Intuitively Compelling

While it does appear that Einstein has indeed given us a paradigm which was indeed world-changing and affected everyone, how well might he have known himself?

He was "driven," as to the" focus and outcome" of GR's growth? Yet, being Jewish, and the meaning he might have had for God(Old ONe) had a perspective about nature, that was embued with a certain terminology?

So having engaged the wording of scientist as of late, I wanted to stay as close as I could to the thinking being developed as they engaged society through their blogging site perspectives.

It was most troubling that any discussing of the timeline and any other constructs place in accordance with that timeline, would/could have been insulting to some, even though it fit into a perspective in terms of microseconds, lesss then somany eseconds of expression.

Again for sure, "thought constructs," most appropriate measures as yard sticks of reality conforming to model approaches? Be open.

Thomas Torrance

In 1978, he won the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion for his contributions to theology and the relationship between it and science

You must understand there is a current struggle in today's world with those who support the Templeton Foundation, it's scientists, and those who believe science should remain free of such influences, so they propagate any information forthcoming as tainted?

Einstein and God By Thomas Torrance"Do you believe in the God of Spinoza?" was asked of Einstein.

I can't answer with a simple yes or no. I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvellously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not two separate things.

The Nature of Reality
Having read all of Jane Roberts books( some might not have taken a shine to such information, but part of the developing perspective included information that was written "intuitively compelled"), so she might have answered a little different, but in essence, thought, to the nature of the universe.

I'll try and find her definition of the building blocks.

So you are give this question as to what the nature of the unverse is? What is it, and people are lead through theoretcial constructs to develope perspective on what that question might be?

Robert Laughlin, does not care if they are Lego bricks or Drunk Sargeant majors:)

Self Organization of Matter, by Robert Laughlin

What Lies Beneath, by Eugene Samuel

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

One had to indeed understand that the maps drawn, were drawn from thOught constructS engaged from wanting to understanding where first principles may have emerged from?

How would you do that without undertanding where this map began?




So what use to Engage Strangelets, New Physics



So from a resulting comprehension of such first principles, there came this resulting course of events, that went through all the phase transitions, to become what it is, in context of the strangelet, a perspective about a measure in the IceCap?



I have been following this research for sometime now. I will be updating this information here].

One has to know where to begin with all this information, and that such "mental constructs" had to know where this beginning was. While there are few here mathematically endowed, I wanted to come here and share perspectve in context of the neurological idea behind the mental constructs that we develope in science.

This is not without foundation that, "globally," when we now see, we had indeed step back to access the greater potential in "thought generation," and that "mass psychosis," (could we call it that as such a verification by the masses?)" endowed to measure, experimentally verified.

I'll wait to see if you want some time to digest and rethink, if you think, it worth doing that? :)

True creativity often starts where language ends-Arthur Koestler

Intuitively Compelling=Intuitive Grasp of Self Evident First Principles



No matter the ideology spread, is there something today that is quite useful in our approaches to cognizing relevance, from "thought constructs" to actual processes, currently asking us our about the beginning of the universe?

While such solidification ensues from taking a stand, as a concluson drawn, is it compelling as to the nature of what first principles might mean? You had to understand the current environment, to conclude an opinion about the measures and constructs, as to those measures asking if there was another way?

You couldn't know that, unless you might have read the links of Robert Lauglhin and understood reductionistic tendencies(science), as to the nature of our universe? It's like joining quantum perspective with General Relativity? You would have to known how this was acomplished? It's result, and hence it's application within society?

If one had not understood, shall we call it a "probabilistic discourse," to have now understood, that a new course may be set today, was different from the past, by "one additional grasp of self evident first principle?" That a new page may be written( what thinking had done so) which may change the course of our lives?

Of course, some will not have confidence yet. :)
That the potential exists within each of us to understand we are partaking of a quest to percieve where this point in existance might be revealled. If not at the basis of reality, then what use the math? While I generalize becuase of my inefficieny of these interpretations, the vastness of the world of math, there was some undertanding geometrically inclined, that is revealled as we followed the logic leading to GR.

Did it mean we should be devoid of our belief in a God, if we held to science principles, while, we engaged in the subjectivity of our opinions?

It All Began in a Dream?

An equation means nothing to me unless it expresses a thought of God.Srinivasa Ramanujan

So to me, it is still all out there for us to look? How we might entertain that awe and beauty in nature?

"God does not play dice" by Thomas Torrance
Einstein was not a determinist but a realist, with the conviction that, in line with Clerk Maxwellian field theory and general relativity theory, nature is governed by profound levels of intelligible connection that cannot be expressed in the crude terms of classical causality and traditional mathematics. He was convinced that the deeper forms of intelligibility being brought to light in relativity and quantum theory cannot be understood in terms of the classical notions of causality–they required what he called Übercausalität–supercausality. And this called for "an entirely new kind of mathematical thinking", not least in unified field theory–that was a kind of mathematics he did not even know, but which someone must find.

Once Comsuming any Model

It is difficult to explain how one might have "the feeling" for curvature on cosmological plateau while such tendencies for quantum perception would be rule by uncertainty?

I wonder if such states held in context to what consciousness might be able to percieve at that level of high energy areas, would give indications to particle natures and the curvatures assigned to each particle nature. What gave these meomntum ad emotive feelings to such travel from the initial contact?

How are we able to pierce this veil and environment, while talking about the nature of such curvatures? We wouldn't survive realistically, yet, we are able to perform "thought constructs" to such models?

So looking at time dilation, the photon within environments, what indications for such curvatures, and one gets this sense of momentum, and in another way, something that I have called toposense.

Variable "constants" would also open the door to theories that used to be off limits, such as those which break the laws of conservation of energy. And it would be a boost to versions of string theory in which extra dimensions change the constants of nature at some places in space-time.

Constants with and without dimensions

Nature presents us with various constants. Some of these constants, such as the fine-structure constant, are dimensionless and are not expressed in terms of units. However, other constants, such as the velocity of light or the mass of the proton, are dimensional and their numerical values depend entirely on the units in which they are expressed. The laws of nature do not, of course, depend on a man-made system of units.

To put this another way, if we want to measure a dimensional constant, we need a "yardstick" to make the measurement. But if we obtained one value when we measured the speed of light on a Monday, say, and a different value when we measured it on a Friday, how would we know that our yardstick had not shrunk or expanded? We would not. Moreover, if we were to interpret our observations as a change in the length of the yardstick, how could we verify it without reference to a second yardstick? Again, we could not. And so on.

However, dimensionless constants are fundamental absolute numbers, measured without reference to anything else. Therefore, if we want to investigate if the laws of nature are changing we must measure dimensionless quantities such as the fine-structure constant or the ratio of the electron and proton masses

Bulk Perspective, As Sound?

Let's say, it all depends on how you would like to look at the universe. Develope your constructs, to tell you how it is the universe came into being and such. A picture then, could become a thousand words? Links on pictures are always important too.

Have you read of the way sonoluminece works?



Let's not worry about the "energy production" for now, other then, the sound and it's application there? Are any of you familiar?

If one holds to the bulk perspective, and you would have to know what I mean by the bulk, then, such concentrations would have held perspectve to the gatherings and created the circumstances for new universe to be borne?



If one types in the "search function" at the top left hand corner the word "bulk," of the blog as I did, with the word, "sound," then a page will come up that will help explain that term. How it is used. The Picture and it's link will be most useful as well.

Basis of Reality by Geometric Design?

I would like to continually like to remind one of Plato's cave. If the sun is behind us, how do you relate what is seen dimensionally, and describe it from first principles? The shadows are used in a way to draw our attention to our limitations of thinking.



So I moved this internally, and the sun behind, becomes the sun from a center realized inside. Circles within circles, topologically and constructively asking, which way are we seeing now?

I was thinking here that to get to the "truer source of reality" what underlies our basic intepretations of such "thought constructs," would be to defined essentially in a geometric way, first. This is how first principle is established, as observation to a "geometric way" leads all concepts from this beginning?

Man ponders shadow, or shadow ponders itself?

So let's say you are this fellow sleeping on the bus, and he is having deep suttle thoughts about life. He generalizes what he might see of "mass psychosis" in a geometical way, as well as, see science, necessary as the basis of this expression?

You also hads to know where the beginning of all expression arose from, so this defintion is very important in that respect?

Although theoretical, it establishment with the basis of science would be very important. As Feynman diagrams are.

Example here given with Dirac?

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.

Picture is link :)

So the thought construct is very dependant on how we would look at reality and this might inject various geometric processes, yet, we are very aware of the timeline, and where this expression arose from. This is what first principle must do?

While we like to think of the "building blocks of matter" you may of liked to call them strings in the first microseconds, this still does not take you to the source of the expression of what is now geometrically enhanced? So one siads there is no geometry? And of course the Pizza Guy is amazed at how all this could exemplify itself in some way in which the false vacuum and the true vacuum can tunnel from one to another.

So definition of "brane thinking" here encases a lot of information conceptually, as we speak about the reality of such things, and how they arose? These are contained in the most simplfied picture forms. It is necessary to see into how the workings of all "thought constructs," will manifest. Why pictures beomes links to a much more detail way of thinking geometrically.

I gave Dirac as a example.



I also link Albrect Durer for a example as well.

What Comes Next?

What Lies Beneath, by Eugene Samuel

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

You might as well famiiarize yourself with Robert Laughlin's, "Self Organization of Matter."

I mean if you think of micro-seconds and someone saids to you, it just doesn't make sense( what energy scale the model of strings applied?) then one might have trouble accepting the report on colliders for consideration, and how we view the outcome of the universe from that beginning?

Nice moose picture in there to look at.

Cycle of Birth, Life, and Death-Origin, Indentity, and Destiny by Gabriele Veneziano

Was the big bang really the beginning of time? Or did the universe exist before then? Such a question seemed almost blasphemous only a decade ago. Most cosmologists insisted that it simply made no sense - that to contemplate a time before the big bang was like asking for directions to a place north of the North Pole. But developments in theoretical physics, especially the rise of string theory, have changed their perspective. The pre-bang universe has become the latest frontier of cosmology

Maybe we need a adustment on what we actually thought happenned at the very beginning? Current science writing then needs to reflect what the information is leading us too?

Quark Soup(Scientific American), is limited then, in what we may think about what happens in those gold ion collisions. The relations, as to what happened cosmologically at the very beginning?

What are the characteristics of superfluids that we would find the work of Ketterle involved here?

Berkeley Lab Technology Dramatically Speeds Up Searches of Large DatabasesJon Bashor

In the world of physics, one of the most elusive events is the creation and detection of “quark-gluon plasma,” the theorized atomic outcome of the “Big Bang” which could provide insight into the origins of the universe. By using experiments that involve millions of particle collisions, researchers hope to find unambiguous evidence of quark-gluon plasma.

Shouldn't that writing lead us to ponder in our minds the next step?

A conclusion then about the difficulties upon which thoughts of viscosity with regards to the beginning of that time? The most perfect fluid. A Hydrodynamical calculation then? I am also thinking of the laval nozzle and the back reaction as well.

You have to forgive me here because it is of some interest that I would like to write, but I would like also to write reasonably and responsibly as well. :)

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.

Is the door open to the eruption of the sociology of knowledge?

Nobody really thinks about the subtle perceptions that can make their way into the scientist's mind? Do they?

While, I had talked about the quiet places we like to go to find that peace of mind, it might be different for each of us? Maybe for Clifford, it is the stream. Maybe for a Witten and his walks, the stream, as well?

I spent a lot of years watching the subtle language that one can draw from the subconscious in dream time and to me such suttle obsersvation while fleeting, it always is a good idea to have a pen and paper alongside of you. Because, it happens that quick sometimes, that if you don't catch it, it sort of leaves the focal front to the tip of the tongue, as a puzzling thought about?

This enlightenment experience is a realization about the nature of the mind which entails recognizing it (in a direct, experiential way) as liminocentrically organized. The overall structure is paradoxical, and so the articulation of this realization will 'transcend' logic - insofar as logic itself is based on the presumption that nested sets are not permitted to loop back on themselves in a non-heirarchical manner. 11

Piercing the veil perhaps?

Some of the things that seem to influence creativity, is the very idea of flow, and sitting by a river, "to think" might be one, or sitting high up on a mountain looking over the landscape, perhaps? Looking deep into "the space of the starry universe" above?



Observation is really important I believe. If I were to say the "space between the heartbeat," it would not have been to unlikely, that the points between something, could ever be reduced to have it seem that our "quantum perception" has revealled a dynamical reality?

Yes it's true. Energy calculations revealled information about the space we are living in? Nothing confusing about that. How silly then, that such a suttle perception as to the cards below would have passed our attention unsignificant?

Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific Discoveries[/b] Kuhn now moves past his initial topic of paradigm to scientific discovery saying that in order for there to be a discovery, an anomaly must be detected within the field of study. He discusses several different studies and points out the anomaly that invoked the scientific discovery. Later in the chapter he begins to discuss how the anomaly can be incorporated into the discovery to satisfy the scientific community.

There are three different characteristics of all discoveries from which new sorts of phenomena emerge. These three characteristics are proven through an experiment dealing with a deck of cards. The deck consisted of anomalous cards (e.g. the red six of spades shown on the previous page) mixed in with regular cards. These cards were held up in front of students who were asked to call out the card they saw, and in most cases the anomaly was not detected.

Attention and awareness is sometimes like listening "between the heartbeats?" Also if you look at that space what is it then filled with? I had a hard time of it trying to understand what nothing meant. It just does not make sense. Nothing is Nothing, and something out of Nothing is really a hard one to ponder for me so I had to see these dynamics working in ways that would tax the mind visually.



So what did I do?

Why is sound so important in the analogies of science now? Acoustically, what would the science of sound mean in our discriptions of the landscape? How does it change the way we thnk and do, and leads our thinking minds into some kind of entrainment that is rhythmetically enhanced? What does it do for the brain waves? Functional use, done in MRI study, along with the process of thinking?



So I thought I should build a world that leads us to realize the reality we create. You think I did not think of the color of these situations? Look carefully at the ephemeral qualities of mind.

You have to understand that the geometrical realization at the basis of my own experiences were derived from understanding the work of Carl Jung, and the mandalas he talked about.

The way in which he might have divided up the circle according to the way our minds work. Having the anima and animus respectvely in both male and female, what really made me think of the topological function of the mind, are up top, on the enlightenment plate. Balance was needed to be struck and this is done automatically depending on our genders the balance would have been injected accordingly?

If you think for one moment our past history is not important, what use to understand that we continue evolve within our consciousness?

There are such designs from our expierence, to learn? You might have read my views on emotions and experience, and how we cannot change what has already happened, but we can meet the expeirence and change the attitude? That is within our power and ths is what sets up the future.

Proceedings of Societies [Report on the Law of Octaves]

Mr. JOHN A. R. NEWLANDS read a paper entitled "The Law of Octaves, and the Causes of Numerical Relations among the Atomic Weights."[41] The author claims the discovery of a law according to which the elements analogous in their properties exhibit peculiar relationships, similar to those subsisting in music between a note and its octave. Starting from the atomic weights on Cannizzarro's [sic] system, the author arranges the known elements in order of succession, beginning with the lowest atomic weight (hydrogen) and ending with thorium (=231.5); placing, however, nickel and cobalt, platinum and iridium, cerium and lanthanum, &c., in positions of absolute equality or in the same line. The fifty-six elements[42] so arranged are said to form the compass of eight octaves, and the author finds that chlorine, bromine, iodine, and fluorine are thus brought into the same line, or occupy corresponding places in his scale. Nitrogen and phosphorus, oxygen and sulphur, &c., are also considered as forming true octaves. The author's supposition will be exemplified in Table II., shown to the meeting, and here subjoined:--

In this way I sort of felt that a calm mind and a calm heart, would allow one to see the discrepancies better. I do not know if that is the truth of it, but imagine our perception going deeper then it had ever gone before? There had to be some results, from listening?

A Chladni plate consist of a flat sheet of metal, usually circular or square, mounted on a central stalk to a sturdy base. When the plate is oscillating in a particular mode of vibration, the nodes and antinodes set up form a complex but symmetrical pattern over its surface. The positions of these nodes and antinodes can be seen by sprinkling sand upon the plates;

If one moment you thought of the Law of Octaves above, what place "the heart" to serve for our evolving consicousness?

The Revolution that Didn't Happen by Steven Weinberg

I first read Thomas Kuhn's famous book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions1 a quarter-century ago, soon after the publication of the second edition. I had known Kuhn only slightly when we had been together on the faculty at Berkeley in the early 1960s, but I came to like and admire him later, when he came to MIT. His book I found exciting.

Evidently others felt the same. Structure has had a wider influence than any other book on the history of science. Soon after Kuhn's death in 1996, the sociologist Clifford Geertz remarked that Kuhn's book had "opened the door to the eruption of the sociology of knowledge" into the study of the sciences. Kuhn's ideas have been invoked again and again in the recent conflict over the relation of science and culture known as the science wars.

See:

Revolutions for Change

Path With a Heart

Comprehending New Physics?

Scientists May Soon Have Evidence for Exotic Predictions of String Theory issued by Northeaster University

"String theory and other possibilities can distort the relative numbers of 'down' and 'up' neutrinos," said Jonathan Feng, associate professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at UC Irvine. "For example, extra dimensions may cause neutrinos to create microscopic black holes, which instantly evaporate and create spectacular showers of particles in the Earth's atmosphere and in the Antarctic ice cap. This increases the number of 'down' neutrinos detected. At the same time, the creation of black holes causes 'up' neutrinos to be caught in the Earth's crust, reducing the number of 'up' neutrinos. The relative 'up' and 'down' rates provide evidence for distortions in neutrino properties that are predicted by new theories."

Well, having tried to understand what this might entail, I have engaged from a layman perspective, my interest in string theory, to see if I could indeed to get to the "heart of the matter." :)

Moving to higher energies, the expected fluxes of neutrinos become smaller, that even a cubic kilometer detector is not able to detect them. Larger volumes can be achieved by replacing optical sensors by acoustic detection. The reason is that acoustic waves can propagate over larger distances than light and allow wide spacing of detectors, and therefore larger detector volumes.

So having understood the high energy interactions above us, what said that the lower energies would have not been followed to some "end?" What "new physics" would have said that what was produced in the sun, and what energy particles emitted into the space, would thusly be recognized in the collidial events. Would have been traced to evidence, as some theorectical conclusion might have evailed of itself?



INtuitive recourse and back.

What that might mean is a philosophical endeavor of mine own, although not well schooled, had existed somewhere deep in the oblivion of the soul encased here. The schooling that has gone on in thesense of out reach programs show by the articles listed by cosmic varaince, respectvely of the two organizations, are very important to me.

What made them f cosmic variance not think I had been doing this kind of stuff on my own years before and in my attempts now, encouraging society to take hold of it's destiny responsibly, and not let it be overtaken by captialistic visionaries, that were out to line their own pocket, then share their philosophies with us while we wroked life and it's responsiblities?

While gone for a bit on my own personal views about Intuition and the kind, it is time to get back to work. Understand where people are going with the theoretical model developed, called "String/M Theory, and try access what valuable insights had been developed "forward" in respect of what those extra dimensions might mean in study "now."

An "arrow of time" thing, that has confused me greatly, even though entropically I understood the resulting universe had become very complex, while at one time, in maybe some supersymmtrical realization, it was much simpler?

Gellman siad it very well earlier on in this blog, by his introduction of what constitued complexity, and this was well within some measurable idealization.

About My personal Beliefs

Sure I could cover it all with the mystic of my personal views and may mislead, having surmized somethings about it. This could be thought as disasterous, when not providing the complete picture that had taken me to the things that I think about.

Truly after studing for a lot of years, although not creditialed, I would like to say too, that society and the developement of the social construct is very important to me as well. What is left "out there" for consideration, should be academically correct.

So I stay very close to the front of, and thinking of scientists who work their respective fields.

This is not to say that I had not developed my own respective views, as if raised religiously, that I would abandon my own beliefs about what God might mean to me.

Just that I continue to act responsibly, as a humanist, and undertanding well the social construct of religion, as my own biographical sketch is well defined in this area, I too became a free thinker. Would like to move ahead as best the human being can be, as I learn to understand our roles in society, our responsibilites in regards to "education and truth to reason" as best as possible.

What is the Observer's Reality?

"Death, so called, is but older matter dressed
In some new form. And in a varied vest,
From tenement to tenement though tossed,
The soul is still the same, the figure only lost." Poem on Pythagoras, Dryden's Ovid.

When your given a certain amount of energy to work with and all of it is accountable except for a some, what conlcusion are you to draw? Sensibly the mapping is done as to the tragetories of all particles, yet it just didn't add up at the end.

Oskar Klein (left) proposed in the 1920s that hidden spatial dimensions might influence observed physics. He poses with physicists George Uhlenbeck (middle) and Samuel Goudsmit in 1926 at the University of Leiden, the Netherlands. AIP Emilio Segrè Visual Archives

Mini Review on Search for Extra Dimensions With Atlas, by S. Ferrag

Thanks to the high collision energy and luminosity of the LHC, the ATLAS detector will be capable of revealing the existence of extra spatial dimensions in some substantial region of parameter space. The talk will summarize recent studies from the collaboration on different possible signals predicted by models where the dimensions are "large", where they are of size ~TeV^-1 or where they are "warped". These signals include direct emission of Kaluza-Klein states of gravitons, virtual effects of graviton exchange and gauge boson excitations. We shall also discuss the possibilities of observing black holes.

There is no doubt in my mind that the leanings towards mysticism should not have entered the picture when dealing with the science, as you say Sean. Through Education, working with the tangible, there will no doubt people who refuse this on a ideological grounds, as to it's misleadings to a better understanding.

If the concepts of GR are ever moved as they were in the perspective of Einstein's thought Experiment, I would think it would have had it's basis on a solid foundation, yet, it drew a conclusive results in the way we now deal with how we can look at the world?



While this may have appeared confusing, and misleading to people, without a deeper comprehension, it is not without some basis some of us would think about these things, and agree with Einstein.

So let's say that if such a basis was given to thethought experiment shown here, is thought of, would the thinking as to the substance of our very thoughts ever been considered in context of the way in which I had been thinking about these things?




If one had never followed the logic and geometry would it have made sense, that the analogy of Einstein's thought experiment, about a hot stove and pretty girl, would seem less then a viable concept, had Einstein never extended his thoughts from a basis, and foundation of GR? Gravity.

On the Effects of External Sensory Input on Time Dilation." A. Einstein, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J.

Abstract: When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute and it's longer than any hour. That's relativity.

As the observer's reference frame is crucial to the observer's perception of the flow of time, the state of mind of the observer may be an additional factor in that perception. I therefore endeavored to study the apparent flow of time under two distinct sets of mental states.

Methods: I sought to acquire a hot stove and a pretty girl. Unfortunately, getting a hot stove was prohibitive, as the woman who cooks for me has forbidden me from getting anywhere near the kitchen. However, I did manage to surreptitiously obtain a 1924 Manning-Bowman and Co. chrome waffle iron, which is a reasonable equivalent of a hot stove for this experiment, as it can attain a temperature of a very high degree. Finding the pretty girl presented more of a problem, as I now live in New Jersey. I know Charlie Chaplin, having attended the opening of his 1931 film City Lights in his company, and so I requested that he set up a meeting with his wife, movie star Paulette Goddard, the possessor of a shayna punim, or pretty face, of a very high degree.

Discussion: I took the train to New York City to meet with Miss Goddard at the Oyster Bar in Grand Central Terminal. She was radiant and delightful. When it felt to me as if a minute had passed, I checked my watch to discover that a full 57 minutes had actually transpired, which I rounded up to one hour. Upon returning to my home, I plugged in the waffle iron and allowed it to heat up. I then sat on it, wearing trousers and a long white shirt, untucked. When it seemed that over an hour had gone by, I stood up and checked my watch to discover that less than one second had in fact passed. To maintain unit consistency for the descriptions of the two circumstances, I rounded up to one minute, after which I called a physician.

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

Same with how GR is reduced from a "larger frame of reference(a quantum microscopic view)," how is it, the probability of any action could have been this one, as I write, or if some thought held to some systemic relation would have found relevance in the weight of our decisions, our choices? I used a scale then, heart and feather and if one associated the gravity of the situation to our thought patterns, how would this pan out in the thinking of emotive thoughts. The discoloration of pure colors, in our expression and emotively realized?

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

Fanciful, Yet working with Reason



You may not take your body with you but you will take the emotive realizations, and they can color our views for a time. If we knew how to take control of the positve expression and change our attitudes, I think this is what allows the circumstance to change(our future), if we only let the reactions govern our existance, nothing changes.

We are thinking beings then, making choices, about the way we will react in the future. Following such reactions to the source and continuing to distill them we will possibly find the truer core of the reactionary base with which to consult. What future changes we will take hold of. It doesn't all have to be negative. We don't have to surround ourselves with such paling colors.

Concepts of the Fifth Dimension

"Yet I exist in the hope that these memoirs, in some manner, I know not how, may find their way to the minds of humanity in Some Dimensionality, and may stir up a race of rebels who shall refuse to be confined to limited Dimensionality." from Flatland, by E. A. Abbott

Oskar Klein September 15, 1894 - February 5, 1977

Dealing With a 5D World

A black hole is an object so massive that even light cannot escape from it. This requires the idea of a gravitational mass for a photon, which then allows the calculation of an escape energy for an object of that mass. When the escape energy is equal to the photon energy, the implication is that the object is a "black hole."

Herein, I also make the assumption:

The Spacetime Fabric, "is" the Fifth dimension.

Now of course, how do such assumptions make their way into my thinking and visualizations that I do? The seeing, of what mathematics and it's symbology had done for those who might see the geometry of expression, as a very vital way of thinking in the abstract world of mind, analogous, to the computer screen in front of us?


Juan Maldacena:

The strings move in a five-dimensional curved space-time with a boundary. The boundary corresponds to the usual four dimensions, and the fifth dimension describes the motion away from this boundary into the interior of the curved space-time. In this five-dimensional space-time, there is a strong gravitational field pulling objects away from the boundary, and as a result time flows more slowly far away from the boundary than close to it. This also implies that an object that has a fixed proper size in the interior can appear to have a different size when viewed from the boundary (Fig. 1). Strings existing in the five-dimensional space-time can even look point-like when they are close to the boundary. Polchinski and Strassler1 show that when an energetic four-dimensional particle (such as an electron) is scattered from these strings (describing protons), the main contribution comes from a string that is close to the boundary and it is therefore seen as a point-like object. So a string-like interpretation of a proton is not at odds with the observation that there are point-like objects inside it.

(Wikipedia 23 April 2006)

Similarly, in general relativity, the fourth dimension is manifested in observable three dimensions as the curvature of path of a moving infinitesimal (test) particle. 't Hooft has speculated that the fifth dimension is really the spacetime fabric.

Linked paragraph above was pointed out to a link you to further thoughts on this. It was a strange revelation of sorts to think that such a process could lead you to such thinking, as well, as leading one to understand how General Relativity becomes a result of of String theory.

It just made so much sense as I watched this developement take place in this geometrical extension of thought, that to a beginning, from a point to a line to a plane, was raised in mind, as a short cut to the brane world understandings. I really do not undertsand how I made this jump, but never the less, it took me to a fifth dimensional referencing.



The work of Banchoff helped in this understanding. In using image production, our 2d computer screens, as example, shows the work we are doing in the abstract space of mind.

While I am still ever the student, such thinking moved from the ideas of General Relativity, and it's geoemtrical nature, moves one into the dynamical regions of thought. Held, in regards to those curvatures. I just tend to see them in this way after understanding the "geometrical nature." So too, the undertanding of General Relativity means, and in this assumption, "gravity" becomes the terminology that I see in the dynamcis of that universe.

Can I help seeing the thought of humanity so capable in the mind, to relate choices to the heart and the feather weighting truth, that I also had come to see the gravity of that situation? IN such thoughts, Einsteins analogy of the Pretty girl always come to mind. It was a conceptual leap of sorts, as well as beautifully laid out model of GR as to our understanding in terms of what gravity means.

From strong to weak, and all the understanding of the place, where a flat plane of which no gravity exists, is a place where such transitions take place in my mind. Is this true or not? The very thinking of brane developement lead me to think in a 2 dimensional framework, yet I am well aware of the fifth dimensional views that this framework supplies. Is it wrong? I would have to rely on competent readers of the Brane world to have them say ye or nay, as to the thoughts being portrayed here.

(Wikipedia 23 April 2006)

In physics and mathematics, a sequence of N numbers can be understood to represent a location in an N-dimensional space. When N=5, one of these numbers is sometimes colloquially called the fifth dimension. This usage may occur in casual discussions about the fourth dimension, which, in the context of physics, refers to time, coming after the first three spatial dimensions (up/down, left/right and forwards/backwards). Abstract five-dimensional space occurs frequently in mathematics, and is a perfectly legitimate construct. Whether or not the real universe in which we live is somehow five-dimensional is a topic that is debated and explored in several branches of physics, including astrophysics and particle physics.

Lisa Randall:

My most recent research is about extra dimensions of space. Remarkably, we can potentially "see" or "observe" evidence of extra dimensions. But we won't reach out and touch those dimensions with our fingertips or see them with our eyes. The evidence will consist of heavy particles known as Kaluza-Klein modes that travel in extra-dimensional space. If our theories correctly describe the world, there will be a precise enough link between such particles (which will be experimentally observed) and extra dimensions to establish the existence of extra dimensions. Dangling Particles,By LISA RANDALL, Published: September 18, 2005 New York Yimes

The extensions beyond what we had always taken for meaning as "seeing," is the undertanding that all 3 space coordinated directions with time, are embedded in some "design" beyond that frame of reference held to General Relativity. If it wasn't, how could anything working beyond this, be found as a coordinated result?

(Wikipedia 23 April 2006)











Figure 2. Clebsch's Diagonal Surface: Wonderful

Models Change Perceptions

"When the student is ready the Teacher appears"

Who said it first?

Our attempt to justify our beliefs logically by giving reasons results in the "regress of reasons." Since any reason can be further challenged, the regress of reasons threatens to be an infinite regress. However, since this is impossible, there must be reasons for which there do not need to be further reasons: reasons which do not need to be proven. By definition, these are "first principles." The "Problem of First Principles" arises when we ask Why such reasons would not need to be proven. Aristotle's answer was that first principles do not need to be proven because they are self-evident, i.e. they are known to be true simply by understanding them.

A universal statement I had been listening to for years. So I thought about it some and look for some comparative relation. How does this manifest? Who is "our father who art in heaven." You had to know this is within our capabilities. Roll your eyes and turn them upward in your head. The perception was never far from our own ephemeral qualites of mind, that we had access to heaven, "all the time":) That a heaven could be created here on earth.

That might be to religious for some. I think it, very human of us.




The pictures are links

Some problems with understanding what ever anyone saids about certain things, is the need for a Rosseta stone. The "other reader" has to have some idea of what you are talking about. If they don't, it's lost, and reading comprehension, never connects. So while up in the "air of mind" about these things, we want to bring it down to earth, fully aware, that these are higher principles with which we will deal. Spiritualism further out brought home to the mind for consideration.

In the quest to develop a notion of quantum geometry, as far back as 1947, people were trying to quantize spacetime so that the coordinates would not be ordinary real numbers, but somehow elevated to quantum operators obeying some nontrivial quantum commutation relations. Hence the term "noncommutative geometry," or NCG for short.

The current interest in NCG among physicists of the 21st century has been stimulated by work by French mathematician Alain Connes.

So in the case of science, how applicable is this relation and you need to see it working in society. Where the demands for a "first principle" might issue from, and here we could talk about the idea of cognitive realizations about where the math was first borne? The reason for it.

Probabilties exist, yet, how are they reduced to General Relativity? Models were produced to help us see differently? Like string theory.

If the basis of geometrical thought is understood then how shall it come from "first principle." As a string theorist they might know, and the problem brought home for consideration. There is currently is no geometry that describes the inner working of the place they know. So I have wrapped it in a process.



Now I see differently.