Light and Life : The Quasiverse as a Mental Model

Light and Life : The Quasiverse as a Mental Model

This morning I had a very deep dream of which I recalled the themes and content of it. (later post more here)

The dream involves the point or pixels in a quasic space and how we try to access them that the become the ground of our consciousness. Such a struggle to reach a higher integration and sentience seems from one view what God Himself in that we can understand the concept may have to do. But the good news is that purely psychodynamic intervention should help educate and open up minds caught on some level of the autistic spectrum. In a sense the mirror cells are not a primary cause of the autism as observed in newscientist in a recent article- and yet it is not a purely physical or subconscious phenomena either- more is going on here on a higher level than the models we have so far- then again life does struggle to secure and move toward and design its own mental models and levels of intelligibility given the genes and environments at hand. We teach people to reach for a model, organize and monitor that model, then perhaps reach new designs of it hands on. In a sense there is a quasi multiplicity of conscious and sub conscious influences involved in what level of awareness in the world an organism achieves- and at the surface of things we cannot say if a person is full or empty of some sense of self or if this self or selves are deeply hidden in the brain or body of the organism- or perhaps the history, but a history that quasizes a dynamic moving time.

Stella Octanga and The Initiator-Terminator Codons

Stella Octanga and The Initiator-Terminator Codons

More speculation is needed to pin down some unique geometry from the diagonal across the quasic grid such that in some structure such as Rowlands octahedron-tetrahedron semi regular space filling structures counted in powers of two leading ultimately to 64 things interpreted as a double helix of DNA. Is the algebra and geometry just an artifact or accident of counting, a triviality in design? Of course just as with any nucleus we are dealing with spaces of more than three dimensions here if we want to see more clearly some interrelated connections.

The Crazy Verse of the Quasiverse (Sci Fi Speculation)

The Crazy Verse of the Quasiverse (Sci Fi Speculation)

A Great Grandiose Space Opera

It is not clear to me if my thoughts of last night are science in the service of science fiction or science fiction in the service of science as a time honored tradition. It makes too much sense and is too simple to seem like science to the extent that wisdom has expanded over the last few centuries.

Of course there are places in the philosophychatforum debates where we question the ultimate law of excluded middle- but who is to say the logic at some place does not give us truths and untruths indistinguishable (as Rowlands suggests we cannot make physical sense of a purely octonion description of physis.) I suspect he and I differ on which is the starting element of this idea of nilpotency. My four quadrants would consider 00 and not his EE the nilpotent entity- but then again what is the philosophy about over all and half the world seems to me 0E and E0 in such matrix quadrants and the symmetries of diagonals, and we can choose to see the world top down or bottom up- a matter of taste perhaps and a great deal of freedom to think and explore at least the abstract math.

So, imagine a universe that exists on the quasic plane- imagine further the quasic states is composed of regions or pixels each of which can be any power of a binary state (clearly the idea of exponentiation is not as strait forward as we imagine.) Imagine further that the plane as represented in a square grid (see blank grid on my last post) is the entire universe with pixels of indefinite infinite divisibility.

This universe consists of a few fixed points, polymoarks which form regions thru the various dimensions called islands. In a sense independent of the orientation of the universe of these islands at the binary pixel level in question, there are only several such islands uniformly, as if a torus space, no matter how far we extend the going out of the apparent local boundary of the island group.

In terms of an imagined universe, let us say there are several islands in a sea of no islands. One can be born in the center of those islands or anywhere on the grid of similiar and uninhabited islands on the grid unto limitless exploration. The question then is are the polymarks the same or different in some sense from one pixel to another? Imagine a child in the first world taking off and building it all again from scratch by some travel on the sea between the parallel worlds of islands. The edges of such a world are only an illusion of our centeredness where the differnce of no center in this world is also an illusion. The limitless extent though infinite also in a sense seems bounded as if its limits is not an illusion.

Now, symmetry to a great extent is about ideal spheres (and n-spheres) We can imagine packing them to fill a three space in some ordered arrangement but it is not clear a random packing could not do better- even in spheres there is room for a thirteenth one beyond the twelve. In a recent article in Science Daily some students packed little tetrahedral dice as random and got closer packing of space than with spheres... I want to point out abstractly here that in this finite approach as the foundations of physis the tetrahedra in question are the four points or time-like dimensions only of these structures for these are the parametric edges of higher binary volume like logical and real spaces.

These islands in a sense conserve the patterns and relationship between polymarks which just as well could be stars or particles- these physical entities do not know what dimension or quasic state they are in and they can shift together between the pixel grids. Yet from this general space general enough not to cause logical problems we can assign information coordinates and ideas with which we can develop models of physis that say incorporate measure and dimensions as well as a location for an ordering in reality of numbers like the irrationals repeated similarly throughout the quasiverse. We can assign meaning and functions to a way to view some model as long as it makes general intelligible sense over all the models.

* * *

As a boy our father bought a carpet for our room which the edges were cities along the themes of spaceports and the interior had planets and stars and a few space ships. We would play leaving one space port and flying through the space to land at another on one side of the board. This was in a sense the idea of hyperbolic space. Also it occurred to me to be careful touching my globe too heavy handed as the very small things there like electrons contained whole levels of people.

Where I stay lately is not quite north and south because of the bends in the river. The sky looked so alien to me, where was the big dipper? When I got on the north south road again I realized the north star was a little higher 45 degrees than I was used to in the southern states and to my surprise the Big Dipper was exactly overhead at zenith. Other than the twins it would have been rather startling to have all the constellations shift and change their linear relationship- as they seem to do subjectively until we find our proper place again in all aspects of our lives and destiny and creativity until the pattern and us make sense again coming back to some sort of self and home.

* * *

A Philosophic Point: Why can it seem that what is reality is something that goes beyond any of our ideas of differences or negative spaces or numbers? I mean in the quantum world the question of vacuum as if it was not in flux is far from how things are applied in a positive direction- concentrating on what can be known as the theory is incomplete, more along Heisenberg's formalism to decide what is to be interpreted as physical. Even in the prefect vacuum so to speak things do not remain fixed but move- that is particles spontaneous come into existence or out of it.

In the quasiverse I can imagine beings passing thru the local islands whose way of life is a sort of super transition or flight and they rarely interact with the more sedate denizens- a concept perhaps of some sort of virtual and intelligible spirits or aliens far from the idea of a super intelligence actually as some absolute of design. We have not adsorbed the verifiable ideas of the variations of quantum theory even when extending it to the more complicated realm of higher energy atomic motions. Super may be a prefix we can use again which does not mean some vague idea of a supersymmetry in the way the term is used now. Dupersymmetric or duperimposed and so on for now may be a better term until the matter is settled.

Nevertheless, there is a point of philosophy here even in this imaginary quasic model. We can abstractly divide the reality into Being, God, and Universe as these seem to ask analogous questions of why there is something rather than nothing. Nothingness might also be a fourth concern. But what does it mean really to say something like- why did God choose this particular string theory?

So, we should expect given the widest design or chance occurrence of existence and being that the theory will be most comprehensive and resolve the questions we ask to the extent it covers our knowing and physical encounter with reality.

What, from the drawing board, would be the physis of the universe beyond some idea of an assertion it was a Creation by God or some absolute of Being? Given not preference and nothing forbidden on all levels, somewhere between the finite and infinite, should we be surprised at our being anymore than why it could not be a nothingness- the question is more than if things can arise locally and globally in some sort of extended state of flux. The idea of some of the quantum principles failing to be complete on this "ultimate" abstract level is a model true to its own ineligibility and scope of action- incorporating its doubts as well as facts of existence. But it cannot account for the world, even in terms of probability any more than to claim God does, or the Being of the Universe does, by our current levels of mathematics and ideas. The fact of the world as to its origin or ongoing existence, its everness, remains for now unintelligible.

Yet, if we think of the most comprehensive design given a world allowed to move and evolve and just do what possible worlds do- the question vanishes in a sense as to the asking of why it is here rather than not- for it is here and not- and even what we mean, on a higher level of ineligibility by asking it vanishes as to the origins neither to claim what is or is not illusion or that facts cannot be in a sense real. At this philosophical level our relative stability in the world as to how we may explore its extent or origins partakes of a certain design as intelligible to ask and to so experience.

Thus we can have a sense of our own reality which at the same time remains a bare fact and yet retains its sense of mystery. Yet I am not sure what is the next level of discovery- certainly let us not restrain the creative dreamers for whatever reason they seek the vision of a unified world- nor their skeptics- nor too much the political assertions in a society that seeks to constrain enquiry for it cannot in principle be so constrained by inadequate and incomplete theories of the real. Still, when the better designs are found let no one be called a scientist who does not have the intellect to acknowledge the new facts.


* * *

A variation on the quasiverse model of a possible design is that we can make those perspectives that tend to explain from some origin a counting and measure with reference to imagined limits and boundaries of any binary pixel region and its depth of field of dimension. We could for example vary the heat in a region or as in the illustration above vary the spectral sequences between quasi disconnected regions. In terms of the lower complex two spaces or even on a higher level of the four spaces integrated into three dimensionality, the virtual knots on some scale can be the paths around such knots and between them such that matter in a sense is a knot of space and the possible paths a sort of field, be mass the charge or not and the directions or not part of the field picture. (see this on Science Daily as one of the old problems solved by our number theorists, but I mean it here in a quasic space akin to what Descartes must have sensed with his form of his graph about Euclidean space- we have to get beyond the ideas of a complex plane and its dimensionality to a wider and more diffuse idea of natural dimension and measure. Measure in a sense is the quantization of the quasic grid read as a small part of itself- that is somewhere between a Cantorean and alph-0 discrete view even when the idea of distance and measure in a sense vanish from the physicality in the equations. Surely our physicists and mathematicians want to go beyond what Riemann and Ramanujan did especially if they aspire to a more unified theory of everything.)

^ ^ ^


Look at this general quasic grid again only this time image that what you see is contained in one of the small squares, and in them more and so on. We can imagine things continuous in the sense from the first square "pixel" it reaches all the way to the last square so to speak at infinity- thus we have a model much like the idea of Cantor that a small part of a whole plane (and thus a Riemann sphere) has the same transfinite number as the whole plane in of course n dimensions. I offer this as a conceptual tool. But to say something like we are confined to a brane is not as general or powerful idea as this generalization of the scope of the model. Here even the idea of negative and positive vanishes in the distinction. Interestingly the number of curves in a plane is greater than the number of lines in such a plane in the natural dimensional Euclidean transfinite sense- but here we have all of these potentially in a vast array of connections over dimensionality and measure. Even the question of what is multiple worlds or one seems indistinguishible as to a meaningful answer unless we set up a physis model as less general. Nevertheless we can imagine something that might go beyond this.

* * *

In the quasic view there is no ultimate distinction between odd and even numbers or dimensions- there may be interesting things from the recent proof that the sum and the digits of prime numbers are on the average half even and half odd (Science Daily and on one blog I follow after this post). My first question is how might this relate to the Bell inequality, that is in the argument and method of what to expect from the experimental data. How then to better generalize the idea of probabilities in the first place let alone questions of random number generation. There is so much more on the foundational level to think about and in many ways we can have a better picture, that is a picture that says a thousand words.

The Man in the Moon has no Palm Prints

The Man in the Moon has no Palm Prints

The moon is not there if we don't see her
but it is not there because we are looking at her

Cassandra at her vanity is full of pocks and wrinkles
but the Man in the Moon has weathered palm prints

While the donkey in his tranquil bliss brays and
talks of pictures of top spinners and bottom dwellers

Who can say, in her freedoms and Gibbous phases, image in
our earth shine there is but one moon seen or not?

The moon through my child's eyes and jittery powerful telescope
is full of all the prism's crystal colors, one slit its spectrum

Yet only one moon rules the night, follows me and hangs firm
no matter how far I walk or fast I run towards home

Like light of a thousand fireflies at once, equal, so hot the summer night
the more I bask and gaze, her classical moonbeams super cool colliding
evaporates her quantum weirdness we sculptors of one theory

That is why time moves and we see one same face spin of Love to
wax and wane, empty full, she the one halo rainbow of my lifetime

* * *

Note: I have begun to question some of Dirac's assumptions he made in establishing the quantum theory and just what it means to limit science to experiment- that is
the more data we receive from the LHC at high frequencies the more we reach for in its self fulfilling prophesy the unified yet classical theory of everything- at least of everything we are content as scientist to see.

* * *

Another thing on my mind today, concerning the stated need to see things in the quantum world a little differently than the classical world- Dirac's clear emphasis on the nature of superposition as a radically different idea, and his axiom that we should establish a form of measure, that such observables is the scientific part of the enquiry, and the integral number of things in that observing which approaches the classical in matters of scale and so on- I disagree that some of the formalism has to be expanded into values that have to have some positive value and not just be zero. I also question that the bra (in the conjugate imaginary and conjugate complex interpretations) should be assumed to be a one to one and not many to one relationship to the ket.

But at which point does a new scientist become distinct from his predecessors? I mean did not Weyl try to combine the quantum ideas and group theory? Did not Einstein establish the quanta nature of light with his work force equations? If Dirac uses the complex numbers and trig and log formalism from the algebra at the foundations are we not limited thing of which the higher groups expand the ideas of space and freedoms and symmetry and asymmetry of division after the fact of some minimum positive dimensionality? Einstein said he believed the moon was there even if he did not see it- but do not the quantum ideas suggest it could be otherwise?

Rowlands powerful idea is that we are on one side of what we can see in the universe so see the positive values of matter and so on and say nothing really observable about the values of things beyond the observable on the other side. Yet does this not happen that we approach the classical the more data or number of photons we have on the other side of a crystal in its 1 or 0 all or nothing orthogonality and its probabilistic generalization? In this sense there is a parallel to Rowlands idea in that the higher energy where particles share the degrees of freedom equally and the more data we accure practically from say that microscope and resolution into the past viewer of our atom smashers- do we not load the dice for the integration of our experiment and by the raw principle of science as empiricism and experiment, despite the intrinsic indeterminacy, actually build a machine that makes the data classical and flat- the proof this side of all that is not negative vacua that our physics is so grounded- that we may say at last we have found this or that complete and unified theory of everything or God's language or God particle but from a more physical and earthly stance?

Dirac reads in the original, and we should always go tot he original source and not just the spin of alternative interpretations, as if a stated text of facts with the usual caveats and remarks toward some philosophic point at issue (for example what Rowlands quoted of Newton on this issue of if there is internal complexity beneath some opaque boundary of a zero point- my colors and supersymmetries within the moon and the old argument also in Buddhism that two spheres do not touch or know they do if they are opaque and atomic without an infinite or large regress of substructures.

Newton wrote his Principia in Latin, the formal tongue already centuries a dead languge and he presented things with Geometry and not his use of the calculus. Yes, Rowlands points out the Leibnizan space differentials and the Newtonian time and this an interplay of the quaternions and multivectors in a unified system of these higher but not highest groups symmetric and asymmetric structures. Yes we can exchange things based on the dualities, yes we can imagine fractional charges with all the problems that has for a general theory, but let us not forget that if we merely think of the Cantorian continuum as aleph1 in contrast to the particle nature as aleph 0, that we also can for sure declare 2 to the nth equal to a continuum. But the idea of numbers, surreality more fundamental or not, or in the raw counting of things including the natural dimensions the so called hook functions of partition theory at least on the low levels of Ramanujan primes, that perhaps the geometry and arithmetic are in a sense a foundational center that at least depending on our symbol systems is equally real and important as the abstract.

One day maybe, in the living language, despite the debate as to if there is a universal language or even a private language, we in the blogosphere with the informal writing will do for science what many have done to lecture in the vulgate and so speak in retrospect linguistic reform brought down to and made accessible to a wider group of people.

* * *
I also did this recreational artistic math where particles change information states:


* * *



* * *

I has been said (Scientific American some time back) that our fingerprints and other such patterns reflect certain things in our genetics- maybe intuitively this is the sense in some people that palmistry may have and intelligible basis- yes, the partial truth that seems evidence for the incomplete and unseen lie, perhaps.

* * *

Experiential Time

Experiential Time

Today I do not seem to have any especially deep math or physics thoughts but I do have a certain feeling or poetic mood concerning experience, personal perhaps, and time. I am not sure how deep this is as a theory. (but what is the original meaning of that term anyway?) I hope I can get this mood across.

It is a if in a way we are traveling in time, a subjective time, but that is not as simple as we imagine. As if we could do jumps in time to the past and the future in a way doing some things, experiencing some things such as making contact again with friends from years ago or reading about them as if a real time traveling- but of course virtually so and thus not in the flesh so to speak- or maybe in the flesh for all practical purposes.

There is a certain concepts of experiencing time, aware in the depths and movement of it, across time really for we have gone through at least one path of the past existentially, and we can touch base with that much no matter how the fabric of time splits or changes, becomes compact or real, decoheres, or life expands beyond our perceptions or reach- or we age in the flesh but not our memories or dreams of some past loved one- or in our dreams they do age as we do- and things ripen with respect to something after all the drama and radiation but not to a dead and cold weight- for we can seem to extend time beyond its supposed ending and we can imagine time fragmenting in our fall through it forever that it so does not end.

If indeed, unseen by us somehow we do travel through the universe to some extent socially in the network of parallel worlds- then of what I speak here is a level just above that. An idea of time beyond its arrow of linear motion and beyond its timeless sense of transcendental daydreams. I experience a much wider traveling in time to which if that were achieved say in physics, that would be a very trivial pursuit compared to the explorations we are capable of, we star rovers, beyond even our most extraordinary dreams. There more choices to be made and yes more coherence and use of that in our organic beings of organic integration and differentiation which we find unified in the sense we at least sense this as we live vitally and so experience the world as well as observe from whatever distance the world. I do not know if such an idea of time, beyond the low level of our sentience and the lowest level of our physical self as the universe of discourse if such an idea- almost reachable as the grapes and the fox of Aesop, tantalizing, that we try to understand and reach such a totality that no matter what the design is the given and experienced world is intelligible- thus it truly evolves and not just in theory of a random casting of dust and dust's encounters.

In understanding and surviving the broken symmetries of such time I yet find I am more myself and more in control of the game and aware of the outcome of the game, the game of theoretical physics in particular of which like chess it is the endgame that is the scientific part of playing. I perhaps must disagree with those who think the end of such enquiry is the psyche or is the matter-energy and the geometry and its leadership of design is just a stepping stone or tool. Let us consider as a thing among equal possibilities, intellectually, that the geometry itself is the goal of the understanding and not the matter or mind. But I mean this as a dynamic and living, not empty geometry seen as being's ground- atoms and strings are concrete but like our universe also evolves. This is not to say that world just beyond it is without physical substance nor without experience nor that these are pale analogs to our accessing beyond our limited inheritance and not something we will find as a higher wisdom in that part of a kingdom a little less than God and more than the teeming sea of scud organizing on the ocean universe. I see also my place in the procession of learning and time and perhaps can keep this in mind and not fall back into darkness too lazy in the contemplations to with permanent revolution and passion cherish its freedoms, Even if toward the endtime the awakening of wisdom is too late and time in a sense too short albeit it also measureless- into that new portal here and now no such morning or fear of such visions of darkness while we can still see will discourage our own and the worlds valuing itself to become a place where enquiry is possible.

* * *

Well, I guess my encounters with the state doesn't slow down my thinking like it used to. I just got back from the DMV and cannot get a state ID without (my stolen from storage) birth certificate-but told otherwise yesterday with the papers I had including the military discharge. So the govt check is not cashable and the banks will not accept it nor is it legal as a govt check for say walmart to do so. 911 made my old photo ID invalid and the ss number on it illegal. It had no date of birth or expiration date.

Maybe if I had stayed in the service and not tried to go to school- I tell you this fingernails would have been pulled for not anticipating 911 and heads would roll for this surveillance state that spies on its own people!

I still believe what we fought for was that a new generation could go to school and make a better safer world.

Preternatural Observation & the Real Character of DNAese

Preternatural Observation & the Real Character of DNAese

Apparently, what I have proposed as a biochemical experiment has been done in nature ages ago. I read the information differently but it does seem like the role of the expression of that information may be involved in genetic system diseases and processes by perhaps methylation. That is if the miRNA and snoRNA circles are like my viral compass deduced from intuitive and foundational first principles. Again, who knows where my insights would have led if I had gone to Madison for genetics? No doubt the lack of specialized education (due to the failure of my government to fulfill its obligations) is an impediment to our faith in and progress toward a Baconian vision of nature and science and our role in designing our own environs and evolution. But I do not understand exactly why those so trained, especially in one on one dialog, cannot seem to understand my views at all even with expert training. Or maybe it is an inhereted ability that brings us to linguistics and more integrated brains that behave with visual cues as if the music was there that they understand and abstractly may compose it and enjoy it in the vacuum of virtual silence.

Then again it may be the climate of our age, an echo perhaps of the scientists and philosophers of the past; of Aristotle and Plato, of Leibniz as the greatest philosopher or Newton as the greatest physicist. Yet science began in the seventeenth century with ideas of method that still lingers with us today as the working hypotheses. Let us also recall in the English speaking world that the sister of Cromwell, Robina, was married to Wilkins who not only tried to bring to the time the reform of language and beyond that a universal designed one, but also brought the ideas of Galileo by the vehicle of science fiction in a story about the flight to the moon.

From a scientific humanist point of view, maybe after a hundred years now too reductionist and overly logical, the romance with the introduced Chinese ideograms suggested a classification or characterization of notions independent of local speech which like the Chinese writing we think would have fossilized progress in adapting to new notions of wider scientific discoveries.

Now, in our modern age where the principle of uncertainty seems one of the few breakthrough ideas- as Rowlands asserts it is the physical interpretation of things and not say the group theory that leads to it that is the desired result of such foundational enquiry, quarks not SU(3) as the result and goal. In terms of information whatever way we interpret the role of the parameters we can say that as if such a principle of uncertainty that we can know or guarantee the author of a message or guarantee the message, but not both. Is space or abstract group geometry the author of the natural world? How about the messages especially in things like genetic messengers of which in our time the view is only that these are the reductionist authors of their own activity much like light itself can be said to influence the gravitational field even if it has no mass.

Now it may be that the code of things results in this concrete and natural form of duality to be interpreted as materialism- and it is as if the primal observer of the fact of the world that is, author unknown or not, actions but maybe not the carrier angels (messengers), God's magic bullets as if he, capable of sperm from outer space (that is what in the resources and chance arrangement of the gene code we inherent and encounter along the lines of Hoyle's theories represented by "Andromeda Strain") That the messenger RNA for example is assumed to be just another chance test, double blind or not empirically the watchmaker, to which we treat the human organism in the name of the general welfare and faith, as guinea pigs.

Our attempts to categorize nature and its notions, our struggle with self duality of epistemology as the center of science and philosophy since Descartes unto the Copenhagen interpretation ideas as possibilities on the quantum level of physics despite some successful universal languages such as the notations of diagrams of organic chemistry, has not resulted in a very logical and viable, adaptable, real character in terms of our notions or symbols of which there is unambiguous control over nature and ourselves. On the preternatural level, at least the metaphysics of nothingness (nilpotency) we may begin to see nature as not characterized (as Rowlands asserts in a physics or philosophy that not only makes overwhelming sense to me but shows the narrowness of many other researchers and thinkers). Then again I feel so much in the lineage of the British thinkers, mostly Cambridge, at least spiritually, beginning with Newton on to Conway and Penrose- I have to ask myself if perhaps there is a bias in my thinking or genes about such foundations. Or maybe these thinkers are the forefront of physics.

Wilkins Real Character was praised but not instituted by the Royal Society at the time. We understand the author but not the message or vice versa. Was Leibniz who was so far ahead of his time on the issues, who make careful decisions on what his language was to shed and keep of irreducible intelligibility? Was he perhaps enamored himself of the binary of the I Ching which only did the counting of the ones and zeros and yes the salamanders between nothing and being as he said of the imaginary numbers? Nature plays these games of skipping stones and calculi of which at times I feel but a small part of it even if the captain of my soul.

The real character in the accompanying illustration under the title is Wilkins symbol for God, and with the small comma above it for male... Our Father. Of course these early pioneers in language planning knew God was a catergory not divisible further in their classification schemes- more like Spinoza the other deep and great philosopher and maybe like Einstein the other possible exception as the greatest scientist other than Newton.

* * *


Here we go again. the same old sides of the foundational debates. From my view the ability to comprehend music beyond the cultural is the integration of the physics that our minds seem to at least approximate an image of in intelligibility- especially of continuous and discontinuous mathematical nature and other secondary ideas such as symmetry. As if a pendulum we see the questioning of the goal of a unified theory and those who seek it either as the program for a rational physics or in the form of the search for some idea of a Deity as did Newton and Descartes and Pascal and others in their vague purposes and unexpected consequences of method.

After posting this article, and thank you Paul Anthony for inspiring my musings again on what is Berkely like in the idea of some Prime Observer even at a distance, a preternatural one maybe of which we can infer in the nothingness some form of music, I find these two relavant articles from New Scientist:


http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627591.300-harmonious-minds-the-hunt-for-universal-music.html

Universal music (wave theory?) and hardwired mathematics as the ground at stake?

* * *

"Life itself is a product of imperfections, from the spatial asymmetry of amino acids to mutations during reproduction. Asymmetries forged the long, complex and erratic path from particles to atoms to cells, from simple prokaryotic cells without nuclei to more sophisticated eukaryotic cells, and then from unicellular to multicellular organisms."

The imperfect universe: Goodbye, theory of everything

* 10 May 2010 by Marcelo Gleiser

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627591.200-the-imperfect-universe-goodbye-theory-of-everything.html?page=2

If the Omnium or theory of everything is abandoned awhile I will wait unto it is popular again and maybe a generation does not give up due to the difficulty of the contemplations and symbolism of notions. Yet the relaxed natural philosophy of creative design will remain an ateleological part of the cosmological down to earth principles.

* * *

At midday after checking general delivery finding a check I cannot cash unless I have a post 911 ID which of course costs some money- and as a govt check no one else can cash it for me either.

* * *

I want to store the quasic grid graph paper here for printing purposes when at the public library computers, and for readers who may want to print off this graph:



* * *

Next day: an interesting article appears on the sciencechatforum new activity in which the subject was on my mind- I mean how early on we can induce an animal to say grow new limbs and how all this fits into say a quasi-local patterning involving these issues of duality, octonions and this applied to the physics of the expressed genome (thereferenceframe has an artical also discussing the possible further use of octonions and so on.) But the point of all of this is that we are in an age of ongoing surprises and there is no good reason other than natural human inertia of laziness that we think the future of a more unified biochemistry and physics is still far away. Surely, around 12 to 16 codons we have the forerunner of the viral compass structures as part of the evolving of species and organism development. Welcome to the new science. http://newsinfo.nd.edu/news/15540/

Discrete Quasilocality and Natural Dimesnsions

Discrete Quasilocality and Natural Dimensions

I just played around with the viral compass idea last night but did not come up with anything significant, as if it was a form of pointless mathematical recreations that seemed to lead nowhere- not anything worth sharing. But in the boredom and since there were no great movies on the television I took a look again at the foundational physics ideas of Rowlands in the early chapters. I agree pretty much with the origin of his nilpotent ideas and things like second quantization is part of the foundations and the shared view that Conway's abstract birthing process is part of the philosophy of physics- and so on. Not that I find points of disagreement as after all we have to make some assertions of connection to how it fits in the world and his goes much further than the debates and theses of many in the field who seem to have clear philosophy but take things with a little skepticism as the natural world seems so messy. Nevertheless such underlying physics of a sort of parametric or holonic, even like quasic, view is that which may ground our real physics say in computation where we imagine such physics the hardware and quantum theory the software. Still, I disagree with Rowlands on the depth of integer numbers even if they are more complicated than the surface structure that meets the eye- in the same way as the cube is not the final structure of what makes its depth, That is the idea of three dimensionality can be seen as a relaxed and very relative foundation that leads to the varieties of Diracian formalism as well that to dimensionality.

The idea some things having only local effects from the continuous view and however we break down the potency may be too narrow a picture. My intuitive principle as an insight that we are in a sea of singularities, and the zero is idempotent in a sense it would be uniformly spread out, its roots as differential operators and so forth, I another way to say we have a deeper ground as nilpotency. Where I differ with Rowlands is that there is a deeper level still, indeed deeper than zero point ideas of the quantum world, as a shifting double zero or null. It follows that where there are flat topological defects at the boundaries, the boundaries are also a sea of everywhere. In a sense in the discrete quasic at least we can have communication between the local and the nonlocal effects, the inside and outside, as a quasi-isolated thus quasilocal phenomena can exist. That we have intrinsic second quantization for me is the fact of the information reduction symmetries of the eight and four dimensions as quaterions into octonians. It is a matter of view also.

What then is there to push against to imagine utilizing the zero point energy when there is no fifth thing around such as mass to push against the nipotency (Rowlands fermion making its own vacuum as that virtually other as not fermion)? In this relaxed world where treatment of dimensionality implies a fifth dimension involved and thus all the five fold ideas visible in the compound Platonic solid shadows- my casual exploring the viral compass suggests we can have an action-reaction, vireal, situation in the reading at least of physical effects of a cosmic code- that is where we find a difference in quasic and cyclic group space. But beyond this is the wisp of an idea that since the combination's may have the same colors it is not clear which dimensionality a give codon is in, that is it can act as if a lower dimension. This would explain a continuous path where a particle can shift into or return to a different virtual generation.

In what I called the Snowplex (that is in my attempt to make a game of my compass thus SNOW,O for the East as in the Netherlands, and that same term for disc in a game called bloopers with eight slots to join making crystal like things and trees) I imagined sometimes in natural dimensional space the quasic cyclic order and the cyclic order can be the same coordinate ambiguously. Now if two such sequences of a compass meet, as if two strands of it as codons, a fundamental decision can be made as to which direction in the separate active time dimension to follow paths. As far as the initial colors in a chain sequence the first of course tends to bunch in a higher frequency per color as if it is indeed the case trivially that nipotency is more fundamental than integer counting, yet this sort of nulpotency thinking is even more trivially fundamental- perhaps vanishing in significance.

If in a sense the null can push against itself (as in some quantum effects of solid helium) this would intrinsically explain the expansion rather than a shrinking or conserved state of the natural dimensional space.

Clearly, if in a sense of a three parton string the partons (quarks) do not know in linear space which is the center one, then in the 2 to the 2 or four formalism we have a wider ambiguity of what is accentuated and privileged as centers of four quarks in a tetrastring or tetra particle. In a sense where there is discrete mass and dimensionality implied as the 3 +1 , 2+2, and 2 to the 2, formalism these can mix in the models and have to be clearly sorted out as to their contributions.

I also vaguely think there are other patterns as for any given selection of 16 codon bases of the 64 that if read as four infomationally on the first level or color half of them will contain things 3+1 or 2+2 and half will not since 8+8= 16 but is this just a trivial result of numbers presupposed in the counting space? I am not quite sure the results of these thoughts and if it means I have just given myself and you something that seems a SNOW job, but then again in the recovery of natural dimensions as a ubiquitous yet familiar view at least the world is explained a little as foundational yet not perfect and crystalline from a quasic view geometrically and messy and rather random like complex- hence the term Snowplex.



* * *

About 9:30 that night I looked at a link on New Scientist concerning miRNA and found this on wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_nucleolar_RNA_SNORD73 on snoRNA