Harmonics will Color Your World?

If you are a active participator of the very world around you, how is it, the makeup of high energy particle creations could not have included the standard model make up "harmonically described" does it not also apply to our "very thinking and conscious mind?" :)

The Landscape “avant la lettre” by A.N. Schellekens

The lowest harmonics correspond to the particles of the Standard Model, plus perhaps a few new particles. The higher harmonics correspond to an infinite series of particles that we can never observe, unless we can build a Planck Energy accelerator

So of course the very basis of the thinking was drawn in my mind to the very subject enlisted by the minds of our predeccessors, to wonder, how this associative function could have ever been at the basis of how we may look at the World?

Lee Smolin:

In case it is not obvious, let me emphasize that harmonic oscillators are not relevent here, and can play no role in a background independent quantum theory, precisely because the division of a field into harmonic modes requires a fixed background metric. Thus, the physics of the problem REQUIRES an alternative quantization

Of course it is never easy for me to understand what is going on while we have the issues of the background, versus, the non background, and this brings up the ole debates about positions and adoptives stances scientists have taken in regards to the "duality" of science's "quantum gravity" issues?



Do I have a complete grasp of it. Absolutely not, while it forces me back to the issues, as to what is the basis of this "difference of opinion?"

THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE


Leonnard Susskind and Lee Smolin

While this is a conversation written by physicists for physicists, it should nonetheless be of interest for Edge readers as it's in the context of previous Edge features with the authors, it's instructive as to how science is done, and it's a debate that clarifies, not detracts.

So by historically looking back, this is a reminder, about the ways in which science people are still looking at things, while holding their positions of thought today?

SEan's meeting at PI, is a very interesting one becuase what it does is take the teacher and student scenario, and manifests the circumstance of clarification as to positions, while providing for a intuitive surge to present itself in the minds of it's participnats.

So this debate then was held and it's relationship rememebered within this blog as to the basis of determination, about how we see the universe and all that is in it.

Lee Smolin:

The aim of this paper is to explain carefully the arguments behind the assertion that the correct quantum theory of gravity must be background independent. We begin by recounting how the debate over whether quantum gravity must be background independent is a continuation of a long-standing argument in the history of physics and philosophy over whether space and time are relational or absolute. This leads to a careful statement of what physicists mean when we speak of background independence. Given this we can characterize the precise sense in which general relativity is a background independent theory. The leading background independent approaches to quantum gravity are then discussed, including causal set models, loop quantum gravity and dynamical triangulations and their main achievements are summarized along with the problems that remain open. Some first attempts to cast string/M theory into a background independent formulation are also mentioned.

The relational/absolute debate has implications also for other issues such as unification and how the parameters of the standard models of physics and cosmology are to be explained. The recent issues concerning the string theory landscape are reviewed and it is argued that they can only be resolved within the context of a background independent formulation. Finally, we review some recent proposals to make quantum theory more relational.

So if someone saids that space is empty, I have a really hard time with it.

See:

Quantum Harmonic Oscillator

Science Mathmatically Endowed?

Approaches to the Quantum Theory of Gravity by the PI Institute

Two methods evolved in the theory of elementary particles to describe such quantized flux tubes. The one, called the loop method, studies them using the basic laws of electricity and magnetism, combined with quantum theory. The second, called string theory, postulates that the quantized flux tubes may be treated as fundamental in their own right, and the laws of electricity and magnetism derived from them.

Many theorists believe that these two points of view are actually equivalent—just different ways of studying the same thing from different points of view. The idea that they are the same is called duality, which here, as in other areas, signals that the same object is being studied with different ideas and methods.

Sometimes this is taken to another level of actual "feuding," yet it is understood, that they are all working towards the same end?


http://www.physics.ucsb.edu/~strings/superstrings/extradim.htm

One might called it discretism(to experimentally justify-Glast induced) while the other a "continuity of sorts" when it comes to "energy valuations" analogistically based on some "KK tower of tree like" reasoning? :) Unfortunately, I lost the owner of this quote below.

The jump from conventional field theories of point-like objects to a theory of one-dimensional objects has striking implications. The vibration spectrum of the string contains a massless spin-2 particle: the graviton. Its long wavelength interactions are described by Einstein's theory of General Relativity. Thus General Relativity may be viewed as a prediction of string theory!

Encapsulate all things "gravitationally enhanced" while extending the framework of the standard model? I did not say, or others did not say, that we should discard all science thinking?

The History of the Tree Rings



Oh that fellow is not me either.

I wanted to added some "time" to the idea of things holding the history of, whether it be "energy valuations" held in regards to the particle creations, but also to the idea of earth's history embedded in some "form of expression" here on earth?

Why it's hard "macroscopically," not to look at the "ancient tree rings" and wonder about the history embedded? What are all those forces involved at that "specific ring time" doing?


Thales of Miletus

Aristotle: Commenced his investigation on the Wisdom of the philosphers. "Thales says that it is water" it is the nature of the arche, the originating principle."

With "time variance recognition" in terms of the "relativity of thought," what said the "measures of Grace" are not suitable to what the history of time may have spoken to us in our undertanding of what "the climate" is doing today? But it is more then that.

The Thalean excursion into the "primary principle" needed a science basis from which to work?:) What was "first Principle" and how did such a thing come into existance? We had to know what the "building blocks of matter" may be wrap in process? And of course the ancient thought of water going through it's phases, comes to mind.

Distilliation, as a recognition of the energy, as well as the recognition of what phases the state of water is in?

While it may be the search for the "emotive forces and inspirative surges" into the exploration of the human condition, it is well considered, that such distilliations is a delving into our makeup(realms of thought).

An "intensity" of thought, that allows the seed bed to "bubble forth" into the recognition of what may arise from a simplier time? The "origins of time," as if brought forth "entropically designed" aspects of reality?



The idea of circles just made sense to me, and how we interpret it. Now again, I must remind you of the layman status I have, and must be forgiven for the attempt to understand where we are currently going with science that is mathmatical endow, but has it's basis "in" the science of?

I shall not forget:)

Reductionism and the Universe

I have been thinking about things quite a bit in regards to information, and where I am getting it from lately. As well, what has occupied me the last couple of days. It has creatd a greater distant in time between blog entries. If you look, you will see it was April 30, so I want to explain that first, and then deal with the opening title of this blog entry.




You must understand that the picture up top is in concert with our understanding of what the early universe is saying of itself, while we look at "segments of time," in relation.

As well, our understanding of the relation string theory has and it's plce in relation to that time line. Sean Carroll refers to it as the arrow of time, and I am inlcined to agree, yet there has been some trouble in my thoughts about these things. About how the cyclical process, is possibly tied to the dynamics of this process.

Before the universe was created, may seem difficult to talk about, yet, if anyhting is to be incluisive in an "all" inclusive that model it had to be part of the picture somehow(standard model and beyond it)? So, I believe it should not be excluded? After, the initial universe created, it had to be geoemtrically tied together, to show this complete model of understanding, in relation not only to the standard model and it's extension with gravity, but the "whole geometrical picture?"

At a certain place ithe universe's evolution, this may not have any information to really describe it, but if contained, can we talk about the containment(?) and how it is trasnformed into the new universe? That is a general question but a scientist would know the deeper inclination.

Where I had Been in My Thinking



As I have said before the departments are not so far apart at Harvard, that the research in one area might be of benefit to the other in model and theoretcial design. I know some do not like the psychology. It's implcations as an affront to the objectivivity of science, yet, I would say, that constructs are very subjective first, and then materialize. Why, I might refer to the cognitive realization of the math most suitable for whatever construct we like to create.

Lubos Motl:

When Ari visited Harvard at the end of 2004, he showed a picture of Che Guevara on one of his transparencies. At that time, I did not know that particular communist bastard, so I asked Ari who was that - and Ari answered that it was a Czech dissident. Ari assumed that I was joking - because we certainly had to hear about Che all the time, he thought - but I was not joking and in fact the Czechoslovak communists did not tell us a single nice word about Che. He was never popular in Czechoslovakia and as far as I can tell, the Czechoslovak communists did not trust allies such as Che

As I said my mind has been extremely occupied these last couple of days but not without keeping in tune what what's being posted out there. Some blogs sites have been kinder to me then others in my thoughts manifest.

I have to tell you my journey has been a quite struggle to get to the beginning of thought in regards to the ideas about our universe and the constructs that we are using and developing in science, hence, the title of the blog entry above.

I gave indications to signal to you that I do understand the time line that has been so far constructed. The ways theoretical models are being used in relation to that developement.

I wanted to talk about the "cross cultural influence", we can garner from our youths to "color" our future. I wanted to say, that such "constructs" are as legitamate as the very science models we are using to describe our universe.

It took me a long time to get here. A long time, to realize the beginning of the universe is calling upon our "cognitive abilites," to come to the forefront of our minds, and see, that mind will and should engage the place, "where it all began," as I have been trying to do, with the limited tools that I have in my own arsenal.

Just so you know, that I had not been so will nilly all over the place not to understand the work I had been doing had a purpose and even though I had not followed the student's way in collegiate access, I should not be sigaled out as a non person in the understanding of the quest I have with my/our place in the universe.

I had all the access in the world to the information that the students do. Why, I was able to understand this "time line and the energy associations" given to the times zones, of the phase states of the universe's construction. What we have so far surmized.

Construct's of Our Youth

Given the circumstances of our youth, I wanted to speak to the "construct" that we do form from experience. The statements, as conclusions we will make in public. If we never understood that part of the individual has a past, what use would it be to understand that any state of "becoming," would indeed have a future?

So this evolving idea in mind is crucial, to what will predate the actual objectivity of the expressions we will make? Are you saying this is not you? :) Many scientist while human, might think themself set apart, no matter how hard they try to show this part of themself as being different. WE are involved in the process be it the Pizza Guy, the person sitting next to you on what ever transportation, that the "class struggle" is sort of defined now? Is it?:)

So I'll be getting back to the original thoughts on this post, shortly. I have an all night work process that has to be done first, to pay for that bus ride.

Krauss Speaks, People React? :)

We understand that Alice is just part of the developing perspective we have about interactions? THis is consistant with Glast, as well as any calormetrical understanding, from an interaction?

That we had not explain the extra energy should still be held respective positions in mind if incoming and outcoming energy calculatins do not match? That left room in mirror world for other possibilities and had not explain all "sum over paths?"

Lubos:

My understanding is that the very main point of his latest book, Hiding in the mirror, is to present the idea of extra dimensions as an essentially religious idea in order to diminish the credibility of the research of modern high-energy physics - because he knows that most of the readers are anti-religious.

Everyone who has ever worked in phenomenology or string theory knows very well that this research has nothing to do with religion. The link is an invention of Krauss' - one that is intended to politicize things and to encourage his readers to think about completely irrational relations between different ideas.

Foot, R., and S.N. Gninenko. 2000. Can the mirror world explain the ortho-positronium lifetime puzzle?

(belongs to another article words that follow within link)
Welcome to the mirror world, in which every particle in the known universe could have a counterpart. This cosmos would hold mirror planets, mirror stars, and even mirror life.

While Alice in Wonderland may be a fictional story and pervasive in terms of many paths taken, the consequence of the photon in this enviroment and under gravitational influences, is well understood I think?

Lubos's first paragraph quoted is a questionable one to me, "on character," as I have understood Krauss to be.

Startreking explanatory on the understanding of reality, to make sure we understand what is going on, as well as, explaining the idea's of scientists who write for the public, in the movie production scenario's?

Kip Thorne and Brian Greene?

Would the normal public understand the evolution of Abbott and flatland, or the develomment of non-euclidean geometries?

You have taken the word geocentrism in vain Lubos:)

As a "liminocentric structure" wholeness is important to me, not just as some circle, a sphere, or how a genus figure is move from one form to another, but that other things are happening as well, when this happens? If it happens many times microscopically will this have satisfied our viewing of Coleman de Luccia Instanton?

It's just another way of "toposeeing" is all" ( many microprocesses make for many new physics to emerge?), and as far I understand it, it is necessary back ground with which to develope a consistant picture of what is going on with our universe, macroscopically, as well as microscopically, continously? Wmap polarization is topolgical driven by perpective sound valuations, blendings so that sucha 2d pciture measured is much more dynamcially seen?

Yes I know, no one knows what geometry this is in the blackhole or what new physics will emerge, so we needed to look for this consistancy beyond the standard model?

How could one not attempt to join this with quantum and cosmological views?

This just may mean that "uncertainty" is encapsulated?

I am glad to have "information" that would maintain my current hold on reality, as I expand the brain's coverings.

As we project our "evolutionary mind in projective geometries" further into the strange world of high energy, as well as reducing to a weak field measure, some hope of a consistant picture.

Okay, I have not forgotten what string theory has already done in regards to bulk pespective:)

So the bulk perspective is "nothing," or does it act as a catelysct?

Nodes and Anti-nodes

Tool's for measure.

The center of the gyroscope is a jewel-like sphere of fused quartz. These spheres, the size of Ping-Pong balls, are the roundest objects ever made by man. The tiny spheres are enclosed inside a housing chamber to prevent disruption from sound waves, and chilled to almost absolute zero to prevent their molecular structure from creating a disturbance. The accuracy of these gyroscopes is 30 million times greater than any gyroscope ever built.

Making Strings in the lab, made me think of Clifford and the ice cream mix that he was privy too, by joining condense matter [ahem...string:] theorists, on a Friday night? :)Nitrogen, and superconductors seem to go hand in hand? Made me think of GPB and [whoops my mistake-not-nobium sphere], were mention for a reason.:)



Normally I do not like to encourage such a view held to speculations, but the transferance to 3d effective thinking and all that, had me look at WMAP, was a process lead through by valuating sound in such analogies. As a layman, I hope I am forgiven.

Is it the process?

Visitors' shadows manipulate and reshape projected images of "Buckyballs." "Buckyball," or a buckminsterfullerene molecule, is a closed cage-structure molecule with a carbon network. "Buckyball" was named for R. Buckminster "Bucky" Fuller (1895-1983), a scientist, philosopher and inventor, best known for creating the geodesic dome.

Nanomandala:

The purposeful arrangement of individual atoms bears some resemblance to the methods monks use to laboriously create sand images particle by particle, however, Eastern and Western cultures use these bottom-up building practices with very different perceptions and purposes.

Photo and text credit: © 2003 Museum Associates/Los Angeles County Museum of Art


To me it is a interesting way of seeing what is happening in space held by perception. BUcky balls and such, from my early days of reading BuckminsterFuller and his interesting building concepts, had somehow morphed into dynamical triangulation, used in the monte carlo method of quantum gravity perceptions.

Dr. Jenny's cymatic images are truly awe-inspiring, not only for their visual beauty in portraying the inherent res-ponsiveness of matter to sound (vibration) but because they inspire a deep re-cognition that we, too, are part and parcel of this same complex and intricate vibrational matrix -- the music of the spheres! These pages illumine the very principles which inspired the ancient Greek philosophers Heraclitus, Pythagoras and Plato, and cosmologists Giordano Bruno and Johannes Kepler.

Dimensional views of the "quark to quark measure" had me see the dynamics of this distance?

How much more then would such a weak field describe for us the oscillation of the neutrino, from one phase state to another. One distance to another? A revealled in cosmic rays, as "new physics perhaps" that extends beyond the standard model?



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.

If for one moment you continue the thought processes in light of visionary changes sought by and spoken in context of polarization effects in the WMAP, then such views have a profound effect, to what was always interesting data from cosmological apprehensions in discovery.

Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein effect92 April 2006 wikipedia)

The Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein effect is a particle physics process which acts to enhance neutrino oscillations in matter.

While dynamic functions are being revealled to me of microprocesses( phases states), these dynamics are always interesting from what the geometrical perpecive of what was derived from Dirac.

A "three dimensional view" of what may be happening in the abstraction of space dynamics seen in UV perspective described in analogy to Gauss's coordinates?

Something much more profound and detail in a greater depth of thinking of an abstractual nature perhaps? B Field dynamics, would be a interesting comparison while holding mind in geometrical abstraction?

Antineutrinos From Distant Reactors Simulate the Disappearance of Solar Neutrinos

The potential importance of the Kamland results goes well beyond the solar-neutrino problem. Particle theorists hope that the masses and flavor compositions of the neutrino mass eigenstates will help point the way to an encompassing unification beyond today's manifestly incomplete standard model of fundamental particles and their interactions. Detailed knowledge of the neutrino states might also elucidate a central problem of cosmology: How did matter come to dominate over antimatter in the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang? Does the mixing of neutrino states harbor the symmetry-breaking mechanism that could have done the trick?


Oscillating flavorsThe three neutrino mass eigenstates are presumed to be different coherent superpositions of the three flavor eigenstates (ne, nm, and nt) associated with the three charged leptons: the electron, the muon, and the tau. There is good evidence that only two of the three mass eigenstates contribute significantly to ne. In that approximation, one can write

The question always arises in my mind about the quantum harmonical oscillations, as part of a much larger inherent feature of reality, with which we might view WMAP. Or, events that arise from the sun. Could such analogy, born in the sun's process spit out the nature of the neutrino?

The plates can be made visible by mounting a mirror behind the row of plates, angled so that the top of the plates are visible to the audience (same idea as in Polarization by Scattering). Create the optimum angle for the front rows, as the back rows will be looking down on the plates anyway. Make sure the cello bow is nice and tactile by treating it with rosin before the performance. Sprinkle the sand on the plates so that it forms an even cover. Don't overdo the amount.

Helioseismology

Neutrino oscillation( 31 March 2006 Wikipedia)

Neutrino oscillation is a quantum mechanical phenomenon whereby a neutrino created with a specific lepton flavor (electron, muon, or tau) can later be measured to have a different flavor. More specifically, the probability of measuring a particular flavor for a neutrino varies periodically as it propagates. Neutrino oscillation is of theoretical and experimental interest, as observation of the phenomenon implies nonzero neutrino mass.

If you change the way you look at things sometimes, this change, helps you see in different ways that you might not have before? WMAP?

Sounding the Sun: HelioseismologyP.B. Stark

On the other hand, the Sun is essentially transparent to neutrinos, and to acoustic waves. Using acoustic energy, we can "see into the Sun" in a way that is quite similar to using ultrasound to image the interior of the human body.

Oscillations of stars have been recognized since the late 1700s. The complicated pattern of the Sun's oscillation was first observed in 1960 by Robert Leighton, Robert Noyes, and George Simon.

The explanation of the pattern in terms of trapped acoustic waves came in 1970-71 by Roger Ulrich, John Leibacher, and Robert Stein. This explanation predicted certain detailed features of the spectrum of solar oscillations that were confirmed by observations made in 1975 by Franz Deubner.

The Sun is constantly vibrating in a superposition of acoustic normal modes (like the patterns with which a guitar string vibrates, but for a spherical body rather than a string). The characteristic period of oscillation is about 5 minutes. It takes on the order of a few hours for the energy to travel through the Sun. The velocity amplitude of solar p-modes is about 1 cm/s; the relative brightness variation is about 10-7.

Mode lifetimes range from hours to months. Modes are typically excited many times per lifetime.

Let's look at the origins of the images below. Have I described their origin?

See:

Angels and Demons

The Devil, is in the details of a Mirror World?

While the "true cast" is here? :)

Coleman-De Luccia instanton

IN what way could some consistent measure be thought of, that such conditions while recognized in the false vacuum, and, with conditions of high energy considerations, be realized into useful information surrounding this move to the true vacuum? It would have to be geometrically explained. Planck epoch in itself, makes this very hard to do, so you use the action of the vacuum, from false to true, to help in that realization.

The volume of the haystack
Lubos Motl:

We don't have a real emotional intuition how "density" in a very-high-dimensional space should behave, but we should probably try to learn it. I feel that these (especially the de Sitter) vacua cannot be quite isolated. There are just many other vacua nearby (virtually all of them) into which one should be able to decay. KKLT only consider one Coleman-DeLuccia instanton, without an enhancement, and I feel it can't be the whole story

The Coleman-De Luccia instanton presents opportunities, or, is the paper countering this proposal? See link below for reference to paper.

I think one needed to understand this movement or how the false vacuum is understood, and how the true vacuum is created.

A geometical smoothly flowing understanding that arose out of "nothing!" Without some geometrical consistancy, this idea isn't going to go away, unless someone has a reason why, and if, that paper deals with it directly?

I remain non-judgemental about characters, and the nature people adopt. I only focus on those issues that would offer us some further ideas to exploit. To help us all push pespectve forward. While there is a facade in what the mind accumulates as the image of who we are, there is "kernels of truth" that we must seek to reference, so the knowledge base can increase, and intuitve leaps for the taking by who ever push persepctove add experimetal basis as a concluding result.

We'll leave the dance and facades for other to design themself. We always want them to be "whole" with what ever they have accepted in life.

Peter Woit recommends supersymmetry

Lubos Motl:

At any rate, quantum black holes do carry quantum information, the relevant entropy is, at least in some cases, attributable to the entanglement entropy, and the research of quantum entanglement in this context could turn out to be very fruitful which is why many of us should look at these "coincidences" more carefully. They may very well clarify the origin and mathematical details of the black hole complementarity

The circumstance around the nature of the state where such superfluids are created, needed some method in which to move, from "one state into another"(turned inside/out)?

If you hold the nature of the bubble universe and it's formation in mind, it does not seem so unlikely that you had the klein bottle, as some geometrical basis from which the false vacuum would direct itself into inflationary results?

So is the paper discounting the basis of the views of Coleman-De Luccia instanton?

The idea behind the Coleman-De Luccia instanton, discovered in 1987, is that the matter in the early universe is initially in a state known as a false vacuum. A false vacuum is a classically stable excited state which is quantum mechanically unstable. In the quantum theory, matter which is in a false vacuum may `tunnel' to its true vacuum state. The quantum tunnelling of the matter in the early universe was described by Coleman and De Luccia. They showed that false vacuum decay proceeds via the nucleation of bubbles in the false vacuum. Inside each bubble the matter has tunnelled. Surprisingly, the interior of such a bubble is an infinite open universe in which inflation may occur. The cosmological instanton describing the creation of an open universe via this bubble nucleation is known as a Coleman-De Luccia instanton.

Okay so we are talking about cosmological proportions here, in blackhole creation and the resulting standard model and interactions developed from the origins of this universe. Is it consistent all the way down to the planck epoch, and how would the planck epoch be described?

One would need to see the geometrical basis of what is hapening from one state to the next. Our universe into some other new expression, or blackhole states, that rejuvenize, using geometrical dynamics of what is already existing?

Would this run contrary to the arrow of time, by having such states within context of the whole universe? Would this not explain the susutenance need to keep the universe in the same state for a very long long time?

Backreaction

Do a search, under the heading of "backreaction in laval nozzle," for further references.

Black Holes and Analogues in Two Dimensions

Examples: acoustics in a moving fluid (“dumbholes”), BEC, Helium, slow light,

See:

Why Higher Energies

Why Higher Energies?

I guess I don't have to tell anyone how confusing all this stuff is and the need for a consistent picture to arise out of it.

New physics beyond the standard model of particle physics and parallel universes by Rainer Plaga

top-quark masses - for which the standard model predicts such a decay - cannot be interpreted as evidence for new physics at low energy scales.

The history of Risk Assessment, was a exercise into understanding the developing role as to what new physics should be? Strangelets and strange quarks arose from this?

The search for the very small requires very high energies. The discoveries necessary for the electroweak unification were near the upper end of available energies in the current generation of particle accelerators. Establishing Grand Unification is beyond the practical limits of earthbound laboratories. This forces particle physicists to look outward to astrophysical phenomena which may have enough energy to shed some light on further attempts at unifying the four fundamental forces.

This map defines the whole standard model and the phase transitions. We are talking about a "certain time" in the planck epoch. So what is happening "in" the Planck epoch?

If such energies had recognized the current state of the superfluid created, then anomalies in "this scenario" would have allowed such "geometrical presence to be channelled" as part of the cyclical features contained in the expression of the universe?

So you take this universe and apply the backhole on a cosmlogical scale eqaul to it's inflation, as a distance in the blackhole's radius? Such a crunch would have recognized the boundary conditions as a the furthest point this universe could have grown, from the original blackhole that created this universe?

So what evidence is left? That the universe and it's "dark matter" as the false vacuum is creating the scenarios for the universe to have found it's temeperature today, started from some "other condition" seen in the planck epoch? Okay how did you get there?

The bubble conditions would then have to existed in the superfluids? How would have geoemtrically arrived at such a "topology expressed" in this one universe?

Professor Satyendra Nath Bose, the founder of Bose-Einstein statistics and the discoverer of the “Boson,” is well known as a giant in the world of physics and science as the man who, along with Albert Einstein, revolutionized the world of theoretical physics and showed the world a new way to imagine how the world works.

The topological genus figure of the sphere, to a torus and it's rotation seen in characteristic, housed the equallibrium state arrived at, as to the channelling of that extra energy and the resulting "new physics" in the strange quarks created?

So what is "that cylinder" created as the jet is expressed, in the gravitational collapse

See: John Bahcall and the Neutrinos

Thus, this cycle is completed in the bulk perspective? Would have created the situation again in strong concentrations? Why cosmologically the conditons are "many" and such evidence pointing to ICECUBE, as to the conditons beyond the standard model, leads to questions about "cerenkov radiation?"

Is there no backreaction created, if we were to lets say look at the Laval nozzles, and understand that what is expressed in the standard model energy once ejected in the jet, would have had counter proposals manifest in the geomerical presence held to a whole universe. The Anti-matter? Non Qui

Ways IN which To Percieve Landscape?

What a Cosmologist Wants from a String Theorist?




Emotion versus Reason?

3.1 As Cytowic notes, Plato and Socrates viewed emotion and reason as in a kind of struggle, one in which it was vitally important for reason to win out. Aristotle took a more moderate view, that both emotion and reason are integral parts of a complex human soul--a theory proposed by Aristotle in explicit opposition to Platonism (De Anima 414a 19ff). Cytowic appears to endorse the Platonic line, with the notable difference that he would apparently rather have emotion win out.

Emotion can be used as a catelysct into higher abstractual/dimensional thinking, if, it can be used to counter research into?:)

Figure 2. Clebsch's Diagonal Surface: Wonderful.

Mein Gott. :) If seeing on distance scales, had relevances in regards to "all the issues" of the standard model, would this not in effect change the way we see in those distances?

Peter Woit:I’ve looked very carefully in landscape papers and Susskind’s book for any sort of plausible idea about how this stuff will ever lead to a prediction of anything and I can’t find it.

Thanks Peter, that's it?


The Hills are Alive with the Sound of M theory?

With the discovery of sound waves in the CMB, we have entered a new era of precision cosmology in which we can begin to talk with certainty about the origin of structure and the content of matter and energy in the universeWayne Hu

By exercising the imagination I thought Wayne Hu did a fine job of relating these things on a "cosmological scale." Hills and Valleys. But in a more detailed quantum look, what value, conformal field theory of point particles?

In effect, the 5-D universe is recorded like a hologram on the 4-D surface at its periphery. Superstring theory rules in the 5-D spacetime, but a so-called conformal field theory of point particles operates on the 4-D hologram. A black hole in the 5-D spacetime is equivalent to hot radiation on the hologram--for example, the hole and the radiation have the same entropy even though the physical origin of the entropy is completely different for each case. Although these two descriptions of the universe seem utterly unalike, no experiment could distinguish between them, even in principle.

Les Houches




ROBBERT DIJKGRAAF:Map of the world, as used in my Les Houches lectures

I like this picture better Clifford. Is the landscape, as barren, or is it, the hope that we see such beautiful things of which the seed bed wil allow such things to arise from it?

For some, the "creative" outlet? Maybe, a Shangri-la high" in the mountains of abstractual thinking?

IN the Wunderkammern

James Joseph Sylvester (September 3, 1814 - March 15, 1897) was an English mathematician and lawyer.

We are told that "mathematics is that study which knows nothing of observation..." I think no statement could have been more opposite to the undoubted facts of the case; that mathematical analysis is constantly invoking the aid of new principles, new ideas and new methods, not capable of being defined by any form of words, but springing direct from the inherent powers and activity of the human mind, and from continually renewed introspection of that inner world of thought of which the phenomena are as varied and require as close attention to discern as those of the outer physical world, ...that it is unceasingly calling forth the faculties of observation and comparison, that one of its principal weapons is induction, that it has frequent recourse to experimental trial and verification, and that it affords a boundless scope for the exercise of the highest efforts of imagination and invention. ...Were it not unbecoming to dilate on one's personal experience, I could tell a story of almost romantic interest about my own latest researches in a field where Geometry, Algebra, and the Theory of Numbers melt in a surprising manner into one another.

While I always point upward in Rapheal's painting, I mention often, the "One thing."

Gold or wisdom, while leadng "the alchemist" in the search of that elucive material, mining, has to note the glimmer's as a sun shines on the landscape of ideas. So you work it, use a sluicebox, or a gold pan. Watch how river flow's and the bends in it. Where some deposits might have laid themself while others are carried off further down stream, left to some "eddie" or "pool of thinking." See flowers emerge in rocks crevices of all places.

However, don't be fooled! The charm of the golden number tends to attract kooks and the gullible - hence the term "fool's gold". You have to be careful about anything you read about this number. In particular, if you think ancient Greeks ran around in togas philosophizing about the "golden ratio" and calling it "Phi", you're wrong. This number was named Phi after Phidias only in 1914, in a book called _The Curves of Life_ by the artist Theodore Cook. And, it was Cook who first started calling 1.618...the golden ratio. Before him, 0.618... was called the golden ratio! Cook dubbed this number "phi", the lower-case baby brother of Phi.

See:

Fool's Gold

The Alchemist in You

String Theory Displays Golden Ratio Tendency

The Singing Bowl

One harmonious possibility is that string enthusiasts and loop quantum gravity aficionados are actually constructing the same theory, but from vastly different starting points-Page 490, Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene

What would such gravitons in the bulk concentration mean, to those whose value might have seen sound expressed, as low and rumbling, while energy would have been freer to implement the expression of higher pitched notes?



Some might have never gotten the greater significance, or the relation to the Kernel of Truth, but hidden behind all the facades of humanities thoughts about sound, it was with the understdanding of Joseph Weber's work, that I too, became intrigued with the cylinder bars and sound.

In the late 1950s, Weber became intrigued by the relationship between gravitational theory and laboratory experiments. His book, General Relativity and Gravitational Radiation, was published in 1961, and his paper describing how to build a gravitational wave detector first appeared in 1969. Weber's first detector consisted of a freely suspended aluminium cylinder weighing a few tonnes. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Weber announced that he had recorded simultaneous oscillations in detectors 1000 km apart, waves he believed originated from an astrophysical event. Many physicists were sceptical about the results, but these early experiments initiated research into gravitational waves that is still ongoing. Current gravitational wave experiments, such as the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO) and Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), are descendants of Weber's original work.

Now what does sound mean in this case? How far shall we go back with Kip Thorne, or John Wheeler? Would a good scientist know that the roots of these thoughts about string theory began long before the mathematical struggles became known in current day thoughts. That the roots began in relativity, and what relativity means geometrically as a gravitational force in consideration?

It required a graduation in thinking. Views in the abstract spaces that were less then understood, that without understanding how such thoughts lead from the classical world, would now move perspectve to it's strengths and weakeness as part of a larger view established from the standard model and beyond. It had to include all the fundamental forces and ultimately it's carriers?

The activity in string theory and quantum gravity is aimed at developing a quantum theory that incorporates the physics of gravity and is valid down to the smallest length scales, where conventional quantum field theory can no longer be applied. There has been rapid progress in this area in recent years, in part due to work of Princeton faculty and students, and it continues to be a fertile source of research problems.

Would These good scientists might have forgotten maybe, or because of the failure of Joesph Webers experiments, the very ideas of LIGO today, would not support the greater depth of seeing? In ways such structures would ring with the gravitational expansion and contraction, and allocated sound value in analogy? What use?

Might I have missed the nature of the bubble in geometric views, as we looked at the sonofusion idea manifested in the way that "time and the bubble's membrane," elastic in it's measure, might have symbolized a larger global view of all the things that it would contained within it. Even, it's magnetic field?



So some were better equiped to see spheres whithin spheres, and all bubble membranes as some topological derivation of Sklars's quandry of what line is a 5 or 1, in relation to the torus. How diffiuclt to undertand that then, inner bubble/line might have encapsulated the expression of Maxwell and all the equations, as being defined within the context of General Relativity and it's completion, as th eenvelope on the outer sphere called earth in space. Some might never have resolved such thinking to sucha bumpy world but it does indeed happen. Not only there, but in how such energies would have made themselves known as we turned this inside out, like some Klein bottled?



I know I have much to learn in the geometrical perspective, but I am trying.

Recognition of a Sphere that is Not so Round

Gravity is the force that pulls two masses together.

Since the earth has varied features such as mountains, valleys, and underground caverns, the mass is not evenly distributed around the globe. The "lumps" observed in the Earth's gravitational field result from an uneven distribution of mass inside the Earth. The GRACE mission will give us a global map of Earth's gravity and how it changes as the mass distribution shifts. The two satellites will provide scientists from all over the world with an efficient and cost-effective way to map the Earth's gravity field.

The primary goal of the GRACE mission is to map the Earth's gravity field more accurately than has ever been done before. You might ask, how will GRACE do this? Two identical spacecraft will fly about 200 kilometers apart. As the two GRACE satellites orbit the Earth they are pulled by areas of higher or lower gravity and will move in relation to each other. The satellites are located by GPS and the distance between them is measured by microwave signals. The two satellites do not just carry science instruments, they become the science instrument. When mass moves from place to place within the Earth's atmosphere, ocean, land or frozen surface (the "cryosphere"), the gravity field changes.

So while I was quite aware of what the earth contained in it's views as a planet on which we live, it was not without some understanding that such mass considerations woul have also included the "view of bubbles"? AS rings around this planet.

The way in which they can work to help push perspective inside/out? Is this wrong? Can no undertanding that leads to electrognagnetsm and gravity joined in the fifth dimensional perspective, lead to the dynamcial understanding of nature in accordance with the spacetime fabric and it's orientations?



Why then lagrange coordinates, and how we see the "hole in space" as satelittes that might choose the most easiest route to travel and least fuel to burn? What say the equillibrium status, had not been reached in the blackhle interior, as a anomlie of perception, in regards to the formation of the superfluid through such collidial events?

A Professors Fate, or Encouragement to Continue?

In regards to #72, as a layman, I continue to wonder.

A VIEW OF MATHEMATICS by Alain CONNES

Most mathematicians adopt a pragmatic attitude and see themselves as the explorers of this mathematical world" whose existence they don't have any wish to question, and whose structure they uncover by a mixture of intuition, not so foreign from poetical desire", and of a great deal of rationality requiring intense periods of concentration.

Each generation builds a mental picture" of their own understanding of this world and constructs more and more penetrating mental tools to explore previously hidden aspects of that reality.

ftp://ftp.alainconnes.org/maths.pdf

No one can be faulted can they for developing pespective? :) No mathematician, for solving age ole problems in regards too, let's say, "Riemann Hypothesis."

What say this view or that view, without siging the death of one professor, or the death of another, as a hand sweeping gesture. As to the "illegitamacy of math models" and their relation to the physics world, lead by science?

Who(the community of scientists) shall decide, or one man?

Not so by evidence of failure? Experimental proposals continued, justification sought by tabletop experiments, or a less then concern, of energy missing from total calculation of imput energy? Within context of the standard model wrapped, and the comlete rotation within, as the signs of the time in one graviattional consideration of it's strength, or it's weakeness? Each "cosmological event" held to this perspective?

So resulting energy calculated in particle showers, leaving amount of energy missing, points too "new physics(increased dimension perspective)?" I mean that is a generalized statement, that might have been asked while the general "state of being" had been reached, in any collidial design? How would this method of travel have been encourgae fromthe event itself in colidial view to one that had traverded through superfluid characteristics and anomalies of such design?

Sustenance of any predictable future in energy production would have asked then, how such perpetuity could be been sustained? Where is that missing energy? How is inflation motivated, if held to the current state of the universe as some cosmological constant method? So the resulting missing energy had been seen in relation to manifested possibilties as strange matter or result cerenkov radational design, of the blue daylight of our world, from the many microbial blackhole events?

The center of our UNiverse and the Arrow of time

About ISCAP Mission

At the energy scales characteristic of the universe's earliest moments, one can no longer approximate matter and energy using an ideal gas formulation; instead, one must use quantum field theory, and at the highest of energies, one must invoke a theory of quantum gravity, such as string theory. Cosmology is thus the pre-eminent arena in which our theories of the ultra-small will flex their muscles as we trace their role in the evolution of the universe.

There had to be some guiding princpal in regards to the schematics of "circles with points," the radius of the universe, and it's relation?



What leads the mind to consider such a thing as a center, and it's possibilties forward and backward in time? When each gravitational collapse could have initiated the same thing over and over again, by the very presence of the blackhole collapse, and the creation of strange matte,r as the darkmmatter of this universe?

A way in which to percieve the comsological constant?

Seeing Into the Heart of the Milky Way

The very heart of the Milky Way is obscured by a thick wall of dust that optical telescopes can't peer through. But astronomers have used the dust-penetrating infrared capabilities of the 6.5 metre Magellan telescope in Chile to look past the wall, and map stars never seen before. Astronomers found thousands of stars jammed into an area only 6 light-years across. The purpose of these observations was to uncover stars which could be orbiting and feeding white dwarfs, neutron stars, or even black holes. These special binary objects are thought to be more common in the crowded centre of the Milky Way.

I mean sure, things are going to bother the thinking we might have, as to where the universe actually began? What indications would reveal this to us?

I am a layman at heart who is questioning the basis of what might have become entropically designed in what we have of the universe today. I also know that at another time such circumstances can be meet by the same process that we encounter in the very formation of how this universe became what it is.

See it must be hard to pinpoint such a beginning point, because you might have needed some motivation and direction inflation would have signalled, to let us know the measures we have today, were much different as we looked to the center of the universe?

So such a center would have had to to have some basis for how such motivation would insighted inflation to become what it is? Also, such an arrow would have ran in one direction, so how could such rejuvenation process ever have signal cyclical natures to have the universe in the position it is with a temperature, as such and such an age of 13.7 billions years old?

Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time Sean M. Carroll and Jennifer Chen

The role of initial conditions in cosmology is unique within the physical sciences. We only have a single observable universe, rather than the ability to change boundary conditions and run experiments multiple times. A complete theory of cosmology therefore involves not only a set of dynamical laws, but a specification of the particular initial conditions giving rise to the universe we see.

One could certainly argue that the origin of our initial conditions is not an answerable scientific question. Given the state of our universe at the present time, and a complete set of dynamical laws describing its evolution, we can in principle solve for the entire history, including whatever the initial state was. Ultimately, we are stuck with the boundary conditions we have. Similarly, however, we are stuck with the laws of physics that we have, but this constraint doesn’t stop us from searching for deep principles underlying their nature. It therefore seems sensible to treat our initial conditions in the same way, and try to understand why we have these conditions rather than some others.

One had to hold in mind the energy/matter relation

For a view that had been materializing and issues raised in my mind, while very far from complete, I started to wonder about the initial conditions of the universe then. If we were consistent in the way we implored the undertanding of the standard model in the inception of this universe, how and what process would geometrically have taken it from the classical defintion of the macro universe, down to the quantum geometric one?

No equillibrium states? How is that possible in context of the views that I am showing in consideration of the lagrange points. The pathway travelled would hav eseemed to have found the easiest route, while, such inflative consideration would also have found a point on which such superfluid strangeness that would come into play?



This is a troubling issue in my mind, becuase there are other events within context of the universe as we know it today, that would have been taken down to the original conditions. These should hve been consistent with where the center of the universe began in like mindedness, as to it's origination.

So thinking of a center in the overall perspective did not seem to unlikely for me?

Well there are better minds out there as I ponder the ideas that I do. This universe then would seem to have "holes" that would have arisen from the very functionability of macrostate blackhole production, that would have continued to fuel the inflation of this universe?

So in the sense I seen in this blog the ideas and questions then arise around how we see blackhole production fuel the inflation to entropic design. That we have the particle shower to not only consider, but also the state of the universe in it's beginnings, as well as such constituents formed, as the galaxies, stars and planets.

The Z Machine

There is no branch of mathematics, however abstract, which may not some day be applied to phenomena of the real world.— Nikolai Lobachevsky

Sandia’s Z machine exceeds two billion degrees Kelvin

Z’s energies in these experiments raised several questions.

First, the radiated x-ray output was as much as four times the expected kinetic energy input.

Ordinarily, in non-nuclear reactions, output energies are less — not greater — than the total input energies. More energy had to be getting in to balance the books, but from where could it come?

Lubos Motl

Janice Granhardt has pointed out a press release that is two days old and arguably much more serious and potentially far-reaching than the news about "sonofusion" we described yesterday.

http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/03/two-billion-kelvins-at-z-machine.html

I reference current article information that I had been working through here and here for obvious reasons. I would like to expand on this.

I am writng this article because of the references Lubos Motl offered on his blog about the need for, "energy production." The whole context of any model has to have understood that the current situation in gravitational perspective will have it's two extremes (weak and strong) held in thought, and ending within this context? A cyclical process maybe like thinking about Steinhardt maybe? :)

I know the idea of free energy machines is a quacks realm, if, the imput energy and output energy is not held in consideration. That a greater output must be sustained. How?

Klein's Ordering of Geometries

A theorem which is valid for a geometry in this sequence is automatically valid for the ones that follow. The theorems of projective geometry are automatically valid theorems of Euclidean geometry. We say that topological geometry is more abstract than projective geometry which is turn is more abstract than Euclidean geometry.


So on what conditions, could you map the process consistently and geometrics, to have been all inclusive?

While one may discuss these alternatives, it might require that we see this process at work on a cosmological scale, and having reduced it to the quantum realm, the questions about the geometries, becomes held under the auspice of "new physics,". That we might ask, "what new geometries?"

The natural process then would have to acknowledge the need for many microstate blackholes to have further the context of the standard model and it's extension?

Is this not a fair statement? Even though we may talk about one event, the recogition is that, this happens many times in regards to high energy articles in a collidial region. This had been answered in Risk assessment, as to why the process developed naturally, in the production of microstate blackholes, we might have created in LHC.

This did not discount, the understanding of what "extra dimensions meant" when we were understanding the "new physics." Reference here, neutrino or strangelets. It was just part and parcel of a greater understanding that John Ellis had pointed us too, is our recognition of the poor man's accelerator.

See:

The Unity of Mathematics

A New Search Paradigm?

The collapsing star scenario that is one of the leading contenders as the cause of gamma-ray bursts. Dr. Stan Woosley of the University of California at Santa Cruz proposed the collapsar theory in 1993. This artist's concept of the collapsar model shows the center of a dying star collapsing minutes before the star implodes and emits a gamma-ray burst that is seen across the universe. Credit: NASA/Dana Berry

If one knew the process of such developements, it is equally important that such information would have been "beamed in a way" that some of us might have wondered, why such a sparkle had caught the eye? ON a snowy day at the olympics perhaps? Hey Paul?

Nima and Lubos speak of one Olympics while we had referred to it in another way. Are you not interested to see what years gone by, might have raised, from all those perspectives on the Bose Nova?



Advancement of internet capabilities are very important, that if one linked the picture to a source, the truth of "the source" becomes known. Much as trackbacks, of certain papers are held relevant. While the blogs linked, non creditialed or not because someone said, you are not a "active researcher", hey Peter?. You know why Christine's site is important in regards to "this topic" linked with the paper present?

That you are not included, does not reduce the importance that the paper plays in itself. Linked or not linked, how relevant I might be, had a perspective, or you had a perspective long before the ideas of the new Paradigm existed. It was in the ideas of measure that the universe culd have ever been held in the eye of microscopic processes. That we have realized that the same "collidial events" would enlist particle shower information in beta decay, from that geometrical collapse?

This view had to be part and parcel of the understanding of the way in which gravitational collapse would have released it's information? What geometry revealled by the nature of the collapse before the dyng star "boundry" closed to a very small point of consideration, held in regards to the superfluid created?

Ah, that's new isn't it?

A New Search Paradigm for Correlated Neutrino Emission from Discrete GRBs using Antarctic Cherenkov Telescopes in the Swift EraMichael Stamatikos for the IceCube Collaboration and David L. Band

Abstract. We describe the theoretical modeling and analysis techniques associated with a preliminary search for correlated neutrino emission from GRB980703a, which triggered the Burst and Transient Source Experiment (BATSE GRB trigger 6891), using archived data from the Antarctic Muon and Neutrino Detector Array (AMANDA-B10). Under the assumption of associated hadronic acceleration, the expected observed neutrino energy flux is directly derived, based upon confronting the fireball phenomenology with the discrete set of observed electromagnetic parameters of GRB980703a, gleaned from ground-based and satellite observations, for four models, corrected for oscillations. Models 1 and 2, based upon spectral analysis featuring a prompt photon energy fit to the Band function, utilize an observed spectroscopic redshift, for isotropic and anisotropic emission geometry, respectively. Model 3 is based upon averaged burst parameters, assuming isotropic emission. Model 4, based upon a Band fit, features an estimated redshift from the lag-luminosity relation with isotropic emission. Consistent with our AMANDA-II analysis of GRB030329, which resulted in a flux upper limit of ∼0.150GeV/cm2/s for model 1, we find differences in excess of an order of magnitude in the response of AMANDA-B10, among the variousmodels for GRB980703a. Implications for future searches in the era of Swift and IceCube are discussed

Very interesting picture below, and site linked on Picture.

It reminded me of Andrey Kravstov's computer images, and other information seen from early universe. Without some comprehension on the subject displayed in our universe from a earlier time, what purpose the view held of "a time" when everything was supersymmetrical? That what is held in the distance of microperspecive images of those created in the microstate blackhole creations, would not have enjoined cosmological happenings, by some analog nature, with that microperspective understanding?



Oh, I cry with you Peter, to be considered "Spambot," an IP, as some "register to comment statistic" only to have been thought less of, by some measure of what you might have been thought of? Don't let Jacque control who you are, by such structuralism, that you might not have "some creative realization" in all the work you have done, and knowledge gained.

Thus in that statement it is realized, that the developement of the internet will not stop good people from, venturing and learning what might raise them to better insight. That the progression, although wrong sometimes, might of bore fruit in knowledge gained along the way.

THis will not stop no matter how much structuralism by control of the internet would have been some idealized version of Jacque's view of the internet universe. He competes with the Stallman's view of growth and productivity, as we become students of the nature, of all that is being explained on this internet.

See:

Evidence for Extra Dimensions and IceCUBE

History of the SuperFluids:New Physics

Strangelets in Cosmic Considerations

Poincare Conjecture

Holographical Mapping onto the Blackhole Horizon

Blackhole Production and Sonoluminence

Have we seen (strange) quark matter?

Well the very idea that such a thing could exist, has been part of the evolving information I had been going through. To be lead to the understanding, of what new Physics would emerge fromm cosmological and collidial events. That there are indeed showers of particles with which such events will let us know cannot be ignored.

First Principle needed to recognize "the very state" that things would arise from. For Robert Laughlin, a condense matter theorist, it didn't mater what you called these building blocks, but any discrete measure had to be recognized it's energy value and tragectories would it not? Hence, the particle shower from a known state of existance, where "first principle" would emerged.

So, any attempt to ignore the possibility of what emerges, and the foundational perspective, put forth in theory, has to help the understandng of what happens when such events do happen, either, micro perspectively or cosmologically.

Any attempts to say that the standard model is not inclusive in this design, would be detrimental to the very statement any mathematican would say against, that simply erasing any connection, would have been futile to their creditbility?

Strange Quark Matter TheoryTamas S. Biro

Ladies and gentlemen, this is going to be the theoretical summary talk of the Strange Quark Matter 2003 conference. When I was alerted by the e-mail we all got, “prepare your transparencies”, I took this home-work exercise seriously. I have prepared quite a few pages before this conference. What can one know in advance, before listening to the talks?.

First of all there is a general outline which a summary talk should follow. On the level of the basic theory one is supposed to conclude about the present status of the underlying theoretical concepts, one ought to emphasize important news, the novel aspects we are encountering, and finally it is useful to formulate in a possibly definite way, what our perspectives for further development are.

So given the research that I had been going through, what is this strangelet subject that was developed, and I will post links that support the development of the fear with which such a thing arose. Was answered, by cosmological and collidial production of microstate blackhole events. Might the story and television series of blackholes been interrupted by such a dialogue, or had I furthered the plot for public consumption? To continue the fear?

Would your scientist/mathematican friend tell you about such things and ways in which to expect information from experimental designs, as not leading into the desire of the essence of new physics?

What began this assumption, was the idea that microstate blackholes were something of a danger, if we were to created them. That was the nightmare. The reality is, that this theoretically written state, is quite useful in terms of what can emerge from the idea of new physics, and had to include the standard model.

To get to new physics you had to have the standard model as a basis, and to move from that point, any resulting shower and new information, like in ICECUBE, along with the historiy and research of neutrinos, points to what? Strangelets to what?

Peter Woit dissassociated himself from that possibility, and if strings was to underly this view, what says, such advancements had not adhered to the demands of theoretcial proposition, that it now sees itself, as part and parcel of the planning for what else will emerge? Sees itself immersed in tachyon demonstration as a sign of cerenkov radiation as that blue light?

So indeed I struggle with how such theorectical position might have told me what is going on, and this issue, is not to be ignored as long as it is remianing consistant with the developement from standard model presumptions.

Paul first, and then I had been wondering about this issue right back in the beginning as it came to our attention. Steinberg and clarifications on what the microstate balckhole is was important, as it demonstrates the basis of work being done taking the energies and collidial events, to a new level of reductionistic perception. The microstate blackhole is the basis as far as I can tell.

Now given the state of Quark Gluon Plasma, what happens when you see such things hhappeniing that you have to aassume a new theoretcial position like M theory that such D Brane assumptions talk abut the viscosity nature? What are the poperties that have emerged from the idea of the blackhole, as this new state of matter tells us something about superfluids and such?

Does Peter understand these new developments? Does his own theoretical position from model assumption he also used, have correlates to current day information and research? It had been my hope, that his position would have created the dialogue necessary. I have enjoyed the mathematical adventures he has shown has developed further my perspective as shown, in the very last link below.

In order to have the perspective and vision of the abstract world of the mathematics shown, you needed to know some things. They had to be couched in the history of all that we have learnt, and any modification in mathematical language, alters that perspective, if it relates to the very work you are doing on extending the standard model?

See:

Quark Gluon Plasma II

Strangelets Form Gravitonic Concentrations

Strangelets in Cosmic Consideration

Cosmic Rays Collsions ad Strangelets Produced

Quark Stars

Accretion Disks

Evidence for Extra Dimensions and ICECUBE

All Particle of te Standard Model and Beyond

All Particles of the Standard Model and Beyond

Polchinski Elected Member Of National Academy of Sciences

Polchinski's discovery of D-branes and their properties is, according to the Academy citation, "one of the most important insights in 30 years of work on string theory."

Can I tell a little story before I head into the essence of this posted thread below?

From one mechanic to another

I am not a mechanic by trade. Yet I had taken apart, and put back together motors which ran and ran well. Through a transition period, and without a place in which to do this work myself, I decided to give it to "a mechanic" to work on. Pay the price, which was well beyond my means at that time. With three children a wife, and barely making it, I asked for help financially. It was cold, and snow blowing.

After picking up my motor and installing it. Making sure everything was right, I went for a slow drive to seat my rings in newly honed out cylinders. Well, much to my dismay and lots of dollars, blue smoke clouded the world behind me.

Taking it back home, I called the mechanic, and told him what was happening. "It was something you must of done," he siad.

So, I called another mechanic. He compression tested the cylinders for me, and to my dismay and his, one of the cylinders was not up to par.

So what things did I learn?

That I could have "one mechanic go against another," for the shoddy work that was done? No, it doesn't work that way.

After tearing off the head, I had found they had broken the oil and compression rings, as they pushed the compressed rings and piston, back into the cylinder. They had cracked them while doing this. The cracked ring gouged the cylinder wall, as it went up and down on the crankshaft.

Were there things I might have done different now? Maybe pressure tested the cylinders before hand?

Anyway, on to the subject of this post.

After doing my research and investigations into how the standard model itself might have been displayed, I selected two events, that were very discriptive of what might have happened, when taken as a whole story of the science in progress.



These were censored by Peter Woit on his site and removed. These lead to questions that might have implicated "string theory" as part of the process of inquiry beyond the standard? See Icecube.

If one holds to the idea that they had assumed a counter position to currents trends, then would it not include the theoretical approach well understood, that it also attached, not just a geometrical association, but one described in the physics process as well?

As a layman, this was proving itself, as I looked at the diversity of the geometrical models choosen to represent that abstract world. See B Field and Hitchins. Genus Figures, and topology, on this site.

More and more, it had weighted heavily on my mind, that the consistancy through which selected comments were shown, were to hold validation processes as to anti-string theory. As tones of select comments, as very disconcerting to me, but through his awareness Peter did strived to referee.

The overall message, was not one with the care which Cosmic Variance had ascertained it's caution of String evangelistism, or Lubos Motl's declaration as well, that the underlying motivation, was more to provide a "general widesweping statement" that applied to the string model development as a whole.

IMpressional Minds
If as a student, having now moved toward my senior years, how could I have turned back the clock of time, that I might have stood beside any of these leaders of science?

That I had to accustom myself to the very level on which my opinion would not have mattered coming from layman status. So being on the bottom of the totem pole, I accept the resolve to which such treatment was dealt. It was a small price to pay.

So imagine then, what the overall message by Peter has done to those prospective entries into the world of, might now have said, why should we now enter, being the brunt of what good science men hate, would have us believe?

The Reductionistic Process
Is it incorrect to say that the events of the collision process are incapable of decribing all fawcetts of the standard model?



So by concentrating on the collision process itself, what factors would have said that no, the standard model does not fit the current processes in LHC? Does not fit the process in high energy collision process to earths atmospheric conditions, for evdience of? See Pierre Auger expeirments here. See John Bachall and the Ghost particle.



So by closely looking at the poor man's version, what process would lead one to believe that the standard model was inclusive in this interactive process as well?

Here's the post in full. It was in response to Jack Safartti's comments and the document in which he had wrote was in contradiction of what I had learnt of the "possible new physics?" THis is of course held within context of collider results and the micro perspective results, created the form of quark Gluon Plasma. A superfluid?

So both events involved, "microstate blackhole" recognitions.

Post removed from Peter Woits comment section

In regards to facing nightmares

In recent years the main focus of fear has been the giant machines used by particle physicists. Could the violent collisions inside such a machine create something nasty? "Every time a new machine has been built at CERN," says physicist Alvaro de Rujula, "the question has been posed and faced."

The link was added here now.

If one follows the logic development, Jack's position becomes a interesting one to question. As well, such thoughts about cosmic collisions, and the high energy particles cosmological events. Microstate blackhole processes are the poor man's experimental pallete. Just as valid the dissipative state created in the collider.

The resulting end product is what is being explore with ICECUBE. It is all consistent with the standard model. Right from, the start of the collision process, to the resulting shower created.

Jack has some explaining to do?

Update

(To help anonymous understand better I hope the student does not feel s/he has to learn string theory in order to be valid in existance. Also, the interactive shower from the collison process with high energy article is well understood and what comes from it.

He deletes yours too.! Oh look, what we have in common?:) What drivel have you drummmed up?)

Anyway. As I was saying.

This is not to slight Peter Woit in the slighest, but to move him to consider the enormity with which the process of string/M theory is involved in the standard model expression. As fundamental particles and the interactions thereof.

To reject the model on the basis of preference, is of course for any who choose to follow which road. But to say that such a process should not be followed would have been a erroneous statement, as well as influencing the general population by such ascertions of preference aghast and in reaction.

Of course I recognized it is his blog and his comment section. On the basis of his dislike for anyone, can do anything they like, within reason right?

See:

History of the Universe and the Standard model