Symmetry: Dimensions of Particle Physics

I thought it important that I present the infomrtaion that was tied to John Ellis's article in previous thread below and what was happening in regards to Microstate blackhole recognition.

Let it Rain
The most energetic particles in the universe have a message for us. The gigantic Pierre Auger Southern Observatory, still under construction in Argentina, is already trying to decipher it.
By Davide Castelvecchi

Most people I have read reveal the silence of common information, as a realization of Blackholes as the cosmological design, we like to play with. But when it comes to testing these extra dimensions, imagine indeed, that such length's we go too, helps us to adjust to what happens around us everyday.

From this conceptualization, much has changed in the propspective views? Staunch supportors of rejection, do not realize what could be implied of the extra energy dissappearing and how you would measure it, in our everyday surroundings?.

I give a philospohical explanation to help explain the realization of how we see in these extra dimensions The earlyhsiory of extending these ideas, calls for more educative functions with those who do not understand this extension and theoretics going out on this limb. Should it be so easily dismissed?


If you do not follow this history, you will never understand what Nima Arkani-Hamed, Sava Dimopoulos, and Gia Dvali been doing with extra dimensions. There is a conceptual feature here that I have spoken too in regards to gravity that few understand.

So as we see Einstein's Bubble, we come to recognize the consistancy with which we would engage information that arises from such bubbles being burst. They give us information about the contents of these spaces, and from such light, we wonder what has been revealled? Cosmologiclaly the whole universe is teaming with the understanding that there can never be this zero function? To have realize it is a very dynamcial process that is continous and cyclical in nature?

Underlying this view of a cyclical nature, is the realization that such events are geometrically/topologically driven and schematically express the whole frame work of this discussion. How suttle it is sometimes, that we would be dismayed by physicists who are speaking about the geometrics/topological functions, to realize they are incorporating the realizations of this contraction/expansive feature, not only in the cosmo, but in how we see into the nature around us now.

Of course this is from a junior mind on these things in terms of education, but hopefully the vsion and eyesight, is well enough that such discriptions displayed, has viable perspectives to share?

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.

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!

What Pattern Emerges?

Problem solvers have a way of getting to the heart of the issues, and unfortunately when ones engages competent minds like Peter Woit in the world? Whose sign post is,"anti-string with no explanation"? This is simple in the minds of the general public? It then becomes a rant, without a substantial basis? Why? Because he had no platform with which to refute?

So this attempt was fruitless, in wondering why strings should not be.

What I did find viable in looking for myself, is finding out where strings applicable features pervaded and what they were describing. Both bottum up and top down have to find approaches that emerge from a place that asks us to map this progress, and there is only one place that allows me to understand this operation.

The spectrum.

When you look at Glast operations this idealization of using the spectrum in cosmological discernation, helped to clarify why the move of strings to a cosmological operation platform was necessary from a experimental and scientific undertanding. Why was this move important?

It had to do with the amounts of energy needed to explore the principles of reductionism? How could we extend reductionism to a cosmological question about the origins of our beginning? There were no limitations as to the question of the energy that could be displayed for us all to wonder on that cosmological pallete, and here Relativity Ruled.

While complexity, asks us about the means of what is established in the forms, stands for us in our observations, as existing? Many people feel safe in what they can see?

I looked for comparative features. Like how ideas could emerge and as a good example of what math could issue from the minds of those whose good observation could speak about natures manfestations.

How good are the observatory minds of mathematicians? That would systematically describe for us this idealization of quantum reality and Relativity to join in a way that makes sense?

Macroscopic and microcosmo perceptions joined?

You say Time? Julian Barbour wants to do away with Time? Yet his goal is the same? He calls Time a human construct? What isn'taside from everythng else that we don't see? Science reveals a deeper truth?

Killing Time

Barbour posits that time is, in fact, an illusion - a measure imposed on the world by humanity. He explains this with the concept of a 'now', which he describes as a snapshot in time - a completely frozen, self-contained instant (much like a Polaroid photograph). Time is simply the measure of the space between two separate and unrelated 'nows.'

BarryTo offer that I am an engineer and a sculpture with a carear of problem solving. To offer that making me understand the final solution is to achieve making it clear to anyone.

I am somewhat like a philosopsher as you are, minus, the engineering, yet I am quite capable of peering past the veil that good minds construct.

In the end, what is taken with you might be the realization that of all the thought forms we have estanblished and created. The illusion that we move through, hides a deeper truth, and we were emersed within it the whole time. Science, verified the anomalies that we saw?

How much power then could we grant the mind who escapes this realization, to find that all the thoughts that have ever existed, were weighted with the gravity that held us to earth? That the forms, revealled a deeper realization of their beginnings?

As the temperature cooled, the solification was final and so was the idealization that manifested from the idea.

When is a pipe a pipe? Is a question about what supergravity reveals in the forms manifestation. Crystalization. What pattern emerges?


Betrayal of Images" by Rene Magritte. 1929 painting on which is written "This is not a Pipe"

Yet probablistic in nature, how could such things arrange themselves as they have?

There is a deeper question here about the reality. If the idea is born in mind how would it not burn up, comparative to the beginning of our universe? Yet nature has supplied a good analogy of bubbles that form, rise to the surface, and this could have been information that arose from the fifth dimension? It all arose form the mind of the subconsious? It was always closer to the source. Why Ramanujan and Einsteins note taking in the subtle realms help to spur the incubation of reality to a deepr level of questions.

People might say indeed, that this departure point from the sane world of forms, is the moving further into the illusions? But if we cannot find a way to free ourselves, then surely, one will accept the consequences of there reality, as they take it with them?:)

Blackhole Production and Sonluminence

John Ellis:The quark-gluon plasma - if it exists and is being produced at RHIC - is considerably more complicated than was thought a few years ago. It seems to be an almost perfect, strongl-interacting fluid with very low viscosity. Theoretically, there have been some very interesting developments relating the plasma to string theory, as well as strongly-coupled supersymmetric gauge theory and ideas from condensed-matter physics, e.g., in nano-Kelvin Bose-Einstein condensates.

I have been interested in finding a consistent geometrical/topological system to undertanding our universe. When we look to the reductionistic principles, I couldn't help but be attracted to the idealization of bubble nucleation, and if such was the case, then such an idea had to emerge from a very hot time.

Can we entertain such bubble nucleations within the context of these experiments?

Would M theory have then found it's experimental counterpart? The Bose Nova and Jet idea from collapsing bubbles has been part of the vision I speculated in what Heisenberg saw in the geometrodynamics of a nuclear explosion. See, not only were we detonating a nuclear reaction(gravitational collapse), but we were doing something beyond the perception, by going to the heart of these particle collisions.

Part of this process for me, was looking for a situable framework in which the gravitational collpase could induce the geometrics /topological explanations that would go hand in hand with these processes. So as theoretical this may sound, before such plasmatic states of existance are developed, what would we see at this level in relations to such bubble nucleations?


The second plume of antimatter was unexpected and has yet to be explained. "The origin of this new and unexpected source of antimatter is a mystery," said Northwestern University physics professor William Purcell.


In the Bose NOva such jets would seem beyond the approach of the micrososmic idealization but if such consistancies could exist, how would we describe the relationship between the very large to the very small? The geoemtrics/topological would have to be compatible?

So in looking for this way in which such energy could go through a increase to generate the needed energy, the collapse of the blackhole would initiate this energy production by tapping the source?

Such Gravitonic condensation would have initiated the booms by contracting the blackhole. Such allegorical relations were developing in my mind about how such gravitons could amassed from such intiated responses, that I looked to sonoluminece as to how such nuclear reaction could have been initiated for energy creation?

I then saw such relations on how grvatons would have been move within the balckhole in comparative sounds vibration being moved witin t ebubbles for reaction. All highly speculative on my part and of course needing correction.

Civilizations Within the Cosmo

In the recent article ‘Conflict between anthropic reasoning and observation’ (gr-qc/0303070) Ken D. Olum, using some inflation-based ideas and the anthropic premise that we should be typical among all intelligent observers in the Universe, arrives at the puzzling conclusion that ‘we should find ourselves in a large civilization (of galactic size) where most observers should be, while in fact we do not’. In this note we discuss the intriguing possibility whether we could be in fact immersed in a large civilization without being aware of it. Our conclusion is that this possibility cannot be ruled out provided two conditions are met, that we call the Subanthropic Principle and the Undetectability Conjecture. The Subanthropic Principle states that we are not typical among the intelligent observers from the Universe. Typical civilizations of typical galaxies would be hundreds of thousands, or millions, of years more evolved than ours and, consequently, typical intelligent observers would be orders of magnitude more intelligent than us. The Undetectability Conjecture states that, generically, all advanced civilizations camouflage their planets for security reasons, so that no signal of civilization can be detected by external observers, who would only obtain distorted data for disuasion purposes. These conditions predict also a low probability of success for the SETI project. We also argue that it is brane worlds, and not inflation, what dramatically could aggravate the ‘missing-alien’ problem pointed out first in the fifties by Enrico Fermi. August 2003

I know some people have to contend with the racial slurs of Martian ancestory, but really:)We are not alone?

In such a delightful mood, what has string theory spawned of itself? IMagine, the mathematics that could arise?



So lets say we are in the moment.:)Lets say, that the very existance of the dimenisonal attributes from our early universe arises from the planck epoch to now, are right here as of this moment. This would mean, that time, as measured, would speak to this dimensional significance, and would reveal that the minds capabilities are far removed from such emotive sufferings of a emotive being from Mars. The intellect is a finer color of yellow:)

String Theory, Universal Mind, and the Paranormal *



Brian D. Josephson
Department of Physics, University of Cambridge

A model consistent with string theory is proposed for so-called paranormal phenomena such as extra-sensory perception (ESP). Our mathematical skills are assumed to derive from a special ‘mental vacuum state’, whose origin is explained on the basis of anthropic and biological arguments, taking into account the need for the informational processes associated with such a state to be of a life-supporting character. ESP is then explained in terms of shared ‘thought bubbles’ generated by the participants out of the mental vacuum state. The paper concludes with a critique of arguments sometimes made claiming to ‘rule out’ the possible existence of paranormal phenomena.

So do you See how the math of this geometry/topology must arise?

So you thought backtracking and th eissues therein were finished?. Well I could help but find that those who were disseting about Josephson, were also complaining about the same thing? You just can't win.

See:

ArchveFreedom

Initial Condition Determinations allow Predictability?

The Lorenz Attractor


One of the basis of using string theory to me, was to identify, the initial conditions? It would be like talking about the weather to me that we could engage such a topic as strings and then ask, how could a quantum mechanical system ever have any certainty?

HUP makes this clear I think and needs no introduction.

If you do not have some conception of the idealization that this principle is built upon, then how would you arrive at such bubble terminologies that would have raised the circumstances of those bubbles, from a home seething?

In the diagram above we can see both stable and unstable orbits as exhibited in a discrete dynamical system; the so-called standard map also known as the Cirikov-Taylor map. The closed loops correspond to stable regions with fixed points or fixed periodic points at their centers. The hazy regions are unstable and chaotic.

Sample Orbits of the Standard Map
(x, y) --> (x + y, y - 0.971635 sin (2px)/2p)
Different orbits are assigned different colors.

Such oceans, would have been a warm place for the new born to arise, and from such conditions, the idealization of new ideas becoming ever more amazing, that they could indeed have arisen from one's own subconcious?

This would mean that a theory of everything, would have to have a common language at it's basis of existance. Such predictabiltiy if ever used, would have found such small discrepancies in the initail conditions, might become very large in the macroworld?

From the first four lessons, you have learned that in a chaotic system, using the laws of physics to make precise long-term predictions is impossible, even in theory. Making long-term predictions to any degree of precision at all would require giving the initial conditions to infinite precision.

It was Socrates' turn to look puzzled.
"Oh, wake up. You know what chaos is. Simple deterministic dynamics leading to irregular, random-looking behavior. Butterfly effect. That stuff."
Of course, I know that," Socrates said in irritation. "No, it was the idea of dynamic logic that was puzzling me. How can logic be dynamic

The Elastic Nature?

As I have explained in a earlier link I am fascinated by the images of bubbles that were demonstrated through a way of thinking of the early universe to arise as Bubble Nucleation.

These images all show the 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-fold eversions in the upper left, lower left, upper right, and lower right cornerse, respectively. First we see an early stage, with p fingers growing in the p-fold everion. Next we see an intermediate stage when the fingers have mostly overlapped. Finally we see the four halfway models. For p odd, these are doubly covered projective planes.

If we had understood the early universe to have this continous nature and not have any tearing in it, how would such rotations have moved according to some method, that we might have considered the klein bottle or some other concept, that would lend itself to explain some of the ways and means, such dynamics could have unfold, enfolded and everted in the actions of that same cosmo?

It would be very difficult to speak to probability statistics, if you did not envelope the possibilites in some kind of configuration, or compared it to a Dalton Board. The Bell curve, or the pascal's triangle to consider how something could arise in certain situations? Might we have called the basis for a "new math" to emerge? If we had come to accept the departue point for Euclid's fifth postulate then what has we encouter inthe dynamcial world of Gauss? Einstein includethese calculation in the evolving feature of GR, so how could we not see this developing of a geometry that would lead to smooth and topological considerations?

The statistical sense of Maxwell distribution can be demonstrated with the aid of Galton board which consists of the wood board with many nails as shown in animation. Above the board the funnel is situated in which the particles of the sand or corns can be poured. If we drop one particle into this funnel, then it will fall colliding many nails and will deviate from the center of the board by chaotic way. If we pour the particles continuously, then the most of them will agglomerate in the center of the board and some amount will appear apart the center.

UNderstanding then that such cosmological event could be unfolding in the universe, visually to me, these configurations had to follow some pattern of consideration, or it just didn't make sense that such abstract math in topologies could ever work. So in looking at a previous comparison here the dynamical nature of the orbital seemed a valid comparison not only on a cosmological scale, but on a very small one as well?

A Holographical way of thinking?

Bubble Nucleation

Based on the no boundary proposal, I picture the origin of the universe, as like the formation of bubbles of steam in boiling water. Quantum fluctuations lead to the spontaneous creation of tiny universes, out of nothing. Most of the universes collapse to nothing, but a few that reach a critical size, will expand in an inflationary manner, and will form galaxies and stars, and maybe beings like us.

The images produce here of bubble formation are most pleasing to me, about what could have emerge from that early universe. If stringy components were evident and cosmic clumping rvealed as in previous post then how would such images lead to bubble nucleations as stringy cosmological patterns?

For such ideas to emerge in thinking there had to be a time when such conditions were conducive to bubble nucleation? Such energy considerations had to provide for these considerations to emerge so. How so?

First-order phase transitions (illustrated below) occur through the formation of bubbles of the new phase in the middle of the old phase; these bubbles then expand and collide until the old phase disappears completely and the phase transition is complete.



During a first-order phase transition, the matter fields get trapped in a `false vacuum' state from which they can only escape by nucleating bubbles of the new phase, that is, the `true vacuum' state.





G -> H -> ... -> SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) -> SU(3) x U(1). Here, each arrow represents a symmetry breaking phase transition where matter changes form and the groups - G, H, SU(3), etc. - represent the different types of matter, specifically the symmetries that the matter exhibits and they are associated with the different fundamental forces of nature

In order for such thinking to produce the cosmos then we would have to understand its early conditions.

Physically, the effect can be interpreted as an object moving from the "false vacuum" (where = 0) to the more stable "true vacuum" (where = v). Gravitationally, it is similar to the more familiar case of moving from the hilltop to the valley. In the case of Higgs field, the transformation is accompanied with a "phase change", which endows mass to some of the particles.