folded mitosis

[SteveA]

A dipolar magnetic field can only confine plasma within 2 degrees of freedom (see magnetic bottle design). Unfortunately, a complete understanding of plasma dynamics requires Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of infinite degrees of freedom (see kinetic theory of heat). Cold fusion is not based on a kinetic theory of charged particles but a theory of proximity of spacetime charges of H-pluses and H-minuses.

That's what I've been thinking as well. The term "energy" alone is just a single qualitative attribute to forms of motion that might not be bounded in complexity.

If gravity provides containment for fusion in a star to occur, then gravity could be a similarly chaotic influence (and this would make it unlikely for their to be significant gravitational waves - this would also allow gravity to operate in a manner faster than light in order to bend or encapsulate light speed motions, even if its just something seen as an aggregate, macroscopic, statistical).

If you let two diffusing balls of gas expand in space, they could appear to remain identical in size to each other - neither appears to be expanding, but they would expand into each other via. some invisible "force" (the formula for time dilation in Relativity would match this same type of phenomenon).

If you take the idea that macroscopic objects should be continually diffusing and "tunneling" around on small scales and this could provide a natural mechanism to integrate internal aging of objects in Relativity as well as gravity and time dilation for motion in space (motion in space of an object is the same as coherent "tunneling" of individual components of an object, in which case internal change of the object is not witnessed but instead ascribed to motion observed macroscopically - kinetic or potential energy is the same but depends upon what reference is being used to measure the motion).

The thing I've been having problems tying in is the details of those motions that are combinations of both "forms" of motion - like an orbital should have both a diffusive component as well as linear and rotational components and these need to have a specific "forward" and (at least statistically) non-reversing direction in all 3 cases. Diffusion is easy to see that statistically it's always "outward", especially with additional degrees of freedom. If we have a cluster of objects moving with Brownian motion (which implies a linear space of diffusion and requires some mechanics in the background to construct that), then we can find that statistical motions can also create translations and rotations, but there's no inertia to these unless some other form of projection is involved. It could be that higher order components of diffusion (such as the differences in diffusive forms over time when utilizing greater numbers of dimensions) could allow multiple, orthogonal, diffusive components to all have a "forward" direction, with inertia (which might even give clues as to what the underlying coherent and non-statistical form of growth/motion of these are) ... for example, here's something to consider:

Statistical Moments:
http://www.google.com/search?q=stati...f87efc6f926f13

[SteveA]

Something else I've been thinking for quite a while is that linearly extended spaces don't seem like they should be "natural". If you have a source of something, there's no particularly reason why there should be an accumulation of any of it - how is it that 12 inches fit linearly into a foot? What are the properties of space that allow for such to be possible or for an object to inertially/kinetically "accumulate" a distance over time?

These things are all seen via perceptions, but those perceptions do not inherently need to accumulate anything. We could say memory does this, but if you have to two objects and one is suppose to be a memory of a state of an object and the other the "actual"/"current" position, it seems arbitrary in which could be picked to be the memory (i.e. did the object move forward to reach the present, or did the object travel backward to become a memory of the present? Either case appears potentially valid - there's simply a property of separation/distance appended to the object)

But lets say that we have some coin flips and various heads and tails results. The most unaltered version of events appears to be a sequential record of them - i.e. head, head,tail,tail,head etc.

Now if we instead apply statistics to this, it becomes an accumulation of results and the above could be said to be 3 heads and 2 tails. Now we've basically constructed a manner of accumulation and the equivalent of an extended/linear space in terms of the quantities of each result that could be detected (in order to do this we need specific additional properties to denote positions in that linear space such as 1,2,3,4,... the numbers we use are rather arbitrary, but they're (believed to be) agreed upon in terms of their natural ordering, but could the universe have a specific ordering of properties that is not simply arbitrary but inherent in physical laws that specifically determines which are the first, second, third etc. positions in space? That's an interesting idea to look at. Consider this, if you had a set of obstructions, such as an array of spectral filters, there could be a natural ordering in how they're layered in order that a maximal "depth" or number of layers of these was visible - i.e. you wouldn't place a completely opaque/black one on top because it would block the view of everything else, so you'd begin with the most transparent one first and then "notch" out as few wavelengths as possible at each step until you reached the bottom, which would be the black/opaque filter).

Anyway, if we look at accumulations for statistical objects, then some form of physical properties should be associated with these accumulations. If we're working with a finite set, then these could naturally appear to be rotations/orbitals within a finite space, though if these accumulations are fundamentally infinite, then a finite set of properties wouldn't be able to describe enough distinct positions/states/forms to contain all these and we could have something similar to linear motion within a Euclidean space where objects can come from or pass beyond (finite) visibility.

That link above regarding various orders of statistical moments (it was a search as there are many applications and contexts in which they can be used) could have some interesting possibilities. If we had a collection of highly chaotic movements witnessed over various windows of time, then various non-gaussian distributions/accumulations could occur and these would imply some coherent aspects of those motions that could be interacted with statistically. Also, because such statistical mechanisms are accumulations, they could be seen as all moving in a "forward" direction (i.e. a coin flip can go "back and forth" between heads and tails but the accumulations of results of these never decrease).

As a quick example, if we had 100 coin flips and we saw 50 head and 50 tail results, then this might be considered "perfectly" random in some ways, but in other ways it could also be considered perfectly non-random as well. (As an extreme example the results could have been just an alternation between head, tail, head, tail, ...)

By looking over various windows/durations of time, there could potentially be biases (which would be similar to seeing short term cause and effect relationships) and these could also be mapped to a "spectrum" of higher order statistical moments (that plot could be 2 dimensional as a magnitude of various statistical moments versus the window of time over which they can be observed, though there can be higher dimensional projections also).

Consider seeing a gaussian "ball"/blur in space, it could be considered to be spherical, but the depth may not be verfiable. Imagine if you rotated an elliptical form, then it could appear spherical from one perspective but oblong from another (in which case a statistical correlation between two properties becomes visible). In a sense, there could be other "dimensions" to this as well and what could appear from one perspective as a gaussian blur could become a highly complex wavefunction in spacetime from another perspective. If it's assumed it can only be gaussian, then it would appear those beliefs would likely be proven true (if someone simply defines something to be random, then even if it obviously wasn't, any patterns or relationships would just be considered coincidental).

... anyway, your comments stimulated a bit of thought for me. Thanks, Antonio. (I admit it's not easy for me working with so many layers of abstraction though, but it's still fun trying and it does seem like there's potentially some method to the madness, even if there might be no way to ever untangle the "last knot" ... on the other hand, it might be that there's really only a finite number of such knots that are relevant to us and that's another one of those "interesting considerations" . If we're seeing things via a finite window, and the only things that potentially need to be done all fall within that finite boundary ... well then it would appear possible that there exists some "perfect ideal" relative to that limited scope ... of course, in order to have such possible that would mean keeping ones view narrow in some respects, likely limiting it to just the most critical finite elements in the picture).

[AntonioLao]

Steve, your two posts mentioned several key words that I would like to expound further. I'm going to start with any one of them but not in certain prioritized order or important. I'm going to randomly select one as it comes to mind. My first selection is the word "tunneling." My understanding of quantum tunneling is the appearance of a particle on the other side of an energy barrier. Classically, if this barrier is of practically infinite energy (for example a 5-foot thick concrete wall) then there is no way a tennis ball can penetrate it regardless how much kinetic energy it has accumulated. Quantum mechanically, the wavefunction of the tennis ball and that of the wall can be linearly superposed, the resulting wavefunction has the statistical probability of appearing on the other side of the wall. This is proven by experiments. Therefore, quantum tunneling is a physical phenomenon that can happen at the quantum level of reality. In a sense, the science fiction of the teletransporter of Star Trek is an example of quantum tunneling that transports matter from one location of spacetime to another beyond the speed of light.

[AntonioLao]

Another key word is "statistical moment." This is meaningful in a theory of probability if and only both definitions of the variance as the square of the standard deviation is defined. The standard deviation, as this term implies, is the distance away from the norm or mean or median of certain spread of random distribution. Since directional distances can be in infinite direction in 2D and 3D but only 2 directions in 1D, the square of the standard deviation eliminated the need to clarify the physical meaning of direction and hence the variance is a statistical measure that is independent of direction in spacetime which I called a directional invariance.