TED Conversations

Gerald Dillenbeck

Consultant - aid and development research, marketing and media,

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Higgs boson central placement is predicted entirely by balanced outside (+) and inside (-) patterned string environments.

The Higgs Boson entropic non-structure is perceivable as empty space structure or antimatter, mathematically speaking, as a Bianchi Group R-zero, where "R" is a core Boolean ring. As such, it has a C-value, in genetic environments, of Zero. In Thurston's geometrization conjecture, this is a compact 3-manifold structure defined most precisely as Hyperbolic geometry-H/cubed AND Spherical geometry-S/cubed. "Cubing" Zero creates a compact, fused, fractal function, that, in the subsequent functional moment, becomes (temporally functional only; that is, with Zero spatial function) CAT(0), Nuclear Universal Vector (see, Buckminster Fuller, 1975, Synergetics). B. Fuller refers to a Higgs boson as both Zerophase, and Cosmic Integrity, with an inherently tri-valent structure, entirely defined by its temporal environment. See 440.00, p. 93, 1975.

Core Boolean rings are what we perceive when we observe the "strings" of the Physics paradigm. That is, this is a snapshot of a string defining energy pattern across a synaptic moment of time, with the Higgs boson forming the entropic/empty core vector or spine of any perceived string in any perceived moment. It logically follows that there is only one Higgs boson within any one Universe. On the other hand, its placement is Universally homeologous, and limited to human visibility only in relation to the placement of the visual/cognitive system Observer.

For example, in Ruth Charney's Geometric group theory research at Brandeis. the Higgs boson functions in geometric group theory as a free abelian group, at the central core of right-angled Artin groups. Cubical complex environments are fractals, with a "chirping" oscillating, ultra-high temporal frequency rhythm when observed functionally across Artin-angled time/relationship.

0
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb
    May 4 2013: I think it will be hard to locate on internet discussion sites people with sufficient expertise in this area to offer reliable and rigorous comment. According to one of our physics-interested members, scienceforums is the physics discussion site that draws the most expert participants, but it is not a lively venue.

    If one of your local universities has a Society for Physics Students, that might be a good group of whom to ask your question.

    While I have no expertise in this area myself, I did scoot your question to one of the scientists on the US Atlas collaboration at the LHC. The response was that the idea is incorrect, in particular because there is not a single Higgs boson in the universe. In fact they have found many now at a 5 sigma level of confidence. Beyond that the argument here was not sufficiently scientifically precise for her to point to specific issues.
  • thumb
    May 4 2013: Are you explaining an accepted idea here or floating a new idea in the hope of finding a specialist here sufficiently knowledgeable in this area to give you feedback?
  • thumb
    May 5 2013: I appreciate both of your suggestions. I would be ecstatic to hear something from other Buckminster Fuller students, and/or someone familiar with more contemporary work on geometrics; a field that has advanced considerably since Fuller's era. It occurred to me that ted.com might have more than its fair share of Fullerites, and others familiar with Supervenient, Synergetic, and other Metaphysical theories.

    If Higgs boson perception is mathematically consonant with a universal CAT(0) metaphysic, then, in the field of Information Theory, its functional definition may "prove" that polynomial time (P) = non-polynomial time (NP). This is a profound question with fundamental implications for not only physics, but also chemistry, botany, genetics, ecology, economics, history, philosophy, math, and perhaps even theology.

    As for your contact's observation that there is not a single Higgs boson in the universe, because many have been found: The Higgs boson, as I understand it, "exists" solely as a measurable/perceivable spatial function without identifiable internal organization. It is the nuclear vector in a CAT(0) manifold. As such, it makes precisely as much sense to say there is more than 1 Higgs boson in any one Universe as it does to say there is more than one "0" in the shared human/mathematical paradigm. Certainly there can be any number of "0"s within any perceptual field, but that does not make it mathematically precise to say there are multiple "0" events. Rather, "0" acts as the placeholder for the absence of relationship, and/or distinction. If the Higgs boson is a nuclear central vector of equilibrium within any one atomic universe, then this is another way of saying it is a "core primordial relationship potential" within any set. It is only in that mathematical sense that I said there can only be one Higgs boson in any one Universe. Perhaps it is less tautological to speculate that there can only be one Higgs boson in any one synaptic moment.
  • thumb
    May 4 2013: Very good question. Primarily "floating a new idea" although this conjecture has grown out of researching Buckminster Fuller's massive "Synergetics" and "Synergetics 2", published in 1975, and 1979. His "universal nuclear vector" definition and prediction appears to be confirmed by recent "Higgs boson" discovery and measurement, and entirely confluent with subsequent (and prior) geometric and DNA/RNA research. Significant exemplars include well-accepted work by Bianchi, Thurston, and perhaps Barbara McClintock's description of an Ac "complete transposon" catalytic function in relation to Ds epigenetic emergence, although the "Ac function" is itself spatially vacuous.