SHF posts #24 - final update?
12/1/24
e, base of the natural logarithm and the complex-number quantized unit function vector (e^iθ) [magnitude is impervious to calculus - radial vector just goes around the 4 quadrants (in π/2* quantized steps) on the Argand circle (8 steps total, including the back, per 'full' revolution)].
*[aka 90°]
Looks like pacman, who is eating quanta in a grid-maze while being chased by ghosts!
Wrap-around space-warp portals.
Fractal-braneworld wonders abound - everywhere you look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dScq4P5gn4A
Remember, this 12 Q-Pair pattern underlying everything is 12 quanta, each with its associated pair from the back of the "2-D" Argand depiction (actually 4-D since both sides are involved).
Another way to think of it is:
1 -> 3 -> 6 -> 12 -> 24
That is, there isn't really even "one thing" since it has a ghost ('i^real' in the other realm) and then becomes three which have ghosts, which have ghosts, which have ghosts.
Why stop there? Because nothing new is happening once you have 12+ and 12-.
Prior to that, the doubling/halving (one becoming two, doubling, in our normal thinking also involves halving) was not fully balanced. The best way to understand it is if you are familiar with differentiating (or integrating) the sine (or cosine, its "quantum pair") function. If you recall, it takes four steps to come back to sin again [eg. diff: sin -> cos -> -sin -> -cos -> sin].
In other words, 24 is like one here - as in "whole", in a way.
That's the best way to think of it although I realise it will seem almost arbitrary - until you realise it only seems that way compared to how things seemed prior to this new understanding and it is actually just the natural complex-n way of things.
Another hurdle I guess - you have to go with your instinct - the opposite of the "scientific method" (a logically false "method" as far as the complex-n Uni is concerned).
Similar (the same in fact) way to understand e (unlike π, it is not really possible to "see" e's role so easily in normal Boolean thinking - it relates to quantization itself).
Anyway, after all that, I just wanted to give you a fun example of how we have been unwittingly making things to the fundamental pattern all our "lives"
BILLIARDS:
Maybe not too familiar to some but it's like Snooker (same 12ft table) but with only one red (on the "black" spot) and each player has a white (one with a spot on it usually).
You score points by potting the red or the opponent's white (left on the table when they breakdown) , or going in-off the red or the opponent's white (pocketing your own white and either of the other balls if you like) or by making a canon wherein you hit both the red ball and the opponents white or any combination of the above.
Really not too important - here's the cool bit:
The table (like regular pool) has six pockets and six cushions (side-rails).
Balls can go into the pockets in play (+) and out of the pockets in reset (-)
The balls interact with the cushions with both the angle of incidence (-) and the angle of reflection (+)
So, that's:
12+ [6 pockets + 6 cushions]
12- [6 anti-pockets + 6 anti-cushions]
Cue ball is origin.
The red ball is like the tonic in the Musical scale or the atom in the Standard Model - the player in the pattern.
So, you see we have been doing things following this pattern without realising it.
The upshot is, the further you stray from it the worse things get, basically...
Instinct always leads to something close to the fundamental pattern - "overthinking" (doubting your instinct) leads to Tenball and other such disasters...
[Tenball]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK7pNJqtXwY
Lots more of that (infinite ammounts for you to find) if you enjoyed it.
Reminder of the list of key examples from the proof (see earlier post here for links):
Fundamental 12 Q-Pair pattern found underlying all structures [at all fractal scales in {real|dark} complex-n Universe].
Key examples:
Standard Model of the atom:
12 particles (6 leptons, 6 quarks)
12 anti-particles (6 anti-leptons, 6 anti-quarks)
The photon is the "origin" of the Argand circle.
Musical scale:
12 intervals up (twelfth-root of 2 factor between each in frequency)
12 intervals down (twelfth-root of 2 divisor between each in frequency)
Tuning reference is "origin".
Earth Year:
12 Full Moon phases
12 New Moon phases
SUN is "origin".
Clock face:
12 ordinals AM
12 ordinals PM
Atomic clock reference (if you are lucky) is "origin".
Human Genome:
12 pairs of chromosomes [11 pairs of homologous chromosomes + 1 pair sex chromosomes] - M
12 pairs of chromosomes [11 pairs of homologous chromosomes + 1 pair sex chromosomes] - F
Mitochondrial DNA is "origin".
jfeldt said: ↑
You are dropping some particles. What about the gluons, W and Z bosons and the Higgs?
I referred to this earlier, essentially they are ghosts of "quantum misunderstanding".
The Universe will produce results for you that are meaningless when you don't understand the complex-n twist to it all (double-slit, etc..).
Once you realise that the chaos/confusion on top of the simple structure is not actually "there" (structurally) then you realise why it looks the way it does experimentally/observationally (not the way it "is").
Nothing to be embarrassed about, we all got here by doing what we did/do.
Rick Robson said: ↑
I guess you hit the nail here if you referred to the intuition, which has been scientifically studied and discovered some nuts and bolts about how and where it functions -- in the caudate nucleus or the putamen (structures of the basal ganglia), besides being empirically proven its essential functions. It was also scientifically proven that this brain's region was more developed is some ancient/native people, like for example the native Americans from US (IIRC the Apaches), the native Mexicans (Mayas, Aztecs). There are quite a few scientific papers on this subject, easy to find on the web, but I'm out of time to link some of them right now.
I don't read other research (unless I happen to) but it sounds interesting.
I would only say that the way to actually solve the Universe is not to go deep on details but rather the opposite [coupled with a broad observational history - "seen it all" kind of life (not literally, of course)].
Turns out the details are not part of the underlying structure but are the "chaos" from the mapping between complex-n Universe and us.
Anyone who still wants the mapping explained linearly hasn't understood intuition.
Just as the circular argument for e^iθ (= cosθ + isinθ ) is not "understood" completely in normal thinking (it's classically "infinite" to start with).
This is not so much an analogy as an equivalence.
Euler's formula - Wikipedia
Evethingandnothing said: ↑
Clear enough. It's religion.
As above, it is the same brain(s) action.
Everything(real, imagined or otherwise) is in that equation, after all.
What you make of it all is up to you - my favourite thing about this finding.
So, you are free to ignore me completely, as a mathematically proven (to an established logical certainty) fact.
Rick Robson:
jfeldt said: ↑
You are dropping some particles. What about the gluons, W and Z bosons and the Higgs?
Interesting points you raised here. And as you mentioned the Higgs Boson, I'd like to hear your opinion on these Dr. Jack Sarfatti's (again ha ha!) comments some days ago:
"... the universe is basically like a super fluid, cosmic super fluid[vacuum condensate], in fact the dark energy and the dark matter are simply two variations on that, that's what people don't understand, [Dark Matter] it's different phases of theHiggs condensate. Because in fact if you go to standard quantum mechanical books, it's just standard stuff, I don't know what's with these people! If you have a uh you know Bosons, spins 1, spin 0, spin 1 and spin 2 virtual particles inside the vacuum, they create dark energy they create an anti-gravity field according to ordinary quantum mechanics. They have negative pressure, the negative pressure dominates the positive energy density. So, and that's in standard textbooks, okay? Let me finish, let me finish! The virtual fermion-antifermion pairs are the opposite, so that's dark matter. So, wherever there's dark matter it's a quantum vacuum phase, where the dark matter is the fermion-antifermion virtual pairs in the vacuum. They there's more, they have a higher density than the virtual bosons, and that's obvious because the virtual fermion-antifermion pairs tend to clump, there's attraction. So they clump in smaller scales. And the virtual bosons they're anti so they spread out! So it's all very simple! It's simple but the people are stupid! I mean, I mean even smart people are stupid ha ha you know, they're looking for particles they're not going to find! Looking for Dark Matter particles or dark energy particles is the same as when Micherson and Morley were looking for the motion of the Earth through the Ether with the interferometer! That's not a real particle effect, it's a virtual particle inside the vacuum, that's all , it's a Zero Point Energy effect. Again , spin one, spin two and spin zero 0 point vacuum energy is anti-gravity. Whereas spin one half & spin three halves your fermionic 0 point energy is dark matter, is attractive."
What's even more interesting is that Dr. Sarfatti is not the only physicist with such an unconventional interpretation, also Dr. John Peacock says the same thing on his book Cosmological Physics (precisely in the first chapter); as well as Dr. Peter W. Milonni on his 1994 paper (Milonni, P.W. (1994) The Quantum Vacuum. American ... SCIRP https://www.scirp.org › reference › referencespapers) and his book "The Quantum Vacuum". Awesome stuff.
There's a famous Dr. Milonni's statement that's ever amazing to remember:
"In modern physics, the classical vacuum of tranquil nothingness has been replaced by a quantum vacuum with fluctuations of measurable consequence."
.
JFeldt (jfeldt):
Rick Robson said: ↑
Interesting points you raised here. And as you mentioned the Higgs Boson, I'd like to hear your opinion on these Dr. Jack Sarfatti's (again ha ha!) comments some days ago:
"... the universe is basically like a super fluid, cosmic super fluid [vacuum condensate], in fact the dark energy and the dark matter are simply two variations on that, that's what people don't understand, [Dark Matter] it's different phases of the Higgs condensate. Because in fact if you go to standard quantum mechanical books, it's just standard stuff, I don't know what's with these people! If you have a uh you know Bosons, spins 1, spin 0, spin 1 and spin 2 virtual particles inside the vacuum, they create dark energy they create an anti-gravity field according to ordinary quantum mechanics. They have negative pressure, the negative pressure dominates the positive energy density. So, and that's in standard textbooks, okay? Let me finish, let me finish! The virtual fermion-antifermion pairs are the opposite, so that's dark matter. So, wherever there's dark matter it's a quantum vacuum phase, where the dark matter is the fermion-antifermion virtual pairs in the vacuum. They there's more, they have a higher density than the virtual bosons, and that's obvious because the virtual fermion-antifermion pairs tend to clump, there's attraction. So they clump in smaller scales. And the virtual bosons they're anti so they spread out! So it's all very simple! It's simple but the people are stupid! I mean, I mean even smart people are stupid ha ha you know, they're looking for particles they're not going to find! Looking for Dark Matter particles or dark energy particles is the same as when Micherson and Morley were looking for the motion of the Earth through the Ether with the interferometer! That's not a real particle effect, it's a virtual particle inside the vacuum, that's all , it's a Zero Point Energy effect. Again , spin one, spin two and spin zero 0 point vacuum energy is anti-gravity. Whereas spin one half & spin three halves your fermionic 0 point energy is dark matter, is attractive."
What's even more interesting is that Dr. Sarfatti is not the only physicist with such an unconventional interpretation, also Dr. John Peacock says the same thing on his book Cosmological Physics (precisely in the first chapter); as well as Dr. Peter W. Milonni on his 1994 paper ( Milonni, P.W. (1994) The Quantum Vacuum. American ... SCIRP https://www.scirp.org › reference › referencespapers) and his book "The Quantum Vacuum". Awesome stuff.
There's a famous Dr. Milonni's statement that's ever amazing to remember:
"In modern physics, the classical vacuum of tranquil nothingness has been replaced by a quantum vacuum with fluctuations of measurable consequence."
.Click to expand...
Virtual particles might produce negative pressure, but we should see that effect in all of our gravitational measurements, but we only see the effect of dark energy on large scale measurements, so that would need to be explained.
For all we know the vacuum is the same everywhere and the Higgs field is a scalar with the same vacuum expectation value everywhere, so if it has a change in the vacuum expectation value in certain locations, that might be an explanation (I’d have to work it out to see if it makes sense to me), but it would just kick the can down the road since then a new mechanism would need to be invented to explain why it is different in certain locations.
Rick Robson [RR]:
jfeldt said: ↑
Virtual particles might produce negative pressure, but we should see that effect in all of our gravitational measurements, but we only see the effect of darle energy on large scale measurements, so that would need to be explained.
Yea but it makes sense to me, as unlike dark matter it spreads out.
Uncle Fred (unclefred)
Rick Robson said: ↑
I agree with your viewpoint on that specific context. But, given some interesting aspects touched upon here, I'd like the word "religion" not turn this thread into another pointless discussions involving this infamous creation by humans called "religion". Hope we move on now, thanks!
You may not care for the term 'religion', but none of this is very comforting to materialists I wouldn't think.
RR
unclefred said: ↑
You may not care for the term 'religion', but none of this is very comforting to materialists I wouldn't think.
I'd think though that the materialists world would be about to completely collapse sooner or later.
RR
unclefred said: ↑
You may not care for the term 'religion', but none of this is very comforting to materialists I wouldn't think.
BTW, since you brought it up, just curious about what's your stance on this matrialists issue.
Me:
Fear (indeed, any negative emotion whatosever) was a Quantum Mechanics effect from before we understood Quantum Mechanics.
This finding (complex-n Universe) simply removes that negative aspect to thinking.
Everything else you think remains entirely up to you - you just no longer need to feel any negative emotion since Quantum Mechanics is now understood fully*.
* the actual understanding (both subjective and objective, intuition) is not at the same "level" as the 'problem' (objectively presented, "scientific method", etc..) itself, that's all - hence it perhaps seeming a little strange at first.
unclefred
Rick Robson said: ↑
BTW, since you brought it up, just curious about what's your stance on this matrialists issue.
The supernatural is simply that which is not fitting the materialist paradigm so if you disregard the baggage words carry, new words have to be used to describe our experience
John B. Good
unclefred said: ↑
You may not care for the term 'religion', but none of this is very comforting to materialists I wouldn't think.
Does "Theology is the Queen of the Sciences" help?
The book titled Thinking the Unthinkable had nothing to with what I am thinking of this discussion, but its title alone somehow seems relevant.
unclefred
John B Good said: ↑
Does "Theology is the Queen of the Sciences" help?
The book titled Thinking the Unthinkable had nothing to with what I am thinking of this discussion, but its title alone somehow seems relevant.
A good description of the Renaissance.
Me:
All interesting but lets keep the specifics of people's beliefs out for this particular place, in discussing this all.
This is a general theory of everything and simply allows the removal of any negativity in thought if you wish.
“Born Free” - Andy Williams
⸮DNE EHT
