[Fis] "Percepts" and self-reference

Thu Jan 16 07:10:11 CET 2025

Dear Luke,
You mentioned a lot of things that are of interest to me and I would like to read more of what you have written.
Among others, this paper of mine will explain why:  https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.03260__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S4YpVHw2Z-GtmRSoZkO4LQCOPuU0ac1jLGVTMfumg3pDlYXiRtisx3tgOxgrOlssbvSwND24_9R4Ov5M$  <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.03260__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S4YpVHw2Z-GtmRSoZkO4LQCOPuU0ac1jLGVTMfumg3pDlYXiRtisx3tgOxgrOlssbvSwND24_9R4Ov5M$ >

Can you send me papers and links?
Best,
Lou Kauffman

> On Jan 15, 2025, at 1:41 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at lkcl.net> wrote:
> 
> (with thanks to dr alex hankey for alerting me to this
> fascinating conversation)
> 
> On Tuesday, January 14, 2025, Alex Hankey <alexhankey at gmail.com <mailto:alexhankey at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com <mailto:loukau at gmail.com>>
> > Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 01:20
> > Subject: Re: [Fis] "Percepts" and self-reference
> > To: Plamen <plamen.l.simeonov at gmail.com <mailto:plamen.l.simeonov at gmail.com>>
> > Cc: fis <fis at listas.unizar.es <mailto:fis at listas.unizar.es>>
> >
> >
> > About Chaitin’s Omega.
> > The n-th digit of Omega is 1 if the n-th algorithm in a given language halts. It is 0 if the algorithm does not halt.
> 
> trimming a huge amount of context (as per 30+ year standard
> mailing list netiquette) i noted the original fascinating
> questions several messages back, and i'd like to share some
> thoughts of the past years and days.
> 
> i have been working on a particle physics theory since 1986
> which started out as a rediscovery of haim harari's rishon
> model and has evolved through *fractional* spherical harmonics
> (see https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.12433__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S4YpVHw2Z-GtmRSoZkO4LQCOPuU0ac1jLGVTMfumg3pDlYXiRtisx3tgOxgrOlssbvSwND24__1y5Vn4$  <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.12433__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S4YpVHw2Z-GtmRSoZkO4LQCOPuU0ac1jLGVTMfumg3pDlYXiRtisx3tgOxgrOlssbvSwND24__1y5Vn4$ >)
> to something that can support consciousness. the problem
> and the godsend being that i have A-Level mathematics and
> have been working with computers since 1978. along the way i
> discovered dr randall mill's superb work which cuts out a lot
> of math to need to do/redo, and i also discovered the de Vries
> Formula for alpha.
> 
> assuming (2301.12433) there exists fractional spherical harmonic
> "shells" equivalent to 1s 1p 2s etc etc, the theory goes that
> 
> * particles are a superposition of one *or more* circularly-
>  self-phase-locked travelling *and standing* photons
>  [in fractional spherical harmonics shell positions]
> * where a non-radiating boundary condition *is* satisfied
>  by the same
> * and that there are no harmonics at the speed of light
>  (therefore special relativity therefore can be applied,
>   greatly simplifying the math - see Mill's work on
>   electron proton and neutron)
> * where each contributing photon itself has a fractional
>  spherical harmonic
> * where the total superposition (if there is more than one
>  photon) *must* sum to a 0,90,180,270 degree spherical
>  harmonic phase position if the particle is to have any
>  chance of being stable
> * where any other phase positions (30,60,120...) are extreme
>  disruptive in "bare" form and consequently are, best way
>  to put it, "electro-magnetically reserved", due to their
>  instability and the EM field disruption they would cause,
>  for quarks and anti-quarks.
> 
> so that is basic background - a summary of 38 years part-time
> research, which ironically and effectively brings back the
> Ring Model, where/but Mill's work mathematically established that
> the EM field created *by* that ring is *perfectly spherical*,
> *and* satisfies a non-radiating boundary condition, which is
> quite stunning.
> 
> i cannot tell you which is which, but i suspect that:
> 
> * the electron is likely to have:
>  - a 180 phase presence
>    (giving us the familiar "negative charge")
> and
>  - be in the 1/2 fractional spherial harmonic category
>    (giving us the familiar "spin half" because the 1/2
>    fractional harmonics require 4pi rotations.
>    see diagrams in https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.12433__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S4YpVHw2Z-GtmRSoZkO4LQCOPuU0ac1jLGVTMfumg3pDlYXiRtisx3tgOxgrOlssbvSwND24__1y5Vn4$  <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.12433__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S4YpVHw2Z-GtmRSoZkO4LQCOPuU0ac1jLGVTMfumg3pDlYXiRtisx3tgOxgrOlssbvSwND24__1y5Vn4$ >)
> 
> * the proton is likely to have a 0 phase presence (+ve charge)
>  but given that this is a new development (one week) i cannot
>  yet say what fractional harmonic category the proton's quarks
>  are likely to be in: whether they are in 1/2, 1/3, 1/6 i really
>  cannot yet say.
> 
> * the neutrino is likely to have a 90 phase presence,
>  likewise the neutron a 270 phase
> 
> * i also suspect (as a 20 year unconfirmed hypothesis)
>  that neutrinos orbit neutrons in exactly the same way
>  that electrons orbit protons, in corresponding shells
>  neutrino-1s, neutrino-1p etc. and that the neutrinos
>  expand their radius correspondingly, accommodating
>  the shell energy in exactly the same way that an
>  electron would, the difference being that the ratio
>  of orbital-shell energy to bare-mass is orders of
>  magnitude different for a neutrino and an electron!
> 
>  however intuitively i would NOT expect the orbit
>  of a single-neutrino round a single-neutron to be
>  stable because with no EM charge there is *nothing
>  protecting them* from surrounding incoming EM fields,
>  which would help explain why the neutron has a half-life.
> 
> it is the neutrino and its families (muon, tau) where things
> get REALLY interesting, because i suspect that the higher
> energy neutrinos are simply its photon *JUMPING TO ALTERNATIVE
> FRACTIONAL SPHERICAL ORBITS*.
> 
> do bear with me, because i have missed out one very crucial
> detail of the significance of photons being phase-locked
> with themselves.
> 
> what that means - given that photons may be phase-locked
> with themselves - is that in essence they satisfy the
> condition of knower *knowing itself*.
> 
> oink.
> 
> let that sink in for a minute.
> 
> much more than that: the circular photon is a way to store
> information *and* a way to perform both differentiation and
> integration over time of that same information *and* when
> superposition is involved (in the form of fractional orbital
> "shells" having the fractional equivalent of 1s 2p 2s 3d etc)
> you can begin to work up towards some extremely complex
> and comprehensive ***SELF-REFERENTIAL*** quantum states.
> 
> the level at which subtle energy, consciousness, homeopathic
> medicine, souls, "sixth sense" - the whole lot - i believe to be
> mathematically at a ridiculously-high-order fractional
> spherical harmonic shell level that superimposes to the
> 90 (or 270) degree phase - the same phase as the neutrino
> family and the neutron [and W0 Bosons, and Higgs0 Bosons]
> 
> the key part about "interaction" with such self-referential
> energy "packets" is that 90/270 phase presence. remember
> that a 0 or 180 overall superpositional phase presence results
> in an electrical charge (epsilon0), which is obviously not
> in any way "subtle"!
> 
> i suspect/intuit that just like the neutrino, these 90/270
> energy "packets" can also, in the right contributing energy
> field, jump up and down the fractional spherical harmonics
> shells, and that this allows an INFINITESIMALLY small but
> very real window of opportunity for lower-fractional-harmonic
> energy "packets" to "superimpose" with (merge with) the
> temporarily-jumped-up ones, in a way that, if 0/180 (aka
> *charged* particles) were involved, would require CERN's or other
> particle colliders to overcome the EM charge and create the
> usual huge exciting mess, including making the surrounding area
> ever so slightly radioactive :)
> 
> thus we have the basis for not just consciousness but also
> the ability to transfer what Daoism terms "Message" from
> one conscious being to another, and so much more.
> 
> in essence the theory has run away with itself to become
> the mathematical basis of a self-referential quantum computer,
> capable of information storage, retrieval, addition, subtraction,
> and differentiation and integration with respect to time.
> 
> which any computer scientist will recognise as being more
> than adequate to be a Turing Machine, if the ticker-tapes
> were put into fantastic mobius strips that *fed back into
> the Turing State Machine itself*
> 
> unfortunately.. beyond an intuitive level, the actual mathematics
> is far beyond my ability. i have gotten this far on sheer
> bloody-minded persistence alongside pattern-recognition
> when reading paper after paper, for decades. i know what i
> am looking for, if that makes sense.
> 
> the summary then - bringing it back to the topic:
> 
> * interaction with surrounding energy is possible (see standard
>  particle physics "ladder diagrams" aka particle "decays")
> 
> * the fractional harmonic superpositions, being circular
>  self-phase-locked travelling and standing waves with
>  themselves and with all other contributors, are by
>  *definition* self-referential.
> 
> i'll leave it at that and would welcome questions and insights.
> 
> l.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ---
> geometry: without it life is pointless
> the fibonacci series: easy as 1 1 2 3
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20250116/029970b8/attachment.html>