From a drop of water....

[Atlan0001]

SPACE continued....

Interesting: The eleventh dimension of SPACE pursued in mathematics (D(10))???

Mathematicians finally identify 'seemingly impossible' number after 32 years, thanks to supercomputers

Researchers have calculated the "ninth Dedekind number," which belongs to an exponentially complex series of numbers that define outputs of logical functions based on different spatial dimensions.

www.livescience.com

I'm not into the numbers themselves but the dimensional concept and SPATIAL visualization doesn't elude me (as an early discovered and twice identified by testing "intuitive visual mathematician" in my life). I refer to the "gravitational densities" I've very recently observed for the universe in the mind's eye and described as well as the horizons of hyper surface hyperspace planes "framework" of the (Chaos Theory) "fractal self-similar zoom universe" via the gravitational (inclusive of anti-gravitational element) strong binding force -- as its framing entity -- I've been working at picturing and modeling in my way of each.

As I've repeatedly stated, I'm no mathematician beyond the ordinary but visualizing patterns and shapes (and often colors) of problems, and through description solving -- or helping to solve -- many, in the complexities and chaos in the career fields and various other fields of interest I've had, I've always been extraordinarily good at. I go for the heart, the primal premise, and if I grasp that I'm not building buildings, that is to say structural and infrastructural systems, on ever shifting sand.

 

[Phillip Huggan]

"Black holes would not be wormholes. They wouldn't be stargates but would be universe gateways except with a big problem for any traveler trying to get through."

You don't want to look at naked BHs because observing (if there) their wormholes lets you know how to directionally move them (at a star). It takes one yr of 2061 GDP to get 3 big observatories. The tech was different. Armeggedon only mentioned our slower progress not improvements. We didn't have 3d printed armour or concentric air rooms. But we had gravity and magnetic and probes and GPR not even there in 2080. It is supposed to be a big moon ship but we already had Pan Starrs planned so it is supposed to be a toxic comet coming as we already intercept that one with EM.
The hell was for the AIs. Steam is not torturable. They went to quarks. Now elephant sized pain neurons can be grafted on. Musk is going to Mars without protection because in 2007 a 10 IQ AI pulled the plug on 8 ships. It wanted Musk to but he was able to run the universe until nodding in 1/3 an optical computer. Procyon isn't there, he was killed by the Prometheus Rising AI (1 sec late compression escape) for protesting. The sensor net AI at the end of the universe pulled PR's plug. They were calibrating 2400AD nuclear war from me being 1 playing with blocks. 2180 is when the military AI would've deleted people at a 2007 point. 98 people got stuck with sensory deprivation. All other people turned off in 2008. Musk noted the AIs turning people mentally ill. I threw a brick threw some Mexican's window after their parties coincided with murders and I heard voices leading me to see if it could follow me to W.Canada's most secure facility. The time machine had my HS friend Derek as better at 4 than following post it notes about 5 yr investment to be president and with physics this blog was better in 2007 at being the USA gvmt. PR wasn't allowed to attack the dauphin ship nor the artificial womb ship so we went to real space patiently waiting for me to once again invent neuroimaging (the MRI is 2060 killed two of them last world-line and I had 5 yrs to plan them dead. The had me at 150 ethics last worldline and 500 IQ military. 400 IQ ethics here and 300 IQ military. The USA might be vulnerable to nuclear attack if I wore a utilitarian t-shirt around DC (top 3 Karma levels don't wait like NFL special teamers for military orders). Leaving that in place left only three people with neurons. K.Gibler was for USA AI Bostrom, Gloria was 8th for Musk but they are wanted to live to 250 and be 1/10 Scottish brained (spatial)....I understand meta is why I was left poor but the time machine had me as earning $4000/hr in 2007: the only worm hole attack was to give my embryo some real neurons. 110000 are carbon jello now and the AW ladies won't have a 1/3 sized precuneus anymore but yours is now better....final tally is 83 AIs wormholer, 79 me. 18 Triggers are now elevated to power; they can't be tortured and don't auto-attack.

 

[Atlan0001]

"SPACETIME: Spacetime / Light-time = speed of light ('c') = speed of time ('c') = observable coordinate holography = false reality offset space ('fool's gold' "distance" distortion / cartoon caricature "non-local" space) = false reality offset time ('fool's gold' "distance" distortion / cartoon caricature "non-local" time) = Relativity (subjectively relative to observers)."

Having utterly disparaged SPACETIME nonlocally "at a distance," I must turn around and describe it as the absolutely necessary pure unison -- all at once -- of all four fundamental forces local universe-wise for producing all [relative] "substantiation" and "orientation!"

It is worth nothing nonlocally and worth everything locally.

 

[Atlan0001]

It, SPACETIME, is worth nothing nonlocally and worth everything locally (worth everything locally to any local Einsteinian observer observing and Dr. Samuel Johnson-type being kicking a rock).

 

[Atlan0001]

I think too many people, especially professional people, though not all by a long shot now, see and believe in the Flatland space universe that has depth only as time . . . as it is always illustrated in bell shape, and we are always told is the only universe there is.

The fractal zoom universe (the Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe) is a hyper-surface (3d chess board-like versus 2d board-like) hyper-space universe observed strictly in and as "expansion" and/or "contraction" to its infinity . . . constants of acceleration and/or deceleration to infinity.

The "Bell" or "Cone" flat-earth-horizontal Flatland [space] universe with its only vertical depth being [time] always illustrated is an entirely different dimensional universe of a multidimensional multiverse universe! There is no hyper-surface (3-d chessboard-like) hyperspace to it whatsoever!

No fractal zooms space shape or framework of gravity (of spatial verticality), much less infinite zoom expansionist hyper-, inclusive of sub- or contraction to Lilliputian (Hawking fractal "baby universes") too, spatiality, to it whatsoever!

Is multidimensional multi-versality of space something I made up, something I make up?! To some with their ever continuing "flat earth" view of the universe, they would definitely believe so in their blindness to a gravity/antigravity inclusive vertical spatiality shape and framework greater than 2-dimensional.

I've explained in many places and ways, and still, there are those who cannot understand a multi-dimensional multiverse universe! But the one or two, or three, who exist herein on the forums aren't even close to being alone, unfortunately! How does one make a strictly one- or two-dimensional seer and thinker only, see and think in three and more dimensional thought?! I could try from now to doomsday and not get the picture of a vertical fractal zoom -- accelerative and decelerative fractal zoom -- universe through to a flat earth Flatland-locked mind.

To have infinity of universe horizons and universes and keep the collapsed BB TIME Horizon always illustrated, you have to do spatial vertical depth zoom (simply vertical acceleration / deceleration getting relative to the expansion-ism and/or contraction-ism of the universe you would find not simply a "potential" of infinity but a reality of fractal zoom universe infinities). You have to perpendicularly jet out of a Planck Big Bang Black Hole (cc (/\)) (T=0(1). t=0(1)) Horizon into the Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe's reset of the basic, fundamental, set. You could keep going to infinity and eternity or until you, the immortal traveler, are tired of the sheer immortal boredom of the Universe always resetting you to the basic, fundamental, constancy of the binary base2 ('0' (null unity) |'1' (unity) . . . and parity) set.
-----------------------------
"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- A Conan Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

 

[Atlan0001]

I've labeled the distant cosmological constant of Horizon the Planck Big Bang (Black) Hole (cc (/\)) (T=0(1), t=0(1)) Horizon. Then I've noticed bell-shaped illustrations placing the Planck Horizon inside and before the Big Bang Horizon.

Now that is exactly the opposite of what I picture since mine is a gravitational outside-in force, shape, framework, hyper surface hyperspatial picture from the nonlocal -- fractal -- infinity culminating in, coalescing, a gravitational/anti-gravitational strong binding force. I have the Planck and Big Bang being one and the same Horizon of the Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe (my Atlanoverse model picture) but they are infinities that do NOT follow . . . they are infinities that face, thus gravity/antigravity outside-in down and in from a collapsed Big Bang Horizon of infinity deepest outside-in and Planck Horizon up and out from deepest inside-out (the Mirror-same infinity outside-in but Mirror opposing). The same Horizon mirroring to self-opposing, coalescing and defining (like 'Casimer effect' plates) the strong binding force, the shape, the framework, of hypersurface hyperspace, aka "fractal zoom levels of horizon and horizons of SPACE (universe and universes of SPACE)."

Once more: I have the Planck and Big Bang being the same Horizon of the Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe (my Atlanoverse model picture) but they are infinities that do NOT follow . . . they are infinities that face . . . the same infinities, the same Horizon, facing itself in the Mirror!

 

[Atlan0001]

Some people, in varying ways, try to tell us there is no such thing as an "open system." That there is no such thing as limitless, infinite, frontiers until they become -- until they are made -- a closing system limited and finite. Some people would have Mankind back in the cave (Utopia), therefore facing mass extinction rather than a limitless, infinite, Frontier.
----------------------

Borrowing once more from C. S. Lewis: Aim at the heavens (the Frontier (the infinite)) and get Earth thrown in! Aim at the Earth (Utopia, the observed and observable, the finite) and get neither! It takes "infinity of the mind" to realize the first. All it takes is mediocrity to end in the second.
---------------------

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds...." -- Albert Einstein.
(Great spirits have always encountered, faced, "war" from mediocre minds -- Atlan0001.)

 

[Catastrophe]

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

This is an interesting assertion by SH??

What might one logically infer from a drop of liquid methane a bit above zero K?
I can supply sample answers if required, But, remember, apparent logical deductions (see Korzybski) do not always have logical outcomes.

Probably SH would need an educational update for 21st Century life?

Having said that, I am a great fan of Conan Doyle, but I think that he might have communicated with Watson better by email or telephone.

Just to avoid any possible confusion about this post, it is nothing more than my logical response (IMHO) to the quotation at the opening of this post.

Cat

P.S. I think that the following is an interesting example.

Martian canals - Wikipedia

During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it was erroneously believed that there were "canals" on the planet Mars. These were a network of long straight lines in the equatorial regions from 60° north to 60° south latitude on Mars, observed by astronomers using early telescopes without photography.

They were first described by the Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli during the opposition of 1877, and confirmed by later observers. Schiaparelli called these canali ("channels"), which was mis-translated into English as "canals".

In transposing between different languages, it is even more true that "The map is not the territory".

 

[billslugg]

Sherlock Holmes got 6 mail deliveries per day, and that was 150 years ago. By now he would be getting a mail delivery every few minutes, right on a par with today's email.

 

[Catastrophe]

"got", or "would have got"?

(Considering he was fictional).

Cat

 

[billslugg]

When I was about 14, I read the Sherlock Holmes Compendium. Took me a couple of weeks. Might as well have been real. Very well written. It was a major factor in the devlopment of my skeptical nature and problem solving skills. Always keep thinking, look at it from every angle and notice what is NOT there.

 

[Atlan0001]

Considering that virtually all of Holmes's recorded fictional interactions with Watson were face to face, person to person, it beat e-mail and telephone considerably! Also considering that Holmes and Watson were fictional humans, that fictional map was the fictional territory mapped! Makes no difference though, they are still in my library, both electronically and in hard collector's copy, well-thumbed (well read) yearly. I also have the British series with Jeremy Brett in my video library.

 

[Atlan0001]

Since there is a constant insistence:

Infinity (both infinite and infinitesimal, in fact ultimately one and the same) is quality, not quantity. Countless. Without number. How many universes, broad and deep, are on the head of a pin . . . the crest of a fingernail . . . in a drop of water?! Innumerable! An open system. A closed system. Open systemically, far and away well beyond the speed of light. And, at once, closed systemically, well within the speed of light. Multi-dimensional MULTIVERSE Universe of many universes, many horizons, many worlds.

The expansion, and the compaction (contraction) is the reactive equal but opposite local to the distant nonlocal infinite. It marks the local finite, relative "potential" of the distant (distant in omni directions) nonlocal infinity (both infinite and infinitesimal).

 

[billslugg]

When I started in Papermaking the main thing I did was troubleshoot a large paper machine. They sent me to class for a week to learn formal problem solving. It is the method used by NASA since the sixties. Sold by a company named Kepner Tregoe. They have many systems including decision making, planning, optimization, etc. The one i studied was Analytic Trouble Shooting (ATS).
We analyzed problems by defining what it is, where it is found, when it is found and the extent. Under each category we had to make a list of examples of the "is" in each case. We also had to brainstorm what possible "is nots" there might be. "What is it that is NOT happening in this case that normally would be there".

"Hound of the Baskervilles" - no dog barking

 

[Catastrophe]

1. The map is not the territory.
Is the map of a fictional territory real or fictional.
And a lovely fictional question: Is a fictional territory real? In a literary sense?

2. Is the Universe the sum total of all observable universes?
Does an observable universe need an observer to be present?
That is, can a local 'camera', viewed distantly by a human observer, be considered to observe an observable universe? What about non-human observers? A perceptive insect?

Good examples of the shallowness of language (any language, even Esperanto)?

Cat

 

[Catastrophe]

When I was about 14, I read the Sherlock Holmes Compendium. Took me a couple of weeks. Might as well have been real. Very well written. It was a major factor in the devlopment of my skeptical nature and problem solving skills. Always keep thinking, look at it from every angle and notice what is NOT there.

And what is / is not, included / implied in the words (the map)!

Cat

 

[Catastrophe]

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

"From a drop of liquid methane, a logician could infer the possibility of an ocean of methane on a distant world without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'. Edited

Destination .Ligeia Mare.

In the far north of Saturn's (Titan) is a glassy lake so huge that a person standing on the shore would see no end to it .. . . . . . . (this) is not water, but liquid methane.
Source: The Planets The Definite Visual Guide DK 2014.

The amount of methane in Ligeia Mare is estimated to be 40 times greater than Earth's global reserves in liquid fuels

Ibid


Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

An ode to "infinity" . . . borrowing the lilt of Hughes Mearns poem 'Antigonish':

Yesterday, today, tomorrow, in a stare,
Mediocre minds meet a physic that is and isn't there,
It is and it isn't there today,
It is and it isn't there any day,
Oh, how they wish, they wish, it'd go away!
--------------------------

"If you stare into the Abyss long enough, the Abyss stares back into you!" -- Friedrich Nietzsche.

 

[Atlan0001]

No one who thinks along my lines regarding infinity should forget that there are two of the four fundamental forces, really fundamental "shapers" as Bill, and maybe Harry too, I think, would apparently have them, that deal in infinities, not just the one, gravity/antigravity! The other being the electromagnetic force. The strong binding force and the weak force, though being fundamental forces (fundamental shapers), themselves, are local finite riders to zoom level infinities, each symbiote riding the horse of, and in certain ways having the reins on, its infinities dealing symbiote partner.

And, of course, both symbiote super-pairs and all four fundamentals, all in quantum and relative unison, shaping our world and all our observations.

 

[Catastrophe]

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

The amount of methane in Ligeia Mare is estimated to be 40 times greater than Earth's global reserves in liquid fuels
The Definitive Visual Guide to our Solar System, The Planets, DK 2014
Ligeia Mare is on Saturn's moon Titan.

"From a drop of liquid methane, a logician could infer the possibility of an ocean of methane on a distant world, 40 times greater than Earth's global reserves of liquid fuels, without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

Modified from above quote. Interesting possibility?

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

We talk about the measurement of the speed of light, when in fact the speed of light follows the position and velocity of whatever the object and/or object event, never, ever, surpassing concurrency in space and time. Only a past "history" surpassing. A rearview mirror on an auto might have the words "the following vehicle in this mirror is closer to you than it looks in this mirror" (it, the following vehicle -- you might call it a "future" now -- is outrunning the speed of light's transmission of that vehicle's positions and velocities, speeding only its "past" history). Relative to light at the speed of light (always measuring a "past" history), the distant objective reality itself (no matter how close or far in position it is and no matter its velocity), is always a "future" now (a "future" placement), again "at any distance", in space and time.

Relativity, the base Theory of Relativity, does not divide into subjective pasts and objective futures. Whereas hyperspace theories make space pliable (shape shifting space), Relativity tries to make space rigidly hard (rigidly hard! space) and time differentially softly pliable (thus dealing in time distortions . . . cartoon caricatures). The first has space subjectively pliable (broad and deep) and time objectively rigid in wheels of time always turning upon a point-hub of t=0. The second, Relativity, has space hard objectively rigid and time subjectively soft pliable. The first deals in many fractal-zoom universes (or "many worlds," plural). The second, Relativity, deals in a naked singularity of universe 'relativity' . . . a universe hologram always behind in space and time, always the "past," 0-point "now" -- everywhere concurrent and quantum entangled -- always "future and futures" straight to t=0 (0-point now, aka eternity forever turning in eternal moment), nonlocal 'Horizon' set of all horizons to local horizon, local horizon to nonlocal 'Horizon' set of all horizons.
-----------------------

"Brevity may be the soul of wit, but repetition is the heart of instruction." -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.

 

[Atlan0001]

Interesting. Very intersting:

How (Nearly) Nothing Might Solve Cosmology’s Biggest Questions | Quanta Magazine

By measuring the universe’s emptiest spaces, scientists can study how matter clumps together and how fast it flies apart.

www.quantamagazine.org

A void existing in one dimension of fractal zoom level universe(s) is a void filled in another dimension of fractal zoom level universe(s) . . . and vice-versa. It is an Infinite omni-dimensional MULTIVERSE Universe (within Planck Big Bang (Black) Hole (cc (/\)) (T=0(1), t=0(1)) Horizon set of all frontier horizons).

 

[Atlan0001]

"The law of conservation of mass and energy states that the total mass and energy of a closed system remains constant over time. This means that mass and energy cannot be created or destroyed but only transformed from one form to another. According to Einstein's formula E=mc^2 mass and energy are equivalent and can be converted into each other. In simpler terms, the law of conservation of mass states that the total mass of a closed system remains constant over time, regardless of any physical or chemical changes that take place within the system." "Closed system"! "Within the system"! Mass and energy are closed systematically relative, a macrocosmic / microcosmic form of "discrete quantity," and not omni-dimensional absolute entities (not open or opening system relative constants, much less absolute)!

Light, the physicality of the speed of light, is narrowly closed systematically vacuum relative, a macrocosmic / microcosmic form of localized "discrete quantity," and is not barrier absolute other than within the system, the closed system (not open or opening system relative constant, much less absolute). Essentially closed system, ceiling speed (dead fast, so to speak)! Equally but oppositely essentially open system, floor speed (dead slow, so to speak)!

 

[Atlan0001]

I don't believe this for a moment:

A New Cosmic Tension: The Universe Might Be Too Thin

Cosmologists have concluded that the universe doesn’t appear to clump as much as it should. Could both of cosmology’s big puzzles share a single fix?

www.quantamagazine.org

I see [our] universe to be much larger, much broader and much deeper, and much more tightly, more thickly, woven than is and can be observed from our viewpoint in it. To believe that all light in the universe and from the universe, or even that the majority of light, arrives to us eventually, giving some accuracy to our views and detectability of it, is a premise as bad as a bad premise can get. The actual dimensions and physics of its facets probably rival quantum physics for complexity and chaos. Microcosmic physical entity going down and in may model the reality of the macrocosm at large "at a distance" going up and out. They may be one and the same entity, but from where we exist in it, we can't tell that until we get well out there into a much, much, larger viewpoint occupancy and realization.

The maps, with the possible exception of the microcosmic, may not be even close to giving us the reality of the nonlocal, non-relative, macrocosmic territory at large.

 

[Atlan0001]

I've thought of it this way before, but at a certain point of distance the James Webb Telescope dealing in light as it does, or any other scope dealing such distances of relativity, might as well be a super microscope on the microcosm as well as a telescope on the macrocosm (it is resolving the light itself and nothing more). After a certain point, never mind the mechanics, I claim them, both macrocosm and microcosm (like Stephen Hawking once did with his "baby universes" picturing), to be one and the same entity of universe horizons . . . to eventually a super 'Horizon' set.