HEIM's Metrons as Cellular Automata, Search for Metronic cyclical processes

This Topic is devoted to exploring the possibility that Heim's cyclical Metronic processes are somehow related to Cellular Automata.

Computer experiments are the method of choice for exploring this computationally intense area. Wolfram's principle of computational irreducibility fully applies to this area of study. This principle means that while the underlying rules of the cyclical Metronic process are simple the observational effects of the simple rules are complex. Therefore, working backward from the observation to find the rule is quite hard.

Guest_MMC's suggestion of using a genetic algorithm to aid in this search is quite appropriate and a powerful way of conducting the search.

jreed's notion of "FUN" is to be followed at all times in this topic. The time I spend on this topic is my recreational time not my work time. So please, no personal stuff, no friction, no argumentation, just FUN with full acknowledgment to all who participate.

More to follow but I have to go to work now!

Paul

The following is a living summary of the work that follows.

I have been studying all of Heim's work that I can find on-line to try and begin to describe Heim's Metron's, Protosimplex's and particles. Most of what I understand I got from Olaf's website.

I will try to describe my understanding in a logical fashion to prove my understanding. Olaf, if you are reading this feel free to correct me.

A Metron is a 2 dimensional area of space of the six available dimensions at the Planck limit. (In the six dimensional version of the theory.)

A Protosimplex is a collection of Metrons.

A particle is composed of multiple Protosimplex's arranged in zones.

Each zone is composed of multiple Protosimplex's of Metrons. The number of Protosimplex's in a zone is given in Olaf's Excel page.

The density of the zones varies. The innermost zone has a cubic relationship to Metron density. The next 2 zones have a quadratic relationship and the outer zone is linear. I don't really understand if the density varies due to tighter packing of the Metrons or their compression or folding of the Metrons. Heim used the word "Compactification". I get the impression that Heim himself did not have a method of Compatification and I don't think the method was all that important to the Mass Formula when compared to the density of Metrons. But I could be really wrong here.

I am pretty hazy on this next point as well but I think the protosimplex's vary because they are composed of metrons of 2 dimensions out of the 6 dimensions of space. Different family's of particles have different dimensional Metrons making different types of Protosimplex's.

The Protosimplex's in a zone are dynamically moving in the zone.

The mass of a particle is calculated from the amount of Metrons and the density of the various zones.

The reason we see probability waves for the location of the particle in space is due to the zones having different densities and dynamical sub-constituents. What this is saying is the results and conclusions of scattering experiments are incorrect because the particle that is being probed (as well as the probing particle) are not really static point particles (In the case of the electron) but particles with dynamic structure. Heim says that the particle may be deformed (I think he uses the word "penetrated") during collision in scattering experiments until it reaches the central zone. As I understand it there are 10's of orders of magnitude from the Planck limit to the observed size of a electron. Heim says the smallest constituent of the electron is at the Planck limit which gives an awful lot of structure to an electron.

This is the critical part. The mass spectrum is made from the sum of these different types of Metrons in a particular particle. And the mass calculation for various particles agrees with experiment incredibly well.

I will stop here and ask for others interpretations before continuing. I would like to revise the points above until a level of consensus is reached. So I will continue studying the source material as well to refine my comprehension.

When we continue we will try to model a particle as a Cellular Automata of Metron's

This must be thread of Zephirs liking.

Just look at this link
http://www.frank-buss.de/automaton/

Booked...

The Heim's theory is a nice target, indeed - but you can try to develope (as the easy training, of course) some cellular automata equivalent of wave equation at first. Another source of inspiration.

Zeph

Thanks for the link. Most interesting paper! The CA cell size that O'Reilly uses is much larger than a Metron. But I imagine that using reals instead of integers makes for a close approximation of Metrons.

Funny you should bring up the wave equation. I once had a prof who was Schrodinger's grad assistant when the equation was developed. My prof told me a lot of great stories about the old days. He did not like quantum dice either.

Paul

The recursive wave equation solution leads to the Dirac equation (a relativistic approximation of Schrodinger equation) in few steps.

Do you have some info, who was Schrodinger's grad assistant when this equation was developed? I've heard about some romantic stories, but I've found no more specific info on the net..

Hi! PNeilson....
If this thread takes off.... (I hope) ....You will be wishing that you were at work so that you could relax.
I will put up my interpretation, (later) of HEIM's Metrons and an approach that could be used.
( he-he-he most of you anticipate what it will be. )
I will EDIT the presentation according to the inputs from this forum, so as to attain greater clarity.
I expect that there will be many "production runs"
We should use a labelling system for the "production runs" so that we will do not confuse all of the "production runs" in our discussions. (editing, to add a name would work)
More later.
jal
ps. I'll even use one of Zephir's pictures. (Improved, of course)

Not all the pictures presented here are mine, but I'd always recommend you to include the link to the original source at this case, or your feedback score will become pretty interesting soon...

Hi All

Zeph, the prof was Wolfgang Yourgrau. When I google his name I get 18K hits I had him in the 70's in a history of science course. It counted for my Liberal Arts requirement while I was finishing up my Chemical Engineering Deg.

It probably was the best course I ever had. We would meet in his home in the afternoon and he insisted that we all bring beer, wine and refreshments. He would pick a beer he liked and we would begin. It was the best teaching method I ever encountered! As a result of this method I have studied QM and GR for fun over the last 30 years. I hope in this forum to recapture some of the feelings of those bygone days.

If you check out Dr. Yourgrau's publications you might find his historical ones interesting for his perspective.

So remember, I am doing this for fun not gain. It's not fun to be unacknowledged or ignored but please leave your ego at the door because I deal with ego all the time at work.

Paul

Here is my promised presentation. It’s a long post.

I will post a link from Burkhard Heim's Particle Structure Theory
And from ENTROPY-POTENTIAL ENERGY to this thread.
Also, I will repeat this post in my thread.
This will be called:
JAL’S INTERPRETATION AND PROCEDURES (Burkhard Heim's Particle Structure to be used for HEIM's Metrons as Cellular Automata ).
This does not need to be the only interpretation or procedure. I’m sure that there will be others.
edited 7 April: inserted quote

If there are suggested improvements, I will make the edits.
If the interpretations and approach are rejected I will delete this posting.
Some links and references will be imbedded in the text.

JAL’S INTERPRETATION OF PROTOSIMPLEX
As some of you expected, I will use circle packing to illustrate the 2 dimension of R6.
When we have obtained a 2 dimensional structure, I will post/edit my interpretation and procedure for our 3 dimensions or R12, which will be sphere packing.
The Metron, is the combined smallest possible unit that can be used.
It is a 2 dimensional surface. This unit is also projected into our 3 dimension.
The way that the Metron is structured/assembled at the 2 dimensional level to make R6 will affect what happens at our dimensional level.

In order to reach down to the level of the metron it is necessary to quantize space time.
1. First level of quantizing spacetime.
I use the densest compaction known to obtain a smooth uniform structure of a 2 dimensional sheet. The results are that we get the 6 directions/dimensions/kissing numbers/R6. That then becomes a unit of 2d spacetime which can communicate with other units.
What we want to do is put a lot of these units together and see what happens.
If we look at a unit of 2 dimensional spacetime and lay a grid over it (see first illustration, modified from Zephir) then all we would get when trying to build a Cellular Automata would be rows of dark/off cells.
This is agreement with observation. Spacetime appears smooth and uniform everywhere at this level.
We would not get anywhere by building a Cellular Automata.
However, If we were building a peer review paper, I would do a “run” for the record.


2. Second level of quantization
Here is where appears the Metron and R4
It should also tell you something about what we can do later, concerning the size of an quanta of space versus the size of a quanta of time. Compare what I said about a unit above with what you see now.
This second illustration is based on a soliton. Just remember that a soliton of energy is not a rigid structure.
The following illustration is wrong because the Metron would not be occupying all four positions at the same time. It is cyclying from #1 #2 #3 #4.
As long as it does not cycle farther than 2 pi then the structure is stable.
It is at this level that we can make a Cellular Automata. It is at this level that we can see how information can flow from one place to the other place in 2d. (This is the motherboard.)

What are the rules that must be incorporated into the program so that we get meaningful results?
1. There should be only one metron in each circle (R4).
2. With one metron in each circle (R4) it is possible to evaluate how they will combine and create a stable structure that will produce a sheet/membrane of R6.
Will someone please tie down Ed Witten until we actually make his membrane.
I can just picture him dying to get to his pen to describe how a string can vibrate to make a Metron and to make the resulting membrane. We haven’t even look at (R12) 3 dimensions yet. That’s when we will have the LQG and Knot people scrambling for their pencils. I’m not worried. There will be plenty of bread and molasses for everyone.

This section is reserved to enter the edited rules needed to make the Cellular Automata.


I would expect that the R6 2 dimensional structure would stabilize with the following illustration imbedded in it. This might help in setting up the rules.


Does the above illustration make you want to take out your pencil to calculate the relationship between a quanta of space, a quanta of time and a Metron? Wouldn’t you like to know what it could look like as a R6 sheet?
edit: inserted 2pi restriction
I'd like to add another visual to try to help with what you said.

If we look at the metron making a 4R and that it is stable within a linear distance of 2pi then we would have the following.
I have taken a 2d section/slice from 3 R6 sheets.

IN A DYNAMIC SITUATION, If contributions to the inner metro is limited to a linear distance of 2pi then only the metrons from the adjacent hex. packing could contribute to filling the inner R4 metro max. density. One metro from the center, one metron from the middle ring, and one metron from the Top and Bottom. Those are the only communicating pathways to the center metron.
Which ones? Heim used a "world selector" mechanism.
Maybe, those are the 12 dimensions that is being talked about?

If the readers are not trying to read the protosimplex then all you'll see are poor simple drawings.
edit inserted following
Hi!
Stephen Wolfram, on page 476, says, "... any node with more than three connections can in effect always be broken into a collection of nodes with exactly three connections..."
By changing the topology of the first level of quantization I get the following illustration.
As a reminder, this is where space and time are equal and are (spheres (12d)).
Is it posssible to use that to construct a Cellular Automata?
There are some 4 connecting nodes which need to be addressed.
Since the second level of quantization produces the first level, do we need to try to do Cellular Automata of second level of quantization (where the metron reside)?
jal

I have one more visual.....duh...
This one will show that strings, metron, LQG, are not that far apart.
It might also suggest the importance of attempting to use CA.
I also think that Wolfram has been trying, (but not saying), to blend those four lines of code together.
The first thing that you will notice, is that there are now two sheets/membranes.
The next thing that will be noticeable is that there are 3 sheet that are interacting.
(The third is shown with only one R4.)
The next thing is that there is that sphere. It is us.
All of this was derived from the fact that 3d has 12 paths of information. Ya.... that stupid thing called hex packing .
jal

ps pssss... don't tell Y... (he's a good seeker) that we have an approach of why there is mass.

Some people might not understand how the "Y" got there so here is what I did.
First, The idea. Metrons at the second quantum level make the first quantum level which are the packed 12 spheres. The spheres make a void between the spheres.
Here is a picture of that void.

I then invested a lot of money into R&D...
I bought one of those kits with magnets with steel ball with short plastic tubes and I made the double simplex. Then I changed the shape without changing the connections.
Since everything can move without breaking apart....you get the picture that I gave and the "Y"'s are reversed.


----------------------------------------------------------------
PROCEDURES
1. We need at least 3 people willing to make a “production run”. You got to let us know who you are. A PM or posting will do the trick.
2. These 3 people should be able to describe the rules that they will use and be able to explain to us dummies how they relate to what the metron is doing.
3. I would recommend that the “production run” start at the simplest and work their way up to more complexity.
4. The simplest would be to limit the movement of the metron to a distance of pi. This is equivalent to saying “round and round they go”.
5. The next step would be to make a “run” where the Metron goes no more than 2pi. Why 2 pi? This allows the Metron to travel linearly and still be within a R4 structure.
6. Travelling farther than 2pi is where we get broken symmetry and “particles?”
7. After everyone is satisfied with a 2d sheet then we can start on 3d.
8. After we are satisfied with the 3d structure we can try to input the variables from Heim's Particle Structure that affect the production of particles such as the constants. I expect that Mrs. SUSY will be keeping an eye on us.

This is only one possible approaches that could be used.
At the end of the day, there should result some publishable results. Maybe I’ll get mentioned in the acknowledgements for inspirational contribution.
Okay, …. let’s get the show on the road!
simple jal

I can give you some information on Schrodinger's equation. It was developed by Schrodinger in trying to find a wave equation solution for De Broglie's pilot waves. De Broglie developed a theory that electrons were guided by pilot waves. This would explain how they could show interference patterns. Schrodinger finally came up with his equation which solved this problem in the non-relativistic domain. Later the pilot waves were replaced with probablity amplitudes.

Dirac's equation wasn't an approximation to Schrodinger's equation. It was a new relativistic solution to the problem. It is the solution to the motion of a quantum mechanical particle including spin which was not part of Schrodinger's equation. It is still however a probability solution. Most physicists consider the solution of these problems are only probability amplitudes of where the particle will be located. These amplitudes are called wave functions. They are complex valued. To find the probability of locating a particle, one has to take the wave function times its complex conjugate. The strange thing about this is that the wave function, Schroedinger's and Dirac's equations are all complex valued. That's a short lesson in quantum mechanics.

I won't have a lot to say about cellular automata until I get up to speed on it. It all sounds very interesting.

jreed

Hi all

JReed Please take a look at the link Zeph posted earlier. I have spent an hour or two reading and rereading O'Reilly's paper that has been submitted to Physical Review A a couple of weeks ago. It is all too much. CA works in this paper. After reading the paper I am sure that I am the amateur that I think I am.

Heck. I might even have to check out Zeph's Aether wave theory after reading this paper. Oh, I have already been on his web site more than once. Don't get cocky with me Zeph after you read this.

But CA just might explain wave particle duality in a way that I can accept. Even Wolfgang Y would like this paper as it gives a mechanism for determinism to exist. He hated probability waves. Must of been a prof student kind of thing. Or at least that is the way it seemed to me when I took the class. O'Reilly says all is a wave it just looks like a particle with our limited senses.

jal, you are going even deeper into what Feynman refered to as "There is plenty of room at the bottom". The Metron must encode information. I think that O'Reilly might be right that it is encoded as stress or strain. If we take Heim literally then the curvature of space that produces gravity must be followed by the curvature of a dimension beyond space that produces charge. Spin might be an emergent property of the Metron cyclical processes.

Or their is an easier explanation which is I don't have any idea what I am talking about. Oh, well. My day is ending. Hope to hear from you all tomorrow.

Paul

It's all right - maybe I should use the word "extrapolation" or "extension" at this case. I know all the quantum equations variant a quite well, nevertheless thank you for your time & explanation, it may be useful for the other people, too..

From the Aether Wave Theory perspective such behavior isn't very surprising at all. All these equations can be described using a rotator formalism based on Euler transforms as a system of transversal waves in nested dimensions. It means, all the quantum concepts (the pilot waves, probability function, de Broglie wave, entanglement, etc.) are having a solid physical meaning and direct analogy for example with the water surface wave spreading.

In fact, the probability wave is the energy density wave, as all the particles are formed by the (torsion) vibrations of vacuum with the common topology. It means, the quantum mechanic isn't about dice playing, but the character of vibrations doesn't enable to study it directly using a light. Compare to my former explanations of double slit experiment, entanglement and other quantum effects.

OK, I've no problem with this, as I'm looking for the most general explanation available. I don't care if you believe in my model or not (as I'm not even able to verify it) - my job is just to make it understandable for most people available. I don't even using the ad-hoc quantum mechanic equation in explanations, because it can be derived in situ with the recursive wave equation solution (i.e. the local form of Newton inertia law).

If all particles are waves, why not to use a wave equation directly?

The Aether Wave Theory doesn't uses the curvature space concept - it replaces it by the deformation of inhomogeneous elastic massive environment concept - i.e. by Aether deformation. The dimensions cannot be "curved", being the abstract quantities, in fact - just the Aether can be deformed like elastic nested foam.

Zeph

I really liked your last posting. Especially the double slit graphics. But chill out. I understand your promotion of the Aether Wave Theory. All of us in this forum already know all about it. "From my perspective" would have worked much better. You are just a little too American in your self promotion. Oops, I am an American so I guess I know all about self promotion. Your ideas are promotion enough as they are really good. Your links are even better. But overselling your ideas gets people uptight. Let your ideas win or lose on their own merits and we all win.

Your Friend

Paul

Zeph

Our last postings seem to have crossed in the mail. I agree. A wave equation may work directly. But somehow it seems to me that the computational cost is too high. Oops, my masters is in computer science. I can't figure out a mechanism to compute the wave equation for no energy cost. Limitless virtual particles don't work for me. But stress and strain in a nearest neighbor CA seems costless.

Keep up the good work.

Paul