Hi,
My way of mapping particle physics as currently taught shows a seemingly "hollow" structure
of juggling possibilities; as such it could be seen as a dynamic or topological view of mathematics.
It is only in counting in a SAME base; that fixed structure seems to appear?
Dr. Stafford seems to regard the "3 dimensions" as kind of holographically projected. I went outside mathematics rather say by talking of "compare two patterns, make a new comparison" calling this "A compared to B giving comparison C; compare with D" which is more general than 4D spacetime.
Quote: "And this is the nature of entanglement also, so probably if we even could completely model everything in physics, then this would at least be much more complicated than doing it incompletely with equations".
Oh I found it is MUCH easier than physics with equations!
My basic system for electromagnetism:
"Magnetic" involves "specification" like where two Venn diagram circles (sets) which I treat as "categories" overlap: this "intersection" is like where you SPECIFY a word by overlapping two categories.
Example: category "car"; category "European product"; where these two categories intersect you get an overlapspace where "car" partially defines "European product" and "European product" partially defines car.
"Electro" involves "generalisation"; this is like "category" or a Venn diagram set where not overlapped. The "div." and "curl" of Maxwell's equations becomes the broadening and narrowing one sees in the process of defining something.
"Particle" becomes "group meets unit"; "boson" becomes "group meets group".
Subatmomic particle map (incomplete so far):
Consider:
A,B: C. Two versions of (A,B) from juggling in C. "A" perspective in "C" of change in "B": W+ particle. "B" perspective in "C" of change in "A": W particle. "C" perspective on (A,B) in "C": spin neutral Zo particle (cancelling out of W+ and W).
Now: D view of group. This view gives a floating bracket that can sort any pair from (A,B,C). Any pair will leave one of A,B,C designated in role of "C" perspective as potential Zo for any allocation of W+ and W roles. (A "floating bracket" seems similar concept to "partial differentiation").
Now, the "D" perspective on juggling A,B,C roles allows an uncertainty between "C" role and "D" role.
From an "E" perspective on juggle A,B,C,D roles, one gets quark definition. But the role swap possibility between C and D gives a spacetime uncertainty in quark definition. If C and D decide who will swap with E, that leaves two places where C and D were for one of them. This deal allows three sympathetic roles of A,B,C to be filled while D and E are filed by folk from C and D.
The D,E uncertainty gives the "gluon" binding of quark definition in spacetime ; the C,D uncertainty gives the "colour" force in polarising quark definition. A cycle of Eviewed juggling where occupiers of A role, B role, C role are conserved gives three colours; any role swapping gives anticolours.
Taking the E perspective where "E" role can be juggled amongst, as a group, the A,B,C,D roles ("E" is like a 5th dimension viewpoint on spacetime juggling in cycles (in mathcounting).
Taking A,B,C,D from E;
any pair in A,B,C,D roles in E perspective, where that pair is conserved but rejuggled (so say A,B swap ideas giving new A,B) is: "upquark".
Any single that remains single (say A stays A; or B stays B) is "downquark".
Cycles of counting "E" perspectives gives juggling of mathematics with (A,B,C,D,E) group:
A new D,E from previous D,E swapping ideas:
If D,E cancel: neutron. (spacespacetime) (spacebias)(head in the clouds)
If D,E not cancel: proton. (spacetimetime)(timebias)(talking)
If D,E uncertain: electron (spacetime uncertain)(listening)
Two cycles of "who is in D role"?:
Double D cancel (Drole occupier rejuggles thoughts): electron (as double D makes D uncertain in E?)
Double D not cancel: muon (heavy electron: uncertain electron as now have double E from conserved D!)
Double D uncertain: tau (very heavy electron: not sure if have double D from E, or double E from D.
Two cycles of "who is in E role"?:
Double E cancel (Erole occupier rejuggles thoughts): neutrino (thinking about the subject, so not totally head in the clouds)
Double E not cancel: muon neutrino (more massive (uncertain) neutrality (as did some thinking, some head in the clouds, but which was when?)
Double E uncertain: tau neutrino (very massive (uncertain) neutrality (as who was that, who could have done some thinking or could have had their head in the clouds?)
Looking at the D view of (A,B,C):
C,D cancel: neutrino (potential discussion that A and B reserved each other common space for in D)
C,D not cancel: antineutrino (potential discussion that A and B reserved space for each other at different times (common space going back in time
C,D uncertain: photonino? (uncertainty in spacetime (is there a possibility of talking?)
Looking at A,B,C:
Two cycles of "who is in A,B role?":
(A,B)(A,B) cancel: upquark (Charged + 2/3 bias to A,B in A,B,C)
(A,B)(A,B) not cancel: charm (room for reappearance of old A,B content)
(A,B)(A,B) uncertain: top (you decide: are you A or B?)
Two cycles of "who is in C role?":
C:C cancel: downquark (charge  1/3 bias to C in C (C reconsidered ideas!)
C:C not cancel: strange (C keeping quiet but still there)
C:C uncertain: beauty (A and B may meet again, don't know where, don't know when; beauty of heaven shines through)
From "The Force Of Symmetry: by Vincent Icke (Cambridge University Press), page 220: "a neutron changes into a proton while emitting an electron and an antineutron!"
This in the above is seen as: a neutron (D,E cancel) changes into a proton (D,E not cancel) via D,E uncertainty (electron) and an antineutrino (C,D not cancel because the D,E uncertainty must I guess involve some difference or certainty at least broadly distinguishing C and D perspectives?)
An idea that comes to mind: everyone tells the truth one way or another.
Looking at page 240 "The Force Of Symmetry":
"When you see a particle with righthanded polarization coming straight at you, its spin rotation looks like the positively mock charged particle above and lefthanded spin is like the negative mock charge. This allows us the following way of undermining weak charge conservation: we stipulate that only particles with one particular handedness carry weak charge; others have weak charge zero."
"As it happens, it is observed that only particles with lefthanded (L) helicity and antiparticles with Rhelicity carry weak charge. All others have weak charge zero, and therefore do not feel the weak force."
This could be explained:
A meets B; they exchange opinions in creating common ground C; and rejuggle ideas again in consultation with C creating D. (call old A,B ideasexchange to newly juggled A,B ideas, an upquark in creating D; as seen from A,B,C,D,E (Ecycle of 4D spacetime).
A proton (promoted viewpoint) from their discussion, seen in an 'atom' of spacetime, contains two upquarks (two versions of (A,B) combined viewpoint. Generalisationbias (electric charge) of the upquark is +2/3 (two thirds of (A,B old views; A,B new views; A,B neutral views), of the A,B promoted view is 2/3 as involves 2 A,B aspects of three.
A downquark in the promoted view from A,B discussion is some neutral ground of A and B that is given to the A,B proton view by C.
Communication channels are open so what could happen in terms of contributions is what is being taken into consideration. The idea is a conversation where every view is heard, every group view and possibility of perspective and rethinking is taken into account. A mathshell effect from counting with numbers defines various tendencies as strong, weak, electromagnetic, and gravitational.
A neutron in D is formed by two downquarks (views of A unchanged still Atype given from C common ground; views of B unchanged still Btype given from C common ground (each 1/3 generalisationbias (electric charge) as e.g. "A" unchanged over three sights of A gives 1/3); and one upquark shared neutrality of perspective in D view of A,B and C view of A,B so possible neutral rejuggling of A,B within bounds of C to D view of neutral ground (so +2/3 charge in the neutron).
Weak force involves reappearance of earlier pattern that was in A meets B (so resides in their creation of common ground C) but juggled out with the rejuggling of A,B ideas (so resides in C to D uncertainty or grouped perspective) then rejuggled back in by third appearance of A,B ideas in E.
Looking at layers of repeat cycles of A,B,C in the expanding floating group definitions of A,B,C from D and E broadening perspectives:
Have cycles: A,B group; A,B,C (C group); A,B, (C in D group); A,B,C (E group). Here some of A,B was in their C juggling; juggled out in their D juggling to be possibly lost back to C in CD uncertainty (C(D group perspective) (so may have mock negative charge as lefthand spin) or possibly lost forward to E in CE uncertainty (coming at you at E it looks like has mock positive charge?).
The weak charge involves three steps: pattern was there; pattern juggled out; pattern juggled back in. A threeinone view of this as groupmeetsunit gives twoviewsofpattern meets one view (so fermion perspective). From this perspective the fermion could be bias to the left or to the right of the juggledout phase.
Just A,B gives a point of contact. C perspective converts the point into a line of reasoning. D perspective spreads the line into a sheet (discussion surface) (mbrane theory?). E perspective allows 3 ways of seeing a sheet from a line (worldline theory of 3D?)(e.g. three ways sheet can roll out as in A way, B way, C way seen from line of choose sheetway,D,E).(Roll alternatives option may explain two curled up dimensions in 3D worldline view)(They are curled up within the uncertainty region defined by mathematical counting with assumed equalspaced numbers; and meeting of two localised views of that counting system.
The disappearance of some C perspective into CD view uncertainty then rejuggling back some C perspective; gives a line of C perspective on D intersecting D's linear view of C; with left and right rotation possibilities of the C line around D.
(Unfinished)
WONDERING ABOUT MASS
Given an "E" cycle of 4D spacetime that is of A,B,C,D:
"D,E" uncertainty when you go (in "E") from your first A,B,C,D to your second A,B,C,D gives an uncertainty in spacetime definition which allows the possibility of a bias (electron).
With many layers of A,B,C,D there are many ways the potential for bias to a particular voluntary structuring in the layers can be carried out.
It seems likely that what is called "mass" can be regarded as "uncertainty" associated with an interference pattern between the usualmath idea of "number" (which allows many ways a number can be constructed) and with the scaffoldinglike structure of a particular particle in its freedom to build a structure over many cycles.
So an electron has the scaffolding of: "cycles of E" as each event of: go from one look of A,B,C,D to a new look of A,B,C,D.
Over many layers of A,B,C,D the electron could take many possible appearances, but still be an electron.
dolphin
