Showing posts with label Self-Organization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Self-Organization. Show all posts

Monday, May 30, 2005

Microstates and Gravity


Strominger: That was the problem we had to solve. In order to count microstates, you need a microscopic theory. Boltzmann had one–the theory of molecules. We needed a microscopic theory for black holes that had to have three characteristics: One, it had to include quantum mechanics. Two, it obviously had to include gravity, because black holes are the quintessential gravitational objects. And three, it had to be a theory in which we would be able to do the hard computations of strong interactions. I say strong interactions because the forces inside a black hole are large, and whenever you have a system in which forces are large it becomes hard to do a calculation.



I was scanning over at Sean Carroll's blog and noticed his current article. It seems he is doing some kind of exorcism?:)

Entropy and intelligence


Consider the following system: a rectangular container filled part way with tiny spheres, some of them made of glass and some of brass. All the spheres have equal size, but the brass ones are heavier than the glass ones. Okay, now please tell me which of these configurations has the lowest entropy (or highest order, or greatest complexity, or whatever it is that you think only intelligence can bring into existence):


Now what was appealing to me here is the question of arrangement, and how chaotic systems might have been ruled by other consequences? Like gravity. So troubled by the analogy presented and distancing myself from some satanic feature of intelligent dsign, I wonder, what is going on here?


The animation shows schematically the behavior of the gas molecules in the presence of a gravitational field. We can see in this figure that the concentration of molecules at the bottom of the vessel is higher than the one at the top of the vessel, and that the molecules being pushed upwards fall again under the action of the gravitational field.


Now if I was to wonder about what would govern these thoughts, then indeed the question is raised that such intelligence is governed by a organizational ability that evolved from a better understanding of these graviational influences?

I am a junior here so the idea that such a exorcism would have been dispelled in this attempted has me wondering. Is there some greater design here in elminating the abilities of capable good thinking people and spooky actions, that have defied explanation?

A nice airplane ride is always fruitful to higher forms of thinking here? Time clocks, still exemplify some characteristics on molecular arangements? As well as Einstein and liethe impulsive qualites that such characters appeal to the scolastic heroes of our time, we are drawn by some inexplicable force to wonder about natures way?

Self Organization of Matter

Likewise, if the very fabric of the Universe is in a quantum-critical state, then the "stuff" that underlies reality is totally irrelevant-it could be anything, says Laughlin. Even if the string theorists show that strings can give rise to the matter and natural laws we know, they won't have proved that strings are the answer-merely one of the infinite number of possible answers. It could as well be pool balls or Lego bricks or drunk sergeant majors.


See:

  • Quantum Microstates
  • Wednesday, February 02, 2005

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

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


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

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


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



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

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

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

    Found in: "What is the Theory of Relativity?",
    Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, Three Rivers
    Press, p. 228-9.


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

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


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


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


    Friday, November 19, 2004

    The Butterfly Effect



    The "Butterfly Effect" is the propensity of a system to be sensitive to initial conditions.Such systems over time become unpredictable,this idea gave rise to the notion of a butterfly flapping it's wings in one area of the world,causing a tornado or some such weather event to occur in another remote area of the world.

    Where do these ideas of weather exist, before they find themselves funneling into man's framework, called the brain?

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


    In contemplating the essence of the ideas of complexity it became increasingly clear to me, that the ideas manifesting and philosophies that were looking at this, could be recognized in tell tale signs of international terrorism of the worst kind.

    The final image of the twin towers in panel shown, before, such a contemplative action, spoke to such complexities. Had we been able to see what effect this action had, we might have then said look, indeed, where is it's origination. The reveberations, "symbolically," not only shook the foundation, but was started long before and continue to this day.

    Whether the state of the nation or of the world community, such attempts to disrupt, left signatures with it's ideological thinking, that became the trademark of expansive and multple effects, as if, reverberating from a initial idea. Community and science spoke freely. Had we let evil loose, from such conceptualizations?

    This raises a much deeper and fundamental question then, about the nature of reality that would emerge in this Third Superstring Revolution, that such conceptualization are now open and free. That questions of self organization, had fundamental thoughts governing it's growth all along.

    These ideas always existed then, in the bulk, but waited, for the right channel to express themselves? Like beget's like, and manifests into form?

    You see?

    Tuesday, November 16, 2004

    Self-Organization of Matter



    Everyone knows that human societies organize themselves. But it is also true that nature organizes itself, and that the principles by which it does this is what modern science, and especially modern physics, is all about. The purpose of my talk today is to explain this idea.



    So why is it so difficult to accept the idea that if a Professor is walking across the room, that many of his students would congregate.:) Just as they would in any other attempts at defining the nature of this reality?

    Hooft, Witten and now Lauglin himself understands, that we have face to face with a problem? By arguing "stuff", would we have divested ourselves of recognition of this Third Superstring Revolution? Of course not.:)


    Likewise, if the very fabric of the Universe is in a quantum-critical state, then the "stuff" that underlies reality is totally irrelevant-it could be anything, says Laughlin. Even if the string theorists show that strings can give rise to the matter and natural laws we know, they won't have proved that strings are the answer-merely one of the infinite number of possible answers. It could as well be pool balls or Lego bricks or drunk sergeant majors.

    Witten's statement has then brought myself to recognize strings will manifest as a emergent property of spacetime. It is a conceptual reocgnition, that does not falter under the guise of irrelevant possibilties, but one facet of a concerted effort.