For a few of you educated formally who may have looked into my notation of quasic abstract motion you could see the insights into intuitive space structure as havining similar formalism to the algebraic description of vectors as of course an intelligible and mathematical mechanism of distribution.
I suggest that the insights as intuition and analysis of physics systems even beyond the string formulations has gone a few steps beyond these know method of mathematics. For one thing the distinction between addition and multiplication is blurred, as is any reference to some unique frames that appeals to a mere shift or even independence from coordinates. I stumbled upon one internet writer who suggested in a formal a paper as can be in this method pretty much an insight of this same thing. This is a question of what is foundational for arithmetic operations.
Rowlands, within the Diracian view, complex numbers and the unification usually found in terms of cosines and angles right or different applies intelligibly a double set of complex numbers which is the heart of kinetic and potential differences such a quantum grounding say in quaternions apply and are projected into a physically vague ground of universal laws, principles, and concepts. But the Eddington view as an ideal frame is equally a reduction and limited vision too. These methods is the discussion of vectors and Eddington's if a frame that while comprehensive of the the universe is one beyond the usual symmetries we find that can be in the compass of the spacetime concrete coordinates of reference.
Thus our foundational problem is the natural extension of our understand into the four-space and beyond. In such space which proves a wider area for speculation than some imagine it seems wide enough for relativity, and for in the variables and fixed parts of a numerical equation- this issue of how to explain the world where some things appear as only partially symmetrical (alternatively partially asymmetrical if that is a given) this side of some intuitive but distant general frame of reference, an absolute but not beyond that into a reality of inversions and mirrors, compliments). Rowlands gives us convincing results that for these variables and fixed parts of a number two sets of complex numbers interlace and give us a compass of intelligible explanations for some of the particle physics and philosophy of energy.
So again my labeling of colors and axes, partial and multiple integrations in the question of sums of square or square roots becomes levels harder than what I found a fundamentally very hard problem- much like, literally, our surprising new layers of the gene code of which I am a little ahead always like the old turtle race of Zeno, but for awhile I am still that little bit intuitively ahead... not the race to catch up to some surprising breakthrough.
Such an insight allows in the virilaity the idea of taking the square root of some such number as a thermodynamic principle as Pitkanen recently posted or to just consider the zero ground and deal with the squares directly as with Feynman. The of course come to the same place in our description of what happens as a thermodynamic environs at the horizon of what we have imagined as a black hole. It is at the heart of the issue of the topology in some dimensional environs as to what can shrink to a point and does that encompass a totality- or in the real part, at least viewed from complex analysis, in what context is the proof of Riemann's zeta zeros or disproof able to capture some totality or it too cascading even beyond the psi square level of wave equations into some new idea of conservation and independent concepts of directionality as manifolds compact or condense, combine or break in the quasifinite absolute and abstract discreteness or its mirrored continuity.
As I have treated both parts of these at least algebraic number equations as coordinates- and in the main they do relate to a squaring or factoring of the coordinate binary information, where that known on surfaces for example is an abstract reference to what would be know holographically in say a relative volume. This requires more than new arithmetical and geometrical symmetry operations but in the higher realm of supersymmetry at each zero or one in the code it is a wider landscape these can be exchanged in meaning or in a physical situation, my so called wild cards, which makes the patterns quite more multiplied as possible yet finite. But the deeper issue is beyond the idea of supersymmetry where new vectors with new operations can arise to which in terms of energy the super duper symmetry seems less real than these higher dimensional string like models once we accept them as real in some sense. These as in the normal logic of the n-dimensional chess games I have designated, beginning in four space, as the unicorn motions or vectors.
No comments:
Post a Comment