Big Baby Bounce or Inflation and Other Unnecessary Ghost Force Assumptions
L. Edgar Otto 24 October, 2013
I cannot find the comment I posted, the realization that at some point an idea was foundation enough that it led me to follow many other things... sometimes the telling of something to someone in a social context awakens in oneself a clearer and more detailed comprehension of what one is more deeply trying to say. I thought it was casually said on Sabine's facebook page.
Casually, that in a sense as far as dark matter the universe itself is a gravitational lens... but that is not a new idea other than seeing the cosmos as if an analog to our collider... that is to see the idea of light from a beginning as a dynamic system, a combination of some of our physics debates and ideas. So I read a report that in a cyclic universe the inflation concept is not needed to account for isometry (and that from previous cycles of the universe the small close regions of new structures is shown possible by the usual modern physics) I think as computer simulation thought experiments... I will find all the links and post them here one day.
I did not post this "We ultimately cannot distinguish the cyclic universe from those of a more intrinsically linear model, that is the wave particle duality can have dimensionless scaling to which in an open or partly open universe renders this a principle that seeks unity as does our search for a unified physics.
I said that if we go to the beginning or as far as we can see into the sky maps, what may be the sort of math or physics as if beneath the Planck scale that as a statistics and continuity is in the main a ubiquitous universal law, a sort of isometry... How we in fact resolve things like Cantors transfinite numbers at least in the lower levels of such applied to structures of dimensions. That is with finer data we could see from any such beginning in a sea of continuous or discrete (geometric points such as orthogons and in them orthogons and so on... we would find the hot and cold spot more an more like a lattice of which in the dynamics we observe the general diversity of structures and guarantees the isometry of this intelligible universe in general.
As quasi-finite or contiguous the "atmosphere" is observed on many levels of which it seems the new results of things like superconductivity, graphene, magnetism and the study of the fluid forms of small layers as in Sabine's recent posts from her time in Sweden, as a third way a sort of quantum foam level in flatland that we view out from the middle scales and does relate to the influence of the Casmir and dark effects... and somehow what we mean by inertia as if a measure of mass or gravity.
If as we may imagine the points of such structures, and the deeper laws for particle generations not just flavor changes of neutrinos by quantum ideas, moreover the hierarchy of broken symmetry not spontaneous only but as a given including other structures, lines, curves and so on then this foundation of things is a given, and while it can explain ghost forces it does not need such a force in itself necessarily short of the usual assumed unlimited ideas of a Deity and those philosophic issues... (the Theotericontinuum). the assumption of the lesser ghosts as a defect of the inflation idea that some assume has to have an explanation, perhaps casual, something to explain the source of such light is not needed but as a working idea for this foundational given.
Of course the quasic idea does not distinguish at the singularity level, where we face the questions like why the world rather than not the world, the idea of nothingness absolutely and as quiet instead of sucking things out from a container or vacuum when a vacuum can exist in a pure form with no such higher vibrations or equations only blowing up out from finer foam. For we answser in the general distinguishing of superimposition, issues of locality, the many and one of things like he universe, the direction and imbalances of pairs of material, anti-material or neutral things that are somehow chiral-parity but cancelling out. one or many universes the same thing. Yet we may in knowing his foundational physics actually create physical models such as the ideas of super-partners for these are not foundational. in the deepest sense- that is while we may create stars from scratch it is not clear it is possible to create a universe in the vague sense of it.
Now, having achieved this level of theory comprehension let us not sit on our laurels for there may be deeper surprised yet and a civilization should not fossilize against new foundational breakthroughs for time itself is a unity in the quasifinite sense...physics will remain, at least for now, something at the frontier forever interesting and something intimate to our thoughts, experiments, and observations. If we declare some things as impossible or this or that an illusion let us make sure that the limitations are not a defect in our thinking itself, a sense of certainty too soon.
* * * * *
By way of review:
When it rains it pours. relevant articles beneath insulation topologically sideways in the quantum foam...
relevant tech 1 science daily articles
relevant tech2
relevant tech 3
relevant tech 4
relevant tech 5
TGD comments
viXra blog comments
More Lubosity I quote: "This seems really necessary because one may at least formally calculate the speed of sound in the environment as
v2soundc2=∣∣∣∂p∂ρ∣∣∣
and if |w|>1, we would get a sound speed that is greater than the speed of light! Alternatively, if the component Tzz were negative and greater than T00 in its magnitude, you could go to a highly boosted frame in which you would have T0′0′<0 .="" a="" allowed="" along="" also="" bad="" be="" blame="" constant="" cosmological="" could="" created="" density="" energy="" equations="" especially="" for="" global="" have="" if="" in="" is="" localized="" marginally="" modifications="" momentum="" negative="" non-object="" nothing="" objects="" of="" on="" out="" p="" positive-energy="" regardless="" seems="" similar="" so="" some="" the="" their="" they="" this="" unstable.="" vacuum="" well-behaved="" with="" would="" you="">
My casual remark that within these rather geometric higher dimensional symmetries of physics that we could perhaps build a sun from scratch I really did think in the realm of philosophy and is found sometimes in science fiction... are objects related to the field or not as in Einstein's cosmic background concept?
synchronicity again - this after seeing this photo on facebook:
Lubosity2 Firewalls I find it interesting... in this brave attempt of resolving such paradoxes using the last swan song of quantum framework written as it was toward the favorable by Lubos... It accepts casually several of the demeaned intuitions of some of our alternative as well as professional theory physicists. Welcome to pushing the paradoxes into a higher level of physical reality as if the issue is solved by such a balanced in method but isolate hierarchy of Chinese dolls... it will not allow in itself the extension of the uncertainty principle (outside this wall of ghostly ignorance to which it seems to smugly set with the usual resolutions of paradoxes just touching on thing like Hilbert space embedded and vaguely defined mirrors. I mean do we trade the question of naked singularity into a wide field of geometric naked non-singularity and what of conservation laws that even string theory does not dare to answer, nor the idea of a naked non-singularity as an arbitrary choice?) This has me wondering just how much the gods and disciples of theorists really know what they believe. Especially how this related to say dark substance ideas. Where is the same idea... that is after all the realization of just how dynamic the universe is or has to be in such models, entropy better grounded and so on... So the information on the outside is that on the inside? what then describes these ghostly dynamic emergent differences in idea such as holography. Where in particular is the wider idea that we could use to extend the ideas of string and brane theory in these binary ideas of continuity? Do I conclude in this narrow focus, after all not so much a wave equation as some reason the matrices of Hissenberg sift thru what can be the closed span of physical reality, dynamic, deeper or otherwise, that our humble correspondent has switched sides to the Loop Quantum Camp so as to guarantee that paradox such that he maintains the quantum formalism and seems to shore up its scope to nothing deeper we can know of the various descriptions of but one form of black holes. Still there seems to be a general awakening in the wind as strange perhaps as we imagined evolving to new layers of consciousness as dark atoms in the work on such wormhole ideas and p-adics already considered by Pitaken in TGD. The paper was not bad work and it was difficult work but we have not resolved the paradoxes at the greater unity or intelligibly of the foundations... What do we lose by holding to this sort of theory that it stays around? We lose the predictability of some technical effects and biological understanding now focusing to new levels by vague guesses as the technical access goes - but ever so slowly. I get the feeling that Lubos thinks we will deficate our pants as we are not potty trained and that the only purpose of this report of a novel and exciting if not advanced enough idea when he seems to need to change his diaperohedron.
* * * addenum on Oct.25, 2013 * * * * then late Oct. 25 :
I keep thinking about what I think I saw in a shared link on fb from Sabine... namely a physical experiment that is a hardware form of my unresolved teleoscoping information theory in my manuscripts of 1995 trying to recall what I had seen in 74. Book: Instruction and Being. It seemed all to easy to work the problems out in a plane instead of a line to see what preceded by what can follow what and where loops would fall out of the determinism (which lately I see proves an advantage) I think it was the way I set up the information in the thematic dial... still, this suggests that after such "super?determinism" there are still issues or concepts to be resolved. What would the technology effects on the nano scale be if we made a fiber or lattice plane of these linear things as to how they act between them and to each other...? Can this effect be coupled to particle data such that we can, if we limit the direction of the apparatus, to see them as in cosmic rays? Quasi holographic and quasi fractal models can have a part in all this. A C D B as linear...
* * * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment