Abstraction of the Stones

I imagine here in trying to visualize higher spaces, the square stones over the numerical garden and all the golden ratios that which is touched by my artistic whims and in the abstraction we find at the heart of things the casual scattering of ink that reduces natural things to vague abstractions. And yet the suggestion is there as in the Japanese sculpture of such abstract yet worked with thought common stones that we have indeed a sensitivity to three dimensional fractal effects with the twists and hollows.

My Virtual Zen Garden

The Oriental Perspective on Painting and the Quasic Field

The differences in how we view space, especially in a cultural tradition as in the West from the beginning of study of perspective, and the East which to some eyes appears flat and simpler without perspective, reflects how we see and interpret the physical basis of our reality. The East is very much I Ching influences on what is the host or the slave, say in the arrangement of trees. The idea of heaven and earth and male and female which can cover the canvass with themes, even for the mountains, that are embedded as themes in themes as representations in a recursive yet motionless fractal like manner scrolling through space top to bottom.

As with the reading of the binary I Ching the painter can apply these principles on a higher level intuitively beyond technique and with expertise ever trying to feel the terrain mirrors what is mechanical or of a wider sensitivity in art.

What one picture would you paint given but one canvass, one lifetime? If, as our global cultural perspectives converge, we allow the tortoise as one of the greater seasonal animals with the phoenix and dragon and crane, and the snake is with the tortoise a symbols of yin and yang- what then of the Chi that a third perspective say of height and flight looks down from some abstract space outside the canvass.

* * *

Sunday August 9th:

An error in the above post, the mystical animals presumably from the stars and seasons are the Phoenix, Dragon, Tortoise and the Unicorn.

The idea of perspective is indeed worth exploring and I find there has been some speculation. In the Oriental ideas of point of view there is the perspective looking up, in depth and looking down from a more or less level or flat view. In fact a frame can ruin the unity of such a painting which implies openness.

What do we see in four-space and that point of view as perspective? Certainly in the West the Mother and Child icon is a deeper metaphysical idea than that of space perspective alone.

My Work is Done

http://www.icmp09.com/ from a post today linked to a blogger I follow. A conference on mathematical physics.
(some social implications of mathematical physics, my poem on myspace.com/ottonian )

* * *


My Work is Done L. Edgar Otto Aug. 6, 2009

I think I know what you are asking me and why you ask it.
but there is no sure guidance in all the wisdom's

When it comes at least to how humans bond

At the origin, singularity, singular paths
Of chance and necessity and the shells and walls of time.


As the best of teachers are surpassed by their students
or squabs, first galaxies, are taught to take their risks to fly

Or that they resent the breaking banquette for their autonomy

My work was done and the world's work, its making of
Our nests of learning love together, debris and tidal surge


Drawn by tears our programmed faith of gentle caring
beyond the rewards, prestige, control of self-with-others
We cannot save even one, ourselves, let alone everyone

Yet I watch you free of me seeking the wild and finding home.

* * *

The Burr Head Universe Footnote to what was on my mind just before the above poem:

More than asking when things begin or end and compare the paradoxes of
stages of our lives and of our generations- we should look more to question the paradoxes of some source or origin where things seem ultimate or different everywhere things change yet are the same. The loom of years cannot be felt or seen until the days have done their weaving. Nothing of the mistakes of the past needs color your own futures and yet in spiritual bonds some things we cannot escape even over time. This poem comes after a small idea of mathematical physics as if we do indeed gain the whole world but cannot locate our center and soul- but as all our spheres interact in shells of expansion, duplication, attracting and in repulsion, centers may correspond as if a dream and not embodied on what is a sea of ghostly spheres anyway to that center, origin which seems to forever be a way into descent and yet abstractly is a very focused limit. The math then, so far, is a loose mechanism of fields and matter and points and lines as if zeros and infinity by analogies- but the description is not understood exactly.

A particular small point flat and in a sea of distinguishable shells does not "know: which "shell" it is in. Is not spatial expansion implied by this as galaxies were more compact in the past and even more their components contain an overall energy than distant objects?
As the world transfer energy in structures is it any different the way the shapes of things like spirals and trees do it? But the bleak picture of fading sparks of light in the growing immensity of space is a small part of the picture in awe of some idea of randomness and a rather depressing picture at that if time itself were not so far from the collapsing of worlds.

I did not write your life script and you used so much of my blood and ink- still, where you create a fictional character, you the author, the best of novels is one where the characters though unreal take on a life of their own. Our real life character sometimes the worst of our own self-deceptions. Love in the main endures and is not lost, is conserved in the immensity. What we write on this earth, it matters not the loss of ink or runes in stones as much as we write with more than our own blood- thus you all ask me too of your origins. Your stars of love need not fail as have so many before you nor do you need to think on this as you entangle your tears and joy in confluence together. I only pray that I have not harmed you even if unknowingly- but we do stumble over each other in each others dreams.

Two Scientific Poems

Two Scientific Poems

For Lincoln et al : should we not consider some alternative answers when no other explanations are offered? If we need to look at artificial
cosmic rays horizontally is there a chance it makes our vision flat?
"[Ducks] + [Margaritas] is not rescued by [Ducks ] + i [Margaritas]."
Lincoln at

"http://www.philosophychatforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&p=133487#p133393"




Leaving Some Things Undefined Aug. 3, 2009

You cannot find the thirteenth step
in the truth of dreams added to dreams imaginary

We know our hearts are stuck there in spin and
tailspin, in the aether and light and matter

Yet some dwell there, build babbles towering
far from the bottomless core and endless sky

Denying spirits in man or beyond this world
can stay the clocks or make them, work intervention

We fallen angels at rest feel no acceleration
our sparks of persistent sperm feel no resistance

We keep our heavens mysterious, veils at a distance
inside the atoms, lust and lover, outside the universe

Ball bearings and magic through the radio without wires the child
could not see the magnets, just cat whiskers and iron filings.

* * *


"http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090804.html" As always the Astronomy Picture of the Day inspires poetry
(as well as sending posters to philosophy to "mathify"
their alternative theories leaning toward prose, Dr. Lincoln. Yes, and poetry.)

Doubled Moon Through the Windowpane

We do not paint the moon as oval
not as we understand her, our eyes see her

Fibonacci's rabbits hop through the windowpane
trapped in lasing mirrors, Casimir their growing pains

Escape through the polarized slits in blinds in ghostly
images, time's shadow arrows hawk like and duck like

A property of space itself beyond the sea of waves
what spins in the cosmic background noise non-linear

I move obliquely to scan fast, not disturb but unify the picture
nor my neighbor primping herself for sleep, Cassandras vanity mirror

The shadow moon orbits from nine to twelve o'clock
the truth and sin original, vaporous energy, mysterious love

To her I am but a braying mule, her sea a donkey in Tranquility
cloudy glare not perturbed through the sun, my eyes not naked.

Structural Reductionism and Quasic Physics

Structural Reductionism and the Idea of Singularity in General as Both a Perception and a Physicality:

As I read through the mathematical physics, apparently going beyond the calculus is where the interesting stuff is, I feel more confident that my speculations as those of last night make as much sense if not more so than things like how we treat configuration space and what discrete principles are involved in vectors and the restrictions of say points in some natural space of particles resolved to a single path. Reading this is as if I have received a message from a different world and see the history of the development of their physics. I note that the proven assumptions if generally true definitely limit as well the culture and psychology of their viewpoints. I ask of course, intellectually, if there is more than even I see in this remote area of enquiry, or that perhaps all I see has and can be presented better. Nevertheless I find some value in the few directions this blog has gone lately as if I had to go step by step to come to some very strange ideas of numbers- yet these are more of a link to whatever we may debate as to what is concrete or what is only brought down from some Platonic conception to the real world (forgive me Doron S. my first instincts were right about the quality of your work in that I can use this link to show the mechanism to bring it down to earth.

The issues I raised in the last post, well let us wax mystical unabashedly (after all the forum is waxing reductionist unabashedly concerning Dawkins and the issue of what is true or not for me in a more general view is not one of either in exclusion- all such assertions tell me is there are closed minds without clear demonstration and that is impure metaphysics and hardly the scientific method as a working principle. Oddly enough two of my sons are discussing Dawkins book one on the trip to visit for their weddings and do not realize how much I was there at the creation. But in any case no one bothers to look up the thorough discussions already on the forum. Yet as poems in the social blogs show these are also concerns of what is time and love and the expression while the living, the loom of years as the days can do their weaving. This business of being and learning in context or as an individual and what it may mean as we become more aware of each other in cyberspace. Clearly, in terms of dimensions, the Euclidean center of a tetrahedron is determined by phi (or tau, the golden ratio) and yet it is a limit really of the Fibonacci ratios, rations that do explain a lot about particle structural possibilities. I will supply my diagrams of last night that started simply but freely developed to make an area of theory I now style "Organoms" for in terms of local and non local and ideas of rotation and so on the singularities are remarkably similar to things like quarks and the number system works efficiently in Fibonacci as well as the natural binary. Amazingly I see patterns now as if numbers are alive but are freer in the ideas of scale although asymmetric and endless. This knack for arithmetic is what I wish I could have done earlier so as to feel the numbers. It is the organoms not random nor determined, string or point, that behave in a creative way and sort of explain the idea of dark matter in their duplications and global group restrictions. All this fits nicely with carbon ideas in organic chemistry. To insist on will in the ecotoms, galatomic, or randomness to explain energy Slacker-Lincoln, misses and overly restricts the next obvious level of prediction and understanding our new natural paradigm.

Dependent Observations Obscuring Each Other

Codependent Screened Logics:

I want to interrupt the previous posts which as it stands my put off some readers as if a smokescreen to the ideas that are more mathematical and come toward the last of the posts. But I am not alone in this subtle form of reasoning. It seems to be the case as with an article today in newscientist titled dark matter obscures the shape of the universe (that is some are not so sure it is flat after all and no one really understands lambda.)

In that our minds mimic the processes of physicality of the cosmos it is clear that our reasoning seems to cloud our reasoning within certain parameters. A statement like that of Lincoln today in philosophychatforum that concerning Dawkins there seems to be two answers, in fact newscientist has an article suggesting things beyond genes, memesm and x today, to the effect yes but only one of the answers is right, seems to me evidence of a lack of understanding of our very fundamental notions of what spacce and chirality is. Sure we can model it with say quaternions, yet this is not enough to pass through the obscurity of the general picture on that level of particle physics. A more discrete twistor like model would work as well, especially with things like virtual pixels in this third stage of possible internet replication integrations of culture and biology. Some of the mathematical problems which some find students there, and I emphasize students who seem to want to replicate so as to teach what they have learned- a condition of not even knowing that the world view obscures the deeper truth where mathematics and physics and number theory meet at least on the level of the monster group of 196884 dimensions- why are there three particle generations and space as three dimensional is the important question. Where is the quantum jumping on the quantum level? Clearly by considerations of geometry of flat tori and spheres what amounts to a quater rotation in the quadratic plane is an inversion in three space without an appeal to discrete limitations of complex methods. The juggle or the tetrahedron in motion has no center (nor in five space can we say which is the inside or outside as things vibrate) yet it does have an actual center of the value phi in Euclidean space coordinates. So to assume there are point particles or an origin at the big bang is to assume really the idea of the strings and twistors and jumps already in the logic of it all. To solve Keplers conjecture is a simple matter of understanding these differences of our idea of locality and non-locality of dimensions and chirality as to close packing of spheres and whatever restrictions are a matter of physicality on possible space or universe shapes. It becomes a more important question as to why there is not an 18 face deltahedraon- but on the forum the answers were assumed obvious that I should understanding them and apparently despite the ongoing evidence of the science news breakthroughs that my speculations still stood and to understand some of them is to understand before hand the articles, I was not nor the subject taken seriouslly. I remind the members left that experiments are one thing but in many cases the world has turned out close to my reasoning before hand and short of having some esp such as precognition or some sort of genius insight beforhand how does one explain this and is the reasoning before hand not some sort of evidence of good scientific thinking?

Does God Hold Atoms Together (Part 2 of 3)

Does God Hold Atoms Together? (Part 2 of 3)

This is not to say the interpretations of mathematical physics is not beautiful in its own right but clearly as evidence of the interpretations of the equations- say density or energy or even the conservation of energy- seems pervasive yet vague and again there is some sense to the philosopher's charge of the ghost of departed quantities. On some quasic level we can take the conceptual step a little higher for something like if some region is toroidal and yet it is not even if things are finite and conserved by whatever fundamental theorems. Symmetry can be seen to come before the power of conservation as much as be behind or co-extensive with it.

In general if the purpose say of the former philochatcom science site is to further education that is a nobel goal but educat is always the leading out of what is within us and the indoctrination from outside us as the basic distinction to keep in mind- a distinction that can relate to and be colored by other realities of our steps of personal and social growth. The participation on such forums is much like the arbritary meeting of a loan officer that is a crap shoot on if one gets the loan or say what to expect from the conscience of a judge's court decisions. What else is there but this human element. But those of us in the know see the irony and true colors of how some of the members feel about certain ideas - ideas that I feel I have grown beyond my allies in the debates btw. Some there beyond the personal factor are truly friends of ideas and science.

Let us say for example, from the wider freedom of the philosophic side of such a forum which is he mirror of our age perhaps but not a clearly defined one in personal or generational time, that an ultimate answer that "There is no universe" makes some intelligible sense for we can indeed imagine a time past or to come when individually this may be the case- or that in a sense we are the same person as say the South Australian organic chemistry teacher walking by me saying hello in the morning with his discipline and years of wisdom and care of his dog on its walk, he the same really as his young student who has finally awakened to the value of enquiry and too after the fact how precious life is and that of his child he sired in wandering years.

As if we are indeed somehow disembodied shadows, ghosts, or wills in this paradox of existing. The question as to what of thought is real is a lesser question and insight than this, lesser in level and irrelavace as Descartes pointed out in doubt and sensing being, for now. The wider idea o cosmology in a belated analogy to natural biology as a process to be taken seriously is also lesser in scope although in that physics seems a branch of biology seems to hint at ghosts where the highest level of complexity is such consciousness- but what that is in the failed interpretations is much more adaptable in complexity as a unified system, it is more on a higher level still and not that we cannot see things on the same logical level or perceive things beyond that but that what we imagine in this lesser level is far from whatever is its ultimate truth as being.