IN Search of Mandelstam's Holy Grail

There are two posts that reflect the purpose of this post today. One is Clifford's linked through Lee Smolin's comment and the other, at Backreaction. Good Physics is Conflict

A lot of you may never understand the significance of the mystery that follows the thinking of the Holy Grail. Yet is it more the knowledge that can be gained from all soul's day, that on this occasion we may have called it Halloween.

We celebrated the past, in the living of today? You philosophize, while you become the thoughts of models created by science leaders shared? I do not think any have a "personality disorder" like I do:)

Lee Smolin:

Here is an example of the kind of question I found I needed a book to explore: what to think of the problems that arise from the need for higher dimensions in string theory, such as the problem of moduli stabilization and the vast number of static solutions. To approach this I read books on the early history of GR and unified field theories and learned that higher dimensional compactifications were explored many times between 1914 and 1984 and that close to the beginning these problems were appreciated and discussed by Einstein and others. I weave this story into my book because I find it useful when trying to judge how serious the present issues in string theory are to know how Einstein and many others struggled with the same issues over decades.

So of course when we think of the persons of science who walked before us (shoulders of giants), what are their whole stories, but what is evidenced to us as we read those words? So you compile your data accordingly, and from it, we say at certain spots, how are we to react to the challenge now facing us?



Stanley Mandelstam, Professor Emeritus, Particle Theory

My present research concerns the problem of topology changing in string theory. It is currently believed that one has to sum over all string backgrounds and all topologies in doing the functional integral. I suspect that certain singular string backgrounds may be equivalent to topology changes, and that it is consequently only necessary to sum over string backgrounds. As a start I am investigating topology changes in two-dimensional target spaces. I am also interested in Seiberg-Witten invariants. Although much has been learned, some basic questions remain, and I hope to be able at least to understand the simpler of these questionsStanley Mandelstam-Professor Emeritus Particle Theory

As a lay person watching the debate it is difficult for me to discern the basis of these arguments. But I strive to go past what you think is surface in conduct in science's response, as some may show of themself in a reactionary pose. Should we all be so perfect, that the human condition is not also the example by which we shall progress in science?

Dealing in the Abstract



A sphere with three handles (and three holes), i.e., a genus-3 torus.

Of course the thinking may seem so detached from reality that one asks for some reason with which to believe anything. It required, that the history of this approached dust off models in glass cabinets, that were our early descendants of the museum today.

Sylvester's models lay hidden away for a long time, but recently the Mathematical Institute received a donation to rescue some of them. Four of these were carefully restored by Catherine Kimber of the Ashmolean Museum and now sit in an illuminated glass cabinet in the Institute Common Room.

How many of you know how to work in such abstract spaces, and know that what you are talking about has it's relationships in the physics of today? Or that, what satellites we use in measure of, have some correlation to how one may have seen "UV coordinates supplied by Gauss?"

Gravity in all Shapes and Sizes?

Q9:But Time on every planet is different, therefore Time on every solar system could be different, and Time in every galaxy different still.

First off I'd like to thank you for taking "the time" to answer the posts that I put up :)If you did not do this I would have to place questions marks after every statement, as if to challenge my thinking mind in assuming that I could be in two places at once? Okay, I have mentioned the teacher and student within each of us and I am sticking to that as I explain myself.

Einstein may have preferred some proverbial wisdom in the form of the Old Ones, yet it is not so strange to me that these persona's are place within any mind to appeal to our higher well intention creations for what heaven is/maybe, suppose to be?

Time

What you say is true, yet I am looking to see that no matter which planet you are on, the rules with which we work will work everywhere. If by chance I assume gravity in all my statements and I assume that gravity is part of the standard model with which we are working, then I would say that what works in one part of the galaxy also is suppose to work here?

Whether there is one observer there and one here, we are experiencing time as a "fundamental aspect" of our being? I enlisted the formation of planets to exemplify not only the matter distinctions in what see forming within our cosmos as planets, but it reveals the hierarchical thinking that exists as a fundamental pattern as the basis of our constructive guise as we put this cloak on?

So I am spelling this out from all the things that have been put forth in regards to model approaches, "as if" I have become them.

How is it then I see as a observer? Do you not think my approach in terms of Colour of Gravity "is" indeed very colourful?

That showing you the ways in which these models can perceptionally make one work can be a sobering thought once having drunk "the beauty" of any language?

Isostatic Adjustment is Why Planets are Round?

Conclusion:The state of mind of the observer plays a crucial role in the perception of time.Einstein

See here.

If we thought of the "Colour of Gravity" posted here, what values could you assign any materials that arise from the centre out? Gravity would have it's way with these materials for us to assign them to their unique ordering?

The Power of Myth With Bill Moyers, by Joseph Campbell , Introduction that Bill Moyers writes,

"Campbell was no pessimist. He believed there is a "point of wisdom beyond the conflicts of illusion and truth by which lives can be put back together again." Finding it is the "prime question of the time." In his final years he was striving for a new synthesis of science and spirit. "The shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric world view," he wrote after the astronauts touched the moon, "seemed to have removed man from the center-and the center seemed so important...

That we may say, the minerals on the moon have been assigned their valuation too? I would say it's the colour of gravity that we had assigned all of humanities thoughts and where is man/woman's centre?

Image: NASA/JPL-

Planets are round because their gravitational field acts as though it originates from the center of the body and pulls everything toward it. With its large body and internal heating from radioactive elements, a planet behaves like a fluid, and over long periods of time succumbs to the gravitational pull from its center of gravity. The only way to get all the mass as close to planet's center of gravity as possible is to form a sphere. The technical name for this process is "isostatic adjustment."

With much smaller bodies, such as the 20-kilometer asteroids we have seen in recent spacecraft images, the gravitational pull is too weak to overcome the asteroid's mechanical strength. As a result, these bodies do not form spheres. Rather they maintain irregular, fragmentary shapes.

By using Grace here, and the way we look at earth now, we get a better sense of what the actual shape of the earth is. WE had all thought it looked so round from space, that under a "time variable measure" we knew better. We knew that the variations in topographical locations would reveal something unique in relation to gravity. It took Grace to do that

Our work is about comparing the data we collect in the STAR detector with modern calculations, so that we can write down equations on paper that exactly describe how the quark-gluon plasma behaves," says Jerome Lauret from Brookhaven National Laboratory. "One of the most important assumptions we've made is that, for very intense collisions, the quark-gluon plasma behaves according to hydrodynamic calculations in which the matter is like a liquid that flows with no viscosity whatsoever."

See more here

The Moon Clementine-Color ratio image of Aristarchus Crater on the Moon-Clementine color ratio composite image of Aristarchus Crater on the Moon. This 42 km diameter crater is located on the corner of the Aristarchus plateau, at 24 N, 47 W. Ejecta from the plateau is visible as the blue material at the upper left (northwest), while material excavated from the Oceanus Procellarum area is the reddish color to the lower right (southeast). The colors in this image can be used to ascertain compositional properties of the materials making up the deep strata of these two regions. (Clementine, USGS slide 11)

It is not so far fetched for the mind to think of the planet in question, as to it's roundness, or, the moon in relation to how we see those impact craters on it's surface. "The moon" quite revealing in the mineralogical decor for us. So there are two things to consider here.

From the "boundary" of the planet "inward" and from the "centre" of the planet "outward."

Polar Flips

Sometimes it is necessary to see the deep impact a thought could have as we try to understand the implications of a "sphere dropped in a viscously liquid" that we might find another correlation in how we see the photon affected in the gravitational field. Can we grasped the feeling illicitated to say we have some what of a deep impact in remembering to think the strange world of fluids could entertain us?

Stokes' law

In 1851, George Gabriel Stokes derived an expression for the frictional force exerted on spherical objects with very small Reynolds numbers (e.g., very small particles) in a continuous viscous fluid by solving the small fluid-mass limit of the generally unsolvable Navier-Stokes equations:



where:

is the frictional force,
r is the Stokes radius of the particle,
η is the fluid viscosity, and
is the particle's speed.

If the particles are falling in the viscous fluid by their own weight, then a terminal velocity, also known as the settling velocity, is reached when this frictional force combined with the buoyant force exactly balance the gravitational force. The resulting settling velocity is given by:



where:

Vs is the particles' settling velocity (cm/sec) (vertically downwards if ρp > ρf, upwards if ρp < ρf),
r is the Stokes radius of the particle (cm),
g is the standard gravity (cm/sec2),
ρp is the density of the particles (g/cm3),
ρf is the density of the fluid (g/cm3), and
η is the fluid viscosity (dyne sec/cm2).

Why are Planets Round?

Q9:

Would these fluids act differently on the Moon and at (on) different gravities

I was loosing the train of thought within this post, and then the thought occurred me.

Why are planets round. This is a "general question" which leads to how we see the formation of the planets?

"isostatic adjustment"

Start there. We also know what a "sphere of water" looks like in space?

While the sphere was being thought of in regards to Stokes's Theorem, I was also thinking of the earth in relation to how we see gravity in regards to the earth already formed. The vicissitude, in which the earth exists within the cosmos. The moon.

The rotating superfluid gas of fermions is pierced with the vortices, which are like mini-tornadoes. Image / Andre Schirotzek, MIT

Bose-Einstein condensation of pairs of fermions that were bound together loosely as molecules was observed in November 2003 by independent teams at the University of Colorado at Boulder, the University of Innsbruck in Austria and at MIT. However, observing Bose-Einstein condensation is not the same as observing superfluidity. Further studies were done by these groups and at the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris, Duke University and Rice University, but evidence for superfluidity was ambiguous or indirect.

The superfluid Fermi gas created at MIT can also serve as an easily controllable model system to study properties of much denser forms of fermionic matter such as solid superconductors, neutron stars or the quark-gluon plasma that existed in the early universe.

There is a special class of fluids that are called superfluids. Superfluids have the property that they can flow through narrow channels without viscosity. However, more fundamental than the absence of dissipation is the behavior of superfluids under rotation. In contrast to the example of a glass of water above, the rotation in superfluids is always inhomogeneous (figure). The fluid circulates around quantized vortex lines. The vortex lines are shown as yellow in the figure, and the circulating flow around them is indicated by arrows. There is no vorticity outside of the lines because the velocity near each line is larger than further away. (In mathematical terms curl v = 0, where v(r) is the velocity field.)

See here for more on Attributes of Superfluids

It is very possible that the information is inundating my thinking here yet without considering the context of the super fluid what requirements would fit the idea that earth is relevant when it comes to the molten core? Or how you see the magnetic field shifting in relation to the poles?

Thus, water is "thin", having a lower viscosity, while vegetable oil is "thick" having a higher viscosity. All real fluids (except superfluids) have some resistance to shear stress, but a fluid which has no resistance to shear stress is known as an ideal fluid or inviscid fluid (Symon 1971).

I am quickly posting this and will have more to add. I wanted to speak directly to the idea of the super fluid. How the "irrotational value of the perfect fluid as a whole," could have it's leakages to the surface of the earth, as small vortices created.

This computer simulation shows the Earth's interior as its magnetic field reverses, perhaps because of changes in the flow of molten iron in the core. Deep inside the Earth, the magnetic field arises as the fluid core oozes with hot currents of molten iron and this mechanical energy gets converted into electromagnetism. It is known as the geodynamo. In a car's generator, the same principle turns mechanical energy into electricity.

No one knows precisely why the field periodically reverses, but scientists say the responsibility probably lies with changes in the turbulent flows of molten iron, which they envision as similar to the churning gases that make up the clouds of Jupiter.

In theory, a reversal could have major effects because over the ages many aspects of nature and society have come to rely on the field's steadiness.

Quasar posted a comment there that immediately made me think what the topic could mean in relation to the post he was commenting on. I thought of the earth's core as the subject was related, and thought how nice it would be to have such a "cylindrical channel that goes from pole to pole?"

Well the viscosity of the fluid as it traverses this cylinder would give some nature to the charge as it passes through? I do not think it could be that simple, if we thought the iron molten as the viscosity had a direct relation to what we know of our magnetic field? We know the earth core is not so cylindrical, that we could the attribute of the superfluid in this case while looking at the iron molten lava

So is it the iron in particular that gives us our strength based on it's fluid's nature?

These changes in Earth’s magnetic fields from 1980 to 2000 may be harbingers of a shift in the magnetic poles

Akeno Giant Air Shower Array (AGASA)

A Quantum Gravity in the Lab a meeting held in regardsEcho: DDR as a Test Model was introduced by Bee of Backreaction.

I thought it important that I give some background on what had transpired here to allow me to make certain comments in face of what they are proposing there in QGL.

An International Facility to Study the Highest Energy Cosmic Rays See:Pierre Auger Observatory

The historical background to this process is very enlightening when we come to investigate what the universe is doing in relation to what experiments on earth. This "correlation" is an important one these two experimental processes in how we see interactions of high energy particles.

One day, some bright, enterprising physicist, perhaps inspired by this article, will complete the theory, open the doorway, and use the power of pure thought to determine if string theory is a theory of everything, anything, or nothing.

Only time will tell if Einstein was correct when he said, "But the creative principle resides in mathematics. In a certain sense, therefore, I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed."Michio Kaku

See: Window On the Universe

Having done this research on my own I was thinking already in context of the high energy particle collisions that were being recorded. In my blogging experience, I was some upset when I could no longer locate the article I did on the Fly's Eye and the oh my God Particle. "Revisited" help to point to this information obtained from wikipedia, but I had it long before.

John Ellis was again instrumental here in pointing to information from the Pierre Auger experiments and is supplied in the labels


shows arrival directions of cosmic rays with energies above 4 x 10¹⁹eV. Red squares and green circles represent cosmic rays with energies of > 10²⁰eV , and (4 - 10) x 10¹⁹eV , respectively.

We observed muon components in the detected air showers and studied their characteristics. Generally speaking, more muons in a shower cascade favors heavier primary hadrons and measurement of muons is one of the methods used to infer the chemical composition of the energetic cosmic rays. Our recent measurement indicates no systematic change in the mass composition from a predominantly heavy to a light composition above 3 x 10¹⁷eV claimed by the Fly's Eye group.

Knowing that such high energy particles did indeed react with what we measure in the Sno or Ice Cube was just one more part of the neutrinos from the new physics that were being developed as well.

MAGIC is an imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescope or IACT that has started measuring since the commissioning ended in late 2004. The project is funded primarily by the funding agencies BMFB (Germany), MPG (Germany), INFN (Italy), and CICYT (Spain).

Relativistic Fluid Dynamics

The Navier-Stokes equations


A bubble is a minimal-energy surface

The Navier-Stokes equations, named after Claude-Louis Navier and George Gabriel Stokes, are a set of equations that describe the motion of fluid substances such as liquids and gases. These equations establish that changes in momentum in infinitesimal volumes of fluid are simply the product of changes in pressure and dissipative viscous forces (similar to friction) acting inside the fluid. These viscous forces originate in molecular interactions and dictate how viscous a fluid is. Thus, the Navier-Stokes equations are a dynamical statement of the balance of forces acting at any given region of the fluid.

In educating myself I learnt to trust my intuition when it comes to defining the basis of "new physics" that was to emerge. As well as, the new particle manifestation that would arise from "specific points" on interaction. What was suppose to be our starting point. This is really difficult for me to put into words, yet, if you knew that there was a "change over/cross over point" and how was this defined? It seemed to me, we had to have a place that would do this.

A more fundamental property than the disappearance of viscosity becomes visible if superfluid is placed in a rotating container. Instead of rotating uniformly with the container, the rotating state consists of quantized vortices. That is, when the container is rotated at speed below the first critical velocity (related to the quantum numbers for the element in question) the liquid remains perfectly stationary. Once the first critical velocity is reached, the superfluid will very quickly begin spinning at the critical speed. The speed is quantized - i.e. it can only spin at certain speeds.

"Nothing" is difficult to talk about, and "empty space" is not really empty. So to think "nothing" is a very hard one for me to grasp. If one thinks about what "sprang into being" I of course had to find this "place of traversing" from "one state of being" to another. What things help us to define the nature of that point?



Example of the viscosity of milk and water. Liquids with higher viscosities will not make such a splash.

Viscosity is a measure of the resistance of a fluid to deform under shear stress. It is commonly perceived as "thickness", or resistance to flow. Viscosity describes a fluid's internal resistance to flow and may be thought of as a measure of fluid friction. Thus, water is "thin", having a lower viscosity, while vegetable oil is "thick" having a higher viscosity. All real fluids (except superfluids) have some resistance to shear stress, but a fluid which has no resistance to shear stress is known as an ideal fluid or inviscid fluid (Symon 1971).

I used the question mark not to befuddle those that read here or sanction any post to some idea about what the title following with a question mark, is worth so many points on the "flowery scale."

On the other hand, gravity in the form of curved space would permeate the whole bulk of the higher dimensional spacetime …. Stephen Hawking¹

I shall have to define "flowery scale" sometime, but I would rather not give any credit to those who hold a position in science who have categorize people according to that same point system. Oh and please, do not consider the flowers less then what I hold as of high value in these "maturations" to be thought less then either.



While we had been witness to the collider experiments we were also quite aware that that such events had to be taking place with earth, from event sources released in space.

Relativistic Fluid Dynamics: Physics for Many Different Scales-Nils Andersson

In writing this review, we have tried to discuss the different building blocks that are needed if one wants to construct a relativistic theory for fluids. Although there are numerous alternatives, we opted to base our discussion of the fluid equations of motion on the variational approach pioneered by Taub [108] and in recent years developed considerably by Carter [17, 19, 21]. This is an appealing strategy because it leads to a natural formulation for multi-fluid problems. Having developed the variational framework, we discussed applications. Here we had to decide what to include and what to leave out. Our decisions were not based on any particular logic, we simply included topics that were either familiar to us, or interested us at the time. That may seem a little peculiar, but one should keep in mind that this is a “living” review. Our intention is to add further applications when the article is updated. On the formal side, we could consider how one accounts for elastic media and magnetic fields, as well as technical issues concerning relativistic vortices (and cosmic strings). On the application side, we may discuss many issues for astrophysical fluid flows (like supernova core collapse, jets, gamma-ray bursts, and cosmology).

In updating this review we will obviously also correct the mistakes that are sure to be found by helpful colleagues. We look forward to receiving any comments on this review. After all, fluids describe physics at many different scales and we clearly have a lot of physics to learn. The only thing that is certain is that we will enjoy the learning process!

Spacetime Curvatures

Flat space time? The thought there are strong gravitational forces at work and where are these located? Can there "be" amidst this strong curvature, the idea that a super fluid born, would have a place where a state of inertia could exist? I thought quickly of what happens when the blackhole collapses and what could come of it?

Of course this concept of inertia is strong in my mind but would need better clarifications as I am relaying it here in this circumstance.

But looking for these locations in Lagrangian views of the Sun Earth relation, it seemed viable to me that such a state could have gone from a very strong gravitational inclination( our suns, increase temperatures of the collapsing blackhole) to one that is "very free" and "not flat" but would allow information both ways(from before to now) to be traversed, as if in a jet or cylinder. So that the space around it would be expression not only the earlier constituents of the universe before this translation but manifest into the new physics with which would motive this universe, new particle manifestation, from what did not exist before.

¹The Universe in a Nutshell, by Stephen Hawking. Bantam Books, ISBN 0-553-80202-X-Chapter 7, Page 181

The Mind Field

Lee Smolin:

Height is proportional to the number of things the theory gets right. Since we don’t have a convincing case for the right theory yet, that is a high peak somewhere off in the distance. The existing approaches are hills of various heights that may or may not be connected, across some ridges and high valleys to the real peak. We assume the landscape is covered by fog so we can’t see where the real peak is, we can only feel around and detect slopes and local maxima.Lee Smolin

See here for more information.

Without giving some coordinates to the thinking in Colour of Gravity I thought it important that such talk be given a new perspective that had not been considered in the context with how hierarchically how I gave meaning to such colours.

But the truth is, the Earth's topography is highly variable with mountains, valleys, plains, and deep ocean trenches. As a consequence of this variable topography, the density of Earth's surface varies. These fluctuations in density cause slight variations in the gravity field, which, remarkably, GRACE can detect from space.

See here for more info on Grace.

First I must say that having the sceptic aligned within oneself is a good thing. To maintain a questioning state to what is ever introduced. For me as I read the exchanges between "Susskind and Smolin" it was not without understanding that I might want to instigate "two other minds in the string debate" to engage them to bring forth "good information" about the model in science, for and against.

Who would ever of thought to give correlate the differences we see on earth as topographical features to have thought "Colour of Gravity" has now been implemented along with sound?

Do not forget "Titan's descent" and what "measure" do we have? We might want to see the surface in a way that you had not seen it before? What I have written so far in this post should open up a new concept in terms of what these measures do for us.

This recording was produced by converting into audible sounds some of the radar echoes received by Huygens during the last few kilometres of its descent onto Titan. As the probe approaches the ground, both the pitch and intensity increase. Scientists will use intensity of the echoes to speculate about the nature of the surface.

So have I lost you in regards to "subjectivity." Was the science reduced to innuendos of all kinds while showing such disrespect? It is less then the desired in exchange. So I have tried to hold this high in my values.

But alas what happens sometimes though, is that we can start speaking past each other, while most distinctly I would prefer the conclusion drawn, where both would agree on the differences. Admit, they would be working to not only support their positions and the reasons why, but instigate others to continue to question and deal respectively with the continued debate. What is gravity?

The immediacy of reactive perceptions would ask that any gravity be held in context of the reaction measured in calorimetric design.

Moving to a "fifth dimensional" understanding was a necessary part of our evolution?

If you join "electromagnetism and and gravity" what will become of your views of the world around you? I am the product of such thoughts. While scientists had been engaged qualitatively, I had become what their equations would allow them too in model design.

So I had to carefully take you to this point to have enlisted the idea of the Mind Field. It's relation to what is hidden in the subtle ideas related to Colour of gravity. That we could have this "multiversity idea held to any scientists mind", while thinking of only the technologies? It had to also have it's subjective valuation too.

How could you think as a scientist and not include this aspect of the thinking mind. That it had some "ascension" to it in terms of "pyramidal qualities." Colours that I might assign? Or, that the "bubble as a sphere" would reflect the scientists mind, as if it was a relation to "earth time variable measures" in the thoughts sequences of experience? You will reflect this, not only on a "verbal level" but one you had not seen before.

Out in Right/Left Field

If one didn't have their own "heart song" what said they couldn't "tap their way?"

Both left and right sides are necessary for complete perception of rhythm. For example, both hemispheres need to be working to tell the difference between three-quarter and four-quarter time.

The front part of your brain (frontal cortex), where working memories are stored, also plays a role in rhythm and melody perception.

So it is no surpise that I would highlight the following debate between Michael Shermer and Deepak Chopra would it.:)

Hope Springs Eternal Science, the Afterlife & the Meaning of Life-by Michael Shermer

The ancient Hebrew word for soul is nephesh, or “life” or “vital breath”; the Greek word for soul is psyche, or “mind”; and the Roman Latin word for soul is anima, or “spirit” or “breath.” The soul is the essence that breathes life into flesh, animates us, gives us our vital spirit. Given the lack of knowledge about the natural world at the time these concepts were first formed, it is not surprising these ancient peoples reached for such ephemeral metaphors as mind, breath, and spirit. One moment a little dog is barking, prancing, and wagging its tail, and in the next moment it is a lump of inert flesh. What happened in that moment?

In 1907 a Massachusetts physician named Duncan MacDougall tried to find out by weighing six dying patients before and after their death. He reported in the medical journal American Medicine that there was a 21-gram difference. Even though his measurements were crude and varying, and no one has been able to replicate his findings, it has nonetheless grown to urban legendary status as the weight of the soul. The implication is that the soul is a thing that can be weighed. Is it?

Taking the Afterlife Seriously by Deepak Chopra

If consciousness is an aspect of the field, then our brains should operate along the lines of a field. This seems to be true. For one thing, it’s impossible to explain how the brain coordinates millions of separate events simultaneously unless something like a mind field is present. Take a compass out of your pocket anywhere on earth, shake it, and a few seconds later the wobbly needle will always settle pointing north. If every person on the planet did this at exactly twelve midnight, billions of compasses would be doing the same thing simultaneously, a fact that doesn’t surprise us because we know that the Earth’s magnetic field is responsible. It would be absurd to claim that each compass decided randomly to pick north.

Gravity Experiments

No matter how absurd? :)

From a early age, young Albert showed great interest in the world around him. When he was five years old, his father gave him a compass, and the child was enchanted by the device and intrigued by the fact the needle followed a invisible field to point always in the direction of the north pole.Reminiscing in old age, Einstein mentioned this incident as one of the factors that perhaps motivated him years later to study the gravitational field. God's Equation, by Amir D. Aczel, Pg 14

So you fast forward a few years and what have you got with regards to nature accompany the man who fell off his roof?


Albert Einstein (1879–1955)

One part of the theory of Relativity was inspired when a painter fell off a roof. Einstein found out that while the painter was falling freely, he felt weightless. This led Einstein to realize that gravity was a form of inertia, a result of the way things moved through space - and General Relativity was born.

So it is "by accident" General Relativity was born? Having things happen within context of natures own timing leaves one with some impressions it seems? How often have you noticed the outside world while you are doing your abstract thinking? What is so conducive that the open doorway allowed this other information to flow quite freely into the mind's cavity? You happebn to be working woth natures and it's puzzles yet what use any of these geometrical forms?

Plato:

It is of course with some concern that any scientific mind, held to the established rules of his organizational, "motto of acceptance of the stringent rules of science" would allow such room, as to imbue the human being with qualities greater then, the value assigned to subjective valuations.

So having faced the idea of the "gravitonic condensation" what use this idea(a painting) in terms of what we see as we spell out the differences between micro lensing and "gravitational lensing" how light travels from those distant points in the universe?

This miniature drop tower is used by Microgravity man and others to demonstrate the effects of reduced gravity on physical and chemical phenomena that are normally masked by Earth's gravity.

I know about people distancing themselves from what may indeed trouble them, as if, one presented some "anomaly in nature" that I/you may have never seen before. Do I take them on face value for what we had know of them? While reading their blog over the years, months, days, what conclusion had you reached?? Superman, Spiderman, and Captain Marvel comics which glorify the hero? Spheres, as bubbles in gravity free environment are always a nice thing to consider.

A bubble is a minimal-energy surface of the type that is formed by soap film.

I selected Kuhn because I was speaking directly to what was evident in my own life. What was presented to me "as the experience" may have likewise captivated a young child of 5, while another is trouble by symmetry in a "qualitative style."

I began my own investigations, and this set the course for my life to understand what had happened. How ever absurd one may find my statement in the previous post, it is a fact that I do not know how it was accomplished, but I did indeed see the effect of the person free of what we know as gravity holding the individual to her bosom.

So you have this statement. Q9 said,"the outer gravity which keeps our feet firmly on the ground."



So how was I suppose to react given the circumstances I had mentioned? If I said the mind was involved in the process "what proof do I have" that the person could indeed do the things that defy, what a frog may do for one who likes to wear shoes that make them light on their feet?

So any concept which had spoken about gravity, to one extent or another, has entered my research, for me to find some way that would allow such a thing to entertain the sceptic, as well as take the form of flowery pot comments. "Concepts" as foolish as the bulk?

Of course I want to know what happen in the way that young Einstein wondered about the mystery of nature assigned to that needle. We know now don't we? Oh, gravity is weak here on earth? Weaker then the magnet that is attached itself to the fridge.

So when gravity had ever been strong? How strong, that it could reach only so far?

The Physics of Mind

It might be that the laws change absolutely with time; that gravity for instance varies with time and that this inverse square law has a strength which depends on how long it is since the beginning of time. In other words, it's possible that in the future we'll have more understanding of everything and physics may be completed by some kind of statement of how things started which are external to the laws of physics. Richard Feynman

While by myself and my explanations, it may seem mystical indeed. In my years of research previous, it was much so. But the research is no less important then the realization that the world in which we live is governed by the list of ways that we measure. A selection from the "sensorium" to have it gain in "probable pictorial outcomes, by recognizing "the crossed wired" in our views, as one more variable?


You may use the scientific measure to take "three pictures" of the same thing, and of this, what physics is attached to what we observe out there in space? What computer processes had we detailed in the "depth of seeing" as we explore the "physics of approach," and see what beautiful pictures of Hubble, or other satellites that we gain much from the beauty of pictures received.

So a picture of the sun taken "over time" in gamma ray detection. What view is that in our depths of reason to understand the sun has certain processes to it? That what we seen in the relation to mind as a physics approach is no less important to what we observe, and are a part of.



The Mind on Physics

Is it possible to predict what a person is thinking of - or even what they are planning to do - based alone on their current brain activity? This project investigates ways to decode and predict a person’s thoughts from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. The key is that each thought is associated with a unique brain activation pattern that can be used as a signature or for that specific thought. If we train a classifier to recognize these characteristic signatures we can read out a person’s thoughts from their brain activity alone. Such “thought reading” can reveal how information is neurally encoded in the brain. The idea is that it is only possible to decode a thought if one knows the correct code. This research has many potential application, as for example in detection of deception, in the control of computers and artificial prostheses by brain activity, or even (more controversial) in market research.

So the onus is on the researcher to gain much more with the depth of reason. So in having sought science to help, one might deal with how we are relating to our world. Is it the beauty that detracts from what lies underneath, or that we understand with a greater measure the valuation we have had with that exchange with reality?

Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Berlin-

Brain regions from which it was possible to "read out" peoples' intentions. In specific regions fine-grained patterns of brain activity showed slight differences depending on whether a person was preparing to perform an addition or a subtraction. From activity patterns in the green regions it was possible to read out covert intentions before subjects began to perform the calculation. From the regions marked in red it was possible to read out intentions that were already being acted upon.

A Scientists Multiversial Bubble



I get excited sometimes when I write, and this is one of those times.

I have see how the scientists engaged. I had lacked a "complete view" of their reality. I saw records of what the "bubble of experience allows them too" in their writings. That they could be, separate from all that exists around them, yet, they are apart of the greater aspect of reality. How dangerous are their voices in lacking, what those of the layman are lacking, when a layman speaks with authority?

This is not to lash out at the scientist, but make him/her aware of the greater potential of information that exists. That speaking "from a solid foundation" just as important as what we read and take part in, as we read the journalism of science.

Who is the Teacher

For me it has been the many who now actively engage by participating in the world of blogging, that I can now say I been so lucky. That what was so distant from, can now become a part of my life. Before this it was books, and I had to piece meal, but now I see the result of many scientists who have helped, greatly developed by giving and that example.

I lacked experience, and thus too, am trying to find my way. Live by example. So too, the teacher assumes that what he teaches, is lived by in his own history, and so of his forbears. So should we become humble in our approaches? That we have so much to learn, and that as human beings, we are not so far apart in our adventures into describing what reality is to us.

There is this demand then of the qualitative measure of that reality that it could be infinite, holds uncertainty, yet we would only see part of it? We are a part of it.

That the mind and it's subjective thoughts could now become part of science is the route "that many a scientists lacked" while holding all the technological values to what is seen in front of them. It to arose out into "validations of measure" as to how mind can be seen.

So quickly I could be dispelled that I thought indeed am I a teacher? What credentials do I have? What gave me authority? While I most certainly say you would be right, and thus, I have been living my fate in amongst the world I develop by my opinion. By "how flowery" I had become.

But without the "physical teacher" what said that we could not develop into "a teacher" and that all of us could not have this teacher within them? I would not dismiss the "rules of law" or be "sanctioned a journalist" when I too blog. But imagine the access to the "greater ability of information" has changed the way you and I can see. What is your history?

WE give this empowerment to people by giving access of information to them. I would say that by seeing this empowerment "outside of themself," I would not want them to know that they could not live to the higher validation of what a good teacher may mean. I would have to say thus, that it is "by the parent in us," that we see what has been transmitted, and that what can be transmitted, will be sent on to further generations.

That even those without being the parent, as a physical result in children raised, has this parent in them. Would a teacher as a parent know of this feeling as I would? I do not dismiss this in them because of what is real in them. Every measure of the parent in them is the advice they have unconsciously now used as this rule of measure. As they form their opinion of what is a good government had been the realizatin that as a adult now they can selectively say this is now my moral standard of law. I defne this government by what I value, and we had quickly lost the parent in all this? No that parent became a part of you. But you learnt to discern these difference between you as a adult and your parent as a adult. You realized your differences. You realized who you are as a adult.

Now about Gravity

What could I loose if such thoughts are introduced to "what may be possible" and you will have to line up all your sceptics, and it would still not dispel what I already know and have observed against all the gravitational laws as we know them.

I do not ever say stop what you are doing as a scientist. Do not loose these values, but unfortunately, I had seen something that is much like the course of events that will change any person. A "license plate" that holds symmetry? Einstein who was given "the gift of the compass," and I in no way align myself with the brilliance of their moments. But point out that each of us may have been given our own anomalies in life which will propel our searches.

I have mine.


The medium DDHome levitating in front of witnesses during an 1868 séance. It was said on this occasion that Home became curiously “elongated” as he rose into the air. Shortly afterwards, he appeared to float upright outside a third floor window. Home had his detractors, but was never discredited.
Image: Fortean Picture Library

Heliocentrism

Andreas Cellarius, Harmonia Macrocosmica, 1708,

In astronomy, heliocentrism is the belief that the Sun is at the center of the Universe and/or the Solar System. The word is derived from the Greek (Helios = "Sun" and kentron = "Centre"). Historically, heliocentrism is opposed to geocentrism and currently to modern geocentrism, which places the earth at the center. (The distinction between the Solar System and the Universe was not clear until modern times, but extremely important relative to the controversy over cosmology and religion.) In the 16th and 17th centuries, when the theory was revived and defended by Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler, it became the center of a major dispute.

I am of course adding this so people understand that even though I espouse an underlying pattern to the nature of reality, it is not held to an ole dispute, but had taken on "new dimensions," if one would like to call it that? :)

Bee:

One other thing that is kind of weird if one faces mathematics with 'reality' is that we can't actually determine any constant 'exactly'. I mean, you'll always have some kind of errorbar. E.g. take your example with Pi. You can define it mathematically, fine. Now you can go and measure it. Draw a circle, measure diameter and circumference etc. To get exactly Pi you'd have to measure infinitely precise.

Even more interesting: consider you could indeed measure arbitrarily precise. You'd find that the ratio is not Pi. Because our spacetime is actually curved and not flat. What would you make out of that? It makes me wonder whether any measurement that we could possibly make - if it were only done precise enough - already contains information about the laws of nature in our universe.

(Just made some spelling corrections, other wise verbatim.)

Not to think it has some "intelligent design" to it either, that you might quickly assume the map of the Hoyle's paragraph above, to have some "alternate plan," to who we are in terms of some conspiracy theory.


School of Athens, by Raphael

So historically it was important that people see this from "that standpoint" and then I will move back to the position I am currently holding. Do people understand the relation I am speaking about in terms of "Raphael's painting," as a model of introspective value? Although old for it's time, it holds an important message about our dealings with the world.

That I place Aristotle and Plato at it's centre is a "key point" to contend with from a "philosophical standpoint" as as well from one we recognize today in the patterns underlying our dealings.

The relation of the two pictures [geocentricity and heliocentricity] is reduced to a mere coordinate transformation and it is the main tenet of the Einstein's theory that any two ways of looking at the world which are related to each other by a coordinate transformation are entirely equivalent from a physical point of view. (Hoyle, 1973, p. 78)¹

¹ Hoyle, Sir Fred (1973). Nicolaus Copernicus. Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., London. ISBN 0-435-54425-X