Showing posts with label Omega. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Omega. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 06, 2010

Cosmic Evolution and the Powers of Ten

Many physical quantities span vast ranges of magnitude. Figures 0.1 and 0.2 use images to indicate the range of lengths and times that are of importance in physics.


Why Is The Universe Complex? Broken Symmetries, Information, Energy,  Work
Next, step: Where to asymmetric crystals and other things come from? By breaking symmetries. The universe started highly symmetric. So for assymetries to arise, those initial symmetries must have been, and even today, continue to be broken.
I want next to show that broken symmetries, absolutely natural in physics, biology, economics, cultural evolution, can arise spontaneously, and become new sources of free energy by which work can be done. But work per unit time is power hence a first step to Chaisson’s increasing power density per gram universe over time.Stuart Kauffman-

The Rise of Complexity in Nature

Cosmic Evolution: From Big Bang to Human Kind

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Tunnelling in Faster then Light

Underneath this speculation of mine is the geometrical inclination of the universe in expression. If it's "dynamical nature is revealed" what allows us to think of why this universe at this time and junction, should be flat(?) according to the time of this universe in expression?

Omega=the actual density to the critical density

If we triangulate Omega, the universe in which we are in, Omegam(mass)+ Omega(a vacuum), what position geometrically, would our universe hold from the coordinates given?

Positive energy density gives spacetime of the universe a positive curvature. A sphere? Negative curvature a region of spacetime that is negative and curved like a saddle? For time travel, and travel into the past, you need a universe that has a negative energy density.

Thus the initial idea here to follow is that the process had to have a physics relation. This is based on the understanding of anti-particle/particle, and what becomes evident in the cosmos as a closed loop process. Any variation within this context, is the idea of "blackhole anti-particle expression" based on what can be seen at the horizon?

A anti-particle can be considered as a particle moving back in time? Only massless particle can travel faster then light. Only faster then light massless particles can travel back in time? So of course, I am again thinking of the elephant process of Susskind and the closed loop process of the virtual particle/anti-particle. What comes out of it?

That's not all. The fact that space-time itself is accelerating - that is, the expansion of the universe is speeding up - also creates a horizon. Just as we could learn that an elephant lurked inside a black hole by decoding the Hawking radiation, perhaps we might learn what's beyond our cosmic horizon by decoding its emissions. How? According to Susskind, the cosmic microwave background that surrounds us might be even more important than we think. Cosmologists study this radiation because its variations tell us about the infant moments of time, but Susskind speculates that it could be a kind of Hawking radiation coming from our universe's edge. If that's the case, it might tell us something about the elephants on the other side of the universe.

So the anti-particle falls into the blackhole? How is it that I resolve this?? You can consider the anti-particle as traveling back in time. The micro perspective of the blackhole allows time travel backwards.

Getty Images
Although a 1916 paper by Ludwig Flamm from the University of Vienna [4] is sometimes cited as giving the first hint of a wormhole, "you definitely need hindsight to detect it," says Matt Visser of Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand. Einstein and Rosen were the first to take the idea seriously and to try to accomplish some physics with it, he adds. The original goal may have faded, but the Einstein-Rosen bridge still pops up occasionally as a handy solution to the pesky problem of intergalactic travel.

There are two cases in which the thoughts about faster then light particles are created and this is the part where one tries to get it right so as not to confuse themselves and others.


So "open doorways" and ideas of "tunneling" are always interesting in terms of how we might look at an area like GR in cosmology? Look for way in which such instances make them self known.

Are they applicable to the very nature of quantum perceptions that such probabilities could have emerged through them? Held to "time travel scenarios" and grabbed the history of what had already preceded us in past tense, could have been brought again forward for inspection?

Sure I am quoting myself here, just to show one of the options I am showing by example. The second of course is where I was leading too in previous posts.

So I was thinking here in context of one example in terms of the containment of the "graviton in a can" is really letting loose of the information in the collision process, as much as we like this "boundary condition" it really is not so.

Another deep quantum mystery for which physicists have no answer has to do with "tunneling" -- the bizarre ability of particles to sometimes penetrate impenetrable barriers. This effect is not only well demonstrated; it is the basis of tunnel diodes and similar devices vital to modern electronic systems.

Tunneling is based on the fact that quantum theory is statistical in nature and deals with probabilities rather than specific predictions; there is no way to know in advance when a single radioactive atom will decay, for example.

The probabilistic nature of quantum events means that if a stream of particles encounters an obstacle, most of the particles will be stopped in their tracks but a few, conveyed by probability alone, will magically appear on the other side of the barrier. The process is called "tunneling," although the word in itself explains nothing.

Chiao's group at Berkeley, Dr. Aephraim M. Steinberg at the University of Toronto and others are investigating the strange properties of tunneling, which was one of the subjects explored last month by scientists attending the Nobel Symposium on quantum physics in Sweden.

"We find," Chiao said, "that a barrier placed in the path of a tunneling particle does not slow it down. In fact, we detect particles on the other side of the barrier that have made the trip in less time than it would take the particle to traverse an equal distance without a barrier -- in other words, the tunneling speed apparently greatly exceeds the speed of light. Moreover, if you increase the thickness of the barrier the tunneling speed increases, as high as you please.

"This is another great mystery of quantum mechanics."

Of course I am looking for processes in physics that would actually demonstrate this principal of energy calculated at the very beginning of the collision process, now explained in the detector, minus the extra energy that had gone where?

This is the basis for the "Graviton in a can" example of what happens in the one scenario.

A Bose-Einstein condensate (such as superfluid liquid helium) forms for reasons that only can be explained by quantum mechanics. Bose condensates form at low temperature

Plasmas and Bose condensates

So in essence the physics process that I am identifying is shown by understanding that the "graviton production" allows that energy to be transmitted outside the process of the LHC?

This is the energy that can be calculated and left over from all the energy assumed in the very beginning of this collision process. Secondly, all energy used in this process would be in association with bulk perspective.

This now takes me to the second process of "time travel" in the LHC process. The more I tried to figure this out the basis of thought here is that Cerenkov radiation in a vacuum still is slower then speed of light, yet within the medium of ice, this is a different story. So yes there are many corrections and insight here to consider again.

The muon will travel faster than light in the ice (but of course still slower than the speed of light in vacuum), thereby producing a shock wave of light, called Cerenkov radiation. This light is detected by the photomultipliers, and the trace of the neutrinos can be reconstructed with an accuracy of a couple of degrees. Thus the direction of the incoming neutrino and hence the location of the neutrino source can be pinpointed. A simulation of a muon travelling through AMANDA is shown here (1.5 MB).

So while sleeping last night the question arose in my mind as to the location of where the "higgs field" will be produced in the LHC experiment? Here also the the thoughts about the "cross over point" that would speak to the idea here of what reveals faster then light capabilities arising from the collision process?

What are the main goals of the LHC?-
The LHC will also help us to solve the mystery of antimatter. Matter and antimatter must have been produced in the same amounts at the time of the Big Bang. From what we have observed so far, our Universe is made of only matter. Why? The LHC could provide an answer.

It was once thought that antimatter was a perfect 'reflection' of matter - that if you replaced matter with antimatter and looked at the result in a mirror, you would not be able to tell the difference. We now know that the reflection is imperfect, and this could have led to the matter-antimatter imbalance in our Universe.

The strongest limits on the amount of antimatter in our Universe come from the analysis of the diffuse cosmic gamma-rays arriving on Earth and the density fluctuations of the cosmic background radiation. If one asumes that after the Big Bang, the Universe separated somehow into different domains where either matter or antimatter was dominant, then at the boundaries there should be annihilations, producing cosmic gamma rays. In both cases the limit proposed by current theories is practically equivalent to saying that there is no antimatter in our Universe.

So we get the idea here in the collision process and from it the crossover point leaves a energy dissertation on what transpired from this condition and left the idea in my mind about the circumstances of what may have changed the the speed of the cosmos at varying times in the expansion process within our universe. So, this is where I was headed as I laid out the statement below.

Of course this information is based on 2003 data but the jest of the idea here is that in order to go to a "fast forward" the conditions had to exist previously that did not included "sterile neutrinos" and were a result of this "cross over."

So what is the jest of my thought here that I would go to great lengths here to speak about the ideas of what happens within the cosmos to change those varying times of expansion? It has to do with the Suns and the process within those suns that give the dark energy some value, in it's anti- gravity nature to align our selves and our thinking to the cosmological constant of Einstein. If we juggle the three ring circus we find that the curvature parameters can and do hold thoughts govern by the cosmological constant?

It is thus equally important to identify this "physics process" that would allow such changes in the cosmos. So that we can understand the dynamical nature that the cosmos reveals to us can and does allow aspect of its galaxies within context of the universe to increase this expansive process while we question what drives such conditions.

Monday, October 02, 2006

CP Violation

The value of non-Euclidean geometry lies in its ability to liberate us from preconceived ideas in preparation for the time when exploration of physical laws might demand some geometry other than the Euclidean. Bernhard Riemann

ON a macroscale the blackhole is a understanding of when we investigate curvature parameters with regards to the nature of our universe in spacetime. We understand this right?

What are the "entropic valuations" being recognized as we look to a earlier time of when the QGP existed and then such manifestaion in the "matters states" have exemplified such characteristics as?

Both space and spacetime can either be curved or flat.

I am going to give you a quick summation of what GR is. It is about "Gravity." Now if you hold that in mind you should not loose any time with what I am telling you.

Now, how is it that we can see the dynamcial nature of the universe, yet, we would not consider the effect of the presence of microstate blackholes in regards to such gatherings in the space, of what we call "spacetime?" What would "such gatherings" show of itself?

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."

Think about the "circle" and it's 2D view of what the blackhole is doing in 3D +time in context of many blackholes. I always refer to "one" so you can see the comparative view that I am having little success in transferring to you, in what I am seeing.

The curvature parameters are closely associated to the thermodynamic realizations. This is importnat not only on a cosmological level, but on a microstate as well.

Lubos explains that here.

There are lots of other examples what you can do to increase the number of black holes. Change the couplings so that the stars burn their fuel faster, and they will collapse into black hole faster. Reduce the gap between the Planck scale and the QCD scale, and nuclear collisions will be more likely to end up as black holes.

It is quite obvious that the change of virtually any parameter of the Standard Model (plus inflation) in the right direction (one of the two directions) will result in an increase of the number of black holes. How can you doubt such a trivial thing?

So there is something about the nature of our universe and the balance that it seeks to maintain of itself? Here we are, looking at events within the cosmo and "secular views of it's manfiestation" different then other locations within the universe. Yet not apart from it, or not indifferent to it's nature to be part of a larger picture?

Silicon Vertex Tracker. The SVT is the heart of the BABAR experiment at SLAC—in the photo, physicists are putting the finishing touches on improvements to the detector. (Photo Courtesy of Peter Ginter)
SLAC's BaBar collaboration has discovered that CP violation—an asymmetry between the behavior of matter and antimatter—exists even in a very rare class of particle decays. This result offers the most sensitive avenue yet for exploring matter-antimatter asymmetries, with implications for the future understanding of physics beyond the Standard Model.

"BaBar has proven to be a fantastic instrument for exploring the origins of matter-antimatter asymmetries, allowing us to probe with exquisite precision very rare processes related to how the early universe came to be matter dominated," said David MacFarlane, BaBar Spokesperson and Professor at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.

So here we are having been given the example of CP violation above and here?

How is it that anything could be asymmetrical? :) So you introduce anti-matter and matter?

(ambigram courtesy John Langdon)
If we could assemble all the antimatter we've ever made at CERN and annihilate it with matter, we would have enough energy to light a single electric light bulb for a few minutes.

As a observer Einstein made it clear that the observable universe has ideas attached to it. The "Pretty girl and the hot stove analogy" was compelling to those of us who recognized the values we may attach to life. "The Gravity of the situation?" How narrow our view of the world is when we feel the world is lost?

But the hope and inspiration is, that the world has a bright future when we undertsand the implications of our views. Our involvement in the "toposense of reality? We are "part and parcel" of it?

So, should we talk about the components of Heaven and Hell( my philosophical discourse on the nature of consciousness?)? You have to understand the picture and the dynamical nature this universe can say about it's entropic valuation?

While I may have understood Omega, it didn't come to the nature it is by not including a geomtrical perspective about the nature of that same universe.

That's my point. It had to arise from a earlier time and the manifestation is the matter states we are defining in correlation to the entropic valuations.

While you see these as macro-characteristics and the relation to blackhole in 3d+time, the result is, a explanation of matter states in "macrostylistic beauty" we see in the events of the cosmo.

If such inclinations to drive the energy to a ever smaller defined circle, as it gets smaller "the difference is" not so indiscernable that the events of the "particle showers" created are matter states that arise form the energy that was used.

You see?:)

The Ceiling

The deeper implications of such a thought from perspective is focused upward? Yet such perspective can be made from other positions? So some minds were flexible? Others, were just engineers? ;)

Understanding other worlds came naturally to him. Perhaps it was an inevitable consequence of being the child of Japanese Americans. His parents, though born in California, spent World War II behind barbed wire, guarded by people with machine guns: incarcerated by their own country as enemy aliens. Afterwards his father worked as a gardener, his mother a maid: two of the few jobs that were available to Japanese Americans. Kaku grew up poor, but one of the family treats was to visit the Japanese Tea Garden in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. It turned out to be the place of a childhood epiphany. Wondering in the way that only a child does, Kaku looked at the carp swimming in a weedy pond and imagined how they would not be able to conceive of other worlds. "A carp engineer would believe that was all there is; but a carp physicist would see the ripples on the surface and start thinking about unseen dimensions," Kaku told me, laying the first of many lashes on his token engineer.

The "ceiling" is the perspective of the carp, not the perspective of the "carp physicist."


  • Liminocentric Structures: Which Circle do you Belong Too?-Sunday, July 10, 2005

  • Ps: Some updates are curvature given for perspective. Think of a string, and any point on that string. What does the energy value of "that point" tell you in regards to the circle? The point on that string. It's just a way of looking at the string and the resonantial value assign along the string's length?

    Wednesday, May 17, 2006

    Instead of the Pea, What New Paradigm?


    Imagine for one moment that this is all wrapped in a bubble(universe). Our views of earth, the hills and valleys, of the gravitational perspective, as I showed of earth as "time variable measure" now brought to conceptual realization for society.

    Einstein's playful example of the hotstove, remember?

    The picture you refer belongs to ISCAP and if you "refresh" that page a couple of times, you will see a number of pictures. They are important. Especially the "Lagrange points" How this perspective is used with satellites in space travel.

    This is a very important perception that is not understood very well. I have another picture that will explain it well. I have maybe given to much to absorb here?

    Hey hey
    Do you believe that Einstein will last forever and that presently visualized elementary particles are all there are?

    What happens on a cosmological scale is indeed explanable as I have shown.

    The trouble is when we move our perception to the quantum probabilities. I surmized these things in context of how we would determined information from the horizon, yet the value of energy determinations here ask us to consider the value assigned to particle inclinations. These energy determinations are still valid within context of the conformal field theories, as the map shows of Bekenstein bound.

    At this site you will find the new black boxes and calibration samples for the LHC Olympics! See: Revolutions for Change

    For example test runs in the olympics of the LHC to be done.

    Blackhole Production

    Blackhole production of course created some concern, while it was being answered in terms of strangelet developement. This spoke to blackhole production directly. But low and behold, how would any of us considered the context of the cosmic particle collisions that go on all the time, and from it, secondary particle showers that are presented to earth as microstate blackhole production, which quickly dissipates.

    So you might have thought indeed strangelet production from microstate blackholes in terms of cosmic particle colllisions?

    But the point is learning to identfy the very beginning, and like most I thought the singualrity was like a pea, while the energy valuation and quark gluon plasma created, has some effects that we have to consider? That were counter intuitive.

    Produced tunnelling? :)

    Thus, this changes the very dynamics of constructs that are being present here, in a philsophical format for consumption by a society that had reached critical density?

    While the energy valuation here would created certain effects. How would you apply this to the sociological developement of a society that welcomes, and from it, is born new possibilities?

    Paradigmal changes perhaps?

    Mental Constructs

    How would such a definition as mental construct find it's place among our interactions?

    Would we not need some "mental construct," to say that if the processes exist and we are fundamentally part of that process, are there different ways in which to measure our valuations in relation to how we might now see earth?

    So there is this "touching" in the way you have said it at a fundamental level and then there is the touching at another level? I am justing tryng to understand it from a frame of reference, yet the idea, ideal, is much finer in it's measure? Where did it begin?

    electron wave packet repelling eachother by exchanging virtual photons

    As you know this process is also encapsulated as part of GR.

    When you engage Gauss's thinking, Gauss's coordinates, it is not without "seeing in ways" that one might not be accustomed too, that we ask, how might we treat this subject?

    Yet, you look for "the consistancy" that is thread through all the geometric incursions we send our perceptions into? So what is this consistancy?

    While we entertain these distances, quark to quark measures, how will this ocnsistancy of thought be held to "a measure" while we send perception all the way down to the reductionist levels, and find that such a fluid allows new physics and idealogical valuations to be now interpeted according to the measures enforced?

    Of course the answer is very simplistic in my books and is one uesed to maintain this consistancy, yet, we would find there is no new geometry or new physics as far as we know, from that beginning point?

    Thursday, March 16, 2006

    If it's Not a Soccer Ball, What is it?

    Timaeus concludes
    And so now we may say that our account of the universe has reached its conclusion. This world of ours has received and teems with living things, mortal and immortal. A visible living thing containing visible things, and a perciptible God, the image of the intelligible Living Thing. Its grandness, goodness, beauty and perfection are unexcelled. Our one universe, indeed, the only one of its kind, has come to be.

    WMap currently expressed, has some explaining to do. While they talk about ekroptic universe and such, such cyclical natures need some reference with which to speak, in order for such idealizations and perspective form around the information WMap has currently released.

    The fifth element, i.e., the quintessence, according to Plato was identified with the dodecahedron. He says simply "God used this solid for the whole universe, embroidering figures on it". So,I suppose it's a good thing that the right triangles comprising this quintessence are incommensurate with those of the other four elements, since we certainly wouldn't want the quintessence of the universe to start transmuting into the baser subtances contained within itself!

    Higher abstractness, in the case of leaving euclidean perspective, are part of the realization when you look at the WMAP, that is being presented. While sound implications are being implied, they are necessary if it is understood the role they will play in such analogies of a larger global pewrspectve then the one seen in how gaussian coordinates and curvatures are implied, in Omega features, and critical density.

    A Finite Dodecahedral Universe

    According to the team, who published their study in the 9 October 2003 issue of Nature, an intriguing discrepancy in the temperature fluctuations in the afterglow of the big bang can be explained by a very specific global shape of space (a "topology"). The universe could be wrapped around, a little bit like a "soccer ball", the volume of which would represent only 80% of the observable universe! (figure 1) According to the leading cosmologist George Ellis, from Cape Town University (South Africa), who comments on this work in the "News & Views" section of the same issue: "If confirmed, it is a major discovery about the nature of the universe".

    So having a greater perspective on this kind of mapping is necessary. While I reference tunneling and such, implicate bee's travelling or satelittes using pathways of least resistance, how does such states have been reached, if you did not have the perspective that is necessary in seeing how the universe is laid out geometrically?

    Scientists Get Glimpse of First Moments After Beginning of Time by DENNIS OVERBYE

    "If this holds up to the test of time, it's a real landmark," said Max Tegmark, a cosmologist and cosmic microwave expert at M.I.T. "I really feel like the universe has given up one more clue," he said.

    The quantum gravity issues implored, and speculated, have a diverse model selection with which to talk about? John Baez's view came up when I seen the model in which he choose for such understanding. Having seen the "membrane" idealizations used in qauntum gravity models, helped with the perspective that he used, but like Plato his definition fell short to me of the substructure(a discrete meaasure in bubble facets) of the cosmo that would relegated some model, to perfect our view microscopically, as well as macroscopically.

    Tegmark and others disproved this, so what is the nature of the cosmo in question, and it's shape? So having understod the idealization of flat gemetries of the universe, how could such negative features be understood as the hyperbolic understanding became part and parcel of GR in our understanding of the gravity issues?

    With the discovery of sound waves in the CMB, we have entered a new era of precision cosmology in which we can begin to talk with certainty about the origin of structure and the content of matter and energy in the universe.-Wayne Hu

    Such analogies were very important in raising our understanding of what might have been seen in the membrane ideals of how gravity could act in bubble boundaries conditions. While such faces might have been understood in such analogies of John Baez's, a spherical harmonics would have had to been much smoother in our understanding?

    Imploring the analogies and models in this respect made it much easier to see on another level, in non euclidean realities. Further then, the understanding of gaussian coordinates. You knew this was part and parcel of a larger picture understood in GR?

    The Sound of Gravitational Waves

    We can't actually hear gravational waves, even with the most sophisticated equipment, because the sounds they make are the wrong frequency for our ears to hear. This is similar in principle to the frequency of dog whistles that canines can hear, but that are too high for humans. The sounds of gravitional waves are probably too low for us to actually hear. However, the signals that scientists hope to measure with LISA and other gravitational wave detectors are best described as "sounds." If we could hear them, here are some of the possible sounds of a gravitational wave generated by the movement of a small body inspiralling into a black hole.

    So there is a culmination in my views as I now look at the new WMap presented. A greater understanding implored in geometric realization, that had to be taken down to the microscopic where quantum gravity existed, yet, the geometry used, what new math would this be? It was encapsulted in the overall understanding of cyclical natures.

    Is there such a thing, as isometrical relations of orbitals, in cosmological designs? A Classical definition of the Quantum World perhaps?

    Some patterns are telling to me of the way in which the universe, and the galaxies in which had formed, would have followed some geometrical all inclusive pattern, that we see unfolding from place to place, and assigning, specific polarization points within the view of the WMAP.

    Now, look at the map below.

    The WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe) mission is designed to determine the geometry, content, and evolution of the universe via a 13 arcminute FWHM resolution full sky map of the temperature anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation. The choice of orbit, sky-scanning strategy and instrument/spacecraft design were driven by the goals of uncorrelated pixel noise, minimal systematic errors, multifrequency observations, and accurate calibration. The skymap data products derived from the WMAP observations have 45 times the sensitivity and 33 times the angular resolution of the COBE DMR mission. The WMAP mission characteristics are summarized in the table below.

    So by using information in the Chladni plate exhibit within this site, it becomes a interesting picture when such "spectrum analysis" make themselves representable in "color" as a variation of the landscape.

    The temperature fluctuations of the Cosmic Background Radiation may be decomposed into a sum of spherical harmonics , much like the sound produced by a music instrument may be decomposed into ordinary harmonics. The "fundamental" fixes the height of the note (as for instance a 440 hertz acouctic frequency fixes the "A" of the pitch), whereas the relative amplitudes of each harmonics determine the tone quality (such as the A played by a piano differs from the A played by a harpsichord). Concerning the relic radiation, the relative amplitudes of each spherical harmonics determine the power spectrum, which is a signature of the geometry of space and of the physical conditions which prevailed at the time of CMB emission.

    But if you are really interested in the way we see the universe how would such patterns illustrate what is being shown in the WMAP. A Chladni plate perhaps as spoken in reference. I needed a model with which to work the whole geometrical picture.

    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


  • Plato's Defintion of God

  • Sound of the Landscape

  • B Field Manifestations

  • Resonance:Brownian Motion
  • Tuesday, March 07, 2006


    It wasn't just the scientific ones either, that were shaped by such analogies to future perspectives. If one demanded change in society, what roads would have been taken that all the best things in people would have been exemplified? Maybe, role models, who enshrined the greatest humanistic and ethically valuated system, in regards to the rights and dignities, of it's democratic people?

    Thomas Kuhn

    However, the incommensurability thesis is not Kuhn's only positive philosophical thesis. Kuhn himself tells us that “The paradigm as shared example is the central element of what I now take to be the most novel and least understood aspect of [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions]” (1970a, 187). Nonetheless, Kuhn failed to develop the paradigm concept in his later work beyond an early application of its semantic aspects to the explanation of incommensurability. The explanation of scientific development in terms of paradigms was not only novel but radical too, insofar as it gives a naturalistic explanation of belief-change. Naturalism was not in the early 1960s the familiar part of philosophical landscape that it has subsequently become. Kuhn's explanation contrasted with explanations in terms of rules of method (or confirmation, falsification etc.) that most philosophers of science took to be constitutive of rationality. Furthermore, the relevant disciplines (psychology, cognitive science, artificial intelligence) were either insufficiently progressed to support Kuhn's contentions concerning paradigms, or were antithetical to them (in the case of classical AI). Now that naturalism has become an accepted component of philosophy, there has recently been interest in reassessing Kuhn's work in the light of developments in the relevant sciences, many of which provide corroboration for Kuhn's claim that science is driven by relations of perceived similarity and analogy to existing problems and their solutions (Nickles 2003b, Nersessian 2003). It may yet be that a characteristically Kuhnian thesis will play a prominent part in our understanding of science.

    There is no secret that I endeavor to see differently of all that we currently see now. This would have been under the auspice of scientific validation. Because we see science expressed in a different theoretcial light, do we discard the process for what Postdiction means?

    Here in this Blog, it is by my attempting to understand the process that I have been lead to the experimental basis, of what Lubos and Nima offer for us reading about what we may find in the LHC collisions.

    At this site you will find the new black boxes and calibration samples for the LHC Olympics! See:Instead of the Pea, What New Paradigm?

    It is very complex indeed that such particle tracings would have been deducted from level of understanding that our view would have quickly changed too? Where had we been brought to now? :)

    Gluonic plasma perception holds a interesting new plateau for consideration and D Brane considerations what role do they play? Ask Peter?

    The Revolution that Didn't Happen by Steven Weinberg

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

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

    I often hear some scientists speak of the "denigration of true science" by the intrusion of philosophical perspective. Does science by it's nature not move it's perspective into the issues of morality and ethics, as well as the political process? :)

    Tuesday, December 20, 2005

    Has Speed of Light changed Recently?

    You have to remember I am not as well educated as the rest of the leaque connected at Peter Woit's site. But how could one think anything less, then what perception can contribute, as less then what the educated mind might have thought of? If it did not have the scope enlisted by others in consideration cosmology might have expressed, then we might have reduced the value of reducitonism role in how we perceive the beginning of the cosmos?

    So what Does Peter Woit say here? I am glad that the support(choir:) moved to Peter's cause for truth and enlightenment, is clarifying itself, instead of the ole rants that we had been witnessed too, in the past.

    Understanding the clear disticnctions make's it much easier now, instead of what opportunities might have been past by? Of course I understood that he is quite happy with the life given, makes it all the more reason that the value of opinion will have direction(not hidden causes). Contributions by the the opinions generated, held to a educative process that we all would like to be part of.

    Peter Woit:
    In general, what I really care about and am willing to invest time in trying to carefully understand, are new physical ideas that explain something about particle theory, or new mathematical ideas that might somehow be useful in better understanding particle theory.

    Strings /M theory moved to cosmological thinking because of where it had been?

    Life, the cosmos and everything:
    Lee Smolin stressed that it is only justifiable if one has a theory that independently predicts the existence of these universes, and that such a theory, to be scientific, must be falsifiable. He argued that most of the universes should have properties like our own and that this need not be equivalent to requiring the existence of observers.

    Smolin's own approach invoked a form of natural selection. He argued that the formation of black holes might generate new universes in which the constants are slightly mutated. In this way, after many generations, the parameter distribution will peak around those values for which black-hole formation is maximized. This proposal involves very speculative physics, since we have no understanding of how the baby universes are born. However, it has the virtue of being testable since one can calculate how many black holes would form if the parameters were different.

    So what are Lee Smolin's thoughts today, and one can see where the interactions might have, raised a claerer perception of what falsifiable is meant in context of today's reasonings. Has this changed from 2003?

    Lee Smolin:
    My impression, if I can say so, is that many cosmologists undervalue the positive successes of CNS. It EXPLAINS otherwise mysterious features of our universe such as the setting of the parameters to make carbon and oxygen abundent-not because of life but because of their role in cooling GMC’s. It also EXPLAINS the hierarchy problem and the scale of the weak interactions-because these can also be understood to be tuned to extremize black hole production. Further, it EXPLAINS two otherwise improbable features of glaxies: why the IMF for star formation is power law and why disk galaxies maintain a steady rate of massive star formation.

    So while we are engaged in the thinking of what can be measured from the big bang till now( Sean Carroll has given us a positon to operate from), but having the Poor man's collider introspective, helps us to consider how we may see the developement of particle interaction, as Pierre Auger experiments have reminded us?

    Since the COBE discovery, many ground and balloon-based experiments have shown the ripples peak at the degree scale. What CMB experimentalists do is take a power spectrum of the temperature maps, much as you would if you wanted to measure background noise. The angular wavenumber, called a multipole l, of the power spectrum is related to the inverse of the angular scale (l=100 is approximately 1 degree). Recent experiments, noteably the Boomerang and Maxima experiments, have show that the power spectrum exhibits a sharp peak of exactly the right form to be the ringing or acoustic phenomena long awaited by cosmologists:

    Then how would we see such changes and views that might of held the mind to variances in the landscape, as hills and valleys, portrayed in our cosmo? Perception between the Earth and the Sun. What shall we say to these values in other places of the cosmo? Will we see the impression of the spacetime fabric much differently then we do with the fabric as we see it now? Some might not like this analogy, but it is useful, as all toys models are useful?

    Had we forgotten Wayne Hu so early here, not to have thought before we let this all slip from our fingers, as some superfluid and how we got there, Whose previous existance we had not speculated(what about Dirac), yet we understand the push to the singularity do we not?

    "How do you actually make a collapsing universe bounce back? No one ever had a good idea about that,” Albrecht said. “What these guys realized was that if they got their wish for an ekpyrotic universe, then they could have the universe bounce back."

    Such gravitational collapse sets the stage for what was initiated from, yet, we would not entertain cyclical models, that would instigate geometrical propensities along side of physics procedures?

    So what do we mean when I say that we have pushed the minds eye ever deeper into the world of the Gluonic phases, which we would like so much to validated from such "traversed paths" that such limitations might have then been projected into the cosmo for a better perspective of time? Langangrain valuations alongside of the cosmic string? Which view is better?

    When I started to look at the idea of these xtra dimensions, and how these would be manifesting and the experimental attempts at defining such, I recognized Aldeberger with eotvos contributions here, that a few might have understood and seen?

    Together now such a perspective might have formed now around perspectve glazes that we might now wonder indeed why such a path taken by Aldeberger might now have been seen in such fine measures?

    The Shape of the UNiverse in Omega Values

    Having walked through the curvature parameters, in the Friedmann equations while understanding the nature of the universe, I thought would have been very important from the geometrical valuations, that I have been trying to understand. That it might arise in a terminology called quantum geometry, seems a very hard thing to comprehend, yet thinking about CFT measure on the horizon(Bekenstein Bound) is telling us something about the space of the blackhole?

    So people have these new ideas about quantum grvaity and some might have choosen monte carlo methods for examination in the regards of quantum gravity perceptive.

    Now some of you know that early on in this blog John Baez's view about the soccer ball was most appealing one for consideration, but indeed, the sphere as the closet example could all of a sudden become the ideas for triangulations never crossed my mind. Nor that Max Tegmark would tell us, about the nature of these things.

    JUst as one might have asked Max Tegmark what the shape of the universe was, he might of quickly discounted John Baez's soccer ball? Yet little did we know, that such a push by Magueijo might have had some influences? How would you measure such inflationary models?

    Plato said:
    When I looked at Glast, it seemed a fine way in which to incorporate one more end of the "spectrum" to how we see the cosmo? That we had defined it over this range of possibilties? How could we move further from consideration then, and I fall short in how the probabilties of how we might percieve graviton exchange of information in the bulk could reveal more of that spectrum? A resonance curve?

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

    One of the ways that has intrigued my inquiring mind, is the way in which I could see how xtra-dimensions might have been allocated to the views of photon interaction? We know the ways in which calorimetric design helps us see how fine the views are encased in the way Onion people work?

    I had recognized quite early as I was getting research material together of Smolin's support of Magueijo, had something to do with the way in which he was seeing VSL approaches to indicators of time valuations?

    Again, this is quite hard to conclusive drawn understanding, in that such roads lead too, would have instantly said that (speed of light in a vacuum)C never changes? How many good teachers would have chastize their students, to have this held in contrast to todays way we do things when looking at Magueijo?

    Magueijo started reading Einstein when he was 11, but he wanted to comprehend the theory using mathematics rather than words. So he read a book by Max Born, which explains relativity in the language of mathematics. He quotes Galileo as having said, "The book of nature is written in the language of mathematics."

    Let's look at what is being said from a fifth dimensional perspective, and tell me why this will not change the way we see? Why model comprehension has not sparked this foundational change in the way we look at the cosmos and the spacetrime fabric?

    Monday, December 19, 2005

    Big Bang Nucleosynthesis

    You know it sometimes boogles my mind, why such adventures had not given perspective to the age of the universe? We are talking about created events, that we work to help us see the nature, from a inception time.

    Something indeed troubles me as I look out towards this universe, that by giving it's age to 13.7 billions years, that we are taking such events as spoken below in regards to superfluid states, as elements spawned out of that early expression.

    The high energy nuclear physics experimental group at Columbia University is conducting research to study the collisions of relativistic heavy nuclei to understand the properties of nuclear matter at extremely high densities (similar to the center of neutron stars) and very high temperatures (much hotter than at the center of the sun). In fact, the temperatures and densities reached in these collisions are similar to those found in the early universe a few microseconds after the Big Bang.

    So what is that troubles me so much? Well if you have given the age of the universe, then you have alloted a time sequence to each and every event in the cosmos? There is not one event, that can be older then the age of our universe?

    Okay now that this basis is understood, why would I be wrong? Is there not a logic that holds to tell us that each and every event will speak to the time and place of it's origination, within context of the whole universe and but never apart from the initial expression?

    That if, for one moment you had seen the a galaxy, who elemental structure given to the signs of the measure of this universe, then it would have been, and related itself, to the very age of our universe and never older?

    So you see my problem then? That if I saw this universe as a landscape. That given the context, the shape, and value assigned in the Omega values, such geometrical propensities would have enlisted the mind to consider?Tthat the very age of our univese plus the events held in context of the universe, would have lead one to see the values assigned in a much larger global context?

    To holes in the very nature of the fabric.

    Having seen the nature of Kravtsovs computer simulations, as cosmic strings, then you would have understood that each of the events in the galaxies would have been connected to each other? Never older, then the age of the universe itself?

    The Physics Experiment

    PHENIX, the Pioneering High Energy Nuclear Interaction eXperiment, is an exploratory experiment for the investigation of high energy collisions of heavy ions and protons. PHENIX is designed specifically to measure direct probes of the collisions such as electrons, muons, and photons. The primary goal of PHENIX is to discover and study a new state of matter called the Quark-Gluon Plasma

    Monday, December 05, 2005

    Bumblebee Wing Rotations and Dancing

    The Bumble Be, Mentality

    So what is the Gluon that binds?:)

    For introduction sake, I might have deviated from Sean Carroll's ideas about the, "what science doesn't know" and traded it for mechanical systems interpretations, and the way we can write comprehension forms from such patterns inherent?

    It always comes down to the lesson of a Beautiful mind? It's struggle for freedom from the illusions that we might perpetuate. The escape from, those delusions, to concrete analysis of such systemic thought patterns within human nature. The triumph and freedom, to overcome all odds?

    If we thought of Belt rotations and Greg Egan, it wouldn't be to hard to place some perspective on how Sean might have intepreted the "wing rotation of slowed photography," and said, "hey, here is this pattern, and something a string theorist could hang their hat on?"

    Satisfactory conclusion to rotations, that equatively reach across and touch us like E=mc2 does, then what's the point of concluding any thoughts if this consistancy can't be accomplished? So herein lies my inexperience, and the last recursive thought of, "okay, what science doesn't know, I scream?" :) Was it emotive enough to make my point?

    And so in reference to string theory work, I couldn't help but think of the rotations, waiters and table trays and such. But it also made me think of the inroads to observation of nature and flight? Wilbur and Orville Wright as well?

    But looking deeper, and from what one could gain from such observations, did I miss Sean's point?

    Kosmopolis 05

    Marc D. Hauser:
    We know that that kind of information is encoded in the signal because people in Denmark have created a robotic honey bee that you can plop in the middle of a colony, programmed to dance in a certain way, and the hive members will actually follow the information precisely to that location. Researchers have been able to understand the information processing system to this level, and consequently, can actually transmit it through the robot to other members of the hive.

    But it's more then the honey bee mentality. It's about communications systems we use to explain? So am I going to get Sean's goat on this one, and reverberate something he does not like? :)

    But we know relatively little about how the circuitry of the brain represents the consonants and vowels. The chasm between the neurosciences today and understanding representations like language is very wide. It's a delusion that we are going to get close to that any time soon. We've gotten almost nowhere in how the bee's brain represents the simplicity of the dance language. Although any good biologist, after several hours of observation, can predict accurately where the bee is going, we currently have no understanding of how the brain actually performs that computation.

    So I have in essence percieved the "Bee HIve Mentality of string theory" as a underlying causation, that if held too, becomes, "how little we really know." What ha/ormonial( I like to play with words?) factor, drives that body/system?

    I bet that sounds like chalk board screeching to him:) Yes I gave the anti-string/M theorist more ammunition.

    I also opened the door to another thought of mine. About the uses of, "Math and the foundations." But this is just me, trying to break down the reistance to mathematical prowness, that any other mathematician might try and hide, as a model of strng theory/M intepretation.

    You can't just sweep it under the rug kind of thing and say what science doesn't know. Has yet to be proved?:) Oops, I extended the board screeching to include, the extension of, and Modifications to GR. I can't help it. The power of the "force" is really string?

    The Cosmological Constant and the Vacuum Energy

    Jacque Distler:
    The cosmological constant is not “predicted” to be Planck scale, simply because, in a QFT context, it is not predicted at all. It is a renormalized coupling and can have any value whatsoever.

    What is true is that, in order to achieve the observed value at low energies, the bare value (at the cutoff scale, which we might take to be the Planck scale) must be fine-tuned to enormous accuracy.

    But that’s not the same thing at all as saying that the value of the cosmological constant is predicted, and that the prediction comes out wrong.

    Jacques Distler has volunteered(?) for the sake of people like myself by opening the doors to clarity issues around the interrpetation of the cosmological constant.

    So this leads to the second part of Sean's post that gets me to thinking about how perception might have been revealled in the dynamics scenario of Omega (w) and how we see that the background as a "energy density," can ever be seen as zero? That such a valuation would limit one to thinking that such a dynamical universe had to explain the nature of the curvature parameters beyond, what was comsologically understood?

    The Friedmann equation which models the expanding universe has a parameter k called the curvature parameter which is indicative of the rate of expansion and whether or not that expansion rate is increasing or decreasing. If k=0 then the density is equal to a critical value at which the universe will expand forever at a decreasing rate. This is often referred to as the Einstein-de Sitter universe in recognition of their work in modeling it. This k=0 condition can be used to express the critical density in terms of the present value of the Hubble parameter.

    For k>0 the density is high enough that the gravitational attraction will eventually stop the expansion and it will collapse backward to a "big crunch". This kind of universe is described as being a closed universe, or a gravitationally bound universe. For k<0 the universe expands forever, there not being sufficient density for gravitational attraction to stop the expansion.

    So on a csomological level we get this sense of curvature and here to further exploit this understanding the means to such equations supplied for this endeavor.

    Now for the vacuum to be define here in a planck scale valuation, it was not important for me, (okay maybe it is needed) to see the positive and negative effect of what and how the universe was doing at any particular stage. I always saw it as expanding, yet within the confines of the universe, it had the capability of doing galaxy dynamics, that would lead to greater intensities, expansive and contraction features, when we looked at the energy and matter cyclical valutions, in a geometrical sense, wrapped as "global" cosmological constant.

    Bumble Bee Economics

    See what happens when the creative juices are added to imagery and analogy gives insight from another perspectve?

    Ed Hessler added this to the comment section of Cosmic Variance.

    Tuesday, November 01, 2005

    Harmonic Oscillation

    This "math sense" has to become part of one's makeup? An inductive process. Experimentally challenged. Deductive.

    If such a idea is held from weak to strong idealizations in terms of comological views, then you get this sense of "energy valuations" as well. If you calculate when the binary pulsar distances around each other, the value of that information has been released in the bulk. This information should become weaker, as the orbits get closer?

    The theory of relativity predicts that, as it orbits the Sun, Mercury does not exactly retrace the same path each time, but rather swings around over time. We say therefore that the perihelion -- the point on its orbit when Mercury is closest to the Sun -- advances.

    I would think this penduum exercise would make a deeper impression if held in concert with the way one might have look at Mercuries orbit.

    Or, binary pulsar PSR 1913+16 of Taylor and Hulse. These are macroscopic valutions in what the pendulum means. Would this not be true?

    Part of the Randall/Sundrum picture Sean supplied of the brane world perspectives needed for how we look at that bulk view. If you are to asume that space is not indeed empty, then what is it filled with? Gravitonic perception would make this idea of the quantum harmonic oscillator intriguing to me in the sense that "zero point", would be flat space time. Any curvature parameters would have indeed signalled simple harmonic initiations?

    Omega valutions in regard to the what state the universe is in, would have been defined in relation to a triangulation.

    The quantum harmonic oscillator has implications far beyond the simple diatomic molecule. It is the foundation for the understanding of complex modes of vibration in larger molecules, the motion of atoms in a solid lattice, the theory of heat capacity, etc. In real systems, energy spacings are equal only for the lowest levels where the potential is a good approximation of the "mass on a spring" type harmonic potential. The anharmonic terms which appear in the potential for a diatomic molecule are useful for mapping the detailed potential of such systems.

    But indeed while we understand this large oscillatory factor in our orbits, does it not make sense to wonder how simple that harmonic oscillator can become when we are looking for extra dimensions?

    I had a picture the other day of a music instrument of a wire stretched, and weights being applied respectfully. The string when strummed gave certain frequencies accordingly to different mass valuations. This is the early pythagorean instrument I had see a few years ago, that would have similarities with "gourds of water" as weight and levels changed.

    Here we seen a torsion pendulum. The way the wire twists and it's resulting valuation.

    So you see how simple experimental processes help to correct our views on the way we see things.

    From a historical perspective views of scientists with this explanation support the harmonic oscillators as follows:

    Let us see how these great physicists used harmonic oscillators to establish beachheads to new physics.

    Albert Einstein used harmonic oscillators to understand specific heats of solids and found that energy levels are quantized. This formed one of the key bridges between classical and quantum mechanics.

    Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger formulated quantum mechanics. The role of harmonic oscillators in this process is well known.

    Paul A. M. Dirac was quite fond of harmonic oscillators. He used oscillator states to construct Fock space. He was the first one to consider harmonic oscillator wave functions normalizable in the time variable. In 1963, Dirac used coupled harmonic oscillators to construct a representation of the O(3,2) de Sitter group which is the basic scientific language for two-mode squeezed states.

    Hediki Yukawa was the first one to consider a Lorentz-invariant differential equation, with momentum-dependent solutions which are Lorentz-covariant but not Lorentz-invariant. He proposed harmonic oscillators for relativistic extended particles five years before Hofstadter observed that protons are not point particles in 1955. Some people say he invented a string-model approach to particle physics.

    Richard Feynman was also fond of harmonic oscillators. When he gave a talk at the 1970 Washington meeting of the American Physical Society, he stunned the audience by telling us not to use Feynman diagrams, but harmonic oscillators for quantum bound states. This figure illustrates what he said in 1970.

    We are still allowed to use Feynman diagrams for running waves. Feynman diagrams applicable to running waves in Einstein's Lorentz-covariant world. Are Feynman's oscillators Lorentz-covariant? Yes in spirit, but there are many technical problems. Then can those problems be fixed. This is the question. You may be interested in reading about this subject: Lorentz group in Feynman's world.

    Can harmonic oscillators serve as a bridge between quantum mechanics and special relativity?

    Lee Smolin saids no to this?

    Monday, August 22, 2005


    What is Sun-Earth Day?

    As I was reading Cliffords newest entry on Cosmic Variance site, his trip reminded me of the hike we took to see the Big Horn Medicine Wheel.

    Now what is interesting about this is I am not one who has had much association with such places of observatories, but far up to the left of this wheel is one that seems very out of place.

    Ironic in the sense that ole history about these "Medicine Wheels" could have brought such historical perspective to the science. Look at the universe, from a place where ancient artifacts gathered.

    At the center of the wheel there is a raised central cairn, and several others on the periphery of the wheel. These have been alleged to have astronomical alignments. Astronomer John Eddy suggested that a line drawn between the central cairn and an outlying cairn at the Bighorn Medicine Wheel pointed to within 1/3 of a degree of the rising point of the sun at the summer solstice. The actual astronomical purpose of the design of these wheels remains controversial. The design may also have assisted in the performance of specific rituals and ceremonies that have been lost to us. The 28 spokes could indicate the lunar month, or the length of the female menstrual cycle.

    But I am not going to join the speculative feature of this wonderment, but to bring forward the understanding that mountains that may look the same, may have other reasons like it does for Clifford and his views of home. That for him to look, and have something nagged his "observatory mind" would have been as simple as "cheez, it looks like home."

    Well from a more suttle place, I bring forward the understanding that our perspective about cosmology, our understanding of the uniqueness of Omega? The implications of General Relativity, and how Alexanders Firedmann's eqaution is part and parcel of the understandng of a geometry. That helps lead the mind into the ability to see dynamicals of this universe. How would your obervation have changed with such paradigmal changes. In Toposense, is speak to that as well as relate that General Realtivity had it's saem consequence. Ask Sean about that one?

    Now we engage the spacetime fabric. This dynamcial abiltiy would not be seen before without this geometrical prospensity. So having been taken over by paradigmal change, the visionistic approach is one based on geometrical design, where the uniqueness of such correlations in the views of where nature resides. Brings one closer to the very spots we call "home". This is a real place for clifford, and yet without inducing such mysticism, this is also a place I draw from.

    Now you say this guy is nuts. But imagine the science that leads one to see such topolgical realizations would take cosmological priciples about this epxanding universe and find that in a Genus example of the spherical WMAP of creation, there are abilities of this universe to become, well, lets say like images of marbles on rubber sheets, and how did such isolated cases exist within the greater potential of this universe to unfold and one is lead to portions of objective collapses that help to bring a greater dynamcial view about this same cosmos.

    What makes this different is I relate topo-sense as a real part of paradigmal change.

    The theory of relativity predicts that, as it orbits the Sun, Mercury does not exactly retrace the same path each time, but rather swings around over time. We say therefore that the perihelion -- the point on its orbit when Mercury is closest to the Sun -- advances.

    I encourage such changes when we learn( or are really a result of such learning). Who could not get this sense from, Mercuries Daisey, or Hulse and Taylor Binary star rotations that release "gravitation waves" that give us information about how close they are becoming. What's it's predictve date about coming together?

    While I relate Mecuries orbital patterns, such sense is not limited to here. Other idealizations as well, that we might wonder indeed how vast this landcape idea, when you consider the >Lagrange points?:)

    Thursday, April 14, 2005

    G -> H -> ... -> SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) -> SU(3) x U(1).

    Here, each arrow represents a symmetry breaking phase transition where matter changes form and the groups - G, H, SU(3), etc. - represent the different types of matter, specifically the symmetries that the matter exhibits and they are associated with the different fundamental forces of nature

    "Nothing to me would be more poetic; no outcome would be more graceful ... than for us to confirm our theories of the ultramicroscopic makeup of spacetime and matter by turning our giant telescopes skyward and gazing at the stars,"
    Greene said.

    Peter Woit:
    Brian Greene was in the audience and somewhat objected to this. Brian's point of view appears to be the more traditional one that people should just try and cook up vacua with as many features as possible close to the Standard Model, and that once they've got such a thing it will have other implications for physics that can be checked. It seems to me that that kind of work has been going on for more than twenty years with no sign of success, but Brian still believes this will ultimately work out.

    To me the idea of bubble dynamics is quite revealling when you place the context and question of the dynamics as underlying feelings(this is quite subjective). Much like GR, and these momentus occasions, that can move within our natures, as our comprehension grows. Time experienced in different ways, does this for us?:)It can still be a highly visula thing?:)

    To not be mistaken, the questions materializes in the reasons why such dynamics may have been offerred in the same vain as GR, to see that this features becomes a signature of conscious effort, where what is being replaced, reveals some dynamics of the true vacuum?:)

    So of course there are questions that need to be resolved. Some might not like to answer them and censor the blog of their own, so that blanket policies regardless of the question, is like who gives a **** about what you think in context of the larger picture of things. Of course they have their own agenda and have the right. It's their blog. I am quite greatful by such resistance presented, has forced me to expand here, where the truth of what I am seeing can be demonstrated.

    But I have digressed some from the important question that is raised not only in Serkan's mind but mine as well. So resource info helps in perspective here.

    Is QFT vacuum real?

    Serkan Cabi:Almost everybody cite the Casimir effect as the proof of reality of quantum ground state of standard model fields. Lately it has become a commonsense especially in the dark energy literature, as an aspect deepening the problem.

    So to me looking for an explanation of ths dynamics is a hard one to qualify as it suggested by some, that one wonders about the way early supersymmetrical idealizations have brought consideration to what emerges from these hottimes?

    But there are other ways here, that having gotten a grasp of this elasticity of a membrane, that one can see how certain features are held too and others, are presented for further developement in the nature of those same psyches? Imagine introducing this memebrance and the elasticity. What has the mind grasped now?

    Below Serkan helps to point out more info for consideration.

    The Casimir Effect and the Quantum Vacuum
    I have presented an argument that the experimental confirmation of the Casimir effect does not establish the reality of zero point fluctuations. Casimir forces can be calculated without reference to the vacuum and, like any other dynamical effect in QED, vanish as a→0. The vacuum-to-vacuum graphs (See Fig. 1) that define the zero point energy do not enter the calculation of the Casimir force, which instead only involves graphs with external lines. So the concept of zero point fluctuations is a heuristic and calculational aid in the description of the Casimir effect, but not a necessity.

    This does not do away with the idea of what can happen within the confines of a vacuum, but ultimately, we realize that the speed of light remains the same, yet other dynamics when playing with physical things, can display wonderful intentions about about this elasticity nature?

    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 it is a highly specialize vision that I had been moving towards that I wanted to make sure any bubble technolgies would encase all that we learnt. That we define the further reaches of what this bubble( K=0 before the crunch begins) might have encompassed? Revealled that outer value(K=0) of Friedman's equation and Omega in terms of what critical density would have expounded? In terms of the distance this bubble could grow, in this inflationary universe?

    Outside this bubble universe, is a dimensionally filled universe that had grown as this bubble grew?

    Such movement in propelling our universe to expression, seems quite a challenge, so having encompassed this larger view of reality, inverse square law would have exemplified the schwarzchild radius, determining the total expansive view of this cosmos?

    You had to be able to confine this view and encapsulate it so that the total view developed through the phases of standard model production would have evetually helped us realize the wide scope this particle reductionism and cosmological endeavors had revealled with distances(large and small) joining?:)