Pages

Showing posts with label Anthropic Principal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anthropic Principal. Show all posts

Monday, April 30, 2012

A Superset Universe?

How would you draw a Universe with all theories as being part of,  as a subset?





Pictorial representations can be very useful in presenting information or assisting reasoning. Venn diagram is an example. Venn diagrams are used to represent classes of objects, and they can also assist us in reasoning about the relations between these classes. They are named after the English mathematician John Venn (1834 - 1923), who was a fellow at Cambridge University.


A few may have taken in the link supplied to a lecture given by Thomas Campbell with regard to his MBT book he had written. Now, I was drawn to the idea of a Venn diagram presented in his lecture and the idea of how one might have use this diagram as a question about the universe and it's subsets? How would you draw it?







I give a current posting by Sean Carroll with regards to his opinion on a book written by Lawrence Krauss. So there all these theories about the nature of the universe and some scientists of course have their opinions.

............Or not, of course. We should be good empiricists and be open to the possibility that what we think of as the universe really does exist within some larger context. But then we could presumably re-define that as the universe, and be stuck with the same questions. As long as you admit that there is more than one conceivable way for the universe to be (and I don’t see how one could not), there will always be some end of the line for explanations. I could be wrong about that, but an insistence that “the universe must explain itself” or some such thing seems like a completely unsupportable a priori assumption. (Not that anyone in this particular brouhaha seems to be taking such a stance.) SEE:A Universe from Nothing?







Physicists have proposed several theories to explain why Λ is so small. One of the most popular -- the "anthropic principle" -- states that Λ is randomly set and has very different values in different parts of the universe (figure 1). We happen to live in a rare region, or "bubble", where Λ has the value we observe. This value has allowed stars, planets and therefore life to develop. However, this theory is also unsatisfactory for many scientists because it would be better to be able to calculate Λ from first principles.



See also:

Friday, June 26, 2009

One Small step.......for Mankind

It should read...Humankind.

Lee Smolin:
"Here is a metaphor due to Eric Weinstein that I would have put in the book had I heard it before. Let us take a different twist on the landscape of theories and consider the landscape of possible ideas about post standard model or quantum gravity physics that have been proposed. 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.


Counter arguments are good things if we can understand where this next step takes us.

***


Science Saturday: The Recipe For Our Universe



People need to understand something about dialogue( Pirsig is being offered here as gesture of what I am paying forward by implication) as a means of bringing out the best of us and of each other. I could of course digress to the Socratic method of searching the population for the most "wisest of words" but we are living in a new age of media now aren't we?:)

I thought to replace Sean's head with Plato and Mark Troddens with Sir Francis Bacon, just to encapsulate further "the rhetoric" that seems "to find the most viable method of presenting the place were we can step off of," and if the moon step taken on one rung down would have you think of Michael Jackson current passing, this would be far from what stepping on new worlds should mean, although I would present his passing as a higher perspective of viewing the world from which he had lived in and shared.

Such conceptual boundaries are then moved in kind. Working the earth in higher geometrical perspective and it's curvature, is a Geometers historical place once part of the discussion of earth as a postulate, to find that all of this becomes part of what the earth as a pearl could look like for the very first time as that first space walk took place.



Photo from NASA of the Bullet Cluster



 


These stills show four stages from an artist's representation of the huge collision that is taking place in the bullet cluster. Hot gas, containing most of the normal matter in the cluster, is shown in red and dark matter is shown in blue. During the collision the hot gas in each cluster is slowed and distorted by a drag force, similar to air resistance. A bullet-shaped cloud of gas forms in one of the clusters. In contrast, the dark matter is not slowed by the impact because it does not interact directly with itself or the gas except through gravity. Therefore, the dark matter clumps from the two clusters move ahead of the hot gas, producing the separation of the dark and normal matter seen in the image. More Images



***


'An unexpected gift' from string theory

The possibility that enormously large galaxies originated from tiny quantum fluctuations may seem too strange to be true. But many aspects of inflationary theory were confirmed by recent astronomical observations, for which the observers won the Nobel Prize in 2006. This gives some credence to an even more surprising claim made by Linde: During inflation, quantum fluctuations can produce not only galaxies, but also new parts of the universe.

Take an expanding universe with its little pockets of heterogeneous quantum events. At some point one of those random events may actually "escape" from its parent universe, forming a new one, Linde said. To use the ball analogy, if it experiences small perturbations as it rolls, it might at some point roll over into the next valley, initiating a new inflationary process, he said.

"The string theorists predict that there are perhaps 101000 different types of universes that can be formed that way," Linde said. "I had known that there must be many different kinds of universes with different physical properties, but this huge number of different possibilities was an unexpected gift of string theory."

According to string theory, there are 10 dimensions. We live aware of four of them—three of space plus one of time. The rest are so small that we cannot experience them directly. In 2003, Stanford physicists Shamit Kachru, Renata Kallosh and Linde, with their collaborator Sandip Trivedi from India, discovered that these compacted dimensions want to expand, but that the time it would take for them to do so is beyond human comprehension. When a new universe buds off from its parent, the configuration of which dimensions remain small and which grow large determines the physical laws of that universe. In other words, an infinite number of worlds could exist with 101000 different types of physical laws operating among them. Susskind called this picture "the string theory landscape."

For many physicists, it is disturbing to think that the very laws and properties that are the essence of our world might only hold true as long as we remain in that world. "We always wanted to discover the theory of everything that would explain the unique properties of our world, and now we must adjust to the thought that many different worlds are possible," Linde said. But he sees an advantage in what some others could see a problem: "We finally learned that inflationary universe is not just a free lunch: It is an eternal feast where all possible dishes are served."


***




See:
  • Bullet Cluster
  • Dark Matter Issue
  • AP(Anthropic Principal) May Still be Useful?
  • Sunday, March 18, 2007

    AP May Still be Useful?

    Full-sky Temperature Maps-Polarized Light-K-Band Map (23 GHz)-Credit:NASA/WMAP Science Team

    The color represents the strength of the polarized signal seen by WMAP - red strong/blue weak. The signal seen in these maps comes mostly from our Galaxy. It is strongest at 23 GHz, weakest at 61 and 94 GHz.

    This multi-frequency data is used to subtract the Galactic signal and produce the CMB map shown (top of this page). These images show a temperature range of 50 microKelvin.


    It is essential that while we are looking at this universe we understand the makeup and how it is being expressed. We also understand that while we knew the uiverse had to have it's motivation for that expression, it had to have other states of existance as well. This is related to the curvatures parameters and how differing times in the universe's expression this curvature had to be considered. These curvatures at one time in the whole context, as some cosmological constant varied, not seem relevant to the state of the universe?

    So you have to explain it. Some may think I am less then desired in my understanding of General relativity, but you can be certain that understand Einstein's work in finding the "geometry of expression" was critical in understanding the "nature of gravity."


    The idea behind the Coleman-De Luccia instanton, discovered in 1987, is that the matter in the early universe is initially in a state known as a false vacuum. A false vacuum is a classically stable excited state which is quantum mechanically unstable. In the quantum theory, matter which is in a false vacuum may `tunnel' to its true vacuum state. The quantum tunnelling of the matter in the early universe was described by Coleman and De Luccia. They showed that false vacuum decay proceeds via the nucleation of bubbles in the false vacuum. Inside each bubble the matter has tunnelled. Surprisingly, the interior of such a bubble is an infinite open universe in which inflation may occur. The cosmological instanton describing the creation of an open universe via this bubble nucleation is known as a Coleman-De Luccia instanton.


    See more on this here

    So by seeing this dynamical nature expressed did not mean you discounted how this universe was acting at various times to become what it is today. You had to find processes that would speak to this,and by defining the continuity of geometrical expression it was important to define this false vacuum in relation towhat the universe was doing as it unfolded itself and from strong curvature parameters settled itself to where it is today.

    Did the universe have a negative density value relation that one could interpret? So you have to explain this as well in relation to what contributed ot the universe speeding up or slowing down. What local events within the cosmos could contribute to the universe in it's total expression?

    Gravity in the microseconds

    Never mind Steven Weinberg's First Three mintes.

    The amount of dark matter and energy in the universe plays a crucial role in determining the geometry of space. If the density of matter and energy in the universe is less than the critical density, then space is open and negatively curved like the surface of a saddle See my post on this here

    While we talk about the universe I understand that there are "curvature parameters" that can be expressed, at any given time "within context of the whole universe." We had somehow forgotten these events as local expressions of galaxies "may contribute to the larger picture?"

    'An unexpected gift' from string theory

    The possibility that enormously large galaxies originated from tiny quantum fluctuations may seem too strange to be true. But many aspects of inflationary theory were confirmed by recent astronomical observations, for which the observers won the Nobel Prize in 2006. This gives some credence to an even more surprising claim made by Linde: During inflation, quantum fluctuations can produce not only galaxies, but also new parts of the universe.

    Take an expanding universe with its little pockets of heterogeneous quantum events. At some point one of those random events may actually "escape" from its parent universe, forming a new one, Linde said. To use the ball analogy, if it experiences small perturbations as it rolls, it might at some point roll over into the next valley, initiating a new inflationary process, he said.

    "The string theorists predict that there are perhaps 101000 different types of universes that can be formed that way," Linde said. "I had known that there must be many different kinds of universes with different physical properties, but this huge number of different possibilities was an unexpected gift of string theory."

    According to string theory, there are 10 dimensions. We live aware of four of them—three of space plus one of time. The rest are so small that we cannot experience them directly. In 2003, Stanford physicists Shamit Kachru, Renata Kallosh and Linde, with their collaborator Sandip Trivedi from India, discovered that these compacted dimensions want to expand, but that the time it would take for them to do so is beyond human comprehension. When a new universe buds off from its parent, the configuration of which dimensions remain small and which grow large determines the physical laws of that universe. In other words, an infinite number of worlds could exist with 101000 different types of physical laws operating among them. Susskind called this picture "the string theory landscape."

    For many physicists, it is disturbing to think that the very laws and properties that are the essence of our world might only hold true as long as we remain in that world. "We always wanted to discover the theory of everything that would explain the unique properties of our world, and now we must adjust to the thought that many different worlds are possible," Linde said. But he sees an advantage in what some others could see a problem: "We finally learned that inflationary universe is not just a free lunch: It is an eternal feast where all possible dishes are served."


    I have been waiting I guess until the appropriate time that I could bring Q9's link of Linde's here for comparison, to what one may think of the landscape. You had to include all the information before this comment to know that what I am talking about has it's relation in the Anthropic Principle.

    The theory of strings predicts that the universe might occupy one random "valley" out of a virtually infinite selection of valleys in a vast landscape of possibilities

    See info on String Theory Landscape

    The title above is taken from Lee Smolin's paragraph listed below. Why I am using it will be come clear after a time in this post. I am working all night because of the duties of life, so I'll have to come back to it tomorrow. I am barely await has a continue to compile the data necessary for understanding the way I see this universe.

    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

    Lee continues on in another forum and is linked to paragraph below.

    I should also emphasize that while the book is not an attack on string theory in general it is very definitely an attack on a point of view about string theory that some, but not all, string theorists have adopted. This includes the arguments that the anthropic principle can yielded falsifiable predictions-which have been shown to be fallacious, and the argument that was made by several string theorists that a theory need not give falsifiable predictions for doable experiments to be believed. My book takes a strong stance against this point of view. I am confident here of my reasons, especially given that already in my first book the possibility of an anthropic solution to the landscape problem was considered and rejected. I am glad to know that my view on this is shared by some string theorists such as Brian Greene but not so happy that a number of very smart string theorists continue to believe that some version of the AP may still be useful.


    Increased Curvatures

    A circle of radius r has a curvature of size 1/r. Therefore, small circles have large curvature and large circles have small curvature. The curvature of a line is 0. In general, an object with zero curvature is "flat."

    See my post here and here.

    The value of the circle in relation to gravity is important to recognize, in that this value of the universe can be different based on what "critical density" in relation to Omega

    In order for one to be concerned about the current state of the universe, it is essential that one realizes it's condition "before it became the way it is?" It's value in relation to the circle.



    The big bang should have created equal amounts of matter and antimatter, with subsequent annihilation leaving neither behind. And yet, the observable universe has about ten billion galaxies that consist entirely of matter (protons, neutrons, and electrons) with no antimatter (antiprotons, antineutrons, and positrons). Very soon after the big bang, some forces must have caused the CP violation that skewed the equality in the number of matter and antimatter particles and left behind excess matter.



    So while we get this sense here of the hills and valleys, what said that the current system had not taken into consideration the sombrero? The effects of gravity when it was once strong, and now is weak. We still get this sense of the universe doing things.

    Thursday, March 08, 2007

    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.

    Tuesday, February 20, 2007

    The Perfect Sphere

    Before I begin I had to mention the following two entries below that I wanted to do but was short on time.

    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.


    I am following behind on the different posts that I wanted to write. One of them in relation to the descent of a "measure gatherer" (sounds primitive doesn't it?) and the sound values produced from that "descent on Titan." Can make it "sound ancient" while current research is of value.

    Almost, as if one is a cave dweller blowing dried paint over their hands, could possibly be thinking of fire and rays cast while their own shadows made them think of a sun that can enter the cave, and chains that need to be broken from thinking so circumspect..:)



    The second one I wanted to talk about was in relation to Themis and the Aurora Borealis. The labels will hopefully help with my previous research that I had done as well as other perspectives that allowed me to see this sun earth relationship. Quasar has currently dealing with that topic further in "Coronal Mass Ejection" as well and Backreaction entitled, "NASA launch of THEMIS Satellite."

    Anyway on to the essence of this post and why it is troubling to me. Many would not know what goes on in my head as I am currently looking at the relationship of the Bose Nova to the jet productions that issue from such spiralled tendency. Accretion disc and the idea of such spiralling, to a pipe that follows to making anti-matter productions?

    See Water in Zero Gravity, by Backreaction
    How did this all arise? So you see such an idea of the sphere in a vacuum is a point from which to begin the search for things that were not there before, so we now know that such collisions can indeed produce "new" information?

    The action taken, although seems related to what Arivero is saying, and of course I already have much on this in terms of Han Jenny, and the taking of the Chaldni plate to spherical relations. As an experiment with a "balloons and dyes using sound" similar to "sand on that same chaldni plate."

    The Perfect Sphere and Sonoluminence.

    Taleyarkhan.A second internal inquiry has found no evidence of misconduct.Credit: Purdue News Service
    Purdue University officials today announced that a second and final internal inquiry has cleared bubble-fusion researcher Rusi Taleyarkhan of all allegations of research misconduct. "I feel vindicated and exonerated," Taleyarkhan says. "It's been a pressure cooker for about a year." But controversy surrounding Taleyarkhan's work isn't likely to die down any time soon.

    Taleyarkhan is the chief proponent of the controversial notion of sonofusion, which suggests that sound energy can collapse bubbles in a way that yields more energy than was initially put in (ScienceNOW, 4 March 2002). Last year, an article in Nature reported that several of Taleyarkhan's colleagues at Purdue were upset by their encounters with him, suggesting that he allegedly obstructed their work and tried to stop them from publishing results that contradicted his own.


    There has been some contention about the results, but this is far from what I wanted to show in terms of the geometrics involved. Patience as to the energy produced from this interaction of "sound on the surface transferred inside" to cause a spherical collapse.


    Experimental apparatus used by the team at the University of Stuttgart. PMT = photomultiplier tube, PZT = piezoelectric transducer. Picture credit: Physical Review Letters
    German researchers have measured the duration and shape of a sonoluminescence pulse for the first time. Sonoluminescence - the emission of light by bubbles of gas trapped in a liquid and excited by sound waves - is one of the most puzzling phenomena in physics. Although first discovered in 1934, physicists have yet to discover the underlying light emitting process.


    Seeing the tensorial action on the bubble moving sound inside, I had wondered about how such a collapse could increase the temperatures involved to produce this "super higgs fluid." Lubos Motl never gave this much thought and I of course am impressionable when it comes to the science mind. I could not shake it.

    Ultrasound can produce temperatures as high as those on the surface of the Sun and pressures as great as those at the bottom of the ocean. In some cases, it can also increase chemical reactivities by nearly a millionfold.


    So we "assign fluids" as one might the "vacuum in space" to illustrate what we have as our way with these bubbles? These claims have not been fantastical other then what the science had been designed for, yet I am drawn to the schematics and geometrics.

    So yes the ways in which the size of the blackhole could all of sudden collapse is critical here, to producing further results in what is required of the new physics? So looking for "such experimental processes" is always part of my resolve to understand the geometrics involved.

    Please be patient while I am learning.


    Axisymmetry is also broken in the fluid bells, which assume the form of polyhedra


    See further information in regards to Broken Symmetry.

    So the idea here that was troubling was the way in which the symmetry was broken in terms of the fluid flows demonstrated by the Broken Symmetry examples.

    My perception is much different here in that the dynamical relation of "the super fluid", may have it's correlation in the Navier stokes equations. This is by "insinuation on my part." How preposterous such a thing to think that the conditions had to be "spelt out first" in order for us to understand the "new physics" beyond the standard model?

    Navier-Stokes Equations

    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.


    Using the geometrical basis of my thought pattern established as a point in a circle, or a point with "no boundary", it seems it is very difficult to talk about the universe if one does not include the way in which such dynamicals can perpetuate the energy within this system.

    In fact, in the reciprocal language, these tiny circles are getting ever smaller as time goes by, since as R grows, 1/R shrinks. Now we seem to have really gone off the deep end. How can this possibly be true? How can a six-foot tall human being 'fit' inside such an unbelievably microscopic universe? How can a speck of a universe be physically identical to the great expanse we view in the heavens above?

    (Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe, pages 248-249)


    Thus too, the understanding, that if you turn Einstein's equation E=mc2 inside/out then what had you done? All "matter states" have then been assigned a energy value? Qui! Non?

    Plato:
    Layman scratching head while faceless expression of Boltzmann puzzlement takes hold?

    How is one suppose to find "a equilibrium" in such a "low entropic state?"

    If we were to experimentally challenging any thinking with "relativistic processes" how could they have ever emerged out of the BB? Maybe, it was a "highly symmetric event" for any asymmetry to show itself as "discrete measures" defined in relation to the "energy of probable outcomes?"

    Where did such reductionism begin for us to ask about the "cross over?"

    We needed high energy perspective to realize that we were still talking about the universe. Are there any other processes within the cosmos that can be taken down to such rejuvenated qualities to new universes being born that while the arrow of time is pointed one way, that the universe itself allowed such expression to continue in the expansion rate, and the speed up?

    A Higg's fluid? Something had to be "happening now" that would dictate?

    Forgive me here for my ignorance in face of those better equipped.


    So you are looking for "this point" where things cross over? It is highly supersymmetric, yet, we know that such matter states have been detailed and defined as "discrete" asymmetric matter states.

    I made a comment above that needed to be looked at again so I am placing it here while it suffers it's fate in another location. The basis of the argument is an ole one indeed that has long been exchanged by Smolin and Susskind.

    Now it is again one of those things that I am trying to make sense of while one could go off in a philosophical direction. While the "facts of the matter" and experimental results dictate my thinking here.

    It's the fault of that ole' Platonic thinking, and the Pythagorean basis of the universe in expression thingy. The universe is very dynamical geometrically while one debates the essence of inflation and disregards what allows such an expression to bring "other ideas" into the fold. How this "eternal idea" can bring other factors in terms of the speed up into consideration, while one ponders why such a thing is happening?

    Neutrino Oscillations? Hmmmm.......

    Oscillating flavors The three neutrino mass eigenstates are presumed to be different coherent superpositions of the three flavor eigenstates (ne, nm, and nt) associated with the three charged leptons: the electron, the muon, and the tau. There is good evidence that only two of the three mass eigenstates contribute significantly to ne. In that approximation, one can write

    Just another fancy way of looking at CNO and the law of Octaves? :) While some thought space was empty, there were aspects of that space "which was alive" regardless of the asymmetrical realization of the discrete matters?

    I'm trying here. You needed a background for it?

    The triple alpha process is highly dependent on carbon-12 having a resonance with the same energy as helium-4 and beryllium-8 and before 1952 no such energy level was known. It was astrophysicist Fred Hoyle who used the fact that carbon-12 is so abundant in the universe (and that our existence depends upon it - the Anthropic Principle), as evidence for the existence of the carbon-12 resonance. Fred suggested the idea to nuclear physicist Willy Fowler, who conceded that it was possible that this energy level had been missed in previous work on carbon-12. After a brief undertaking by his research group, they discovered a resonance near to 7.65 Mev.

    Now I am not pro or against anything, just trying to make sense of the disparity of such anthropic reasonings. So what processes in Cern reveals such an idea? Muons?

    What's that saying? The devil is in the details :)


    So we want to define our relationship with the world in some computerized method? It has always been something of a struggle to explain how one may see the world as they lose the focus of distinctive sight and hearing and soon realize that if they are all amalgamated, you might get this idea of the gravitationally inclined atomized in some computerized process? Feelings?:)

    You finally learnt something about yourself?


    A thought crossed my mind. A fictional story?

    It’s interesting what calorimetric measure can do when you are looking at cosmological events. So, the photon becomes descriptive in itself?

    Of course speaking of Glast here. Building alliances?


    Perhaps Quantum Gravity can be Handled by thoroughly reconsidering Quantum Mechanics itself?

    You are working “to set” the course of events? So we have this description then of the universe and it’s “phase transitions.” It’s behind the “value of the photon in it’s description and escape velocity” and it’s value also “gravitationally linked?”

    So technology now stops the photon in flight? We can then “colour our views with the gravitationally inclined?”:) A “philosophical take” on new computerized development with feeling?


    The leading computer technologies here is not to diverge from what I moved too in terms of understanding the human condition. This is very important to me, and includes not only our biological functioning, but our resulting affect from the physiological one as well.

    So while "you think" I hope to chart the colours spectrally induced oscillatory universe from the "photon stop over" and subsequent information held in that abeyance. Sure it's a story of fiction right now, but in time I would like to see this connection to reality.

    It may only rest at this time in conceptual framework that was constructed from what was available in the physics and science at our disposal, while I had to move forward slowly.

    It was important to understand why there would be such divergences in perspective and how these would be lined up? Some of course did not want to take the time, but it was important to me to understand the "philosophical position" taken.



    One could just as well venture to the condense matter theorist and said, what building blocks shall we use? One should not think the "history of Platonism" without some "other influences" to consider. Least you assign it to a "another particular subject" in it's present incarnation? An Oscillatory String Universe?

    So the evolution here is much more then the "circumspect of the biological function," but may possible include other things that have not been considered?

    Physiologically, the "biological function" had some other relation? So abstract that I assigned the photon? So I said "feelings," while Einstein might assigned them to a "short or long time" considering his state of mind? :)

    More thought of course here on the "fictional presentation" submitted previous. As a layman I have a problem in that regard. :)


    So no one knows how to combine thermodynamics and general relativity? Hmmm....Boltzmann puzzle..hmmmmm...and I slowly drift off in thought.

    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."

    How does relativity ever arise out of such a situation? If "tunnelling was to occur" where would it occur, and where would "this equilibrium" find comparative Lagrangian relations in the universe? These perspectives are leading to what we see in the WMAP polarization patterns?

    Are there not "comparative features" that allows for the low entropic states, within the existing universe? Allows us to return to those same entropic states in their respective regions, while "feeding" the universe?

    You had to look for the conditions that would be similar would you not? And "supporting evidence" to explain the current universe speeding up. These conditions would have to support that contention.



    I am holding off producing any new posts until I can bring the discussion to a suitable ending where Lee Smolin admits the ideas are not yet completed in terms of of our understanding of the landscape?

    Clifford has a good humour post about real estate in the extra dimensions. Of course you had to follow other discourses here to understand how one may view what is "current in the thinking?"

    This "balance in perspective" is not just one or the other but on how such perspective is formed around it. So on the one hand you have this Anthropic approach in string theory, and then you have the "philosophical differences on the other?"

    Your trying to explain it and in so doing revealing the train of thought that was established. One does not disavow the road leading to the physics established of course, and no where is this intentional on differing perspectives

    Lee Smolin: "Here is a metaphor due to Eric Weinstein that I would have put in the book had I heard it before. Let us take a different twist on the landscape of theories and consider the landscape of possible ideas about post standard model or quantum gravity physics that have been proposed. 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.

    Saturday, September 23, 2006

    Hydrogen, and the Law of Octaves



    Alex Vilenkin - Many Worlds in One article by Mark of Cosmic Variance drew my interest again after reading with a new perspective gained from understandng some implications about the "anthropic principle."

    Sometimes I even still hold to the idea it is better not to touch this topic because of the greeness with which insight has now taken over. This greeness resides against the reason with which such logic is necessary in regards ot the debate between Susskind and Smolin.

    I do not want to be blinded by the razzle dazzle either of men leading this debate, so as to the layman's pursuite of understanding, I hope to show what I am seeing?

    While I have not read the book either I am still "drawn to the debate" about what the "anthropic reasoning" is talking about at a fundamental level? Scared yes, and on wobbly legs so I continue.

    So as a layman I am curious too ,about views here and what the basis could lead too, in terms of what our universe had become?

    If "carbon" wasn't present at the beginning, then how would you explain our universe?

    Because the triple-alpha process is unlikely, it requires a long period of time to produce carbon. One consequence of this is that no carbon was produced in the Big Bang because within minutes after the Big Bang, the temperature fell below that necessary for nuclear fusion.

    Ordinarily, the probability of the triple alpha process would be extremely small. However, the beryllium-8 ground state has almost exactly the energy of two alpha particles. In the second step, 8Be + 4He has almost exactly the energy of an excited state of 12C. These resonances greatly increase the probability that an incoming alpha particle will combine with beryllium-8 to form carbon. The existence of this resonance was predicted by Fred Hoyle before its actual observation based on its necessity for carbon to be formed.


    I too hate the idea of the "law of crackpostism," yet research back to mendeleev table in regards to Newland, raised interesting ideas about the future of testbility?

    A "harmonical disseration" about the ways we will in the fuure be able to map the elements in "photonic imagery" devised to work within carbon processes?

    What were the ground rules for this universe?

    He is best known for discovering the element plutonium, with Edwin McMillan. He led the team that devised the chemical process for extraction of plutonium.

    Seaborg served as chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission from 1961 until 1971.

    He and McMillan shared the 1951 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for research into transuranic elements.


    Having a framework here in which to establish the elemental nature of our universe, how is it that such principals inherent in "string theory" should not direct our attention to what is a viable indicator of what will fill the spaces between, as Mendeleev was able to do in prediction?

    While one has been introduce to the "allotopes of Coxeter," it is not without some thought that "planck length," along with the understanding of what "geometrical inhernetness?" qunatum geometry, would also spew forth from the very basis of the beginning of that big bang?

    So while I have shown the allotrope here, and dimensional perspective developed, what degrees of freedom say that the space would allow all constants of nature to be described here, and allowed such geometrical principals to form in the bucky ball of carbon, carbon nanotubes?

    It was not wihtout directing our attention to the immediacy of that big bang in the microsecond of "planck time" that we are at a loss then?


    The last major changes to the periodic table was done in the middle of the 20th Century. Glenn Seaborg is given the credit for it. Starting with his discovery of plutonium in 1940, he discovered all the transuranic elements from 94 to 102. He reconfigured the periodic table by placing the actinide series below the lanthanide series. In 1951, Seaborg was awarded the Noble prize in chemistry for his work. Element 106 has been named seaborgium (Sg) in his honor.


    See:

  • CNO and the Law of Octaves

  • Allotropes and the Ray of Creation
  • Wednesday, September 20, 2006

    CNO and the Law of Octaves

    "String theory—the hot topic in physics for the past 20 years—is a dead-end, says Smolin, one of the founders of Canada's Perimeter Institute of Theoretical Physics and himself a lapsed string theorist. In fact, he (and others) argue convincingly, string theory isn't even a fully formed theory—it's just a "conjecture."Publisher's Weekly


    As we keep going here let's remeber to keep our eyes open, eh?:)

    Okay just so you know Harmonics "do" color my world.

    The CNO (carbon-nitrogen-oxygen) cycle is one of two fusion reactions by which stars convert hydrogen to helium, the other being the proton-proton chain. While the proton-proton chain is more important in stars the mass of the sun or less, theoretical models show that the CNO cycle is the dominant source of energy in heavier stars. The CNO process was proposed in 1938 by Hans Bethe.


    Whilst I struggle, it is with the recent post it has become clear that the roles of choice in the expression of our universe has met up with the logic of "Anthropic reasoning?"


    NATHAN MYHRVOLD

    I found the email debate between Smolin and Susskind to be quite interesting. Unfortunately, it mixes several issues. The Anthropic Principle (AP) gets mixed up with their other agendas. Smolin advocates his CNS, and less explicitly loop quantum gravity. Susskind is an advocate of eternal inflation and string theory. These biases are completely natural, but in the process the purported question of the value of the AP gets somewhat lost in the shuffle. I would have liked more discussion of the AP directly


    Up to this point this distance was kept because I really did not understand the full scope of what is being implied here, from either of Susskind or Smolin. I do not want to cloud the issue, but by association with either point of view, it seems I am destined to be called archetyphically, one or the other?

    The triple alpha process is highly dependent on carbon-12 having a resonance with the same energy as helium-4 and beryllium-8 and before 1952 no such energy level was known. It was astrophysicist Fred Hoyle who used the fact that carbon-12 is so abundant in the universe (and that our existence depends upon it - the Anthropic Principle), as evidence for the existence of the carbon-12 resonance. Fred suggested the idea to nuclear physicist Willy Fowler, who conceded that it was possible that this energy level had been missed in previous work on carbon-12. After a brief undertaking by his research group, they discovered a resonance near to 7.65 Mev.


    I had always remained at a distance with this topic only to find that I had been expressing parts of it in one way or another by assuming model implications by association. Either with Susskind or Smolin with the debate ongoing.

    Well as Plato ,I am a little different in my assumption based on a model that sees developmental attitiude towards music in ways that we had never considered before? Sound? Or, had thought arose in minds from other sources, whose philsophical based was always hidden in the mysterium of some secret given to mankind on it's journey to remembering who we are.

    So I left stories of the deluge of mankind and the secrets to be maintained in model symbologies, that would remain with us for many a day, without ever lossing it's structure.

    Okay. I've gotten a litlle extreme with PLato's name use, but in developing a heirarcheal thinking of that "ray of creation," I was always more impressed with how one may see the "elemental discernation of reality" in such photonic expressions and spectrum analysis, that matter based defintions were somehow holding the mind to matter based thinking. I did not want to be constricted by this. By emotions either. By mental impediments to clear mind and thinking.

    So by association I have been cast to the archetypal forms and shapes of thinking minds, either on one side or the other? By speaking my mind on the nature of music, that I would quickly be dispelled to crackpottery, by oneside or the other?

    “Superstring theory forms a vast and impressive mathematical framework and makes enormous claims. But where is the experimental evidence? What if your intuition tells you that this elaborate construction, shrouded by the sweet vagueness of quantum mechanics, cannot represent the complete truth? Lee Smolin is keeping his eyes open, asks sharp questions, and offers his delightful insights as a critical insider.” Gerard ‘t Hooft, Nobel Laureate, University of Utrecht


    Casting Stones

    Hey! If you can apply it to each other, then why not I, or any other, to all of the society of scientists like Peter Woit or a Sean Carroll who belong, that they could on the substance of who drives/speak about the "philosophy of life?" Speak about each other or others that would speak in regards to the concepts(pulled all the way back from "a theory")justifing the new views.

    Baby Universes



    Looking at Smolin's "baby universes" it became evident then that my views on blackholes would indeed serve as the repository of "events," that it would follow in my line of reasoning, to present "new physics." Whilst I did not know, supporting the road taken by Smolin.

    INdeed, I have always had a soft spot for his views, because of the clarity of the reasoning behind Three Roads to Quantum Gravity.

    So, where am I now in my thinking, that I should be held accountable to Susskind's views, and find that such views speak towards the photonic expressions I have about spiritual life? The roads that go beyond the basis of "Carbon based reasoning" as the predominant value of this universe? Maybe it is a "cycle in time" of this universe that the "laws in the octave of creation" wait for new energy to be put into, "raising" the octave our thinking?

    So by where, and how, such injections in the realization, that the balance of these two thinking minds shall we be elevated to a "real value" in society? One that moves towards a spiritual development, whilst breaking the shackles of a "carbon based society?"

    Whose Societal value is now aninflationary rate which has been set by the "blackgold" of human kind's dependancies.


    MIT researchers have discovered that certain molecules can attach themselves to metallic carbon nanotubes without interfering with the nanotubes' exceptional ability to conduct electricity. At left, the high conductance state has two molecular orbitals, shown in green. Some molecules even let the nanotube switch between highly conductive, left, and poorly conductive (right, with one red molecular orbital), creating the potential for new applications. (Image courtesy of Marzari Lab)


    Shall it be freedom in computerization first, or just another means to hold society to the machinations of our dependancies, and the forever "sleeping state" we like to lay back down in, afer such "revelations" have become use too?

    So the process of discovery is precendent/predictive on the developing what we need in terms of the "information age" that we will all awaken to the truth about what?

    See:

  • BigFoot: The Anomalistic Reality?
  • Thursday, August 17, 2006

    Cyclic Universe Could Explain Cosmological Constant

    Thanks Paul for pointing this article out here some time ago.

    Physicists have proposed several theories to explain why Λ is so small. One of the most popular -- the "anthropic principle" -- states that Λ is randomly set and has very different values in different parts of the universe (figure 1). We happen to live in a rare region, or "bubble", where Λ has the value we observe. This value has allowed stars, planets and therefore life to develop. However, this theory is also unsatisfactory for many scientists because it would be better to be able to calculate Λ from first principles.


    We understand where strings reside in terms of "microseconds" and the "arrow of time?"

    Once we know that there is one de Sitter solution, it is easy to find many more of them by just changing the values of the fluxes. Sujay Ashok and Michael Douglas of Rutgers University have recently estimated the number of different solutions to be at least 10100, which indicates an extremely rich landscape with many mountains, valleys, oceans and even volcanoes. Each minimum-energy point represents a different universe, and the height of that point is the value of the cosmological constant for that universe. Viewing the solution this way, the probability that one of these universes has a cosmological constant that is as small as is indicated by current experiments is actually non-zero.





    Hmmmm..... remember Higgins?

    Monday, June 12, 2006

    Harmonics will Color Your World?



    If you are a active participator of the very world around you, how is it, the makeup of high energy particle creations could not have included the standard model make up "harmonically described" does it not also apply to our "very thinking and conscious mind?" :)

    The Landscape “avant la lettre” by A.N. Schellekens

    The lowest harmonics correspond to the particles of the Standard Model, plus perhaps a few new particles. The higher harmonics correspond to an infinite series of particles that we can never observe, unless we can build a Planck Energy accelerator


    So of course the very basis of the thinking was drawn in my mind to the very subject enlisted by the minds of our predeccessors, to wonder, how this associative function could have ever been at the basis of how we may look at the World?

    Lee Smolin:
    In case it is not obvious, let me emphasize that harmonic oscillators are not relevent here, and can play no role in a background independent quantum theory, precisely because the division of a field into harmonic modes requires a fixed background metric. Thus, the physics of the problem REQUIRES an alternative quantization


    Of course it is never easy for me to understand what is going on while we have the issues of the background, versus, the non background, and this brings up the ole debates about positions and adoptives stances scientists have taken in regards to the "duality" of science's "quantum gravity" issues?



    Do I have a complete grasp of it. Absolutely not, while it forces me back to the issues, as to what is the basis of this "difference of opinion?"

    THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE


    Leonnard Susskind and Lee Smolin


    While this is a conversation written by physicists for physicists, it should nonetheless be of interest for Edge readers as it's in the context of previous Edge features with the authors, it's instructive as to how science is done, and it's a debate that clarifies, not detracts.

    So by historically looking back, this is a reminder, about the ways in which science people are still looking at things, while holding their positions of thought today?

    SEan's meeting at PI, is a very interesting one becuase what it does is take the teacher and student scenario, and manifests the circumstance of clarification as to positions, while providing for a intuitive surge to present itself in the minds of it's participnats.

    So this debate then was held and it's relationship rememebered within this blog as to the basis of determination, about how we see the universe and all that is in it.

    Lee Smolin:

    The aim of this paper is to explain carefully the arguments behind the assertion that the correct quantum theory of gravity must be background independent. We begin by recounting how the debate over whether quantum gravity must be background independent is a continuation of a long-standing argument in the history of physics and philosophy over whether space and time are relational or absolute. This leads to a careful statement of what physicists mean when we speak of background independence. Given this we can characterize the precise sense in which general relativity is a background independent theory. The leading background independent approaches to quantum gravity are then discussed, including causal set models, loop quantum gravity and dynamical triangulations and their main achievements are summarized along with the problems that remain open. Some first attempts to cast string/M theory into a background independent formulation are also mentioned.

    The relational/absolute debate has implications also for other issues such as unification and how the parameters of the standard models of physics and cosmology are to be explained. The recent issues concerning the string theory landscape are reviewed and it is argued that they can only be resolved within the context of a background independent formulation. Finally, we review some recent proposals to make quantum theory more relational.


    So if someone saids that space is empty, I have a really hard time with it.

    See:

  • Quantum Harmonic Oscillator
  • Saturday, January 14, 2006

    Wolfram's Ring Tone

    What makes this a little bit, well more then a bit interesting is the evaluation you might try to assign reality of the unseen. IN Mendeelev's table, I like to think in a different way, and if one held the Riemann hypothesis up for grabs, what said that any elemental consideration would have been derived from some Probabilistic evaluated state, not to have formed into views with which all nature might have embued itself?

    Lubos Motl:
    If you're interested in the more precise isomorphisms between the cellular automata and the anthropic principle, there is a cute analogy invented by Nima that looks as follows: the negative cosmological constant is mapped to the automata that die out (big crunch) while the large positive cosmological constant is mapped to the trivial (solvable) automata - and the nontrivial automata that don't die out represent the anthropically allowed window for the cosmological constant. :-)


    You need a background for this, about how such perceptions could have arisen from the very nature that all things, will continue to vibrate even in a empty space.The quantum harmonic oscillator would have something to say to this, and if held to the very nature of flat spacetime, where would this be stopped?

    Wolfram's Theory of Everything


    So such expansions to the entropically large valuation of all that is in materiality, had to come from some kind of "soup of thnking" that rests itself from all the myriad forms that could have been emitted? So our thnking is "colored" then from musical interludes analogistically based. But indeed, how did you get there and you have this strict regimentation to follow in the probabilitic valution that the Pascal triangle would have surmounted, when thinking of Wolfram's work.

    Plato:
    How do such things make there way into reality and these prime numbers as signatures of the atoms and ways in which they would relate themself to this elemental table for viewing, and something then shifts in my perception. I don't know why? :)


    How can you not help but think in new ways, once your given perspective about the ways we have always done things. A Serpinski fractoriallization about the nature of the world in a myriad of ways, and the probabilistic valuation about events in the unseen. How could they ever be captured?

    Sunday, January 30, 2005

    Civilizations Within the Cosmo

    In the recent article ‘Conflict between anthropic reasoning and observation’ (gr-qc/0303070) Ken D. Olum, using some inflation-based ideas and the anthropic premise that we should be typical among all intelligent observers in the Universe, arrives at the puzzling conclusion that ‘we should find ourselves in a large civilization (of galactic size) where most observers should be, while in fact we do not’. In this note we discuss the intriguing possibility whether we could be in fact immersed in a large civilization without being aware of it. Our conclusion is that this possibility cannot be ruled out provided two conditions are met, that we call the Subanthropic Principle and the Undetectability Conjecture. The Subanthropic Principle states that we are not typical among the intelligent observers from the Universe. Typical civilizations of typical galaxies would be hundreds of thousands, or millions, of years more evolved than ours and, consequently, typical intelligent observers would be orders of magnitude more intelligent than us. The Undetectability Conjecture states that, generically, all advanced civilizations camouflage their planets for security reasons, so that no signal of civilization can be detected by external observers, who would only obtain distorted data for disuasion purposes. These conditions predict also a low probability of success for the SETI project. We also argue that it is brane worlds, and not inflation, what dramatically could aggravate the ‘missing-alien’ problem pointed out first in the fifties by Enrico Fermi. August 2003



    I know some people have to contend with the racial slurs of Martian ancestory, but really:)We are not alone?

    In such a delightful mood, what has string theory spawned of itself? IMagine, the mathematics that could arise?



    So lets say we are in the moment.:)Lets say, that the very existance of the dimenisonal attributes from our early universe arises from the planck epoch to now, are right here as of this moment. This would mean, that time, as measured, would speak to this dimensional significance, and would reveal that the minds capabilities are far removed from such emotive sufferings of a emotive being from Mars. The intellect is a finer color of yellow:)

    String Theory, Universal Mind, and the Paranormal *



    Brian D. Josephson
    Department of Physics, University of Cambridge


    A model consistent with string theory is proposed for so-called paranormal phenomena such as extra-sensory perception (ESP). Our mathematical skills are assumed to derive from a special ‘mental vacuum state’, whose origin is explained on the basis of anthropic and biological arguments, taking into account the need for the informational processes associated with such a state to be of a life-supporting character. ESP is then explained in terms of shared ‘thought bubbles’ generated by the participants out of the mental vacuum state. The paper concludes with a critique of arguments sometimes made claiming to ‘rule out’ the possible existence of paranormal phenomena.


    So do you See how the math of this geometry/topology must arise?

    So you thought backtracking and th eissues therein were finished?. Well I could help but find that those who were disseting about Josephson, were also complaining about the same thing? You just can't win.

    See:

  • ArchveFreedom