Quantum Fractals are out...

[ark]

First of all i would like to say congratualtions. :D

I apologize if this is a stupid question, but how do the laws of quarks differ from atomic laws, and does the saying "as above, so below" apply to either of these, and the macro world in general? If not, what differs?

What do you mean by "the laws of quarks"? Let us have a look at the Wikipedia entry:

"quarks are never directly observed or found in isolation; they can be found only within hadrons, such as baryons (of which protons and neutrons are examples), and mesons"

Do you notice a contradiction in this statement? Isn't it formulated in a rather funny way? Never "directly observed" but "can be found"! Strange are these "laws of quarks" and certainly different from atomic laws. I do not know about quarks existing "above". I have doubts whether they exist "below".

To quote from a 2007 paper "PHENOMENOLOGICAL AND ONTOLOGICAL MODELS IN NATURAL SCIENCE" by Milos V. Lokajcek, a physicist from Prague:

"And so, even if at the first sight the existence of quarks might represent quite intuitive approach one is forced to ask whether their mysterious properties (or rather the mathematical artifacts) do not disqualify them actually from further considerations. The usual argument that any other explanation does not exist until now should be denoted as contra-productive (having been untrue at the same time)."

 

[gdpetti]

above and below... reminds me of the discussion on matter from Session #011129

 

[Lilou]

above and below... reminds me of the discussion on matter from Session #011129

It would be helpful if you could quote what you are making reference to. Is the session # you are referring to Nov 1, 1997? I'm a bit confused by the 29 at the end.

 

[SeekinTruth]

above and below... reminds me of the discussion on matter from Session #011129

It would be helpful if you could quote what you are making reference to. Is the session # you are referring to Nov 1, 1997? I'm a bit confused by the 29 at the end.

Might be November 29, 2001? Don't know....

 

[Lilou]

Yep, you're right, ST. It is Nov 29, 2001. I had it stuck in my mind it was referenced by day, month year....but clearly see now it is year, month, day. :P

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=18647.msg176214

Q: ... Are we heading toward a macrocosmic quantum jump, including a collapse of the wave, and the dissolution of matter, even if only temporarily as I have proposed in Noah?
A: Close.
Q: What could get me closer to the exact idea?
A: Matter is, in macrocosmic terms, somewhat different than you suppose.
Q: What do you mean by that? Matter in terms of stars and solar systems? It is what?
A: How about "larger."
Q: So, when we think of matter as being atoms and molecules, solar system and cosmic matter is composed of larger units?
A: Yes.
Q: What are the smallest of these larger units?
A: Living things.
Q: (A) Living things extending through densities?
A: Yes.
Q: (A) Wait. Are there beings composed of stars like we are composed of atoms?
A: In a certain sense, yes.
Q: (A) So, larger, we added living things as not just built of matter, but as units of matter.
A: Yes.
Q: In other words, when an event occurs, as in a "measurement," or a "change," in terms of macrocosmic quantum changes, it is like a phase transition of a certain collection of matter units in terms of living beings? Living beings as whole units, can "survive," so to say. I have in mind that it's almost like a decision in your life. When you make a decision, it's like a shift in your consciousness. And when you are looking at a macrocosmic quantum transition, it's almost like a decision, in a sense. And on one side of it, you come to that moment, and you make the decision, and on the other side of that moment - which, in a certain sense, the moment of measurement is immeasurable - and on the other side of it, everything is different. Not only is it so, that on the other side of the measurement is everything different, like with an atom, when an event occurs, something is gained or lost, or has moved its position or momentum or something, some significant difference exists in the state of the atom after this moment of measurement. And this significant difference is what I am trying to get at. (A) Probably what you have in mind is something like "transiting to 4th density, what really happens?" (L) Yeah.
A: "Happens" is not quite the proper term, more like "becomes."
Q: (A) Becoming is creating something completely new. "Happen" means that things change, move, regroup. But "become" means...
A: Yes.

 

[Cosmos]

I don't know or understand much about Fractals, but the Thundebolds Project published a recent talk about it from Dr. Jonathan Wolfe, who tries to explain Fractals in simple ways to kids:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...7c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[rs]

Hi Ark. I know you are just the author and are not the publisher "Customer Service Hot-Line", but I placed an order April 22 and still have not received a (hard) copy. Do you possibly have any information as to when hard copies will be available and shipped? (I have replied to World Scientific to ask them.)

thx

 

[Eboard10]

Hi Ark. I know you are just the author and are not the publisher "Customer Service Hot-Line", but I placed an order April 22 and still have not received a (hard) copy. Do you possibly have any information as to when hard copies will be available and shipped? (I have replied to World Scientific to ask them.)

thx

In the link provided by Ark in OP there is a date, Sep 2014 so I assume the book isn't coming out until then?

 

[rs]

Hi Ark. I know you are just the author and are not the publisher "Customer Service Hot-Line", but I placed an order April 22 and still have not received a (hard) copy. Do you possibly have any information as to when hard copies will be available and shipped? (I have replied to World Scientific to ask them.)

thx

In the link provided by Ark in OP there is a date, Sep 2014 so I assume the book isn't coming out until then?

Uh... Doh!

 

[Laura]

Funny you asked this just now: Ark just received his advance author's copy. It's a nicely done book; they should start shipping them soon.

 

[rs]

I received this reply from the publisher:

Dear R...,

The book has just been published. The stock will arrive by early next week and your backorder will be released. Upon receipt, delivery time is 4-5 business days.

Thank you and we apologize for the delay.

Regards,
C....

It is on its way! Now I just hope I can understand it...

 

[trendsetter37]

I am chomping at the bits as well. Amazon has an estimated Delivery of July 18 - July 30. But it hasn't been shipped yet so I doubt that is accurate :/.

 

[SMM]

A really fascinating piece of work, Ark! Verry happy to see it out - I have my copy and making a way through it. There will perhaps be may more other ways made through it to come :D Seems it will become very handy in future :)

Again, congratulations Ark!!!!

 

[MusicMan]

Congratulations on the book, Ark.
Just wondering if your question:

quote
"What are the open problems with iterated function systems based on Mobius transformations?"
/unquote

could have anything to do with 'Strange Attractors', which I think exhibit all the characteristics of the "As above, so below" phenomenon, especially as I see it in the patterns of weather in the atmosphere, the oceans and the land masses.

 

[thorbiorn]

Recently I found the book by Ark again and read a few pages - so far the first about 20 - and I'm already getting into stuff, that was not elaborated to such an extent in the courses I took, but should that be an argument for not reading more? Rather than aspiring to read and understand everything, I think I will go for the subjects that interest me the most, subjects that inspire me. I may never be able to understand all about any one subject, but does that matter. If I read a novel, would I necessarily understand all the subtleties of the characters and the plot ,as the author intended?

While many people will be able to follow the introduction, or some of the early reflections, it gets more difficult later, but for many subjects or terms, the Web is often helpful, and one can find both text explanations and videos. Below are two examples:

There are different random number generators, differing in their quality (cf. e.g. [Dutang and Wuertz
(2009)]), but for our purpose it does not really matter which one we use.

If one makes a search for "Dutang and Wuertz (2009)" there is a good chance one will succeed finding a document of about 30 pages long, like here. This is not a major point in the book, but I just happened to be interested in this subject, and following the references one can indeed learn more.

Or say, one wants to know more about "Cantor set" (page 11), then one can enter this subject on Youtube and watch presentations, but one likes text, one can of course also find such explanations too..

I really like the artistic beauty of the mathematical discoveries shown in this book, and some can be found on Youtube as animations.

Therefore, I think even those who have less interest in mathematics may finds illustrations in this book that will fill them with wonder.