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" To Remember: Eskesthai
A long-shot method to test one type of simulation hypothesis was proposed in 2012 in a joint paper by physicists Silas R. Beane from the University of Bonn (now at the University of Washington, Seattle), and Zohreh Davoudi and Martin J. Savage from the University of Washington, Seattle.[11] Under the assumption of finite computational resources, the simulation of the universe would be performed by dividing the continuum space-time into a discrete set of points. In analogy with the mini-simulations that lattice-gauge theorists run today to build up nuclei from the underlying theory of strong interactions (known as Quantum chromodynamics), several observational consequences of a grid-like space-time have been studied in their work. Among proposed signatures is an anisotropy in the distribution of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays, that, if observed, would be consistent with the simulation hypothesis according to these physicists.[12
While I was dealing with a brain injury and finding it difficult to work, two friends (Derek Westen, a friend of the KITP, and Steve Shenker, with whom I was recently collaborating), suggested that a new direction might be good. Steve in particular regarded me as a good writer and suggested that I try that. I quickly took to Steve's suggestion. Having only two bodies of knowledge, myself and physics, I decided to write an autobiography about my development as a theoretical physicist.
This is not written for any particular audience, but just to give myself a goal. It will probably have too much physics for a nontechnical reader, and too little for a physicist, but perhaps there with be different things for each. Parts may be tedious. But it is somewhat unique, I think, a blow-by-blow history of where I started and where I got to.
Probably the target audience is theoretical physicists, especially young ones, who may enjoy comparing my struggles with their own. Some disclaimers: This is based on my own memories, jogged by the arXiv and Inspire. There will surely be errors and omissions. And note the title: this is about my memories, which will be different for other people. Also, it would not be possible for me to mention all the authors whose work might intersect mine, so this should not be treated as a reference work.See: Memories of a Theoretical Physicist by Joseph Polchinski
Dr.
Amanda Peet (University of Toronto) delivers a public lecture on how
string theory can provide the "Legos" of the universe to understand
phenomena like black holes. The talk was held at Perimeter Institute on
May 6, 2015. See: Perimeter Public Lecture: String Theory Legos for Black Holes
As you notice with the following, I upgraded the current thought process of the demonstration of the 6 videos in length, to suggest an approach to how we see a science develop out of an approach using consciousness.
Well I think most definitely it is an attitude that is born out of a position you adopted for sure.
Here;s the point.....every thing that is discussed in TM is functional without ever having to talking about using of this method.
The underlying sources in recognition of the philosophy is all there and it is academic in it's settings. So they used that to demonstrate the logic of their approach, and ultimate realization to say its all string or its all consciousness as a demonstration of this Unified Field.
There is a ole and ancient philosophy tied to this by correlation which is of Vedic and correlated to a leader of such thought.
Throw the leader aside and the religious association to money making schemes as to set each of us within a intonation, and we go on our way to delving into the relationship of the deeper thinking mind. This capability already exists within our range of thinking if we but learn to relax, sit by a stream or water fall, and you do not have to divest yourself of the reason with which you look at the world.
So the realization that everything is sound, is a conversion process that takes place in the mind as to describing what we have already described in the physics as measure, so we turn our language over to see collisions processes as described this way.
There is nothing wrong with seeing this way as long as you stay with the theoretic and physics of high energy approach.
So resonance in the brain matter, is as an affective state of consciousness, is a measure of frequency of the brain. Such a measure along side of showing what state your mind is in through different examinations is equally as valid as to the approach of the method of TM, while recognizing the underlying philosophy of approach.
The attempts of seeing such characters as one might mention in Castaneda as a fictional portrayal at best, as we have now come to know. Isn't this much like the theory of form as we discuss the method underlying the talk of forms in our approach as we listen to a story that Plato may have written about Socrates?
These forms are like qualitative examinations at the basis of thought become extrapolated to the world at large, so we see literature used to speak about a question and answer, as we are lead to the forms of the story.
The push toward an answer beyond a certain point in the physics of the big bang is then supplemented with some thing even much deeper then the equations that have taken us to a current time within the expression of the big bang, to realize that all around us now is consciousness in expression, are elements of the language to suggest, that such evidence exists at this very moment all around us.
We might have looked at the latest gravitational foot print to call it B modes in the WMAP? That is a conversion to the application of sound? So what are we saying? That gravity, is like sound?
Particulates as a measure of the energy as a frequency of sound. So you see the move to describe matter in another way may have been a revelation of a kind that was lead to a subjective form of reasoning that was deductive. So in that moment, where was consciousness as a measure of the state of the mattered brain as it explored??
What are black holes? What are they made of? What is string theory? Is
everything we see just vibrations of strings? How are string theory and
black holes related? What are the fundamental laws of Nature?
For
decades, since the discovery of quantum mechanics and Einstein’s theory
of relativity, scientists have been trying to combine the two
perspectives of the world into one single unified theory. One of the
results was string theory: where the strangeness of quantum reality and
the weirdness of relativity theory come together and create something
even more puzzling - a world with extra dimensions . String theory
says that there is only one fundamental object in the universe: the
string. Much like the strings in a guitar give rise to different sounds
when you pluck them, the strings of string theory give rise to the
different constituents of the observed reality when you make them
vibrate at different energies. Is everything in the world made of
strings? If so, what is a black hole? SEE:Black Holes, String Theory and the Fundamental Laws of Nature with Andrew Strominger
The allegorical relations that one might find to the subject of Brane is more then just the grey matter, but is an extreme version of a mathematical structure opening from an accumulation of previous mathematical structures. So the Brane New World is a idea behind revolutions(a Kuhnian thesis extrapolation) that takes place in abstract thinking and how relevant it is in the whole scheme of things. From the Renormalization Group to Quantum Gravity:
To tell you the truth the unfolding of point, line, and plane(early drawings that I had, have since been lost) to me seemed logical as one moved to the idea of cylinders and brane as a extreme journey into an abstract space that few could follow. Even for myself. I did have these early visualizations long before string theory came into the picture that lead too, me seeing a version of the intersection of such brane. I wish I could find the drawing that I did so many years ago. Why this has always piqued my interest.
In the Kaluza-Klein picture, the extra dimensions
are envisioned as being rolled up in compact space with a very small
volume, with massive excited states called Kaluza-Klein modes whose
mass makes them too heavy to be observed in current or future accelerators.
The braneworld scenario for having extra dimensions
while hiding them from easy detection relies on allowing the extra dimensions
to be noncompact, but with a warped
metric that depends on the extra dimensions and so is not a direct product
space. A simple model in five spacetime dimensions is the Randall-Sundrum
model, with metric See: Kaluza-Klein in String Theory
I definitely do not understand it all but I do understand the historical journey. I am glad to see that such evolutions can help people move forward in the relationship of how one may look at physics approach.
The
general theory of relativity is as yet incomplete insofar as it has
been able to apply the general principle of relativity satisfactorily
only to gravitational fields, but not to the total field. We do not yet
know with certainty by what mathematical mechanism the total field in
space is to be described and what the general invariant laws are to
which this total field is subject. One thing, however, seems certain:
namely, that the general principal of relativity will prove a necessary
and effective tool for the solution of the problem for the total field. -Out of My Later Years, Pg 48, Albert Einstein (bold and underlined added for emphasis)
***
You see, I am formulating qualifiers as to the nature of the question about the total field? The idea here is that from a symmetrical state, and not wanting infinity to be such a thing, what is the underlying the question of what exists as a moduli figure? The total field is as if, some vacua, which has a hold on the idea of time and where this leads one too? No time.
So there is then this evolution of the moduli figure that rests in the valley, as to the question of what as a probabilistic event may be determined, as if, the higg's. It reveals that the higg's, is not the end all too the story and I question the nature of the total field..
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, Omegam(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.
Some may understand the significance of this part of one's journey in the exploration of consciousness. It's really not that mystical that one has gone over to the crazy side exploitative of metaphysical issues that hold no constructive value to the efforts of looking into nature and what it means? A location, or a focus you see.
Let us say that for all intensive purposes that you pick a real location. Just so that you are on par with the understanding that this place is a real place. You can touch it, you can smell it....you can take it all in .....and others are here. Okay, so its a conference then. Your looking at the landscape?
While I have provided an image above it may be less then truthful of the park. It can be a Butterfly Sanctuary located just outside of Parksville on Vancouver Island.
It was more of what this Picture means to me as an example of, and feeling of. So while it is not an image of the park of m youth it reminded me of one. I had been to "a Park-Focus 27" when I was very young through happen stance encouraged by my wanting to know what I was to be when I was older. So you now recognize the distinction, and I did not have to do much work.
The correlations can happen from what one may find from using a systemic effort to organize a route that others have traveled and are traveling unbeknownst to them self. The odds are that you will find other people who in having no experience have awakened these correlations in search capabilities in perspective.
The framework regardless of the abstraction that is delivered is related too contact with levels of perception that are not normally sought after on a everyday level. It could be the areas of work or expertise that one ventures through that enhance attributes of your perceptions.
So what do you find? Focus 15: A state of "no time" in which you
explore beyond the constraints of time and place. Opportunities are
abundant for establishing communication with larger aspects of self.
Setting and knowing the route ahead you pave the way for the paradigm method to arrive on the doorstep to new and interesting thoughts about what is taken from that Locale. So your a scientist of a kind and you want reproducible results that others can experience too. So you work the method to perceptional awareness to contract occurrence with lets say Focus 15 or above? What is the benefit then?
Here's the thing that is interesting, whether your some mathematician or scientist, you are using part of your intellect focus to penetrate current constructs in order to either extend them or discover new attributes of the work. The shift in focus is life changing in that once moving to a new perception basis having traveled the route a new world is encountered whether one would like to say to admit to it or not.
It is a foundational change.
It should be apparent that in order to establish this framework for extension requires that one be able to move through the abstractions as one would move through a new neighborhood. On the surface you may only see the framework and not know of the further efforts or the attempts by which you have set up access to new information. New homes new people new thoughts and events.
Establishing this route requires that one understand they may had not be using another systemic approach and that they were trying to explain that they had established their own. So we are talking about developing systemic approaches to new discoveries here about the nature of our world?
So the level of perception is a mathematical one. Your always expressing your disdain for the approach to what is theoretically being designed yet you see no benefit to the using the framework. You call it all kinds of things....not being in touch with reality, or, has shown no experiential attachment with regard to some phenomenological approach?
How the heck did you get to that point if you had not delved into the construct being evidential to the way in which you have pushed perception? So you can say I can see nothing and that such a abstraction is not worth the push into the capabilities of new perceptions? I shall decide to chorus the exploitative of this non attachment on a perceptional relation and repeat what others repeat.
You realize you have not venture here and we are all layman at this point....so all you see is the framework and not how you got there.
We argue that the following three statements cannot all be true: (i) Hawking
radiation is in a pure state, (ii) the information carried by the radiation is
emitted from the region near the horizon, with low energy effective field
theory valid beyond some microscopic distance from the horizon, and (iii) the
infalling observer encounters nothing unusual at the horizon. Perhaps the most
conservative resolution is that the infalling observer burns up at the horizon.
Alternatives would seem to require novel dynamics that nevertheless cause
notable violations of semiclassical physics at macroscopic distances from the
horizon. Black Hole: Complementarity vs Firewall
This lecture presents some particular thoughts that rang a bell for me in terms of what reporting was done here earlier on the thought experiments by Susskind on how one may interpret information gained by the process of entanglement to an observer outside the black hole.
Various neutron interferometry experiments demonstrate the subtlety of the notions of duality and complementarity. By passing through the interferometer, the neutron appears to act as a wave. Yet upon passage, the neutron is subject to gravitation. As the neutron interferometer is rotated through Earth's gravitational field
a phase change between the two arms of the interferometer can be
observed, accompanied by a change in the constructive and destructive
interference of the neutron waves on exit from the interferometer. Some
interpretations claim that understanding the interference effect
requires one to concede that a single neutron takes both paths through
the interferometer at the same time; a single neutron would "be in two
places at once", as it were. Since the two paths through a neutron
interferometer can be as far as 5 cm to 15 cm
apart, the effect is hardly microscopic. This is similar to traditional
double-slit and mirror interferometer experiments where the slits (or
mirrors) can be arbitrarily far apart. So, in interference and
diffraction experiments, neutrons behave the same way as photons (or
electrons) of corresponding wavelength. See: Complementarity (physics)
At the heart of modern cosmology is a
mystery: Why does our universe appear so exquisitely tuned to create
the conditions necessary for life? In this tour de force tour of some of
science's biggest new discoveries, Brian Greene shows how the
mind-boggling idea of a multiverse may hold the answer to the riddle.
Brian Greene is perhaps the best-known proponent of superstring
theory, the idea that minuscule strands of energy vibrating in a higher
dimensional space-time create every particle and force in the universe.
See: Music of the Quantum You combine theoretical positions with concrete ideas?
If one has never encountered an anomaly in nature and thought okay this happened but with no scientific qualification what so ever then indeed it is not a measurable quality about dealing with reality. So only you know it happened. Of course, then, you ask yourself, what weight do you apply to that unless you can reproduce it, or, have the witnesses to back it up? Many years have gone by now.
So it spurs one to investigate some things about nature that as yet you know it happened are only thoughts which may belong to an area that is highly theoretical. A way to make sense of it or grasp the significance of what is not normal. Defines laws of?
So, I am trying to say what may be possible and at the same time ask why nature did not take that course, or, why we are not aware of the anomaly as being "a possible" now?
I know at some point I will have to say that because this is not a measurable process I have to ignore it until I can explain it or reproduce it? Just go on with my life as an unexplainable event. But in the mean time, one can learn many the things because of it?
Is this what you mean? This response, was only possible by you asking the right question?
Now I write this link and quote above because it set my own mind in motion, from that point. I began looking at the experiments and trying to derive something that was consistent in that process that would lead into that same logical conclusion that we are "seeing" and "not seeing" what happens.
What I have learn by association is that sometimes the spring board to move forward can be raised by others who question and point out things about nature. How in being a scientist how one might look at things. How to be responsible about dealing with the world of observable things as well as interject about how theoretical explanations may provide for some foundation of how to explain "the possibilities" in nature? But without phenomenology this is really only an abstract thing. Some would just call it "a math" without a reality foundation.So would you say then they are lost in an abstract world?
Even here as a layman I am assuming that concepts them self are really covers for abstract things. One assumes there is math at it's basis and that all life without this approach is the foundation toward the phenomenological approach? You look for signs of the anomaly in nature and experiment.
Excerpt from "Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer - A Physics Experiment on the International Space Station" by Dr. Sam Ting: The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS-02) is a state-of-the-art particle physics detector constructed, tested and operated by an international team composed of 60 institutes from 16 countries and organized under United States Department of Energy (DOE) sponsorship. The AMS-02 will use the unique environment of space to advance knowledge of the universe and lead to the understanding of the universe's origin by searching for antimatter, dark matter and measuring cosmic rays.
Experimental evidence indicates that our Galaxy is made of matter; however, there are more than 100 hundred million galaxies in the universe and the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe requires equal amounts of matter and antimatter. Theories that explain this apparent asymmetry violate other measurements. Whether or not there is significant antimatter is one of the fundamental questions of the origin and nature of the universe. Any observations of an antihelium nucleus would provide evidence for the existence of antimatter. In 1999, AMS-01 established a new upper limit of 10-6 for the antihelium/helium flux ratio in the universe. AMS-02 will search with a sensitivity of 10-9, an improvement of three orders of magnitude, sufficient to reach the edge of the expanding universe and resolve the issue definitively.
The visible matter in the universe (stars) adds up to less than 5 percent of the total mass that is known to exist from many other observations. The other 95 percent is dark, either dark matter (which is estimated at 20 percent of the universe by weight or dark energy, which makes up the balance). The exact nature of both still is unknown. One of the leading candidates for dark matter is the neutralino. If neutralinos exist, they should be colliding with each other and giving off an excess of charged particles that can be detected by AMS-02. Any peaks in the background positron, anti-proton, or gamma flux could signal the presence of neutralinos or other dark matter candidates.
Six types of quark (u, d, s, c, b and t) have been found experimentally, however all matter on Earth is made up of only two types of quarks (u and d). It is a fundamental question whether there is matter made up of three quarks (u, d and s). This matter is known as Strangelets. Strangelets can have extremely large mass and very small charge-to-mass ratios. It would be a totally new form of matter. AMS will provide a definitive answer on the existence of this extraordinary matter. The above three examples indicates that AMS will probe the foundations of modern physics.
Cosmic radiation is a significant obstacle to a manned space flight to Mars. Accurate measurements of the cosmic ray environment are needed to plan appropriate countermeasures. Most cosmic ray studies are done by balloon-borne satellites with flight times that are measured in days; these studies have shown significant variations. AMS-02 will be operative on the ISS for a nominal mission of 3 years, gathering an immense amount of accurate data and allowing measurements of the long term variation of the cosmic ray flux over a wide energy range, for nuclei from protons to iron. After the nominal mission, AMS-02 can continue to provide cosmic ray measurements. In addition to the understanding the radiation protection required for manned interplanetary flight, this data will allow the interstellar propagation and origins of cosmic rays to be pinned down. See: The newly-installed Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer-2 (AMS)
For myself understanding the dimensional relationship toward the QFT perspective of particle research and development, it has been a difficult road to understanding this relation. It is not just the idea of what transpires as we architecturally build the world\universe we live in, but to understand nature's expression as we see the movement in the universe as we research and experimental with particle decay products.
Click on Image to go to appropriate site for image dedication
So there is a lot being said about what is contained in the first paragraph of this opening blog post that will never be understood by other layman like myself, or, other experts considering the developmental phases I have been going through. Are my ruminations consistent, or, have they haphazardly layered a trail of confusion to have it said that what danger lurks in this determination of what is written here is to confuse.
Should I put aside all that I have learn in context of theoretical developments?
No. I can assure you that I have been at this a number of years now to say that with what I am doing now is filling in the gaps of where I have been to where I am going in terms of better explaining myself in a scientific context that is acceptable to the notion of what might have transpired in the 21 st century for some. It has been in learning string theory. Yes, I have listened to all the articulations of the back and forth of what the basis of this theoretical determination is "as a mathematical foundation" has yet to prove it''s validity as a method by which to explain the nature of the universe?
The crystalline state is the simplest known example of a quantum , a stable state of matter whose generic low-energy properties are determined by a higher organizing principle and nothing else. Prof. Robert B. Laughlin
This is just the road I took and it allowed me to see what can ever transpired as a expression of a understanding of symmetry breaking. It is an understanding of this correlation toward the "false vacuum to the true." This was an expression of the space we are "living in" as an understanding of the timing in relation to the expression of this universe. One just had to know indeed their was indeed a higher order? A Klein bottle perhaps in following the lines on the surface?
Using the anti–de Sitter/conformal field theory correspondence to relate fermionic quantum critical fields to a gravitational problem, we computed the spectral functions of fermions in the field theory. By increasing the fermion density away from the relativistic quantum critical point, a state emerges with all the features of the Fermi liquid. See:String Theory, Quantum Phase Transitions, and the Emergent Fermi Liquid
What can we say then is emergent? So you are learning to count in geometrical expressions as a placement of the Genus figures? So what correlations can be drawn toward the beginning of such counting?
For me it was necessary to carry on the tradition of geometrical seeing what was revealed in relativity development(Grossman and Riemann) to know that such an expression had to be moved into the world of the very small.
It had to have a relativistic interpretation of the way in which such energies could detail the understanding of particles in expression. But also, of the energies involved. So this "Royal road to geometry" in relation to topology, had to be understood by myself as I understood the Genus placements in the valleys of expression. The landscape.
I knew where such new physics needs to be in relation to what is happening as we look at the experiments of LHC . Of course I have to better understand the Jet manifestation in order to reveal some of the thinking that has been produced in my journeys.
I wanted to expand on where the title,"Another Kind of Sideways." This blog posting came from an interview with Clifford of Asymptotia by PBS. He had a posting of his own entitled Multiverse Musings about a Nova series on PBS in the Fall related to Brian Greene's book, The Fabric of the Cosmos.
Where would these other universes be in relation to ours? Is there a way to envision it?
Well, we live in three spatial dimensions: We move back and forth, up and down, left to right. And then there's time, so that's our four-dimensional universe. Another universe might be essentially right next to ours by going in another direction that's not one of those four. We might call it "another kind of sideways." See: Riddles of the Multiverse
The whole context of the idea of the Multiverse could have in my layman view be classified as speaking about and argued as the basis of "existing outside of time." I just wanted to say that mathematically this definition of the Multiverse can actually exist in that framework, yet had to be extrapolated to the real universe we live in and how other universes may apply.
SOCRATES: But if he always possessed this knowledge he would always have known; or if he has acquired the knowledge he could not have acquired it in this life, unless he has been taught geometry; for he may be made to do the same with all geometry and every other branch of knowledge. Now, has any one ever taught him all this? You must know about him, if, as you say, he was born and bred in your house.SEE:Meno by Plato
I am always interested in the way a correlation is struck, from a scientist's mind when looking at the world and the comparisons they may find in the real world. I mean, to stand on top of a mountain as I did, you get this sense of the terrain, and how the landscape appears. How from an idealist position, a mathematical position is described and how the universe can be described?
LEE SMOLIN- Physicist, Perimeter Institute; Author, The Trouble With Physics
I find it hard sometimes to try and explain something that is "not outside of time." That such description of reality while confounding to those like me less able to understand the mathematical world of such truths that contrary to Lee Smolin's opinion such schematics can be found to exist "within each of us." How we build our world from the inside, and how we contain it.
Is the mathematical description of polytopes any less real as a mathematical basis?
If one is to believe that a mountain top represents some "perfect symmetry" then what said all those places in the valleys can exist and would not represent some genus figure? What are we saying about the possible universes, locations within the universe, and the creation of?
That a pencil standing on point, could fall one way or another, or a description of a false vacuum to a true could represent something leading away from such symmetry? Why the problem with such mathematical and schematize attributes? Would you as a scientist turn your back on such mathematical interpretations of the world?
Thanks to Lubos Motl for link too, "Jeff Harvey Summary Video" and of course, the current state of String Theory. Of course conference has since past, but hey, the information is great from many perspectives that were there.
By The original uploader was 
See: 
