Sunday, November 29, 2015

An Argument Against the Platonic World

 Pierre Curie (1894): “Asymmetry is what creates a phenomenon.”

 Against symmetry,  is what constitutes time as a measure. So there is this argument in there too.:)
My aim in this essay is to propose a conception of mathematics that is fully consonant with naturalism. By that I mean the hypothesis that everything that exists is part of the natural world, which makes up a unitary whole. This is in contradiction with the Platonic view of mathematics held by many physicists and mathematicians according to which, mathematical truths are facts about mathematical objects which exist in a separate, timeless realm of reality, which exists apart from and in addition to physical reality. -A naturalist account of the limited, and hence reasonable, effectiveness of mathematics in physics
 The point I think I am making, is that in issuance of any position, any idea has to emerge from an a prior state in order for the "unitary whole" to be fully understood? Timeless, becomes an illogical position, since any idea in itself becomes an "asymmetrical view" as a product of the phenomenal world. Symmetry then implies, a need for, and a better description of the unitary whole.

There is a constant theme that I observed with Lee Smolin regarding the effectiveness of the idea about what the Platonic world means in face of being a realist of the natural world. So in one stroke,  if we could but eliminate the question about the Platonic world of forms,  would we see that Platonism is a duelist of nature, and not a realist of the kind that exists as a product of the natural world. But more then this, the idea somehow that the platonic world is a timeless truth about our existence.

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner

The great mathematician fully, almost ruthlessly, exploits the domain of permissible reasoning and skirts the impermissible. That recklessness does not lead him into a morass of contradictions is a miracle in itself: certainly it is hard to believe that our reasoning power was brought, by Darwin's process of natural selection, to the perfection which it seems to possess. However, this is not our present subject. The principal point which will have to be recalled later is that the mathematician could formulate only a handful of interesting theorems without defining concepts beyond those contained in the axioms and that the concepts outside those contained in the axioms are defined with a view of permitting ingenious logical operations which appeal to our aesthetic sense both as operations and also in their results of great generality and simplicity.

[3 M. Polanyi, in his Personal Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1958), says: "All these difficulties are but consequences of our
refusal to see that mathematics cannot be defined without acknowledging
its most obvious feature: namely, that it is interesting" (p 188).]

So you can see that I attain one end of the argument,  against being a naturalist,  given I hold to views about the Platonic world? Against FXQi, and its awarding program regarding the selection of the subject as an awardee, if I counter Lee's perspective?
There are many other classes of things that are evoked. There are forms of poetry and music that have rigid rules which define vast or countably infinite sets of possible realizations. They were invented, it is absurd to think that haiku or the blues existed before particular people made the first one. Once defined there are many discoveries to be made exploring the landscape of possible realizations of the rules. A master may experience the senses of discovery, beauty and wonder, but these are not arguments for the prior or timeless existence of the art form independent of human creativitySee:  A naturalist account of the limited, and hence reasonable, effectiveness of mathematics in physicsBy Lee Smolin
I have my own views about what constitutes what a naturalist is in face of what Lee Smolin grants it to be in face of the argument regarding what is an false as an argument about what is invented or discovered.  So of course,  full and foremost, what is a naturalist?

But again,  let us be reminded of the poet or the artist,

Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty, a beauty cold and austere, like that of sculpture, without appeal to any part of our weaker nature, without the gorgeous trappings of painting or music, yet sublimely pure, and capable of a stern perfection such as only the greatest art can show. The true spirit of delight, the exaltation, the sense of being more than Man, which is the touchstone of the highest excellence, is to be found in mathematics as surely as in poetry. --BERTRAND RUSSELL, Study of Mathematics


You see, Lee Smolin's argument regarding naturalism falls apart when we consider the context of the nature of the quasi-crystal given,  we understand the nature of the quasi-crystal signature? It is necessary to understand this history.

See Also:

Friday, November 06, 2015

Dr. Duncan MacDougall's Idea

I had done this title before under a different heading, in a different time. The subject seems to have been resurrected by Discovery Magazine and thought it worth bringing up here so you get an idea here of the dilemma I faced regarding the substantial weight of things?
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks  should be. -Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Einstein,  was a materialist?

If one has followed my blog postings over the years the idea here is not that I had solely uprooted the essence of the question about substance and the weight of things, but to show the complexity of the idea that points to the hereafter. These, as beliefs retained by a large swath of the population on this planet.
The title(of Blog post) refers to the early 20th-century research of physician Dr. Duncan MacDougall who attempted to show scientific proof of the existence of the immortal human soul by recording a loss of body weight (representing the departure of the soul) immediately following death. The research by MacDougall attempted to follow the scientific method and showed some variance in results ("three-fourths of an ounce", which has since been popularized as "21 grams" is the reported weight loss from the death of the first subject). MacDougall's results were published in the peer reviewed journal "American Medicine".[4] - 21 Grams


NYT article from March 11, 1907
Duncan MacDougall (doctor)


Do you think that these abstractions, these mental journeys, are all of it? No but it is on the road to the understanding and discovery of what Plato meant by his heaven. It is not about the patriarchal view that as a messenger, that we gain, but by the exploratory adventure given toward the discovery of what that heaven may mean. Pierre Curie(forgive me)mentions that any phenomena is the discovery of asymmetry? The message helps to provide clarity to the ongoing seeking issue of understanding reality and understanding consciousness? What is that understanding?

      Pierre Curie (1894): “Asymmetry is what creates a phenomenon.”

Plato wasn't wrong about his attempt at a fundamental understanding and the way he went about it. It isn't just about the architecture of matter......but of the progression toward an understanding of what can be done with our imagination when we send it far off in space, or look into the very nature of the sun. Do you think relevant questions you may have is not the next step to what answer is received?

   Aperiodic tilings serve as mathematical models for quasicrystals, physical solids that were discovered in 1982 by Dan Shechtman[3] who subsequently won the Nobel prize in 2011.[4] However, the specific local structure of these materials is still poorly understood .Aperiodic tilings -


See Also:

Friday, October 30, 2015

Floating Frog

Mr Andre Geim, 2010 Nobel laureate in physics (along with mr Konstantin Novoselov), was invited by Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg to give a lecture in the crowded lecture hall RunAn in the student union building at Chalmers, on December 13 2010.


 Papyrus of Ani

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

Regarding Justice( as a scale of truth), as seen, and the relation to how Plato saw Truth? The heart,  is not a physical thing. So what did they mean? The concepts themselves are alien, and that by such thought processes enacted the abilities with which to affect the weight of things? Are their/there things, "lighter then, the feather?"  So we find crude imitations, as that created by science? To them back then in the culture, what was known?

By accident, and in early youth,  we would like to experiment. This is to say,  that the presence of a group(isolated), could affect the weight of such a thing? So there is this critical side, and exploratory side,  as to the way in which beliefs formed to become the foundation of what a group could do, when they gathered to accomplish.

Remove the group then, and it is still inside the mind, and without that group, it continues. So, it rests finally in the mind. I am not saying it could work for all, and it is not some bouncing meditationalist, but of something quite other then, what we understand today.

What I am saying is that there is a profound way in which we do not see consciousness ability, and how that consciousness can be used.

On the other hand, the enclosed photographs of water and a frog hovering inside a magnet(not on board a spacecraft) are somewhat counterintuitive and will probably take many people (even physicists) by surprise. This is the first observation of magnetic levitation of living organisms as well as the first images of diamagnetics levitated in a normal, room-temperature environment (if we disregard the tale about Flying Coffin of Mohammed as such evidence, of course). In fact, it is possible to levitate magnetically every material and every living creature on the earth due to the always present molecular magnetism. The molecular magnetism is very weak (millions times weaker than ferromagnetism) and usually remains unnoticed in everyday life, thereby producing the wrong impression that materials around us are mainly nonmagnetic. But they are all magnetic. It is just that magnetic fields required to levitate all these "nonmagnetic" materials have to be approximately 100 times larger than for the case of, say, superconductors.[/I]Diamagnetic Levitation

So while there is some understanding here, there are remaining questions.

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Can We Explain What Consciousness is?

Brain Imaging Reveals What You're Watching

So if one wanted to assume the images arise solely from the matter state, then the structure of the matter is a replica used in imagery......then such a model should eventually be used as the tools that are needed, in which we can create consciousness?

 Is this the same as consciousness experiencing. What if these tools/matter states require consciousness? That any image created is not the same as what consciousness is capable of creating? So consciousness as the alternative, is producing by how that matter resonates and is used by consciousness? Just giving an alternative view point other then the one that matter just creates as a question?
Visible light is merely a small part of the full electromagnetic spectrum, which extends from cosmic rays at the highest energies down through the middle range (gamma rays, X- rays, the ultraviolet, the visible, the infrared, and radio waves) all the way to induction-heating and electric-power-transmission frequencies at the lowest energies. Note that this is the energy per quantum (photon if in the visible range) but not the total energy; the latter is a function of the intensity in a beam.
 Increasing the range of spectrum with which we see......does this imply we will understand the mechanism for which we believe mind as brain wave state correlate? Does this imply we will understand the mechanism as matter states with which such a process of mind? Mind, is only one aspect of consciousness?

Biofeedback information is helpful with regard to brain wave we know.... That if the body is in a given brain wave state......the body biofeedback system will give us certain information? We are progressively moving toward the orientation of matter defined states. aWhat is the ground state? What is a node/anti-node in physics?

We are using extensions of the spectrum in order to look at how we see, how we think does not give perspective on what can be seen beyond the senses?

Does the spectrum reveal "the matter" of the thought? If thought is an energy state, then what is it' ground state as a thought? We use analogies all the time.....and we shift between senses, to create a greater perspective on the nature of the matter?

We emulate gravity as we know exactly what Gravity is? Can we measure the momentum of a thought? What is the energy range of a thought/many thoughts, to measure its entropy?

If consciousness is not measurable, then how do we see consciousness beyond the senses?

A Unified Field theory has to be able to explain this. All theories of everything, have to explain this. Other then demonstrating the act of consciousness, all Toe's are only metaphors, like sound or light for explaining what consciousness is? Progressively, you are moving beyond the matters as a question of what consciousness is, or what mind is, as a part of our consciousness?

Saturday, October 17, 2015

What Types of Sources Cause Gravitational Waves?

Advanced LIGO is searching for gravitational waves - what will it find, and what will it mean? Caltech LIGO scientists Kip Thorne, Sarah Gossan, and Rana Adhikari answer your questions. More information:
See Also: LIGO as video source page. Video is for education purposes only.

Monday, September 28, 2015

Paul "DJ Spooky" Miller

See: TEDxAustin - Paul "DJ Spooky" Miller 

 .....that's where the new material comes from so with ice you're seeing a subatomic molecular structure a vice which is based on hexagonal form there's always a six-sided hexagon but the beautiful part of this is that an elegant mathematics

Unified Reality Theory

Unus mundus, Latin for "one world", is the concept of an underlying unified reality from which everything emerges and to which everything returns.
There is an inclination for one to try and tie everything together. I have mentioned Jim Gates and used him as an example. In the quote above, this may have been Jung's attempt to bring it all together.

The process has been on going for a long time. So given there are two different academic fields for consideration, A theory of Everything, would explain a Unified reality theory?

If one has a scientific mind, or, philosophical mind, what does this mean to you? I am interested on what you have to say about this.....

There are unified fields theories and as a scientist would this play into an aspect of reality as a Unified Reality Theory(Finding a ToE is one of the major unsolved problems in physics?) See: Theory of Everything -

As a philosopher( the system-building scope of philosophy is often linked to the rationalist method of philosophy,) as a deeply debated theory of everything? See: -Theory of Everything and philosophy

Now, could "consciousness research" trump both?

Complex ideas, complex shapes Adinkras — geometric objects that encode mathematical relationships between supersymmetric particles — are named after symbols that represent wise sayings in West African culture. This adinkra is called "nea onnim no sua a, ohu," which translates as "he who does not know can become knowledgeable through learning. See: From the Mathematics of Supersymmetry to the Music of Arnold Schoenberg

Jim Gates is an example of a scientist, looking for a pattern. His historical investigation in terms of the culture was used as a template to show a correlation pattern established in the way in which "pattern formation" was developed according to his theory. Algorithmic in nature, as to its identity as to a beginning to the formation of his theory. Symmetry, as to have formed from the perfect state. Symmetry breaking, as to become a materialization.

Aperiodic tilings serve as mathematical models for quasicrystals, physical solids that were discovered in 1982 by Dan Shechtman[3] who subsequently won the Nobel prize in 2011.[4] However, the specific local structure of these materials is still poorly understood .Aperiodic tilings -
Examples of complex diagrams "as E8" was used to demonstrate a whole system. Riemann hypothesis, as sieves, to reveal a much larger pattern regarding as the ulam spiral? Recognizing a pattern, as a quasi-crystal.

"...underwriting the form languages of ever more domains of mathematics is a set of deep patterns which not only offer access to a kind of ideality that Plato claimed to see the universe as created with in the Timaeus; more than this, the realm of Platonic forms is itself subsumed in this new set of design elements-- and their most general instances are not the regular solids, but crystallographic reflection groups. You know, those things the non-professionals call . . . kaleidoscopes! * (In the next exciting episode, we'll see how Derrida claims mathematics is the key to freeing us from 'logocentrism'-- then ask him why, then, he jettisoned the deepest structures of mathematical patterning just to make his name...)

* H. S. M. Coxeter, Regular Polytopes (New York: Dover, 1973) is the great classic text by a great creative force in this beautiful area of geometry (A polytope is an n-dimensional analog of a polygon or polyhedron. Chapter V of this book is entitled 'The Kaleidoscope'....)"
So in a sense, going back to the beginning of all this material stuff. In a perceptive recognition of the beauty, as a mental examination, an understanding evolving of this "spiritual eye."

Now beauty, as we said, shone bright among those visions, and in this world below we apprehend it through the clearest of our senses, clear and resplendent. For sight is the keenest of the physical senses, though wisdom is not seen by it -- how passionate would be our desire for it, if such a clear image of wisdom were granted as would come through sight -- and the same is true of the other beloved objects; but beauty alone has this privilege, to be most clearly seen and most lovely of them all. [Phaedrus, 250D, after R. Hackford, Plato's Phaedrus, Library of the Liberal Arts, 1952, p. 93, and the Loeb Classical Library, Euthryphro Apology Crito Phaedo Phaedrus, Harvard University Press, 1914-1966, p.485, ]


asking the sixty-four dollar question is consciousness the ultimate reality is it the Unified Field See: Is Consciousness the Unified Field?, John Hagelin


 Here is a video called, Beyond Einstein: In Search of the Ultimate Explanation (Original Program Date: June 1, 2008)that help create the question for me. When, and if you have time.

The question about wholeness, as a quest for bringing everything together seemed to be an underlying need for a foundation to explain a Unified Reality Theory. A quest for science regarding Relativity ad Quantum mechanics. A quest for a unified reality theory requires consciousness?

In a way, the closing of the Tesserack scene in Interstellar while a science fiction, is an interesting cumulative quest for understanding gravity across time. "They are not beings they are us?"