Infinity

[ark]

Kudos to Ark
for his attention to (the devil is in) the details!

But the devil is not there alone. In the details there also dwells the Beauty.

 

[dant]

Agreed!

Just a curious question though... often times we hear
about famous people, mostly academic types, are often
found in cafe/coffee/tea shops, writing thoughts on napkins...
did your eureka moment happen at the moment while eating
two French croissants... put the two together... "Ah ha! Infinitely
good French croissants!" ? :P

 

[ark]

No. I am a turtle. After 800 pages of calculations, most of them leading to nowhere or wrong, finally you find something that seems to work. So, after another 400 pages you get something that looks like being indeed true.

 

[dant]

Wow, and yes, of course - there are no short cuts...
one must DO the hard work! I remember the same,
when I took college courses... and it demands hard
work, all by yourself and/or perhaps given the clues
by the "teacher", or one does not get to pass to the
next level.

In any case, I do understand what it takes, but all in all
- knowledge, persistence, motivation and drive is the key
and one must try, and try again - never giving up, as the
turtle, slowly and methodically, as opposed to the rabbit,
going too fast, missing the signs, not being careful, falls
deeply into the rabbit hole...

 

[John G]

No. I am a turtle. After 800 pages of calculations, most of the leading to nowhere or wrong, finally you find something that seems to work. So, after another 400 pages you get something that looks like being indeed true.

So your paper is kind of like a very big tip of a very very big pyramid with much of the actual pyramid hidden (much like that one perhaps near Bermuda). I'm trying to mesh your paper with things I've read before. You say this is perhaps two separate spacetimes (a double double light cone) with one double light cone labeled past and the other future. For me I relate this to defining a present "now" as having a past world of the many worlds and a future world of the many worlds (braneworlds if we were talking string theory).

I also relate this to ideas where antimatter is considered a time reversed version of matter. Thus antimatter in our world would kind of be "lost" using our past world as its future world and say Bermuda Triangle planes would kind of be "lost" using the antimatter's future world as its past world (or something like that).

As for conformal compactifying, I've seen pictures from you before, and I've seen words without pictures that I think but am not sure were for the same geometry. Anyways, after conformal compacting, the view I had was Minkowski time infinity going to a conformal cone vertex and Minkowski light cones going to the conformal cone infinity (the spherical base?). It seems with your paper the Minkowski light cones and time infinity all end up togther (via vertices and spherical bases) at the same conformal cone infinity.

 

[ark]

It seems with your paper the Minkowski light cones and time infinity all end up togther (via vertices and spherical bases) at the same conformal cone infinity.

Yes, they all go together. Physicists do not like it. They prefer to distinguish space from time, spacelike from timelike. Mathematicians think this to be not natural. But mathematicians do not have the same intuition as physicists. It happened several pasts in the past that mathematicians had to learn new tricks from physicists. So, perhaps I am wrong following my mathematical nose instead of listening to what physicists have to say. Perhaps Penrose is wrong too. After all he is mainly a mathematician. On the other hand we can't do more than just continue and at the end see who is right and who is wrong. Perhaps string theorists are right. Or perhaps those playing with loop quantum gravity and spin networks. Or someone else. Now I am going to play a little bit more with light and photons. I like to play with light.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

So did John Wallis just fluke out when he chose the lemniscate as the symbol for infinity? Or was he peering into the future? :)

 

[ark]

So did John Wallis just fluke out when he chose the lemniscate as the symbol for infinity? Or was he peering into the future? :)

Good question. The only sure answer is "coincidence" - including quotation marks. But I am not sure about how sure.

 

[shijing]

We may even have a natural doubling of both spacetime and infinity. Perhaps a separate world where matter reigns and another one for antimatter. Both are connected by the "infinity door".

I had always thought, based on sci-fi stuff that I was exposed to, that matter and anti-matter were just two kinds of "matter" with reversed polarities of some sort. But I read something in the transcripts awhile ago that made me wonder if anti-matter = 'ethereal'. Is that possibly the case? And if so, would the "matter" half of the infinity loop correspond to the lower densities (1-3), and the "anti-matter" half to the higher densities (5-7), with 4th density somehow straddling them both at the nexus? Or is this completely off?

Just for the record, this was completely off -- I just ran across what I was vaguely remembering, and it was actually the opposite of what I thought:

Q: (L) None of this makes a whole lot of sense. I thought I was beginning to understand it, and obviously I don’t have a clue. Let’s try a different direction. You said that the universe consists of equal amounts of matter and antimatter. Are the first three densities, densities of matter?
A: And antimatter.

Q: (L) Are there equal amounts of matter and antimatter at all densities?
A: Yes. Remember, density refers to one’s conscious awareness only. Once one is aware, all [many spirals of the planchette] conforms to that awareness.

 

[John G]

We may even have a natural doubling of both spacetime and infinity. Perhaps a separate world where matter reigns and another one for antimatter. Both are connected by the "infinity door".

I had always thought, based on sci-fi stuff that I was exposed to, that matter and anti-matter were just two kinds of "matter" with reversed polarities of some sort. But I read something in the transcripts awhile ago that made me wonder if anti-matter = 'ethereal'. Is that possibly the case? And if so, would the "matter" half of the infinity loop correspond to the lower densities (1-3), and the "anti-matter" half to the higher densities (5-7), with 4th density somehow straddling them both at the nexus? Or is this completely off?

Just for the record, this was completely off -- I just ran across what I was vaguely remembering, and it was actually the opposite of what I thought:

Q: (L) None of this makes a whole lot of sense. I thought I was beginning to understand it, and obviously I don’t have a clue. Let’s try a different direction. You said that the universe consists of equal amounts of matter and antimatter. Are the first three densities, densities of matter?
A: And antimatter.

Q: (L) Are there equal amounts of matter and antimatter at all densities?
A: Yes. Remember, density refers to one’s conscious awareness only. Once one is aware, all [many spirals of the planchette] conforms to that awareness.

Actually you were very close, I took it as OK.

from 960615
Q: (L) Is antimatter ethereal existence?
A: Pathway to.

In other words it with matter creates that "infinity door" and since we obviously have plenty of matter, it makes sense to think of antimatter as the door supplier.

 

[dant]

So, antimatter strips matter,
and what is left is "essence"?

 

[ark]

Matter, antimatter, but do not forget about pentagons and hexagons! One day they will be handy.

 

[ark]

FYI: New corrected and updated (today) version of my paper "On Conformal Infinity and Compactifications of the Minkowski Space". Sent for publication in a journal. Waiting for referees' reports. Working now on the next one - also dealing with light and infinity.

 

[stellar]

I was just thinking how this picture reminds me of our magnetosphere if I were to place our BBM at the common point in the middle. And then I would be looking at Earth as the point through which the 'balancing' of the left and right spheres was taking place and manifesting in the 3D physical way that we understand like weather, geography etc.
Then I also wandered if the spherical doors are what are used for time travel by the 4D STS to keep altering our past and keeping us in the same spot on the loop so to say.
Probably just a bit of noise but that's what came to my mind.

 

[ark]

Probably just a bit of noise but that's what came to my mind.

Well, there are certain geometrical and structural forms that evidently Nature likes and uses them in many different circumstances. Spheres, for instance, appear everywhere. The same with Golden Ratio. Or, maybe it is us, who are especially sensitive and detect easily these particular forms? Hard to say.
Anyway, I think the true play starts only with extra dimensions, those beyond space. Infinity may be the door, but after the door there is a vestibule, and I am trying to get a peek in there - as the logical next step. But is is not the hyperspace of Michio Kaku, who is trying to connect it to string theories. It is rather the hyperspace of early Kaluza, Klein, Einstein and Bergmann, also of Burkhard Heim - the "real one", not just a "virtual" one, that can be seen only at Planck's energy, as in string theories and Kaku's "Hyperspace".