While the basis of the cosmic string lying in ruins in terms of verification that others went after, it does noes not in anyway reduce the impoirtance of how Andrey Kravtsov's animation can be less in our assumption of the supersymmetrical universe?
It's as if the neurons are connecting, in the vast universe, to bring parts of itself to linking in some "visionary image," that mankind has connected, from one thought to another.
Never mind about Jacque Distler's interlinking software capabilites, as this has been going on for sometime now, here, and on other forums.
Even the term Trackback is new, while this neuronical developement was understood in terms of Andrey Kravtsov's computer imaging, it becomes even more apparent, as the images I bring forward take their place in our thinking.
There is more to follow for sure.
They call them trackbacks." I just call them a continuation of the interlinking that is going on in the universe.:) Wordful quotation, or in imagery, we can track it to the source eventually?
It's a way of seeing dynamical movement and phase states? If Alice didn't step into mirror world, what would Young's experiment have meant in relation to path integrals?
G -> H -> ... -> SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) -> SU(3) x U(1). You have to realize that such emergence into the views of universal formulations, has to have some associative response from the quantum world to see that such relevance in the cosmological particpations could have ever pointed to the motivation of these universes coming into being, that it would go through a phase transformation relevant to each particle discription? Is this correct? This presented itself in a "way of seeing" that stretches the mind imaginations tht I wonder have I indeed gone off the deep end.
Columbus, or the Greeks, over some "edge" and be done with it? :) No there are always greate rimagnations working to solve the fantasies that Dirac may of set in motion for Feynman.
So "Toy models" are created to house the systemic movements. From this, calorimetric instruments are developed.
Now we change the way we have been doing things and the following paragraph makes more sense?
We had to break out of the moulding with which society has cast itself. It requires "greater ingenuity and imagination" to go beyond the standard model.
Shall we forget about Dirac's abilties besides writing to the algebraic equations, or Feynman's extension of the matrices, to toy models?
Three dimensions are all we see -- how could there be any more? Einstein's general theory of relativity tells us that space can expand, contract, and bend. If one direction were to contract down to an extremely tiny size, much smaller than an atom, it would be hidden from our view. If we could see on small enough scales, that hidden dimension might become visible.
Some actually testng that has been postulated to look at what may be anywhere between the "inaccessible Planck length and infinity."