Weird notions come into my mind and I like to ponder on them and see to where they take me.
Universe expanding with the speed of light, as is mentioned here too, space expanding.
Outer space? The space between galaxies and stars or all space? Even to the space we occupy ourselves. Blowing up, expanding like balloons in all three dimensions.
It is space itself that expands, is found in NASA's Imagine the universe website,
".. but actually it is space itself that is expanding faster than the speed of light, driving objects further apart at an increasing rate."
The example of raisins in a cake as it is baked and raised up, the raisins on the surface grow distant from one another, but the raisins themselves are built on space, the concept of space is not limited only to the space observed by an individual, but includes as well the space the individual itself occupies, the raisins themselves occupy, even the space their atoms occupy.
The atom built by protons and neutrons enclosed in the nucleus and far far away, in relative terms, the electrons orbiting, an enormous amount of space included and include the point-like entities of electrons, protons and neutrons, attributed with mass equals energy, that space that lies within objects expands too, and expands with the speed of light, or, as it is claimed faster than the speed of light, in order to compensate for the ultimate speed, the speed of light, the limit all objects in the universe can be accelerated to.
We ourselves, as objects of this universe expand in space, or the space that our atoms occupy expand with or faster than the speed of light.
And all done equally, we are none the wiser. The only thing that changes is the distribution of energy in space. Which in a sense is diluted. How this notion would accommodate all what we think about what mass is? Inertial mass, rest mass of a body for zero speed; at any other speed the inertial mass is greater.
According to the equations of special relativity the mass of a body increases as it is gaining speed, it is about three times as much of the inertial mass for speeds at 0.95 of the speed of light and the graphs point to infinite mass as it gets nearer and nearer to the speed of light, asymptotic curve that never touches the y axis as the speed increases to ridiculous decimal increments to the speed of light.
What if space, all around the universe environs expands at the same time? Would an infinite mass postulate still hold? Would the beginnings of the universe from a singularity, an infinitesimal point of infinite energy be more plausible? Energy and space fundamental entities that combining the two together to produce mass? Mass an emergent entity, an entity that becomes apparent only if it is looked at from above a threshold, a macro-threshold, our familiar macro-world loosing completely that attribute when it is looked at from a point below that threshold. Mass concept becomes meaningless from the standpoint of the micro-world, the quantum realm, being only extremely concentrated foci of enormous amounts of energy kept apart by even greater distances of empty space?
What difference would that make if we take the point that this space expands at the speed of light in the same way that the universe itself expands at the speed of light.
Friday, 6 November 2009
Tuesday, 25 August 2009
Systems adiabatic? Understanding subsystem-system interactions.
It is mentioned in page 166, of the book Experimental techniques in low-temperature physics by Guy Kendall White, Philip J. Meeson
"Most properties of materials are categorised in terms of the phonon system, the electron system and the spin system (i.e. the nuclear or electronic magnetic moments)."
Three subsystems that make up for most of the properties of materials, the physical and chemical properties, matter organised into the macroscopic system of the physical world, determine how the physical world behaves.
"These different subsystems, although intimately mixed together in any one material, can be separated in the imagination and analysed as independent systems."
Determine physical behaviour as the embedded sub-systems are intimately mixed, which brings into mind attractors and synchronization, attractors achieved by the ever so slight tweaking of relevant parameters, the electron-phonon interactions synchronized, by even the transient fluctuation enhancement referred to as peculiar to macroscopic systems, triggered by the exposure to additional parametres brought in, by the other embedded sub-systems.
These three subsystems separated and analysed independently? Their connections severed, each one imagined on itself? An approach which can be followed on all subsystems, lower-dimensional systems embedded in higher dimensional systems, the macroscopic systems? Understanding the relationships between embedded and embedding systems, all systems in all realms, portable via the self-similarity principle of chaos.
And all the while, each sub-system being dynamic, ever so 'touchy' to any changes introduced by either sub-system, via the electron-phonon interaction.
"Consider for example the separation of the phonon system from the electron system in a metal. This proceeds from the knowledge that the phonon system is 'heavy' arising from the motion of ions in the lattice whilst electrons are light. The mass difference (and differing statistics) influences the available energy levels in each system and ultimately limits the flow of momentum and energy between the two systems."
The phonon system 'heavy', the electron system 'light' a matter of size. The phonon system arises from the motion of ions, the electron system from electrons. This mass difference limits the flow of momentum and energy between the two systems, practically isolated from one another, each system with its own agent, phonon electron, interactions between their agents determine their behaviour.
Accordingly, it can be assumed that any introduction of extra agents, like nanoparticles upsets this balance, the flow of momentum and energy, between the two systems, as the mass of the nanoparticles being similar in size, could introduce novel interactions, leading to the emergence of properties, alien to the subsystems. The observation of novel chemical and physical properties in nanoparticles, when introduced into the nanoscales, indicative of this process.
"This 'adiabatic' or Born-Oppenheimer approximation regards the two subsystems as separate but interacting via an electron-phonon interaction."
Embedded sub-systems separate but interacting via an electron-phonon interaction? Interacting as sub-systems? Preserving their integrity, their independence of a sort. An adiabatic boundary, a barrier that prevents the direct flow of energy and momentum from an embedded system to another or even the embedding macroscopic system apart from the electron-phonon interaction, each sub-system the 'whole' by itself and as a whole interacts.
Embedded sub-systems adiabatic. Embedding systems, by virtue of being embedded themselves, sub-systems to higher dimensional systems, adiabatic too. All systems adiabatic. Biological, emotional, psychological, social systems adiabatic? Understanding systems by using the adiabatic system property?
"Most properties of materials are categorised in terms of the phonon system, the electron system and the spin system (i.e. the nuclear or electronic magnetic moments)."
Three subsystems that make up for most of the properties of materials, the physical and chemical properties, matter organised into the macroscopic system of the physical world, determine how the physical world behaves.
"These different subsystems, although intimately mixed together in any one material, can be separated in the imagination and analysed as independent systems."
Determine physical behaviour as the embedded sub-systems are intimately mixed, which brings into mind attractors and synchronization, attractors achieved by the ever so slight tweaking of relevant parameters, the electron-phonon interactions synchronized, by even the transient fluctuation enhancement referred to as peculiar to macroscopic systems, triggered by the exposure to additional parametres brought in, by the other embedded sub-systems.
These three subsystems separated and analysed independently? Their connections severed, each one imagined on itself? An approach which can be followed on all subsystems, lower-dimensional systems embedded in higher dimensional systems, the macroscopic systems? Understanding the relationships between embedded and embedding systems, all systems in all realms, portable via the self-similarity principle of chaos.
And all the while, each sub-system being dynamic, ever so 'touchy' to any changes introduced by either sub-system, via the electron-phonon interaction.
"Consider for example the separation of the phonon system from the electron system in a metal. This proceeds from the knowledge that the phonon system is 'heavy' arising from the motion of ions in the lattice whilst electrons are light. The mass difference (and differing statistics) influences the available energy levels in each system and ultimately limits the flow of momentum and energy between the two systems."
The phonon system 'heavy', the electron system 'light' a matter of size. The phonon system arises from the motion of ions, the electron system from electrons. This mass difference limits the flow of momentum and energy between the two systems, practically isolated from one another, each system with its own agent, phonon electron, interactions between their agents determine their behaviour.
Accordingly, it can be assumed that any introduction of extra agents, like nanoparticles upsets this balance, the flow of momentum and energy, between the two systems, as the mass of the nanoparticles being similar in size, could introduce novel interactions, leading to the emergence of properties, alien to the subsystems. The observation of novel chemical and physical properties in nanoparticles, when introduced into the nanoscales, indicative of this process.
"This 'adiabatic' or Born-Oppenheimer approximation regards the two subsystems as separate but interacting via an electron-phonon interaction."
Embedded sub-systems separate but interacting via an electron-phonon interaction? Interacting as sub-systems? Preserving their integrity, their independence of a sort. An adiabatic boundary, a barrier that prevents the direct flow of energy and momentum from an embedded system to another or even the embedding macroscopic system apart from the electron-phonon interaction, each sub-system the 'whole' by itself and as a whole interacts.
Embedded sub-systems adiabatic. Embedding systems, by virtue of being embedded themselves, sub-systems to higher dimensional systems, adiabatic too. All systems adiabatic. Biological, emotional, psychological, social systems adiabatic? Understanding systems by using the adiabatic system property?
Thursday, 20 August 2009
Low-dimensional systems embedded in macroscopic systems. Enhanced fluctuations?
I feel I have stumbled once again onto something which will augment my knowledge, my perspective. It will drag me away from my current endeavours to bring me back enhanced and ready for new challenges.
Writing unhindered by any considerations deemed irrelevant for my pursuits. Enough introduction, back to the point.
Šil'nikov phenomena, are referred to, in this paper titled 'Poincaré versus Boltzmann in Šil'nikov phenomena'. It was the climax of my google searching, following terms like, subordinate Šil'nikov bifurcations, Sil'nikov-saddle-node interaction, Šil'nikov phenomena, Sil'nikov chaos.
Analyse the terms and deepen my knowledge by examining the effects, the mentioned concepts had on the knowledge already held in my reverberated neural nets and in the process ascend whatever fragments are there, and emerge in new knowledge, new ways of looking at things.
In the abstract of the paper, 'Poincaré versus Boltzmann in Šil'nikov phenomena', it mentions
"By suitable adjustment of the control parameters in a CO2 laser with feedback we show experimental evidence of Sil'nikov chaos, ..."
... control parameters, as in parameters and variables. Parameters, of which their values are considered if not unchanged, changing within a very narrow limiting and limited range, as in any fractal-making program, what you tweak ever so slightly, to get all kinds, versions of the initial fractal. Suitably adjusting the parameters, deemed as controlling in the CO2 laser. Feedback providing the iteration part, the recursiveness in function, for chaos coming.
Experimental evidence of Sil'nikov chaos? What kind of chaos is this?
It further mentions,
".. characterized by intensity pulses almost equal in shape, but irregularly separated in time."
Intensity pulses irregularly separated in time, their experimental setup signature of chaos. Irregularity signifying chaos.
"The times of return to a Poincare section are statistically spread,.."
Poincare sections traversing its flow in time, incisions right through its fractal space, revealed statistically spread times of return, the order hidden amidst chaos. Chaos generating order.
Chaos as described in mathematics, measuring fluctuations in the intensity of forces, stresses, pressures plotted into graphs or even plain mathematical functions, self-referential, iterated loosing themselves into chaos. Translated into all kinds of forces exhibited in all systems possible. Physical, mental, emotional, psychological, social, spiritual systems analysed in the very same way as mathematical chaos.
"... however their iteration map is one-dimensional and in close agreement with that arising from Sil'nikov theory."
The map of the iterated points is one-dimensional? All falling onto a single line? Or the map, being a function and the one-dimensional referred to, its mathematical property. And all this, .. 'in close agreement with that arising from Sil'nikov theory'.
"Thus, the iteration map of the time intervals becomes the most appropriate indicator of this chaos."
An appropriate indicator of this chaos? Sil'nikov chaos. The one-dimensional iteration map of the time intervals?
"The residual width of the experimentally measured maps is due to a transient fluctuation enhancement peculiar to macroscopic systems, which is absent in low-dimensional chaotic dynamics."
Macroscopic systems distinct from low-dimensional chaotic dynamics? Underlying systems different than systems above? Chaotic dynamics of underlying systems, systems embedded within systems above, low-dimensional as embedded systems are bound to have less dimensions, than the system they are embedded in, embedding system which includes more than one low-dimensional systems.
The transient fluctuation enhancement peculiar to macroscopic systems? Due to the influence of additional parametres a low-dimensional system is exposed to, by the other low-dimensional system(s) that together comprise the macroscopic system they are embedded in?
Each low-dimensional system compensating for the introduced parameters, tweaked. Embedded low-dimensional systems integrated and together now determine the properties, attributes, the behaviour of the macroscopic system.
My very own thoughts developing in a similar process. All systems possible, physical psychological, social developing likewise.
Writing unhindered by any considerations deemed irrelevant for my pursuits. Enough introduction, back to the point.
Šil'nikov phenomena, are referred to, in this paper titled 'Poincaré versus Boltzmann in Šil'nikov phenomena'. It was the climax of my google searching, following terms like, subordinate Šil'nikov bifurcations, Sil'nikov-saddle-node interaction, Šil'nikov phenomena, Sil'nikov chaos.
Analyse the terms and deepen my knowledge by examining the effects, the mentioned concepts had on the knowledge already held in my reverberated neural nets and in the process ascend whatever fragments are there, and emerge in new knowledge, new ways of looking at things.
In the abstract of the paper, 'Poincaré versus Boltzmann in Šil'nikov phenomena', it mentions
"By suitable adjustment of the control parameters in a CO2 laser with feedback we show experimental evidence of Sil'nikov chaos, ..."
... control parameters, as in parameters and variables. Parameters, of which their values are considered if not unchanged, changing within a very narrow limiting and limited range, as in any fractal-making program, what you tweak ever so slightly, to get all kinds, versions of the initial fractal. Suitably adjusting the parameters, deemed as controlling in the CO2 laser. Feedback providing the iteration part, the recursiveness in function, for chaos coming.
Experimental evidence of Sil'nikov chaos? What kind of chaos is this?
It further mentions,
".. characterized by intensity pulses almost equal in shape, but irregularly separated in time."
Intensity pulses irregularly separated in time, their experimental setup signature of chaos. Irregularity signifying chaos.
"The times of return to a Poincare section are statistically spread,.."
Poincare sections traversing its flow in time, incisions right through its fractal space, revealed statistically spread times of return, the order hidden amidst chaos. Chaos generating order.
Chaos as described in mathematics, measuring fluctuations in the intensity of forces, stresses, pressures plotted into graphs or even plain mathematical functions, self-referential, iterated loosing themselves into chaos. Translated into all kinds of forces exhibited in all systems possible. Physical, mental, emotional, psychological, social, spiritual systems analysed in the very same way as mathematical chaos.
"... however their iteration map is one-dimensional and in close agreement with that arising from Sil'nikov theory."
The map of the iterated points is one-dimensional? All falling onto a single line? Or the map, being a function and the one-dimensional referred to, its mathematical property. And all this, .. 'in close agreement with that arising from Sil'nikov theory'.
"Thus, the iteration map of the time intervals becomes the most appropriate indicator of this chaos."
An appropriate indicator of this chaos? Sil'nikov chaos. The one-dimensional iteration map of the time intervals?
"The residual width of the experimentally measured maps is due to a transient fluctuation enhancement peculiar to macroscopic systems, which is absent in low-dimensional chaotic dynamics."
Macroscopic systems distinct from low-dimensional chaotic dynamics? Underlying systems different than systems above? Chaotic dynamics of underlying systems, systems embedded within systems above, low-dimensional as embedded systems are bound to have less dimensions, than the system they are embedded in, embedding system which includes more than one low-dimensional systems.
The transient fluctuation enhancement peculiar to macroscopic systems? Due to the influence of additional parametres a low-dimensional system is exposed to, by the other low-dimensional system(s) that together comprise the macroscopic system they are embedded in?
Each low-dimensional system compensating for the introduced parameters, tweaked. Embedded low-dimensional systems integrated and together now determine the properties, attributes, the behaviour of the macroscopic system.
My very own thoughts developing in a similar process. All systems possible, physical psychological, social developing likewise.
Sunday, 26 April 2009
The tremendous speeds earth is traveling in space. Is gravity a classical force? Is the search for gravitational waves a futile endeavour?
In Philosophic Wonders
"The Sun and its family of planets are orbiting the galaxy at about 135 miles per second."
The solar system moves at 135 miles per second, relativity's essence. Where the hell do we draw the certainty, be so sure, letting ourselves feel peace and tranquility, when we relax bathing in the sunshine lying in oblivion, on a beach lounger. In the knowledge, that at the same time, planet earth along with us, are propelled into the vacuum of space, in shearing shattering speeds. If we subject, the hapless fragile human being, in these tremendous unreal speeds, we will be lucky to find traces of the bones to verify its past existence.
And yet, here we are, alive and well, despite the speed we travel in space, to have the arrogance to enjoy, a peaceful morning. Peaceful. Anything else apart.
Centripetal force, the essence of gravity, what keep us pinned on the ground. That do not let us, being swept away from the face of planet earth, and not only us, but what keeps the dust, the rocks on the face of the moon and all the rest of the planets and other so-called heavenly bodies.
Gravity, that sucks us inwards, towards the centre of planet earth, to spare us the oblivion of our precious being, by the shattering speeds, our very own nurturing earth, is itself subjected to.
Apart from the solar system traveling at 135 miles per second, we have as well that
"The Earth rotates on its axis at about 1,100 miles an hour, a motion that creates day and night."
and
"The Earth orbits the Sun at about 67,000 miles an hour, a motion that takes one year."
and
"The Sun circles the Milky Way at a speed of about 486,000 miles per hour."
and
"And every object in the Universe is moving apart from the other objects as the Universe expands at a constantly accelerating rate."
Devastating forces that would have left nothing standing, long enough, that not only life nurtured, in the warm and welcome abode of planets, but even the existence of these wonderful incubators, if it wasn't for the protection offered by the gravitational forces, that not only effectively counteract against the shearing power of the speeds developed, by heavenly bodies in their endless journey in the vast space but even overcomes it, for us to enjoy the tranquility of nature.
Heavenly bodies in their endless journey around the centre of... The centre of .... their very own system or any other system they are part of. Earth orbiting around itself, moon orbiting around itself and moon orbiting around earth, the earth-moon system. Earth orbiting around the sun, the planets orbiting around the sun, the solar system around... Circularity.
Driven by gravity itself and by gravity is counteracted. The shearing speeds that the motion, its very own existence propagates and as it is counteracted by, at the same time. A dependency built-in, in the system, in each system by itself, the speed and the forces developed cannot be greater, than what the heavenly body can withstand. The speed of rotation around itself, as well as around the larger body in the system, would not be allowed to reach levels that would jeopardize its very own integrity. The seemingly hazardous journey, a gentle stroll in comparison.
How can we comprehend the nature of gravity, when we think of its appearance, as it vanishes down to the centre of a heavenly body. Attraction, of every piece of matter upon each other. Additive, as more and more pieces of matter accumulate, the stronger it becomes. Heavenly bodies borne out of dust, stardust as it has been found, accumulating into foci driven by chance (chance?) ... for more and more dust particles to gather up into the heavenly bodies which they become. What they are now. Matter may be pushed into coalescing, ... by the very vacuum surrounding it ... via pressures they are subjected to. Is it just a vacuum pressure effect or an actual attraction of matter objects. The actual rotation of a heavenly body around itself, a vacuum pressure effect. The same would hold valid, regarding the rotation of a heavenly body around its bigger counterpart in the system, rendering the presumed action at a distance character meaningless, what elevates gravity from a purely classical force into a fundamental force. Is the search for the graviton justified, or even the existence of gravitational waves feasible, the search for gravitational waves a futile endeavour.
The whole case, can be thought of in terms of systems. Systems within systems, a guiding principle universal for all systems. Systems that are dynamic ...
Oh, well fractal. Is there anything apparent in the galaxy system that would justify the term fractal? May be not merely in its spatial dimensions, but taking into account its evolution through time too. Energy dissipation. Energy being apparently high, at the very centre of a galaxy, stellar nurseries, black holes. Dissipating to lower and lower energies towards its perimeter. Fractal being characterized by its non-integral nature, non-integral dimensions. Is there any indications of non-integral dimensions in the galaxial system organisation?
What about warped spacetime, wormholes and the like. Does that not point towards a fractal evolution for the galaxy system. Gravity a mere manifestation of energy dissipation governed even by the Feigenbaum series concept.
"The Sun and its family of planets are orbiting the galaxy at about 135 miles per second."
The solar system moves at 135 miles per second, relativity's essence. Where the hell do we draw the certainty, be so sure, letting ourselves feel peace and tranquility, when we relax bathing in the sunshine lying in oblivion, on a beach lounger. In the knowledge, that at the same time, planet earth along with us, are propelled into the vacuum of space, in shearing shattering speeds. If we subject, the hapless fragile human being, in these tremendous unreal speeds, we will be lucky to find traces of the bones to verify its past existence.
And yet, here we are, alive and well, despite the speed we travel in space, to have the arrogance to enjoy, a peaceful morning. Peaceful. Anything else apart.
Centripetal force, the essence of gravity, what keep us pinned on the ground. That do not let us, being swept away from the face of planet earth, and not only us, but what keeps the dust, the rocks on the face of the moon and all the rest of the planets and other so-called heavenly bodies.
Gravity, that sucks us inwards, towards the centre of planet earth, to spare us the oblivion of our precious being, by the shattering speeds, our very own nurturing earth, is itself subjected to.
Apart from the solar system traveling at 135 miles per second, we have as well that
"The Earth rotates on its axis at about 1,100 miles an hour, a motion that creates day and night."
and
"The Earth orbits the Sun at about 67,000 miles an hour, a motion that takes one year."
and
"The Sun circles the Milky Way at a speed of about 486,000 miles per hour."
and
"And every object in the Universe is moving apart from the other objects as the Universe expands at a constantly accelerating rate."
Devastating forces that would have left nothing standing, long enough, that not only life nurtured, in the warm and welcome abode of planets, but even the existence of these wonderful incubators, if it wasn't for the protection offered by the gravitational forces, that not only effectively counteract against the shearing power of the speeds developed, by heavenly bodies in their endless journey in the vast space but even overcomes it, for us to enjoy the tranquility of nature.
Heavenly bodies in their endless journey around the centre of... The centre of .... their very own system or any other system they are part of. Earth orbiting around itself, moon orbiting around itself and moon orbiting around earth, the earth-moon system. Earth orbiting around the sun, the planets orbiting around the sun, the solar system around... Circularity.
Driven by gravity itself and by gravity is counteracted. The shearing speeds that the motion, its very own existence propagates and as it is counteracted by, at the same time. A dependency built-in, in the system, in each system by itself, the speed and the forces developed cannot be greater, than what the heavenly body can withstand. The speed of rotation around itself, as well as around the larger body in the system, would not be allowed to reach levels that would jeopardize its very own integrity. The seemingly hazardous journey, a gentle stroll in comparison.
How can we comprehend the nature of gravity, when we think of its appearance, as it vanishes down to the centre of a heavenly body. Attraction, of every piece of matter upon each other. Additive, as more and more pieces of matter accumulate, the stronger it becomes. Heavenly bodies borne out of dust, stardust as it has been found, accumulating into foci driven by chance (chance?) ... for more and more dust particles to gather up into the heavenly bodies which they become. What they are now. Matter may be pushed into coalescing, ... by the very vacuum surrounding it ... via pressures they are subjected to. Is it just a vacuum pressure effect or an actual attraction of matter objects. The actual rotation of a heavenly body around itself, a vacuum pressure effect. The same would hold valid, regarding the rotation of a heavenly body around its bigger counterpart in the system, rendering the presumed action at a distance character meaningless, what elevates gravity from a purely classical force into a fundamental force. Is the search for the graviton justified, or even the existence of gravitational waves feasible, the search for gravitational waves a futile endeavour.
The whole case, can be thought of in terms of systems. Systems within systems, a guiding principle universal for all systems. Systems that are dynamic ...
Oh, well fractal. Is there anything apparent in the galaxy system that would justify the term fractal? May be not merely in its spatial dimensions, but taking into account its evolution through time too. Energy dissipation. Energy being apparently high, at the very centre of a galaxy, stellar nurseries, black holes. Dissipating to lower and lower energies towards its perimeter. Fractal being characterized by its non-integral nature, non-integral dimensions. Is there any indications of non-integral dimensions in the galaxial system organisation?
What about warped spacetime, wormholes and the like. Does that not point towards a fractal evolution for the galaxy system. Gravity a mere manifestation of energy dissipation governed even by the Feigenbaum series concept.
Friday, 24 April 2009
.. a ... significance of Lyapunov exponents? ... to absorb chaos?
... to absorb chaos?
.. a ... significance of Lyapunov exponents? In their predictive(?) power to show whether a certain trajectory converges or diverges? Convergence or divergence determining the way that chaos is viewed by individuals? Diverging pathways, or for that matter constantly diverging pathways, result in what as seen as chaos and converging pathways create attractors, which can be seen as order?
... determining a measure of Lyapunov exponents out of the processes involved which will show whether the processes undertaken will bring about order or chaos? In almost everything which evades a thorough analysis by any other prescribed procedures but exhibiting chaotic tendencies?
Rigorous mathematics, scientific proof, all part of cognition which is taking place outside, from where it should be taking place. The human mind. As meaning is derived by mind itself, it can not materialise in spheres other than what the mind provides for. And attempting to frame meaning, with processes that the language provides it is a futile endeavor, because at the end the whole process must be accepted by the mind itself.
.. a ... significance of Lyapunov exponents? In their predictive(?) power to show whether a certain trajectory converges or diverges? Convergence or divergence determining the way that chaos is viewed by individuals? Diverging pathways, or for that matter constantly diverging pathways, result in what as seen as chaos and converging pathways create attractors, which can be seen as order?
... determining a measure of Lyapunov exponents out of the processes involved which will show whether the processes undertaken will bring about order or chaos? In almost everything which evades a thorough analysis by any other prescribed procedures but exhibiting chaotic tendencies?
Rigorous mathematics, scientific proof, all part of cognition which is taking place outside, from where it should be taking place. The human mind. As meaning is derived by mind itself, it can not materialise in spheres other than what the mind provides for. And attempting to frame meaning, with processes that the language provides it is a futile endeavor, because at the end the whole process must be accepted by the mind itself.
Space, a result of forces? Interaction of forces? It is bound to be.
New thoughts light up, in my mind... Exciting.
Space, a result of forces? Interaction of forces? It is bound to be.
As all these I have been working out, put into these posts .... are getting pieced up together, become coherent.
(Regression). I have to analyse this. The way it happens. What makes a thought developed independently, loose as is, with no ties (obvious?) with any other thoughts (residing in some other realm, context). But out of no-where, without warning, nevertheless click (systems exhibiting chaos' self-similarity?), or hook, or whatever, one with the other. They become connected, tag and drag along the entirety of the concept, notion, thought, idea; the bonus being, all the rest of the properties and attributes, these mental structures, are associated with. A bonus since, as the thinking develops, all these properties and attributes, branching-like extensions on all sides, are engaged in the thinking process. Being tags themselves, either concepts, or notions, or thoughts, or ideas, potentially concise and coherent mental structures, on their own right, they have all what is needed, to form by themselves, novel associations. The word 'concepts', as it comes into mind, with their properties (as they develop), provide the associations, and by virtue of their associations, cohere from ..(humble, incoherent, haphazard) beginnings ... into more inclusive concept circa thoughts.
Space, (as I have surmised in that post) was non-existent before the big bang, or in the manner we experience it right now. (Vast, solid objects within, immense, three dimensional, containing or expressed with or give substance to the word-concepts of macrocosm and microcosms). Space, distance developed fractally the world we live in, the universe, just a thin fractally developed sheet. Space, a reference frame fractally developed, 'sitting' on another deeply fundamental space
Space, a result of forces? Interaction of forces? It is bound to be.
As all these I have been working out, put into these posts .... are getting pieced up together, become coherent.
(Regression). I have to analyse this. The way it happens. What makes a thought developed independently, loose as is, with no ties (obvious?) with any other thoughts (residing in some other realm, context). But out of no-where, without warning, nevertheless click (systems exhibiting chaos' self-similarity?), or hook, or whatever, one with the other. They become connected, tag and drag along the entirety of the concept, notion, thought, idea; the bonus being, all the rest of the properties and attributes, these mental structures, are associated with. A bonus since, as the thinking develops, all these properties and attributes, branching-like extensions on all sides, are engaged in the thinking process. Being tags themselves, either concepts, or notions, or thoughts, or ideas, potentially concise and coherent mental structures, on their own right, they have all what is needed, to form by themselves, novel associations. The word 'concepts', as it comes into mind, with their properties (as they develop), provide the associations, and by virtue of their associations, cohere from ..(humble, incoherent, haphazard) beginnings ... into more inclusive concept circa thoughts.
Space, (as I have surmised in that post) was non-existent before the big bang, or in the manner we experience it right now. (Vast, solid objects within, immense, three dimensional, containing or expressed with or give substance to the word-concepts of macrocosm and microcosms). Space, distance developed fractally the world we live in, the universe, just a thin fractally developed sheet. Space, a reference frame fractally developed, 'sitting' on another deeply fundamental space
Sunday, 29 March 2009
Higgs boson existence?
About the Higgs boson in ars technica article 'Narrowing in on the Higgs boson'
"Since the LHC is anticipated to produce its first collisions later this year, it may not be long before we obtain clear evidence of the existence of the Higgs boson. I tend to think that this would be one of the least exciting answers possible, though. The real scientific treat would be if the LHC and other colliders can't find any Higgs particles. This would mean that the standard model, one of the shining examples of the power of particle physics and a theory on which a lot of physics rests, might be wrong; we would have to go back to the drawing board and invent something new."
Attributed as 'real scientific treat' if the colliders do not find any proof of the Higgs boson existence? Why would my mind stop at that particular sentence?
It is not its existence that is doubted, ... but its existence in a ... free form in the universe? ... that the universe is inhabited by a vast number of Higgs bosons, hiding obscuring their presence? ... it is what part of the universe they inhabit, it's what matters.
While this is unlikely, seeing as how the experimentalists have found 60 of the 61 particles that appear within the standard model, it sure would make the next few years interesting, both for scientists in the field and interested third parties like science journalists."
"Since the LHC is anticipated to produce its first collisions later this year, it may not be long before we obtain clear evidence of the existence of the Higgs boson. I tend to think that this would be one of the least exciting answers possible, though. The real scientific treat would be if the LHC and other colliders can't find any Higgs particles. This would mean that the standard model, one of the shining examples of the power of particle physics and a theory on which a lot of physics rests, might be wrong; we would have to go back to the drawing board and invent something new."
Attributed as 'real scientific treat' if the colliders do not find any proof of the Higgs boson existence? Why would my mind stop at that particular sentence?
It is not its existence that is doubted, ... but its existence in a ... free form in the universe? ... that the universe is inhabited by a vast number of Higgs bosons, hiding obscuring their presence? ... it is what part of the universe they inhabit, it's what matters.
While this is unlikely, seeing as how the experimentalists have found 60 of the 61 particles that appear within the standard model, it sure would make the next few years interesting, both for scientists in the field and interested third parties like science journalists."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
