B Field Manifestations

Ah what the heck......I'll bite....let the skeptics converge in a harmonic convergence:)

Nigel Hitching

Sylvester Surfaces and the B field?

Are you a "gold fish" or a "Ant world person?" Are you a pigeon? Have you sent your vision into the things of nature, to explore it's potential in other ways?



Figure 2. Clebsch's Diagonal Surface: Wonderful

Rupert SheldarkeThe morphic fields of mental activity are not confined to the insides of our heads. They extend far beyond our brain though intention and attention. We are already familiar with the idea of fields extending beyond the material objects in which they are rooted: for example magnetic fields extend beyond the surfaces of magnets; the earth’s gravitational field extends far beyond the surface of the earth, keeping the moon in its orbit; and the fields of a cell phone stretch out far beyond the phone itself. Likewise the fields of our minds extend far beyond our brains.

The Faraday's, the Gauss's, the Reimanns learnt to see in other ways? Does this imply some spooky valuation beyond the confines of the brain's home?

"The gravitons behave like sound in a metal sheet," says Dvali. "Hitting the sheet with a hammer creates a sound wave that travels along its surface. But the sound propagation is not exactly two-dimensional as part of the energy is lost into the surrounding air. Near the hammer, the loss of energy is small, but further away, it's more significant."

So is it just a brain thingy, or is this "field real?" Some were not so unintelligent to "refute the aether" at one time. For we now understand what exists in the real spacetime valuations, beyond what is held to the brane, and see bulk manifestation, as real and populated. AS a extension, beyond those surfaces.

The Sound of Billiard Balls

Savas Dimopoulos:

Here’s an analogy to understand this: imagine that our universe is a two-dimensional pool table, which you look down on from the third spatial dimension. When the billiard balls collide on the table, they scatter into new trajectories across the surface. But we also hear the click of sound as they impact: that’s collision energy being radiated into a third dimension above and beyond the surface. In this picture, the billiard balls are like protons and neutrons, and the sound wave behaves like the graviton.

Are we execising the brains ability to get this toposense and geoemtrical revelation beyond straight lines and distances between points?

So what is a chaldni plate?:) helps you to see how sound is of value beyond the confines Faradays magnetic field lines, as real effects of that same magnet, and resonant coupling points. Exercising the potential of banging metal, helps the mind point to other places too. Playing pool, does too?:)

A Model for Thought?

Bernhard Riemann once claimed: "The value of non-Euclidean geometry lies in its ability to liberate us from preconceived ideas in preparation for the time when exploration of physical laws might demand some geometry other than the Euclidean." His prophesy was realized later with Einstein's general theory of relativity. It is futile to expect one "correct geometry" as is evident in the dispute as to whether elliptical, Euclidean or hyperbolic geometry is the "best" model for our universe. Henri Poincaré, in Science and Hypothesis (New York: Dover, 1952, pp. 49-50) expressed it this way.

See:

Science and Hypothesis

Rasmus said:

If you accept mathematical platonism, which is by far the prevalent philosophy of mathematics, at least among mathematicians, then you accept that to say that "x exists" is not necessarily to posit a single way of "existing": this very much depends on the x that is being spoken of.

This is a difficult one. The basis of existance arrived from nothing? What is nothing, and as soon as you do this, you have no frame work?

So one percieves that there is always something and from it? So we postulate X ?

In this platonist are discretism people, while the people who believe there is always something, an expression of the continuity of something called X? The true vacuum? The Quantum harmonic oscillator?

This all might be "abtraction to some" but it goes to the heart of any logic. In my case, I have to assume something always existed. So how do you deal with that logically?

Now you might be better educated then me, yet to me, numbers reveal a strange world of things we can't see yet we know exist. We have ways to measure it, and numbers in which to express it.

Now it would be very hard to assume that the average person, that scienitific progress can ever have any basis in what I just say above, but they are articluated from real issues that pervade thinking.

Now real things discrete as they are reveal matter constitutions, and the basis of this dealing with the likes of a Robert Mclauglin, or the likes of those who wish to expound on the continuity of expression. Leading into the understanding of Genus figures, this becomes a interesting analogy to way such continuity can be expressed?

Let me just say here that topologically this wold have arisen from a euclidean based perspective and move dynamically into revelations of curvature and such. So we know that above euclidean perspective and coordinated frames of reference this is discretism's way?

Dynamically the non-euclidean world condensing into a box? Some of us like things this way, but there are higher realms of thinking, that are transcendance to a platonist like me. :)

This is not a "superiority wording," but the true recognition of higher forms of mathematical derivation that the lay person would not understand. This intellectual was moved too, as I developed away from material things? :)

Here I am respective of the lineage of geometries, and anyone could interject in this consistancy. Some will be better equiped to move past the abstraction, while others perfectly comfortable with what I just said.

Is it transcendance? IN a way it is. In that we had moved intellectual academia into and away from emotive causations that might have ruled our thinking?

Is this feature absent from our intellectual developement, or is it more well defined? "Better perspective," as we move away from articulated matter constitutions and speak about "the finer things" above those same material things?

As one knows, one can become very abstract to the lay individual. While any who deal intellectually and emotively from the lay people, are not removed from and have perfected the emotive causes of memory inducement:?) Your history. Although we know of prospective change, as viable opportunites in the future. Continuity of expression.

Rasmus

But many are those who say that this is NOT what they mean when they say they believe in God. If atheists wish to argue against THESE religionists, then first they must reckon with what they are arguing against
No doubt.

How far can science go here? So they look for this beginning.

It's not easy if you assume nothing in the beginning and it is always much easier to change the models of perception. Adjust the view point, to see that a new model can change the way we always viewed things. That what model assumption does when you grokked it.

So like I said in the beginning, and where if such a continous nature is implied, can we deal with the idealization in science?

So if you took a look at calorimentric views and encapsulte this action you would find the point to which this beginning spoke? So a blackhole, is just not some sinkhole, but a transformation of a kind that we hope we can measure finding some means.

Energy in energy out if unbalanced leaves some room for questions? This dimensional perspective is very relevant in math, yet soe do not like to infer this and deem it unrealistic.

Early universe and glast determination have detailed discretism in interactions, as a viable means to measure. Yet we understand well the photon is massless, yet it can be indicative too. Thanks LIGO for engrandizement of the interferometer.

Artists such as M. C. Escher have become fascinated with the Poincaré model of hyperbolic geometry and he composed a series of "Circle Limit" illustrations of a hyperbolic universe. In Figure 17.a he uses the backbones of the flying fish as "straight lines", being segments of circles orthogonal to his fundamental circle. In Figure 17.b he does the same with angels and devils. Besides artists and astronomers, many scholars have been shaken by non-Euclidean geometry. Euclidean geometry had been so universally accepted as an eternal and absolute truth that scholars believed they could also find absolute standards in human behavior, in law, ethics, government and economics. The discovery of non-Euclidean geometry shocked them into understanding their error in expecting to determine the "perfect state" by reasoning alone.

Discretized 2D quantum gravity

Ancient Comparisons for thought

Now in itself, and of itself, the triangle when hit produces sound. IN this we understand the vibrational field that is generated. Hold your finger to a spot and where will the resonances slow down and come to a stop?

The chaldni plate is a easy experiment in using sound, "as an analogy of this higher quality." Some like the magnetic field, and its demonstration. Gaussian arc?
Imagine that the "earth based square," as the basis of mass considerations. Call it iron if you like.

Now in light of the triangle, or "trinity," what ever, lets say that the vibrational nature can be associated to this triangle.

That low notes that are slow in vibrations, also can reveal the mass considerations at the base , with greater vibration intensity at the peak? You now have a scale and iron as the core/base? We know there are certain energy values to elemental consideration?

How would you apply this to the chaldni plate? How would this apply to the world at large. How would you apply this in yourself?

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.

Left or Right Brain Doesn't Matter, When your In The Dimenisons?

Einstein in response tyo Minkowski's Space World: Since there exist in this four dimensional structure [space-time] no longer any sections which represent "now" objectively, the concepts of happening and becoming are indeed not completely suspended, but yet complicated. It appears therefore more natural to think of physical reality as a four dimensional existence, instead of, as hitherto, the evolution of a three dimensional existence

If we recognize the valuation of what exists regardless of the things that would hold the photon for consideration, the realization is, that the inetrplay would have revealled the Halo in definition of that gravitational radiation?

THE NOTION OF DIMENSION IN GEOMETRY AND ALGEBRAYuri I. Manin

“A natural or acquired predilection towards geometric or algebraic thinking and respective mental objects is often expressed in strong pronouncements, like Hermann Weyl’s exorcising “the devil of abstract algebra” who allegedly struggles with “the angel of geometry” for the soul of each mathematical theory. (One is reminded of an even more sweeping truth:

This goes back to the origins of the math, as to whether it is manufactured or is natural? Some of these distinctions are self evident as we look at Pascal's triangle for a selection of what may arize out of what might be called quantum geometry. We had to understand it's origins and the distant functions that would have been revealled? We also understood where such a view would have become realizaed in the detrminations of the nergy that was produced and the curvatures that would be inherent in this scalable feature relegated to dimension.



If the brain resonates, then it may become aware of the undercurrents that would subjectively be realized in the subconscious, to have understood that it too was capable of determining the outcome to a pressupposed course of action taken in life? Chaldni plates, but much subtler in the brain's organization?

The subconcious was able to predict the outcome of the actions that have been set, by the actualization of consensus. Ramanujan moduli forms may have, from what I understood found such expressions and spoken to the predictabiltiy of outcome, in relations to what I have just said above.

Einstein's usage:
We can distinguish various kinds of theories
in physics. Most of them are constructive.
They attempt to build up a picture of the more
complex phenomena out of the materials of a
relatively simple formal scheme from which
they start out. Thus the kinetic theory of gases
seeks to reduce mechanical, thermal, and
diffusional processes to movements of molecules
-- i.e., to build them up out of the hypothesis of
molecular motion. When we say that we have
succeeded in understanding a group of natural
processes we invariably mean that a constructive
theory has been found which covers the
processes in question.
Along with this most important class of
theories there exists a second, which I will
call 'principle-theories'; These employ the
analytic, not the synthetic, method. The elements
which form their bases and starting-point are not
hypothetically constructed but empirically
discovered ones, general characteristics of
natural processes, principles that give rise to
mathematically formulated criteria which these
separate processes or the theoretical
representations of them have to satisfy. Thus
the science of thermodynamics seeks by
analytical means to deduce necessary conditions,
which separate events have to satisfy, from the
universally experienced fact that perpetual
motion is impossible.
The advantages of the constructive theory
are completeness, adaptability, and clearness,
those of the principle theory are logical
perfection and security of the foundations.
The theory of relativity belongs to the latter
class. In order to grasp its nature, one needs
first of all to become acquainted with the
principles on which it is based. Before I go
into these, however, I must observe that the
theory of relativity resembles a building
consisting of two separate stories, the special
theory and the general theory. The special
theory, on which the general theory rests,
applies to all physical phenomena with the
exception of gravitation; the general theory
provides the law of gravitation and its relations
to the other forces of nature.
Found in: "What is the Theory of Relativity?",
Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, Three Rivers
Press, p. 228-9.

Part of the difficulty in understanding the analogies to scientific pursuite is the relationship what might be drawn to the "idea"? Like sound, consolidation in nodal points lines of the Chaldni plate. Such predictive features of the marble drop of course ask us to question what outcome waould be a viable model to what might be demonstrated in the Bell curve?

Quantum gravity models in the membranes show nodal point flips as in the monte carlo model for comprehesnion. Demonstrates the triangular function of this energy, and becomes quite pronouced, the greater the energy?


We do not know for sure how particles get their mass. The current best idea is that they acquire it by interacting with a field (like a gravitational field), known as the Higgs field. The more strongly a particle interacts with this field, the greater its
mass. The field is expected to produce a new particle called the Higgs particle.

INherent in the quest for the appropriate visaulization of course depends greatly on where these abstractions exist? Without this ocean in which we are immersed, it would make no sense to speak about maths which do not arise into fractorialized states of existance. Not arisng from states of nothinness, but from states of possibile outcomes?

Illusions and Miracles

Abbott was certainly aware of these ideas although he did not express any interest in them. However, they must have represented some fascination to him on one level, since they raised from a different viewpoint one of his primary concerns, namely the relationship between illusion and miracle. If what we perceive as a miraculous event, contrary to the laws of nature, later appears as the quite natural manifestation of some reality we had not previously recognized, then we have to re-evaluate the whole situation in the light of the new knowledge. What had appeared to be contradictory and not worthy of belief or acceptance now becomes a set of new facts that can be reconciled with a larger body of knowledge. One lesson from this is that we should not be dependent on miracles as the basis for our beliefs, either in spiritualism or in conventional religions

.


The title of this post was derived from the information I had travelled through and highlighted above.

In this picture, the billiard balls are like protons and neutrons, and the sound wave behaves like the graviton.

There are some importmat considerations that must be given here to the analogies that a pool table brings to us, and what the collsion of these two particles might mean in terms of the thrid dimension as sound. But I want to add to this thought following of Peter Steinberg. Peter points us to look forward the new roles movie and television will play for us. Black Hole (2005) (TV)


Peter Steinberg:

The creepy part of these kind of discussions is that one doesn't say that RHIC collisions "create" black holes, but that nucleus-nucleus collisions, and even proton-proton collisions, are in some sense black holes, albeit black holes in some sort of "dual" space which makes the theory easier.

Playfully I have extended the idealization for sound by moving them in concert to a two dimenisional chaldni plate for perspective. This represents the lines of two points that might have demonstrated in the monte carlo effect, in terms of quantum gravity.

For those who have followed the topics I have been examining will notice most definite inferences to dimensions, and how we might have viewed these in todays world of the sciences. It is not always easy to have a complete view here that would have satisfied those who were less then kind to such views. That it should contain some geometrical definition.

For instance, many would have never understood that Maxwell was interested in these higher dimensions, as was Gausss and Riemann. For the general public, our introduction is of course Michio Kaku in Hyperspace. The overlay Michio represents, is a early interest he had that allowed us to flex the mind's capabilities in how we might see the world that intrigued Einstein as he came to recognize what was taking place in using this geometry.