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.

Shut Up and Calculate

I think its the Feynman approached the work of Dirac by using Feyman diagrams to illustrate a mapping of the interactions. Now to me the visualization techniques are much as Feynman puts it, where okay you are an alien, how would you approach the world and you see Feynman comes up with the method.....I think reiterating what his Father said to him.

Paul Dirac When one is doing mathematical work, there are essentially two different ways of thinking about the subject: the algebraic way, and the geometric way. With the algebraic way, one is all the time writing down equations and following rules of deduction, and interpreting these equations to get more equations. With the geometric way, one is thinking in terms of pictures; pictures which one imagines in space in some way, and one just tries to get a feeling for the relationships between the quantities occurring in those pictures. Now, a good mathematician has to be a master of both ways of those ways of thinking, but even so, he will have a preference for one or the other; I don't think he can avoid it. In my own case, my own preference is especially for the geometrical way.link is evasive http://atomicprecision.com/Topics/Pa...20Geometry.pdf

So Feynman's series sort of helps you to set your self up in such a way in order to see that perception has to be ignited in such a way as to ask question in a the approach he discusses.

	I always used these geometrical ideas for getting clear notions about relationships in relativity although I didn’t refer to them in my published works.Oral History Transcript — Dr. P. A. M. Dirac

So for Dirac to to help us understand anti-matter as symbol within the matrices, beauty in the analytical way, also needs as good way to visualize what he was doing. IN the same breathe Penrose uses Riemann sphere to elucidate the geometry as a sister approach to developing his thoughts regarding the universe. A geometrical underpinning.

[ROGER PENROSE] "One particular thing that struck me... [LAUGHTER]...is the fact that he found it necessary to translate all the results that he had achieved with such methods into algebraic notation. It struck me particularly, because remember I am told of Newton, when he wrote up his work, it was always exactly the opposite, in that he obtained so much of his results, so many of his results using analytical techniques and because of the general way in which things at that time had to be explained to people, he found it necessary to translate his results into the language of geometry, so his contemporaries could understand him. Well, I guess geometry… [INAUDIBLE] not quite the same topic as to whether one thinks theoretically or analytically, algebraically perhaps. This rule is perhaps touched upon at the beginning of Professor Dirac's talk, and I think it is a very interesting topic."http://atomicprecision.com/Topics/Pa...20Geometry.pdf

So this is my suspicion and I am not sure many share it. It goes back to when Penrose's talks about cohomology and he illustrates, Penrose's triangle. How would he get anyone to see the way he does and point out the difficulties and say, maybe you have an answer, because I do not know? Your invited?


So you develop a model, and lets call it a virtual reality. Once you climb on board how will your world view have changed that the things you answer seem so different, had you not answer the question without such a bias? A alien really, I think this was quite suggestive of Feynman to help others see away into what he was doing.

	Feynman: ‘Maxwell discussed … in terms of a model in which the vacuum was like an elastic … what counts are the equations themselves and not the model used to get them. We may only question whether the equations are true or false … If we take away the model he used to build it, Maxwell’s beautiful edifice stands…’ – Richard P. Feynman, Feynman Lectures on Physics, v3, c18, p2.

Shut Up and Calculate, you get what was meant.

Maybe, you will invoke different models with analytical functions in order to help you see differently, add perspectives that without considering Feynman's approach, this advancement in thinking would not take place. We get to these points and move the goal post(we get stuck), in order to see where the ole timers left off, and prepares for the next generation of thinkers? Feynman came to the realization on his own by correlating insights over a span of hundreds of years, by himself, not with others, so how did he do that? He is telling us. Like Penrose is telling us, requires visualization capabilities that have already been mapped and can be mapped to higher dimensions? What purpose to see Adinkras that will light the way toward.....???????


Beauty is understood then, when it came to pass, Dirac's equations lead the way, and Little did we know how Dirac actually used his perception. It propelled him forward, as it does for Penrose, but the beauty remains, and how far forward will somebody else with vision help us toward the next step?

 So cosmological you are looking to the past? You look up at the night sky and when were all these messages received in the classical sense but to be an observer of what happened a long time ago.

Consciousness as a Pure State

Life must be understood backwards; but... it must be lived forward.
Soren Kierkegaard

If consciousness is able to abstract, then consciousness is able to survive a heat death by going back to the beginning of the universe with those abstractions? Consciousness, is able to survive a heat death by mathematically abstracting, then ones consciousness can indeed reach a Pure State.

Since entropy gives information about the evolution of an isolated system with time, it is said to give us the direction of "time's arrow" . If snapshots of a system at two different times shows one state which is more disordered, then it could be implied that this state came later in time. For an isolated system, the natural course of events takes the system to a more disordered (higher entropy) state. -http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/seclaw.html

	The concept of entropy and the second law of thermodynamics suggests that systems naturally progress from order to disorder. If so, how do biological systems develop and maintain such a high degree of order? Is this a violation of the second law of thermodynamics? -http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/bioentropy.html#c1 See:  Chicken or the Egg Dilemma

***

Found a video for reference and posted for examination.Interesting comment at this moment?




So, what does Sir Roger Penrose say about consciousness?

So I may talk about a gap, but what is Stuart saying. So as a Platonist, we do not just see mathematics, but we see other things.

In a logical process, objective reductionism(ORCH) takes you to a certain point. Your aware of this point, and you can go back and look at the theory so as to suggest what consciousness is actually doing in that state. Penrose is actually telling us about the differences, regarding use of consciousness versus the computational view.

So with regard to this phenomenological association between two people, as Stuart and Sir Roger, they are melding "the abstract" to the biology. I asked if one could see a contradiction and I think if you look at what Stuart is saying here how does this fit with ideas about entropy?

So both of them were attack by philosophers, and by many others about their ideas.

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

Quantum Tunnelling

Quantum tunnelling or tunneling (see spelling differences) refers to the quantum mechanical phenomenon where a particle tunnels through a barrier that it classically could not surmount. This plays an essential role in several physical phenomena, such as the nuclear fusion that occurs in main sequence stars like the Sun.[1] It has important applications to modern devices such as the tunnel diode,[2] quantum computing, and the scanning tunnelling microscope. The effect was predicted in the early 20th century and its acceptance, as a general physical phenomenon, came mid-century.[3]

ABSTRACT Surprisingly robust quantum effects have been observed in warm biological systems. At the same time quantum information technology has moved closer to physical realization. This one day workshop will examine the significance of mesoscopic quantum coherence, tunneling and entanglement in biomolecular membranes, proteins, DNA and cytoskeleton, with particular attention to recently discovered megahertz ballistic conductance in microtubules. Potential utilization of biomolecular quantum information in regulation of cellular activities will be addressed, along with implications for disease and therapy as well as the future development of quantum computation and artificial intelligence.Google Workshop on Quantum Biology, Welcome and Introduction, Presented by Hartmut Neven

See Also:

• Discovery of quantum vibrations in 'microtubules' corroborates theory of consciousness
• Are microtubules macroscopic quantum systems?
• Flatland in Expression?

A Universe on the Other Side

 "I think people thought that the universe was smaller, yet discoveries in the last century have found there are black holes everywhere, billions of black holes in our universe and each may produce a universe on the other side, like an infinite tree," he said. - See more at: New Hit Film ‘Gravity’ Speaks to Our Endless Fascination with Deep Space - See more at: http://www.noodls.com/view/6061E5510....3rrRV6eS.dpuf

Just to help here given a platform with which to consider,  the question of," Dr. Poplawski from the University of New Haven, Connecticut, concluded that each time a black hole forms, a new universe could form within it."

One is always looking for evidence of such things. The very contention of black hole itself has to have had a basis with which to consider. So we may say these black holes are real.

While the subject provides many things to consider how does Dr. Poplawski provide evidence for such a statement of universe within universe?

If you look at closely at align perspectives with which to examine this it may help to look at how one is perceiving the idea of the universe? For cosmology they may say that in a coordinated system there is no before or after, just what exists as is? So any notion of what came before this universe or what is to come after is hard pill to swallow.



For some of us it is not a problem. For me then the idea is that in local regions of the universe, information is crunched in order to be dissipated in the larger universe. This supplies the motivation for expansion, and at the same time the evolving nature of the universe has to have more black holes in order to summat the existence of any cosmological constant that is to be considered positive?

The question of entropy,  as it existed in the early universe? How does this figure into the ability for any new universe to form? You are confronted with the notion of a symmetry existing in the early universe for the nature of entropy to follow the path it is today? How could any universe have existed as a fundamental reality of the current universe?

BEFORE THE BIG BANG: AN OUTRAGEOUS NEW PERSPECTIVE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS

For example.

In 2010, Penrose and Vahe Gurzadyan published a preprint of a paper claiming that observations of the cosmic microwave background made by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and the BOOMERanG experiment showed concentric anomalies which were consistent with the CCC hypothesis, with a low probability of the null hypothesis that the observations in question were caused by chance.[5] However, the statistical significance of the claimed detection has since been questioned. Three groups have independently attempted to reproduce these results, but found that the detection of the concentric anomalies was not statistically significant, in the sense that such circles would appear in a proper Gaussian simulation of the anisotropy in the CMB data.[6][7][8]

The reason for the disagreement was tracked down to an issue of how to construct the simulations that are used to determine the significance: The three independent attempts to repeat the analysis all used simulations based on the standard Lambda-CDM model, while Penrose and Gurzadyan used an undocumented non-standard approach.[9]Conformal cyclic cosmology

So for some who hold entropy as a subjective examination of the reality with which we live now,  how can one exist as a viewer of the larger universe that contains all these other universe being respective of the arrow of time??
 
Can disorder precede order as a question of what came first as to the existence of the universe? The chicken or egg question. The idea then that the overarching principle here is an arrow of time, such hypothesis to consider needs a factor with which to consider such expansion being supported by some factors given to what can exist as a fundamental reality in those local regions of the universe.

Information Loss

You see, people are uncomfortable with this information loss. It’s the minority view.Pg 64, The Cyclic Universe: A Conversation with Roger Penrose

I am certainly uncomfortable with it, as I have always seen it from the idea  as to what is current in the field of discussion around blackholes and such. So there are things going on as I am reading the pdf discussion with Roger Penrose.  I am also listening to Susskind's lecture while correlating the perspective that is being talked about by Roger Penrose.

I am adding this link just for some perspective about information and the presence of an anomaly that I perceive for such rules about past and future, and the topic of will. This as it relates too, the whole gamut of the science and investigation of what truly exists in terms of information.  Most surely,  I have some issues to deal with:)

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....

Universal Resurrection?

 It might sound metaphysical and ominous with the idea that such a rebirth could have become the idea of a reincarnation with all that it could entail in information that is existing for the next round of universal expressions. So no,  information is never lost :-) Shall we for ever tassel for the Chicken and Egg question or accept cosmologically that the universe is as if the chick and no further questions asked?:)

Maybe you are a good practicing Catholic for what is coming with Easter?? I would never judge any individual for what their religious belief is. But yes,  I do believe that such rebirths are part of the process for our improvement, how ever such views allow us to the see the world,  it is in these new ways.  It is,  as if even our own view is an example of the world in which we will see,  as to how we are at the center of our own expressions. Not intentionally being self centered, but administrating that such births take place even within us. But that's just my point of view.

So anyway onto the scientific explanation as I see it.

 
Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, from one of his Pittsburgh lecture slides in June, 2009. Photo by Bryan W. Roberts


Some things that came to mind are based on the idea of cyclic universe as supposed by Sir Roger Penrose. Questions outside the parameters of the cosmological universe allow for other points of view to emerge as one can surmise as not being blatantly unfair. That such a thing is as to consider "other universes" then, could become possible.  I would like to present then that the idea of the current universe is as if counted as speeding up, something within our current universe is contributing. Sean Carroll was looking for that.

To maintain such a balance as Omega (If we triangulate Omega, the universe in which we are in, Omega_m(mass)+ Omega(a vacuum), what position geometrically, would our universe hold from the coordinates given?),  then is to suggest that speeding up, has components that will help to incite a geometrical presence as to how such a universe is displayed? If so,  then at a "quantum level" such contributions are being classically displayed, while forcing views with regard toward  powers of ten as to suggest, there is a much wider view here then what you see in the everyday life.

That's just part of it. So it is with this video that you might find interesting. S James Gates demonstrates a measure of time in the sense that what was historically displayed by scientists of the last hundred years can emerge within as building a systemic picture and language development which is beautiful,  while being abstract worthy of considering. This is a good example of how ones view of the world can change from what we had as always looked at the world. You find such abstractness( math structure) but there is indeed a lesson in it.

A Superset Universe?

How would you draw a Universe with all theories as being part of,  as a subset?

Pictorial representations can be very useful in presenting information or assisting reasoning. Venn diagram is an example. Venn diagrams are used to represent classes of objects, and they can also assist us in reasoning about the relations between these classes. They are named after the English mathematician John Venn (1834 - 1923), who was a fellow at Cambridge University.

A few may have taken in the link supplied to a lecture given by Thomas Campbell with regard to his MBT book he had written. Now, I was drawn to the idea of a Venn diagram presented in his lecture and the idea of how one might have use this diagram as a question about the universe and it's subsets? How would you draw it?

I give a current posting by Sean Carroll with regards to his opinion on a book written by Lawrence Krauss. So there all these theories about the nature of the universe and some scientists of course have their opinions.

............Or not, of course. We should be good empiricists and be open to the possibility that what we think of as the universe really does exist within some larger context. But then we could presumably re-define that as the universe, and be stuck with the same questions. As long as you admit that there is more than one conceivable way for the universe to be (and I don’t see how one could not), there will always be some end of the line for explanations. I could be wrong about that, but an insistence that “the universe must explain itself” or some such thing seems like a completely unsupportable a priori assumption. (Not that anyone in this particular brouhaha seems to be taking such a stance.) SEE:A Universe from Nothing?

Physicists have proposed several theories to explain why Λ is so small. One of the most popular -- the "anthropic principle" -- states that Λ is randomly set and has very different values in different parts of the universe (figure 1). We happen to live in a rare region, or "bubble", where Λ has the value we observe. This value has allowed stars, planets and therefore life to develop. However, this theory is also unsatisfactory for many scientists because it would be better to be able to calculate Λ from first principles.

See also:

• Plinko Sounds a Bit like the Galton Board

• Justified true belief

• Memories Arise Out of a Equilibrium

Relativism

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1914 Max von Laue

I am not sure what I can add other then what I have already been saying toward logical deduction....I still need to get a handle on the essence of what is being said here in opening thread.

So with what I looked at, can we say that the deductive recognition of lets say symmetry would be in contrast to how you might look at the world in a relativistic sense versus Platonism.

See: Against Symmetry

This setting was used more I think in terms of how a scientist is explaining himself and his relationship with the way in which he had approached science.....yet I could see there were scientist who had adopted the Platonic Tradition. Example of Penrose and Coxeter were demonstrative of this idea?

5.4.3 Platonism and Relativism

Platonism is a family of views that get their name because they involve entities--propositions, properties, sets--which, like Plato's Forms, are held to be abstract, immutable things that exist outside space and time. On many platonistic approaches, concepts express abstract properties and beliefs are relations between people and abstract propositions. This suggests a way around some types of relativism, since people in quite different cultures could have many of the same beliefs (because they could believe the same abstract propositions), and a belief would be true just in case the immutable proposition it expresses is true.

The relativist may reply that platonistic accounts lead to severe difficulties in epistemology and semantics. The problem is that we are physical organisms living in a spatio-temporal world, and we cannot interact causally (or in any other discernible way) with abstract, causally inert things. Moreover, few people are aware of having any special cognitive faculty that puts them in touch with a timeless realm of abstract objects, neuroscientists have never found any part of the brain that subserves such an ability, such a view is not suggested by what is known about the ways children acquire concepts and beliefs, and nothing in physics suggests any way in which a physical system (the brain) can make any sort of contact with causally inert, non-physical objects. Moreover, if our minds cannot make epistemic contact with such things, it is difficult to see how our words and linguistic practices can make semantic contact with them.

None of this proves that abstract propositions don't exist, but it shows it isn't obvious that they do. There have been few debates between relativists and platonists over such matters, however, perhaps because the two views lie so far apart that their proponents cannot easily engage one another.

So these were two positions that were adopted within the push toward understanding the basis of science and it's mathematics.

In theory model development was pushed forward on the basis of such adoptions. Loop Quantum Gravity?

Quasicrystal: Prof. Dan Shechtman

***

Just throwing some stuff together in order to understand the extent of relativism as a universal truth, while seeking to understand the subjective realism that make up our individuality. As a layman I do not know if it will be useful under that admittance. You can judge for yourself of course.

Most people think of "seeing" and "observing" directly with their senses. But for physicists, these words refer to much more indirect measurements involving a train of theoretical logic by which we can interpret what is "seen."- Lisa Randall

If one was to solidify some basis to truth how would this be done? The question of a logic oriented view for me saw a basis in what Penrose was explaining using his Twistors, as a foundation in incorporating Fuzzy logic?

While examining the psychological model of Venn logic and TA combined, it was important that there be some relative framework for such a subjective interpretation of a logic orientated world. How subjectively could this have been managed?


Perspective of the Theoretical Scientist

So you have this history and theoretical perspective that sees the world in one way or another? How do you reduce it to a process through Computing that establishes a basis in machining the effects of [and\or-so that we say a statement is .7 true and .3 false.]? We've created a space in between a true and false statement?

DNA computing is a form of computing which uses DNA, biochemistry and molecular biology, instead of the traditional silicon-based computer technologies. DNA computing, or, more generally, molecular computing, is a fast developing interdisciplinary area. Research and development in this area concerns theory, experiments and applications of DNA computing See:DNA computing

Entanglement then provides for other understanding then of a framework that sees the interrogation of a subjective world?

Do we selectively ignore other models from artificial intelligence such as Zadeh's Fuzzy Logic? This is a logic used to model perception and used in newly designed "smart" cameras. Where standard logic must give a true or false value to every proposition, fuzzy logic assigns a certainty value between zero and one to each of the propositions, so that we say a statement is .7 true and .3 false. Is this theory selectively ignored to support our theories? Ideas on Quantum Interrogation

***

Geometry Leads us to the Truth?

Part of the realism here for me is the idea that such patterns established deep within our psyche are inherent in each of us as an image first to our awareness, but encompasses a geometric patten of sorts. This was part of the work I did on myself as I explored the realm of dreams. The idea then manifested in what was the basis of this thought process as mandala in origins. A historical vision of an ancient idea of model building. In today's world I thought this as appropriate toward how theoretical ideas are built around a whole history of science and information.

Inspirations

Inspired on Escher's works. A free vision on how could be his workplace.

I was made aware of This Youtube video by Clifford of Asymptotia. He also linked, Lines and Colors.

The Physics of Reality

Roger Penrose discusses his experiment on the BBC (25 minutes in)

Melvyn Bragg examines the physics of reality. When Quantum Mechanics was developed in the early 20th century reality changed forever. In the quantum world particles could be in two places at once, they disappeared for no reason and reappeared in unpredictable locations, they even acted differently according to whether we were watching them. It was so shocking that Erwin Schrodinger, one of the founders of Quantum Theory, said "I don’t like it and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it." He even developed an experiment with a cat to show how absurd it was.

Quantum Theory was absurd, it disagreed with the classical physics of Newton and Einstein and it clashed with our experience of the everyday world. Footballs do not disappear without reason, cats do not split into two and shoes do not act differently when we are not looking at them. Or do they? Eighty years later we are still debating whether the absurd might actually be true See: The Physics of Reality

See Also:

• The Penrose interpretation
• The Planck length as a minimal length
  

Geometry Leads us to the Truth?

"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

I too have always been interested at the idea of what we can see deeper then what we observe on the surface. As if an abstraction in the geometry may be leading when considering Polytopes and allotrope s or even Penrose Tilings as to the Truth?:)

A remarkable mosaic of atoms

In quasicrystals, we find the fascinating mosaics of the Arabic world reproduced at the level of atoms: regular patterns that never repeat themselves. However, the configuration found in quasicrystals was considered impossible, and Dan Shechtman had to fight a fierce battle against established science. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2011 has fundamentally altered how chemists conceive of solid matter. See: The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2011 Dan Shechtman

I do not think one can ever imagine what goes through my mind and I guess that's part of my artistic journey is to better learn how to describe what I am seeing. It goes back some time as to what I learn about myself and how some of these geometers see. I did not ever feel apart from them as I tried to look deeper into reality and see what the basis is and how  we might describe that.

You must also know I now sport an interesting tattoo that I will share shortly. Maybe even consider it as a line break, and as a pointer. You'll see why when I upload picture. So,  that has been my thing when I look at all this science and those espouse the teaching of,  that I tried to find my place in it. I mean I could be so wrong in a long of things.....but isn't that part of the evolution of being?  Learning about those mistakes and dealing with the responsibility of finding that truth within self?

If the heart was free from the impurities of sin, and therefore lighter than the feather, then the dead person could enter the eternal afterlife.

My second tattoo will be as in the picture showing below on this blog site demonstrating and seen above is an ancient idea about "our heart" in relation to "the truth."  How we weight that against one another and how the choices we make will have us asking whether we acted in accordance with that truth. That is "the final judgement" and if this is understood then we can access whether or not we have much more to learn. I know that setting right past mistakes is not an easy thing but if you at least start then that is part of the success of not of having to repeat them. Maybe repeat many times until you finally actually get it.

Well then,how does one simplify that picture of such Judgement in the Hall of Ma'at as to know that this message is alive and well in today's world and just as valid? How well will the tattooist portray this design? I'll have to give it to her  so she has some time to look at it and decipher.:)

 See Also:

• Fulleranes and Allotropes
• Coxeter and Plato's Cave
  

Conformal Cyclic Cosmology....

Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, from one of his Pittsburgh lecture slides in June, 2009. Photo by Bryan W. Roberts

Also see: BEFORE THE BIG BANG: AN OUTRAGEOUS NEW PERSPECTIVE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS

....... (CCC) is a cosmological model in the framework of general relativity, advanced by the theoretical physicist Sir Roger Penrose.^[1][2] In CCC, the universe undergoes a repeated cycle of death and rebirth, with the future timelike infinity of each previous universe being identified with the Big Bang singularity of the next.^[3] Penrose outlines this theory in his book Cycles of Time: An Extraordinary New View of the Universe.

Contents 1 Basic Construction 2 Physical Implications 3 Empirical Tests 4 See also 5 References

Basic Construction

Penrose's basic construction^[4] is to paste together a countable sequence of open FLRW spacetimes, each representing a big bang followed by an infinite future expansion. Penrose noticed that the past conformal boundary of one copy of FLRW spacetime can be "attached" to the future conformal boundary of another, after an appropriate conformal rescaling. In particular, each individual FLRW metric g_ab is multiplied by the square of a conformal factor Ω that approaches zero at timelike infinity, effectively "squashing down" the future conformal boundary to a conformally regular hypersurface (which is spacelike if there is a positive cosmological constant, as we currently believe). The result is a new solution to Einstein's equations, which Penrose takes to represent the entire Universe, and which is composed of a sequence of sectors that Penrose calls "aeons."

Physical Implications

The significant feature of this construction for particle physics is that, since baryons are obey the laws of conformally invariant quantum theory, they will behave in the same way in the rescaled aeons as in the original FLRW counterparts. (Classically, this corresponds to the fact that light cone structure is preserved under conformal rescalings.) For such particles, the boundary between aeons is not a boundary at all, but just a spacelike surface that can be passed across like any other. Fermions, on the other hand, remain confined to a given aeon. This provides a convenient solution to the black hole information paradox; according to Penrose, fermions must be irreversibly converted into radiation during black hole evaporation, to preserve the smoothness of the boundary between aeons.

The curvature properties of Penrose's cosmology are also highly desirable. First, the boundary between aeons satisfies the Weyl curvature hypothesis, thus providing a certain kind of low-entropy past as required by statistical mechanics and by observation. Second, Penrose has calculated that a certain amount of gravitational radiation should be preserved across the boundary between aeons. Penrose suggests this extra gravitational radiation may be enough to explain the observed cosmic acceleration without appeal to a dark energy matter field.

Empirical Tests

In 2010, Penrose and V. G. Gurzadyan published a preprint of a paper claiming that observations of the cosmic microwave background made by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and the BOOMERanG experiment showed concentric anomalies which were consistent with the CCC hypothesis, with a low probability of the null hypothesis that the observations in question were caused by chance.^[5] However, the statistical significance of the claimed detection has since been questioned. Three groups have independently attempted to reproduce these results, but found that the detection of the concentric anomalies was not statistically significant.^[6][7][8]

See also

• Conformal geometry
• Cyclic model
• Black hole information paradox

References

1. ^ Palmer, Jason (2010-11-27). "Cosmos may show echoes of events before Big Bang". BBC News. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11837869. Retrieved 2010-11-27. 
2. ^ Penrose, Roger (June 2006). "Before the big bang: An outrageous new perspective and its implications for particle physics". Edinburgh, Scotland: Proceedings of EPAC 2006. p. 2759-2767. http://accelconf.web.cern.ch/accelconf/e06/PAPERS/THESPA01.PDF. Retrieved 2010-11-27. 
3. ^ Cartlidge, Edwin (2010-11-19). "Penrose claims to have glimpsed universe before Big Bang". physicsworld.com. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/44388. Retrieved 2010-11-27. 
4. ^ Roger Penrose (2006). "Before the Big Bang: An Outrageous New Perspective and its Implications for Particle Physics". Proceedings of the EPAC 2006, Edinburgh, Scotland: 2759-2762. http://accelconf.web.cern.ch/accelconf/e06/PAPERS/THESPA01.PDF. 
5. ^ Gurzadyan VG; Penrose R (2010-11-16). "Concentric circles in WMAP data may provide evidence of violent pre-Big-Bang activity". arΧiv:1011.3706 [astro-ph.CO]. 
6. ^ Wehus IK; Eriksen HK (2010-12-07). "A search for concentric circles in the 7-year WMAP temperature sky maps". arΧiv:1012.1268 [astro-ph.CO]. 
7. ^ Moss A; Scott D; Zibin JP (2010-12-07). "No evidence for anomalously low variance circles on the sky". arΧiv:1012.1305 [astro-ph.CO]. 
8. ^ Hajian A (2010-12-8). "Are There Echoes From The Pre-Big Bang Universe? A Search for Low Variance Circles in the CMB Sky". arΧiv:1012.1656 [astro-ph.CO].

See Also: Penrose's CCC cosmology is either inflation or gibberish