its it about the board or that which is within it? This is an important and deep question if one pays attention and thinks to ask it.

By the way, writing in the quiet not in the coffee shop- I do miss the pen and paper but not running out of those nor of ideas- what I write also has been influenced by the medium it is done with. I am not sure in the virtual world this is observable- so we can no longer claim ownership of styles. But there is so much still for me to learn now that I am back and noticed I have become whole again, can see how beautiful and ugly some people are and why I did not notice one way or the other not that long ago.

* * * * * *


LAMPION - 02.11.12 QUASIC GROUP TRANSPARENCY

L. Edgar Otto

When we apply group theory to the quasic (brane) plane so as to turn the totality. in the dimensions abstractly (I use abstract in the quasic symmetry sense unless explicitly refered to as abstract algebra) vertical to the plane, that is a concept of superabstract symmetry, a directionality is established in the natural superabstract symmetry breaking without rigid but averaged generational independence from the order of permutations and as holographic abstract superimposed shells a certain transparency exist that is the structural result of these finite algebraic properties such that the creative field (in Hoyle's sense) establishes opacity between layers. In particular, in the case of four layers three of them are continuous and a quater of them is magic square unstable.

We see then that the usual groups do indeed break down in its properties when the quasic dimensions exceed eight (and in the intelligibility of numbers and dimensional numbers the deep group involving supersymmetry of 15 is open thus capable of merger between rows an columns to the next number, as seven implying 8 or 15 implying 16) but to realize the full symmetry of the dihedral group up to superimposed octonions the pattern repeats as four fold and the extension into the five and greater dimensions is a force that at unity can be interpreted as that of gravity and mass as one concept and mechanism as the universe, omnically, appears to approach the unities of remote scales. Thus the concept of scale or other invariance s can be generalized to that of superabstract symmetry invariance as also a steady state.
in the process as quasi-finite creativity. Abstractly and in profound conception the holographic or K group without a pole, and some particles would be distinct as to generations and not mix can be said to connect through the one fourth imbalances in this view as part of a general model that does also establish the nucleus and deeper structures.

But in any case the quasic factoring intelligibly but not rigidly in the local vicinity of action events does not leak nor loose the quantum information but puts limits on the natural resistance by motion making heat as if objects growing hot falling in a gravitational well by this superabstract thermodynamic process regardless of the isolation or connection of such laws as to the behaviors in systems. In geneneral the curve (circles) into lines as far as stretchable entities into ellipses and also show the mechanisms of the symmetries of polytopes can so stretch as ellipsoids and thus we can derive the ideal case that we describe to the ideal limits as asymptotic freedom, Also these principles permit on any scale level the endurance of substructures for if you think about it what guarantees this and for how long if we ask this question of a natural restriction and not imposed one from theory as to what happens in the wake of action. It is not clear or explicitly stated how this relates to dark matter as beyond the positive mirror of such quasic spheres as boundless and finite but the idea of these as in the quark center such as in Kea's Insight strikes me as a very good start for after all triality is involved just within the standard theory, also we clearly see the models can be purely four fold as in Pitkanen's view. But such dark mass and normal mass meet there, the Higgs too at unity asks this question of superabstraction of symmetries even far from unity into the remote span or background which as Dirac noted is generally a balance of forces and masses on dialectical scales. These fractal and holographic considerations together implies that where mixing is legitimate and can be shown to have predictable paths and energy scale intelligible measure and observation can themselves mix as if permuted matters in the quasic transparency so as to be done in a less rigid way for the generalized connections in the topology.

Part of the inspiration for this other than the types of art that empty near the logic of it computer bitmap drawing and an old diagram I forgot and found on this computer was the short text I found on double factorials as simple numerical formulas and how these multiple factorials in the simple formula with expanded meaning as I grow my more expanded context that seems to make easier and faster connections generalized quasicly between the concept of the various factorials. It is clear that also Newton had a good sense of these general notions to leave the ghost of departed quantities off in some heaven beyond our braneworlds as quasic entities. Perhaps to have wisdom is precisely what can be implied from simpler beginnings of a theory.

* * * * * * *

As a footnote these are rather esoteric principles so far that goes beyond our general conceptions of matter, even the question of existence of supersymmetry and higher dimensions as there are relevant to the physical world. Beyond the quantum theory which on some level can be seen as the bias for world models as absolute randomness and uncertainty of any system as characterizable.

For example we can imagine the elements beyond 120 or 136 as in the chemistry of the 18 shell level in Seaborg's chemical model of the periodic table in perhaps limitless element structures. But such matter may be found (yes, beyond the machines that in effect approach the conditions of the assumed Big Bang) in deeper concepts of space and its intelligibility. What restricts us to QFT and QCD as we regard the issue of mass from our familiar view and not just as some much deeper than the hidden views, is the superdupersymmetry SSUSY. SUSY being the combining of or symmetry breaking in the standard models and by virtue of connections and extensions, abstract and concrete aggregates by Quasic Transparency. In this way we can justify the concept of material creation and evolution by a theory that does not just combine things or break them apart to see what happens limited to issues of just the supersymmetric level we have yet to get firmly fixed down.

* * * * * * * *


The n-quasicality distribution

L. Edgar Otto 02-11-12

Distribution is said to be the heart of algebra. Quasicity can be the same form of this as a geometry of parallels in a quasi-finite dimensional lattice in the so called non-linear. Thus, distributed over an array of superimposed ambiguously isolated finite objects or coordinates are separated but parallel which can be read as n-ality. The powers then can be read as powers of powers fractally. The be abstractly generationally parallel is to be a quasic mirror of things separated as a possibility. But this separation does not constitute the vacuum properties as if those properties explain the possibility of expansion of space, inflation, or is the grounding and cause of dark matter (or the noir forces in general.

Clearly the same general principle imagined as to the information on a holographic surface free to connect to other such surfaces of a lower or total isolated generational order or scale as lost or less than the emergence of properties in the interior or volume as such entities in principle are free to interact, there is a world where this abstractly seems partially the case, mass ratio wave guides of sorts and energetic standing waves in a quasi-finite coming into and out of existence of some substantial field that also may be n-quasical in distribution in the remote laws of things neither parallel nor dependent nor rigid beyond the ratios of such concrete distributions- heat in particular is transferred beyond the ideas of simply the complex plane.

* * * *