On the Quasi-Unique Generalization of the Unity Expressed by Primes

On the Quasi-Unique Generalization of the Unity Expressed by Primes

L. Edgar Otto    08 May 2012

This is a comment on an earlier post of Pitkanen last month...

Additional Stray Thoughts: out of boredom perhaps I went to the coffee shop at night and stayed awhile because of the rain.  I checked the blogs but did not have an illustration with me so I add it here.  Upon coming to the blog it opened to Matti's blog of a month ago in the list.  I seemed to discuss things relavant to my current concerns- indeed the Riemann idea is in its own way rather basic but as I understand him, Pitkanen idea while essentially right are not to me shored up on the level of foundational issues in regards to say primes in the scheme.  But the spirit of the post did make things a little clear after I realized more the scope of the problem (of which Pitkanen takes serious and  is quite of as problems to be solved.

Sometimes we can look down from a wider but not too unintelligible system as too far away or we can imagine the next higher one or series of them- the isssue of Planck ideas and how they may relate to natural space and so on as per his article.  So, what is it I do not see already in his general theory or better what does he not seem as at least parallel to my views?

As Kea said when I suggested a wider space and a specific number that we first have to get the next level down before we go beyond that.  That seems to me what Pitkanen has to do (and yes the rant in the comments is justified and I imagine slows him, and his nation down too) or maybe his is such a standard treatment that this is all that can be done and the world is not as complex as in my unification, but this debate is definitely on a much higher level than its simple analog as to are there higher dimensions or superstrings or sparticles and so on.

OK  my issue tonight is this idea of the universal design and structure of primes, that is the multiversal as well to use the ordinary slanguage.  These I assume for this arguement the ground state as if a zero solution or some relation in general to the idea of a unity, or the roots of unity, some not necessarily numbers that are complex but do not involve just negative roots of unity when we take the simple square roots and so on.

As this is the case then, what keeps an irreducible unity as an integer prime from being unique in its influence of physical phenomena such as Pitkanen's Mersenne applications?  His treatment of such primes may just as well apply to say a parallel universe.  How many copies are there and in what depth and what span and what exception to the proofs if any of things like Riemann's complex analysis.  We need further generalization and what Pitkanen asserts clearly can be generalize without the conclusion as a vague fact that say there is nothing in a jump save some sort of will or consciousness even if we only need the wormhole mouths to describe things , the ends of such creative string like objects.  Thus the wildcard and my issue of the gray groups or not.  I find it not clear in any of our systems save by a prison that is limited materially or in reduction to a physical ground that a finite group has to have in its connections and descriptions an infinite group associated with it.  This is for now a matter of philosophy, as I said one can move into the higher space and see the lower ones of general systems a little more clearly and deeper.

Would such groups apply to some point, a collection of such points the same prime that vanish in the totality as some mirror zero grounding- does a particle without will or determinism know which of the significant primes it is in so as to describe which multiverse and on which level so that within the boundaries of some uncertainty the proof and intelligibility of Riemann's and Ponclares indeed the proof in the corresponding reduction and vanishing in a totality of presumably higher scale- the measure of scale the issue also in many places?

Of course sooner or later I should take my own advice being here on some very much higher frontiers which who knows, if they escape beyond the real no matter for a poet after all.  Guess that is why I wanted to look at the equations of measurement on my level not needed- a bridge to another idea but more one that slides down- note, I am not bragging about my position- those who think that betray their own level of well, territoriality.  When the system plagiarises you,
e plageration among each other is a fiction and the state by its practical power can move through the cracks of braids and knots and revise history in a concrete manner if not literally on some higher psi level.  But this level of reality will always defeat those who dare to watch as if they can probe the human heart and records all the traffic of such manifold time throughout the universe even if in doing so they have time to forecast the rain not in real time, or if we in real time do not build just as well by walking outside and saying it is raining.

If it is an obvious thing to do, and perhaps even in secret no one wants to do it, why not add the simple mathematical methods of quasic motion to the greater generalization of p-adic numbers? It is a matter of philosophy as well- and for all us who strive to learn like ice crystals in boiling water we can be the exceptions and hot on the trail of something have a few rather stupid ideas- even the best of us, even the clowns and Einsteins.

I am not sure I will formalize and shore up this level of abstraction myself, that level before the omnium where the background is rather Ramanujan like in the treatment of calculus and counting. It is great higher up as long as I can fly, this world does not require one or give him the desire to be a down going to speak unto the mortals.  I will not offer you the keys to some kingdom as if you were little children, more like unto the half gods you can be.

* * * * * * *