tMoA

~ The only Home on the Web You'll ever need ~

    The Semiosic Universe

    Ashera
    Ashera

    Posts : 984
    Join date : 2011-03-16
    Location : Alienne Atreides

    The Semiosic Universe Empty The Semiosic Universe

    Post  Ashera on Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:25 am

    Yes, physics has its limits...

    Sent:
    Thu, December 17

    Subject: [4DWorldx] Signal-Nonlocality Signature of Inner Consciousness


















    [size=21]
    Signal-Nonlocality Signature of Inner
    Consciousness

    Jack Sarfatti

    adastra1@me. com

    Abstract

    What physical object in the brain et-al is the hologram? It must
    be a ground state


    condensate of some collective mode that is biologically relevant,
    e.g. Freeman-


    Vitiello modeli. My key point here is that
    signal nonlocality violation (Antony


    Valentiniii) of orthodox quantum
    physics is a necessary condition for inner qualia


    to emerge - for our consciousness to form.iii

    The key equation for signal nonlocality is

    P ! " 2 (1.1)

    When we pump an open dissipative system (e.g. a laser) we prevent
    the


    relaxation of H to zero - that's what we are (e.g. model of H.
    Frohlich
    iv
    on

    biomembrane) . The H function is ~ log of the ratio of the LHS to
    the RHS ---> 0 in


    sub-quantal thermal equilibrium, i.e. signal locality limit of no
    cloning a quantum


    et-al.

    H ~ log

    P(q)

    ! (q) 2 " dq
    (1.2)

    The integral is over the entire classical field/particle
    configuration space
    (q)

    moved by the pilot wave ! (q) . The spontaneous relaxation equation of motion

    for closed QM systems is

    dH

    dt

    = ! 1

    "

    H

    H (t ) =
    H (0)e

    ! t

    "

    (1.3)

    In contrast for an open pumped dissipative structure (e.g.
    Prigogine
    v, Hakenvi)

    dH

    dt

    = ! 1

    "

    H + # dE

    dt

    (1.4)

    ! dE dt
    = external pump power
    flow.


    Take the time Fourier transform for complex frequency also
    ! &" are kept

    constant for now, if not they induce cross-mode coupling via the
    convolution


    theorem.vii

    H!
    =

    "(i! +# )E!

    i!
    +# + 1

    $

    %& '

    () *

    =

    "E! (i! +# ) +i! +#
    + 1

    $

    %& '

    () *

    ! 2
    + # + 1

    $

    %& '

    () *

    2 (1.5)

    There is no AC resonance in this model because it is lacking a
    second order time


    derivative.

    i http://portal .. acm.org/citation .cfm?id=1594473

    ii http://eprintweb . org/S/authors/ All/va/Valentini

    iii In the Bohm ontology the classical electromagnetic field
    configuration and the electrical charges are


    classical hidden variables moved by their quantum pilot waves, but
    they do not back-react on their pilot


    waves. This is the approximation that Valentini calls “sub-quantal
    equilibrium” where the nonlocal


    entanglements cannot be used as a stand-alone communication
    channel. This is signal locality where


    H = 0
    and quanta in arbitrary states cannot be cloned. I note
    in passing that Hawking’s chronology


    protection conjecture preventing time travel to the past around
    closed timelike world lines seems to violate


    the no-cloning theorem of signal locality. When there is direct
    back-reaction of the hidden variables on


    their pilot waves we have signal nonlocality beyond the orthodox
    quantum theory that only applies to


    closed systems. An external pump opening the system maintains
    H ! 0 . In addition,
    if we have “More is


    different” (P.W. Anderson) spontaneous symmetry breaking in the
    ground state of the system we then have


    a set of Goldstone phases with which to possibly imprint and
    extract hologram information.


    iv http://www.usyd . edu.au/news/ science/397. html?newsstoryid =3955
    - recent
    update


    [size=7]“Their research, published in the US journal Proceedings of the
    National Academy of Sciences earlier in
    [/size]


    [size=7]2009 and in the US journal Physical Review E on 13 August 2009,
    provides evidence against a popular
    [/size]


    [size=7]model of human consciousness, which incorporates Fröhlich
    condensates in microtubules inside cells,
    [/size]


    [size=7]acting like cellular quantum computing
    elements.”
    [/size]


    This paper’s conclusion that Roger Penrose’s gravitational
    collapse of the quantum state in the human brain

    is falsified is disputed by Stuart Hameroff (e-mail to me
    12/15/09). It will take time to resolve this

    controversy. Hameroff says he only needs the “weak” phase of the
    Frohlich condensate not the strong

    coherent phase. Quite apart from that, the basic Penrose mechanism
    is general and not inextricably tied to

    the Frohlich condensate as a necessary condition. The origin of
    consciousness I propose in this paper is not

    dependent on Penrose’s gravitational collapse idea. Indeed, there
    is no actual collapse in the Bohm

    ontology that I use.

    v http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Ilya_Prigogine

    vi http://itp1 . uni-stuttgart. de/en/arbeitsgru ppen/?W=5

    viivii http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Convolution_ theorem

    In [size=9]mathematics[/size], the
    convolution theorem states that under
    suitable conditions the
    [size=9]Fourier[/size]


    [size=9]transform [/size]of a
    [size=9]convolution [/size]is the
    [size=9]pointwise product [/size]of Fourier
    transforms. In other words,


    convolution in one domain (e.g., [size=9]time
    domain
    [/size]
    ) equals point-wise multiplication in the other
    domain


    (e.g., [size=9]frequency
    domain
    [/size]
    ). Versions of the convolution theorem are true for
    various
    [size=9]Fourier-related[/size]


    [size=9]transforms[/size]. Let and be two
    [size=9]functions [/size]with
    [size=9]convolution [/size].. (Note that the
    [size=9]asterisk[/size]


    denotes convolution in this context, and not multiplication. … Let
    denote the Fourier


    transform [size=9]operator[/size], so and are
    the Fourier transforms of and , respectively.
    Then

    [/size]














    Ashera
    Ashera

    Posts : 984
    Join date : 2011-03-16
    Location : Alienne Atreides

    The Semiosic Universe Empty Re: The Semiosic Universe

    Post  Ashera on Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:42 am

    Monday, October 4, 2010 2:46 AM





























    The living word is not
    computable. This is very irritating, I know, but otherwise
    self-consciousness and self-determination would not be possible. Then
    always some kind of "group behavior" (even on the subatomar layers)
    would define reality. To what effects this politically leads we can
    experience daily. Not the best is done, but some compromise gets
    realized. What does this compromise "mirror" then in fact? Nothing but
    itself.

    The syntactic layer (as a third degree simulacrum) has
    overwhelmed semantics here. This is, the expected "child" of measurement
    (since it is self-referential in fact) never comes to birth.

    Alienne.

    The Semiosic Universe Gnot10









    Sent: Fri, October 1, 2010 1:53:51 PM
    Subject: [quantumrelativity] The Protoversal Seedling
    Omniverse as Another Many Worlds

    The Protoversal Seedling Omniverse as As Another Many Worlds

    In Lake'ch - I am another yourself!

    May the Inner Peace of Mind be with you in these times of the present, which shall soon blend your pasts with your futures.

    A
    great controversy in theoretical paradigm building is the notion of how
    a single universe containing many consciousness carriers can relate to
    the statistical distribution of those 'cosmic inhabitants'.


    With
    the birth of quantum theory in the early decades of the 20th century
    came the realisation, that the observer of physical phenomena is not
    absolutely independent from the
    system observed.

    Bohr,
    Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac, Born, Planck and Einstein, to mention
    but a few of the 'midwives' of quantum mechanics; constructed the
    mathematical formalisms to describe an interactive reality on the
    microscopic or quantum level of measurement and soon realised, that the
    quantum realm of the very small did not behave in the classical sense of
    the Greek-Newtonian physics on which the basis of scientific-physical
    reality stood.


    As
    the worlds of the very large, the scale of the universe as a macrocosm
    of galaxies behaving like cells in a biological body; had also become
    illuminated by the pioneering cosmologists like Einstein, Hubble and
    Sandage; a synthesis of the macroworlds with
    the microworlds became a new aim of research for all scientific
    thinkers, philosophers and experimenters concerned.


    Until
    Edwin Hubble discovered the expansion of the universe as a
    selfcontained entity; all light sources in the sky were assumed to be
    stars or 'island universes' or 'nebulae' within a single universe - now
    rendered dynamically expanding and no longer static in its hitherto
    presumed infinity-stasis of the Newtonian worldview.


    For
    the remainder of the 20th century then, natural philosophers of divers
    kinds attempted to blend the quantum nature of the macroscales with
    those of the microscales.

    Many
    difficulties surfaced, such as the incompatibility of the quantum
    formalisms, built on the metrics of subatomic and atomic displacements;
    with the metrics of the larger scales and as experimentally predicted
    and verified by the theories of Newton and Einstein.


    Eventually,
    and to accomodate the superposition of quantum selfstates derived from
    the quantum mechanics; a Many Worlds Cosmos was proposed by exponents
    such as Hugh Everett and David Deutsch.

    This
    is known as Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics and
    is proposed to build on and to be complementary for older quantum
    interpretations, such as the Copenhagen Interpretation,
    the Afshar Complementarity or the Cramer Transactional Interpretation.


    The
    MWI utilises the established quantum formalism of quantum field theory
    (QFT), which has been verified in countless experiments as a valid model
    to describe the statistical-probabilistic nature of the 'particle'
    distributions in the universe and its subsystems as 'stochastic'
    eigenvalues for 'standing waves' or 'Bohmian-pilotwaves' describing the
    density distribution of the 'particles'.


    But
    the MWI then proposes a Many Universe distribution on the
    macro-classical scale of the universe itself to account for a
    distribution of the superimposed selfstates in a
    linear-classical geometry.

    A
    particular distribution of eigenstates, say as 'materialisations' of
    the Schrödinger equation, are so not confined in one universe as
    either-or materialisations, but are split into a number of universes
    identical to the number of quantum eigenvalues derived from the equation
    as and-solutions.


    As
    the distribution of those solutions is summed to accomodate the
    original 'set of solutions' obtained in the one quantum universe; the
    linearity of Parallel Universes as superposed macroquantum universal
    eigenstates can be alternatively accomodated in the model of the Many
    Mind Interpretation or MMI. The MMI became formally introduced into the
    scientific database by Dieter Zeh in 1995 and
    expanded upon by Loewer and Albert.


    In
    the MWI, the universe occupies a single and fundamentally indeterminate
    quantum eigenstate with a noncollapsing wavefunction; but an evolution
    of this 'groundstate' or wavefunction into higher and higher complexity
    in the splitting of macrouniverses and a say 'original infinite mind'
    into many minds.

    Any
    act of measurement or observation so 'splits' an 'older parental' mind
    into its offspring in Decoherence, alternatively described as
    wavefunction collapse in the 'competing' models for the quantum reality.


    The
    MMI
    replaces the linear parallelism of singularised macrouniverses with an
    angular parallelism of multiconnectedness of the one macrouniverse.

    Here
    the proposition of the MWI with its split of two observers in say two
    different macrouniverses and so with two now different minds is replaced
    by a split of the two observers into two psychophysical universes.

    In
    other words, the one physical observer within the one macro-universe
    splits into two forms from its physical parent with a shadow
    psychophysical 'double' mirroring the former.


    There
    are many problems with both the MWI and the MMI, both as defined
    presently in their
    embryonic states of development; not at least the Definition of the
    Selection of the Singular SelfState as the Seed for the subsequent
    'splitting'.

    But
    the MMI is more appropriate to the development of the encompassing
    formalism, than the MWI and more shall be shared at the appropriate
    time.


    What
    the MMI does, is point to a necessary Duality between the physical and
    the metaphysical or the physical and the mental or the body and the mind
    - and also its necessary coupling in the 'negation' of this Descartian
    Duality.

    Both, the MWI and the MMI utilize the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics, say the formalisms of
    Schrödinger, Dirac and Klein-Gordon.

    Both
    so also 'copy' the inherent 'flaw' in those formalisms, to do with the
    nonlocality and the indeterminant qualities embodied in the
    quantum-field-approach.


    I
    direct the reader to familiarise with the concept of the Quantum Mind
    and especially the pioneering works of Evans Harris Walker; Roger
    Penrose, Stuart Hameroff, Max Tegmark (opposing Penrose and Hameroff);
    David Chalmers, Henry Stapp and most of all David Bohm, Karl Pribram
    and Fritjof Capra.


    Please find further below a brief (wikipedia) outline of
    the MWI and the MMI.


    IAmWhoIAm - A Quantum Computer!


    In Lake'ch - I am another yourself -Mirror, Mirror on the Wall!

    Peace Be in the mind of the ones, which can perceive themselves in the words of their own shadows!

    This message shall address the question of Identity and some of your recent ponderings.
    For this purpose, I shall briefly comment on the thread below.

    These
    messages are sent under the web identity of Tony Bermanseder and so you
    all perceive this to be the same identity as that of Tony B. from the
    past.
    This is not so!

    Why is it so hard to understand that the physical locale of an identity can be multi-faceted and multidimensional?

    To
    be Alice in Wonderland is possible for all of you; should you escape
    your limited self-labelings as being your bodies and being situated in
    spacetime within those, your bodies.

    Allow me to
    explain, what happened on June 24th, 2008 in a metaphorical and an allegorical sense.

    Many
    of Your 'extraordinary' - often term them 'spiritual' experiences
    relate to your entering the mirror of Alice Carroll to became teleported
    'in spirit' aka the electromagnetic monopolic radiation, which is
    independent on inertial parameters.

    In such a scenario, akin
    your dreaming realities, you are no longer colocal with the waking 3D
    reality of your sensory perceptions within the Gaian environs, but you
    become colocal with this reality in what you may label as your
    collective image.

    The Mayan saying 'In Lak'ech!', which annoys so many of you, is literally true in the encompassing multidimensional sense.

    One
    day, you shall understand the importance for the divisionary veil,
    which separates your #-dimensional reality from your multidimensional
    one; namely when this 'veil' will vanish in a holographic
    dimensional intersection between the two worlds, separating the 'Living
    Schrödinger Puppy' who you all are from the 'Dead Schrödinger Kitten'
    who you also are in your wavemind bodyparticle dualism.

    So later on on this message , I shall solve this 'Schrödinger Paradox' for your individual discernment.


    Being in embodiment does something to the spiritual creators which all of you are.
    Being
    in embodiment as creations pollutes the EMPTINESS and so 'blemishes'
    the MIRROR of your souls as the LIVING DEAD who you all are - being born
    with the expectation to die.

    Only the DEAD ALIVE ONES have
    emptied themselves, but as 'Running Water' of a say 'previous lifetime'
    or such labelings and your
    'cosmic life' is indeed eternal as can be considered in essays, such
    as in the parable of the 'Leaf on the Twig on the Branch of the Tree' ,
    describing the 'being without body' and so an inhabitant of the 'Land
    of the Dead', yet another essay on the subject matter to begin yet
    another journey of self-discovery.

    Many of you scoff at and
    ridicule the things, which your conscious ego often rejects; your
    subconscious ego fears, but accepts as part of you as itself and which
    your superconscious ego loves and embraces.
    Your superego is divinity
    itself and is absolutely equivalent to all other superegos, including
    that of Tony B.; the skeptics who know themselves and the antiskeptics
    who play the opposing polarity to the skeptics.

    There is a
    'little Lucifer' in all of you, as Vincent Price used to say and all of
    you are both your own creators as forethought and your own creations as
    afterthoughts.
    You all are in a continual process of recreating your
    identities in the 'most significant views of beingness' which you can
    conjure up or invent.

    The little child in Rwanda is in no manner less than the old man in New York; but it is not more either.
    You
    all are mirrors of each other and noone is in any form or manner more
    than any of you, but this same noone also is in no manner less, than any
    of you either.


    So
    when some of you ridicule and belittle the words from the 'mirros',
    meaning each other, you are simply belittling and ridiculing yourselves.
    And when some of you embrace and appreciate the words from the mirror, you are embracing and appreciating yourselves also.


    So
    all of you are mirrors of each other; but it is not required that any
    of you 'empty yourselves' to
    also avoid 'Charon, the Ferryman, across the River Styx'; as one
    mirror, say anyone of you as a template is enough within the cosmology
    of a holographic Universe as a Seedling Protoverse.

    Of course,
    you can decide to also do so and in doing so, you will attain resonance
    with a particular frequency, the frequency of the EMMR, which manifested
    the physical universe in a Quantum Big Bang.
    This frequency is
    precisely what your bodies are made of, should you reduce all of your
    embodiments into 'pure energy' according to E=mc2.
    Then
    to 'shortcut' your 'Journey in the Land of the Shadows' and only if
    you succeed to avoid the crossing of the 'River Styx' and 'Charon, the
    Ferryman'; can you mirror all of yourself as a template of the cosmic
    collective back to yourselves.
    It is a redemption of sorts, but a rescue of Faust from Mephistoles as a selfcreated Shadow Identity and so a
    rescue from itself as false images.
    The icecold heaven in your minds is as real as the firehot hell which is your body.
    They require to be 'married' you know; how else can the 'kingdom of the father' blend with the 'queendom of the mother'?

    So
    for the purpose to 'once and for all' to 'do away' with the false
    images of selfcreated gods and selfcreated devils; you are required to
    'double' yourselves in your own shadows and as mirrors of the oneness.


    This
    mirror of oneness has 'captured' all of your gods and devils and has
    'wedded' every one of your white angels to their appropriate black
    demons.

    Many will not understand what is shared in this message
    and this is appropriate; as the 'polarity' between state and antistate
    must continue to fulfil the 'timeline' set into place about 25,624 years
    ago.

    But this message has been given for the few to understand their own starry origins and destinies.

    I
    shall now intersperse the thread below to indicate the 'cosmic
    individuates snowflaked holograms' you all are represent in the 'greater
    order' of the Omniverse.


    "Jim Whitescarver"

    wrote:
    >
    > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Maria Odete Madeira
    > maria_odete_m@... wrote:
    > > [God created it all in seven days. Tony's explanation may take seven
    > > years to unfold within my mind (g)]
    > >
    > > Does that mean that we will have to wait seven years for a reply
    from Tony!?
    > > Couldn't a faster browser and or
    internet connection, or cosmonet
    > > connection, speed things up a little?

    "Maria, you are a pearl amongst pearls and the heavens have blessed you with a most lucid male intelligence.
    Your destiny shall be to acquire a matching female wisdom and sophia as a Queen of the realms.
    Just
    as the Iberian explorers discovered fruitful pastures, as they set sail
    for distant horizons; so shall you find your lost spirit of hope and
    faith from your Iberian past.

    You have suffered greatly under misconceptions and the ignorance of rulers and this has rendered your spirit weary and cautious.
    You
    shall rejoice in a blending of your mental understanding maleness with
    a mindful intuited female knowledge; which shall set you free."



    >
    > You
    underestimate Tony, seven days is more than enough for Him :-p
    (more below)
    >
    > > --- On Tue, 11/11/08, John Van Winkle jack_vanwinkle@... wrote:
    > >
    > > From: John Van Winkle jack_vanwinkle@...
    > >
    > > God created it all in seven days. Tony's explanation may take seven
    > > years to unfold within my mind (g)

    "John,
    you are a greatly beloved wisdom-keeper of most ancient days. You have
    come here in these troublesome times to bear much of the brunt of the
    fearful adherents of the separation.

    There
    are two equally valid ways of knowing the All. There is the way of
    Unity within Separation and there is the way of Separation within Unity.

    The
    Unity within Separation leads to a multiverse of separated universes -
    these are simply the people moving about, thinking of themselves as
    disconnected from each other.

    This
    self-perception then leads to the domination of the 'outer ego' of the
    conscious self - you have called this reptilian roots, but it is more
    than this, as the fourth 'brain' will reattain the roots in their grand
    realisations of the selfhoods. One can term this the Christed
    dragonhood.

    In terms of science, the
    multiverse so perceived consists of SEPARATED universes - drifting apart
    into oblivion in a 'heat death' or an ultraviolet catastrophy.


    The
    Separation within Unity encompasses all 'people-seeded' universes or
    monosongs of individuality as a Multiverse which is SELFCONNECTED and
    which is so 'mapable' as a one-to-one correspondence (isomorphism)
    within a Greater Omniverse.


    In terms of polarity, the Separation within Unity is the Individuality within the Body of God and the Unity
    within Separation is the Individuality without a Body encompassing the Individuations.


    Your
    commission, in this your final incarnation, is to be a messenger for
    the Separation within Unity and you have followed your predisposed path
    magnificently."


    >
    > Tony is that way, he answers by assimilating everything, a super human
    > feat. He blows everyone's mind that actually can understand any of
    > what he is saying.
    >
    > To me, the simple answer suffices, but it requires that we forget
    > everything we thought we knew, instead of assimilating it.
    >
    > If we forget inventing a "special" vacuum energy, and consider it
    > ordinary energy, at the zero point, simply because it is the lowest
    > energy, we recognize that it is restricted to expand at light speed
    > and thus may be lumpy rather than uniform. As all energy, the
    vacuum
    > would exhibit energy pressure, an dark energy is no surprise, it is
    > simply the zero point energy at about 185 GeV/cm^3.
    >
    > Since light speed in a medium is a function in no small part of energy
    > density, we can expect light in a denser region of the vacuum, to be
    > seen to be slow in the same manner as light speed is lower in glass.
    > Being slower than light, light in denser space would exhibit a rest
    > frame.
    >
    > In addition, the space time geodesics of general relativity may be
    > interpreted as reflecting an effectively denser vacuum in the vicinity
    > of masses. Time/frequency slows in a gravitational field and delays
    > light passing in the vicinity of masses as if the light was slowed by
    > some medium, such as a denser vacuum. From the distance, we calculate
    > that the light took extra time passing the mass, effectively moving
    > slower than
    light and exhibiting a rest frame.
    >
    > We can expect that anything exhibiting a rest frame will exhibit
    > gravity according to its energy in mass units. We would then except
    > to see the vacuum energy behave as dark (unseen) matter anywhere the
    > vacuum energy is actually denser or in the vicinity of masses.
    >
    > Is this any better? Is anything unclear? Or is there another point
    > of Tony's you want in jimspeak?
    >
    > Jim

    "Jim,
    you greatly beloved from the senate of the elders; you have come to
    exemplify the polarity of the original separation, the breaking of the
    cosmic symmetry, which allowed space and time to manifest and assured
    the 3rd dimension to become created.

    On the one hand you resonate in oneness with the transcended materiality and on the other hand you dissonate with your own
    wisdom.

    You exemplify both, Kali the
    Creator Goddess and Kali the Destroyer Goddess; in that you find
    yourself in a constant state of war within yourself.


    In this manner, you clearly show to the world, that the Mind of Man and the Body of Woman are INCOMPLETE.
    Your very own BEINGNESS manifests the WAVE of Mind of Oneness in selfcontradiction with its BODY form as a Particular.
    Instinctively, you understand, that the Oneness and Unity you seek, is compromised in the Particularisation of the embodiments.

    So you search for the Particularisation of the Wave in the attempt to GIVE A BODY to the UNITY of God.
    Dear One, YOU are the Body of God and the temple and Vessel and merkabah of your own- and so the world's deliverance.

    You

    are a PHASESHIFT of the PROTOVERSE and realising this and in joining or
    connecting to just one other such phaseshift, you will become a
    MULTIVERSE and thereby 'Free and Deliver God' from the 'broken symmetry'
    and the separation of the mental maleness from the mental femaleness.


    But
    you have known for a long time, that God as a father desires to become a
    Grandfather, thus requiring his Sons and Daughters to reproduce
    themselves in a grander cosmic selfidentification. The Multiverses are
    the Family of God and the Omniverse is the Kingdom of the FatherMother.

    So you can refine your seeking to MAKE PEACE with yourself.

    Your realisation of the discrete nature of the universe is also your key.
    This
    discretisation does not require displacement in principle, as it was
    the definition of the fractal itself, that defined the manifesto of
    space and
    time in the Planckian Action."




    Thanks Jim.

    I appreciate your kind interpretation of Tony's revelations. Tony and
    our friend Dennis Oku wished to complete the bridge between science and
    spirituality one for commercialization, the other for the uplift of
    knowledge for the progress of scientific understanding of a vibrational
    world made up solely of frozen thought forms.

    I come from a simpler gnostic that needs no external language for
    understanding. Tony and I can see I to eye, if not from word to mind. I
    have always admitted to being semantically challenged and present myself
    only as a reporter, maybe an interpreter.

    The message of old was never to the intelligentsia in the square but to
    the common man, the plebian, the fisherman inside each of us. This is
    what I attempt to put into words in a manner to embed a different
    worldview within the observing
    mind.

    Where I would say that all matter falls to the center, Tony and others
    have taken this to many different levels and sublevels.

    Where I would say that Thoughts are Things, Tony and others can explain
    the vast Intelligence and how it created something, our present, from
    Nothing, a Thought.

    Where I would say that all Creation came from one center and moves
    outward from the center in waves of creation and communicatng preset
    patterns, Tony would describe it for the scientific community in their
    own words.

    Where I and many others say, I AM ALL, or I AM, Tony explains how this
    is possible.

    Where I say All Knowledge come from Within, Tony explains how the
    Universe can be both inside and outside in a manner that many find hard
    to dispute.

    Thank you again Jim, It is many years since my poor brain knew the
    science and math behind Tony's inspired writings. In my dotage I have
    chosen
    to leave the shoemaker to his last, and I will stick to my last,
    and as they say "the last shall be first" (g)

    God is simple, we are complex.

    JohnV


    On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Carl Gustav wrote:
    > [and I do not doubt great minds like Newton and Tony]
    >
    > Now Jim, to compare Tony with God, that's okay, it's in proportion, but to
    > compare him with Newton, don't you think that goes a bit too far?


    "Carl-Gustav, beloved adversary; do you know how important your mission is for the overall balance of things?
    You consider yourself a prodigal son and a rebel to the status
    quo. Like a black sheep, you seek to be different and not to 'fall for the fallacies' of the collectives.

    Do you know, that your fleece is as white as snow?

    You
    are a typefication for the motto of the Unity within the Separation;
    and as you know, this modus operandi is as valid as its contra-type of
    the Separation within Unity.

    You know that
    in your paradigm, no encompassment and no gods are required as you have
    realised that you are equal to whatever god has become shared by the
    collective history of the human mental library.


    Your
    knowledge has given you great understanding; but your understanding is
    the wisdom of the outer ego and your consciousness of perception in
    regards to the worlds as you consider them reality.

    And yet you seek for the revelation of the inner being of
    yourself.

    Often you awake from nightmarish explorations and journeys, sent to you by your inner selfhood of the subconscious alter ego.
    Often you break out in sweaty exclamations of your body, not knowing that your superego is communicating to you.


    Carl, soon you will become an elder in the council of the orbs - a Black brotherhood blended with its Whiteness.
    I
    share a mystery with you; you have already become Whitnessed and
    because of this, you have also entered a mirror of sorts and this is the
    cause for certain discomforts.

    You have lost one third of something you thought inseperable of you and this something is a Shadow of your Body in
    Plato's Cave.


    Your mission Carl; is to
    ABSORB certain energies - for the Good of the Unity, which you still
    fear, but a Unity which shall give you much Joy and allow your
    splendiferous Passionate Nature to manifest in hitherto unexplored
    vestiges of your soul and creativity.


    Another secret I share with you; you know of other places in the universe, where you have been in disembodied form.

    You know of a place of deserts and a vastness, where loneliness can overwhelm.
    You are an expert on the abyss of the human soul dear Carl and much of your skepticism derives from your familiarities.

    But
    can you fathom the great mission of sharing the bottomless pit with the
    many who have not experienced the wilderness in the deepest
    recesses of their souls?

    Can you FEEL your soul as being more, than an ultimate construct of the human mind, which actually it is?
    One
    day you shall not ony feel your own essence, but also THINK the same in
    resonance and harmonisation of all your egos of selflabelings.


    Walk
    on into your own selfredemption dear Carl - you are like a dark
    watchhouse, which does not light the way for others, but an observing
    tower which absorbs the darkness of others as a foggy mist, so that they
    can see the light even without knowing that they are being 'shown the
    way' and in a sense being 'saved' by you - Carl Gustav - the Redeeming
    Dark Lucifer and Double-Secret Agent of the Light."


    Actually, God is the superset of Newton, Tony, Carl, insects, etc..
    Elements of the set are a referent to the set, only when they include
    the whole set in their being as
    exhibited more or less, by Newton,
    Tony, etc., and perhaps even the Pope, at times. I do not actually
    consider Tony God, but I do believe he expresses the prophetic, in his
    way, significantly, some of the time.

    Jim

    > 2008/11/11 Jim Whitescarver

    >>
    >> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Carl Gustav
    >> wrote:
    >> >
    >> > Oh man, now that I was expecting some more "Gnostic enlightenment" about
    >> > the Nothing, the One and the Everything!
    >>
    >> I was hoping someone would ask :-p
    >>
    >> Anything is Nothing more than the effect of the rest of the One
    >> universe, where is it exhibited only by interaction with Everything
    >> else, owning Nothing of its One existence within itself, independent
    >> of the quantum logical arrangement that exhibits
    it.
    >>
    >> > At least there was that revelation present in the "dead sea scrolls"
    >> > ("dead
    >> > see?") surprise that puts God working on the seventh day, which actually
    >> > makes sense since they didn't have unions back then, explains a lot
    >> > about
    >> > the universe being the way it is, really.
    >>
    >> Newton thought all Truth is encoded in the Bible, and I do not doubt
    >> great minds like Newton and Tony, but my simple mind see it as a
    >> hopless task, even Newton failed. I am always surprised to find all
    >> the Great Truths in all religions, when I seek them.
    >>
    >> > At least in Vertigo's Lucifer, the devil had his rest on the seventh day
    >> > after his own parallel creation.
    >>
    >> Indeed, creation and destruction go hand in hand.
    >>
    >> Jim









    Ashera
    Ashera

    Posts : 984
    Join date : 2011-03-16
    Location : Alienne Atreides

    The Semiosic Universe Empty Re: The Semiosic Universe

    Post  Ashera on Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:46 am

    I
    use my own approaches, convinced that they are more far reaching and
    far more lively. And they are potentially understandable. If they are
    not understood it is not my problem. Not departing from some universal
    equipartition of consciousness anyway...



    Nothing
    in Penrose*s approaches (full of ideologisms and hypostases btw.) that
    we could not scrutinize and explain by the means of textual sciences -
    and it already has been done.



    I only can laugh about monoglossic authors hiding behind objectivity...

    But what is the use of reasoning that again?

    Truth is a power play...

    Alienne.

    The Semiosic Universe Gnot10


    From: Allen Francom
    To: quantumrelativity@yahoogroups.com
    Cc:
    Sent: Wednesday, December 1, 2010 4:40:36 AM
    Subject: Re: [quantumrelativity] the Universe Before the Big Bang


























    I used to not like Penrose much. It took a
    long time. He, a long time ago, argued that bits are no good for the
    quantum, because they'd need more states. It was then, way way back
    then, I was like "ever hear of software ?"


    i.e., "use more of 'em".


    I'm not sure he's ever let go of that. But everywhere else he has been mind opening.






    On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Alienne Laval [email=alienne_v@yahoo.com][/email]wrote:



















    Not that I support Penrose*s ideas unquestioned...

    Alienne.


    -----------------



    November 26, 2010







    "We Can Glimpse the Universe Before the Big Bang": One of World's Leading Physicists






    <img style="font-family:Courier New, courier, monaco, monospace, sans-serif;" alt="Wmap_band_iqumap_r9_5yr_1_K_v3_12arcmin_nonlin_RGB" title="Wmap_band_iqumap_r9_5yr_1_K_v3_12arcmin_nonlin_RGB" border="0">

    The
    circular patterns within the cosmic microwave background suggest that
    space and time did not come into being at the Big Bang but that our
    universe in fact continually cycles through a series of "aeons,"
    according to University of Oxford theoretical physicist Roger Penrose,
    who says that data collected by NASA's WMAP satellite supports his idea
    of "conformal cyclic cosmology".
















    Penrose's finding runs directly counter to the widely accepted
    inflationary model of cosmology which states that the universe started
    from a point of infinite density known as the Big Bang about 13.7
    billion years ago, expanded extremely rapidly for a fraction of a second
    and has continued to expand much more slowly ever since, during which
    time stars, planets and ultimately humans have emerged. That expansion
    is now believed to be accelerating due to a scientific X factor called
    dark energy and is expected to result in a cold, uniform, featureless
    universe.

    Penrose, however, says Physics World, takes issue with
    the inflationary picture "and in particular believes it cannot account
    for the very low entropy state in which the universe was believed to
    have been born – an extremely high degree of order that made complex
    matter possible. He does not believe that space and time came into
    existence at the moment of the Big Bang but that the Big Bang was in
    fact just one in a series of many, with each big bang marking the start
    of a new "aeon" in the history of the universe."

    The core concept
    in Penrose's theory is the idea that in the very distant future the
    universe will in one sense become very similar to how it was at the Big
    Bang. Penrose says that "at these points the shape, or geometry, of the
    universe was and will be very smooth, in contrast to its current very
    jagged form. This continuity of shape, he maintains, will allow a
    transition from the end of the current aeon, when the universe will have
    expanded to become infinitely large, to the start of the next, when it
    once again becomes infinitesimally small and explodes outwards from the
    next big bang. Crucially, he says, the entropy at this transition stage
    will be extremely low, because black holes, which destroy all
    information that they suck in, evaporate as the universe expands and in
    so doing remove entropy from the universe."

    The foundation for
    Penrose's theory is found in the cosmic microwave background, the
    all-pervasive microwave radiation that was believed to have been created
    when the universe was just 300,000 years old and which tells us what
    conditions were like at that time.

    The evidence was obtained by
    Vahe Gurzadyan of the Yerevan Physics Institute in Armenia, who analysed
    seven years' worth of microwave data from WMAP, as well as data from
    the BOOMERanG balloon experiment in Antarctica. Penrose and Gurzadyan
    say they have clearly identified concentric circles within the data –
    regions in the microwave sky in which the range of the radiation's
    temperature is markedly smaller than elsewhere.
    The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation is the remnant
    heat from the Big Bang. This radiation pervades the universe and, if we
    could see in microwaves, it would appear as a nearly uniform glow across
    the entire sky. However, when we measure this radiation very carefully
    we can discern extremely faint variations in the brightness from point
    to point across the sky, called "anisotropy". These variations encode a
    great deal of information about the properties of our universe, such as
    its age and content. The "Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe" (WMAP)
    mission has measured these variations and found that the universe is
    13.7 billion years old, and it consists of 4.6% atoms, 23% dark matter,
    and 72% dark energy.

    According to Penrose and Gurzadyan, as
    described in arXiv: 1011.3706, these circles allow us to "see through"
    the Big Bang into the aeon that would have existed beforehand. They are
    the visible signature left in our aeon by the spherical ripples of
    gravitational waves that were generated when black holes collided in the
    previous aeon.

    The "Penrose circles" pose a huge challenge to
    inflationary theory because this theory says that the distribution of
    temperature variations across the sky should be Gaussian, or random,
    rather than having discernable structures within it.

    Julian
    Barbour, a visiting professor of physics at the University of Oxford in
    an interview with Physics World, says that these circles would be
    "remarkable if real and sensational if they confirm Penrose's theory".
    They would "overthrow the standard inflationary picture", which, he
    adds, has become widely accepted as scientific fact by many
    cosmologists. But he believes that the result will be "very
    controversial" and that other researchers will look at the data very
    critically. He says there are many disputable aspects to the theory,
    including the abrupt shift of scale between aeons and the assumption,
    central to the theory, that all particles will become massless in the
    very distant future. He points out, for example, that there is no
    evidence that electrons decay.

    The image at top of the page shows the CMB fluctuations from the
    5-year WMAP survey. The average brightness corresponds to a temperature
    of 2.725 Kelvins (degrees above absolute zero; equivalent to -270 C or
    -455 F). The colors represent temperature variations, as in a weather
    map: red regions are warmer and blue regions are colder than average by
    0.0002 degrees. This map was formed from the five frequency bands shown
    below in such a way as to suppress the signal from our own Milky Way
    Galaxy.

    Casey Kazan via Physics World and arXiv: 1011.3706.

    http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/11/we-can-glimpse-the-universe-before-the-big-bang-one-of-worlds-leading-physicists-.html
    Ashera
    Ashera

    Posts : 984
    Join date : 2011-03-16
    Location : Alienne Atreides

    The Semiosic Universe Empty Re: The Semiosic Universe

    Post  Ashera on Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:49 am

    We called that "endless semiosis" in the 1980s. A universe then can be understood as a temporary makeshift.


    It is a textual approach in its core, even if they do not get that.


    Nothing new what he found out there.



    Alienne.


    The Semiosic Universe Gnot10

    Sent: Thursday, December 2, 2010 1:11:59 PM
    Subject: [quantumrelativity] The Cyclic Universe of Roger Penrose





























    SERAFINA - Posted 31 Hours Ago



    Have Physicists Found Echoes From Before the Big Bang?


    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/11/29/have-physicists-found-echoes-from-before-the-big-bang/
    The Semiosic Universe Spreddit1 The Semiosic Universe Facebook_share_icon The Semiosic Universe FarkItButton2_16x16 . .
    0diggsdigg


    The Semiosic Universe WMAP-rings The Big Bang was not the beginning, Roger Penrose believes.
    The eminent Oxford physicist has long advocated the wild idea of
    “conformal cyclic cosmology,” a cyclical universe without beginning or
    end in which the Big Bang 13.75 billion years ago was simply one of
    many. This month, Penrose pushed his idea further: His team says
    it has detected a pattern in the cosmic microwave background—radiation
    left over from just after the Big Bang—that represents the echo of
    events that occurred before the Big Bang itself.
    Penrose examined the data from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP ), the mission that just completed
    nine years of surveying the cosmic microwave background across the sky.
    His study points to concentric circular patterns in the WMAP data where
    he says he found something surprising:
    The circular features are regions where tiny temperature variations
    in the otherwise uniform microwave background are smaller than average.
    Those features, Penrose said, cannot be explained by the highly
    successful inflation theory, which posits that the infant cosmos
    underwent an enormous growth spurt, ballooning from something on the
    scale of an atom to the size of a grapefruit during the universe’s first
    tiny fraction of a second.
    Inflation would either erase such patterns or could not easily generate them. [Science News ]

    By Penrose’s thinking, those circles are the calling cards of something big that happened in the universe
    before our Big Bang and reverberated after it. Like the birth and death of previous universes.
    From calculations made by Penrose, he believes that as each universe evolved,
    the catastrophic collisions between supermassive black holes (the black hole behemoths
    living in the centers of galaxies) would have generated gravitational waves within that universe’s lifetime.
    When the next universe exploded into being, these gravitational waves were converted into energy,
    ensuring their “fingerprint” bled through to the next universe.
    The pulse of energy caused by the transfer of gravitational waves
    from one universe to the next would have caused a kick to the distribution of dark matter,
    creating uniform, spherical patterns in the current universe. [Discovery News ]

    So what are we to make of this? I put it to cosmologist Paul Davies , who says the question rests with inflation.
    “Penrose was always been a doubter of inflation,” Davies says. “It’s against the fashion of the moment,
    but that’s fine. (And) if you abandon inflation, what happened before the Big Bang could leave an echo.”
    That’s because inflation would smooth out that echo. (Another possibility, he says, is idea of “incomplete inflation ,”
    in which inflation could have existed but not been thorough enough to smooth out all echoes.
    That theory wouldn’t require abandoning inflation to accommodate an echo in the microwave background.)
    However, Davies says, even if the finding is correct, this explanation for it
    —a black hole smash-up from before the Big Bang leaving its fingerprint after the Big Bang
    —isn’t the only possibility. “People have been looking for concentric rings
    in the cosmic microwave background for a while,” he says,
    because such a finding could support several different ideas.
    One of those alternate explanations plays on the idea of our universe being a “bubble” created by inflation;
    if two bubbles collided, he says, the result could leave a cosmic microwave echo.
    Lastly, he says, the source of the study makes it a tad suspect.
    “You’d expect people at the sharp end of the data to make an announcement like this.
    You wouldn’t expect a mathematician.” So I asked Charles Barrett, who was the lead investigator of WMAP,
    and in his reply email he too expressed skepticism:
    “Unfortunately, the paper does not provide the necessary detail on how they performed their calculations.
    I am concerned that the noise properties and pattern of the WMAP instrumental sky sampling
    were not properly taken into account in their analysis.
    If these are not handled correctly then spurious results are likely. In my opinion,
    the paper should have specified the data analysis steps in detail, but it did not.”

    Penrose counters that he looked at not only WMAP but also data from a second mission,
    BOOMERang , which confirmed the pattern he saw.
    At the moment, then, these huge claims about the nature of the universe are bogged down
    in competing calculations and critiques of calculations. The future of this question could lie
    with the Planck mission by the European Space Agency,
    which is presently mapping the cosmic microwave background in greater detail than WMAP.
    In the meantime, we get to wonder. Says physicist Shaun Cole :
    “It’s a revolutionary theory and here there appears to be some data that supports it.
    In the standard Big Bang model, there’s nothing cyclic; it has a beginning and it has no end.
    The philosophical question that’s sensible to ask is ‘what came before the Big Bang?’;
    and what they’re striving for here is to do away with that ‘there’s nothing before’
    answer by making it cyclical.” [BBC News ]




    Edit Delete
    The Semiosic Universe Big_profile My Posts
    Admin
    Posts: 479
    Tonyblue - Posted a few Seconds Ago




    Roger Penrose, whose work I often use in Quantum Relativity; is basically on the right path of reconstructing the cosmogenesis.
    However the cyclic universe is built on its own protoversal seed and the 'Big Crunches' are electromagnetic and not intertial.
    This means, that there will be no gravitational contraction in a
    shrinking of the protoverse; but the electromagnetic lightpath becomes
    multidimensional and multivalued. One can so model this on a cyclic
    electromagnetic cosmology with a 'Hubble heartbeat' of a semibeat of so
    16.9 Billion years.
    Indeed, the Inflation PRECEDED the Big Bang and this is the simple solution for the 'inflation paradoxes' as some might term it.
    The WMAP data in the picture in this post actually is descriptive for
    the wavequark model in Quantum Relativity with an inner gluonic
    (anti)neutrino kernel or core, an Inner Mesonic (down quark) Ring and
    an Outer Leptonic (strange quark) Ring.

    For further details, a consultation of the Thuban archives on http://cosmosdawn.com/ is suggested.
    Tonyblue
    Ashera
    Ashera

    Posts : 984
    Join date : 2011-03-16
    Location : Alienne Atreides

    The Semiosic Universe Empty Sign-Locality

    Post  Ashera on Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:52 am

    The sign-local potential of protonarrativity...

    Alienne.

    The Semiosic Universe Gnot10


    -----------------------------

    Quantum Honeybees


    http://www.discover.com/issues/nov-97/features/quantumhoneybees1263/

    How could bees of little brain come up with anything as complex as a
    dance language? The answer could lie not in biology but in
    six-dimensional math and the bizarre world of quantum mechanics.

    By Adam Frank

    DISCOVER Vol. 18 No. 11 | November 1997 | Space

    Honeybees don’t have much in the way of brains. Their inch-long bodies
    hold at most a few million neurons. Yet with such meager mental
    machinery honeybees sustain one of the most intricate and explicit
    languages in the animal kingdom. In the darkness of the hive, bees
    manage to communicate the precise direction and distance of a newfound
    food source, and they do it all in the choreography of a dance.
    Scientists have known of the bee’s dance language for more than 70
    years, and they have assembled a remarkably complete dictionary of its
    terms, but one fundamental question has stubbornly remained unanswered:
    How do they do it? How do these simple animals encode so much detailed
    information in such a varied language? Honeybees may not have much
    brain, but they do have a secret.

    This secret has vexed Barbara Shipman, a mathematician at the University
    of Rochester, ever since she was a child. I grew up thinking about bees,
    she says. My dad worked for the Department of Agriculture as a bee
    researcher. My brothers and I would stop at his office, and sometimes he
    would show us the bees. I remember my father telling me about the
    honeybee’s dance when I was about nine years old. And in high school I
    wrote a paper on the medicinal benefits of honey. Her father kept his
    books on honeybees on a shelf in her room. I’m not sure why, she says.
    It may have just been a convenient space. I remember looking at a lot of
    these books, especially the one by Karl von Frisch.

    Von Frisch’s Dance Language and Orientation of Bees was some four
    decades in the making. By the time his papers on the bee dance were
    collected and published in 1965, there was scarcely an entomologist in
    the world who hadn’t been both intrigued and frustrated by his findings.
    Intrigued because the phenomenon Von Frisch described was so startlingly
    complex; frustrated because no one had a clue as to how bees managed the
    trick. Von Frisch had watched bees dancing on the vertical face of the
    honeycomb, analyzed the choreographic syntax, and articulated a
    vocabulary. When a bee finds a source of food, he realized, it returns
    to the hive and communicates the distance and direction of the food to
    the other worker bees, called recruits. On the honeycomb, which Von
    Frisch referred to as the dance floor, the bee performs a waggle dance,
    which in outline looks something like a coffee bean--two rounded arcs

    bisected by a central line. The bee starts by making a short straight
    run, waggling side to side and buzzing as it goes. Then it turns left
    (or right) and walks in a semicircle back to the starting point. The bee
    then repeats the short run down the middle, makes a semicircle to the
    opposite side, and returns once again to the starting point.

    It is easy to see why this beautiful and mysterious phenomenon captured
    Shipman’s young and mathematically inclined imagination. The bee’s
    finely tuned choreography is a virtuoso performance of biologic
    information processing. The central waggling part of the dance is the
    most important. To convey the direction of a food source, the bee varies
    the angle the waggling run makes with an imaginary line running straight
    up and down. One of Von Frisch’s most amazing discoveries involves this
    angle. If you draw a line connecting the beehive and the food source,
    and another line connecting the hive and the spot on the horizon just
    beneath the sun, the angle formed by the two lines is the same as the
    angle of the waggling run to the imaginary vertical line. The bees, it
    appears, are able to triangulate as well as a civil engineer.

    Direction alone is not enough, of course--the bees must also tell their
    hive mates how far to go to get to the food. The shape or geometry of
    the dance changes as the distance to the food source changes, Shipman
    explains. Move a pollen source closer to the hive and the coffee-bean
    shape of the waggle dance splits down the middle. The dancer will
    perform two alternating waggling runs symmetric about, but diverging
    from, the center line. The closer the food source is to the hive, the
    greater the divergence between the two waggling runs.

    If that sounds almost straightforward, what happens next certainly
    doesn’t. Move the food source closer than some critical distance and the
    dance changes dramatically: the bee stops doing the waggle dance and
    switches into the round dance. It runs in a small circle, reversing and
    going in the opposite direction after one or two turns or sometimes
    after only half a turn. There are a number of variations between species.

    Von Frisch’s work on the bee dance is impressive, but it is largely
    descriptive. He never explained why the bees use this peculiar
    vocabulary and not some other. Nor did he (or could he) explain how
    small- brained bees manage to encode so much information. The dance of
    the honeybee is special among animal communication systems, says
    Shipman. It conveys concise, quantitative information in an abstract,
    symbolic way. You have to wonder what makes the dance happen. Bees don’t
    have enough intelligence to know what they are doing. How do they know
    the dance in the first place? Calling it instinct or some other word
    just substitutes one mystery for another.

    Shipman entered college as a biochemistry major and even spent some time
    working in a biology lab studying the hemolymph--the blood--of honeybee
    larvae, but she quickly moved her interest in bees to the side. During
    my freshman year, she says, I became more attracted to the beauty and
    rigor of mathematics. She switched her major and eventually went on to
    graduate school and to a professorship at the University of Rochester.
    For several years it seemed as though she had wandered a long way from
    her childhood fascination.

    Then, taking an unlikely route, she found herself once again confronting
    the mysteries of bees head-on. While working on her doctoral thesis, on
    an obscure type of mathematics known only to a small coterie of
    researchers well-versed in the minutiae of geometry, she stumbled across
    what just might be the key to the secrets of the bee’s dance.

    Shipman’s work concerned a set of geometric problems associated with an
    esoteric mathematical concept known as a flag manifold. In the jargon of
    mathematics, manifold means space. But don’t let that deceptively simple
    definition lull you into a false sense of security. Mathematicians have
    as many kinds of manifolds as a French baker has bread. Some manifolds
    are flat, some are curved, some are twisted, some wrap back on
    themselves, some go on forever. The surface of a sphere is a manifold,
    says Shipman. So is the surface of a bagel--it’s called a torus. The
    shape of a manifold determines what kinds of objects (curves, figures,
    surfaces) can live within its confines. Two different types of loops,
    for example, live in the surface of a torus--one wraps around the
    outside, the other goes through the middle, and there is no way to
    transform the first into the second without breaking the loop. In

    contrast, there is only one type of loop that lives on a sphere.

    Mathematicians like to examine different manifolds the way antiques
    dealers browse through curio shops--always exploring, always looking for
    unusual characteristics that expand their understanding of numbers or
    geometry. The difficult part about exploring a manifold, however, is
    that mathematicians don’t always confine them to the three dimensions of
    ordinary experience. A manifold can have two dimensions like the surface
    of a screen, three dimensions like the inside of an empty box, four
    dimensions like the space-time of our Einsteinian universe, or even ten
    or a hundred dimensions. The flag manifold (which got its name because
    some imaginative mathematician thought it had a shape like a flag on a
    pole) happens to have six dimensions, which means mathematicians can’t
    visualize all the two-dimensional objects that can live there. That does
    not mean, though, that they cannot see the objects’
    shadows.

    One of the more effective tricks for visualizing objects with more than
    three dimensions is to project or map them onto a space that has fewer
    dimensions (usually two or three). A topographic map, in which
    three-dimensional mountains get squashed onto a two-dimensional page, is
    a type of projection. Likewise, the shadow of your hand on the wall is a
    two- dimensional projection of your three-dimensional hand.

    One day Shipman was busy projecting the six-dimensional residents of the
    flag manifold onto two dimensions. The particular technique she was
    using involved first making a two-dimensional outline of the six
    dimensions of the flag manifold. This is not as strange as it may sound.
    When you draw a circle, you are in effect making a two-dimensional
    outline of a three- dimensional sphere. As it turns out, if you make a
    two-dimensional outline of the six-dimensional flag manifold, you wind
    up with a hexagon. The bee’s honeycomb, of course, is also made up of
    hexagons, but that is purely coincidental. However, Shipman soon
    discovered a more explicit connection. She found a group of objects in
    the flag manifold that, when projected onto a two-dimensional hexagon,
    formed curves that reminded her of the bee’s recruitment dance. The more
    she explored the flag manifold, the more curves she found that precisely

    matched the ones in the recruitment dance. I wasn’t looking for a
    connection between bees and the flag manifold, she says. I was just
    doing my research. The curves were nothing special in themselves, except
    that the dance patterns kept emerging.

    Delving more deeply into the flag manifold, Shipman dredged up a
    variable, which she called alpha, that allowed her to reproduce the
    entire bee dance in all its parts and variations. Alpha determines the
    shape of the curves in the 6-D flag manifold, which means it also
    controls how those curves look when they are projected onto the 2-D
    hexagon. Infinitely large values of alpha produce a single line that
    cuts the hexagon in half. Large values of alpha produce two lines very
    close together. Decrease alpha and the lines splay out, joined at one
    end like a V. Continue to decrease alpha further and the lines form a
    wider and wider V until, at a certain value, they each hit a vertex of
    the hexagon. Then the curves change suddenly and dramatically. When
    alpha reaches a critical value, explains Shipman, the projected curves
    become straight line segments lying along opposing faces of the hexagon.

    The smooth divergence of the splayed lines and their abrupt transition
    to discontinuous segments are critical--they link Shipman’s curves to
    those parts of the recruitment dance that bees emphasize with their
    waggling and buzzing. Biologists know that only certain parts of the
    dance convey information, she says. In the waggle dance, it’s the
    diverging waggling runs and not the return loops. In the circle dance
    it’s short straight segments on the sides of the loops. Shipman’s
    mathematics captures both of these characteristics, and the parameter
    alpha is the key. If different species have different sensitivities to
    alpha, then they will change from the waggle dances to round dances when
    the food source is at different distances.

    If Shipman is correct, her mathematical description of the recruitment
    dance would push bee studies to a new level. The discovery of
    mathematical structure is often the first and critical step in turning
    what is merely a cacophony of observations into a coherent physical
    explanation. In the sixteenth century Johannes Kepler joined astronomy’s
    pantheon of greats by demonstrating that planetary orbits follow the
    simple geometric figure of the ellipse. By articulating the correct
    geometry traced by the heavenly bodies, Kepler ended two millennia of
    astronomical speculation as to the configuration of the heavens. Decades
    after Kepler died, Isaac Newton explained why planets follow elliptical
    orbits by filling in the all-important physics--gravity. With her flag
    manifold, Shipman is like a modern-day Kepler, offering, in her words,
    everything in a single framework. I have found a mathematics that takes

    all the different forms of the dance and embraces them in a single
    coherent geometric structure.

    Shipman is not, however, content to play Kepler. You can look at this
    idea and say, ‘That’s a nice geometric description of the dance, very
    pretty,’ and leave it like that, she says. But there is more to it. When
    you have a physical phenomenon like the honeybee dance, and it follows a
    mathematical structure, you have to ask what are the physical laws that
    are causing it to happen.

    At this point Shipman departs from safely grounded scholarship and
    enters instead the airy realm of speculation. The flag manifold, she
    notes, in addition to providing mathematicians with pure joy, also
    happens to be useful to physicists in solving some of the mathematical
    problems that arise in dealing with quarks, tiny particles that are the
    building blocks of protons and neutrons. And she does not believe the
    manifold’s presence both in the mathematics of quarks and in the dance
    of honeybees is a coincidence. Rather she suspects that the bees are
    somehow sensitive to what’s going on in the quantum world of quarks,
    that quantum mechanics is as important to their perception of the world
    as sight, sound, and smell.

    Say a bee flies around, finds a source of food, and heads straight back
    to the hive to tell its colleagues. How does it perceive where that food
    is? What notation can it use to remember? What terms can it use to
    translate that memory into directions for its fellow bees? One way, the
    way we big-brained humans would be most comfortable with, would be to
    use landmarks--fly ten yards toward the big rock, turn left, duck under
    the boughs of the pine tree, and see the flowers growing near the trunk.
    Another way, one that seems to be more in line with what bees actually
    do, would be to use physical characteristics that adequately identify
    the site, such as variations in Earth’s magnetic field or in the
    polarization of the sun’s light.

    Researchers have in fact already established that the dance is sensitive
    to such properties. Experiments have documented, for example, that local
    variations in Earth’s magnetic field alter the angle of the waggling
    runs. In the past, scientists have attributed this to the presence of
    magnetite, a magnetically active mineral, in the abdomen of bees.
    Shipman, however, along with many other researchers, believes there is
    more to it than little magnets in the bees’ cells. But she tends not to
    have much professional company when she reveals what she thinks is
    responsible for the bees’ response. Ultimately magnetism is described by
    quantum fields, she says. I think the physics of the bees’ bodies, their
    physiology, must be constructed such that they’re sensitive to quantum
    fields--that is, the bee perceives these fields through quantum
    mechanical interactions between the fields and the atoms in the

    membranes of certain cells.

    What exactly does it mean to say that the bees interact with quantum
    fields? A quantum field is a sort of framework within which particles
    play out their existences. And, rather than assigning an electron to one
    position in space at one particular time, you instead talk about all the
    different places the electron could possibly be. You can loosely refer
    to this collection of all possible locations as a field smeared out
    across space and time. If you decide to check the electron’s position by
    observing it, the interaction between your measuring device and the
    field makes the electron appear to be a single coherent object. In this
    sense, the observer is said to disturb the quantum mechanical nature of
    the electron.

    There is some research to support the view that bees are sensitive to
    effects that occur only on a quantum-mechanical scale. One study exposed
    bees to short bursts of a high-intensity magnetic field and concluded
    that the bees’ response could be better explained as a sensitivity to an
    effect known as nuclear magnetic resonance, or nmr, an acronym commonly
    associated with a medical imaging technique. nmr occurs when an
    electromagnetic wave impinges on the nuclei of atoms and flips their
    orientation. nmr is considered a quantum mechanical effect because it
    takes place only if each atom absorbs a particular size packet, or
    quantum, of electromagnetic energy.

    This research, however, doesn’t address the issue of how bees turn these
    quantum-mechanical perceptions into an organized dance ritual. Shipman’s
    mathematics does. To process quantum mechanical information and
    communicate it to others, the bee would not only have to possess
    equipment sensitive to the quantum-mechanical world; to come up with the
    appropriate recruitment dance, it would have to perform some kind of
    calculation similar to what Shipman did with her flag manifold. Assuming
    that the typical honeybee is not quite intelligent enough to make the
    calculations, how does the bee come up with the flag manifold as an
    organizing principle for its dance? Shipman doesn’t claim to have the
    answer, but she is quick to point out that the flag manifold is common
    both to the bee dance and to the geometry of quarks. Perhaps, she
    speculates, bees possess some ability to perceive not only light and

    magnetism but quarks as well.

    The notion that bees can perceive quarks is hard enough for many
    physicists to swallow, but that’s not even the half of it. Physicists
    have theorized that quarks are constantly popping up in the vacuum of
    empty space. This is possible because the vacuum is pervaded by
    something called the zero-point energy field--a quantum field in which
    on average no particles exist, but which can have local fluctuations
    that cause quarks to blink in and out of existence. Shipman believes
    that bees might sense these fleeting quarks, and use them--somehow--to
    create the complex and peculiar structure of their dance.

    Now here’s the rub. The flag manifold geometry is an abstraction. It is
    useful in describing quarks not as the single coherent objects that
    physicists can measure in the real world but as unobserved quantum
    fields. Once a physicist tries to detect a quark--by bombarding it with
    another particle in a high-energy accelerator--the flag manifold
    geometry is lost. If bees are using quarks as a script for their dance,
    they must be able to observe the quarks not as single coherent objects
    but as quantum fields. If Shipman’s hunch is correct and bees are able
    to touch the quantum world of quarks without breaking it, not only would
    it shake up the field of biology, but physicists would be forced to
    reinterpret quantum mechanics as well.

    Shipman is the first to admit that she is a long way from proving her
    hypothesis. The mathematics implies that bees are doing something with
    quarks, she says. I’m not saying they definitely are. I’m just throwing
    it out as a possibility. And when she publishes her research, probably
    sometime next year, no doubt many scientists will be turned off by her
    dragging quarks and quantum mechanics into the picture.

    The joining of mathematics and biology is a fascinating endeavor and is
    just getting under way, says William Faris, a mathematician at the
    University of Arizona. Connecting quantum mechanics directly to biology
    is much more speculative. I frankly am skeptical that the bee dance is
    related to quantum mechanics. The mathematics she uses may be related to
    a completely different explanation of the bee dance. This is the
    universality of mathematics. To venture into quantum mechanics may be a
    distraction.

    Shipman isn’t the first scientist to go out on a limb trying to link
    biology to quantum mechanics. Physicist Roger Penrose of Oxford
    University has postulated that nerve cells have incredibly tiny tubes
    that serve as quantum mechanical detectors, and other physicists have
    expressed similar ideas, but they are by no means widely accepted.

    It is risky for a young scientist to take on a radical theory.
    Championing an unproved or unpopular idea is a good way to put your
    academic career on permanent hold. My thesis adviser was worried, too,
    says Shipman. He was happy to know that I am beginning collaborations
    with biologists.

    However, Shipman is too excited about the ideas to care about the risk.
    To make discoveries that cross disciplines, someone has to start. I know
    there is always resistance to new ideas, especially if you are
    approaching the problem from a different perspective. Sometimes theory
    comes before discovery and points the way toward the right questions to
    ask. I hope this research stimulates other researchers’ imaginations.

      Current date/time is Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:35 pm