Science > Physics > Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 19: Cancer, AIDS/HIV Virus and Negative Curvature
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"OsherD" |
| Date: |
23 Apr 2006 12:04:16 AM |
| Object: |
Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 19: Cancer, AIDS/HIV Virus and Negative Curvature |
From Osher Doctorow
In the earlier section of this thread that dealt with Cancer and
AIDS/HIV, I pointed out that the latter virus is spherical with spikes,
somewhat like an underwater mine of certain types or a porcupine with
its quills standing straight outward (roughly speaking). Since
(generalized) friction including drag and ultraviolet radiation are
arguably implicated in various cancers from skin cancer to lung cancer
and throat cancer and others, I introduced the model of friction
producing increased sensitivity to an object's boundary at the same
time that a virus is produced at least in the context of living
organisms, with the shape of the virus following the boundary of a
person or an idealized spherical internal/external model of the person
except for spikes to represent regions of increased friction. The
spikes seem to be "evenly distributed", so there is some imprecision or
"averaging" in this process.
A slightly different perspective also yields a similar picture, namely
Negative Gaussian Curvature. The spikes would be approximations to
handles or holes regarded as handles. Recall that the more handles
that are attached to a sphere, the more negative the Gaussian Curvature
of the "n-handle sphere" becomes. Through the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem
and its Corrolaries of Differential or Differential-Topological
Geometry, this also relates to the Euler Characteristic.
Friction causes pain to organisms in general, and the Negative Gaussian
Curvature perspective associates pain regions from friction with
"handles". Although a spike is geometrically just a pointed truncated
cone, the closest thing to that in a sideways geometric projection in
topology would be a sphere with n handles. But why would the organism
choose a handle representation rather than a spike representation, or
why would it even be concerned with their relationships? Well, pain
is a type of discontinuity to an organism, a break in its attention and
well-being and perceptions, especially if the pain is severe enough.
A handle, like the handle of a teacup, has a hole in it which would
represent the discontinuity.
The Euler Characteristic has already appeared in an earlier section of
this thread, so things are gradually coming together.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 19: Cancer, AIDS/HIV Virus and Negative Curvature |
23 Apr 2006 12:36:20 AM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
General Relativity (GR) is arguably the most curvature-oriented theory
in physics, so the generation of (virus) mass by friction involving
Gaussian Curvature suggests a possible tie-in with GR and gravitation.
So we come to the general question of mass/matter generation in physics
and its relationship to various forces and geometry and other things.
There is a general view today in cosmology, I think, that Condensation
creates matter, although there are many indications of a more subtle
type that black holes with their tidal (and arguably friction-related)
forces play important roles in at least galactic matter generation.
The Big Bang tends to be viewed in isolation without clear explanation
by Condensation, so that despite the Condensation idea both the Big
Bang and inflation and acceleration are ultimately unexplained, often
indicated as "originating from nothing" if the researcher bothers to
explain.
It appears from this thread that Friction or Generalized Friction
should be regarded arguably as an alternative or possibly coexistent
method of generating Matter to Condensation. The Universe may not
"perceive" pain as clearly or explicitly as a human being, and that
suggests that the Big Bang may have occurred as a non-pain or low-pain
response to a more subtle type of friction in the early Universe. If
the very tiny early Universe were faced with an analog of low but real
pain, it might dispense with the spikes or handles of the sphere and
just generate spherical expansion and spherical radiation - the latter
as a "pre-matter" phase that we know as the Radiation-Dominated Era of
the Universe.
What would be the analog of low but real pain for the Universe? Its
own birth, I think, or "rebirth" for the cyclic theorists. In the
language of Steinhardt, Turok, Khouri, and Nathan Seiberg of the
Institute for Advanced Studies at Princeton, the Universe had passed
through the singularity (contrary to Linde's intuition). It couldn't
locate the frictional sources of low-order "pain", but they seemed
concentrated at some "central point or little string or brane". The
Universe became more sensitive to its own "boundary", but it couldn't
locate where the friction was in its boundary or regarded it as being
in a "generalized" location, i.e., spherical, or "everywhere" which
would be like Chaotic Inflation if different speeds and distances were
taken into consideration. From this perspective, the Universe's
analog of frictional generation of viruses as a type of Matter was the
Pre-Matter generation of Radiation and Geometry.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 19: Cancer, AIDS/HIV Virus and Negative Curvature |
23 Apr 2006 12:49:54 AM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
So the physical analog of the creation of viruses by friction is the
creation of Radiation by Singularities, not the creation of Matter
directly. Just as a virus is intermediate between Life and inorganic
scenarios, Radiation is intermediate between Geometry and Mass as
Matter.
The role of Condensation, rather than being pre-Universe as in Tachyon
Condensation or similar Condensations, was arguably post-Radiation,
when temperatures decreased and Condensations yield Mass. The
Matter-Dominated Era arguably began this way, somewhat of a misnomer
since Radiation has remained as well.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 19: Cancer, AIDS/HIV Virus and Negative Curvature |
23 Apr 2006 01:01:56 AM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
We also have an explanation of Why the Holographic Principle of 't
Hooft is true in this scenario. Knowledge or Semantic Information
isn't concentrated in the boundaries of objects "purely for its own
sake," but rather because Friction or Generalized Friction operates at
and through the boundary. To say that the organism or the Universe
or an organ or a physical object becomes "attentive" to its boundary as
a result of (Generalized) Friction is to say that the boundary has
become the main Causal or (Probable) Causal focus of the object.
Another way to say this is that the Holographic Principle is caused by
the fact that external forces affect objects through their boundaries.
This is already contained in the Probable Influence/Causation Theorem:
Theorem. P(A-->B) = 1 iff A is a subset of B a.e. (up to sets of
probability 0).
So only the interior and (for closed sets) boundary of B exert maximal
influence on any set B. I proved this several times in previous
threads.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
