Trying to Drill through Pearls and Real or Fictitious Forces

Trying to Drill through Pearls

L. Edgar Otto  16 November, 2012

When the oyster is opened we find the pearl

for what is inside, outside or between the absolutes,  exchanges of mirrors through the irritating grains of sand

Triune razors cut the feet of Yankee boys running over the bed but not the barefoot Southern lad millions of years ago at the dawn of sharpened spear heads and language

Dawn became fire engine red shifting faster than the spinning ray one solid thing around beyond the speed of light though infinitely slow in the deep wellspring dimensions

In the clear blue sky above the brick by brick built pyramids

dry ice and contrails the high energy physicist is bored in the endless count of particle trails, the cosmic spoor, accelerator

Meaning does not keep watch, nor strings of pearls together

lazy Jupiter full of rocks and gas, Pegasus and her Trojans

* * * 

  Real or Fictitious Forces

The authors in the last part of Rowland's book make a case, cautiously based on his metaphysics of the vacuum and the ground of nilpotent Dirac algebra interpretations- in short the "creative" aspects which as a term fits in pretty well with the overall thrust of this blog only I find things there only on the surface from in the author's speculation on the "Nature Code".  The idea of real or fictitious forces, the reduction to the relaxed or sold idea of spin, centrifugal or centripetal and so on is to be related to a more comprehensive Machian view where even the electric charge (taking time yet overall with a long reach or shadow) to bundle ideas of inertia centered in realized space as the weak force: vacuum then concrete with its defined and realized vacuum.  Of course I see this as cautious written as speculation and also as overly speculative without solid grounding and I was there years ago.

Still it is good to have others that share some of the same views.  In particular the attempt to apply this to evolving or living things such as the gross DNA and RNA fortuitous mechanism.  This suggests that atoms, as if the spiral from the first as a neutron or neutronium (an idea that needs a wider view of chirality but it is a part of the greater pattern of atom structure) evolve- yet not in the creationist sense spontaneously in our era- if in the paradox and contradictions this has to be explained in a flat universe of infinite extent and illusions of spin and expansions- when does the material creation begin or materialize?

Can we suggest that an atom can change state to add to its atomic number and structure?  Is that any more fanciful than in the steady state model a proton forms in the remote vacuous regions of about one per cubic meter?  But the reduction to the concrete given these multiple field relationships and inertial like sources with heat generated from one view by the shear falling is in its own story convincing as far as it goes.  Yet there has always been resistance to apply such ideas to the biological levels of things including the actual gene codes.

We consider then because of this deeper view of a brane of quasic space as a duality or dihedron of no but infinite volume and the binary relationship of simple numbers to the quasifinite grid referenced as field and frame, that general systems evolve and are asymmetrical in total pattern as the nature of atoms (the electrons themselves riding and spinning on the shell as if the classical radius is the eye of these electromagnetic hurricanes for calculations) somewhere between the sense of purpose identical with the mechanism as to which side of the mirror of our centered perspective and which of them is the virtual or the real.

For me, it is obvious that the Casmir effect (the 1/4 power) exists even at a level between stacked bases and more so the neutronium idea applies to how the chemistry is structured and intelligible on the molecular level- but more to the point within the base itself with its various symmetries 4 or 5 fold are stark reduced geometric relations as if the atom points by which the same laws apply reversed in the macro or micro cosmic images and we the surface of the mirror- and I do not agree this is clearly a matter of zero point energy quantum ideas nor the generally holographic ideas a the most foundational and the quasi-creative.  These relations, Coxeter like in the graphs and scaless over the group theory, are of course Euclidean- thus we can use the force terminology in a more classical way as apparently the quantum formalism seems to do in the greater inertial context.  

This is not to say Einstein was wrong and Mach the key idea because Einstein was well aware of the nature of having to assume in his day of what are forces and matter that gravity lives somewhere as rest mass one assumes.  Yet gravity is a source where if time moves on classically in theory any string of material things, in chain of pearls, any dominoes in a row may continue on forever...  Does this not strike you at least existentially as a fundamental source or force, energy?

The distributive law is the heart of algebra, but in the awkward counting and computation in the mirror space this law has to be suspended while it cannot be abandoned in the foundations- then the mirrored items can exist in balance as the same real thing over its zeros and negative perspectives.  Not that the wildcards and random deal cannot choose as well equality with the imaginary numbers as well as zero, one  (or infinity) and their negations as in the rarefied abstraction of new and old physics Rowlands certainly suggests if not asserts that we should understand.  For me I assert it as an obvious if not trivial fact to which our new theoreticians will eventually have to deal with.

* * * * *