Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Back-reactions to Hawkings Supertranslation Paper




Back-reactions to Hawkings Supertranslation Paper

What do you think? I find it certainly disappointing and pretty much agree with Sabine's evaluation and frustrations. Rather impatience with the only two games in town, loopy and stringy. The smart phone market share like these camps seem fixed. Return to ideas of superdeterminism and minimum distance by her was a legitimate third opinion in an era where the utility of premises is at frontiers electic. (The simple shift from a 2D to 3D minimum quantized loop is continuous as well discrete 4 6 8 as to abstract intervals if classically Euclidean as a unitary foundation compromise.) What an entangled web we weave! As for me I have evolved beyond caring for things like publication. (From WTF to who gives a F. There is a limit to defining ourselves by debates with others including on the blogs) A pox then on both their houses! But climbing out of the gray goo of speculation there is a freedom found and new clarity where so many future optimistic things in day to day useful applications and yet not imagined future technologies are seen clearly. If civilized communication is possible it is only slowed down if thought to be useful as an instrument of resentment and revenge.. we finite lives should not be rendered empty by imperfect soft gravitron earthly forgiveness either. Are we scientists or social engineers? Sometimes, unfortunately, good fences make good neighbors.



PS  seeing the paper on the PC (with  perhaps there is something to be said for the internet as a medium to fade in its usefulness of the ever hopeful role of new media as well as say the state of Academia) I see nothing really new. It is not very translatable as straightforward, that is find its hidden agendas or assumptions once we translate the method of formulas or the sainted names. In fact it should be obvious that many have put forward these things on a foundational level even within those named in concepts and formulas.  Either as a formal abstract structure or or vague field concept (they did not touch upon symmetric neutrality of the gauge itself... that is an entirely new area of inquiry).  For example Nilpotent hypotheses of Dirac as reviewed by some modern authors excluded from the usual forms of publication but published elsewhere.  What is their plus and minus J infinity but my consideration of spacious singularity?   I note that in his usual way even Lubos has a strong if  vague uneasiness or reaction to this paper. Is it the darling topic of the day? Is it true that new blood in the mix of invaders to a new place taking over a discipline or country and extending their own sense of universal laws must  be coming from the dregs of groups fleeing tyranny?  We either accept all people can so rise or we do not.  But when they do the first thing seems historically the do not pass on their power to others and usually take their turn suppressing them in turn.  Not that we do not need competent people to teach, raise up others - even the first Russian armies could not get along without officers effectively.  We for some reason finally acknowledge there may be more than 4 dimensions but debate in the continuity of things as dualities if ideally or of a cruel thermodynamic indifference the value 2 means as in the paper we can insulate ourselves against the cold night by dividing space like a shirt without given in sacrifice the shirt to another off our backs.  Some truths out there somewhere is all around us but we have not learned to see them in front of our face. It is not that there are alternative voices, nor a matter of intelligence, but a few people in our time try to speak with us in common sense genius once seen a little higher light- and bless them, bless the peace makers who hope they can bring us a better world where all may so hear them as they try to speak while dealing with their down-going to the hungry people of our small village. Such work is that of the gods and their struggle also. If Love finds us worthy.

Friday, August 28, 2015

Forbidden Logic and the Theotericontinuum (Thcm)





Forbidden Logic and the Theotericontinuum (Thcm)

These ideas were extensively developed and extended in my 1500 lost poems  "Pipe Songs of the Sea Horse."  Alas, the poems are needed to directly explain in metaphors some of the physics.

***

http://motls.blogspot.com/2015/08/lhcb-2-sigma-violation-of-lepton.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29
Lubos has an interesting post today on current exploration of the cosmic background as if a super collider from a higher salvation of the string theory view. It is one of his more mystical or subjective posts. In these matters of theology here is how it is done:

***
The filaments can only make knots in three space, so there can be a force difference to expanding or hidden other dimensions. Inflation or not the abstract source of such motional energy grounding inertia and symmetry breaking is more fundamental than the clever speculation the article proposes which makes the persistence of such knots possible in the first place. Otherwise these knots would become less tangled in vacuum expansion from bottom up mass considerations.
***
Thing is that a further step into this issue of "communities " of causal cones still allows for things like loops that preserve on a still higher level day Lorentz not broken. Thus the paradox yet no paradox in a more general view. The hint of a still deeper general theory. Certainly suggests it underscores current hot issues at the frontiers of today's physics & perhaps new physics or ways to see it as open inquirey that may come. The viewpoint of this article casually in its scope is evidence of a sorts for a new approach to speculation itself after a series of long periods of stalemate in unification hopes.
***
Eventually they will stumble on my quasic theory of 1964.
***
Forbidden Non-necessary Dark Information Logic
It only appears to suggest physics beyond the standard model or Lorentz GR as if obsolete. The LHC is evidence also of dark information.
***
If it helps you sleep to endure suffering that your reward will be greater in heaven (which is the same concept as God) OK, but if you make others suffer you will not survive. God is not mere physics as equifinality. Beyond that don't you think? Each of us begins and ends the whole universe - it is arrogance and blasphemy to presume to equate this creative and eternal attribute we share from said God so to limit Him. If you knew God you could ask Him anything about the Creation so know this truth. But as merciful as God is knowing your heart it is up to you to choose if you want to write yourself out of the play. Is there not a verse where hell is defined as the abscence from the Father? Such anxiety induced will only reap destruction and demean those prophets whose vision once commanded the whirlwind.
***
Imagine limitless resolution and a snapshot of a cell then projecting states and pathiways and possibilities before and after. This can be done. The applications would make 3D printing look like a quaint old technology- not to say we will not raise the bar on more interesting problem in both medicine and material science. Ironically the best future field turns out to be graphic design. Innovation always needs to make a better crystal ball then everyone will replicate and want one. Good career move if the powers that be can recognize the power of your vision, Joseph.
***
Don, but when it comes to weather prediction every day is groundhog day. Maybe that is the best model of a universe if we remember enough to learn to say, play the piano or become a doctor.
***
Reply to David B. : The terms are so widespread now, not very clear terms even as a metaphor, I've stopped always qualifying them as opaque or dark- like concepts. But there are more so called dark fluid metaphors. But all the equations have a core of (scientific humanist) logic in one form or other. Power in motion or implied as transfers is take something away, lose something, give something away, or find something. Four forces where some combination of them are said unphysical. This is a healthy skepticism if all things reduce to nothingness or plausibility itself decreaces along the way to a point singularity. But we can simulate two naked point singularities like the ends of a spinning USA football. I am very skeptical of the promised mechanisms from Hawking's new conference. It better be damn good, original, and floor me. I never much cared for dark matter speculations. If they come up with generalized amplituhedra generalized from its vague logical argument that includes chiral and parity effects for the ongoing or evolving dynamics I will be half convinced. Until the next level of physics if there is one. Yet it is only superficially string theory. Memory exits in the abstract., structure of the pure vacuum that stands on real matter. Hologram quasi finite could do it as a metaphor but aren't we tired of news that promises the news more than the fact of the news if we ever get to the story ...? That binds our attention but not for everyone. Have they really banished the metaphysics by these ideas of consciousness and logic? I change the channel wondering why they think they have convinced anyone by such methods. I expected more from our leaders in the town and gown than for a couple of generations to be so Merkeled (I cannot spell when the letters change and one is aware of it) You know, that QM physicist lady German leader the kids have turned into a slang verb. The terms are so widespread now, not very clear terms even as a metaphor, I've stopped always qualifying them as opaque or dark- like concepts. But there are more so called dark fluid metaphors. But all the equations have a core of (scientific humanist) logic in one form or other. Power in motion or implied as transfers is take something away, lose something, give something away, or find something. Four forces where some combination of them are said unphysical. This is a healthy skepticism if all things reduce to nothingness or plausibility itself decreaces along the way to a point singularity. But we can simulate two naked point singularities like the ends of a spinning USA football. I am very skeptical of the promised mechanisms from Hawking's new conference. It better be damn good, original, and floor me. I never much cared for dark matter speculations. If they come up with generalized amplituhedra generalized from its vague logical argument that includes chiral and parity effects for the ongoing or evolving dynamics I will be half convinced. Until the next level of physics if there is one. Yet it is only superficially string theory. Memory exits in the abstract., structure of the pure vacuum that stands on real matter. Hologram quasi finite could do it as a metaphor but aren't we tired of news that promises the news more than the fact of the news if we ever get to the story ...? That binds our attention but not for everyone. Have they really banished the metaphysics by these ideas of consciousness and logic? I change the channel wondering why they think they have convinced anyone by such methods. I expected more from our leaders in the town and gown than for a couple of generations to be so Merkeled (I cannot spell when the letters change and one is aware of it) You know, that QM physicist lady German leader the kids have turned into a slang verb.
***
Internal subprotonic quasentangled micro wormholes.
Adds to the Qx-bit informational count on different generational levels.
***
Jaya, Whitehead generalized Euclidean geometry in terms of congruence. He worked with Russel. Minimum distance into c can be a theory of types. Of logic, epistemology, and metaphysics as core philosophy do you mean pure physics is logic?
***
Some of us do know such foundations, but it arose in the middle 20th century. (not in the 21st or 22nd  Giotis Mth.
***

Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Toward a Journal of Quasic Physics


http://motls.blogspot.com/2015/08/stephen-hawking-solves-information-loss.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29

Physics in its foundational debates will not be superfied as a generalization where the relation of stringy or loopy camps as now formulated reach a compromise. Can it be so from my Edot view verses the Gordian knot of Lumo's. (Lubos Motl's) physics is constipated view. Lubos has written a masterpiece as a work of art that demeans Sabine Hossenfelder etc al as if his model in a super Nova flux exploded out over the whole universe everywhere. What is left is a pee brain just awake enough to know where to hedge his bets. It ends with his use of 'she' pointing out he is being respectifully politically correct. But begins with a paragraph of a single sentence, a brilliant put down within a put down really of Dr. Bee dancing with Nude Scientists. But if one reads his post carefully and sorts out what concepts he connects or denies, while he cannot see the implications, we find he does not understand QM theory, string theory, the application of the hologram ideas, how laws relate explicitly on the micro scale, how he could count beyond the slicing of K-Klein incomplete manifolds, or Sabine's advanced comment on the question of at least analog duality in regard to QM doubling of information as maybe not a violation of cloning ad much as one that should be raised in the light of new evidence of Bell inequalities and limitations of what is reality in spooky action at a distance. This is why I gave Lubos the Turkey Prize (that as an abstract American mythical symbol can go either way. ) but he certainly deserves it for at least originality (finally) beyond a BS degree. But really Lubos, this BS is getting old.

* * *

Reply to Hawking and Don Lincoln: Sooner or later Hawking is going to realize this is barely a general description of the universe. To interpret it as multiverse does not solve general evolving structure of say the unified view of quasars and their era as central to it all, a ring of evil much like the so-called axis of evil. The error or dead end of speculation for higher laws of matter and spacetime was not to give equal weight to Fred Hoyle F.R.A.S. and other cyclic models. Unless of course such a description goes to somewhere else entirely such as the mechanism that would make quasars a sort of chariot to a barely imaginable Heaven.
Neil Haverstick replied:  "...the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine." Sir James Jeans

* * *
in reply to Horgan's update: The polyhedra in spacetime article is hardly new. But it is correct as far as it goes. Spin as such, locally Euclidean, can recover QM effects by a minimum quantization over a convex surface defining directions (and no magnitude vectors) real or imaginary. Moreover, on a generational level what the author suggests as time-like can be a looping within the 4th or Gravitional level of quasifinite chiral freedom effects some not distinguished in asymmetry but equivalent representations.. QM and GR needs not be generalized separately. This is also the "where does the (QM) information go problem" where neutral entities can be interpreted as either ellyptical or hyperbolic or together a spacious null singularity at each spherical rotocenter with eutactic face defined vectors.
* * *
Reply to Joy Christian & Sabine:
Very interesting and kudos to you. I can see that it can lead to more secure communications but think this is meeting fundamental than QM theory it can contain. Assuming a more general loophole and deeper definition of ratios of dimensions and distance and the background structurally at a distance, intimate to 4 & 5 space chirality as spin... how might such quasi real and quasi local phenomena apply to Hawking's loophole escape of such information from a black hole?. Three spheres (I cannot picture this from the computer code link) certainly is part of the picture - that most likely defines certain measures to clarify the generation problem. This can be seen as double information reduced again to one picture (a half). By reflection alone and two chambers the stereonometry of this picture would give us this experimental result half independent of random inputs.

* * *
On the other hand Hawking has found a way out where it takes forever to enter a black hole or hardly any time at all depending on what is seen inside or outside the view. Thus instead of dying from a disease that should have killed him in two years, like a QM cat with 8+1 lives he slowly evaporates over decades. :-)
* * *
In reply to Jaya: Jaya, interesting speculations which ultimately.do not need some assumptions either to explain things. All these are an art form really and should be cherished like civilization held alive in dark ages by the Viking vulnerable monks or the great literature of nuns safe in their creativity from the inevitable dark ages. Here again I need more to explain some unclear term like information. Dimensions! How can space expand faster than the speed of light? Tell Mr more. What is the difference in appealing to an idea of multiverse and that of light in a few higher dimensions? Does science need independent backgrounds or is determinism and free will an issue which may meet or not in some local reality? Or in the surface thermodynamics of a spherical region will Nepal allow a new Western Provence?
* * * *

Friday, August 21, 2015

Metaphorce & Creativity (Cosmic Stereonometry, Cosmometry)





2D + 3D = 5D ; 3D + 5D = 8D and so on. Think of the arithmetic as 2^3D if you doubly square things as in the periodic table of elements. This is an old problem. Light and heat as originally conceived as fire rather than air (oxygen) despite the abstract asymmetry and dimensionless levels of motion can be seen as elements. Sign and chirality as absolute. Where does the twin paradox go? There is more than this concept of continuity dividing space as if quasi- finite.
We cannot make the microcosm symmetrical and continuous without destroying quantum theory as well.
Is an integer in itself a discrete or continuous concept?
Phi + 1 = Phi^2
Lubos has a blogspot on this yesterday in which he states the concept is not understood as an established fact by even some of our best theoreticians. If rigid discs are not possible in nature how can string theory describe the universe by using the concept as a part of a total theory that does not transcend Lie or continuous groups? It from bits or bits from its? Is he right or two not even rights make a trivial not even right? Could his phenomenology not be uncertain as to if such a solution is subjective or objective applied with the same paradox of reasoning, biased effectively? Does not our experimental data now give us different fundamental results? A theory that pushes the analogy of sub particles can have no reachable end. Matter had a property that goes beyond radiation and its pressure condensates that on our modern level is creativity (no good word here, perhaps "Metaphorce") Why can't supersymmetry be oscillating and periodic in Nature's fundamental expression as something from nothing cosmometry?
The gist of this is that we can say just as well of GR what we say of QM when we say it is incomplete. But one soul's reality can be argued as another soul's fantasy or delusion. What I find remarkable is that as the speculation grows more complicated - if the world makes sense - this impasse goes in cycles where we as historical know the names of scientists whose deeper assumptions perpetuate this partisan paradox. The PBS series on matter was most informative for me as an overview. But we have made fundamental progress - the SM and GR do not exclude each other. Marie Curie made her breakthroughs without a PhD but she could not have done it without her tech school husband whose study of crystals gave them a superior instrument. But the chemists of the day wanted something they could weigh, spectrum was not enough. So where are the weights in string theory today? And how much of mass is determined by friction of motion of little motes of dust as if a crude analogy to the exclusion of caloric? Humans evidently need this concept of dust very deeply to stand on. We need more than a total theory, we need something whole - perhaps sacred. (Kailo in Sanskrit) perhaps Kailo-omnium. After all Noether said light has a purpose, and that purpose was to seek the path of least action.
Thanks, you brought out thoughts and perplexity I have had lately as if hitting a brick wall. I did not mean to express them all on you as if a lecture. :-) good friend.
****
Paul Hr:
I started my quasic theory as a dynamic order of error correction with recursion. DNA the model. For awhile I thought the term common knowledge, a sort of mathematical induction that guarentees things like long computer simulations. It seems to me more now than my casual assumptions I used for my simple recreational games and puzzles and candle design and processes coloring in space - rediscovered how I thought it was done. This afternoon in the cool weather I fell asleep waking up at the boy yelling for his father at the old show The Rifleman. I was annoyed my dream of collecting old lenses and vacuum tubes and other interesting things I wad allowed to keep from the landfill. Then after becoming wide awake a possibility occurred to me based on my comments on the creative force to Marcus on fb. Kailomnium or Metaphorce (whole+sum total" Such intuition must be a deeper process as error correction codes. Cosmic Stereonomeyry would be the more general physical ( recursively awake case). Cosmometry to use and old word) I took a photo to illustrate those comments intending to post on my blogspot and this comment to you instead of intended post to my status just now: Holy Crapola! If this theory is not a dream in the dark, then we have become the creator and consumer of stars! Think stellar models as if chain reaction of this physics transcending mere radioactivity as a source of vaster energy in the hierarchy of this new property of matter and physics classifying black holes. Ut oh, I thought genie is out of the bottle. But maybe I should have classified myself! Guess our intuitions that raise the usual moral issues of science comes after the facts.
****
Jes, you had me at quantanglement. :-)

Then why is this interpretation presented as set in stone? Already the technology promised is here and ahead of that level of QM theory if we can orient entangled objects on dimensionfree scales as if only the linear bi-directionality of time.
Jes, I wrote almost the same thing as you have on the need for more general interpretation when I was closer to your age. I agree that when determinism enters in as the author suggests, some things are paradoxically set in stone. Nature is not necessarily mystical claptrap, she does the same interpretative conceptual reductions as Feynman diagrams then does a better job generalizing this.
If by transactional they mean the generational problem then as simple transactional analysis it likely involves psychology. But I have no doubts that biology and physics are to be interpreted as the same thing. But this too generalizes QM theory which only recently is taken seriously on brain scales. Now, the heart of this recent paper after all this time tells us QM theory (or GM) is in serious need of new interpretations? I may read this paper too, or maybe it was the same enduring mysticism we read long ago?
David, I suspect we agree on this level or that we are using the same assumptions to actually miss each others point. Does knowing the unknown if we knew of everything, as science, preclude the mystery? Not for me. As things stand now it is not clear at all that all things are necessarily connected to everything else. Is Einstein's first quote here a vague statement that all things are relative or that our methods remain in a sense an quantum idea of reality vaguely as well? In the second quote is he saying that we may as well forget interpretation of the logic of it all- Is the moon there when not seen, he suspects so as a personal interpretation... what gods, the God of Spinoza? Plato? One star that does not exist unless from the past a sentient being sees a single photon of it? The universe as god that guarantees the existing of everything as a sentient being? We put to much into what Einstein may be saying in his humility, yet we hold and experiments show we feel some certainty in his concepts as truth. But Satan's laughter (a technical term) is a message sent as on a phone cable into deep space and no one is there to hear it, where does the message go? Look, everyone can see color as sound or sound as color... there may be individual rights but the mechanical devices of a cyborg if rights at all are for the mechanical men.
David Barkin replied:  As we make exchanges back and forth, let me pause and mention what today has become a fetish with Physicists...

Dark Matter and Dark energy.

Their existence is accepted as if they were proven facts. What in FACT is the only evidence for their existence?

Here is our only data. There is more matter in the universe then we have been able to detect.

From that one piece of evidence, it is hypothesized that a completely unknown form of matter and energy exist. Which if true, makes a mockery of ALL existing models of Physics. What kind of foolish arrogance is this?

Could it be that our primitive tools are not capable of seeing all the existing forms of normal matter? Could this be the case? Whenever I even suggest this as a possibility, I am met with patronizing laughter. Ridicule from people who have absolutely no evidence at all.

Sorry, your remarks leave me with Einsteins quote.

"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge in the field of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."

L. Edgar Otto From that one piece of evidence, it is hypothesized that a completely unknown form of matter and energy exist. Which if true, makes a mockery of ALL existing models of Physics. What kind of foolish arrogance is this? " Well, I have just posted that this is the case- a further property of matter. I am not sure but it is a possibility and will not make a mockery of all existing modes of physics but unify them... yet there may be a surplus of earlier narrow speculators... common sense and our brains seem to be quite a tool would you not say? Do we ridicule the thinker or the thought as if that would prove anything? Well, as Einstein said once I have read "economics is harder than physics" So let us look closer at a child's game... given three wishes what would you wish for? Perhaps a thousand more wishes? Does the debate as to the multiverse or universe make any sense at all in our future? How can we go through life and not have at least the curiosity to try to know? I do not believe that God would have given us a mind if he did not want us to use it. Would we have a god think for us? If he is a Maxwell's demon surely that the world works is evidence that such an all knowing being would immediately send it into disorder so He or the universe, if this is a true fact, seems a lot smarter than us monkeys to get around this design problem. Anyway, it is not clear at all if we can read each others mind or not. Scientific arrogance is the concepts that come up from time to time that declare since x, say string theory or dark matter, God does not exist or perhaps the conclusion a God exists. "The price the gods extract from us for making a song is that we become the song we sing" How odd of God to load the dice and then walk away." Hey, I am just deep into the fun of it playing the glass bead game.
David Barkin replied:  Thanks, no one has made my case better then you.

L. Edgar Otto Who am I to deny rights to all the hallucinating mechanical men? Whatever turns you on... whatever the interpretation of a fetish that you need to do that. But its a damn shame Paris Hilton did not run for president and win... her stimulus would have worked given everyone one Gucci bags and shoes. ;-)
*******

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Instar (Insei) Superluminal

I guess I do claim to have the next.theory of everything. While it is easy to see or feel smarter than those with total theories beneath you, how can one presume to understand those above you? My simple experiment is within all of us monkeys already. The mind is more than intimate in scale as a quantum or relativistic mechanism. Consciousness awake is metaphysically reaching light speed of the psi plasm but it is still more than this as superluminal. It is still more than those who work with the calculus of pure singularity. While warp drive is quasifinitely likely I still cannot see if this excludes a generalization as time travel. For now we have to generalize the idea of Weyl points as a focused class concept at least. I would call this Instar Superluminal if the term available, otherwise I use Insei (Japanese for meteor). This vision is exceeding beautiful, but so are those of a slightly lesser speculation as we gaze into infinite reflections.

***
Jaya Ram Bisto It is indeed superb !
Jaya Ram Bisto In Consciousness when one gets the speed higher than that of light ,Is our consciousness a Weyl points of Divergence or Convergence ? Maxwell in his work told us that Light is Divergence attaining highest speed .Singularity is Convergence, Does Singularity have highest speed than that of light ?
Neil Haverstick We can also transcend thinking after a certain point...
L. Edgar Otto I will need time to transcend in my thinking to have more than an opinion on that very deep question Jaya. The best of our loop and string theories- do they converge or diverge together? I cannot claim to know everything. I noticed that when I post something as a small idea I sense right you and a few others do see it as standing out- it is a great gift and for now the frontier is condensed something.
****

Monday, August 17, 2015

Quasi-Inertia and the Vanishing of Contiguous Vectors


There is interesting counting where we extend this concept to abstract higher space representations. The page is short because most ideas were posted first in comments on facebook, some of which I re-post here for reference.

* * *

Thing is someone who makes such a big step in probing the shadows - even as a first daring step of approximation will always be with us as he leaves such a long shadow.  Jacob Bekenstein (1947-2015)
***
Have not seen very many mail trucks lately. So would a zip code flock of drones be delivered by a self driving truck or just send the code to our advanced 3D printers to make and duplicate most anything for free (well, raw materials). Would updates be hackable as now is the case? It perhaps is a good time to fulfill a human need like daily delivery by a small nano drone projector that would greet us as a holographic postman.
***
A lot can be said for this American like learning by immersion hands on but out of favor for awhile 'pragmatism". Yes it goes in cycles and can be taken too far. We should not underestimate some formal training where it too after hard exercise can awaken in kids as also science as useful and fun. This is important for certain ages where girls especially are vulnerable to pressures of social discouragement.
* * *
Careful analysis of this theory emphasizes orbitals are not fundamental as as the role of an incomplete quantum theory. The oscillation as super-symmetry is not as simple as pair relations and as that emphasized can lead to new tech. But such a condensed matter concept is still essentially a transistor where effective shell and lattice structure for truly new physics game changing tech inherent in the complexity to find and thus avoid the frontiers by design of experiments so assumed in long search as the case cannot ignore hidden mirrors of triality vanishing in effects to infinity nor such n-ality thus thermodynamic analogs at points of singularity of discrete dimensionless phenomena we call gravity where forces being equal it takes a minimum of four to have local chiral effects emerge excluding a general field singularly as well. Warp ten, fusion containment, and nuclear decay of more general physics of super conductivity as metal - an induced lattice of Lord Kelvin's almost convex solid as a space filler could be a game changer but QM solutions are not as difficult to find or calculate in atoms of as many mirrored sub parts as say mercury. Nor can we eliminate higher forms of uncertainty by depending on Lie group descriptions trivially, only.
***
Is someone suggesting out little planet can colonize the universe. Reach the other end of it? That would take quite a bit more. But we could hop from quasar to quasar. I do not mean black or worm holes. Otherwise there would be no exotic matter to mine. We can be in a 2^n finite places symmetrically at once.
***
Only QM may not necessarily connect and information theory as such is more fundamental than QM where they do connect.
***
The idea of microwave motion demonstrated by NASA when understood then shown amplified (warp drive discrete recursive in multiple orders, if we show further possibilities (not infinite warp) I strongly suspect sooner than not accessible by a simple thought experiment absurdly easy to make. Quasi-inertial theory.
***
This is nothing more than an axiom that supports its own conclusion. Silence in a vacuum can have independent structure too. The universe like our concepts of God evidently is not as narrow as our imagination.
***
We only see a fourth of the picture. We have to give equal weight to the silence also. Music if anything is a state of motion while it moves.
***
This is a question where our laws have not caught up with theory and technology. A "pre- embryo" as such exists for human tissue only after 32 cells. At which time we can debate legal rights of the embryo as an individual. Contraception not necessarily the same moral class as abortion. So where do we draw the line after that? Why is self repliication so important to even so called liberal people? A politician canvassing a rural district asks the farmer if he lived there all his life. The farmer replied "Not yet." This is not a good question asked as evidence for a political agenda to have someone believe the conclusion. Nor did any of our politicians answer it well so betraying their grasp of objective science. It is not a good question but one of the most profound ones of our day.
The greatest good as sacrifice of the few covers a lost of sins, but so does the promotion or forgiveness (as in rape or incest exceptions) which takes away the individual rights some claim to protect.
***
Heisenberg wept. Good point but then does string theory apply to the physical - even branes? Chairman Mao out voted by the party wanted a red flag with one star ... not the 5 fold tradition as nonphysical as the concrete playing of Magic the Gathering. And he added a yellow stripe at the bottom for the Yellow River. Perhaps two simple but so are geometric issues of duality between a point and a line.
***
Jes, every child has to memorize 15 sum combinations before they can do arithmetic at all. This method may as linear be good for the digital age letting the 2D matrix in the cloud give us but one of many answers we cannot see let alone discuss curvature as analog theory.
***
These authors should go outside and break slabs of wood for firewood with the help of gravity over a single sheet of newspaper. I did my share faster than the karate boys.
***
Yanik, based on this fundamental reasoning. I imagine a very simple experiment that may not give us the result we may expect. What might you make of this sort of synthetic generalization as a general inertial lens?
***
Both matter and iife forces so to speak self organize in a triplet of states provided these are simply connected as self dual. Consider why our world is 3D or 3 quarks (or nD or 5 quarks... ) How many pentagonal shapes tile a plane? Sexual selection in this respect is as important as natural selection. If time (philosophically) is the 4th dimension, then 5D can be regarded as Fate yet with recursion to the same final outcome through all arbitrary historical paths.
***
In surreal calculus the square root of 2 can be regarded as a rational number. But that has been under development fir some time. (See Conway) Other controversial maths have been under development too like p-adic models. The arithmetic I posted left out a step and concept I felt it easy to correct and find. - namely not 144 but doubling the field group numbers 2048 - 1152. But these do seem approximations in that it is closer to 137 as Eddington was criticized for in his finite universe. As far as the linguistics go there are deeper models that conflict between Roman and Phonecian structures. - Egyptian and Chinese picture languages are as important in analogies to physics concepts. But as often said the only valid analogies are those of geometry. But not everything is ancient or discovered anew from the ashes. Who remembers the names of the Arab chess masters at the hight of their civilization?
***
If this can be measured at some point of creation. The abstract quasar era as the center of physical reality could be a portal to things quite beyond or outside even the philosophy. Fall into one is a religious question if an ultimate one. As if a chariot beyond time and stars to some yet imagined Heaven. That Alpha = Omega is an assertion and insertion by Greek philosophy into say the New Testament. 1296 the number of time and times, that minus 1024 is twice 136... that is the 24-cell polytope in 4D relates to the fine structure or cosmological constant. The Greeks knew their intuitionist arithmetic and geometry.
***
Mark, ask me more. I do not understand the scope of your question. Before the world was we shall be. Is the fleeting spark of existence an evergreen tree or a weeping willow? A dark raven or a Phoenix?
***
Jaya, at the moment it seems to me much a language problem in the way words are formed. Triliteralism vs the richness of Sanskrit. Among alphabet systems that is. Like cvcvc of Phoenician. If v = 5 there are 25 possibilities. So we have 10 and anti-10 plus 5 neutral . In this respect it is arithmetic that can be extended geometrical. Is this a formal mathematics? Vowels as the soul of a word in script can be hidden. Does this resemble string theory? Euclidean 10D anyway? Part of TOE links goes beyond comparetive linguistics. vv x ccc = 6 but between c and v we only resolve curvature 4D and chirality with flat 5n as a double universal process. We process v on one hemisphere of our brain and c on the other. I suspect Sanskrit involves the next level of such hyperparallel layers of 49 in 3D which we now conceive as dark fluid or matter as the metaphor.
***
So, where these points of view do agree on principles can we map them where they represent they same or similar things? Each link with a context or modification? So far I see nothing in the daily explosion of speculations published not predicted or can be interpreted in retrospect from "quasic" fundamental theory. What then is "normal" physics if our imagination is limited but seemingly intuitively complete if in the depth of that unknown there can be still imagined places in the Big Dynamic Show no links at all? Your experience and opinions are intrinsically valuable in the Big Ask and the sharing of hints on the way to a bigger or the Big Picture. This makes the laws of life universal and part of the Natural normal ... interestingly my whole evolving blog to debate took the hint of what is called dark fluid. But philosophically there can be superdupper symmetry and such a fluid view too. We all face uncertainties on realizations seeking, taking the questions of self doubt in stride if possible.
****

Friday, August 14, 2015

Quasic (Tauonic) Multi-TOE Color Extension toward the Sukodu Game in the Standard Model




David Horgan remarked:  Always good to see teams trying to figure out how to challenge quantum gravity with observations.

Scalar and tensor perturbations in loop quantum cosmology: High-order corrections

http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.03239
*******
Giotis Mth posted:

I was browsing the infamous by now (so called) map of "Theories of Everything" of Quanta Magazine:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20150803-physics-theories-map/

and I noticed a general misconception regarding quantum foam. For reasons I don't understand the quantum foam model is connected to LQG and causal dynamical triangulations but not to String theory. The truth is that the notion of quantum foam is generic and is expected to be a feature of a candidate QG theory which should be able to incorporate and reveal the quantum foam picture of space time at a certain limit. For String theory in particular there are already preliminary results indicating that indeed the theory is capable of doing exactly that.

The relevant paper that I'm aware of for example is the classic paper by Vafa et al linked below where topological probe branes reveal that the quantum foam picture dominates at short enough distant scales for certain spaces.

Of course my main objection with the Quanta magazine map is the misleading title (in fact the only Theory of Everything is String theory since the other presented theories are just miserable attempts to quantized gravity which is not the same thing) and the ridiculous public voting initiative.

I replied:   So, are you suggesting this was an oversight or a conceptual error? Will all of physics one day just be material science reduction? Does a TOE exist as a foam if there are no scud on a surface to perceive it? I think this map embodies a higher principle we scud intuitively try to solve if a universe planned or by accident makes sense. Short of that or some not multi-TOE creative process or Ultimate Design - the same principle really, the links between these approximate regions are from this QM mysticism are not necessarily independent as well a matter of degree. If there is a sentient God could He be a scud while not a foam?

********

The Game Board in Planning Stages for Manufacture....   L. Edgar Otto (the PeSla)