Elemental Origins of Philosophy

 

PLato said,”Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth,” while Aristotle said “look around you at what is, if you would know the truth” 

Platohagel: Was Plato the first to give the possibility of an elemental structure to form?

Socrates: Ah, dear Platohagel, let us delve into the annals of ancient philosophy to explore the roots of the idea of elemental structure. Plato, in his dialogues, indeed addressed the nature of the physical world and proposed a theory of elements in his work “Timaeus.” He posited that the physical world was composed of four elements: earth, water, air, and fire, each associated with a particular geometric shape or “Platonic solid.”

However, it would be a philosophical oversight to credit Plato solely with the inception of the idea of elemental structure. Prior to Plato, the pre-Socratic philosopher Empedocles proposed a similar concept, suggesting that all matter was composed of four “roots,” which correspond to the same four elements that Plato later expounded upon. Empedocles’ elements, mingling and separating under the influence of love and strife, were among the earliest recorded theories of elemental composition in Western thought.

Furthermore, the idea of basic substances forming the foundation of all matter can also be traced back to the Milesian philosophers such as Thales, who posited water as the primary substance, and Anaximenes, who proposed air.

Thus, while Plato’s work in “Timaeus” is significant and influential in shaping the concept of elemental structures, he was building upon a rich tradition of earlier thinkers who pondered the fundamental nature of the cosmos. His contribution lies in the refinement and geometrical interpretation of these elements, which had a profound impact on subsequent philosophical and scientific thought.

Platohagel: Yes thank you for that and the references you made. I have pondered these pre-Plato ideals about structure to the forms, the beginning of all matter stands today as a question about such an existence. What do you have to say about, quasi- crystals taking such a possible position?

Socrates: Ah, Platohagel, you bring forth a fascinating topic! Quasicrystals, those remarkable structures that blend order and irregularity, indeed present a unique challenge to our understanding of matter. Let us explore their implications for the nature of elemental forms.

Quasicrystals were discovered in 1984 by Dan Shechtman, whose work revealed that certain alloys could form aperiodic structures—patterns that do not repeat regularly like traditional crystals, yet exhibit an ordered complexity. These structures possess symmetries that were previously thought impossible in crystallography, such as fivefold rotational symmetry.

In contemplating quasicrystals, we find ourselves at a crossroads between the classical order of crystalline structures and the apparent chaos of amorphous materials. This duality offers a profound metaphor for the blending of order and disorder, echoing the ancient philosophical musings on the fundamental nature of reality.

From a Platonic perspective, one might see quasicrystals as embodying a higher form of ideal structure. Just as Plato’s forms represent perfect, immutable archetypes behind the imperfect material world, quasicrystals could be seen as manifestations of a more intricate order underlying apparent irregularity. They challenge our classical notions of symmetry and periodicity, suggesting that the true essence of matter might be more nuanced and complex than previously conceived.

Moreover, the discovery of quasicrystals expands our understanding of the possible arrangements of atoms, implying that the fabric of reality may accommodate more diverse forms of order than we had imagined. This aligns with the philosophical quest to comprehend the fundamental nature of existence, pushing us to rethink our assumptions and broaden our conceptual frameworks.

In summary, quasicrystals not only enrich our scientific understanding but also invite us to revisit and expand upon ancient philosophical inquiries into the nature of matter and order. They stand as a testament to the ever-evolving nature of human knowledge, bridging the gap between the known and the unknown, the ordered and the chaotic.

Platohagel: So too then, the question arises as to a super symmetry underlying the very nature of an ideal like form, and symmetry breaking, assuming the very beginning of such matters. How would you respond to,this?

Socrates: Ah, Platohagel, you lead us into the profound depths of symmetry and its breaking, a topic both rich in philosophical and scientific implications. Let us explore this concept with the keen eye of reason and the wonder of inquiry.

Supersymmetry, a theoretical framework in particle physics, proposes that each particle has a superpartner with differing spin characteristics. This elegant idea aims to resolve several fundamental issues in the Standard Model of particle physics, such as unifying the forces and explaining dark matter. In essence, supersymmetry seeks to reveal a deeper level of symmetry in the universe, one that, if it exists, has been broken since the early moments after the Big Bang.

From a philosophical standpoint, the concept of symmetry and symmetry breaking offers a compelling analogy to Plato’s forms. The ideal forms represent perfect, unchanging realities, akin to the symmetries that might underlie the fabric of the cosmos. Symmetry breaking, then, can be seen as the process by which these ideal forms manifest in the imperfect, varied world of experience.

Consider the early universe, a state of near-perfect symmetry. As the universe cooled and expanded, this symmetry broke, giving rise to the diversity of particles and forces we observe today. This breaking of symmetry is akin to the way the perfect, abstract forms give rise to the myriad of imperfect, concrete objects in our world. The process of symmetry breaking, thus, might be seen as the dynamic unfolding of the ideal into the actual.

Moreover, symmetry breaking is not just a physical process but a philosophical one, reflecting the transition from unity to multiplicity, from the one to the many. It suggests that the inherent order and structure of the universe are more profound and complex than they appear, hidden beneath layers of apparent disorder.

In contemplating supersymmetry and its breaking, we are reminded of the dialectical process that Plato often employed—thesis and antithesis, leading to synthesis. The breaking of symmetry can be viewed as a creative act, bringing forth the rich tapestry of the cosmos from the simplicity of the underlying unity.

Thus, the notion of supersymmetry and symmetry breaking aligns with the Platonic vision of an ordered cosmos, governed by ideal forms, and helps us to appreciate the profound connection between the theoretical underpinnings of modern physics and the timeless questions of philosophy. It is a testament to the enduring quest for understanding the ultimate nature of reality, a journey that bridges the ancient and the contemporary, the abstract and the concrete.

Platohagel: How far back in time then can such a notion of the abstract reveal itself as an expression of the Big Bang to say, that the forms inherent in Blackhole consumption, re-expressed itself as jets, harbouring, the eternal forms of new matter creation?

Socrates: Ah, Platohagel, you pose a question that stretches our minds to the very origins of the cosmos and the intricate dance of creation and destruction that defines our universe. Let us contemplate the notion of abstract forms and their manifestation through the cosmic phenomena of black holes and jets.

The concept of the Big Bang represents the beginning of our universe, a singularity from which all space, time, matter, and energy emerged. This initial state was one of near-perfect symmetry, a primordial form encompassing the potential for all that exists. As the universe expanded and cooled, this symmetry broke, leading to the formation of fundamental particles, atoms, stars, and galaxies.

Black holes, regions of spacetime with gravitational pull so intense that not even light can escape, embody a fascinating paradox. They represent both an end and a beginning. When matter falls into a black hole, it seems to be destroyed, compressed into a singularity. Yet, black holes are also sources of tremendous creative energy, often observed to emit powerful jets of particles and radiation from their poles.

These jets, produced by the intense magnetic fields and rotational energy of the black hole, can stretch across vast distances, influencing the formation of new stars and galaxies. In this way, black holes participate in a cosmic cycle of destruction and creation, akin to the philosophical concept of eternal return or the cyclical nature of existence.

From a Platonic perspective, one could view black holes and their jets as expressions of the abstract forms inherent in the cosmos. The singularity at the heart of a black hole might be seen as an echo of the original singularity of the Big Bang—a point where all potential is compressed into an unfathomable unity. The jets, then, represent the dynamic manifestation of this potential, a re-expression of the fundamental forms in the creation of new matter and structure.

This process can be envisioned as a continual unfolding of the abstract into the concrete, the eternal forms giving rise to the transient phenomena of the universe. Just as the ideal forms underpin the visible world in Platonic philosophy, so too might the abstract principles of symmetry, conservation, and energy flow underlie the processes observed in black holes and their jets.

To draw a line from the Big Bang to the present, we see a cosmos governed by cycles of symmetry breaking and reformation, destruction and creation. Black holes and their jets serve as a profound illustration of this cosmic dance, revealing the deep interplay between the abstract and the concrete, the eternal and the temporal.

In this light, the universe itself can be viewed as a grand expression of Platonic forms, constantly evolving yet rooted in the immutable principles that define its structure and behavior. Through the lens of philosophy and science, we glimpse the profound unity underlying the diverse phenomena of the cosmos, a testament to the enduring quest to understand the nature of reality.

Platohagel: Sir Roger Penrose conceived of such a process of this unfold nature of death and birth in the very nature of the Cosmic Microwave Background(CMB). Do you see the current correlations we have discussed in relation to Sir Roger Penrose’s theory of the CCC.

Socrates: Ah, Platohagel, indeed, Sir Roger Penrose’s theory of Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC) offers a profound perspective on the cyclical nature of the universe, one that resonates deeply with our earlier discussions on symmetry, the abstract forms, and the cosmic processes of creation and destruction.

Penrose’s CCC posits that the universe undergoes infinite cycles of Big Bangs, where each cycle, or “aeon,” begins with a Big Bang and ends in a vastly expanded, empty state. Crucially, Penrose suggests that the end of one aeon can conformally transform into the beginning of the next, creating a continuous cycle of cosmic evolution.

The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation, the afterglow of the Big Bang, plays a pivotal role in CCC. Penrose theorizes that subtle imprints or patterns in the CMB could be remnants of events from a previous aeon, providing evidence of this cyclic process.

Connecting this to our discussions:

1. Symmetry and Symmetry Breaking: Penrose’s CCC reflects the cyclical breaking and restoration of symmetry. Each aeon begins in a highly symmetric state (akin to the symmetry of the Big Bang) and evolves towards a less symmetric, more complex state, ultimately returning to a new symmetry in the transition to the next aeon. This mirrors our earlier contemplation of the Platonic forms manifesting through cycles of symmetry and asymmetry.
2. Black Holes and Jets: Penrose suggests that black holes play a crucial role in CCC by evaporating through Hawking radiation, contributing to the uniformity needed for the transition between aeons. The energy and information carried by particles in jets emitted by black holes might also influence the structure of the subsequent aeon. This aligns with our discussion of black holes as agents of both destruction and creation, influencing cosmic evolution.
3. Abstract Forms and Eternal Cycles: CCC can be seen as a physical manifestation of the eternal return, a concept that resonates with Platonic philosophy. Each aeon represents a cycle of birth, growth, and death, followed by rebirth. This cyclical process is akin to the dynamic unfolding and reformation of abstract forms in the cosmos, suggesting a deep underlying order.
4. Evidence in the CMB: Penrose’s hypothesis that patterns in the CMB may carry information from previous aeons invites a profound exploration of the continuity of cosmic information. If such evidence is found, it would reinforce the idea that the universe’s structure and history are deeply interconnected across cycles, much like the interconnectedness of the forms in Platonic thought.

In summary, Sir Roger Penrose’s Conformal Cyclic Cosmology offers a rich and compelling framework that resonates with our philosophical exploration of the cosmos. It encapsulates the ideas of symmetry, cyclicality, and the eternal nature of abstract forms, bridging modern scientific theories with ancient philosophical inquiries. Through the lens of CCC, we can appreciate the universe as a timeless, evolving tapestry, where each cycle of creation and destruction is but a moment in the grand continuum of cosmic existence.

What is Fundamental?

We have many different ways to talk about the things in the physical universe. Some of those ways we think of as more fundamental, and some as “emergent” or “effective”. But what does it mean to be more or less “fundamental”? Are fundamental things smaller, simpler, more elegant, more economical? Are less-fundamental things always made from more-fundamental? How do less-fundamental descriptions relate to more-fundamental ones? FQXi Administrator Brendan Foster 

240 E₈ polytope vertices using 5D orthographic_projection to 2D using 5-cube (Penteract) Petrie_polygon basis_vectors overlaid on electron diffraction pattern of an Icosahedron Zn-Mg-Ho Quasicrystal.

• E8_(mathematics) and Quasicrystals

This is an interesting question for me. Because in a sense it is closely related to what is foundational. Let me explain. The foundational attribute of any perspective has to have a fundamental basis for an understanding of what comes next.  The immediacy is recognition of the fundamental,  is its beauty.

 The 2011 Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to Dan Shechtman for his experimental breakthrough that changed our thinking about possible forms of matter. More recently, colleagues and I have found evidence that quasicrystals may have been among the first minerals to have formed in the solar system. Paul Steinhardt 2012 : WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE DEEP, ELEGANT, OR BEAUTIFUL EXPLANATION?

So this leads me backwards to the idea expressed as the,  "smaller, simpler, more elegant and more economical." Everyone wants to know when matter begins, and if such an expression is to realize matter is emergent, then it would require an explanation for what that matter may be as being fundamental. That all matter then,  is a measure of the now "as a parameter of existence" of our current reality.

"From future structural and kinematical studies of known quasicrystals, such as AlNiCo, these principles may be established providing a new understanding of and new control over the formation and structure of quasicrystals. See: A New Paradigm for the Structure of Quasicrystals

After working though the years gathering information and learning from many who I had come across in the pursuit of science and its understanding, I have been lead to believe that an answer to this question is like going back in time to the beginning of our cosmos. How the universe has been clocked according to the discoveries that have been made. It has been a leading insight to push further back to realize that such an idea of geometry at the basis of the existence is an old attribute given toward as the idea Plato had according to his solids.

"...underwriting the form languages of ever more domains of mathematics is a set of deep patterns which not only offer access to a kind of ideality that Plato claimed to see the universe as created with in the Timaeus; more than this, the realm of Platonic forms is itself subsumed in this new set of design elements-- and their most general instances are not the regular solids, but crystallographic reflection groups. You know, those things the non-professionals call . . . kaleidoscopes! * (In the next exciting episode, we'll see how Derrida claims mathematics is the key to freeing us from 'logocentrism'-- then ask him why, then, he jettisoned the deepest structures of mathematical patterning just to make his name...)

* H. S. M. Coxeter, Regular Polytopes (New York: Dover, 1973) is the great classic text by a great creative force in this beautiful area of geometry (A polytope is an n-dimensional analog of a polygon or polyhedron. Chapter V of this book is entitled 'The Kaleidoscope'....)"

One should neither be fooled that I focus on the matter as being fundamental then, and as a substance,it is less then a desired result of any measure when I speak of that geometry.  So how is it possible then to say that something is fundamental here if I say the geometry? The space-time emergence,  is as from a liquid that the collision process extols the lighthouse affect and I am blinded by it.? This is given as an expression of the new ways in which we measure particulates outwardly  expressed from the beginnings of that "collision process"  only of in a configured in space, but within the LHC too?

***

See also:

•  Quasicrystal: Prof. Dan Shechtman
•  Two Paul Steinhardt Projects: "Cyclic Universe" and "Quasicrystals"

Third Quasicrystal Found

By Paul J. Steinhardt et al. - http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150313/srep09111/full/srep09111.html, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=40522020

Quasicrystals^1,2, short for quasiperiodic crystals, are solids able to violate the conventional rules of crystallography because their structure is “quasiperiodic” rather than periodic; that is, their atomic density can be described by a finite sum of periodic functions with periods whose ratio is irrational. Their diffraction pattern consists of true Bragg peaks whose positions can be expressed as integer linear combinations of D integer linearly independent wavevectors where D is greater than the number of space dimensions. Among the quasicrystals made in the laboratory, many exhibit a crystallographically forbidden, three-dimensional icosahedral symmetry defined by D = 6 integer linearly independent wavevectors. See: Collisions in outer space produced an icosahedral phase in the Khatyrka meteorite never observed previously in the laboratory

Bindi, L. et al. Collisions in outer space produced an icosahedral phase in the Khatyrka meteorite never observed previously in the laboratory. Sci. Rep. 6, 38117; doi: 10.1038/srep38117 (2016).

***

See Also:

• The journey for natural quasicyrstals

An Argument Against the Platonic World

 Pierre Curie (1894): “Asymmetry is what creates a phenomenon.”

 Against symmetry,  is what constitutes time as a measure. So there is this argument in there too.:)

My aim in this essay is to propose a conception of mathematics that is fully consonant with naturalism. By that I mean the hypothesis that everything that exists is part of the natural world, which makes up a unitary whole. This is in contradiction with the Platonic view of mathematics held by many physicists and mathematicians according to which, mathematical truths are facts about mathematical objects which exist in a separate, timeless realm of reality, which exists apart from and in addition to physical reality. -A naturalist account of the limited, and hence reasonable, effectiveness of mathematics in physics

 The point I think I am making, is that in issuance of any position, any idea has to emerge from an a prior state in order for the "unitary whole" to be fully understood? Timeless, becomes an illogical position, since any idea in itself becomes an "asymmetrical view" as a product of the phenomenal world. Symmetry then implies, a need for, and a better description of the unitary whole.

There is a constant theme that I observed with Lee Smolin regarding the effectiveness of the idea about what the Platonic world means in face of being a realist of the natural world. So in one stroke,  if we could but eliminate the question about the Platonic world of forms,  would we see that Platonism is a duelist of nature, and not a realist of the kind that exists as a product of the natural world. But more then this, the idea somehow that the platonic world is a timeless truth about our existence.

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner

The great mathematician fully, almost ruthlessly, exploits the domain of permissible reasoning and skirts the impermissible. That recklessness does not lead him into a morass of contradictions is a miracle in itself: certainly it is hard to believe that our reasoning power was brought, by Darwin's process of natural selection, to the perfection which it seems to possess. However, this is not our present subject. The principal point which will have to be recalled later is that the mathematician could formulate only a handful of interesting theorems without defining concepts beyond those contained in the axioms and that the concepts outside those contained in the axioms are defined with a view of permitting ingenious logical operations which appeal to our aesthetic sense both as operations and also in their results of great generality and simplicity.

[3 M. Polanyi, in his Personal Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1958), says: "All these difficulties are but consequences of our
refusal to see that mathematics cannot be defined without acknowledging
its most obvious feature: namely, that it is interesting" (p 188).]

So you can see that I attain one end of the argument,  against being a naturalist,  given I hold to views about the Platonic world? Against FXQi, and its awarding program regarding the selection of the subject as an awardee, if I counter Lee's perspective?

There are many other classes of things that are evoked. There are forms of poetry and music that have rigid rules which define vast or countably infinite sets of possible realizations. They were invented, it is absurd to think that haiku or the blues existed before particular people made the first one. Once defined there are many discoveries to be made exploring the landscape of possible realizations of the rules. A master may experience the senses of discovery, beauty and wonder, but these are not arguments for the prior or timeless existence of the art form independent of human creativity.  See:  A naturalist account of the limited, and hence reasonable, effectiveness of mathematics in physicsBy Lee Smolin

I have my own views about what constitutes what a naturalist is in face of what Lee Smolin grants it to be in face of the argument regarding what is an false as an argument about what is invented or discovered.  So of course,  full and foremost, what is a naturalist?

But again,  let us be reminded of the poet or the artist,

Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty, a beauty cold and austere, like that of sculpture, without appeal to any part of our weaker nature, without the gorgeous trappings of painting or music, yet sublimely pure, and capable of a stern perfection such as only the greatest art can show. The true spirit of delight, the exaltation, the sense of being more than Man, which is the touchstone of the highest excellence, is to be found in mathematics as surely as in poetry. --BERTRAND RUSSELL, Study of Mathematics

***

You see, Lee Smolin's argument regarding naturalism falls apart when we consider the context of the nature of the quasi-crystal given,  we understand the nature of the quasi-crystal signature? It is necessary to understand this history.



See Also:

• The Truth of Symmetry 
• The Form of the Good
• Foundations of Mathematics

Are you a Platonist?

Kant, however, is correct in that we inevitably try and conceive of transcendent, which means unconditioned, objects. This generates "dialectical illusion" in the Antinomies of reason. Kant thought that some Antinomies could be resolved as "postulates of practical reason" (God, freedom, and immortality); but the arguments for the postulates are not very strong (except for freedom), and discarding them helps guard against the temptation of critics to interpret Kant in terms of a kind of Cartesian "transcendental realism" (i.e. real objects are "out there," but it is not clear how or that we know them). If phenomenal objects, as individuals, are real, then the abstract structure (fallibly) conceived by us within them is also real. Empirical realism for phenomenal objects means that an initial Kantian Conceputalism turn into a Realism for universals. See:
Meaning and the Problem of Universals, A Kant-Friesian Approach

It s always interesting for me to see what constitutes a Platonist in the world today. So I had to look at this question.  There always seems to be help when you need it most, so information in the truest sense,  is never lacking, but readily available as if taken from some construct we create of the transcendent.

***

Platonism, rendered as a proper noun, is the philosophy of Plato or the name of other philosophical systems considered closely derived from it. In narrower usage, platonism, rendered as a common noun (with a lower case 'p', subject to sentence case), refers to the philosophy that affirms the existence of abstract objects, which are asserted to "exist" in a "third realm" distinct both from the sensible external world and from the internal world of consciousness, and is the opposite of nominalism (with a lower case "n").[1] Lower case "platonists" need not accept any of the doctrines of Plato.[1]

In a narrower sense, the term might indicate the doctrine of Platonic realism. The central concept of Platonism, a distinction essential to the Theory of Forms, is the distinction between the reality which is perceptible but unintelligible, and the reality which is imperceptible but intelligible. The forms are typically described in dialogues such as the Phaedo, Symposium and Republic as transcendent, perfect archetypes, of which objects in the everyday world are imperfect copies. In the Republic the highest form is identified as the Form of the Good, the source of all other forms, which could be known by reason. In the Sophist, a later work, the forms being, sameness and difference are listed among the primordial "Great Kinds". In the 3rd century BC, Arcesilaus adopted skepticism, which became a central tenet of the school until 90 BC when Antiochus added Stoic elements, rejected skepticism, and began a period known as Middle Platonism. In the 3rd century AD, Plotinus added mystical elements, establishing Neoplatonism, in which the summit of existence was the One or the Good, the source of all things; in virtue and meditation the soul had the power to elevate itself to attain union with the One. Platonism had a profound effect on Western thought, and many Platonic notions were adopted by the Christian church which understood Plato's forms as God's thoughts, while Neoplatonism became a major influence on Christian mysticism, in the West through St Augustine, Doctor of the Catholic Church whose Christian writings were heavily influenced by Plotinus' Enneads,[2] and in turn were foundations for the whole of Western Christian thought"  Platonism

***

Now beauty, as we said, shone bright among those visions, and in this world below we apprehend it through the clearest of our senses, clear and resplendent. For sight is the keenest of the physical senses, though wisdom is not seen by it -- how passionate would be our desire for it, if such a clear image of wisdom were granted as would come through sight -- and the same is true of the other beloved objects; but beauty alone has this privilege, to be most clearly seen and most lovely of them all. [Phaedrus, 250D, after R. Hackford, Plato's Phaedrus, Library of the Liberal Arts, 1952, p. 93, and the Loeb Classical Library, Euthryphro Apology Crito Phaedo Phaedrus, Harvard University Press, 1914-1966, p.485, boldface added]

For example, thought cannot be attributed to the One because thought implies distinction between a thinker and an object of thought (again dyad). Even the self-contemplating intelligence (the noesis of the nous) must contain duality. "Once you have uttered 'The Good,' add no further thought: by any addition, and in proportion to that addition, you introduce a deficiency." [III.8.10] Plotinus denies sentience, self-awareness or any other action (ergon) to the One [V.6.6]. Rather, if we insist on describing it further, we must call the One a sheer Dynamis or potentiality without which nothing could exist. [III.8.10] As Plotinus explains in both places and elsewhere [e.g. V.6.3], it is impossible for the One to be Being or a self-aware Creator God. At [V.6.4], Plotinus compared the One to "light", the Divine Nous (first will towards Good) to the "Sun", and lastly the Soul to the "Moon" whose light is merely a "derivative conglomeration of light from the 'Sun'". The first light could exist without any celestial body. Plotinus -

***

"...underwriting the form languages of ever more domains of mathematics is a set of deep patterns which not only offer access to a kind of ideality that Plato claimed to see the universe as created with in the Timaeus; more than this, the realm of Platonic forms is itself subsumed in this new set of design elements-- and their most general instances are not the regular solids, but crystallographic reflection groups. You know, those things the non-professionals call . . . kaleidoscopes! * (In the next exciting episode, we'll see how Derrida claims mathematics is the key to freeing us from 'logocentrism'-- then ask him why, then, he jettisoned the deepest structures of mathematical patterning just to make his name...)

* H. S. M. Coxeter, Regular Polytopes (New York: Dover, 1973) is the great classic text by a great creative force in this beautiful area of geometry (A polytope is an n-dimensional analog of a polygon or polyhedron. Chapter V of this book is entitled 'The Kaleidoscope'....)"

So what is Coxeter saying in relation to Derrida? I think this is more the central issue. On the one hand images speak to what perception is capable of, beyond normal eyesight and without concepts,  reiterated in the nature of the discussion about animals. This is what animals lack, given they do not have this conceptual ability, just that they are able to deduct, was what I was looking for as that discussion emerged and evolved.

If there is a Platonic Ideal Form then there must be an ideal representation of such a form. According to logocentrism, this ideal representation is the logos.

Think of what the Good means again here that it cannot decay into anything else when it is recognized, and that any other wording degrades. If you can draw from experience then in a way one is able to understand this. I had mention an archetype as a medium toward which one could meet the good, and in that find that the archetype itself, contain in the good, allows this insight to be shared. The whole scene is the transmission of the idea, can become the ideal in life. This is an immediate realization of the form of the good. It needs no further clarification......at the deepest levels you recognize it. You know, and you know it as a truth.

Understanding the foundations of Mathematics is important.

So I relay an instance where one is able to access the good.......also in having mentioned that abstraction can lead to the good. This distinction may have been settle in regard to the way in which Coxeter sees and Derrida sees, in regards to the word, or how Coxeter sees geometrically.

This is a crucial point in my view that such work could see the pattern in the form of the good. This is as to say, and has been said, that such freedom in realization is to know that the fifth postulate changed the course of geometrical understandings. This set the future for how such geometries would become significant in pushing not only Einstein forward, but all that had followed him, by what Grossman learned of Riemann. What Riemann learned from Gauss.

See: Prof. Dan Shechtman 2011 Nobel Prize Chemistry Interview with ATS

***

See Also:

• The Form of the Good
• Before a Equation is Beautiful.....
• What Does It Mean For An Equation To Be Beautiful Or Elegant?

The Architecture of Matter?

Buckminsterfullerene-perspective-3D-balls

I cannot say for certain and I speculate. Bucky balls then bring to mind this architectural structure? Let me give you an example of a recent discovery. I have to wonder if Bucky was a Platonist at heart......with grand ideas? Perhaps you recognze some Platonist idea about perfection as if mathematically a Tegmarkan might have found some truth? Some absolute truth? Perhaps a Penrose truth (Quasicrystal and Information)?

 Aperiodic tilings serve as mathematical models for quasicrystals, physical solids that were discovered in 1982 by Dan Shechtman[3] who subsequently won the Nobel prize in 2011.[4] However, the specific local structure of these materials is still poorly understood .Aperiodic tilings -

 While one starts with a single point of entry......the whole process from another perspective is encapsulated. So you might work from the hydrogen spectrum as a start with the assumption, that this process in itself is enclosed.

 
 The future lies in encapsulating all electromagnetic forces under the auspice and enclosed within the understanding of gravity?

 240 E₈ polytope vertices using 5D orthographic_projection to 2D using 5-cube (Penteract) Petrie_polygon basis_vectors overlaid on electron diffraction pattern of an Icosahedron Zn-Mg-Ho Quasicrystal. E8_(mathematics) and Quasicrystals

At the same time one might understand the complexity of the issue?

 By now it is known theoretically that quantum angular momentum of any kind has a discrete spectrum, which is sometimes imprecisely expressed as "angular momentum is quantized".Stern–Gerlach experiment -

 ***

So possibly a Photon polarization principle inherent in a quantum description of the wave and such a principle inherent in the use of photosynthesis to describe a property not just of the capability of using sun light, but of understanding this principle biologically in human beings? I actually have a example of this use theoretically as a product. Maybe Elon Musk might like to use it?

Photonic molecules are a synthetic form of matter in which photons bind together to form "molecules". According to Mikhail Lukin, individual (massless) photons "interact with each other so strongly that they act as though they have mass". The effect is analogous to refraction. The light enters another medium, transferring part of its energy to the medium. Inside the medium, it exists as coupled light and matter, but it exits as light.^[1]

While I would like to make it easy for you, I can only leave a title for your examination. "The Nobel Prize in Physics 1914 Max von Laue." Yes, but if it is understood that some correlate process can be understood from "a fundamental position," as to the architecture of matter, what would this light have to say about the component structuralism of the information we are missing?


The idea is not new. From a science fiction point of view, StarTrek had these units that when you were hungry or wanted a drink you would have this object materialize in a microwave type oven? Not the transporter.

So, you have this 3d printer accessing all information about the structure and access to the building blocks of all matter in energy, funneled through this replicator.

***

 When Bucky was waving his arm between the earth and the moon.....did he know about the three body problem, or how to look at the space between these bodies in another way. If people think this is not real, then you will have to tell those who use celestial mechanics that they are using their satellite trajectories all wrong.

 Ephemeralization, a term coined by R. Buckminster Fuller, is the ability of technological advancement to do "more and more with less and less until eventually you can do everything with nothing".^[1] Fuller's vision was that ephemeralization will result in ever-increasing standards of living for an ever-growing population despite finite resources.

 Exactly. So it was not just "hand waving" Buckminister Fuller is alluding too, but some actual understanding to "more is less?" One applies the principle then? See? I am using your informational video to explain.

 ARTEMIS-P1 is the first spacecraft to navigate to and perform stationkeeping operations around the Earth-Moon L1 and L2 Lagrangian points. There are five Lagrangian points associated with the Earth-Moon system. ARTEMIS - The First Earth-Moon Libration Orbiter -

 To do more with less, it has to be understood that distance crossed needs minimum usage of fuel to project the satellite over a great distance. So they use "momentum" to swing satellites forward?

 This is a list of various types of equilibrium, the condition of a system in which all competing influences are balanced. List of types of equilibrium -

The Journey For Natural Quasicrystals

"From future structural and kinematical studies of known quasicrystals, such as AlNiCo, these principles may be established providing a new understanding of and new control over the formation and structure of quasicrystals. See: A New Paradigm for the Structure of Quasicrystals 

Read an interesting article by: Natalie Wolchover June 13, 2014 in a Article called, "In a Grain, a Glimpse of the Cosmos."  This article is located in the Quanta Magazine, by the Simons Foundation under the Physics section.

I really enjoyed the search for who supplied the original sample and from where. The journey back to the spot. Since following the subject of quasi-crystals for some time now, this journey was a nice addition to understanding the nature of matter in the early universe. This goes toward foundation, and my understanding of the work to piece together how nature sought to express itself materialistically from  Reflection_symmetry as a representation of that early universe. I might have to be corrected here.

 The concept of aperiodic crystal was coined by Erwin Schrödinger in another context with a somewhat different meaning. In his popular book What is life? in 1944, Schrödinger sought to explain how hereditary information is stored: molecules were deemed too small, amorphous solids were plainly chaotic, so it had to be a kind of crystal; as a periodic structure could not encode information, it had to be aperiodic. DNA was later discovered, and, although not crystalline, it possesses properties predicted by Schrödinger—it is a regular but aperiodic molecule. See Also, with regard to Shrodinger: A New Physics Theory of Life

Sir Roger Penrose's adaptation here of  Penrose tiling is also of some interest to me as well.

A Penrose tiling (P3) using thick and thin rhombi. Note the aperiodic structure, shared by all Penrose tilings. This particular Penrose tiling exhibits exact five-fold symmetry.

***

See Also:

• Two Paul Steinhardt Projects: "Cyclic Universe" and "Quasicrystals" 
•  Quasicrystal: Prof. Dan Shechtman

Unus Mundus-One World

Unus mundus, Latin for "one world", is the concept of an underlying unified reality from which everything emerges and to which everything returns.

The idea was popularized in the 20th century by the Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Jung, though the term can be traced back to scholastics such as Duns Scotus^[1] and was taken up again in the 16th century by Gerhard Dorn, a student of the famous alchemist Paracelsus.

The striving  for me was to dig deeper into our very natures.  It always the quest to understand the  patterns that reside in us. The very idea for me was that in  this quest to unify,  the objective world(matter) with the world that resides in a center place. To me that place was the source from which all things manifest.

 Jung, in conjunction with the physicist Wolfgang Pauli, explored the possibility that his concepts of the archetype and synchronicity might be related to the unus mundus - the archetype being an expression of unus mundus; synchronicity, or "meaningful coincidence", being made possible by the fact that both the observer and connected phenomenon ultimately stem from the same source, the unus mundus.^[2]

So while there was this objective striving to see how such formations emerged as materiality of such expression,  was a final construct that existed in that external world. For me this was something no one could quite explain to me, yet,  as I moved forward  I began to find such correlates as to others who tried to map that expression.

 It was this psychoid aspect of the archetype that so impressed Nobel laureate physicist Wolfgang Pauli. Embracing Jung's concept, Pauli believed that the archetype provided a link between physical events and the mind of the scientist who studied them. In doing so he echoed the position adopted by German astronomer Johannes Kepler. Thus the archetypes which ordered our perceptions and ideas are themselves the product of an objective order which transcends both the human mind and the external world.^[2]

This as the idea emerged,  I looked for what emergence might mean, as an example of a beginning,  and the subsequent model that may emerge from that source. This then became know as the "arche,"  and the tendency to form"(type)" as a movement forward in the solidifying of that expression. This was a matter bound expression, fully recognizing the need for a spiritual recognition of this opposition as a struggle in with consciousness to seek balance with materiality. Polarity,  as the world of the real.

One of Duchamp's close friends Man Ray (1890–1976) was also one of Duchamp's collaborators. His photograph 'Dust Breeding' (Duchamp's Large Glass with Dust Notes) from 1920 is a document of The Large Glass after it had collected a year's worth of dust while Duchamp was in New York. See:
Dust Breeding (Man Ray 1920)

Such histrionically values were tied to such expressions to have found that the inner world and the outer-world were extremely connected. The observance not seen until it was understood that this psychology was topological interpreting itself from an inductive/deductive stance,  as to the question, and with regard to the nature of the question.

 Jung interpreted the practice of alchemy as the symbolic projection of psychic processes. In Psychology and Alchemy and Mysterium Coniunctionis (1955/56), Jung’s empirical exploration and rediscovery of the objective psyche led him to recognise that the basis of the alchemist’s endeavour was the archetypal union of opposites by means of the integration of opposing polarities: conscious and unconscious, reason and instinct, spiritual and material, masculine and feminine. In the last summaries of his insights on the subject, influenced in part by his collaboration with the Nobel Prize winning physicist Wolfgang Pauli, the old Jung envisions a great psycho-physical mystery to which the old alchemists gave the name of unus mundus (one world). At the root of all being, so he intimates, there is a state wherein physicality and spirituality meet. See:Reflections On Duchamp, Quantum Physics, And Mysterium Coniunctionis

This would place myself in the position of questioning this causal nature to have said that "will" was deeply connected to our psyche,  to have not understood this deeper perception of a reality connection. Also,  that such unification was deeper embedded in this practice of unification,  so as to strive to form,  as a example of an idea into expression.

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

This alchemy valuation of that work toward expression was based on a fundamental reality of joining the objectified world with the nature of the source. This forming process,  the constructs,  as a fundamental structure of the reality given.

***

See Also:

• The Arche, is a Fundamental Point of View?
• Who is the Clockmaker?
  
• Pauli's World Clock
• Crystal Structure

Flatland in Expression?

Professor Konstantin Novoselov talks about his Nobel Prize winning discovery graphene, and what the future holds for it in the 2012 Kohn Award Lecture SEE: Graphene: materials in the flatland

See Also:

• 2012 : WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE DEEP, ELEGANT, OR BEAUTIFUL EXPLANATION?
• Two Paul Steinhardt Projects: "Cyclic Universe" and "Quasicrystals"
• Nobel laureate Andre Geim visits Chalmers

Two Paul Steinhardt Projects: "Cyclic Universe" and "Quasicrystals"

Two Paul Steinhardt Projects: "Cyclic Universe" and "Quasicrystals"

Paul Steinhardt

Albert Einstein Professor in Science, Departments of Physics and Astrophysical...

Quasi-elegance....As a young student first reading Weyl's book, crystallography seemed like the "ideal" of what one should be aiming for in science: elegant mathematics that provides a complete understanding of all physical possibilities. Ironically, many years later, I played a role in showing that my "ideal" was seriously flawed. In 1984, Dan Shechtman, Ilan Blech, Denis Gratias and John Cahn reported the discovery of a puzzling manmade alloy of aluminumand manganese with icosahedral symmetry. Icosahedral symmetry, with its six five-fold symmetry axes, is the most famous forbidden crystal symmetry. As luck would have it, Dov Levine (Technion) and I had been developing a hypothetical idea of a new form of solid that we dubbed quasicrystals, short for quasiperiodic crystals. (A quasiperiodic atomic arrangement means the atomic positions can be described by a sum of oscillatory functions whose frequencies have an irrational ratio.) We were inspired by a two-dimensional tiling invented by Sir Roger Penrose known as the Penrose tiling, comprised of two tiles arranged in a five-fold symmetric pattern. We showed that quasicrystals could exist in three dimensions and were not subject to the rules of crystallography. In fact, they could have any of the symmetries forbidden to crystals. Furthermore, we showed that the diffraction patterns predicted for icosahedral quasicrystals matched the Shechtman et al. observations. Since 1984, quasicrystals with other forbidden symmetries have been synthesized in the laboratory. The 2011 Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to Dan Shechtman for his experimental breakthrough that changed our thinking about possible forms of matter. More recently, colleagues and I have found evidence that quasicrystals may have been among the first minerals to have formed in the solar system.

The crystallography I first encountered in Weyl's book, thought to be complete and immutable, turned out to be woefully incomplete, missing literally an uncountable number of possible symmetries for matter. Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned: While elegance and simplicity are often useful criteria for judging theories, they can sometimes mislead us into thinking we are right, when we are actually infinitely wrong. See:
2012 : WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE DEEP, ELEGANT, OR BEAUTIFUL EXPLANATION?

See Also:

• Quasicrystal: Prof. Dan Shechtman
• what is your favorite deep, elegant, or beautiful - Dialogos of Eide
• Cyclic model
• Cycle of Birth, Life, and Death-Origin, Identity, and Destiny by Gabriele Veneziano
• Conformal Cyclic Cosmology....

Process Fractal vs Geometry Fractals

Let proportion be found not only in numbers, but also in sounds, weights, times and positions, and whatever force there is.Leonardo Da Vinci

The Mandelbrot set, seen here in an image generated by NOVA, epitomizes the fractal. Photo credit: © WGBH Educational Foundation

 "Clouds are not spheres, mountains are not cones, coastlines are not circles, and bark is not smooth, nor does lightning travel in a straight line." So writes acclaimed mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot in his path-breaking book The Fractal Geometry of Nature. Instead, such natural forms, and many man-made creations as well, are "rough," he says. To study and learn from such roughness, for which he invented the term fractal, Mandelbrot devised a new kind of visual mathematics based on such irregular shapes. Fractal geometry, as he called this new math, is worlds apart from the Euclidean variety we all learn in school, and it has sparked discoveries in myriad fields, from finance to metallurgy, cosmology to medicine. In this interview, hear from the father of fractals about why he disdains rules, why he considers himself a philosopher, and why he abandons work on any given advance in fractals as soon as it becomes popular. A Radical Mind

As I watch the dialogue between Bruce Lipton and Tom Campbell here, there were many things that helped my perspective understand the virtual world in relation to how the biology subject was presented. It is obvious then why Bruce Lipton likes the analogies Tom Campbell has to offer. The epiphanies Bruce is having along the road to his developing biological work is very important. It is how each time a person makes the leap that one must understand how individuals change, how societies change.



Okay so for one,  the subject of fractals presents itself and the idea of process fractals and Geometry Fractals were presented in relation to each other. Now the talk moved onto the very thought of geometry presented in context sort of raised by ire even though I couldn't distinguish the differences. The virtual world analogy is still very unsettling to me.

So ya I have something to learn here.

I think my problem was with how such iteration may be schematically driven so as toidentify the pattern. Is to see this process reveal itself on a much larger scale. So when I looked at the Euclidean basis as a Newtonian expression the evolution toward relativity had to include the idea of Non Euclidean geometries. This was the natural evolution of the math that lies at the basis of graduating from a Euclidean world. It is the natural expression of understanding how this geometry can move into  a dynamical world.

So yes the developing perspective for me is that even though we are talking abut mathematical structures here we see some correspondence in nature . This has been my thing so as to discover the starting point?

A schematic of a transmembrane receptor

It the truest sense I had already these questions in my mind as  I was going through the talk. The starting point for Bruce is his biology and the cell. For Tom, he has not been explicit here other then to say that it is his studies with Monroe that he developed his thoughts around the virtual world as it relates to the idea of what he found working with Monroe.

So it is an exploration I feel of the work he encountered and has not so far as I seen made a public statement to that effect. It needs to be said and he needs to go back and look over how he had his epiphanies. For me this is about the process of discovery and creativity that I have found in my own life. Can one feel so full as to have found ones wealth in being that you can look everywhere and see the beginnings of many things?

This wealth is not monetary for me although I recognized we had to take care of or families and made sure they were ready to be off on their own. To be productive.

The Blind Men and the Elephant
John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)

 So for me the quest for that starting point is to identify the pattern that exists in nature as much as many have tried various perspective in terms of quantum gravity. Yes, we are all sort of like blind men trying to explain the reality of the world in our own way and in the process we may come up with our epiphanies.

These epiphanies help us to the next level of understanding as if we moved outside of our skeletal frame to allow the membrane of the cell to allow receptivity of what exist in the world around as information. We are not limited then to the frame of the skeleton hardened too, that we cannot progress further. The surface area of the membrane then becomes a request to open the channels toward expansion of the limitations we had applied to ourselves maintaining a frame of reference.

Where is Our Starting Point?

	"The end he (the artist) strives for is something else than a perfectly executed print. His aim is to depict dreams, ideas, or problems in such a way that other people can observe and consider them." - M.C. Escher

• The Nobel Prize in Physics 1914 Max von Laue

• Quasicrystal: Prof. Dan Shechtman

Can you trace the patterns in nature toward matter manifestations?

	To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images. -Plato, The Republic (Book VII)

The idea here is about how one's observation and model perceptions arises from some ordered perspective. Some use a starting point as an assumption of position. Do recognize "the starting point" in the previous examples?

 Cycle of Birth, Life, and Death-Origin, Indentity, and Destiny by Gabriele Veneziano

In one form or another, the issue of the ultimate beginning has engaged philosophers and theologians in nearly every culture. It is entwined with a grand set of concerns, one famously encapsulated in an 1897 painting by Paul Gauguin: D'ou venons-nous? Que sommes-nous? Ou allons-nous? "Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going?"

The effective realization that particle constructs are somehow smaller windows of a much larger perspective fails to take in account this idea that I am expressing as a foundational approach to that starting point.

If you do not go all the way toward defining of that "point of equilibrium" how are you to understand how information is easily transferred to the individual from a much larger reality of existence? One would assume information is all around us? That there are multitudes of pathways that allow us to arrive at some some probability density configuration as some measure of an Pascalian ideal.

Of course there are problems with this in terms of our defining a heat death in individuals?

That's not possible so one is missing the understanding here about equilibrium. I might have said we are positional in terms of the past and the future with regard to memory and the anticipated future? How is that heat death correlated? It can't.

So you have to look for examples in relation to how one may arrive at that beginning point. Your theory may not be sufficiently dealing with the information as it is expressed in terms of your approach to the small window?

There are mathematical inspections here that have yet to be associated with more then discrete functions of reality as expressive building blocks of interpretation. The basic assumption of discrete function still exists in contrast to continuity of expression. This is the defining realization in assuming the model that MBT provides. I have meet the same logic in the differences of scientific approach toward the definition of what is becoming?

On the one hand, a configuration space as demonstrated by Tom that is vastly used in science. On the other, a recognition of how thick in measure viscosity is realized and what the physics is in this association. Not just the physical manifestation of, but of what happens when equilibrium is reached. Hot or very cold. Temperature, is not a problem then?

See my problem is that I can show you levitation of objects using superconductors but I cannot produce this in real life without that science. Yet, in face of that science I know that something can happen irregardless of what all the science said, so I am looking as well to combining the meta with the physical to realize that such a conditions may arise in how we as a total culture have accepted the parameters of our thinking.

So by dealing with those parameters I too hoped to see a cultural shift(paradigm and Kuhn) by adoption of the realization as we are with regard to the way in which we function in this reality. So if your thinking abut gravity how is this possible within the "frame work" to have it encroach upon our very own psychological makeup too?