Showing posts with label False Vacuum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label False Vacuum. 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:

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

It's Neither World, not Nether

Netherworld is often used as a synonym for Underworld.

Okay this may seem like a strange title, but believe me when I say how fascinating that such dynamics in meeting "each other: will allow something to "pop" right out of existence.

Underworld is a region in some religions and in mythologies which is thought to be under the surface of the earth.[1] It could be a place where the souls of the recently departed go, and, in some traditions, it is identified with Hell or the realm of death. In other traditions, however, such as animistic traditions, it could be seen as the place where life appears to have originated from (such as plant life, water, etc.) and a place to which life must return at life's end, with no negative undertones.

I mean I am not quite sure how this post must materialize, to conclude "non-existence" until it is clear, that such dynamics  will allow such a thing to happen, that one could say indeed,  they have completed their journey.

Now can I say that this is the process of the universe,  I can't be sure.I know that in the "mediation process" for concluding the experience,  such an experience has to come undone. Again this is such a strange thing in my mind that I had to say that "I was the experience" until such a time, that going along with other things in sameness of dynamics, that it was hard at first to see this dynamics in play as being apart from it.  I could actually only say enough of this experience to concluded  the realization of coming undone. Hmm...

To solidify this until understanding, I relived these things until I saw the last of the tension ebb away to allow  "a tension" to become undone. As if such tension "had to exist" until the very bubble that harbored and allowed all of the world of our expediency no longer supported such a viable option as that bubble.

I know this is not such a cute analogy but to get to the essence of the story then it has to be understood that underneath "this experience"  is a dynamcial revelation of sorts that hides the equation of such an experience?

You should know then that I see this very schematics of the world as having this nature to it that we may describe reality as something closer to the definition of it's very existence and that such a attempt at describing nature was to get to the very end of what begins? Imagine arriving at the juxtaposition of such a point?

How are We to Contained Experience?

In mathematics, the Klein bottle ([klaɪ̯n]) is a non-orientable surface, informally, a surface (a two-dimensional manifold) with no identifiable "inner" and "outer" sides. Other related non-orientable objects include the Möbius strip and the real projective plane. Whereas a Möbius strip is a two-dimensional surface with boundary, a Klein bottle has no boundary. (For comparison, a sphere is an orientable surface with no boundary.)
By adding a fourth dimension to the three dimensional space, the self-intersection can be eliminated. Gently push a piece of the tube containing the intersection out of the original three dimensional space. A useful analogy is to consider a self-intersecting curve on the plane; self-intersections can be eliminated by lifting one strand off the plane.
This immersion is useful for visualizing many properties of the Klein bottle. For example, the Klein bottle has no boundary, where the surface stops abruptly, and it is non-orientable, as reflected in the one-sidedness of the immersion.

The geometry was revealing as I tried to encapsulate this point, so as to see where such a description fell away from all that we can contain of the world. That we can truly say we had indeed let go. To imagine then that one's grip on things became ever tighter, while wishing to let the strength of this while becoming ever stronger to fall away.

"While Gassner was watching television, the natural motion of the Earth must have carried him through a small non-orientable pocket of the universe," said Boris Harkov, a mathematician at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. "That's the only reasonable explanation."

One way to test the orientation of the universe is to hurl a right-handed glove into the air and see if it falls back to Earth as a left-handed glove--if it does, the universe must be non-orientable. Since Gassner's announcement, physicists have been carrying out such experiments, both outdoors and in Gassner's TV room, but so far all tests have come back negative. Still, many researchers are optimistic. "I'm confident that the glove will flip soon," said Chen Xiang, an experimental physicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York. The Klarreich Occasionally


Ultimate realization that what is negative is a positive toward completion.That is how one might define the whole perspective of validation of no longer being negative?

As if one wold realize that such a tension revealed in the Tao, no longer existed in the picture as a demonstration of the Tao now gone.
Now, such a object seemed part of the experience,  as to the unfolding, yet in my inadequate understanding how could such a thing be taken down to such a point as to say it no longer existed. How can I say say such a geometry was part of that process while I struggle to define such an action as falling away or reducing it to such a point of nothing?

It's enough then that one sees "around that point"  that the ultimate quest envisions such  an "undoing" that we see where the relevance of such a tension can and should no longer exist?

The Experience Most Fitting then ?

As I relayed earlier I experience many things until I understood this undoing, that such reason then to awareness of "what should be" was capsulized in only one example. How shall I say it then that I understood all that befell me to dissolution to show that such a demonstration was complete. I would still be here? That such an equation of resistance could have been imparted not only in the equation, but in the telling of the experience too?

While I show by experience such an example it should be taken that in this example I have changed the name of the person in order to protect our association. Shall I be so forthcoming that only the "object of relation" shall be the only thing identifiable  so as to know that this association is very real to me, and only to me by that person's identification as an experience that is real? Aw....well anyway "more then one" for sure, as to the way in which I use that experience to demonstrate.

It all began, as I noticed a tension in his voice, as he slipped into the realization of something that had happen to him earlier in that day. I was taken to a "good observation point" so that I might admit to seeing what he was seeing.  As hard as I looked at first I could not tell what he was so upset about that I tried ever harder  to see, that slowly I understood then what he was pointing at. Why such a tension could exist in him and his voice, that such a rectification and adjustment was needed in order to make this right.

As I relay this situation it was apparent at the time of such a demonstration, as to a example that this situation popped up,  as such a reason to be demonstrated that to make it right, had to be the undoing of what made it wrong you see. To make the point ever driven home for realization was to demonstrate that such undoing had to rectify the situation of where it began, so of course,  all actions taken to get it fixed. Could it have ever been undone?

Well as if I understood why such an experience came frothing to the surface of awareness I thought to conclude this example by what I saw, that it took me by realization that "in turning" to back up, a hand imprint in oil was left on the back of the seat in order for the person to complete the job. A "new point of tension" by not washing their hands, or not covering  pristine upholstery that was just purchased, was created.

All of this has to be undone in order for one to say that this experience has popped out of existence you see?

That was how such a demonstration was shown to be reasonable in my mind for such an equation to manifest such a description about that experience that I could say that it was reasonable to me that I had understood.

Was it a good example rests on you to be sure.

***
Physically, the effect can be interpreted as an object moving from the "false vacuum" (where = 0) to the more stable "true vacuum" (where = v). Gravitationally, it is similar to the more familiar case of moving from the hilltop to the valley. In the case of Higgs field, the transformation is accompanied with a "phase change", which endows mass to some of the particles

"Quantum Field Theory

Quantum Vacuum:

In classical physics, empty space is called the vacuum. The classical vacuum is utterly featureless. However, in quantum theory, the vacuum is a much more complex entity. The uncertainty principle allows virtual particles (each corresponding to a quantum field) continually materialize out of the vacuum, propagate for a short time and then vanish. " http://universe-review.ca/R15-12-QFT.htm#vacuum

"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." http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/public/qg_qc.html

Monday, November 12, 2007

Where Spacetime is flat?

......A Condensative Result exists. Where "energy concentrates" and expresses outward.

I mean if I were to put on my eyeglasses, and these glasses were given to a way of seeing this universe, why not look at the whole universe bathed in such spacetime fabric?

This a opportunity to get "two birds" with one stone?

I was thinking of Garrett's E8 Theory article and Stefan's here.

On March 31, 2006 the high-resolution gravity field model EIGEN-GL04C has been released. This model is a combination of GRACE and LAGEOS mission plus 0.5 x 0.5 degrees gravimetry and altimetry surface data and is complete to degree and order 360 in terms of spherical harmonic coefficients.

High-resolution combination gravity models are essential for all applications where a precise knowledge of the static gravity potential and its gradients is needed in the medium and short wavelength spectrum. Typical examples are precise orbit determination of geodetic and altimeter satellites or the study of the Earth's crust and mantle mass distribution.

But, various geodetic and altimeter applications request also a pure satellite-only gravity model. As an example, the ocean dynamic topography and the derived geostrophic surface currents, both derived from altimeter measurements and an oceanic geoid, would be strongly correlated with the mean sea surface height model used to derive terrestrial gravity data for the combination model.

Therefore, the satellite-only part of EIGEN-GL04C is provided here as EIGEN-GL04S1. The contributing GRACE and Lageos data are already described in the EIGEN-GL04C description. The satellite-only model has been derived from EIGEN-GL04C by reduction of the terrestrial normal equation system and is complete up to degree and order 150.


How many really understand/see the production of gravitational waves in regards to Taylor and Hulse?

To see Stefan's correlation in terms of "wave production" is a dynamical quality to what is still be experimentally looked for by LIGO?

As scientists, do you know this?

6:41 AM, November 11, 2007
See here

Thus the binary pulsar PSR1913+16 provides a powerful test of the predictions of the behavior of time perceived by a distant observer according to Einstein's Theory of Relativity.


Since we know the theory of Relativity is about Gravity, then how is it the applications can be extended to the way we see "anew" in our world?

A sphere, our earth, not so round anymore.

Uncle has tried to correct me on "isostatic adjustment."

Derek Sears, professor of cosmochemistry at the University of Arkansas, explains. See here

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

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


Do not have time to follow up at this moment.

7:02 AM, November 11, 2007
.....and here.


In context of the post and differences, I may not have pointed to the substance of the post, yet I would have dealt with my problem in seeing.

In general terms, gravitational waves are radiated by objects whose motion involves acceleration, provided that the motion is not perfectly spherically symmetric (like a spinning, expanding or contracting sphere) or cylindrically symmetric (like a spinning disk).

A simple example is the spinning dumbbell. Set upon one end, so that one side of the dumbell is on the ground and the other end is pointing up, the dumbbell will not radiate when it spins around its vertical axis but will radiate if it tumbles end-over-end. The heavier the dumbbell, and the faster it tumbles, the greater is the gravitational radiation it will give off. If we imagine an extreme case in which the two weights of the dumbbell are massive stars like neutron stars or black holes, orbiting each other quickly, then significant amounts of gravitational radiation would be given off.


Given the context of the "whole universe" what is actually pervading, if one did not include gravity?



So singularities are pointing to the beginning(i), yet, we do not know if we should just say, the Big Bang, because, one would had to have calculated the energy used and where did it come from "previous" to manifest?

So some will have this philosophical position about "nothing(?)," and "everything as already existing."

Wherever there are no gravitational waves the space time is flat. One would have to define these two variances. One from understanding the relation to "radiation" and the other "perfectly spherically symmetric."

Monday, April 02, 2007

Blackhole Horizon, "as a Hill?"


Physically, the effect can be interpreted as an object moving from the "false vacuum" (where = 0) to the more stable "true vacuum" (where = v). Gravitationally, it is similar to the more familiar case of moving from the hilltop to the valley. In the case of Higgs field, the transformation is accompanied with a "phase change", which endows mass to some of the particles.
See Bubble Nucleation

You know I have these thoughts about the string landscape. No where do I find a conversation ongoing that speaks to this.

I am directing our views back to the origins of the universe so that while the geometrics of Smolin's is speaking to what manifests in our universe, the propagation there holds a vast difference to what is being implied in the geometrical topology to other possible expressions asking for clarification "in tunnneling" with the string theory landscape

With regards to the matrimonial issues of the science and quantum gravity, any perspectives with differing views would help elucidate the problems. So one may help indicate "the network" to which each is thinking and thus reveal the attributes encoded in that marriage. This is a well balanced approach to facing the future in regards to science in my view? :)

Hurricane tree © by Jocke Berglund See " A tree in the forest"

Without continuing debate one may come to a dead end, whilst the "opening to diversity" had already been implied in quantum gravity research. Which part of the elephant are you grabbing on too?

Plato:
I know most have moved on.

String Theory Landscape

Quantum Effect, however allow a manifold to change state abruptly at some point-to tunnel through the intervening ridge to a nearby lower valley.


See here

AS a layman I needed to understand the differences of String theory Landscape and Fitness landscape? Are others having the same problem?

Fitness landscape

In evolutionary biology, fitness landscapes or adaptive landscapes are used to visualize the relationship between genotypes (or phenotypes) and reproductive success. It is assumed that every genotype has a well defined replication rate (often referred to as fitness). This fitness is the “height” of the landscape.


See here

Always still a puzzle to me. :) Thanks for your patience.


[Published in: Chains of Affection: The Structure of Adolescent Romantic and Sexual Networks, Bearman, Moody and Stovel, American Journal of Sociology, 110, 1 (July 2004) 44-91.] See "Sexual Network."

It was important that I distinguish between positions currently adopt by the String community and what is proposed in argument by Lee Smolin's perception? You had to know that regardless of the views extolled by each of them, they must each have some "geometrical basis" that allows us to understand what the "bubble nucleation" is talking about. The false vacuum and it's movement to the true.

You had to identify the mechanism used here to extol the points being made.

Some may have designs of networks that speak to the propagation of what this Fitness landscape is about, and people would not be all the wiser if they had understood the geometrical inclination described in the quote above placed at Clifford's ongoing conflict of representation about string theory to have it further announced at Cosmic Variance as String Theory loosing some kind of battle?

Using Boltzman's brain as a recall of what is happening in the blackhole is part of the discussion I had been trying to move forward without any help from those that should be standing front and centre, regarding their respective fields. Why I have hung around Clifford's continued efforts to answer this supposed Conflict? In face of proponents who would like to bury string theory for what ever reason.

I have to include this post so that you understand the relationship of

If one cannot see "the mechanism being used" then of course it won't make sense.

String Theory Landscape

Quantum Effect, however allow a manifold to change state abruptly at some point-to tunnel through the intervening ridge to a nearby lower valley.

Some maybe happy with the propagation of the species :) but one would have to draw their attention to the geometrical basis of these two differing views on the landscape brought forward?

I am invoking "Boltzmann's brain" here. :) While it may ensue from "first principles" I am still referring to quantum gravity in both regards.

If this is not done, then the debate will continue, "in the land of babble" and "Pink Elephants." Us lay people are not happy about this.
See here for link.

So without identifying the "physics involved" and the "geometrical basis" what use is there to continue the debate while it had been thought that the layman were disrupting the process while the supposed educational level was being somehow more responsible?

It required that we indentify the markers from which to progress and in doing this, one then gets a fothold on the ensuing debate about string theory landscape versus Smolin's Fitness landscape? Hope I got this right?

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.

Friday, February 16, 2007

The Multiverse is like a....Flower?

Alexander Vilenkin
The implications of inflation are particularly important in the context of the landscape of string theory. One of the leading researchers studying how inflationary cosmology evolves through the landscape is Alex Vilenkin, a theoretical physicist at Tufts who has been working in the field of cosmology for 25 years and is a pioneer in introducing the ideas of eternal inflation and quantum creation of the universe from nothing. Here he sets forth his ideas of how the set of theories which began with Guth's inflationary scenario are playing out.


This post on the Multiverse of mine, may be an "psychological interpretation" here that I would like to bring forward. This may be distasteful for people of science. Please bear with me as I try to explain myself, and not sanction me to a site that has issues with "ten dimensions and and quantum tunnelling?":)

The Flower as a Universe in Expression

So I will open the above with an example of one of the flowers done up with regards to Mandalic interpretations. This has been part of my research to understand the "individuality of each persons expression" from the inside out. As if, one understood the "liminocentric structure" develop from the schematic of the "circle with a point" in it, "to a point" with a boundary condition that is contained, as an equation of E=mc2.

AS well the student here is learning to give credence to a "way of enlightenment" that foreshadows what can exist as "this schematic mathematical diagram," could find itself looking quite nicely in such a expression as that of a flower.

"Out of Nothing" Came Art and Science?

But even empty space has faint traces of energy that fluctuate on the subatomic scale. As suggested previously by Jaume Garriga of Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona and Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, these fluctuations can generate their own big bangs in tiny areas of the universe, widely separated in time and space. Carroll and Chen extend this idea in dramatic fashion, suggesting that inflation could start “in reverse” in the distant past of our universe, so that time could appear to run backwards (from our perspective) to observers far in our past.


I think one can be detracted by good pictures as to the originality of how we might see the universe in expression. So "without further explanation" we might say yes indeed they are good pictures of flowers without understanding the inheritance of the explanation forth coming.

So the idea here is not to be judgemental of the "book by it's cover" until one has considered the explanation that is forthcoming. As one weights what the expression of any universe can mean, while within it, there are evidences for the possibilities of what exists as our own universe, was granted a design, as one might grant each galaxy in expression?

Take an event within the colliders and tell how each will react according to the energies used?


MARIO MARKUS, Max Planck Inst., Dortmund
This first issue of the journal became a "meeting place" of an international group of authors, representing five continents. Although the papers give reliable information about the authors, we add here some brief "informal" notes on all of them:


I may have been attracted to this one for consideration by implicating the "music of the spheres" in my previous comments so however words are transported back and forth between scientists, or "the insinuation" of JoAnne of Cosmic Variance has for it, I cannot help the way I see.:)

OKay now. On to the explanation, as I have learnt to understand it, and then, what ever fate I have assigned to me and this becomes the way of it for me? Cracked flower pot and all.

Bubble Nucleation

During a first-order phase transition, the matter fields get trapped in a `false vacuum' state from which they can only escape by nucleating bubbles of the new phase, that is, the `true vacuum' state. See here for correlating Post.

Now is it enough that I identify the "source of such expressions" to advance the "geometrical inherent of form" as a universe in expression? So where did this design come from. How could anything issue from such "chaos implied in all the possibilities" that we might have the universe we did in this one?

Physically, the effect can be interpreted as an object moving from the "false vacuum" (where = 0) to the more stable "true vacuum" (where = v). Gravitationally, it is similar to the more familiar case of moving from the hilltop to the valley. In the case of Higgs field, the transformation is accompanied with a "phase change", which endows mass to some of the particles.




So by looking at the picture below you get this sense of why the "sombrero as a hat" serves us well to explain the nature of gravitational considerations while this "collapse of the sphere" can produce all kinds of models of geometrical expressions, as a Calabi Yau?



The "landscape" has been something of a issue, as I have travelled through the last couple of years, watching scientists go back and forth in debate. They have their reasons why of course.

I will not assign "a label" although I use them here in this blog "to categorize the times that I have ventured onto a particular subject." I will not succumb to "any categories" that insinuate that "one group of scientists belong to let's say the "Templeton Foundation" and thusly criticize them, as being insignificant and deluded. "Founding a movement" to change society other then, what society wants itself to become.

So by characterization I have learnt to not hold any woman or man to the "fate of character alone," or the "choices they make." But to see the basis of science is continually being adhered to on a level of "correlation of cognition." Given, the experiment and facts, what does one conclude to do while they venture forward? What do they pull toward them, as they theorize about the science?

How is their philosophy imbued them to speak, while there is this underlying mathematical basis to the world? Is it all "flowery or drawn to the arts" that it detracts from the science? Are there not ways that art helps science visualize what has come from their thought processes?

So Tegmark saids,"the universe is not a bagel?" And we have all these ideas about the "shape of the universe." Cosmology likes em large, while the Calabi Yau-ist like it small? Okay, not small, but descriptively unique?

Sunday, October 29, 2006

The Higg's Boson and Memory?

While some like chocolate bars and the bubble nature of candy, some also like the molasses and ice cream? :)


If Plato Had thought "the new born" was not really such a "blank slate" then what did he mean exactly? If we could remember, "in what form" would these memories have manifested?

The origins of thought would have found that what existed before, had to make it's way into what we are doing today? So is it really "lost" since we cannot and do not remember what was before? Or, is it possible to remember?

Not many can see in this abstract way, or have considered how a photon might have traveled? Sure they have understood satellites and the travel through space, but have they consider this in context of CSL lensing? Sean put up a link yesterday that had me seeing how such a travel over distance might have had some photon's strange journies in context of such lensings.


So how does this lump of clay ever take with it all that was before. Is it just a slight shift in our tonal? What was "not apparent before" is now very much a a part of our views of nature now. Before, it was "very pleasing," and now, it is "still very pleasing" that our cosmological views have been extended some how? :)

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.


Of course we always look for directions as to which way we'll have to look for things to understand just what our perceptions reveal and what is the basis for our thoughts as to the nature of the universe?

For example, theory says that Higgs particles are matter particles, but in most respects the Higgs behaves more like a new force than like a particle. How can this be? In truth, the Higgs is neither matter nor force; the Higgs is just different.


So it is never easy for me to follow from one thought to the next.

Imagine, the "molasses" here for a minute. What gives mass it's shape while we cannot discern the very beginning as an asymmetrical valuation? Based on the notion, that there was a simpler time entropically, how do we know what is discretely measured?

Why the discrete measure and it's shape?



New measurements of top quark mass at Fermilab have revised estimates for the mass of the Higgs boson.
Scientists believe that the Higgs boson, named for Scottish physicist Peter Higgs, who first theorized its existence in 1964, is responsible for particle mass, the amount of matter in a particle. According to the theory, a particle acquires mass through its interaction with the Higgs field, which is believed to pervade all of space and has been compared to molasses that sticks to any particle rolling through it. The Higgs field would be carried by Higgs bosons, just as the electromagnetic field is carried by photons.

"In the Standard Model, the Higgs boson mass is correlated with top quark mass," says Madaras, "so an improved measurement of the top quark mass gives more information about the possible value of the Higgs boson mass."

According to the Standard Model, at the beginning of the universe there were six different types of quarks. Top quarks exist only for an instant before decaying into a bottom quark and a W boson, which means those created at the birth of the universe are long gone. However, at Fermilab's Tevatron, the most powerful collider in the world, collisions between billions of protons and antiprotons yield an occasional top quark. Despite their brief appearances, these top quarks can be detected and characterized by the D-Zero and CDF experiments.


So yes there are these experiments that lead us to think about how the universe came into being? All these things that we see in the universe, are they so very different from every other point in space. How is it's particle nature revealed and we have gained much from discerning the quantum dynamically nature of what, "just is."

What just "is?"

Physically, the effect can be interpreted as an object moving from the "false vacuum" (where = 0) to the more stable "true vacuum" (where = v). Gravitationally, it is similar to the more familiar case of moving from the hilltop to the valley. In the case of Higgs field, the transformation is accompanied with a "phase change", which endows mass to some of the particles.


I mean it's vague to me that such a memory could have been transferred to other things. The Universe has become very large, and entropically complex? Our universe of discrete things, have become complex in discretized values. How would we have ever seen the "purity of thought manifest" if we did not delve ever deeper into the nature of things?

In 2000 the same analogy was used to establish the robustness of the spectrum of primordial density fluctuations in inflationary models. This analogy is currently stimulating research for experimenting Hawking radiation. Finally it could also be a useful guide for going beyond the semi-classical description of black hole evaporation.

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Saturday, July 29, 2006

What is the False Vacuum?



Quantum Field Theory

Quantum Vacuum:
In classical physics, empty space is called the vacuum. The classical vacuum is utterly featureless. However, in quantum theory, the vacuum is a much more complex entity. The uncertainty principle allows virtual particles (each corresponding to a quantum field) continually materialize out of the vacuum, propagate for a short time and then vanish. These zero-point vibrations mean that there is a zero-point energy associated with any quantum field. Since there are an infinite number of harmonic oscillators per unit volume, the total zero-point energy density is, in fact, infinite. The process of renormalization is usually implemented to yield a zero energy density for the standard quantum vacuum, which is defined as no excitation of field quanta, i.e., no real particles are present. In other word, the quantum vacuum is at a state of minimum energy - the ground state.


You have to be able to envision this movement in what our universe is doing. What is WMAP saying? Other events say what, in the node/anti-nodal?

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;


The "quantum harmonic oscillator" and "zero point as a ground state, are the basis of my thinking. :)Energy densities. I needed a way in which to see these events unfolding in the universe. Why I look at WMAPing very seriously. Why I looked at the chaldni plate very early on.

Physically, the effect can be interpreted as an object moving from the "false vacuum" (where = 0) to the more stable "true vacuum" (where = v). Gravitationally, it is similar to the more familiar case of moving from the hilltop to the valley. In the case of Higgs field, the transformation is accompanied with a "phase change", which endows mass to some of the particles


If you look at things in this way I have covered a lot of ground work in terms of what the basis of this universe is? "Nothing," is a extremely hard thing for me to accept when I accept the quantum harmonic oscillator, as the basis of my thinking. I had to be able to describe what I was seeing. So "sound" in analogy became a very important aspect of my research. Became discriptive of what Higgin's the graviton is doing?

If you sprinkle fine sand uniformly over a drumhead and then make it vibrate, the grains of sand will collect in characteristic spots and figures, called Chladni patterns. These patterns reveal much information about the size and the shape of the drum and the elasticity of its membrane. In particular, the distribution of spots depends not only on the way the drum vibrated initially but also on the global shape of the drum, because the waves will be reflected differently according to whether the edge of the drumhead is a circle, an ellipse, a square, or some other shape.

In cosmology, the early Universe was crossed by real acoustic waves generated soon after Big Bang. Such vibrations left their imprints 300 000 years later as tiny density fluctuations in the primordial plasma. Hot and cold spots in the present-day 2.7 K CMB radiation reveal those density fluctuations. Thus the CMB temperature fluctuations look like Chaldni patterns resulting from a complicated three-dimensional drumhead that


String theory is only "topologically equivalent" to the shape and values of those events microscopically/macroscopically at a certain plac einthe unfolding universe? I learnt that the energy densities flunctuations, would give meaning to the place dynamically and geometrically speaking, to the place in time, that is unfolding. What evidence do you have for that if "Higgin's" is strong in some event places and not in others? :)

The star Eta Carina is ejecting a pair of huge lobes that form a "propeller" shape. Jet-like structures are emanating from the center (or "waist"), where the star (quite small on this scale) is located.


Yes, there are many event shapes and they are diverse. But they happen within context of a "larger false vacuum" scenario as I am explaining it, while they make their way to what is "True?"

I had to "go further" then the microseconds, strings inhibit?

The plates can be made visible by mounting a mirror behind the row of plates, angled so that the top of the plates are visible to the audience (same idea as in Polarization by Scattering). Create the optimum angle for the front rows, as the back rows will be looking down on the plates anyway. Make sure the cello bow is nice and tactile by treating it with rosin before the performance. Sprinkle the sand on the plates so that it forms an even cover. Don't overdo the amount.

Friday, May 19, 2006

Writing Your Story of Creation?

"No container is available, and the vaporization must occur in vacuum." Wozniak


With all that energy concentrated in a space about the size of an atomic nucleus, the colliding ions, for a tiny fraction of a second, will reach a temperature one hundred thousand times hotter than the core of the sun - hot enough to "melt" the ions into their component quarks and gluons. By studying the data from millions of these high-energy collisions, RHIC scientists will be able to gather definitive evidence that quark-gluon plasma was formed, and begin to understand its properties.

Thousands of particles are emitted following each head-on collision. Sophisticated detectors have been constructed at four of six collision points around the ring to gather and decipher the enormous volumes of data that are recorded regarding the properties of these emitted particles. Two large detectors, PHENIX and STAR, are several stories tall. The other detectors, BRAHMS and PHOBOS, are smaller and more specialized. Scientists will be analyzing data collected by these detectors during continuous runs in the collider throughout the summer. The scientists anticipate releasing the first results from those analyses sometime at the beginning of next year.


Immediately what came to mind is the reductionist views we have about the beginnings of the universe. The picture above, came to mind. And from it, all the ideas that I had been reading about when I had engaged the topic of the universe in question.

THis is a interesting question and if you read what anyone might of surmized, how different would this simplification of the question be, if it is holding all the answers to what really happened at the start of that universe?

Lubos Motl:
The first one measures the total fraction of the multiverse volume occupied by pocket universes or vacua with the desired value of the quantities. The second one measures the expected density of intelligent life in the given type of vacuum. If defined properly, it is the product of the density of stars,


Keeping sharp on the nature of speculations.:)Well of course "timing is everything" and if one ask a question in one part of the uiverse how could it ever been related to what Lubos writes in his? Well I have to speak to that:)

So right away seeing this is a good question to ask, and based on what one had been learning as they engaged science, how consistant would this story be with what is actually been taking place in science? One guess is as good as another? Or are there simplified versions that we could pass onto our children so that they understood the fullscope of this story of creation.

Now you must remember, as a student and a older one at that, there will always be mistakes. Being granted this reprieve for a time(writing our fiction?), while we look at the question asked, what do I think? Hmmmm.... interesting question.

Schematic diagram of the collision stages in reactions between a 5 GeV hydrogen ion and a gold nucleus: in the initial stage, heat is deposited in the nucleus, accompanied by the knockout of several fast particles. The hot nucleus then thermalizes and expands, eventually undergoing a "soft explosion," or multifragmentation. During this process, the nucleus acts like a molecule that is going from the liquid to the vapor state. (Image courtsey of Vic Viola, University of Indiana.


So at the very top of this page there was a problem right away about such containment, and if I was to ask where and how would such conditions emerge for such a thing as the beginning of the universe to be known, why could I not explain it in my immediate environ, where cosmic particle collsions mimic what we are doing in our colliders?

Is this not simple enough to ask, that such a question could bring perspective not ony from the very beginning of our universe, but to have corralled it to what is happening now. These two things are very important to bring together so that we understand that creation exists in our terminologies, as if every moment has the potential to be created as it was in the very beginning of that universe.

Isn't this stance important to comprehend as I begin my story?

As I have been talking about, for so long, I wonder where it would end, that I soon learnt in mind that such a processes had to be cyclical in nature, yet, how could energy start off in place and go through all the phases to have become contained in the "possibility again" to continue this process.

So here this is another insight into the nature of my story.

One would have to have surmized the very beginning, and some might called is the sea from which all things arise and it is mythical in nature, that all life arose from this sea of possibilty?

While some will take their time to descipher the good book some wil try their hand at the "bibble interpetation Sean gives to the public for consideration." Well my story of fiction still begins with "adam and eve." I have a new version though.:)

To e- or not to e+ :)

Of course in my own artistic rendition, the shakespearean heart arose from my lips touched to ask. "To be or not to be," is not the question.



Of course I would have to give credit to Paul(not in the bible) for his early interpretation of the design shown above so as to wonder about such a procreative design to have said, "this is indeed the measure of our reality while we look back to it's beginning?"

So you needed this measure of "certainty" to ask how is it that such a beginning could have ever emerge from the "values of light" that it could contain information about our beginnings? I know it seems I may be getting too technical for the average Joe?

Based on the no boundary proposal, I picture the origin of the universe, as like the formation of bubbles of steam in boiling water. Quantum fluctuations lead to the spontaneous creation of tiny universes, out of nothing. Most of the universes collapse to nothing, but a few that reach a critical size, will expand in an inflationary manner, and will form galaxies and stars, and maybe beings like us.


So it indeed becomes really difficult to contain the very expansive nature of the universe in such a boundary condition, does it not? So you look for the basis of reality in a way that allows such travel or "tunnelling" to help push the idea I have about my story of creation. It is parts and pieces of the that exemplify our ideas about the origins of nature, to wonder, if that energy began? Where did it?


Physically, the effect can be interpreted as an object moving from the "false vacuum" (where = 0) to the more stable "true vacuum" (where = v). Gravitationally, it is similar to the more familiar case of moving from the hilltop to the valley. In the case of Higgs field, the transformation is accompanied with a "phase change", which endows mass to some of the particles.


It is very impotrant to set up the "nature of reality" as it began, yet, it is not so simple then to ask that if zeropoint had this basis of reality as well, what existed in this false vacuum, to have it exemplified the resulting information which travelled "through to the universe" as we now know it?

You had to wonder, and know that such phase changes began in the very beginning,and as the universe unfolded, to have given "all that is" a place in this timeline of expression, to have made it, to what is in the nature of the cosmo?

It did not mean that we could not find our moments and secondary showers from such a beginning, not to have traced it back and know, that this beginning point was really never so far away? They do it in the colliders. They have t account for this energy, and some of it is missing.

So containement was a problem, and with it we began to use these analogies for describing "backreaction." Oh, we have some mode of time travel here? Or, that we may have some idea about what is geometriclaly enhanced in our talks, to have actually followed the physics process?

Yes, I did that too.

I referenced tunnelling for very specific reasons, but alas, I too have to ask then that if such dissipated forces are the continued unravelling of that fluid state, then how would such information be released in the secondary shower effect?

The nature of our universe in continued expression?

That means that it left something somewhere for the false vacuum to have initiated the transferance of the original information, back, into the design of the cosmos?

I like analogies for that reason, and if some want to write fiction, while they hold other minds to the constraints applied in our reasoning of that science, then you should be prepared to suffer the consequence of what any mind like that of a Kaku, or Greene, in those extra story telling versions?

You will be targetted for all the insane things you might hence forward say. It's just somethng I noticed when I tried to go deeper into the world that science brings us.:)Scientists can indeed be unkind to each other?

See:

  • Sonofusion - star in a jar
  • Saturday, May 06, 2006

    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.

    Wednesday, March 22, 2006

    Coleman-De Luccia instanton

    IN what way could some consistent measure be thought of, that such conditions while recognized in the false vacuum, and, with conditions of high energy considerations, be realized into useful information surrounding this move to the true vacuum? It would have to be geometrically explained. Planck epoch in itself, makes this very hard to do, so you use the action of the vacuum, from false to true, to help in that realization.

    The volume of the haystack
    Lubos Motl:
    We don't have a real emotional intuition how "density" in a very-high-dimensional space should behave, but we should probably try to learn it. I feel that these (especially the de Sitter) vacua cannot be quite isolated. There are just many other vacua nearby (virtually all of them) into which one should be able to decay. KKLT only consider one Coleman-DeLuccia instanton, without an enhancement, and I feel it can't be the whole story


    The Coleman-De Luccia instanton presents opportunities, or, is the paper countering this proposal? See link below for reference to paper.

    I think one needed to understand this movement or how the false vacuum is understood, and how the true vacuum is created.

    A geometical smoothly flowing understanding that arose out of "nothing!" Without some geometrical consistancy, this idea isn't going to go away, unless someone has a reason why, and if, that paper deals with it directly?

    I remain non-judgemental about characters, and the nature people adopt. I only focus on those issues that would offer us some further ideas to exploit. To help us all push pespectve forward. While there is a facade in what the mind accumulates as the image of who we are, there is "kernels of truth" that we must seek to reference, so the knowledge base can increase, and intuitve leaps for the taking by who ever push persepctove add experimetal basis as a concluding result.

    We'll leave the dance and facades for other to design themself. We always want them to be "whole" with what ever they have accepted in life.

    Peter Woit recommends supersymmetry

    Lubos Motl:
    At any rate, quantum black holes do carry quantum information, the relevant entropy is, at least in some cases, attributable to the entanglement entropy, and the research of quantum entanglement in this context could turn out to be very fruitful which is why many of us should look at these "coincidences" more carefully. They may very well clarify the origin and mathematical details of the black hole complementarity


    The circumstance around the nature of the state where such superfluids are created, needed some method in which to move, from "one state into another"(turned inside/out)?

    If you hold the nature of the bubble universe and it's formation in mind, it does not seem so unlikely that you had the klein bottle, as some geometrical basis from which the false vacuum would direct itself into inflationary results?

    So is the paper discounting the basis of the views of Coleman-De Luccia instanton?

    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.


    Okay so we are talking about cosmological proportions here, in blackhole creation and the resulting standard model and interactions developed from the origins of this universe. Is it consistent all the way down to the planck epoch, and how would the planck epoch be described?

    One would need to see the geometrical basis of what is hapening from one state to the next. Our universe into some other new expression, or blackhole states, that rejuvenize, using geometrical dynamics of what is already existing?

    Would this run contrary to the arrow of time, by having such states within context of the whole universe? Would this not explain the susutenance need to keep the universe in the same state for a very long long time?

    Backreaction

    Do a search, under the heading of "backreaction in laval nozzle," for further references.

    Black Holes and Analogues in Two Dimensions

    Examples: acoustics in a moving fluid (“dumbholes”), BEC, Helium, slow light,


    See:

  • Why Higher Energies