Flatworms, Roundworms, and Superior Sperm

Flatworms, Roundworms, and Superior Sperm

L. Edgar Otto February 13, 2012

Is prestige essential for the promotion of scientific progress or does it inhibit enquiry unfairly?

Sometimes, when I read an article, a review of some technical discovery I smell a Nobel Prize. Such prizes are somewhat hereditary in that Nobel prize laureates's have been know to beget other laureate winners. Einstein was not awarded that prize for his synthetic and heuristic theories but for his results on the photo electric effect. I have heard it said that it was awarded to him so as to add to the prestige of the prize as he was renown and popular.

Some working scientists and those in academia do not understand from their world view why when fundamental theories are questioned it seems always a challenge to Einstein even at the hint of some new physics that may change the established facts. This seems to me to be the new spring via the internet where hold up as a prize this social reward and like a trial by a jury of peers the justice of it is blind and not always the correct decision made as to the proof of actions and events.
This new spring can be the revolution against the evaluation by such a process that many times is inspired by those left outside the opportunity to have the academic freedom to do research much like when elected there is some time of immunity for the sake of stability in government by those in power or by general agreement some rules of conflict and diplomatic immunity that keeps a balance between various jurisdictions in the aggregate of world powers as armament and economic treaties that may work for the benefit of the whole.

Science, like the long time of adaptation and evolution, if it is to endure and build, has as one of its properties as a discipline that it is in a sense something exacting in its aspirations although we know there can be dead ends of logical systems that do not adapt in a non-necessary universe.

In the last few years there has been many observations, breakthroughs in discoveries, so fundamental as to suggest these will gain the prize at some future date regardless of some individual achievement or some consensus even by the whole computing power of mathematicians on the internet. Some of these relate to cell biology as to how mitosis occurs in various species of organisms. Speculations here usually suggest some utility by the discovery for disease and the processes of aging.

Lately, I see that a cell is exacting in the separation of chromosomes that can be related to certain proteins that balance the choices of what goes where and when into the daughter cells. I note also that some proteins seem to be in the organism from the start and is the ground for others that do not have such a long lifetime in their functions and coherence. I see also that for the process of mental phenomena, of memory in particular, that child abuse can lead to an individual that does not reach the most potential and is delayed in his general development and more likely to reach a certain decoherence toward in old age. These as just theories have always been questioned as controversial in matters of how psychology or evolution connects between the remote ends of lifetime as an individual evolves his understanding.

I see, and most of this comes from the science magazines it said that the main difference in man and the other primates is "superior sperm". (Now ladies, let us not raise a social issue here as it is hard to surpass the complexity of the human egg and well, vive l'difference if we really want a world of superior diversity). The superiority of sperm sets the coherence of the cells and for the brain results in a higher intelligence as well a longer life span than the lesser apes.

In the case of a controlling step in the process of mitosis by certain proteins the issue becomes one of the integration and differentiation of body cells, in particular the keeping separate those mechanisms that distinguish the stem cells from the differentiated cells. Probably, that this is presented as if an objective and materialist view of such a discovery along with the research comes a hidden agenda in effect for a world view, may tend to preserve the paradigm a little deeper than the general consensus as to what is the foundational view of the universe thus in those in the game of research are likely to have the opportunity to contribute until one day, merit aside, someone has the position to be the judge with respect to be sought for consultation by those who have not yet earned their peer status or tenure.

So in the general design of things there are fixed elements and there are adaptable elements which are like the proteins as the scaffolding for careful and creative new physics where even the few outsiders have some useful influence outside the stem cells for a little chaos can give us perspective. Even in the socialist models it was soon learned for an army not to have officers was to have an army that could not function as such.

As far as the media is concerned, perhaps seen with jealously by the state and for issues of privacy and property rights at least for the established world without a freer medium and the sharing of scientific knowledge with protections against the abuse of this not too wide a method of stealth and censorship, even the editors of newspapers with there position of op ed will take the letters to the editor as a lesser journalism so as to blacklist from the heart of publication those who chose to serve that function as if the town and not the gown in public meetings.

Moreover, the flat worms seem to have no such mechanisms as such for such mitosis yet they get along fine. In a quasic sense although separate they are easily cloned as if more closely one organism. In a general sense the very proteins eaten by one that has learned a maze teaches the solution, probably via RNA the way to navigate through that maze to the prize.

Beneath this level, heart tissue synchronized in the petrie dish and from different hearts reaches a compromise of the heartbeats. Cancer cells seem immortal just as such tissues that is not clearly dependent on an extended aggregation into a wider organism that globally protects its coherence and tendency to survive. Many of these principles as theoretical only prove to be the fact, controversial without the explicit molecules and energies involved so as to ground it as science. The nature and nurture debate as a general dialectic comes to mind. But can we say the organization of molecules has a purpose for the emergence of an organism? The fact that it exists in a pattern, an anthropocentrism, in a wider sense proves nothing deeper than what is as it is and that can be seen to explain nothing although it seems to, that gives a sense of purpose as if a sentient force behind these mechanism of nature that is still an open question of what is real in the world views.

Is the idea of a Nobel Prize a projection of our scientific research purposes or have we become a projection of that and of other concerns or rewards like that? Such rewards are much like the dreamy world of fantasy that is inspired by the virtual world which as a dream is subject to its inner laws of facts and reasons. Some mourn the loss or breakdown with on line friends as much as one would mourn the loss of some real friend or perhaps a family pet. Most time meetings result in the cruel world of reality where those more into the ideal of such a world act in real life with ill results. In a sense the internet is an extension of our substance and state of mind but can it be said to be a mind of its own even in the thought that a collective awakening might be seen so?

In a non-necessary universe its state of existing, vanished or as a given, or as a process of coming and going out of being, is a quasi-finite default state as far as objectivity and subjectivity goes. In the process, to say the universe does not or will not exist, perhaps as anything more than illusion while we can still think about it for we cannot say anything about its nothingness not in the given even if a false ground to explain what is that it could not be otherwise, we find the paradox that some such world is not forbidden, with of course an uncertainty of the numbers of such necessary worlds where they meet the possible in physical reality and our imaginations, that being indifferent to some design or to some purpose and with nothing else to make a difference to the design we can understand that in the foundations the universe will exist if it is not forbidden and the question as to why it comes to be is not necessarily one that it is meaningful to ask on the lower levels of possible designs.

These are issues of quasicity in the sense of what is the unique original in the actions of light and sentient being in a universe of patterns, parallels and similarities. It is where the Chinese Box debate as to the nature of symbols meets on the cave walls of walls of Plato as the Ship of Theseus on the seas of chaos. It is the difference in the round and flat worms on the make in the wormholes of chance and the span of the manifolds and infinity seek mirrors for renewal and conjugation (even on the paramecium level, or better the actions of sperm like that of the grampus dolphins in a pack hunting the ladies have those that sacrifice themselves for the alpha male to take the prize where such relations are superior binary one-on-one instead of multivalued at least at one event). The ship paradox is solved somewhat by the quasic ideas as to what constitutes that distinguishing as unique an individual or collective and is the case for the more general physical processes as the state of the foundations of the universe insofar as we may now feel a little better explanation of the what if not the why it is. To imagine the events, as in a quantum world as many-world or multiverse is to go beyond the natural state of the totality, that I have styled the Omnium.

Also, the concept of some sort of scale invariance taken to logical extremes is not deep enough as physics to reach this state of explanation, in effect the idea of crystal lattices as real or abstract symmetries needs some deeper work as to how the theory relates to a third law of thermodynamics- for we have to address the level of aggregates of patterns before we can move on decisively to address what we come close to in the truth of the matters of creative physics and yes that which will stand as objective design should science prove in the future to be creative and prove it by its new technologies that is hoped, as a scientific humanism or benevolent and fair judgement of equal weight at least initially for those who desire for whatever reason a life of research- give then a special place in heaven for the sake of us all, so rare such a hopeful species and so hard the proliferation in nature to insure the design, with purpose or not, fills this universe or not, in our hope the stars. For that, if not some higher being is as much our higher judge as we are in the design of our civilization itself. But I have told you much that you already know, and for me at least much that is new in my little corner on the checky shores of the quasi-infinite universe.

* * *

Desosynthelation (Toward a Journal of Quasic Physics)

Desosynthelation L. Edgar Otto

From "geodesic" and synthesis (a coming together)

One of my oldest words now put toward an idea. I am considering a more formal treatment: The Journal of Quasic Physics not to be confused with the term "quasiphysical ", (a medical term).

Clearly, the parallels between objects as in quasicrystals as a sense of a general space and physics principle,( one by the way I suggested to NC state admissions in the days I thought these powerful and wise people before the tradition of the teaching faculty as well as merit now caries little weight. This bureaucratic veto at first blush mentality seems invariant even in the community colleges which were after all a solution for the overflow into academia by Vietnam era veterans) carries over to n-ality by this array and grid of quasic objects in a certain sense multiple but indistinguishable.

This can also be intelligibly visualized in three space, as an alternative to several speculations on why the universe in the main seems three dimensional. The idea of generations of particles in nature becomes a given and no as if the Deity made some ad hoc addition superfluous to the design of creation.

The general idea of line and point duality carries over to the axiom generalized for higher dimensions and symmetry. Three planes can intersect into a point but the sense of the totality (what I would call flangelation in the condensing and by the way a mechanism of structure that does distinguish fermion and bosons in nature). For over the duality in the four space grid, with an assumed half singularity center, real or virtual, the subspace of the elements that compose a hypercube are the quasically ordered Sudoku matrices, magical or tending to random arrays.

The qasic transparency suggests, that on a certain level of generational symmetry we cannot in the conservation idea of symmetry, even with a wider view of cell color parity probe the depth of the quasic n-fields as if in the twists and turns there is a holographic sense of the structure containing all the momentum and this in that it can merge with other broken symmetric arrays on the same level it can fractally move toward the said structural center on the hierarchy of holographic shell structures that the boundary of such a shell is not a total isolation but a return to a generalized idea of superdupersymmmetry, (SUSUSY).

By the nature of quasicity with consideration of these concepts the idea of the variety and unity found in the universe as well the possibilities where such views can be taken to totality to a logical extreme, the integration and differentiation of body cells as the complexity of organisms as in the physics model, tissue to be viewed quasically, we find both sides of what is digital or analog, finite or continuous a dialectic of reasoning and reality in a quasi-finite universe. These views are not necessarily separate ad hoc additions to physics for justifying exclusion of one view as fantasy, nor for that matter do we need to add mass ad hoc to our physics equations.



What is different in the quasic physics considering entities as distinct yet the same or similar thing, is that they are a small region of a continuous whole connected at a distance with a concept of intervening emptiness from some view. The surfaces of objects remain connected although in the usual intuitive idea of continuity one cannot walk somewhere on the surface of the earth for example and find himself on the surface of the moon thus there is more to translation and rotation as concepts to find in the geometry of the world.

When a tree is cloned from a twig of another tree is it not in some sense the same tree? We can of course argue these concepts as philosophy going a little beyond the strictly scientific sense of things when we imagine such things as "baby universes" or within a multiple ensemble of patterns over some infinity things recur, in particular the idea of multiple copies of oneself or even variations on this in parallel worlds of endless minor changes of what makes the identity to define of such individuals.

If such entities exist there is not good reason to imagine them elsewhere in time or space in a universe of ultimate unity. The poet in me considers this uniqueness question of science and philosophy as the unique most original and of one entity for this question really one of psychology when we are, on whatever level of our learning and endowment, in the state of creative passion as the center of our identity in a multiverse.

In the abstract we may consider this an issue of the finite as a matter of measure and distinction within the continuous along quantum principles and observations to the extent these are unique but not uncertain in the working space, the dark emptiness between entities, wherein the vacuum is filled and things vanish or in aggregation with connections are partially filled as if a set of particles imagined as mirrors. In the process we ask the question of uniqueness in the universe as to what in this ensemble of specters can come back from its grey muddiness, as of created again from the absolute nothingness or from some field of minimum but grounding vibrations beginning with the duality of changes of sign in some level of what constitutes dimensional space. This then the same paradox and debate as to what constitutes the foundation of the physics as to what in the persistence and effort in the universe can stay a rest or change its fundamental states of being.

We can argue that the logic of it all does not hold for the same events over time otherwise when they are the same individual for all other properties and parameters. Or that it somehow does if we these simple ideas of what time is from the usual philosophic perspective as subjective. Some, more radically than explicitly stated by say the quantum theory would deny the uniqueness of any pathways with the rather quasic concept of infinite path sums over finite time (what is meant here by the corpuscular view as the finite?) that ultimately all things are in a sea of randomness and cloudy uncertainty to which any view if in a state possible for measure or within a range of probable physicality as the real that while there is a distinction between the subjective and objective these are lesser concepts than what we expect of a higher unity of the world as quantum and other ideas of the topology if it all in the relativity's. That is to say if ultimately the subjective and objective are one substance neither can be biased as a description for the world as the physics and for that matter the philosophy is greater than that picture and the model for the world is too closed an entity for a comprehensive and unified system.

Some traditions, religious and philosophic, imagine that the death of one individual person or soul is in a sense the vanishing totally of the entirety of what constitutes a universe. Would this be the death also of some ultimate concern, of God as well? Would it be an absolute denial of such a being perhaps grounding some tenable bias in world view that beyond our existing now there is nothingness thus we feel the existing is all the more real? Is such a being multiple and unique in this sense itself as well of what we ask as the structure of the universe? Can we not ask this same question of the idea of vacua, of the nothingness?

In our vaguely intuited ideas of the third physics, of the Quasic Physics, at least from a subjective and philosophic perspective the act of existing, coming into and out of being as or near a uniqueness of existence is not just something done isolated in an autistic like concept or in a jumbled concept or some other psychological forms that may have a physical if not a unique basis but the description, beyond ideas even as "at a distance" to the extent it is described by a unique creative individual is also an expression of that description and enactment of an aggregate of social and collective individuals.

In this sea of singularities of the hidden subjective we can quite imagine that the state of an individual in the fight for the state of the universe if these can be seen within some level of a total theory where things are more importantly uniquely isolated than the question of what is the energy and entropy as the ground of states,
that our consensus and the world itself could be a sum of the birth and absolute separation on some space structure of individuals who vanish and arise as if with them the existence of the universe itself.

In theology we ask these questions of such assumptions of an ultimate subjectivity capable of being more than an indifferent universe and doubly a phantom, one we may imagine is not there when we do not see it as Einstein say he did not believe so vanished the moon. Or can we conjure some such entity into existence in the world of what actually is substance beyond the ideas of symmetries and dimensions on the local scale at least? Can it be that in the best and ultimate design of the world God can only step aside for as if Maxwell's demon his knowing all would send it into ultimate chaos as far as the entropy goes? Could he not in principle intervene or have the choice to do so in a universe as quasi-finite (quasi-infinite)? If such a deity is manifest could He distinguish what in this world is its foundations and what is miracle including himself in the world? In the sense of deity as creative uniqueness in the Intelligent Design sense, not as in Hoyle's intelligent design and creation field concepts but with the capitals... both levels of concept an "intelligible design" apparently, can we not ask also of this deity if in the same way to the level of our learning and comprehension is He multiple?

To some extent it is not the content of an organism that strives to endure and replicate but the context of at least indifferent purposes yet with action part of which, if we are godlike wise in the distance, is the continuation and expansion of existence. If the world were just quantum then the God by turning off the computer so to do quantum computation world solve the problem faster than it left on, when it turns on again. But are such answers unique? Are these dreams of godlike thought between similar universes multiple?



* * * * *
Poetry Projects 02-12-12 L. Edgar Otto

Theme: From the Small Man within I Find Your Face a Variegated Nakedness through Styled in His Ugliness when I am not Blind...

Homunculus Hidden in Your Animus
L. Edgar Otto

We are one tribe while the others take on the forms of lesser animals, the wolves, the chickens, the giraffes
Here and there an elephant or storks with their cacophony of laughs, or our antics mirrored by our inner monkeys hanging by their tail, tempting tigers

So why do we need distance and dividing the future king om into parts, can we not walk as equals, surely
We have the same intelligence, or so we suspect so
for me to demean our heritage is to demean myself
yet not so far away,my compassion, Wounded Elf

Are you waiting for me to show you the moves and way? Do you think your lies will net me,
Your methods, I a fool for tears but not the things you think the way to my stomach, deception simmering in the cold night filling up my wanting ears

In this you are not original, but I admire your creativity
What zombie awakens without doubts takes upon itself my knife teasing me unto your self sacrifice?

* * * * * * *


We Need no Cheerleaders Marshaling us with Their Pompoms L. Edgar Otto

Your desire, the last kicks, Little Mouse,
on awakening. or a storm of sparks, Failed Star
in death throws but to little effect, questioning bonds

The philosopher in me finds the peace in acceptance
without the loss of love yet indifference to your plight
real or not , your soul not mine a wide gaping squab

The sweet voice lives awhile only in the air waves
some story of your singing, helping your mother cook
No fame or fortune matters, zombies getting only rise

That widens your eyes but you can see nothing nor
reversed in your stupor all your words of love for life
that's what its about, possession, slaves of Sandmen

I have seen too long your puppet dance, flight into yourself
that your body cry's out to hang out, offended
I do not believe or find joy in words to be forgotten

Or of a record with a scratch, looped and telling me over and
over again the same old song, or bits of one we cannot quite
hear the words right, rapid speech

Is that freedom to fly above the storm clouds
losing altitude and risking icing up your wings,
rather make the scratched disk your song, play it once, Wax one?

I am not that child that confuses Princess Summer Fall
Winter Spring in the black and white telecast
never a recording made for the love of her as real.

As the World Grows Smaller L. Edgar Otto

I met you after a long time, half a lifetime really, I called but you did not remember me, not one thought in all that time, but all I thought about was you

Oh, how is so and so, how is your Dad, what are you doing now, Did you get married, Have kids? I found you quite by accident on the internet, as Kevin Bacon

More and more I find the others but we never ask about such things, surely we do not want to talk about who is still around, who moved on, who fell out of time

Rapidly in the cloud meetings and bonds change, questioning why we were smitten, why we just hang around in the befriending, old times sake, like real life

I did not see your face then, no mirror for my reflection
invasion of our privacy, our masks at a distance where nothing is hidden, ghosts taking a long time to die

Now I see I turned my eyes because it was too bright, your amazing beauty, I would explode if not blind to it the Virgin viewed, my innocence, but not lose sight

You were the one, that a good thing to believe in Love itself our hearts to grow, as we fruitfully multiply
I cannot count the gray days when I felt you cry.

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *


* * * *

Are You Theorists and Engineers in the Wrong Universe?

Are You Theorists and Engineers in the Wrong Universe?

L. Edgar Otto 02-10-12


From the view of significance in depth for what seems a trivial thing, this seems to apply to algebra too. I listed some simple additions without the benefit of the compressing of things into useful formulas of number theory. This certainly seems in my posting of physical laws as if they are simple addition of low numbers that I am not saying very much, at least formally and scientifically, but when we take those numbers which seem to put deeper laws into categories of these numbers or laws of physics as if not far from the trivial and obvious with some modifications in the higher concepts. But if you read these simple numbers with the idea of simple geometric ideas in mind as concerning the number of some dimension and concept then ever 2 +2 = 4 seems profound.

So, poetically I might say- as did those without the jail or straitjacket or bucket that can hold the waters of wisdom in the early days of algebra- all was words. If mathematicians are fond of inverses of things we can say:

Lampion - a number added to its inverse and that made into a heap then multiplied by that number is the number square plus unity.

Well, this is simply the equation n(n+1/n) = n^2 + 1. Now this seems we simplified the problem from some vague notion of measure- or we can make sense with the symmetries of trivial counting and structure of what underlies and is philosophically controversial or even illogical as to a quantum physics idea like:

Lampion - we get a closer value and accuracy for some physical values if we add the inverse to the measure of said properties.

In the first place can we put transcendental values into the number n without exceeding the idea of what makes the seeming certainty of an algebraic number? In the second place as in the unique case of n=3 the resulting number is split into two parts, both as if real, and one part results in the value of unity, three = three. The other part is a multiplication by triality which like duality is everywhere in the powers as dimensions. The idea of unity itself raises all the logical and philosophic issues such as of one thing but indeterminate in value such that we may say the same thing of scale not tied to a more reductionist and materialist bias to define physics.

What are we to make of things that are squared. The magic squares in particular as stable abstract designs for integration and a host of other deeper things like squared wave equation quantum field world of which now familiar we say if we say understand it we do not as the humor of the half truth joke goes? So we add the square part again to the grounding in the numerical value of this unity as if we ground an end of a line or string into some properties of a higher brane.

In still another place it is not clear that nature herself without explanation more deeply contemplated can say when we real some unity of being, total theory even if founded on the method of nothingness as in the nilpotent formalism once achieving unity connections and parallels, or evolution, or insights as to what is the actual basis to say which is the inverse and which is the real number.

In the next place- for with the idea of dimensions we can lose count rapidly, as rapidly in the patterns as formulas giving us high numbers that exceed our super computers - the string theory even if a successor to the quantum physics suffers from the lack of substance of what dimensions they reside within- and the loop theory itself when taken to the extremes of a total unified theory lacks the scaffolding of strings but relies on a disembodied field geometry of indeterminate but with a span of intelligible values for some ultimate explanation of what matter is with these very abstract ideas of universal backgrounds.

It is no wonder then that these world views come to head for some idea of unity, the Higgs particle of the standard theory- a unity that exceeds both the material count and the concept of geometric fields.
Even though we have the principle that these views are a dualism and can make an inverse of the other resulting in say higher masses of expected and looked for particles even smaller and more massive than our lowly level and grounding in the idea of a proton.

Although the numbers work to some degree, the models can make foundational and obvious assumptions like we divide the concepts of charge, mass, space, time as some sort of dialectic between the continuous and discontinuous once we designate some arbitrary sign in the physics for formula consistency, (as in Rowlands brilliant assignment of the concepts to Dirac and nipotent methods), nature is not characterized (as he says) in the process by such algebra and geometry that gives us a hint of what is foundational in physics and let the rest, the cart that brought us there, vanish in significance to the content of the cargo.

That said, these explorations and styles of reason and research at some unity with our experiments are the only tools, creative and imaginary or otherwise, we have to use. It is a good thing to be an expert in the languages if we do not become bewitched by the meaninglessness or emptiness of the models and methods in themselves such that we think we have the right answer- we often can see, and this is a property of modeling and computation that is reliable to great levels if not the absolute of calculations itself- that is a form of reliable mathematical induction like intuition raising awareness and making progress toward the unknown in the main.

The quasic idea, which I have long regarded as a third physics, of which I do not know just how much is new in the world or is just a fine juggling and juxtaposition of several existing ideas (as ideas, the scientist in me assumes the world is intelligible in its design) is after all about the quasic plane which seems to go beyond the generalization from those of Euclid, through the complex number plane, Lorentz invariance like ones, to Branes of various forms in our day. We evolve, and not always directly, an edifice of the number line- fractions are taught to us early but they came late in the literature. In the interest of national security after the world war there were several experiments in teaching our children- either the old way of geometry rather strict with no hint it involved a certain artful approach to the proof of Euclid or something a little more liberal and Aquarian even - some hippie view, an age singing of candles in the rain to the beat of the mellow rock of the Fifth Dimension. For there was the new math and new ways to teach reading, a concentration on the abstract operations before learning to reckon and to write, and it remains a matter of taste as to if these experiments failed. For this was the time of growing up while the death of Einstein, and the first Echo satellite, before the modern abacus of computers was widely available, and when so much of drugs and drink made as well - so in our day we may never know the results of such experiments.

How I looked back at the old biplanes thinking that was a rather backward generation all around- oh, it had its charm. But the other day reruns of the old Twelve O'clock High came on the new meTV channel (there are a lot of old folks advertizements on it) Nostalgia. Well, the B-52's in the show were once for me the most advanced things and it took years before I could see progress in jets and ball point pens. Without propellers it just did not seem like and airplane. Rockets were different until confused with the space shuttle- each generation has its confusions, where does the phone and television and computer begin or end as these converge?

How odd the events in time. I recall the first beeps of the Sputnik I tuned into on the large stand up shortwave. I saw the Echo wobble. In the middle of the night watched when the station turned on for the event the first hydrogen bomb. I said to my dad, he radioman in the Navy, "that is an awful lot of bomb for a ship." He looked serious and thoughtful and said "it is for cities..." After awhile what we hold as nostalgic collectibles that survived the junkyard becomes future generations forgotten junk.

But I have digressed. Even about our own theoretical models we do not always understand the significance and this is a natural problem of self communication as much as what we expect in the giving of our exciting finds to others that they will find the excitement and more go on to shared discoveries so to teach back again the guru or myth and legend of one, who denies he is one usually and that thought evidence, all perhaps for the understands of what is valuable (well, to see the heartbeat through the toy microscope I now mention after all, but it is a common thing, a potential and promise, life waits for a child what is hardly imaginable years for the return of the great Hally's comment only to find it not much really, not that it is less of the first video in for ages in the sky but a little lesser in the city lights and neon signs where we as humans command and contain the fire so much brighter from the violent but distant oasis of this Earth for all its chance disasters and our own, in time if we can live among ourselves without all sides of thought and madmen breaking the little bits some of us might add to the unity of theory and the world should they meet and both be logical in multiplications of no good compromise so as to welcome the balance of the books to zero sum.

It should be clear that in the hologram idea and the fractal idea, as positive and absolute values that the quasic field, in binary primarily, can be factored abstractly. If anything can give us the primes this may at any point in an evolving sequence- I suspect this lately as it seems to work from the digits themselves as to what is a prime number when in binary and read freely in all the bases and dimensions- but that is speculation of the nature of which the deeper question that makes it possible to ask deeper questions than we know at the earlier time for me vaguely and now the one of uniqueness in the world, its people, its stray falling of rocks into the planets formed in the sky. To say we lose or gain such information inside or outside the hologram should be a principle of method not some imagined restriction to model the world with to the point were time itself can be said an illusion that exists on no surfaces of things where the universe itself is imagined a quasic space without a surface. Is it not remarkable we can read the binary numbers and from their digits divide as if by decimal ones limited to zeros and ones? This is a property of numbers that are in such a squaring plus unity and goes a little beyond the idea of lower relations of quadratic reciprocity and such, and contains the idea of other forms of prime number systems.

Old plus one - Eddington, should not have been called that for his was a profound insight more than some greatest mistake of his career. Like some such mistakes over time, well, the Galois of it all in that I could understand it back when had me think there could only be five quarks- why would I think that? In a lot of abstract ways I begin to think it was not a mistake after all, and even then for my intuition they have been few. The universe is at least favorable and not indifferent to those who will dare and try to think carefully and clearly.

Who remembers Bicentinuum?

* * * * *


The Quasi-reality of Count & Structure in Trivial Data Interpretations

L. Edgar Otto 02-10-12

The sense we have within ourselves or how we may imagine others feel about our particular interpretations, or world view as to what explains ourselves and the world can seem like the coincidental or even most trivial, doubtful or irrelevant numerology in the counting or a geometry too obvious to be questioned where its physics and analogies may be seen as deterministic and necessary laws of the universe and of reason.

This is a part of the creative impulse to what we have not perceived directly that there can be progress and possibilities of growth and learning. The emotional view and the general accessibility to energy and memory of an organism over time, in ascent or descent of its complexity is not always connected to objectivity if there is an emphasis on the poetic mood- at least insofar as content is concerned. This I suspect is the echo of enactment of our mental design as in sync with the context of natural law independent in principle as to it being the source of such law as the laws can be grounded in non-necessity, paradoxically.

The mastery of new information can inhibit the expression of poetry although both are needed for creativity and even a the same time, both ultimately can be seen as a similar method at least for the intensity of thought, inertia also to continue or resistance to the effort required for a new poem or quest for something scientific. Over time then we may lose material as in a chess game while we gain strategic design. But nature is not forgiving of our blunders when she acts as if a machine most likely not aware of that beyond the context of her programming compass.

Some things are not forgotten in our laziness of method or simple act of remembering to pay attention to the design and emotional states. It is as if we grow more adept rather than get rusty- for example when I take up the guitar after a long time. This relation to music cannot just be some sort of body memory that is imprinted on specific brain structures.

For example, in my prime but in descent as to the amount of baldness and alternating over some months between poetry and massive eye straining calculations my wife noticed that in the poetic mood I seemed to grow hair but in the analytic mood I seemed to lose hair. (As I recall it but in thinking about this it could have been the other way around- after all with the same habits and objects memories seem to mix events around them. In any case doing both did sprout the number of hairs and length at the same rate.)

I am a fair chess player but trying the game- I mean I am not addicted to the virtual world per se although one could suspect otherwise from the amount of presence. Even the thrill of what we think we are doing, its urgency as if the reality has to be heeded for texting for example or the distraction when time seems to subjectively change and the clock or pot left on the burner is forgotten until it boils over. Or my young kids finally leaving the Mario game obviously needing to take a pee- yes, I heard that happens and there was first hand experience. The influence of violence was easier to deal with- I said if you fight over a game I will simply unplug all of it. That did well- I tried the game but I had to set it on "Daddy please don't hurt me" when I faced the sneaky well armed jackbooted enemy. It is humbling to not be as fast and quite amazing really how children so young can read the scrolling screen.

So, I tried the chess game that came with this computer and it gives me a sound thrashing most of the time- I mean part of it may be I have not played for awhile (well, even the best of internet drama can become boring, more like work one may not want to do or do for so long. Even the pretty gals that make most men stay on facebook a month if they see her picture- well, facebook has the population now just a little less than India or China- but it is not all just passion and hormones.)

So I tried the game, and when I do win , usually with some radical moves I am thrilled I trounced the machines programming (it must know the 200 or so openings that I have not memorized until the masters learning from each other settle down to endless draws.) But I think if I continued to play this game on line seriously- well we are only as good as our opponents so I think I would become more like the machine in play on any level. I just do not see why people enjoy playing these games which are so deterministic and rapid and said to be a measure of intelligence.

On the other hand, I think I have made inroads into what is the nature of the game, as I have posted. I do not see why the hints are there- I mean, are they needed, are they a gift or flirtation that addicts us in loops of false senses of power and weight? Will these principles which are much like the hints of what can be attacked or moved in the game be powerful enough to beat the brute calculator on the run? I mean I find no fun in setting games to a character that is immortal and has a stash of all the possible weapons so shoots everything, all the other players and even the windows and other virtual furniture- some young adults I have seen do this for hours and yet have no interest on what makes the game work. Perhaps there is something to be said for being a part of interaction with others, a dialog of sorts, a suspension of disbelief where the game like a sock hop teen dance is really just the symbolic ambiaince to prepare for awkwardness, to socialize I guess.

This post today, out of boredom and as a rest from all the learning of what to do between an off line and on line computer - I cannot say I like the cloud idea that comes to you even if what I have is pretty much an open book- was one of an art project as pure art really. I have been using the primitive paint program as it was closer to the logic and have used the last posts principle of the four way patterns. So I was surprised when stray drawings began to look interesting for arts sake alone. Take this post this way then- as an artistic thought experiment.

We are only as good in battle as our opponent- this came home to me caught between so many unwell or drugged up people and the bureaucrats I avoid - they do nothing but harvest the troubles of others and overstep their bounds for pennies really enslaving even those who would benefit to an ongoing industry to which there is too much because it seems they do not contribute to the wellness of our society, not that I say they are mean spirited- just that they have a world view and expectations as to what is their rights as in the judgement of others as worthless characters or undesirables who should have equal access to public institutions.

But in the deeper scheme of things one does not have to encounter and fight others to undermine and even redeem their hearts in the influence they have on the well being of our society. Well, even Leonardo had a life long fight with city hall. I will not make predictions about what is likely to happen in our society- not to put ideas in anyone's head- there is enough violence there already and it is intolerable on so many levels to put up with. Besides, no one heeded my warnings before and such unlikely happenings became the mainstream news. Let the senators die from cancer and I will not shed a tear for they did not support me and others in the general advancement of science when I had time to make a difference and the intense desire.

Nevertheless, the core work gets done and sustains us. Let us not be biased against the competent who have a high opinion of themselves where your loyal friends are dishonest and your honest friends are disloyal.

Then again I outgrew the whole shebang, but I have not outgrown what I expect of computers and society as for the most part it takes so long to catch up for this primitive world in my eyes- why do some want to stop designs even if theirs are lacking- but it is theirs at the cost of some power game to be ahead then to settle for less to be so of the other guy or gal. I hate to go Ayn Rand on you but many times I have thought to take the ball away when I leave the game- but all this, formally is asking a question that is not just pure art- its it about the board or that which is within it? This is an important and deep question if one pays attention and thinks to ask it.

By the way, writing in the quiet not in the coffee shop- I do miss the pen and paper but not running out of those nor of ideas- what I write also has been influenced by the medium it is done with. I am not sure in the virtual world this is observable- so we can no longer claim ownership of styles. But there is so much still for me to learn now that I am back and noticed I have become whole again, can see how beautiful and ugly some people are and why I did not notice one way or the other not that long ago.

* * * * * *


LAMPION - 02.11.12 QUASIC GROUP TRANSPARENCY

L. Edgar Otto

When we apply group theory to the quasic (brane) plane so as to turn the totality. in the dimensions abstractly (I use abstract in the quasic symmetry sense unless explicitly refered to as abstract algebra) vertical to the plane, that is a concept of superabstract symmetry, a directionality is established in the natural superabstract symmetry breaking without rigid but averaged generational independence from the order of permutations and as holographic abstract superimposed shells a certain transparency exist that is the structural result of these finite algebraic properties such that the creative field (in Hoyle's sense) establishes opacity between layers. In particular, in the case of four layers three of them are continuous and a quater of them is magic square unstable.

We see then that the usual groups do indeed break down in its properties when the quasic dimensions exceed eight (and in the intelligibility of numbers and dimensional numbers the deep group involving supersymmetry of 15 is open thus capable of merger between rows an columns to the next number, as seven implying 8 or 15 implying 16) but to realize the full symmetry of the dihedral group up to superimposed octonions the pattern repeats as four fold and the extension into the five and greater dimensions is a force that at unity can be interpreted as that of gravity and mass as one concept and mechanism as the universe, omnically, appears to approach the unities of remote scales. Thus the concept of scale or other invariance s can be generalized to that of superabstract symmetry invariance as also a steady state.
in the process as quasi-finite creativity. Abstractly and in profound conception the holographic or K group without a pole, and some particles would be distinct as to generations and not mix can be said to connect through the one fourth imbalances in this view as part of a general model that does also establish the nucleus and deeper structures.

But in any case the quasic factoring intelligibly but not rigidly in the local vicinity of action events does not leak nor loose the quantum information but puts limits on the natural resistance by motion making heat as if objects growing hot falling in a gravitational well by this superabstract thermodynamic process regardless of the isolation or connection of such laws as to the behaviors in systems. In geneneral the curve (circles) into lines as far as stretchable entities into ellipses and also show the mechanisms of the symmetries of polytopes can so stretch as ellipsoids and thus we can derive the ideal case that we describe to the ideal limits as asymptotic freedom, Also these principles permit on any scale level the endurance of substructures for if you think about it what guarantees this and for how long if we ask this question of a natural restriction and not imposed one from theory as to what happens in the wake of action. It is not clear or explicitly stated how this relates to dark matter as beyond the positive mirror of such quasic spheres as boundless and finite but the idea of these as in the quark center such as in Kea's Insight strikes me as a very good start for after all triality is involved just within the standard theory, also we clearly see the models can be purely four fold as in Pitkanen's view. But such dark mass and normal mass meet there, the Higgs too at unity asks this question of superabstraction of symmetries even far from unity into the remote span or background which as Dirac noted is generally a balance of forces and masses on dialectical scales. These fractal and holographic considerations together implies that where mixing is legitimate and can be shown to have predictable paths and energy scale intelligible measure and observation can themselves mix as if permuted matters in the quasic transparency so as to be done in a less rigid way for the generalized connections in the topology.

Part of the inspiration for this other than the types of art that empty near the logic of it computer bitmap drawing and an old diagram I forgot and found on this computer was the short text I found on double factorials as simple numerical formulas and how these multiple factorials in the simple formula with expanded meaning as I grow my more expanded context that seems to make easier and faster connections generalized quasicly between the concept of the various factorials. It is clear that also Newton had a good sense of these general notions to leave the ghost of departed quantities off in some heaven beyond our braneworlds as quasic entities. Perhaps to have wisdom is precisely what can be implied from simpler beginnings of a theory.

* * * * * * *

As a footnote these are rather esoteric principles so far that goes beyond our general conceptions of matter, even the question of existence of supersymmetry and higher dimensions as there are relevant to the physical world. Beyond the quantum theory which on some level can be seen as the bias for world models as absolute randomness and uncertainty of any system as characterizable.

For example we can imagine the elements beyond 120 or 136 as in the chemistry of the 18 shell level in Seaborg's chemical model of the periodic table in perhaps limitless element structures. But such matter may be found (yes, beyond the machines that in effect approach the conditions of the assumed Big Bang) in deeper concepts of space and its intelligibility. What restricts us to QFT and QCD as we regard the issue of mass from our familiar view and not just as some much deeper than the hidden views, is the superdupersymmetry SSUSY. SUSY being the combining of or symmetry breaking in the standard models and by virtue of connections and extensions, abstract and concrete aggregates by Quasic Transparency. In this way we can justify the concept of material creation and evolution by a theory that does not just combine things or break them apart to see what happens limited to issues of just the supersymmetric level we have yet to get firmly fixed down.

* * * * * * * *


The n-quasicality distribution

L. Edgar Otto 02-11-12

Distribution is said to be the heart of algebra. Quasicity can be the same form of this as a geometry of parallels in a quasi-finite dimensional lattice in the so called non-linear. Thus, distributed over an array of superimposed ambiguously isolated finite objects or coordinates are separated but parallel which can be read as n-ality. The powers then can be read as powers of powers fractally. The be abstractly generationally parallel is to be a quasic mirror of things separated as a possibility. But this separation does not constitute the vacuum properties as if those properties explain the possibility of expansion of space, inflation, or is the grounding and cause of dark matter (or the noir forces in general.

Clearly the same general principle imagined as to the information on a holographic surface free to connect to other such surfaces of a lower or total isolated generational order or scale as lost or less than the emergence of properties in the interior or volume as such entities in principle are free to interact, there is a world where this abstractly seems partially the case, mass ratio wave guides of sorts and energetic standing waves in a quasi-finite coming into and out of existence of some substantial field that also may be n-quasical in distribution in the remote laws of things neither parallel nor dependent nor rigid beyond the ratios of such concrete distributions- heat in particular is transferred beyond the ideas of simply the complex plane.

* * * *

The Quasi-reality of Count & Structure in Trivial Data Interpretations

The Quasi-reality of Count & Structure in Trivial Data Interpretations

L. Edgar Otto 02-10-12

The sense we have within ourselves or how we may imagine others feel about our particular interpretations, or world view as to what explains ourselves and the world can seem like the coincidental or even most trivial, doubtful or irrelevant numerology in the counting or a geometry too obvious to be questioned where its physics and analogies may be seen as deterministic and necessary laws of the universe and of reason.

This is a part of the creative impulse to what we have not perceived directly that there can be progress and possibilities of growth and learning. The emotional view and the general accessibility to energy and memory of an organism over time, in ascent or descent of its complexity is not always connected to objectivity if there is an emphasis on the poetic mood- at least insofar as content is concerned. This I suspect is the echo of enactment of our mental design as in sync with the context of natural law independent in principle as to it being the source of such law as the laws can be grounded in non-necessity, paradoxically.

The mastery of new information can inhibit the expression of poetry although both are needed for creativity and even a the same time, both ultimately can be seen as a similar method at least for the intensity of thought, inertia also to continue or resistance to the effort required for a new poem or quest for something scientific. Over time then we may lose material as in a chess game while we gain strategic design. But nature is not forgiving of our blunders when she acts as if a machine most likely not aware of that beyond the context of her programming compass.

Some things are not forgotten in our laziness of method or simple act of remembering to pay attention to the design and emotional states. It is as if we grow more adept rather than get rusty- for example when I take up the guitar after a long time. This relation to music cannot just be some sort of body memory that is imprinted on specific brain structures.

For example, in my prime but in descent as to the amount of baldness and alternating over some months between poetry and massive eye straining calculations my wife noticed that in the poetic mood I seemed to grow hair but in the analytic mood I seemed to lose hair. (As I recall it but in thinking about this it could have been the other way around- after all with the same habits and objects memories seem to mix events around them. In any case doing both did sprout the number of hairs and length at the same rate.)

I am a fair chess player but trying the game- I mean I am not addicted to the virtual world per se although one could suspect otherwise from the amount of presence. Even the thrill of what we think we are doing, its urgency as if the reality has to be heeded for texting for example or the distraction when time seems to subjectively change and the clock or pot left on the burner is forgotten until it boils over. Or my young kids finally leaving the Mario game obviously needing to take a pee- yes, I heard that happens and there was first hand experience. The influence of violence was easier to deal with- I said if you fight over a game I will simply unplug all of it. That did well- I tried the game but I had to set it on "Daddy please don't hurt me" when I faced the sneaky well armed jackbooted enemy. It is humbling to not be as fast and quite amazing really how children so young can read the scrolling screen.

So, I tried the chess game that came with this computer and it gives me a sound thrashing most of the time- I mean part of it may be I have not played for awhile (well, even the best of internet drama can become boring, more like work one may not want to do or do for so long. Even the pretty gals that make most men stay on facebook a month if they see her picture- well, facebook has the population now just a little less than India or China- but it is not all just passion and hormones.)

So I tried the game, and when I do win , usually with some radical moves I am thrilled I trounced the machines programming (it must know the 200 or so openings that I have not memorized until the masters learning from each other settle down to endless draws.) But I think if I continued to play this game on line seriously- well we are only as good as our opponents so I think I would become more like the machine in play on any level. I just do not see why people enjoy playing these games which are so deterministic and rapid and said to be a measure of intelligence.

On the other hand, I think I have made inroads into what is the nature of the game, as I have posted. I do not see why the hints are there- I mean, are they needed, are they a gift or flirtation that addicts us in loops of false senses of power and weight? Will these principles which are much like the hints of what can be attacked or moved in the game be powerful enough to beat the brute calculator on the run? I mean I find no fun in setting games to a character that is immortal and has a stash of all the possible weapons so shoots everything, all the other players and even the windows and other virtual furniture- some young adults I have seen do this for hours and yet have no interest on what makes the game work. Perhaps there is something to be said for being a part of interaction with others, a dialog of sorts, a suspension of disbelief where the game like a sock hop teen dance is really just the symbolic ambiance to prepare for awkwardness, to socialize I guess.

This post today, out of boredom and as a rest from all the learning of what to do between an off line and on line computer - I cannot say I like the cloud idea that comes to you even if what I have is pretty much an open book- was one of an art project as pure art really. I have been using the primitive paint program as it was closer to the logic and have used the last posts principle of the four way patterns. So I was surprised when stray drawings began to look interesting for arts sake alone. Take this post this way then- as an artistic thought experiment.

We are only as good in battle as our opponent- this came home to me caught between so many unwell or drugged up people and the bureaucrats I avoid - they do nothing but harvest the troubles of others and overstep their bounds for pennies really enslaving even those who would benefit to an ongoing industry to which there is too much because it seems they do not contribute to the wellness of our society, not that I say they are mean spirited- just that they have a world view and expectations as to what is their rights as in the judgement of others as worthless characters or undesirables who should have equal access to public institutions.

But in the deeper scheme of things one does not have to encounter and fight others to undermine and even redeem their hearts in the influence they have on the well being of our society. Well, even Leonardo had a life long fight with city hall. I will not make predictions about what is likely to happen in our society- not to put ideas in anyone's head- there is enough violence there already and it is intolerable on so many levels to put up with. Besides, no one heeded my warnings before and such unlikely happenings became the mainstream news. Let the senators die from cancer and I will not shed a tear for they did not support me and others in the general advancement of science when I had time to make a difference and the intense desire.

Nevertheless, the core work gets done and sustains us. Let us not be biased against the competent who have a high opinion of themselves where your loyal friends are dishonest and your honest friends are disloyal.

Then again I outgrew the whole shebang, but I have not outgrown what I expect of computers and society as for the most part it takes so long to catch up for this primitive world in my eyes- why do some want to stop designs even if theirs are lacking- but it is theirs at the cost of some power game to be ahead then to settle for less to be so of the other guy or gal. I hate to go Ayn Rand on you but many times I have thought to take the ball away when I leave the game- but all this, formally is asking a question that is not just pure art- its it about the board or that which is within it? This is an important and deep question if one pays attention and thinks to ask it.

By the way, writing in the quiet not in the coffee shop- I do miss the pen and paper but not running out of those nor of ideas- what I write also has been influenced by the medium it is done with. I am not sure in the virtual world this is observable- so we can no longer claim ownership of styles. But there is so much still for me to learn now that I am back and noticed I have become whole again, can see how beautiful and ugly some people are and why I did not notice one way or the other not that long ago.

* * * * * *

GENERAL STEREONOMETRY

GENERAL STEREONOMETRY

L. Edgar Otto 02-10-12

Considering the universe as quasi-finite, when we look at the general sky for patterns we could consider evidence for finite polytopal models that are geometrically still in the running for the idea of the finitude of a model of the universe.

This will seem trivial as a way to view things or too synthetic for it not to be mere properties of mathematics or physics principles. Such structures and relations are ways we orient ourselves in the world and Penrose suggests that twistor theory orientation is the general mechanism of gravity. Ideal objects as material objects aleign to this concept of directionality. Gravity as such reacts to the mass positionally in what seems the usual case in a general space to which we may add or modify principles toward some imagined universal center.

This center can be in time also, and there may be a center or some levels that so contain such a center. From one respect each of us has a center, as from the view of each galaxy assuming a proper time as if the absolute aether after all (Einstein we could use the old term within newer theories of spacetime and matter). Does this correspond to some higher actual center, the earth is said to be as we reason out or think we see things like an axis of the universe- or I have heard some theoreticians speculate such a center exists 65 or so million years away.

Perhaps it is not so much a mystical theory along the lines of Kepler's centering of the shells of polyhedra, but with at least 4-space considerations to get the idea this said in evolving historical terms that at the still mysterious extinctions that long ago may be connected as if major states of the universe within geological time have shifted almost abruptly including evolving atoms. I would relate this to Saturn's rings but that is falsified in that such rings lately are thought to remain stable from some origin that is not clear as to when.

Of course many interesting views of this cosmic background have been presented, some not as deep a theory in the details as say the measure of anisotropy of light or for that matter on the subatomic scale evidence in the wobble of muons for parallel universes just as some think they see rings, which of course would be evidence also including the influences from previous states that still connect to this one.

Some of these philosophic ideas and vague but useful general principles become a little clearer when we take the quasic view as principles of a third and new physics. The mystery becomes a sensing of what seems trivial (after all it is rare we are aware of the invisible air we breathe). Our thinking itself evolves to understand such changes of states to which a rigid game to its programming has yet to ultimate beat our brain and mind design finite or progressively quasi-finite.

In such a case some principles that have a certain reality and utility for explanations cannot merely be a matter of mechanism as rigid logic, nor can chaos or randomness be the accessible god behind the machines. There is more to the universe than mathematical and physical descriptions as the certainty of some characterized ground where the quasi-finite is ambiguous where such general species of reason and laws are applied to a non-necessary but paradoxical universe.

Hence we have the concept and problems with say monopoles. But what is such a pole but some intersection of greater spaces where somewhere in that space we are the center where all directions meet as if we contain such a real or virtual singularity. The ideal point at infinity in perspective needs not be the only one in a composite drawing.

So, we simply suggest that the actual universal background taken as at least spherical harmonics can be in its components of whatever nature or origin- even that of dark matter of which we say we can model from the densities of the cosmic background, or the ratio of H and He so as to determine the universe's age, say from the "Big Bang"- that we apply the simple and abstractly independent idea of group theory. That is on all the multiverse of perspectives and planes and dimensions shadowed down as what we see on the surface or on multiple three space shells of surfaces as a "general stereonometry"- we rotate it for example as the dihedral group. If we do this we may see the concept of orthogons as embedded in a quasi-finite hierarchy with the usual number of shadows in shadow dimensions for the various inter-dimensional motions, rests, and abstract centering by which it is not clear we have not imposed the pattern of geometry imagined on the universe, not the algebra of it all upon the working, not foundational laws. It is of interest, even when evaluating statistical data that we take the general quadrapole structures in account.

In three space, moreover, groups around the sphere as the usual representation when infinite as in Noether's sense of action and so on, or for the idea of holograms of infinite poles, we can in a tangible universe see or impose on such centers, and spherically so for we are outside the background as if we can assume a nucleus is in fact spherical, that what is trivial and ambiguous can ground the physical fact of structure, or for that matter the action of the vacuum and its relatively proper space structures. In this sense we do not rest on the idea that any sort of nilpotence or conservation laws need be anything but a little less rigid as quasi-symmetry and of course as all is abstract but in a sense over time becomes concrete as structure, the quasi-super symmetric. Thus that world as a tension or coincidence of things invisible as also quasi-asymmetric.

* * * * *

Oxford Avenue Lampions (Alpha)

Lox (Oxford Avenue Lampions) L. Edgar Otto

February 9, 2012

Toward the possibilities of nD printing: Thought Experiment Alpha, the synthetic theory...

Observation 1 - A 3D printer can be assembled as one piece including the "holes".

Intuition 1 - A nD program will logically design the placement of such holes (tubes, or in a sense with active axioms, worm holes.)

Observation 2 - A binary number can execute a program such that its inverse (which as a physical reality is ambiguous) amounts to an assertion of relatively not ambiguous zero division.

Intuition 2 - This symmetry of ambiguity can be used to determine the knotting in a field of such worm holes.

Intuition 2b - In 4 and greater space the idea of a knot as fixed or tied variously shows that we need an ambiguous generalized definition of the knot concept itself.

Intuition 2c - In that knots are forms of loops or braids, such arrangements in the general view can function as opened or closed under the general ambiguity of a knot field and its restrictions as to the ambiguity of physical solutions.

Observation 3 - In quasic knot space the application of octonions and beyond can find symmetric solutions for field theory which are not there for non-ambiguous field theory.

Intuition 3 - Thus, with the quasic ambiguity (beyond the idea of a fixed world with the effects of uncertainty) the notion of arithmetical operations can be extended in this symmetry way beyond the notion of their vanishing into physicality only as an absolute singularity (that too generalized) of a field space.

Observation 4 - Structure and Numbers conceivable as a distinct reality from the physical has the same ambiguities as that of the tying of knots of worm holes in space as field.

Intuition 4 - As a metalanguage between these distinguished realitites any substitution of the symbols of one string of elements can match that of the other string of elements in all possible permutation orders, real or fanciful or only part solutions.

Intuition 4b - From this 2 + 2 formalism as reflections and condensing in a dynamic compactification based on the duality of the digits (an abstract behavior not unlike our observed behavior of the effects of dark matter) we are apt to confuse this simple level with the mechanism of consciousness. Here, at least, objective and subjective are ambiguous and beyond the strict distinction without merger necessarily nor for what is more or less the reality of it.

Intuition 4c - In the time like or heat like description of the source motions and sink rests (and conversely) especially with the gender of numbers (as a quasic property Euclid sensed related to the more strict even-odd perfect Mersenne primes) no all sequences as quasi-finite can be turned into any other sequence. Structure has a quasi-unique identity. But the nature of this in the quasi-infinite is the tying or untying of space in the universe.

Intuition 4d - These concepts suggest the universe or multiverse ideas, ambiguously so, itself is quasi-unique and we cannot duplicate meaningfully and independent structures or orders save in the temporal solutions, condensing and diverging symmetries beyond path choices in dynamic time.

Intuition 5d - With the even-odd and gender factoring and these distinctions- the totality of this holographic information with this distinction in mind is the ultimate conserved quantity as the physics of the universe.

Intuition 5e - These are of course the properties of such planes (quasic, Euclidean,complex, branes and so on) as the theory of matrices and determinants and the logic that underlies the properties of magic squares (both for stable and unstable solutions for integrated equations.)

Experiment 1 - ( Breakthroughs preceding theory) Between two layers of graphene a dope of Molybdenum wherein there is massive quantum tunneling [see science magazines yesterday] but is the directionality, Casmir like, explained from one layer to another as in the unexplained (by quantum theory) build up of charge to make lightning by contact of smaller particles? Is this an ambiguous property of the heat transfer as such of which the electromagnetic field falls out of the aggregate of physical and structural-numerical evolution? Given that theory or one like it before the fact this would be cited as evidence of the alternative SUSY. But it is a trivial state of things when adding more power to a machine to find particles assumed to go ever deeper and show up at higher energies and state of assumed timelines as if at least some local origin (thus strings and the Planck level) Thus it is a successful proof that may follow from the experiment by its virtual and even unbiased design. Until we find something not reachable or show it unknowable but can falsify the process to ever wider significant measure of doubt. Or in the wagers of chance bet it solidly found.

Intuition X1 - The structural reason for colors not recognizing certain combinations in the unit pixel that on inversion may represent discontinuity including something that initiates a quasi-looping process of universe as dynamics. Triality is not necessarily conserved even in the virtual infinite division of space and especially if any formulas tend toward the singularities in a rigid descending model - for again we do not forbid but can imagine distinctions quasi-connected over space and time, or even at action at a distance- thus an intelligibility with quasi-uniqueness that has to have depth as well as the span as if a totally unique entity. This seems true in our doubts of what eternity and physicality may mean to us as individuals- and philosophically this may explain some of our usual paradoxes of wonder about properties we have imagined would apply to a God. The Diety as such is certainly a state of non-necessity for the proposition, fundamentally and not so much as unnecessary as in the issue of necessity and free will ask perhaps of the universe itself as quasi-unique action.

Intuition X1b - Dirac's and Eddington's theories were equally bizarre after all- but together, now that is perhaps finally bizarre enough to get us beyond this diamond jubilee stalemate of foundational physics.


* * *



The Creative Scientific Universe (WMAP) L. Otto

PeSla Roo refers to the hot spots vaguely seen as if seas and continents, making sense of shapes giving them names as we do stars in a constellation or street and city designations from the speculations of Creative Philosophy in the short age of the COBE map data.

Of course many go beyond such data painting shapes and unifying theories each according to some inner logic of their vision and dreams as the sense of myth becomes the reality and the philosophy becomes the science or our minds and souls disconnect or come to clarity in awareness and coherence again, for some ideas themselves may evolve toward error and isolation to evaporate as dreams within dreams, unique the soul but chaotic as if that the only real as we experience, engage the spirit with physical and thought experiments.

In such growth and transitions that move things while some things fundamentally are or can be seen to stay fixed we can find some place for these explorations of alternative roots for theories- those especially accepted for awhile universally such as inflation theory- or they can fall out of our useful working theories more or less adsorbed into higher visions. That is where we seem to be at this era in so far as the question of the Higgs particle and mechanism- not so much the interpretations cannot prove a certain scientific reality but that there are cautious doubts about the sanity of such metaphysics before the map of the very small like that of the universe at large with finer eyes begins to make real sense so far as a philosophy.

But can we see beyond our self imaginings and logical structures and shifting or vanishing meanings of foundational concepts and words we put like pearls together in codes- what genes we find or lack if science is to be blind in its objectivity?

No theory or belief likes to die. But the truth seems to be that even with overwhelming evidence everything does. Something in me ultimately questions the truth of this if we take things as science and so weigh them in our finite thoughts. Nor do I think, the poet in me at least, that I am imprinted upon as a child or seduced as an adult from the literature of the Good Book, although I am aware that the separation of the land and the sea is a very powerful image in Genesis even if interpreted in one's own special way that can be dissonant or irrelevant as error or even a stumbled upon truth, the truth of which we may never directly know. Too much for our shared language grounding English as the King James, as with all spiritual literature, is subject to great loss in the translation, and creeping loss in life's boredom at some first passion if our aging is the reality if not the reflection of how old we think we feel.

* * * *

OXLampion o2.10.12

Intuitively we imagine the idea of continuity as if a sense of touch, at some location or at a distance perceptually- as a definition of geometry this role seems reversed for sight- as a pen that does not leave contact in the writing on the paper.

This vague and common experience seems to justify the need in string theory, given as an example, for the increase of an added dimension. "so the strings have wiggle room to vibrate." Now, there may be some deep reasons under this vague popularization metaphor beyond obvious need to communicate the worth of science as important to everyone.

So, I will use this philosophic axiom or reasoning of the introduction of abstract dimensions to express the deep and shallow need to the gods of theory and the common folk for this little light of understanding.

The structure of a logical and theoretical system, seems to need wiggle room in the generalization of dimensional concepts such as that of generations that can begin as some dimensional minimal level. Such a general picture of continuity cannot describe the picture of things as linearity alone, nor as some vague metaphysics of rigid existence or non-existence as the arithmetic of 1 v 0 called non-linear but this not simply meant where things match to a zero balance in the notion of some place as just a matter of dimensions as powers or as the inverses of powers.

In particular, the doubling of things, here also he unexpected virial differences not taken to the next generational level of the kinetic and potential difference of duality doubling and halving. But the process is intelligible as in the complex space and apparently as dualism at least is without dimensional number limits. Such limits arise in the totality considered intelligible and not necessarily vaguely non-linear nor can such always be reduced on the same level of logic to explicit linear reductions if any idea of such reduction is reality of a physical (or even mental) system.

How can the continuity of the Power set, 2^n exist beyond the common and lower dimensions that so extend to great dimensions without generational wiggle room? How can they exist beyond the idea of systems that seem as numbers reaching a point of vanishing algebraic properties with any such duplication without the quasic view of dimensions? Of which it is clear that 16 or 24 or whatever dimensions are needed for example the rigid rotations having wiggle room for continuous and rotation.

Let us not confuse such space as mystically quantum hidden in the symmetries of the discrete, in the example of say duplicating 16 dimensions as shadows not beyond the properties of quasic space beyond 8 dimensions- clearly, we gain little by an inverse reductionism onto the span or macro scale and count of things by treating spin as if somewhere meeting its common sense of spinning objects but limited to physical properties dismissed as the upper state of things as simply generalized to being laws of physics everywhere scalar. Although, from this higher view such notions have their place and utility- we looking down into the dream then rather than being blind in the awareness of being in the flow of the dream as to its design, destinations, and meaningful sorting of information and mechanics for action or purpose.

* * * * *

Year of the Dragon, Neptune, & New Science

Year of the Dragon, Neptune, & New Science L. Edgar Otto

I had something post but the computer will not accept wps. I working off-line for awhile.

* * * * *

Access back- This was the original posting intended:

Lampion 02.07.12 Beyond Structural Arts for the String Theory L. Edgar Otto

So, with administrative access to the computer I find so many things I can do with it. For one thing there is a history going back a few years of all the downloaded photos, graphics, and copies of texts. It is much easier to combine all the earlier graphics and I rapidly made a dozen at this optimal resolution. I feel a little behind the technology- wanting to see the heart of how it works close to the assembly code and pixels but some of these programs for other things could be useful for mathematical projects.

But from the Philosophy of it all I see my growth since my blog-spot posting, a torrent of ideas and information the same symbols or metaphors repeated even if not clearly in a new context and needed coined working words where just another color for the same idea. I also noticed it in the development over the same time like by bogglers I have encountered here and saw in this matter of communication of their ideas the also seem to be saying things in quite familiar metaphors with ideas not as clear as the style or interpretation of their language. But do we want light that magically enlightens us or do we want the discussion of the hard philosophy and facts.. Let us hope we make more progress within ourselves and to others- even the general public to take to heart not be convinced vaguely.

* * * * *