Atlas and Proton-proton Collisions

Depth of Perception

I am responding to the link here on Cosmic Variance and the related article, Cosmic Violence. I do not want to tie up their space, so my "further response" is being given here.

I speak of Glast in the context of that "Window on the Universe" view. This helps to orientate our deeping recognition of those events, but does not include the realization of where high energy considerations are taking us as well.:)

What is happening at the beginning of our Universe? High energy implications and lower energy determinations reveal prospective views about that same universe? How is it such a view created by such particle collisions could not be drawn to a certain time in our universe?

By getting to the "high energy times", we are also getting to the circle (think the planck epoch to now) valuation of that early universe? There are always results of energy dissipaton of these early cosmological events, so it needed a consistant way in which to look at this?

The machine, dubbed ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS), is one of four facilities to be located at a powerful accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), now under construction near Geneva, in Switzerland.

If we were to accept the circle and strong curvature as evident from our early universe considerations, (think of the circle and the planck epoch diagram as a blackhole?), then what happens when our views have been taken to suspersymmetrical points of view and the whole picture becomes locked within the model computation that Andrey Kravtsov does for us. The relaization is that this circle when taken down to planck has extremely strng gravitational considerations, and when and how do we reach this level of consideration on the time and birth of this universe?

IN Regards to Mathematical Constructs

Such an article presented by Peter Woit (How Much Mathematics Does A Theoretical Physicist Need To Know?), had me thinking in terms of what the quoted italicized statement below might mean in terms of the consistancy of mathematics developed?

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=256#comment-4918(my comment below)Click on post and you now see the numbered posts alignment. What's the point?

Plato said:

If the Horizon exists as a mathematical construct, would we dissallow any mathematical counterpart that would lead from this, to incorporate other perspectives?

"D-branes provide the fundamental quantum microstates of a black hole that underlie black hole thermodynamics"

Developement of the mathematics would have been consistent then in how strng theory had developed?

So we know getting to the depth of perception necessary, had to include physics views here in order to develope the framework. High energy consideration could not have done it on it's own, so the topic is masked in theoretical definitions that we are not to accustomed too?:)

Yet it deals with a specific time frame in the developement of the early universe that is below Planck length. Below the "Planck epoch" (this holds a measureable time frame just after the beginning of the universe?)is the realization and "time valuation" that we assign this new perspective view, when we take physics in hand and abstract mathematics to it's fruitation?

While the link has been maintained to Peter Woits Blog, the post has not. It had been supplemented by Dickt's post.

This won't deter the documents and valuation of what string theory had to offer, and refused acknowledgement by Peter Woit to the progress, such developements might have taken string theory too?:)Tricky post like I wrote, acknowledges not only string theories position but Lee Smolins pursuate as well:)

Quantum Gravity: The Blackhole

Drawing Plane and Coordinate Systems More information is given here in Wiki.

There is no "distance" separating cosmological events, from the cubic centimeter in the corner of the room? I have to tell you why I see this, and what lead me to conclude such a thing. As I relay at bottom of page, this will be the subject of the next posted thread.

Imagine spreading such malicious comments as those in bold below?:)

Brian Greene

Sure. One of the strangest features of string theory is that it requires more than the three spatial dimensions that we see directly in the world around us. That sounds like science fiction, but it is an indisputable outcome of the mathematics of string theory. So the question is, where are these extra dimensions? One suggestion is that they're all around us, but they're small relative to the dimensions that we directly see and therefore are more difficult to detect.

I guess the link to source is good enough sometimes but not the page with which the url exists?:)

Sometimes all it takes is a concept to fuel the direction with which we might presume to deal with this world of the spacetime fabric. Brian Greene surmizes, and in a synoptic mode aligns our view for consideration, or a Lee Smolin, in developing Three roads, previews quantum gravity approaches for consideration. This "lineage", is developed in this sense.

The Fabric of the Cosmo, by Brian Greene, is a good source for inspiration, on my "The Fifth Dimension, is the Spacetime Fabric." I am gone in a whisper, and advancement is placed for those who will exceed our limitation in how we percieve the world. This is the way it has always been. On and upward.:)

Good people like Gerard t'Hooft help direct our attention in a most appropriate way, even amidst the ramble of rejection of any theoretical position. Once the comment is established, then indeed we move ahead to wonder and draw the conclusions we do, with a whole page of such reasoning. This whole blog is filled with this central idea.

Imagine molecules in the corner cubic centimeter of the room( nice visulaization for a strting point), and all that exists in this space is contained, all, the information of the universe at large? Would I have triggered ideas in the notion that Pierre Auger seen something unusual in cosmic interactive features of our current earth, as a playing field for particle reductionism? In face of LHC and all the wonderful toys that have been produced to extend vision in a reductionistic world? You have to remember John Ellis here, is how I ascent to views in these two different ways.

Gerard t' Hooft:

The predominant force controlling large scale events in the Universe is the gravitational one. The physical and the mathematical nature of this force were put in an entirely new perspective by Albert Einstein. He noted that gravitation is rooted in geometric properties of space and time themselves. The equations he wrote down for this force show a remarkable resemblance with the gauge forces that control the sub-nuclear world as described in the previous paragraph, but there is one essential difference: if we investigate how individual sub-atomic particles would affect one another gravitationally, we find that the infinities are much worse, and renormalization fails here. Under normal circumstances, the gravitational force between sub-atomic particles is so weak that these difficulties are insignificant, but at extremely tiny distance scales, of the order of 10-33 cm, this force will become strong. We are tempted to believe that, at these tiny distance scales, the fabric of space and time is affected by quantum mechanical phenomena, but exactly how this happens is still very mysterious. One approach to this problem is to ask: under which circumstance is the gravitational force as strong as it ever can be? The answer to this is clear: at the horizon of a black hole. If we could understand the peculiar physical phenomena that one expects at the horizon of a black hole, and if we could find a meaningful description of its quantum mechanical laws, then perhaps this would open up new perspectives.

Smolins interpretive stance of the blackhole horizon( glast determnations fuel this venture into recognition of a discrete approach to measure,) in what is emitted on a cosmological scale. Others who paved the way for this horizon problem, take us back, Hawking, to the pre-established roads to wonder, where today does subject sit? How well in minds has this conclusion played out, that we have ventured forth in a wonderful way to approach this in such a theoretical fashion. That only "pure thought", mathematics, could have paved the way of where physics will continued on in physical interpretation.

I will introduce the idea of this "membrane analogy in the cubic centimentor:)" for further consideration, shortly after I attend to getting wood fuel for the winter months today.

UV Fixed Point

Clifford draws our attention to further talks here in his post and directs us to what Jacque Distler has to say.

I must say this is a refreshing look with Jacques contribution to further the layman point of view. Such links are worth while in the advancement of the "sentient being" that Clifford might have thought the computer world could have developed into once we assign our geometries to that world, as we would of numerical relativity and the designs we get from this look. Thomas Banchoff should be commended forthis contribution to fifth dimensional idealism in the computer world, with the notion of graphics design as a whole new approach to this understanding. Who said mathematics guys are a little to abstract for the laymen view?

Jacque Distler:

Yeah. I had hoped I was being clear.

I meant a nontrivial (non-Gaussian) UV fixed point. A Gaussian fixed point would be too much to hope for.

Now you must know that to see what he was saying, "Gaussian coordinates" determined below this post helped me to relate what was being said here. But more then this the statement of Jacques orientates what might be further implied and what had missed in my thinking.

So just to carry on a bit with this point "P" in gaussian coordinated of frame of UV, what realization exists that we could not find some relevance here in the geometry to have further exploited the mind's capabilties by venturing into the Wunderkammern of thinking. By association, of Nigel Hitchin's "B Field manifestations geometries" to realize that althought these might be limited to what Jacque is saying , then what value this geometry if we can not see the landscape as something real in time variable measures?

That we might attribute a globe, that while spherical in it's design, holds much more in it's determination. That while it might issue it's electronmagnetic field of lines, that it too could have found greater relevance in the issues of Quantum gravity, with those same inclinations of time variablenesss, that I allude too?



What am I missing that such events held to the brane in fermion distinction would not find boson production off the brane, as real as, the topic of time variableness that we might issue in geometrical feature of a globe. A globe, that is very bumpy indeed. Is this thinking limited in terms of landscape valuation? Not only in terms of brane and fermionic response, but of the real live correlation of the topic of branes in a more realistic sense, held to these geometries?

While indeed such B Field Manifestation becomes real in tangibles in our arguement of where our UV perspective might be held too, then "P" becomes of value in time variablemess, as a landscape ideology spread throughtout the brane world features? While it is also intriciately linked to our formation of landscape futher out in the recognition of the bumpy world?

So while we might see this landscape in terms of photon calorimetric association with Glast, what value besides gauusian coordinate might be freed, when we see dimensinal sigificance being represented with Glast as well. Is this thinking wrong?

Entanglement Interpretation of Black Hole Entropy

"Entanglement entropy" is the latest article posted by Lubos Motl. From this ideas are brought back for consideration, with Nigel and myself in trying to explain. I am not to swift sometimes in my explanations, so the inudation of links here direct underscore the probabilistic valuation one might assign perspective in relation to the topic assigned by Lubos in titled Link.



Plato said:

I was going after consensus in terms of how temperature on Bekenstein bound was seen in context of 5th dimenison and 5d comparisons.

Bekenstein image is very useful here as was Lee Smolins discription.

If not in your surprize(?) I do not think Lubos Motl and Lee Smolin are too far apart? Here is a better picture of the Lava lamp. The Window on the Universes, has extended our understanding here as well.



Entanglement Interpretation of Black Hole Entropy in String Theory

This allows the comparison of the entanglement entropy with the entropy of the field theory dual, and thus, with the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the black hole. As an example, we discuss in detail the case of the five dimensional anti-de Sitter, black hole spacetime

Glast determination in "calorimeric views" would be consistent the deeper look of gluonic perception at such levels? It would be hard to know this starting point yet the environment is conducive, non?

Three quarks indicated by red, green and blue spheres (lower
left) are localized by the gluon field.

A quark-antiquark pair created from the gluon field is
illustrated by the green-antigreen (magenta) quark pair on the right. These quark pairs give rise to a meson cloud around the proton.

The masses of the quarks illustrated in this diagram account for only 3% of the proton mass. The gluon field is responsible for the remaining 97% of the proton's mass and is the origin of mass in most everything around us.

Experimentalists probe the structure of the proton by scattering electrons (white line) off quarks which interact by exchanging a quantum of light (wavy line) known as a photon.

Remember that the age is determined by the dark matter density. Mathematically, the length is roughly the geometric mean of the mean free path and the distance light can travel without obstruction (the horizon scale).

Unexpected High energies of Cosmic Rays

Plato said:

I am thinking about Lee Smolin’s history here in terms of discrete measures ( I am developing a perspective here in relation that will be complied later) How this effected the the way Lee may have viewed the background. I don’t want to speak for Lee Smolin, but I would like to make it simple.:)

Can this difference be as simple as, “a determination between “being discrete, and implying continuity“?

Where strings implying only tree features, while the approach to glast, as a “new view” supported by "Doubly Special Relativity", that Rovelli and Lee produced? This basis and history is what I am compiling.

One can ask any question and have it loaded, with lots of information. But just trying to bring something to simple clarity, even in conceptual framesworks is not always easy, if you don' ask the question?

Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin limit

The Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin limit (GZK limit) is a theoretical upper limit on the energy of cosmic rays from distant sources.

This limit was computed in 1966 by Kenneth Greisen, Vadem Kuzmin and Georgi Zatsepin, based on interactions predicted between the cosmic ray and the photons of the cosmic microwave background radiation. They predicted that cosmic rays with energies over the threshold energy of 5×1019 eV would interact with CMB photons to produce pions. This would continue until their energy fell below the pion production threshold. Therefore, extragalactic cosmic rays with energies greater than this threshold energy should never be observed on Earth.

Unsolved problems in physics: Why is it that some cosmic rays appear to possess energies that are theoretically too high, given that there are no possible near Earth sources, and that rays from distant sources should have been absorbed by the cosmic microwave background radiation?A number of observations have been made by the AGASA experiment that appear to show cosmic rays from distant sources with energies above this limit (whimsically dubbed Oh-My-God particles). The observed existence of these particles is the so-called GZK paradox or cosmic ray paradox.

Anyway, this was brought up and the questioned asked, because I did understand something that even if it was based on theoretical definitions might have been ones that were different from another, and brought the scorn of high energy physicists to wonder, where such principles had been raised in terms of quantum gravity?

So lookng at Lee's position and it becomes clear when one does the research on cosmological scenarios, that no wonder you want the string theorist on side, in this debate.

John Ellis is a fine educator when it come to laying the simple view to avenues related to both High energy physics and the relation in Pierre Auger determination.

Imagine microstate blackholes, and I wonder what "this trigger is" that would make life so much easier if we could determine the background,versus non background debate in terms of these experimental positions?



So strings and Loop quantum are face to face here in our informational predictions, about outcomes of the background versus the non-background, and getting to the source of this debate, from a physics interpretation and a expeirmental one, has always been the quest I think, and one supported by Lee Smolin.

So what rationality might have issue from the basis of that theoretcial position, and like I said before, it seems what pubic relations the top scientists have with the public, is to lay the foundation at the front door in a simple a way as possible from the blogosphere. What other way is so simple and direct tot he public that such distance could now been narrow to someone like Clifford in Cosmic INvariance, speaking to this very subject. Any the link below this sets the tune, and here th econtinuation of th equestion I had there that has not been repsonded too, becuase of the layman underdevleoped view of where top theoretorcians reside.

I'll give it a stab anyway. There seems to be a certain romance I have with the subject, that does not require money from any avenue, and such grants, far from the layman's view that doing this for fun, has been most rewarding becuase it brought me to see in different ways in the bulk, that others in simple life care not, and walk their way.

Plato said:

Seeking clarity in relation to experimental propositions of Glast 2006 and how it shall support one’s position over another? Will it?

High energy relevance had to meet each other in a way that cosmologically had something to do with high energy perceptions in relation to the trigger? Link on name.

The “beginning”, as first principles? Robert Laughlin saids no to “first principles”?:)

Since it is hard to put a link within a link, I thought I better put link on name here as well.

I really hate quoting myself, but alas the move is to continue regardless, so onto, "Gubser and structure information."

Lubos Motl said:

Steve Gubser (from Princeton) has just gave an interesting talk at the joint seminar in which he tried to convince us that structure formation (the process in which the early clumps of matter and the first galaxies were born) is a very interesting topic in cosmology, even for string theorists, in which some signs of new physics may be found if one tries to reproduce the observations.

How indeed would one see gluonic perception at this level bringing us ever closer to views on the window of the universe, and such leaidng indicators has to bring some noton to what started in the beginning? Non?

Shakespearean Quandry Has Limits

As a measure how far can this be taken? Some like to think like Smolin, and Smolin's reference to Glast is a important one:)This defines his limits.

Others, have decided to go beyond this.:)

Kilometric Radiation?

So we use physics in ways to change the way we see? Here are some examles from the Cassini Project and Wikipedia.

Cassini Plasma Spectrometer (CAPS)
The Cassini Plasma Spectrometer (CAPS) is a direct sensing instrument that measures the energy and electrical charge of particles such as electrons and protons that the instrument encounters. CAPS will measure the molecules originating from Saturn's ionosphere and also determine the configuration of Saturn's magnetic field. CAPS will also investigate plasma in these areas as well as the solar wind within Saturn's magnetosphere.[1]

Cosmic Dust Analyzer (CDA)

The Cosmic Dust Analyzer (CDA) is a direct sensing instrument that measures the size, speed, and direction of tiny dust grains near Saturn. Some of these particles are orbiting Saturn, while others may come from other solar systems. The Cosmic Dust Analyzer onboard the Cassini orbiter is ultimately designed to help discover more about these mysterious particles, and significantly add to the knowledge of the materials in other celestial bodies and potentially more about the origins of the universe.[2]

Composite Infrared Spectrometer (CIRS)

The Composite Infrared Spectrometer (CIRS) is a remote sensing instrument that measures the infrared light coming from an object (such as an atmosphere or moon surface) to learn more about its temperature and what it's made of. Throughout the Cassini-Huygens mission, CIRS will measure infrared emissions from atmospheres, rings and surfaces in the vast Saturn system to determine their composition, temperatures and thermal properties. It will map the atmosphere of Saturn in three dimensions to determine temperature and pressure profiles with altitude, gas composition, and the distribution of aerosols and clouds. This instrument will also measure thermal characteristics and the composition of satellite surfaces and rings.[3]

Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer (INMS)

The Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer (INMS) is a direct sensing instrument that analyzes charged particles (like protons and heavier ions) and neutral particles (like atoms) near Titan and Saturn to learn more about their atmospheres. INMS is intended also to measure the positive ion and neutral environments of Saturn's icy satellites and rings.[4]

Imaging Science Subsystem (ISS)

The Imaging Science Subsystem (ISS) is a remote sensing instrument that captures images in visible light, and some in infrared and ultraviolet light. The ISS has a camera that can take a broad, wide-angle picture and a camera that can record small areas in fine detail. Scientists anticipate that Cassini scientists will be able to use ISS to return hundreds of thousands of images of Saturn and its rings and moons. ISS includes two cameras; a Wide Angle Camera (WAC) and a Narrow Angle Camera (NAC). Each uses a sensitive charge-coupled device (CCD) as its detector. Each CCD consists of a 1,024 square array of pixels, 12 μm on a side. The camera's system allows for many data collection modes, including on-chip data compression. Both cameras are fitted with spectral filters that rotate on a wheel—to view different bands within the electromagnetic spectrum ranging from 0.2 to 1.1 μm.[5]

Dual Technique Magnetometer (MAG)

The Dual Technique Magnetometer (MAG) is a direct sensing instrument that measures the strength and direction of the magnetic field around Saturn. The magnetic fields are generated partly by the intensely hot molten core at Saturn's center. Measuring the magnetic field is one of the ways to probe the core, even though it is far too hot and deep to actually visit. MAG's goals are to develop a three-dimensional model of Saturn's magnetosphere, as well as determine the magnetic state of Titan and its atmosphere, and the icy satellites and their role in the magnetosphere of Saturn.[6]

Magnetospheric Imaging Instrument (MIMI)

The Magnetospheric Imaging Instrument (MIMI) is both a direct and remote sensing instrument that produces images and other data about the particles trapped in Saturn's huge magnetic field, or magnetosphere. This information will be used to study the overall configuration and dynamics of the magnetosphere and its interactions with the solar wind, Saturn's atmosphere, Titan, rings, and icy satellites.[7]

Radio Detection and Ranging Instrument (RADAR)

The Radio Detection and Ranging Instrument (RADAR) is a remote active and remote passive sensing instrument that will produce maps of Titan's surface and measures the height of surface objects (like mountains and canyons) by bouncing radio signals off of Titan's surface and timing their return. Radio waves can penetrate the thick veil of haze surrounding Titan. In addition to bouncing radio waves, the RADAR instrument will listen for radio waves that Saturn or its moons may be producing.[8]

Radio and Plasma Wave Science instrument (RPWS)

The Radio and Plasma Wave Science instrument (RPWS) is a direct and remote sensing instrument that receives and measures the radio signals coming from Saturn, including the radio waves given off by the interaction of the solar wind with Saturn and Titan. The major functions of the RPWS are to measure the electric and magnetic wave fields in the interplanetary medium and planetary magnetospheres. The instrument will also determine the electron density and temperature near Titan and in some regions of Saturn's magnetosphere. RPWS studies the configuration of Saturn's magnetic field and its relationship to Saturn Kilometric Radiation (SKR), as well as monitoring and mapping Saturn's ionosphere, plasma, and lightning from Saturn's (and possibly Titan's) atmosphere.[9]

Radio Science Subsystem (RSS)

The Radio Science Subsystem (RSS) is a remote sensing instrument that uses radio antennas on Earth to observe the way radio signals from the spacecraft change as they are sent through objects, such as Titan's atmosphere or Saturn's rings, or even behind the sun. The RSS also studies the compositions, pressures and temperatures of atmospheres and ionospheres, radial structure and particle size distribution within rings, body and system masses and gravitational waves. The instrument uses the spacecraft X-band communication link as well as S-band downlink and Ka-band uplink and downlink.[10]

Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrograph (UVIS)

The Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrograph (UVIS) is a remote sensing instrument that captures images of the ultraviolet light reflected off an object, such as the clouds of Saturn and/or its rings, to learn more about their structure and composition. Designed to measure ultraviolet light over wavelengths from 55.8 to 190 nm, this instrument is also a valuable tool to help determine the composition, distribution, aerosol particle content and temperatures of their atmospheres. This sensitive instrument is different from other types of spectrometers because it can take both spectral and spatial readings. It is particularly adept at determining the composition of gases. Spatial observations take a wide-by-narrow view, only one pixel tall and 60 pixels across. The spectral dimension is 1,024 pixels per spatial pixel. Additionally, it is capable of taking so many images that it can create movies to show the ways in which this material is moved around by other forces.[11]

Visible and Infrared Mapping Spectrometer (VIMS)

The Visible and Infrared Mapping Spectrometer (VIMS) is a remote sensing instrument that is actually made up of two cameras in one: one is used to measure visible wavelengths, the other infrared. VIMS captures images using visible and infrared light to learn more about the composition of moon surfaces, the rings, and the atmospheres of Saturn and Titan. VIMS also observes the sunlight and starlight that passes through the rings to learn more about ring structure. VIMS is designed to measure reflected and emitted radiation from atmospheres, rings and surfaces over wavelengths from 0.35 to 5.1 mm. It will also help determine the compositions, temperatures and structures of these objects. With VIMS, scientists also plan to perform long-term studies of cloud movement and morphology in the Saturn system, to determine the planet's weather patterns.[12]

So how does String/M theory change the way we see?

The calorimeter design for GLAST produces flashes of light that are used to determine how much energy is in each gamma-ray. A calorimeter ("calorie-meter") is a device that measures the energy (heat: calor) of a particle when it is totally absorbed.

Smolin added his contribution to the string theory discussion on the new Cosmicvariance.com site that has been created by a group of people that offer perspective. In this case Sean Carroll posted a thread on Two Cheers for String theory, provoked some iteresting responses by minds who are at the forefront of these conversations.

I responded to this becuase I had been following both avenues Smolin spoke too, so I'll put my comment here as well.

This topic thread was develope from my reactions based on those who call people who are trying hard to integrate views of the natural world with the physics ideology of the topic of Strings?M theory, these fellows present. If they can not show us these new views as Smolin offers for inspection then what use the models and theories if no onne wants to se these work in the world we undrstand well by seeing around us?

While some people are looking for consistant means of determinations, others apply "conceptual situations" and bring forth comprehension of a kind. Now to this degree, that "gluonic perception is being adjusted" to see these values. The Smolins and others understood well the limitation of these views? Are there any?

Radio sounds from the source

All of the structures we observe in Saturn's radio spectrum are giving us clues about what might be going on in the source of the radio emissions above Saturn's auroras," said Dr. Bill Kurth, deputy principal investigator for the instrument. He is with the University of Iowa, Iowa City. Kurth made the discovery along with Principal Investigator Don Gurnett, a professor at the University. "We believe that the changing frequencies are related to tiny radio sources moving up and down along Saturn's magnetic field lines."

Has Sound, Changed the way we See?

Most of us understand the the aurora display do we not, and the resulting interactive play between the sun and the earth? The Auger experiment previously talked about and spoken too, by John Ellis, is a fine example of the diversity of interative features we can hope to see, as we examine the particle nature apart from the LHC rules of energy engagement, above and beyond the limits that have been imposed on us earthlings:)


The Fly's Eye and the Oh My God Particle

While the topic is produced for this conversation seems disjointed, the ideology of the string theorist is held to a boundry of thinking in my eyes that such a membrane( here I could link a toy model for comparison), and defined in this bubble context, as rudimentry as it appears in my mind's eye, it follows the developemental processes we see from the eulicidation Einstein offered us by joining Maxwell into the process unfolding in nature and to see the effect of any bulk production as a necessary step beyond the boudaries of this bubble?


Now in contrast I see the soapy bubble and light refraction dispalyed in such a lovely continuous flow over it's surface, that to me, it does not make sense if such auroric dispalyes are not to give us new ideas about the interactive feature of the sun with earth? Conceptually, thes ideas of hitting metal plates and such present new ideas in how dispersion across that plate could represent other ideas. What are those. Wel that's what I am trying to do is free the mind from th econstraints we had put on it in sucha strick language accompany those that step ahead of us in their own specualtions educationally followed doctrine. What new light and thinking patterns follow these people?

The auroral ionosphere is a natural emitter of radio waves, and many of these emissions are observable at ground level. Several types of radio emissions have been well documented using a variety of ground-based, stepped-frequency receivers (see reviews by LaBelle [1989] and LaBelle and Weatherwax, [1992]). In particular, auroral roar is a relatively narrowband emission at roughly 2 and 3 times the local electron cyclotron frequency ( ) [Kellogg and Monson, 1979; Kellogg and Monson, 1984; Weatherwax et al., 1993, 1995]. Much effort has been made in characterizing the seasonal, diurnal, and spectral characteristics of auroral roar to aid in determining its generation mechanism [e.g., Weatherwax et al., 1995.

See also:

http://www-pw.physics.uiowa.edu/plasma-wave/tutorial/examples.html

News articles shamelessy borrowed:

Space Music

The Musical Sounds of Space

'Sun Rings' Shares the Music of
Space

Quartet, Choir Debut NASA's 'Space Music'

Out of This World

Music of the Stars

Music of the Spheres

NASA Music Out of This World

Sun Rings

Turning Sounds From Space Into a Symphony

Science and Music Merge for Fall Concert

UI Space Physicist's Sounds of Space Inspire Work of Art

John Venn

The early historical work can be derived from personages. Helps sometimes to illucidate the avenue and abtractions that seem only fitted for the abstract mind?

Do people like to deal with such issues? I am finding that as I am learning, I am tryng to find the means with which to express myself, so that such a basis is understood when I bring togehter the thoughts I like to do, into other areas. So it is necessary to see how such abstract avenues play their role in my "fantasy journey's" and then introduce the deepr pursuate to explain myself more coherently.

A painting of John Venn by Charles E. Brock. Photograph by Christopher Hurst, Hamilton-Kerr Institute, University of Cambridge

John Venn (August 4, 1834 - April 4, 1923), was a British mathematician, who is famous for conceiving the Venn diagrams, which are used in many fields, including set theory, probability, logic, statistics, and computer science.

He was born in Hull, Yorkshire. He entered Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge in October 1853 and graduated in 1857. Shortly after graduating he was elected a fellow of the college. He was ordained as a deacon at Ely in 1858 and became a priest in 1859. In 1862 he returned to Cambridge as a lecturer in moral sciences.

So having lead one to the esence of this individual I wanted to introduce a journey that combined a few different avneues, and how I go to that point. But before I do this, the image with which I wanted to supply, will do wonders on the unification idea manifesting in my own mind.

Thomas Young's Double Slit Experiment

The double-slit experiment consists of letting light diffract through two slits producing fringes on a screen. These fringes or interference patterns have light and dark regions corresponding to where the light waves have constructively and destructively interfered. The experiment can also be performed with a beam of electrons or atoms, showing similar interference patterns; this is taken as evidence of the "wave-particle duality" explained by quantum physics.

Society and all it's function might have seemed beyond the approach of a method to determination that could underlie it's very existance by functions that would have never made sense had they not been curtailed to a way of seeing. I exploit this ability to see underneath society and its basis, by bringing together perspective, hopefully in a sound mangagement style and artistic endeavor, no less then the work of Lewis Carroll and his fictous name sake, that will be revealled soon enough.



This image below will serve it's purpose when it comes time, so being part of this overall post, this directs us to the amazing value of mathematicians as they exercizes their creatve abilities beyound the abstract frames they have give themself.

Lewis Carroll's fame is universal. I can easily cite a couple dozen books that mention him or quote from his books. Temptation to quote from Alice's experiences with which so many people can identify, is indeed great. But the trend may be reversing. In the introduction to a book I have recently come across, the author found it necessary to mention that in the whole of the book there is not a single reference to either Alice in Wonderland or Through the Looking Glass - the two books that made the name of Lewis Carroll a household item the world over. However, his other works are either forgotten or known far less. In real life he was a mathematician C. L. Dodgson with deep interest in symbolic logic and logical reasoning. I have described elsewhere one of his probability and the doublets puzzles.

Now for some, the Feynmen diagrams become a useful toy model for defining the interatcive phases, and for me, being Junior in these aspects, I come with a lot of speculation, but no less the need for something to hang my hand on. It was interetsing for me to see that such defintions and pathways would have been exemplified by such drawings to hold the perspectve to specific interactve phases.

Now a given wide a berth to my speculation, from Young to Feynmen, I saw this content from Dirac's early work, as example used the matrice design? The work of Feynmen, leading from this. Now not to spread the willy nilly fate of wrong information, I would have to qualify this statement, and I wil do so at a later date. I will watch for such statements in my journeies and draw from them for support, if given. I would not lesson this view, by stating the topological pathway would have been incorporated into a design of strings no less held to such views of feynmen lines, that it would have explained these interactve phases as well. I think peope do not understand this very well?

So the work her ehas been lead nto a area of math that defnes the thinking process I have in a way that might not have been considered before? I wil expound even greater to confuse the masses, by introdcution of other areas that I found explicable by uniting avsion of such phase as to ask what value would GHZ entnaglement serve, but to have found the questions of the like sof Gerard t' hooft haunting when it comes to the questions also posed by Penrose. Do we need a new quantum mechanical view?

This highlighted my thinking and of course directed it too the state of examination given by Smolin and others, as we expound greatly on the essecne of Thomas young and his expeirment, and the basis bneeded for detrmination of the Trigger?:) I bet some see the principals now shown as I lead into other areas soon?:)

You had to understand, that Alice and Bob serve their purposes in a strange wonderful way. That one asks where had the photon gone, in it's illustrous journey of possibile pathways, that we did not wonder what intiatied this process? Would such a signature have highlighted the view with the question of the rigger signifying some deeper inherent basis of existance. That signalled other views to manifest into the world of gravtonic perceptions, no less dictating our understanding of time variable measures?

The Looking Glast

The Trigger

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.

Why no new Einstein?

This article entitled above has been thought about in terms of the issue brought forth by Peter Woit and Lubos Motl rspectively.

When I seen Sean's post it brought back to me the work I had been doing to understand the way in which such measures allow us to precieve the interactive feature of the world that few of us will ever see without these means of measure.



It also brought me back to how we see in terms of calorimetric views, in the Glast satelitte. Here was two methods, that used similar processes, to help us understand the interact feature we might seen in the reductionist priciples that are happening right now out in the cosmo and what the potential was through particle collisions.

Part of the counterpart of looking at particle creation would have been able to understand the part of the calorimeters that are used to measure the evidence produced. IN this context, it lead me to the Atlas information held at CERN. It also made me think of Glast determinations of early universe indications from the calorimeter located in the Glast satelitte.

Sean Carroll:

As a theorist (and one who grew up in astronomy departments), one of the most fascinating concepts in high-energy experiments is that of a trigger. Each detector will witness approximately one billion collisions per second, which is a lot. You might imagine that you're faced with two problems: simply recording all the data from each event, and then sifting through them for the interesting bits. You're right, but it's much worse than you think. That's because each event isn't just a few bytes if data; it's of order one megabyte per event. There's simply no way you could record all of the data.

So indeed such views move our consideration to what happens at these levels and the beginning of this process known as the trigger. Mine, is a generalized view and without inducing the features of Intelligent Design and such, I am still amazed that ths issue has moved some of these minds to wonder about the forces of light and darkness, and what these gentlemen might have seen as the "good and evil of the world?"

Is this what it has come down too? That the requirment of Cern will not have found the means to point us in the direction of the "basis of all design" and leave us to wonder what that trigger might have been? I think, as vague as I lead, I have been lead? On the contrary, such sharing that had taken place has alowed me the oortunity to explore these potentials amongst a segment of the population, that few had ever dared to enter froma public perspective.



It seems quite simple to me, that such a basic question belies the level of commitment that our forebears have in "directing us." To look at, "what could exist in the space around us," and we had not understood that something could exist in both worlds of design. That the weak and strong, might show us, that there is a basis? Again here I am cautioned by John Ellis's views.

Toward the end of a ten-year experiment in 1991, postdoc Hungye Dai of the University of Utah was puzzling over some really unusual data. The experiment was Fly’s Eye, which pioneered a new method of studying ultra-high-energy cosmic rays by monitoring the faint flashes of ultraviolet light produced in the sky when the particles hit the upper atmosphere. Lead scientist Pierre Sokolsky recalls when Dai showed him the anomalous numbers. Sokolsky thought they were a fluke from the detector: “You know, you always expect to see stuff like that, and it’s usually just junk,” says Sokolsky. “So I told him to go away, and to look at it some more.”

So we are indeed looking for this method, this trigger, that would unite both possible worlds, to understand as we look around us, something exists which we had never entertained before? Microstate blackholes and blackholes of the cosmo, as triggers?

But if this is so, then what language would suit us to know that the basis of this existance can operate in both seemingly unrelated views of GR and Quantum mechanics?

So like Smolin, we are looking hard for this trigger, and many scientists are engaged from different perspectives to say that if we unite in this view, then indeed the new spirit of Einstein was born, because we set him free amongst the population?

Missing E_T and its uses (LHC)?

Why No New Einstein

To them, I said,
the truth would be literally nothing
but the shadows of the images..

-Plato, The Republic (Book VII)

The inference of dimensional attributes scares many good minds away from the matters at hand?:)

Lubos Motl:

The only truly open questions about the interpretation of quantum mechanics are those that also require us to understand dynamics of quantum gravity properly.

I think Gerard t' Hooft would like to change the way we see quantum mechanics? Non!

The Holographical Principle

I must add a very important note. It is still hard for me to believe that Lee Smolin wrote something that could imply that *he* was the author of the conjecture. Lee Smolin has nothing to do with the discovery of the holographic principle and I hope that he always refers to the real authors properly-and it was just you who did not read carefully enough. The holographic conjecture, based on the Bekenstein's bounds and the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the black hole,has been first proposed by Gerard 't Hooft and discussed in more detail by Lenny Susskind:

But my point is, that if we are lead to the understanding of gravity as GR does, then why would we not entertain the idea, that there are forces of gravity stronger, and areas, that are weaker?

Of course, to Plato this story was just meant to symbolize mankind's struggle to reach enlightenment and understanding through reasoning and open-mindedness. We are all initially prisoners and the tangible world is our cave. Just as some prisoners may escape out into the sun, so may some people amass knowledge and ascend into the light of true reality.

What is equally interesting is the literal interpretation of Plato's tale: The idea that reality could be represented completely as `shadows' on the walls

How will the photon respond in such shadows?

Why would we not extend this vision from GR understanding well, that such resistance by Einstein, required deeper thinkers to respond to the theory that they had put forth in Solvay?


by Jacob D. Bekenstein
TWO UNIVERSES of different dimension and obeying disparate physical laws are rendered completely equivalent by the holographic principle. Theorists have demonstrated this principle mathematically for a specific type of five-dimensional spacetime ("anti–de Sitter") and its four-dimensional boundary. In effect, the 5-D universe is recorded like a hologram on the 4-D surface at its periphery. Superstring theory rules in the 5-D spacetime, but a so-called conformal field theory of point particles operates on the 4-D hologram. A black hole in the 5-D spacetime is equivalent to hot radiation on the hologram--for example, the hole and the radiation have the same entropy even though the physical origin of the entropy is completely different for each case. Although these two descriptions of the universe seem utterly unalike, no experiment could distinguish between them, even in principle.

It is thus, it challenged the views, of even the most determined thinkers, professional or not, once the paradox of thought experiment was introduced? Set the targets for research and developement and the initiatives of the younger generation to excell where the limtations had been drawn.

So in the one sense such a strong stance by Einstein was the incentive for a generation to prove its ability and prowness to overcome the limitations set by Einstein.

Do I believe he understood this?

Most assuredly so, for such conversation and thought experiments would have never been inrtroduced in such a forum, as to the require greater participation of thinkers to succeed. Some even to their death, still felt Eisntein's challenge, and we have a wonderful area of developement that has moved our visions to wonderful interactive feature of "gluonic perceptions."

I believe also that Lee Smolin, from his current work, is to instill and gather strong leaders to focus in a direction that Lubos has spotted, as a signature of Lee Smolin ways. To discern the quality and direction, before gravitonic abilities are ever encountered.

So yes such attempts are interesting, in that we see Glast detrmination as viable pathways to solving the understanding of the world around us and even going to great lengths, to move these consderation down to the level we might seee in such energetic features where such gravities might have exemplied a measured interactive feature like those of the Calorimetric design.

So the challenge was given to both sides of the camps to give us a way inwhich to see how such a challenge could measure progress? Is it not here, that such a stance holds each other accountable?

Lee Smolins ways expermentally are driven, even as the world of Strings are driven to bring perspective to the engagement, of the "way in which we see?" Careful challeneges to the interpretation, that such ideas are held within the scope of the Calorimentric view and all the while, the challenge has been a puzzle to that "missing energy" going someplace?

Where is this if such a boundary has been understood and the puzzle offered for introspection, that each other wants the other to understand it's limitations?

So now we have the place in which such a challenge should make itself known and we have the likes of Cern's delivery on microstate blackhole production, to have found it's associative feature in how we see interactive features can happen all around us without cern? >John Ellis is careful to draw these distinctions for us.

Do we have Proof of this Missing Energy? If the answer is yes, then the issue has not been resolved?

Coulomb Interactions, Thomson Scatterings

I think most people understand this stuff, and that experiment is the most efficient way of dealing with this issue. Even if we understand the matrix developemental view it's shortcoming are well expressed by others in that field of quantum grvaity. That could have easily helped orientate further constructive processes in that same respect.

John Ellis:

To my mind, one of the most plausible extensions of the Standard Model is supersymmetry (just look at the subjects of my research papers!), so could the minimal supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model have created the matter in the Universe?

John Ellis and the views about the supersymmetrical are really more in depth then the suttle words listed and spoken about by some. String Theorists knew how far this went?:)

Peter Woit said,

Certainly some people should be working on quantum gravity, especially if they are doing it in a non-overhyped way, trying to really seriously understand the technical issues involved. The LQG community appears to be doing this. But, personally, I don't have any ideas about how to start from thinking about quantum gravity and get to particle physics, whereas I do see some hope that if one better understands the structure of the standard model, one may be able to get to quantum gravity from there.

Posted by Peter Woit at May 30, 2005 05:22 PM

While some people are looking for consistant means of determinations, others apply "conceptual situations" and bring forth comprehension of a kind. Now to this degree, that "gluonic perception is being adjusted" to see these values. The Smolins and others understood well the limitation of these views? Are there any?

It becomes extremely difficult, as reductionistic processes are further detailed. So how far will this informtaion take us in terms of early universe understanding? Througha comsic interactive theme in the expeirments lead by situation in particle interaction in our atmosphere we can direct same particle interaction?

The calorimeter design for GLAST produces flashes of light that are used to determine how much energy is in each gamma-ray. A calorimeter ("calorie-meter") is a device that measures the energy (heat: calor) of a particle when it is totally absorbed.

What will glast do for this comprehension, understanding well the Calorimetric view of information given to us about those early universe situations?

Remember that the age is determined by the dark matter density. Mathematically, the length is roughly the geometric mean of the mean free path and the distance light can travel without obstruction (the horizon scale).

Gamma Ray Detection

A important point here is that there should be coincidental features in gamma ray detection, that should align with LIGO detectors?

Why are two installations necessary?

At least two detectors located at widely separated sites are essential for the unequivocal detection of gravitational waves. Local phenomena such as micro-earthquakes, acoustic noise, and laser fluctuations can cause a disturbance at one site, simulating a gravitational wave event, but such disturbances are unlikely to happen simultaneously at widely separated sites.

Lubos said::

The LIGO collaboration informed that the second science run did not detect any gravitational waves. The results follow from 10-day-long observations in early 2003 (two more science runs have been made ever since)

A current blackhole has been detected and so should LIGO detect it. So how long should we wait if findings are only now being conisdered from 2003 run?

Scientists have detected a flash of light from across the Galaxy so powerful that it bounced off the Moon and lit up the Earth's upper atmosphere. The flash was brighter than anything ever detected from beyond our Solar System and lasted over a tenth of a second. NASA and European satellites and many radio telescopes detected the flash and its aftermath on December 27, 2004. Two science teams report about this event at a special press event today at NASA headquarters.

Journey to a Black Hole

A direct image of gravity at its extreme will be of fundamental importance to Physics. Yet imaging a black hole requires a million times improvement over Chandra. That's a big step. Over the next 20 years, the Cosmic Journeys missions will take us closer and closer to a black hole though the power of resolution. Each successive mission will further us in our journey by 10- or 100-fold increases in resolution, step by step as we approach our goal of zooming in a million times closer. And each stop along the way will bring us new understandings of the nature of matter and energy.

GLAST is a gamma-ray observatory mission that will observe jets of particles that shoot away in opposite regions from a supermassive black hole at near the speed of light. We do not fully understand how a black hole, which is known for pulling matter in, can generate high-speed jets that stretch out for billions of miles. Galaxies that harbor black holes with a jet aimed in our direction are called blazars, as opposed to quasars, which have their jets aimed in other directions. GLAST, up to 50 times more sensitive than previous gamma-ray observatories, will stare down the barrel of these jets to unlock the mechanism of how the enigmatic jets form. The Constellation-X mission will probe the inner disk of matter swirling into a black hole, using spectroscopy to journey 1,000 times closer to a black hole than any other mission before it. With such resolution, Constellation-X will be able to measure the mass and spin of black holes, two key properties. This X-ray mission will also map the distortions of space-time predicted by Einstein. Constellation-X draws its superior resolution by pooling the resources of four X-ray satellites orbiting in unison into one massive X-ray telescope. The ARISE mission will produce radio-wave images from the base of supermassive black hole jets with resolution 100,000 times sharper than Hubble. Such unprecedented resolution can reveal how black holes are fed and how jets are created. ARISE will attain this resolution through interferometry. This technique is used today with land-based radio telescopes. Smaller radio telescopes spread out on land -- perhaps one mile apart -- can work together to generate a single, huge radio telescope with the collecting power of a one-mile radio dish. ARISE will utilize one large radio telescope in space with many other radio telescopes on Earth, bringing what is now a land-based technology to new heights.

New NASA Satellite to Study Black Hole Birth and Gamma Ray Bursts

The Swift observatory comprises three telescopes, which work in tandem to provide rapid identification and multi- wavelength follow-up of GRBs and their afterglows. Within 20 to 75 seconds of a detected GRB, the observatory will rotate autonomously, so the onboard X-ray and optical telescopes can view the burst. The afterglows will be monitored over their durations, and the data will be rapidly released to the public.

See:

Longitudinal and Transverse Information about the Energy Deposition Pattern

The Calorimetric View?

The Calorimetric View?

The Title, might seem somewhat strange, but a issue has developed for me that I see raised in the scourge of other intellectuals, who disavow the extra dimension scenario.

So you have this view and you have this idea of missing energy? Where did it go and where did it come from? Pierre Auger linked previously and the Oh my god particle, raise this idea more in line with the vaster layout of this possibilty.

You see these things are happening around us now, and you needed a much comprehensive view of this compacted dynamcial world? So the methods seen for determination help us to see what is happening in relation not only to particle reductionistic views, but of the relationship happening with Earth and the Sun. Our other Cosmic relations, that move here in the vast network of spacetime contortions that signal informative views from earlier times


ATLAS and the LHC

Describing the strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions in terms of gauge theories, the Standard Model (SM) of fundamental particles and their interactions has successfully explained and predicted many aspects of high-energy particle interactions. However, despite its tremendous successes, it remains theoretically unsatisfactory. The SM cannot answer what is the origin of particle masses, contains a large number of arbitrary parameters, and does not explain why there are so many types of quarks and leptons, among other questions. Perhaps as much as theoretical breakthroughs are needed in order to improve the SM, so are experimental observations on phenomena which can further constrain the SM or may reveal physics beyond it.

The question I raised was in looking at where the missing energy had gone? This is a important question, becuase it speaks to what energy gone in/out, as not being equal? I take it, that all particle reductionistic interpretations would have surmized it's energy value, and then, had something left over that is accoutable? How would you know it's missing?

Now I was looking a Cabi's ole post and from it, this lead me to look at the title of the connected paper for consideration.


A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS

Part of the counterpart of looking at particle creation would have been able to understand the part of the calorimeters that are used to measure the evidence produced. IN this context, it lead me to the Atlas information held at CERN. It also made me think of Glast determinations of early universe indications from the calorimeter located in the Glast satelitte. See the Looking Glast


A Higgs Mechanism for Gravity, by Ingo Kirsch

In this paper we elaborate on the idea of an emergent spacetime which arises due to the dynamical breaking of diffeomorphism invariance in the early universe. In preparation for an explicit symmetry breaking scenario, we consider nonlinear realizations of the group of analytical diffeomorphisms which provide a unified description of spacetime structures. We find that gravitational fields, such as the affine connection, metric and coordinates, can all be interpreted as Goldstone fields of the diffeomorphism group. We then construct a Higgs mechanism for gravity in which an affine spacetime evolves into a Riemannian one by the condensation of a metric. The symmetry breaking potential is identical to that of hybrid inflation but with the non-inflaton scalar extended to a symmetric second rank tensor. This tensor is required for the realization of the metric as a Higgs field. We finally comment on the role of Goldstone coordinates as a dynamical fluid of reference.

Now I have not gone into in detail because I am somewhat slow and a bottom feeder trying very hard to gain perspective of the world these fellows like to deal with.

So the water symbolically speaking, sound manifest, with those inhabiting a dynamical world, speak about the nature of matter constitutions. That come from some state of existance? Here the idea, that it could emerse from nothing (where do the graviton perceptions reside?), is again hard to swallow becuase, "preconstitutional states," had allowed such manifestations to emerge from something? It just seemed logical? Non!

When you think this is going to be the end of it, I thought, I would recap, because I have given the containment(calorimetric) that such particle views, or early universe connections, might have brought forward in detectors methods?

This would have satisfied Peter Woit I am sure, but this view is far from over. The rules have defined a greater context to the issue that points us to the deeper issue of what Gerard 't Hooft might have said was comprehensible features of computerized information consistancies. This would have been far from the truth. Blackhole particle production, would have said hold on? To have this comprehensive view, you needed to include a completed version of the standard model? Without the grvaiton in cvomputerized versions you see where the picture is far completed and you se where the extra dimensiona would have certain features that would have incorporated graviton perceptions in the bulk?



The horizon would have been far from complete had the standard model not included this into the the energy in/out version. This would have been the thread(string) that connected the innner space of the blackhole with the particle production that would have dissipated/exploded in view? How would computerization meet this demand? LIGO?

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.

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?

Shakespearean Quandry?

e^- or not to e⁺ :)

Light-matter interaction

Low energy phenomena  Photoelectric effect
Mid-energy phenomena  Compton scattering
High energy phenomena  Pair production

Part of the realization is that if we encounter this dynamical universe with ways to intuitive glance at the interplay of this black and white, I was drawn to the idealization of the matrices, and their involvement?

Pair Production

Every known particle has an antiparticle; if they encounter one another, they will annihilate with the production of two gamma-rays. The quantum energies of the gamma rays is equal to the sum of the mass energies of the two particles (including their kinetic energies). It is also possible for a photon to give up its quantum energy to the formation of a particle-antiparticle pair in its interaction with matter.

This is very touchy area for me, but I endeavor to what Glast determinations are revealling, as we move to consider the relevance of this interactive feature of the dark matter energy, in regards to the cosmological movement revealled by the Friedmann equation.

We needed this question of Shakespeare, to move our minds to the question of the ever constant becoming, to know that it would manifest in this cyclical nature of rejuvenation. Where blackhole and gravitonic condensation, can become viable features of phase state changes, taking us back the beginning of this universe, now?

Now it's possible that those kinds of laws in physics may be incomplete. It might be that the laws change absolutely with time; that grvaity for instance varies with time and that this inverse square law has a strength which depends on how long it is since the beginning of time. In other words, it's possible that in the future we'll have more understanding of everything and physics may be completed by some kind of statement of how things started which are external tothe laws of physics.

Pg 206 and 207, of Superstrings, A Theory of Everything, by P.C.W.Davies and J. Brown

So lets cosider something else here where such dynamcial realization would point to microstate blackholes. This will follow later for consideration.

Timeline

There are reasons for this theme, that I thought most appropriate to the discussion of illusion and miracles.

In the thread previous to this one, a concept is put forward by Arkani-Hamed that focuses on the issue of the timeline from my perspective, relates to what Peter Woit speaks about here. I will try and explain, but I needed to comprehend better Peter's position.

Peter Woit:

Another way of saying it is that in the standard model you have an SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) principal bundle, and the geometry of the fibers is tightly constrained by the gauge symmetry, which is why the theory works so beautifully.

But before addressing this a couple of things came to mind today that pointed to the need for this timeline to be addressed in a most appropriate manner that would tax the minds position it had assumed to free it to other possible realms for consideration.

So I place here two idealizations that I thought of first and by doing this help hopefully to orientate peoples minds around the string issue and it's place in the spectrum of possibilties.

The Planck Epoch



In order to further expand this conceptual frame work, I am reminded of the Glast determinations and spectrum analysis we have engaged, which has allowed a deeper look at the timeline of events. The place from that earlier time.

It was not to difficult to realize that work and place was being supplanted by a theoretical approached, so new ideas could emerge from current established views. Assumptions of theoretcial models would pushed the mind into other venues of considertaion and force upon it, the realities of acceptance.

The Pre-Big Bang Scenario in String CosmologyM. Gasperini1 and G. Veneziano

During the past thirty years, mainly thanks to accelerator experiments of higher and higher energy and precision, the standard model of particle physics has established itself as the uncontested winner in the race for a consistent description of electroweak and strong interaction phenomena at distances above 10⁻¹⁵ cm or so. There are, nonetheless, good reasons (in particular the increasing evidence for non-vanishing neutrino masses [388, 568, 569]) to believe that the standard model is not the end of the story. The surprising validity of this model at energies below 100 GeV, as well as the (in)famous Higgs mass fine-tuning problem, suggest some supersymmetric extension of the standard model (for a review see [501]) as the most likely improved description of non-gravitational phenomena over a few more decades in the ladder of scales. It is however quite likely that other questions that are left unanswered by the standard model, such as the peculiarities of fermionic masses and mixings, the family pattern, C, P, CP, B violation, etc., will only find their answers at –or around– the much higher energies at which all gauge interactions appear to unify [21]. This energy scale appears to be embarrassingly close (on a logarithmic scale) to the so-called Planck mass, MP ∼ 10¹⁹ GeV, the scale at which gravity becomes strong and needs to be quantized.

On the one hand then we see where this timeline of physics and it's approach has been and still remians consistent with established views, but we have overlayed this idealization of the spectrum with a new approach to place the established geometries toplogiies that are curently being put forward in the mathematical realms for further extension of these natural laws? So what math shall preceed these views, if we do not change the concepts we had currently established to have the mind consider other prorposals?


Drawing by Glen Edwards, Utah State University, Logan, UT

Here I will refer back to Kip Thorne and the plate for consideration about how we see this timeline further illucidated upon( I mean really)and now we place it here in context of a new approach?