On Saturday, January 26, 2019 at 5:01:02 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Saturday, January 26, 2019 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, January 26, 2019 at 2:25:59 PM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Friday, January 25, 2019 at 6:06:09 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Friday, January 25, 2019 at 4:48:38 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 2:03:10 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 12:57:00 PM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 8:59:42 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 5:54:46 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My point is that in physics what might be called a halting >>>>>>>>> condition is an attractor point or limit cycle. Equilibrium is the >>>>>>>>> terminal >>>>>>>>> point in the evolution of some system, say thinking according to >>>>>>>>> Landauer's >>>>>>>>> original paper on thermodynamics and information. The quantum field >>>>>>>>> theory >>>>>>>>> of black holes has no equilibrium condition. Now if the black hole >>>>>>>>> runs >>>>>>>>> away with Hawking radiation it will “explode” in a burst of gamma >>>>>>>>> rays and >>>>>>>>> other quanta. A Turing machine that does not halt can also be said to >>>>>>>>> burn >>>>>>>>> itself out, and if anyone has programmed assembler there were loops >>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>> could put a machine into that might do damage. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sorry for being slow on this. I forgot to get flu shots this year >>>>>>>>> and I have been hit with a real doozy of a flu. Since Sunday night >>>>>>>>> until >>>>>>>>> yesterday I was horribly ill, and only now am beginning to feel >>>>>>>>> normal. Get >>>>>>>>> the shots, you really do not want this flu! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> LC >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I used to think that there *could be* true hypercomputation (what >>>>>>>> is called super-Turing machines) in nature, but now I think that there >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>> no such thing (but anything remains possible, of course). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *But the idea of substrate-independent Turing machines is >>>>>>>> incomplete.* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I shouldn't say (if will jinx me!) but I've never gotten a flu shot >>>>>>>> and I haven't gotten the flu in over 40 years. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But I hope the flu program doesn't start running in / affect my >>>>>>>> substrate! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - pt >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I hate to pop your bubble here, but a few years ago at a New Year's >>>>>>> party a person who had cancer go into remission made this statement >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> she never got colds or flus. A doctor I know was there and responded >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> how not getting these sicknesses is a risk factor for cancer! The woman >>>>>>> died a last summer with the return of her non-Hodgkins lymphoma. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hyper-Turing computations or results are not accessible to local >>>>>>> observers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LC >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What about the interviews of people over 100 who say they've never >>>>>> had a cold or the flu? >>>>>> >>>>>> And where are these hyper-Turing processes occurring? >>>>>> >>>>>> - pt >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hypercomputations run into extreme energy or frequency, so the >>>>> conclusion of it occurs in black holes or in trans-Plankian scales we >>>>> can't >>>>> observe. In a sense it is a sort of renormailization and treated as a >>>>> p-adic regularization of quantum gravity. >>>>> >>>>> When it comes to cold and flu I am just echoing what I was told. You >>>>> would have to research this out more extensively. >>>>> >>>>> LC >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I think "hypercomputing" is not needed in the quantum space (LQG) model >>>> of black holes (the recent Penn State, LSU model). >>>> >>>> As for the flu, I'm afraid researching it might jinx me. :) >>>> >>>> - pt >>>> >>> >>> LQG of course breaks Lorentz symmetry near the Planck scale. The finite >>> elements have reduced diffeomorphic symmetry, and which buries away any >>> such problems. The numerical simulations you reference are a typical case >>> of computer science, input variables in, output variable result. LQG has a >>> hard renormalization UV cutoff that breaks the symmetry of the field. >>> >>> LC >>> >>> >> In LQG, or quantum space models in general, the *Lorenz group* [ >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_group ] would be replaced by a >> different mathematics. >> >> *All of the mathematics of conventional physics has to be "quantized" all >> the way down.* >> >> - pt >> >> >> >> > > It's a subject worth exploring of course: > > https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.00924 > > > Discrete Lorentz symmetry and discrete time translational symmetry > Pei Wang > <https://arxiv.org/search/cond-mat?searchtype=author&query=Wang%2C+P> > (Submitted on 1 Aug 2017 (v1 <https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.00924v1>), last > revised 19 Feb 2018 (this version, v2)) > > The Lorentz symmetry and the space and time translational symmetry are > fundamental symmetries of nature. Crystals are the manifestation of the > continuous space translational symmetry being spontaneously broken into a > discrete one. We argue that, following the space translational symmetry, > the continuous Lorentz symmetry should also be broken into a discrete one, > which further implies that the continuous time translational symmetry is > broken into a discrete one. We deduce all the possible discrete Lorentz and > discrete time translational symmetries in 1+1-dimensional spacetime, and > show how to build a field theory or a lattice field theory that has these > symmetries. > > > - pt >
The spinorial Lorentz group for (½, 0)⊕(0, ½) is SL(2, C). This being SL(2, C) =SL(2, R)×SL(2, R) there is a modular subgroup to SL(2, R) of linear fractional transformations SL(2, Z) ⊂ SL(2, R). This defines a set of equivalent orbits or paths. This is a discrete Lorentz symmetry for gauge or coordinate condition equivalent moduli. It is not commonly thought this is what spacetime is near the Planck scale, I suppose unless you are an LQG maven. It is connected with orbits on strings, with Teichmuller spaces of 6g - 6 dimensions and so forth. LC -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
