Raychaudhuri Equation

Is it sand running through our fingers, or a taffy like substance, in symbolic form?

The difference, discretium and fluidity of nature, geometrically/topologically driven, are at war with what we might interpret in time? Early on, Salvador Dali understood well this geometrical propensity to the tesserack, that he embued his art with higher religious context(time). But in real life, he was different man?:)

The issues were not far removed from perspective, that this battle would find itself challenged, in how we would portray the nature of reality? That it had burst forth in science and it's manifestations.

But come back to earth, and we have to wonder indeed if this fluid is slipping through our fingers as time reveals a more intrinistic view of the reality in the cosmos?



Sean Carroll said:Friedmann fights back:

For those of you interested in the attempt by Kolb, Matarrese, Notari, and Riotto to do away with dark energy, some enterprising young cosmologists (not me, I'm too old to move that quickly) have cranked through the equations and come out defending the conventional wisdom. Three papers in particular seem interesting:

Lubos Motl:Superhorizon fluctuations and accelerating Universe:

Several physicists and bloggers, e.g. Jacques Distler, Peter Woit and especially Sean Carroll who may be considered a true expert in these questions and who added a very new article after this article of mine was published, recently noticed a paper that claimed that the cosmological constant was not needed. Instead, the accelerating expansion was conjectured to be a consequence of fluctuations of a scalar field (and the associated stress energy tensor) whose wavelength was longer than the Hubble radius i.e. the size of the visible Universe, roughly speaking.

I agree with Lubos here in regards to what has already been establish to date in the positions. Here with Sean Carroll, Jacques Distler, Peter Woit, and Lubos Motl respectively, that they all agree on the standards set here?

This would be a clear statement of position, and one that would signal, accepted practice on the expository view of our cosmos? Is it to ambitious?

Out of this a standard, even if there are divergences of personality; this is wiped away, so that we are introduced to new information as Sean shows us withRaychaudhuri equation? This gives one direction to look at.

This equation has the special characteristic that it is true without reference to the Einstein equations . That is, it is true for any spacetime. It is an intrinsic property of the volume expansion.

Now we come back to the intuitive development from this standard presence. Would it be so wrong to ask that four minds to stand together and paper their perspective? Then open it up to geometry/topological views, in relation to how we might develop the imagery of what might have been gathered from the dynamical realization of early universe idealizations?



In regards to the tactile experience one might want to comprehend is in the way the universe now has unfolded?

Now there is a most definite need to grasp the issue here in terms of what causality might mean in terms of balckhole/3 brane collapse as a perspective to the dynamics that would be revealled, for photon,/graviton production from the blackhole?

Using Calorimeter, we see where such advances help us to distinquish early universe information in Glast cosiderations, but how much more suttle has this experience need to be expanded upon, to understand the exchange that takes place in the gravitational collapse?

John Baez:

Now, the way Hawking likes to calculate things in this sort of problem is using a "Euclidean path integral". This is a rather controversial approach - hence his grin when he said it's the "only sane way" to do these calculations - but let's not worry about that. Suffice it to say that we replace the time variable "t" in all our calculations by "it", do a bunch of calculations, and then replace "it" by "T" again at the end. This trick is called "Wick rotation". In the middle of this process, we hope all our formulas involving the geometry of 4d spacetime have magically become formulas involving the geometry of 4d space. The answers to physical questions are then expressed as integrals over all geometries of 4d space that satisfy some conditions depending on the problem we're studying. This integral over geometries also includes a sum over topologies.
That's what Hawking means by this:

Stephen Hawking:I adopt the Euclidean approach, the only sane way to do quantum gravity non-perturbatively. In this, the time evolution of an initial state is given by a path integral over all positive definite metrics that go between two surfaces that are a distance T apart at infinity. One then Wick rotates the time interval, T, to the Lorentzian. The path integral is taken over metrics of all possible topologies that fit in between the surfaces.

How would missing energy events isolate the realization that such ventures would have been specific in detailing the envelope capturing all that has evolved in our universe to know that there is this consistancy, that spreads itself through all possibiltyies of Feynman's sum over paths of expression, that still needs to be identified?

Now you must know that there are consequences when we see this collapse take place that asks us to consider the nature of the temperatures and diameter in reduction?

That what has been reduced in this energy developing scenarion of the cosmos in action, is a applicable view to geometry/topology that at the same time reveals the idealization of entropic features of supersymmetical views that we learn to see?

How this experience, as tactile as I approach it, is induced, is at very illusatory experience way back in some speculative past.:)Whooh! What? Careful now, I am analogically speaking here, because I like to see this way. It feels right(not saying it is right) as simple statement quickly summing up many mathematical views in a very short and simple way. That's what I hope anyway.

When you look at this fluid geometrically/topolgically driven what view has transpired in blackhole production? You want to be able to understand the symmetrical breaking that is taking place? Crystalization processes, would quickly surmize a Laughlin view from a fast cooling temperature, to realize, it is much more slower then this in the cooling(15 bilion year assumption) in a cosmological process?

So we understand curvature is well aquainted with vast track of cosmological views, but it become much more diffiult at such microscopic thinking. Sort of, all smeared out in a vast supersymmetrical views of previous states of existance, that quickly gather to form maybe, cosmic strings?:)

John Baez said,

But you shouldn't imagine the mood as one of breathless anticipation. At least for the physicists present, a better description would be something like "skeptical curiosity". None of them seemed to believe that Hawking could suddenly shed new light on a problem that has been attacked from many angles for several decades. One reason is that Hawking's best work was done almost 30 years ago. A string theorist I know said that thanks to work relating anti-deSitter space and conformal field theory - the so-called "AdS-CFT" hypothesis - string theorists had become convinced that no information is lost by black holes. Thus, Hawking had been feeling strong pressure to fall in line and renounce his previous position, namely that information is lost. A talk announcing this would come as no big surprise.

Searching for Extra Dimensions

Sometimes you have to venture further into the logic of strings to see where these applications are revealling themselves for consideration first and then work from the idea of compacted states and the relevance of dimensial attributes for consideration? Here the question points to bulk information in relation to the blackhole, three brane wrap to gravitational collapse. How is this clcical nature revealling itself and not limiting time to a end, but to the recognition of the value of "time" in those dimensions.

The idea of taffy seems like a very tactile experience for me, becuase of how I see entropic issues relevant to unsynmmetrical views of symmetry breaking, and this relation not only to the blackhole expansion that takes place but the recognition of previous states of existed at high energy scale.



Did Picasso know about Einstein?

Was it a coincidence that Picasso developed Cubism at about the same time that Einstein published his theory of relativity? Arthur I Miller thinks not, as he explains to Ciara Muldoon

You have to understand, that artist rendition must be implored sometimes to help good scientists extend their visions of things most appropriately. I found evidence of this, when reading about Arthur Miller, and looking at what Penrose did when he implored the skills of Escher?

Basic intuition tells us that there are three spatial dimensions in our universe. In more normal terms, this means that we are able to move along three different axes (basic directions) of motion, back/forth, left/right, and up/down. Einstein, in his theory of relativity, proposes that time is also a dimension, similar to the three spatial dimensions, except for the fact that we do not control our motion through it. We almost never consider the idea that there could be more than these dimensions, because we have never experienced anything that suggests this.

In context of this information what would degrees of freedom have to do with how we see these extra spatial dimensions signify. What rules tell us what actions will take place there?

What extra dimensions, you probably think, having just read the title. We know very well that the world around us is three-dimensional. We know East from West, North from South, up from down – what extra dimensions could there possibly be if we never see them?

Well, it turns out that we do not really know yet how many dimensions our world has. All that our current observations tell us is that the world around us is at least 3+1-dimensional. (The fourth dimension is time. While time is very different from the familiar spatial dimensions, Lorentz and Einstein showed at the beginning of the 20th century that space and time are intrinsically related.) The idea of additional spatial dimensions comes from string theory, the only self-consistent quantum theory of gravity so far. It turns out that for a consistent description of gravity, one needs more than 3+1 dimensions, and the world around us could have up to 11 spatial dimensions!

For those who do not understand the issues in regards to the compactified dimensions you have to understand the implications that this topic speaks too. I have listened to well intentioned indivduals reject this notion outright, without further explanation. To me ,logical discourse must speak to this.



If you think about Plato's cave you soon learn what is encouraged here again? From not the usual framework the cave offered us, as we look out from inside and explain the shadow figures on the wall. It is a paradoxial twist on human comprehension?

Science fiction characters make travel through extra dimensions look as easy as getting on the subway, but physicists have never taken them seriously. Now in the 6 December PRL a team proposes a radical idea: We may indeed live in a world with more than three spatially infinite dimensions, yet the extra dimensions might be essentially imperceptible. For years researchers have discussed extra dimensions that might be "compactified"--curled up to a very small size--but no one thought that non-compact dimensions could exist without obvious effects on experiments.

Many physicists hope that string theory will ultimately unify quantum mechanics, the theory of small-scale interactions, with general relativity, the theory of gravity. String theory requires at least nine spatial dimensions, so proponents normally claim that all but three of them are compactified and only accessible in extremely high-energy particle collisions. As an alternative to compactified dimensions, Lisa Randall of Princeton University and Raman Sundrum, now of Stanford University, describe a scenario in which an extra, infinite dimension could have remained undetected so far.

TimeSpeak

One of the things that appeared so strange to me was in how we could look at gravitational variances with scientific means. As we know now, this is being accomplished in ways that test the minds imagination, as to how we would apply these features here to earth, and beyond.

You and I know it as a time machine. Physicists, on the other hand, call it a "closed timelike curve." Below, feast on the concepts and conjectures, the dialects and definitions that physicists rely on when musing about the possibility of time travel. If this list only whets your appetite for more, we recommend you have a gander at the book from which we excerpted this glossary: Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy, by Kip S. Thorne (Norton, 1994).

Failing to move into the abstract realms of higher dimensional figurations, is one of the exploits that we can operate with in the realm of human experience? Why would we not look at these examples? So, if we have enough examples, how would this lay out in experimental context. Is the Earth not so round any more?

Now of course I will assume that the world of spacetime has been reached and understood by most readers. In so recognizing this capability of those same people I then want to re-instroduce some of the concepts that captured my mind as I delved further into string theory and the dimensional inferences that soon materialized.

1. Where is Gravity Stronger?
2. When Gravity Becomes Strong?
3. Time and Gravity
4. Microstates of Quantum Gravity
5. Primordial Gravitational Waves?
6. A Sphere that is Not So Round

Time is of your own making;
its clock ticks in your head.
The moment you stop thought
time too stops dead. Angelus Silesius

Now much as we would like to speak about the concepts of "Time" in spacetime regard, it is very important that we extend our vocabulary in terms of what the mind will do to stretch it's capabilities when considering the abstract world of dimensional attributes. We understand well I think the limits in the strength's and weakness in terms of what we may see of the universe now. The microscopic view, within the context of a the cosmological view?

Vision

It's no secret now, that I see where symbols are very important in the analysis of complex structures, once modeled. Might move the definition of everything we had encountered, from that model assumption. One had to know that Michio Kaku has prep the minds for this deepr understanding, and with it something very powerful abot the symbols he implores.

For the first time, physicists appreciate the power of symmetry in their equations. When a physicist talks about “beauty and elegance” in physics, what he or she often really means is that symmetry allows one to unify a large number of diverse phenomena and concepts into a remarkably compact form. The more beautiful an equation is, the more symmetry it possesses, and the more phenomena it can explain in the shortest amount of space” Pg 76 Einstein's Cosmos by Michio Kaku

In looking at what Michio Kaku presents in his books, one thing I learnt from reading was the powerful way in which such images are implored to help us see in ways that we might not have seen previous.



LEONARD SUSSKIND:

And I fiddled with it, I monkeyed with it. I sat in my attic, I think for two months on and off. But the first thing I could see in it, it was describing some kind of particles which had internal structure which could vibrate, which could do things, which wasn't just a point particle. And I began to realize that what was being described here was a string, an elastic string, like a rubber band, or like a rubber band cut in half. And this rubber band could not only stretch and contract, but wiggle. And marvel of marvels, it exactly agreed with this formula.
I was pretty sure at that time that I was the only one in the world who knew this.

In looking at Susskind, and the history of strings, flashes of insight are very important features of work, which previously and intensely, occupied a mind. Might all of a sudden reveal to it, a synthesis of all that it has worked through, in such an image, as was revealed to Susskind.

These applications are very interesting to me because on two levels, we see where constructive phases would encourage the mathematical mind to work within a environment, and then success where new work might be introduced to help explain previous mathematical processes that lack expression.

As to the historical figurations, such views are important to determining the process which evolution has embedded itself in evolutionary tactics of the brains development (systems of science)?

Are such adaptations significant in the brains developmental encasement, to see where evolution has evolved its capacity to think differently?

Banchoff's fifth dimensional capabilities, as they are explained in regards to computer screens, is something the brain is quite capable of handling. We just didn't know that it could visualize things this way before?



Lastly in the case of Witten, where such work intensely occupies the mind, a nice quiet walk by a stream or anything that frees it from such engagement, might find a free line and direct outward ness to expression.



That's what I call creativity. I have examples of this in terms of the effort of Cubist art and the Monte Carlo methods used to induce idealization in terms of quantum gravity. One method anyway :)


Cubist Art: Picasso's painting 'Portrait of Dora Maar'

Cubist art revolted against the restrictions that perspective imposed. Picasso's art shows a clear rejection of the perspective, with women's faces viewed simultaneously from several angles. Picasso's paintings show multiple perspectives, as though they were painted by someone from the 4th dimension, able to see all perspectives simultaneously.

P. Picasso Portrait of Ambrose Vollard (1910)
M. Duchamp Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2 (1912)
J. Metzinger Le Gouter/Teatime (1911)

The appearance of figures in cubist art --- which are often viewed from several direction simultaneously --- has been linked to ideas concerning extra dimensions:

Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey

A look at the higher dimensionsBy Michio Kaku

"Why must art be clinically “realistic?” This Cubist “revolt against perspective” seized the fourth dimension because it touched the third dimension from all possible perspectives. Simply put, Cubist art embraced the fourth dimension. Picasso's paintings are a splendid example, showing a clear rejection of three dimensional perspective, with women's faces viewed simultaneously from several angles. Instead of a single point-of-view, Picasso's paintings show multiple perspectives, as if they were painted by a being from the fourth dimension, able to see all perspectives simultaneously. As art historian Linda Henderson has written, “the fourth dimension and non-Euclidean geometry emerge as among the most important themes unifying much of modern art and theory."

Quantum Jitter

When you look at the spacetime fabric the cosmological views makes it nice and neat for us, when we are tryng to comprehend the ripples and waves that are generated.

So how, you might ask, can multiple strings make up a proton if each has a mass of ten billion billion times that of a proton? The answer has to do with quantum jitter. According to the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics, nothing is completely at rest. Quantum jitter actually has negative energy that cancels out much of a string's mass. In the case of the graviton, the cancellation is perfect, yielding a particle with zero mass. This is what was predicted since gravitons travel at the speed of light.

The microscopic view of gravitatinal wave generation asks that we look much closer at how we perceive the actions of the turbulence and uncertainty as we move closer for a introspective view of the compact spaces that the genration of graviton in place of the views such uncertainty might be generated.

Reviews Georg Riemann's view of curved spaces, which is the mathematical core of general relativity. Quantum geometry is the mathematical core of string theory, though it is not as ready-made as was Riemann's geometry for Einstein. Riemann drew on Gauss, Lobachevsky, Bolyai etc. and evaluated the measure of distances in curved space. Einstein concluded the curvature of space is gravity.

Larry Summers Issue Reveals Deeper Implications

All the informtaion is gathered material, that held the Larry Summers issue in context. I was revealing aspects of this issue on another level, that many would not have understood. I wanted to bring it together here because the understanding of rhythmns, is at the core of my belief system. I have expounded on this greatly throughout this blog. It is not altogether clear sometimes even for myself.:)

So I hope the suttle implications here are understood not only from a psychological point of view, but also from a scientific one as well. It is a strange thing when the mind has jumped in model apprehension about how it might look at the world in a new way(Quantum Harmonic Oscillators).

I don't know when it happened, and how, it's just that I don't look at the world in a normal way anymore.:) Model apprehension if adopted, will color one's thinking. If life was so simple as the circle would have implied, then it's varying attributes topologically would be listed deeply embedded within our thinking? Thinking that extends far beyond the earth and it's solid form, to the far reaches of the cosmo to all of our suns and balckholes, in our thinking?

Without this cyclical nature, the universe does not make much sense to me. Of course I have to bite my tongue here, so that I do not loose many good minds that are speaking to the finer details of our views theoretically developing at the forefront of the physics and theoretic examination of those same "fields" of endeavor.

Anyway to the below information gathered.

For some who wanted to know? Have a good look at what took place today in a Harvard vote. Of course this is date dmaterial so looking back one should look forward, to what is presented today here.

I present on the one hand, material for revealing a closer views of the "source material." I have refrained from commenting as well, until now.

I tend to look at the ideas here as more inclined to questioning the dynamics of geometry. Male and female, as a dynamical expression, not only in the cosmos(Friedmann equations) but in how this may be deeply inserted in our psychological processes.

I inserted previously, the subject of Liminocentric structures under the title of PI day, as part of this comprehension and expression.



Maybe see a ole rerun of the movie PI and wonder if the Show Numb3rs was based on it?



Or think about the Perimeter Institute(PI) for those less familiar.

....or even contemplate John Baez's Fool's Gold PHI and the golden ration begininng from some sort of mandalic interpretation, coming from a psychological model based on Liminocentric structures? :)

This might seem a little kookish as well? :)

I try to reserve judgement on characters, while maintaining a view of the situation as it is reported. I do not look at the character of who is reporting but maintaining awareness of the bend they might have to that same reporting.

European attitudes, are they different then Canadians views on men and woman?

So I try and move past these stereotyping behaviors to look deeper in the process of the human structure of thinking. You know, right brain left brain? :)

Induction ad Deduction

In looking past to the origins of expression, to undertand, what it is that both sexes use to express either of these nurturing, or abstract tools of mathematics? As moving beyond the home, where the ability is quite feasible in either sexes, when implored.

If you wanted to understand democracies, first principles this is where I began my journey.

Matter condensed physics under the likes of Robert Laughlin and his buildings blocks of matter, or a deeper look into the structure of our universe? Some reject the Mother principle of M theory,and preferred to stay in the coordinates of a euclidean world.

This does not reject, what we could apply in our non-euclidean thinking. Maxwell and Gauss and Riemann are all part of this process in enlighened thinking? Einstein moved it further, in the use of GR with the help of Grossman? Now there is this attempt to join the cosmological world of the very large with the very small(reductionism views).

You just had to know how to get there in the expression using the Fifth postulate. Emmy Noether and others tell me that we can all use this faculty for inductive/deductive processes in our expressions?



Even Thales, recognized the Arche of reason? Parts of this picture, are pasted throughout this site linked above.


Thales might of called it the primary principal and used water. It is a very defining I think that we understand this fluid nature as a contiuity of expression, while we like discrete things as well. Plato solids eventually lead to a defintion of what God might be? :)

Discrete things could be viewed as solidification processes, we like to see consolidating in the shadows of things, while the sun can be a very abtract thing topologically in revealing the energy that we can use? :)

I tend to look at the ideas here as more inclined to questioning the dynamics of geometry. Male and female, as a dynamical expression, not only in the cosmos(Friedmann equations) but in how this may be deeply inserted in our psychological processes.

One may tend back to philosophical questions about these differences, but they are innnate features in all of us? Jung's determinations, in the animus or anima, and the response's too, the male and female that seeks balance in it's life?

The distinction may be domineering at one point or another, but there is this balance contained, much as we would define the relationship of Maxwell in electric/magnetic fields? That one would ask where good common sense should rule?

The humanities in science should then beg the question, that neither of these things should ever be considered separate, or not equal, for they would be interchangeable and contained deeply in our extensions and consolidations of expressive thought?

That these distinctions are never really separate issues contained in the brain's alternating features of the brain's capacity to Babble, left/right? :) Topologically it would be difficult to distinction of the inner from the outer, but this is not to say that this can't be done in perspective.

....or even contemplate John Baez's Fool's Gold PHI and the golden ration begininng from some sort of mandalic interpretation, coming from a psychological model based on Liminocentric structures?

The mind, all the time engaged in heavy thought can easly recognize, when it has all come together in model apprehension. It's own image, for complete acceptance, we then undertand well the forays the mind has ventured through to come to such forms of consolidate thought and image reproduction? :)

It is not until well into the high school years that males begin to close the gaps in terms of Language and social skills. Unfortunaly the boys, society, and educators continue to view boys as poor communicators and as doing poorly in L.A., therefore boys don't view their language skills as strong.

There are just plain busy elsewhere? It's the primal words spoken of beating drums and far off places? :)

Maybe, the educational system is not intune with the developing scenarios of male/female attributes??

I was reading the other day a opening in regards to Plato's academy for learning. Although this was in context of early historical developement, I couldn't help be drawn to the the views that were developed alongside of, perspective. I will have to go back and look at this.

One thing that attracted my interest was the role music would play in developing rythmns of youth that were conducive to awareness and steady developement? Now I don't like to be called ole fashion, but the rhythms in youth were attractive to me because they might have taught the basis of movement in life, much like, and in concert with, the expansion and contraction scenarios of thinking and developement. Now remember focus on the rhythm

Of course I always come back to the regress of reasons to explain this intuitive leap that developed trends found in new realities emerging. Arche means elements, and any reductionistic system asks us to delve into the reasons why, even though on large scale media observation, the Summers might have had issue with deeper implications to consider?

Not fully understanding the emotive developement and differences between both, mental enhancement through age aggression to advance thinking, these rhythmns would have helped to place, societal thinking above the aggressions of war, our own human struggle to rise above those things that would hold us to the earth? :)

The Cosmic String Visited Again and again......

I am not sure if this bothers others, but when I close a link, I do not like the whole web site to shut down so that I have to go to a link and restablish contact. So what I do is offer a target=_blank to my html, so that it adds a open window that can be closed, and leave you with the site in question. So any thoughts on this you html buffs?

1. Here Previously
2.Here again
3.I'm adding this link so that the views of Cosmic string are held in context of what Emergence might mean?

Circles wihtin circles, and Sklar interpretation is posted throughout this site. A deeper look into the "manifestation point( let's call it emergence in this thread)" of blackhole consideration would ask, okay, at the supersymmeticla level , what is this "point" that is to emerge?

See, when you take this vision of the three brane collapsing in context of gravitatinal collpase, you are given perspective geometrically/topologically that any abstract mind would have missed, had they not understood the physics involved, is also tied to these views.



Now the interesting thing to me is, if you move your perspective to the blackhole for a minute here you learn to question what value might be attained from emssion standards that would help you orientate the views to a much more dynamical version of the cosmos?

What is the ideal supersymmetical view that would arise from 1 brane, and could have manifested from three brane collapse? Now you kow I am working backwards here, just to point to the source of the cosmic string, so that what ever it's manifestation, I am quick to think of a vast network of energy very spread out all of a sudden igniting some lightning strike across the universe? Thinking of a universe in a box here helps sometimes, but the move to ballooning features, you need to understand this progression through universal manifestation from those bubbling universes?

So there are two views here, that ask whether the constructive mode of the current universe, arising from this cosmic string, has painted a nice little framework for topological considertaions, that we could now see were the micro views of blackhole emissions are held as standard?

Emergence= Phase Transitions of Symmetry?

Witten said:

One thing I can tell you, though, is that most string theorist's suspect that spacetime is a emergent Phenomena in the language of condensed matter physics.

Part of the difficulty was realizing that the end result of a current depiction of the universe, and the reality around us now, had led us to assumption discrete manifestations of a earlier prospective universe. From that early universe, until now.

In 1877 Boltzmann used statistical ideas to gain valuable insight into the meaning of entropy. He realized that entropy could be thought of as a measure of disorder, and that the second law of thermodynamics expressed the fact that disorder tends to increase. You have probably noticed this tendency in everyday life! However, you might also think that you have the power to step in, rearrange things a bit, and restore order. For example, you might decide to tidy up your wardrobe. Would this lead to a decrease in disorder, and hence a decrease in entropy? Actually, it would not. This is because there are inevitable side-effects: whilst sorting out your clothes, you will be breathing, metabolizing and warming your surroundings. When everything has been taken into account, the total disorder (as measured by the entropy) will have increased, in spite of the admirable state of order in your wardrobe. The second law of thermodynamics is relentless. The total entropy and the total disorder are overwhelmingly unlikely to decrease

Now the apparent contradiction is to understand that when the views are taken to those small spaces, reductionistic features of a discrete nature have forced us to consider the building blocks of matter, but at the same time, something else makes it's way into our views that would have been missed had you not realized that the space contains a lot of energy?

To build this symmetrical and simple model of elegance, you needed some model, some framework in which to consider the distant measure here would be ultimately derived from the blackhole and it's dynamics? The simple solution would help you recognize that any massless particle emitted from this state, would automatically signal the closest source of consideration that any of us could have imagined.

Even Smolin, recognized the Glast determinations. Why I have said, that Smolin could not have gotten any closer then what is surmised from the origination of emission from the blackhole consideration?

Power of Symmetry Allows Us to Unify Disparate Pieces?

You know it is very frustrating sometimes when the paradoxal is presented to the mind through obsevration, to have it sloughed off as some speculative point that might be less then what the Doctor ordered?

In this case, the cause of the observation posts, what a three brane wrapped blackhole can mean? Here we see where the issues of Space-tearng conifold transitions are presented in a theoretical approach and quickly discarded by some, because it contained the brane word and would imply some kind of Brain world, ( Brane world.)

Well if you do not catch it the first time, there is hope that the theoretic applied will speak to what Hawking radiation might have in regards to the gravitational collapse initiated.

What is this physics doing here? This is not some free jaunt down memory lane, but a advancement in what is proposed? Very difficult to do this, if the environment is not translated in and by other ways, to see what the outcome of such a gravitational collapse can do. What is transmitted back into the space?

So I leave this here for a minute, and draw a quote from someone who is a good writer and has a good comprehension of the world as it sits. He might have been targeted as some wonder seeker by some, but his position to me has presented inquiring minds with the knowledge and basis, from which we must think.

So here is his quote, and I shall not name him. So that those who think he is some "wonder seeker" who has bastard the science who sold out his values, might wonder about their own position in the developing world of theoretics. To wonder, why such a message might not be important, when they think they can propose their own views about what the world should be.

Should what they have to say be held in any less contempt, that we should not only apply these same rules to those who hold a position about the harmonious whole, that we should even take the time to listen what they have to say?

To be quickly dismissed as verbiage not worth seeking because of some entertainment value as though one might he have sold out his profession? Any one, who uses this medium and blogging, can now consider themself part of the evil they think has manifested and sold out on. I refuse to even name this individual because he is advanced in his thinkng and is courting the world of theoretics.

For the first time, physicists appreciate the power of symmetry in their equations. When a physicist talks about “beauty and elegance” in physics, what he or she often really means is that symmetry allows one to unify a large number of diverse phenomena and concepts into a remarkably compact form. The more beautiful an equation is, the more symmetry it possesses, and the more phenomena it can explain in the shortest amount of space” Pg 76

And again here so that we see know less the value of these inisghts, I place this final quote of his as well.

Rotating in four dimensional space unifies the concept of space and time

You had to know, that the pre-existing set of cicumstances would highlight the accomplishements of what Maxwell had done, as well as, learn to see into what the world Gauss and Reimann sought to exemplify beyond our normal comprehensions modes.

Moving into such realms dones not as far as I see it lessen the impact of what theorectic has done by way of descrbing the physics, but cautiously asks us to see what is happening in those compacted spaces.

Space-Tearing Conifold Transitions

Many years ago in my doodling, I created some comparisons to what I would have percieved in describing a point, line and plane. To me, I wanted to find a way to describe this point amidst a vast background of all points, so by constructing this diagram, and by realizing coordinates, intersection of lines and planes seemed a interesting idea to get to this point.

This brought some consideration to what was being shown by Greene below.


The Elegant Universe, by Brian Greene, pg 326


Now at the time, this being far removed from the stories that are developing in string theory, learning that having moved to brane considerations we can see where three brane world wrapped around a sphere could produce wonderful things for us to further ponder. That such emissions, from the gravitatinal collapse could all of a sudden produce, massless vibrating strings. We know then that such strings can be a photon or a other massless particles?:)


The Elegant Universe, by Brian Greene, pg 327

Part of the problem then for me is to figure out the stage of the developement of the cosmo what stage followed which stage, and the scheme within the cosmological display, the torus that had to become a sphere, or sphere collapsing to a torus? Concentrations of gravitonic expressions?

There were geometrical consideration here to think about.

Physicists found that a three-brane wrapped around a three-dimensional sphere will result in a gravitational field bearing the appearance of an extremal black hole, or one that has the minimum mass consistent with its force charges. Additionally, the mass of the three-brane is the mass of the black hole and is directly proportional to the volume of the sphere. Therefore, a sphere that collapses to a point as described above appears to us as a massless black hole, which will return to the discussion later.

Now as you know from my previous thread on the Flower considerations, color is a wonderful thing, but if my view was to be consistent, then how could there be any tearing in the use of a topological structure? The flower became very symbolic to me of what we see in the universe unfolding in these galaxies?

Two-dimensional strings trace out two-dimensional worldsheets. Since strings, according to Feynman's sum-over-paths formulation of quantum mechanics, simultaneously travel by all paths from one point to another, they are always passing by every point in space. According to physicist Edward Witten, this property of strings ensures that six-dimensional figures called Calabi-Yau spaces (theorized to be the shape of the other dimensions of our universe) can be transformed by certain topology-changing deformations called flop transitions without causing physical calamity. This is because strings are constantly sweeping out two-dimensional worldsheets that shield the flop transition point from the rest of the universe. A similar thought process goes toward the ability of Calabi-Yau spaces to undergo more drastic changes called space-tearing conifold transitions.

In order for me to consider the comlexity of the question certain insights about the nature of our universe has pointed out that there always had to be something existing, even in face of what any of us might thought of as a singularity in that blackhole collapse. But it is not that easy.

One had to assume that the bulk represented the continuance of some kind of flunctuating field of endeavor, that could hold our thoughts to dimensional attributes shared in the presetnation of Reimann's sphere. Gauss saw this early and gaussian coordinates also help to unite Maxwell into the glorifed picture of a dynamcial world?

The replacement of a 1-D sphere ( a circle ) with a 0-D sphere ( two points ) can create a different topological shape. A do-nut has a circle, round its lesser diameter, which is pinched to nothing. The do-nut turns into a cresent or banana-shape, with the two end-points repaired by the two points of a zero-dimensional sphere. The torus cum cresent can now transform into a ball, without further tearing.

This is as if Klein's hidden extra dimensions of space transformed from the one curled-up shape to another, comparably to the normal extended three dimensions changing the shape of the universe from a torus to a ball.
The evolution of the universe may involve such transmutations between curled-up Calabi-Yau spaces.

Equations governing the 'branes' showed that, from our limited three-dimensional view-point, the three-brane "smeared" around a three-dimensional sphere, within a ( curled-up ) Calabi-Yau space, sets up a gravitational field like a black hole.
The space tearing conifold transition from three to two dimensional sphere happens to increase the number of holes by one. These holes determine the number of low mass particles, considered as low energy string vibration patterns. The shrinking volume of the 3-D sphere goes with a proportionate mass decrease to zero: a massless black hole.

On a Very Large Scale Spatial Curvature?

These are beautiful pictures of flowers my wife grew, and as a collage they make a nice way of expressing the diversity of galaxies, within context of our whole universe.:)

So you develope this sense on the large scale about what is possible given certain circumstances. What is driving inflation? As this universe expands and we realize that Omega=1 one has to assume that teetering on the brink of a topolgical form has some significane in how we see the overall expression of this same universe?



What are supersymmetrical valuations telling us about the nature of the universe in that the beginning? Is it "seed like" and how would such things be driven too, if something did not already exist? Can this nugget actually be living in nothing and arise from nothing? This logic is really hard to swallow for me, yet I recognized that a dynamcial universe needed soemthing in order to drive it from such flat state of existance, to indicators that would have revealled and explained these geometries/topologies.

   Unsymmetrical-cooling-gravity weaker
              Expanding
            \            /
             \          /
              \        /
              _\      /___
             /  \    /    /
            /    \  /    /
           /      \/    /  -------- 
          /            /         Supergravity 
          -------------           Symmetrical
                ^
                I
            seedlike
           

If you define something arising from such a state where nothing exists, the logic saids, that the geometry could have never arisen if you did not have some motivator telling it too? So you begin to enteretain cyclical natures that would be very revealling. Steinhardt, Turok, and others start to wonder then about how these things could materialize?




So we look at the span of time in relation, from the supersymmterical state to the 300,000? Yet on a dynamical level if the universe was to level out in fifteen billions years, then we would have understood that we had only seen one part of this dynamic process revealing itself from a state of existance maybe as a nugget form, to extend itself, all the way to the outer fringes and cooling nature, in a flat state. Will it turn back to the crunch?

One consequence of general relativity is that the curvature of space depends on the ratio of rho to rho(crit). We call this ratio Omega = rho/rho(crit). For Omega less than 1, the Universe has negatively curved or hyperbolic geometry. For Omega = 1, the Universe has Euclidean or flat geometry. For Omega greater than 1, the Universe has positively curved or spherical geometry. We have already seen that the zero density case has hyperbolic geometry, since the cosmic time slices in the special relativistic coordinates were hyperboloids in this model.

So the logic is telling me that such a crunch would have had to signal other geometries/topologies, that would kick in, that taken in view of the large way in which we are taking snapshots, this consistentcy is being, and should be topolgically considered even though it is happenng on such large scales?

If a blackhole existed in the center of every galaxy, then the universal expression in nature would detail for us "phases in symmetrical breaking" within the overall larger perspective?

On this larger perspective and sense, we would see this mode of operandi, expressing itself many times not just in context of the whole universe, but within the subtle parts, all the way down to the microstates of existance? Thes ewould have to be initiated even within context of our safe and surreal world of matter states, that we have come to love and feel safe in?:)

So what does sound have to to do with all this?

I like knocking the wind out of the sails in order for one to shift perspective in how resonances might be percieved and such gatherings in nodal point cosiderations, as string indicators of gravitonic expression.

In order to shift this focus to such states of cyclical natures in the realms of topological considerations, you had to understand that even on a flat plate in Chaldni examples, these views were developing on much larger scales, on ballons with dyes, all the time revealing resonant features, to the quality of those same sounds?

Ahem!:)Ya I know. How do you transfer such thinking from orbits of Mercury and binary star rotations to signal valuations in sound determinations? Now remeber I gave a very global perspective on the unverse that include geometry/topological considerations. I wanted to shift these views to viable means of expression.:)

One the Earth as a Sphere is not so Round, and giving the symetrical relaizatin of a sphere, smaller circles and all, there had to be a way inorder to speak to the 1r radius of expresion not just a s a inverse square law valution of gravity, but also within context of other things based on this law. These within the case of the standard model would have to be inclusive in a model design.

Without Gravitational Waves, Spacetime is Flat?

I know it is very difficult for some people to understand this translation to harmonical expressions(any horizon and what is to lie beyond?) and the way in which we would percieve this dynamcial nature, using the expressions of non-Euclidean geometries?



We understood this creation of positive and negtaive in context of each other did we?

Riemannian Geometry, also known as elliptical geometry, is the geometry of the surface of a sphere. It replaces Euclid's Parallel Postulate with, "Through any point in the plane, there exists no line parallel to a given line." A line in this geometry is a great circle. The sum of the angles of a triangle in Riemannian Geometry is > 180°.



It is a strange thing to wonder how the heck one get's to translating harmonical oscillations in context of what we see expounded by Taylor and Hulse. To understand that at some point, the rotation around each other in distance, will decrease in time, and the oscillations will increase? What does this signal?:)



You do not discard thnking about the cosmological nature, methods, that have been used to orientate the world view in such a way, where all of a sudden the complexity of this dynamical nature has moved your thinking to strength and weakness of those same gravitational wave explanations.

Working closely with the experimental group, we use astrophysical, particle physics and superstring theory combined with observations to study gravitation and the origin and evolution of our universe.

The beautiful consistency of the cosmological tests with the Lambda CDM theory for structure formation maybe is particularly impressive to me because I spent so much of the last 15 years studying alternatives; you can trace through astro-ph my history of proposals that were viable when submitted but soon ruled out by advances in measurements of the angular distribution of the 3K thermal background radiation. But the constraints from the cosmological tests are not yet much more numerous than the assumptions in Lambda CDM and related models; it's too soon to declare closure of the cosmological tests.

Great Circles

You would think with this uncertainty, that I had answered my own question about what Peter Woit has done, in terms of offering some substantiative understanding for rejection of string theory. But it doesn't.

Sometimes we rely on the roads taken by Webber, Wheeler and Kip, and those who understood well the consequence of gravitational considerations, to further enhance these specualtive journies and to better explore the bulk that might have varying attributes?

The theory of relativity predicts that, as it orbits the Sun, Mercury does not exactly retrace the same path each time, but rather swings around over time. We say therefore that the perihelion -- the point on its orbit when Mercury is closest to the Sun -- advances

.

What am I saying here? You mean, that in the primordial understanding there are extensions of what could be thought of in terms of strength and weakness, in gravitational terms? I would most certainly like to see the light shining in these circumstances.:)But like anything of course, we like to LIGOlize these terms for further consideration. Don't we?

Let us see how these great physicists used harmonic oscillators to establish beachheads to new physics.

Bubble world

Using a rubber band analogy over top of a ball is a interesting way to approach the circle used, and the energy determinations found of value in calculating 1r radius(KK Tower) of that same circle, as you move to the top. But if you move it along a length and you find that you can calculate the difference in this length by the changes in the energy valuations?



It’s how you look at this space inside the bubble versus outside the bubble. John Baez might look at it on the outside as such above recognizing well the lines connectin flip and change depending on the energy demonstrated in a quantum grvaity model? While the inside of the bubble is dictated by some other means of interpretation? From the inside, a soccer ball universe(poincare structure) would seem so appropriate but here Max Tegmark has answer this view, through Wmap views?



For me, I would look at the surface of the bubble and the rainbows that could shimmer across it’s surface. We would be defining the shape of the bubble in a way we had not considered before? Moving sound in analogy to the world of gravitational considerations how would this view be considered now in context of bubble technologies?



Using circles as energy determination seems viable as they travel the length, but it becomes much more diffiuclt when you are trying to merge these bubbles, it looks discrete, when the lines are joining while curvature defines the connection between the two? You see the bubbles have a outer structure. As these circles merge, it is not past the knowledge to coisder that the path integral approach is being exemplified.

Running contrary to the view of bubble world, the images of a vast systems of cosmic strings that would flash across a universe may seem very interesting as I gaze from artistic perception about the flash of a lightening strike? That ignited new possibilties into expression, new life in the universe?

Quantum gravity, the as yet unconsummated marriage between quantum physics and Einstein's general relativity, is widely (though perhaps not universally) regarded as the single most pressing problem facing theoretical physics at the turn of the millennium. The two main contenders, ``Brane theory/ String theory'' and ``Quantum geometry/ new variables'', have their genesis in different communities. They address different questions, using different strategies, and have different strengths (and weaknesses).

What is Quantum Gravity?

Quantum gravity is the field devoted to finding the microstructure of spacetime. Is space continuous? Does spacetime geometry make sense near the initial singularity? Deep inside a black hole? These are the sort of questions a theory of quantum gravity is expected to answer. The root of our search for the theory is a exploration of the quantum foundations of spacetime. At the very least, quantum gravity ought to describe physics on the smallest possible scales - expected to be 10-³⁵ meters. (Easy to find with dimensional analysis: Build a quantity with the dimensions of length using the speed of light, Planck's constant, and Newton's constant.) Whether quantum gravity will yield a revolutionary shift in quantum theory, general relativity, or both remains to be seen.

Cosmic Strings Revisited

This high energy consideration does this, as well as directs the mind to consider the cosmological evidence that lays before us now. Dimensional interpretation, has to have it's basis contained within this whole view. With the cosmic string we are only defining a period of time with in the whole expression of this same universe? This would inlcude Pre bang scenarios and how these must be included.

Cosmic Superstrings Revisitedby Joseph Polchinski

Thus far we have quoted upper bounds, but there are possible detections of strings via gravitational lensing. A long string will produce a pair of images symmetric about an axis, very different from lensing by a point mass. Such an event has been reported recently

Universe INside a Box




Lens candidates in the Capodimonte Deep Field in vicinity of the CSL1 object by Sazhin M.V.1, Khovanskaya O.S.1, Capaccioli M.2,3, Longo G.3,4,Alcal´a J.M. 2, Silvotti R.2, Pavlov M.V.2

In Paper I we discussed the strange properties of CSL1: a peculiar object discovered in the OACDF which spectroscopic investigations proveed to be the double undistorted image of an elliptical galaxy. Always in Paper I we showed that CSL1 could be interpreted as the first case of lensing by a cosmic string.

In the present work, starting from consideration that a cosmic string is an elongated
structure which produces non local effects we investigated the statistics of lens candidates around the CSL1 position.

Supersymmetry

There is no branch of mathematics, however abstract, which may not some day be applied to phenomena of the real world.

— Nikolai Lobachevsky


John Ellis:

Extensions of the Standard Model often contain more discriminatory parameters, and this is certainly true of supersymmetry, my personal favourite candidate for new physics beyond the Standard Model. One of the possibilities suggested by supersymmetry is that Higgs bosons might distinguish couple differently to matter

Without consideration of that early universe, the quantum interpretation doesn't make sense unless you include it in something whole?



Lubos said,

There are also many other, indirect ways how can we "go" back in time. This is what evolution, cosmology, and other fields of science are all about.

   Unsymmetrical-cooling-gravity weaker
              Expanding
            \            /
             \          /
              \        /
              _\      /___
             /  \    /    /
            /    \  /    /
           /      \/    /  --------300,000 years
          /            /          Gravity strong
          -------------           Symmetrical
                ^
                I
            seedlike
           
                    
     Q-------------Quark measure is stronger
            \        /
             \      /
              \    /
               \  /
               Q--Q
                                     

Symbolically how do you create a inclusive system, but to look at alien and foreign ways in which this logic might force you to consider the interactivity of a theory of everything? Greater quark distance, greater energy, higher gravitational field generation. The field around this distance, and supersymmetrical realization bring us closer to the source of the energy creation, closer to the source of the universe's beginnings

....to consider such eneregies within the sphere of M, at a quantum level, as well at such cosmological scales."

The Bubble Universe / Andre Linde's Self Creating Universe

These are the theories discussed in class. The bubble universe concept involves creation of universes from the quantum foam of a "parent universe." On very small scales, the foam is frothing due to energy fluctuations. These fluctuations may create tiny bubbles and wormholes. If the energy fluctuation is not very large, a tiny bubble universe may form, experience some expansion like an inflating balloon, and then contract and disappear from existence. However, if the energy fluctuation is greater than a particular critical value, a tiny bubble universe forms from the parent universe, experiences long-term expansion, and allows matter and large-scale galactic structures to form.

The "self-creating" in Andre Linde's self-creating universe theory stems from the concept that each bubble or inflationary universe will sprout other bubble universes, which in turn, sprout more bubble universes. The universe we live in has a set of physical constants that seem tailor-made for the evolution of living things.

It is very difficult sometimes to bring another individuals view in line with the vast resources that could point the mind to consider the whole thing?



If you did not have a encompassing philosophy, and I know this word is dirty to some, but without pointing to a basis for which the universe sprang, then such topological features would never make sense.

So you direct the thinking to what the early universe looked like(?), and it's potential for expression. A lot of things are going on that are not considered geometrically/topologically unfolding, which hide within the basis of expression. So you have to use analogies to nudge the mind into possible structural considerations, with evidence of graviton production?

Notes on Hyperspace Saul-Paul Sirag

The rule is that for n hidden dimensions the gravitational force falls off with the inverse (n + 2 ) power of the distance R. This implies that as we look at smaller and smaller distances (by banging protons together in particle accelerators) the force of gravity should look stronger and stronger. How much stronger depends on the number of hidden dimensions (and how big they are). There may be enough hidden dimensions to unify the all the forces (including gravity) at an energy level of around 1 TeV (1012 eV), corresponding to around 10-19 meters. This would be a solution to the hierarchy problem of the vast difference in energy scale between the three standard gauge forces and gravity. This is already partly solved by supersymmetry (as mentioned previously); but this new idea would be a more definitive solution--if it were the right solution!