4 views

Uploaded by john_k7408

science

- Interchange Labs : Spiral Vortex Theory Rev 3
- Review Values Education 9
- Templates for Asymmetric Integer Tetrahedra
- maths-contest
- Freewill
- Essays on Thesalonians Galatians and Romans
- If there were no free will.pdf
- An Icosohedral Quasicrystal and E8 Derived Quasicrystals
- 1997_savezno_e
- Awakening:13 Steps to Love, Freedom, and Power
- Cfdnotes Fv Integration
- Shapes1.pdf
- The Handbook of the New Paradigm
- Introduction to Psychology
- RonnieMiller_PHI_101_Paper2.docx
- The third world war.pdf
- Prabhanjan5
- 5-math-unit-6
- 327377301 Flyers Leaflets at Promotional Materials
- Politics Essay Final

You are on page 1of 9

QSN

In the simplest possible terms, the Quasicrystalline Spin Network or QSN is a quasicrystal

that we theorize is the fundamental substructure of reality. Imagine it as a 3D version of a 2D

TV screen. A 2D TV screen is made up of 2D pixels that change brightness and color levels

from one video frame to the next at a certain speed (for example 24 frames per second in

most modern movies). Similarly, the QSN is a 3D grid of Planck scale, tetrahedron-shaped

“pixels” that via the rules of a binary, geometric language/code, exist at each "frame" of

reality as either on or off, and if on, then rotated left or right. These pixels populate the QSN,

and their states change from one frame to the next, at a "universal frame rate" of 10^44

frames per second (Planck time). Over many of these frames patterns emerge on this 3D

quasicrystal. These patterns become more and more meaningful and sophisticated with time.

After a while, particles begin to form on the quasicrystal. With time, these particles take on

more and more complex forms, and eventually the reality we all know emerges.

Now a slightly more technically detailed explanation: the Quasicrystalline Spin Network is a

3D representation of a 4D quasicrystal, called the Elser-Sloane Quasicrystal, which is created

by projecting the E8 lattice to 4D. This 4D quasicrystal is made entirely of regular, 3D

tetrahedra, which is achieved due to the particular angle of the E8 to 4D projection. When we

take any five 3D subspaces of this 4D quasicrystal (one subspace being all tetrahedra that are

oriented in the same direction) and then rotate them from one another by 15.552* degrees, we

come up with a 3D quasicrystal that can be seen as a representation of the 4D, Elser-Sloane

quasicrystal. We call this new, 3D quasicrystal the “compound quasicrystal.” Why is the

compound quasicrystal important? It is important because of its relationship to the QSN.

2

The QSN is the densest possible 3D network of point-sharing Fibonacci chains and is the

most computationally efficient point space in 3D. It is created by taking the FCC lattice (a

point space that provides the densest packing of 3D spheres) and then spreading its points

until they are spaced according to the Fibonacci sequence. We then take this new lattice of

Fibonacci spaced points, clone it five times and rotate the five clones from one another by

15.522 degrees to create the QSN.

As it turns out, the compound quasicrystal is an exact subspace of the QSN: the QSN

contains all legal configurations of the Elser-Sloane, E8-to-4D quasicrystal.

The QSN therefore is deeply related to the E8 lattice and its 4D projection.

To read a more detailed, scientific paper on the Quasicrystalline Spin Network click here.

NOTE: Patterns on the QSN that have not been actualized as expressions of the code do not

actually exist in some sort of “possibility space”. For information to exist, it must be

actualized into existence by the process of recognition/registration by a form of

consciousness. And if reality is information, then there is no real space of “no-information”.

There is information that has been generated and information that can be generated but has

not been. The latter type does not exist, ontologically speaking.

3

Quasicrystals

The existence of quasicrystals in matter was firmly believed by the scientific community to

be absolutely impossible.

Then Dan Schechtman discovered them in matter. Synthetic matter, but matter.

And then they were discovered in nature. In meteor fragments – but nature.

dimension is created by projecting a crystal - a periodic pattern - from a higher dimension to

a lower one. For example, imagine projecting a 3-dimensional checkerboard - or cubic lattice

made of equally sized and equally spaced cubes - onto a 2D plane at a certain angle. The 3D

cubic lattice is a periodic pattern that stretches out infinitely in all directions. The 2-

dimensional, projected object is not a periodic pattern. Rather, it is distorted due to the angle

of projection, and instead of containing only one shape that repeats infinitely like the 3D

crystal does, it contains a finite number of different shapes (called proto-tiles) that combine

with one another in specific ways governed by a set of mathematical/geometrical rules to fill

the 2D plane in all directions. It is possible, with the correct mathematical and

trigonometrical toolkit to actually recover the mother object in 3D (the cubic lattice in this

example) by analyzing the 2D projection. A famous example of a 2D quasicrystal is the

Penrose tiling conceived by Roger Penrose in the 1970’s, in which a 2D quasicrystal is

created by projecting a 5-dimensional cubic lattice to a 2D plane.

Emergence theory focuses on projecting the 8-dimensional E8 crystal to 4D and 3D. When

the fundamental 8D cell of the E8 lattice (a shape with 240 vertices known as the “Gosset

polytope”) is projected to 4D, two identical, 4D shapes of different sizes are created. The

ratio of their sizes is the golden ratio. Each of these shapes are constructed of 600 3-

dimensional tetrahedra rotated from one another by a golden ratio based angle. We refer to

this 4D shape as the “600-Cell”. The 600-cells interact in specific ways (they intersect in 7

golden-ratio related ways and “kiss” in one particular way) to form a 4D quasicrystal. We

then project this 4D quasicrystal to 3D to form a 3D quasicrystal that has one type of proto-

tile: a 3D tetrahedron.

To learn more on the fascinating new world of quasicrystals, here are some academic papers

on the subject:

Dan Shechtman, Ilan Blech (1984). “Metallic Phase with Long-Range Orientational Order

and No Translational Symmetry.”

Paul Steinhardt. Here is a list of papers he authored and co-authored on the subject of

quasicrystals.

4

Quasicrystalline Potential.”

Marjolein N. van der Linden, Jonathan P.K. Doye, Ard A. Louis (2012) “Formation of

dodecahedral quasicrystals in two-dimensional systems of patchy particles”

Structures.”

densely packed tetrahedra.”

Dmitrienko, V E.; Kléman, M. (2001). Tetrahedral structures with icosahedral order and

their relation to quasicrystals.

Henley, C.L. (1986). Sphere Packings and local environments in Penrose tilings.

5

The principle of efficient language states that the universe tends toward expressions that use

minimal geometric symbolism for maximal meaning. And there are two general classes of

meaning that it recognizes: geometric (physical) meaning, such as a triangle formed by three

particles, and emergent virtually transcendent meaning, such as humor. The system is

intelligent enough to register both types of meaning. And it can register meaning, via its sub-

systems (sub-consciousnesses of the universal consciousness), such as humans.

particles) and organizational/syntactical rules (force interactions allowing certain

relationships between particles). And, as with all codes, there is freedom (particle degrees of

freedom) within the syntax. This language expresses the geometric meaning of physical

systems.

nature. This is the case with cellular automata (Wolfram). Such algorithms can be fully

deterministic or have non-deterministic variable choices at certain steps (converting a mere

algorithm into a code/language). We call these free choices “hinge variable” steps. A simple

example of language and the hinge variable idea is this code: Take two moves forward on a

checkerboard. Then choose one step right or left and then take two more steps forward and so

on. The choosing of steps (right or left) at the hinge variable, can be done randomly or by the

strategy of an intelligent code user.

It is generally presumed that the hinge variable degrees of freedom in the language of nature

are operated randomly by an intrinsic randomness in nature. That is, wherever rules don’t

force a particle’s position (e.g., two equally low energy wells that are each an equal distance

from an approaching particle), pure randomness will determine it. And quantum mechanics

goes even further, speculating that the appearance of all particles at any location is always

random.

If nature is truly a language because it is non-deterministic and yet has rules and a finite set of

object types, there are only two choices for how the decisions at the hinge variable free steps

in a language can be made: Randomness or conscious strategic choice. The case for

conscious choice “steering” of the hinge variable is made easily in situations with humans.

For example, let’s say you creatively invent a reason to step to your right instead of left. By

doing so, you orchestrate countless trillions of actions in the particle based physical code.

Imagine that the hinge variable options of particles in your body are acted on by pure

randomness. If so, when you creatively steer your body to walk right instead of left, you

“break the symmetry” of the randomness and bias the system to your purposes – your freewill

intention. The system of your body can no longer be said to have evolved as randomly as

before you started making freewill choices. In other words, some of the previously random

hinge variable choices in the physical particle language are now neither random nor

algorithmically determined. Instead, they are steered or indirectly chosen by your freewill

action to walk to the right.

However, it is difficult to conjecture that randomness ever existed in the code in the first

place, even before you chose to walk right. There is no good experimental evidence for

randomness. This fact is known by many scientists but not the public. However, there is

reasonable scientific evidence for freewill.

6

exists, we can come to the conclusion that human freewill can hijack some of the hinge

variable freedom within the code – taking it away from previously random influence.

There is no known upward limit on emergent consciousness and freewill. So, in principle, all

of the matter and energy of the universe can self-organize into intelligent sub-systems, like

humans, that are capable of hijacking every formerly random hinge variable code choice in

the Planck scale building blocks of the fabric of spacetime. That is, of course, if the choices

were ever random in the first place.

The takeaway so far in this story is this: If the universe operated according to a code, there

are hinge variables in the code. A code is any algorithm with hinge variable degrees of

freedom, such as English. For example, rules force you to use an adjective at the blank in the

following sentence but give you hinge variable freedom of which adjective you can choose:

“The dog ran _____”. The objective with codes is to use them efficiently in order to express

maximal meaning with minimal symbolism or choices. A code of physical reality expresses

geometric meaning. According to emergence theory, the base symbols at the pixilated

substructure of space are geometric – regular tetrahedra. And they are organized according to

a code. The actions of change in the code need to be conserved efficiently, according to the

principle of efficient language, so that maximal physical meaning is achieved with minimal

code actions. This idea mirrors the fundamental principle of least action in physics.

So, would the system ever make hinge variable choices by also registering meaning that is

non-physical? That is, would non-geometric (non-physical) meaning, the transcendent

meaning that humans are experts at creating, break the balance of an ordinarily pure

geometric system of meaning? Yes, the double slit experiment is evidence of this. Humans

are highly emergent sub-systems of this universal system. We ourselves ascribe meaning. We

create it. More than any other known part of the universe, a human is exceptional at creating

abstract emergent meaning. For example, consider just a few types of meaning an

experimenter adds to realty as she conducts a double slit quantum experiment in her lab: (1)

the significance of the meaning of the particle going through one slit versus the other, (2) the

competing theories relating to quantum particles versus waves and (3) the delight at the

thought of her supervisor seeing she was able to register that particular recording of a particle

going through a given slit. There are many abstract meanings we ascribe to things that go

beyond brute-simple physical meaning – that is, the pure geometric information or meaning

of the code. When this extra meaning is “pumped” into the system of reality by an animal

such as a human, the purely physical “symmetry” of the system is broken in some sense. An

asymmetry of meaning occurs with respect to the hinge variable choices in the geometric

quantum gravity code occurring around the two slits. The human is able to add additional

meaning to reality itself about a particle going through one slit if he/she can devise an

experiment that provides the meaning about the path of that particle through one of the slits.

The hinge variable aspects of the code are then steered or directed in some sense by the

human adding this new meaning into the system. But, mathematically, the collective

consciousness based substrate of the code operates the actual hinge variable choices in the

code. The purpose of any code/language is to convey meaning. And any good code user,

whether nature, via the principle of least action, or a human code user, seeks to generate

maximal meaning from minimal instances of symbol choices. A spoken language analogy of

a system with an efficient ratio of symbols to meaning is a play on words, such as a double

entendre or poem, where a small number of words can have multiple meanings. A physical

example of a single symbol playing a rule in multiple instances of meaning is a quasicrystal.

7

Fibonacci chain strings of binary code.

600-Cell

Emergence theory focuses on projecting the 8-dimensional crystal known as the E8 lattice to

4D and then representing the resulting, projected 4D quasicrystal in a 3D quasicrystal on

which reality as we know it emerges.

When the fundamental 8D cell of the E8 lattice - a shape with 240 vertices known as the

“Gosset polytope” - is projected to 4D, two identical, 4D shapes of different sizes are created.

The ratio of their sizes is the golden ratio. Because of the particular angle of projection from

8D to 4D, each of these shapes is constructed of 600 3-dimensional tetrahedra rotated from

one another by a golden ratio based angle. We refer to this 4D shape as the “600-Cell.” The

600-cells interact in specific ways (they intersect in 7 golden ratio related ways and “kiss” in

one particular way) to form the 4D quasicrystal.

8

20‐group

A ball of 20 regular tetrahedra with a shared vertex at the center is special. It is the largest

number of tetrahedra that can share a vertex and it is the smallest cluster of tetrahedra that

form a sphere-like shape. It is also the smallest group of tetrahedra with the symmetry of an

icosahedron. It is roughly spherical. Spherical forms are ubiquitous in the universe, from

micro to cosmic scales.

Each tetrahedron has four faces with none being parallel to the others. By contrast, a cube has

six faces that come in three pairs of parallel faces. When 20 tetrahedra are evenly spaced

around a shared vertex, there are gaps between the inner faces, creating 70 sets of parallel

faces.

That is, most faces are not parallel with any others. When we rotate each tetrahedron in the

same direction on an axis running through outer face centers to the shared inner vertex by a

golden ratio based angle of ½ [ArcCos(1/4) – ArcCos(-1/2)], all the inner faces kiss (no gaps)

and the 70 sets of parallel faces shrink to only 10 – the minimum possible for 20 connected

tetrahedra (connected because each touches all 19 of the others). The outside edges cross at

an interesting point – a point dividing each exactly into the golden ratio, where the ratio of

the short side to the long side is the same as the ratio of the long side to the whole edge (the

sum of the long and short sides).

What is so interesting about this shape for unification physics? It relates to higher

dimensions, just as the mathematics of modern gravitational and particle physics does. Like a

shadow, a quasicrystal is a projection of a crystal shape in one dimension to a lower

dimension. The number of parallel edges, faces or volumes in the projection cannot be greater

than in the higher dimensional shape. Our physics model is related to the algebra and

geometry of the E8 lattice. We project it to a 4D quasicrystal made of 3D tetrahedra that are

in groups of 20, which share a vertex. This 20-group in 4D also has 10 sets of parallel faces.

So the importance of our 3D 20-group of tetrahedra that are golden ratio twisted in the way

shown is that it maps to or encodes information of the eight dimensional E8 lattice right here

in our ordinary 3D physical reality. And this, we will show, is necessary for fundamental

unification physics.

9

German physicist Werner Heisenberg developed the first equations of quantum mechanics

using Matrix mathematics. He deduced that space and time were pixelated into indivisible, 3-

dimensional Planck length units (similar to the 2D pixels on your computer screen). The

mathematics indicated this, and there was no solid experimental evidence for smooth – in

other words not pixelated – spacetime.

Smooth spacetime comes with the strange implication of an infinite amount of points

between any two points. The entertaining Zeno’s Dichotomy Paradox confronts this problem

by suggesting that if you want to get from point A to point B, you first must get half way

between those two points. And to get there, you must get half way between those two points

and so on ad infinitum.

Obviously, this paradox is silly because we usually do get to point B. however, if we do get

to point B, this implies that reality is pixelated. Heisenberg’s ideas of a pixelated reality were

too radical for most scientists of his day except, notably, for Niels Bohr, who agreed with

them. Today, more scientists agree with this digital physics notion of a pixelated spacetime.

Many still do not, and believe spacetime is smooth, and without structure – not pixelated. On

the other hand, most agree that a length can be no shorter than the Planck length, which

suggests that reality is pixelated. So there is a good deal of confusion.

We believe that until a powerful quantum gravity theory of pixelated spacetime is discovered,

the issue will remain confusing.

- Interchange Labs : Spiral Vortex Theory Rev 3Uploaded byBrandon Cooper
- Review Values Education 9Uploaded byChristine
- Templates for Asymmetric Integer TetrahedraUploaded bycmcallister
- maths-contestUploaded byapi-256636606
- FreewillUploaded byAl Khwarizmi
- Essays on Thesalonians Galatians and RomansUploaded byAnton Viorel Pop
- If there were no free will.pdfUploaded bypsicobain
- An Icosohedral Quasicrystal and E8 Derived QuasicrystalsUploaded byKlee Irwin
- 1997_savezno_eUploaded bySlaven007
- Awakening:13 Steps to Love, Freedom, and PowerUploaded byuragreat125622
- Cfdnotes Fv IntegrationUploaded bymohammadtari
- Shapes1.pdfUploaded byyunanmr
- The Handbook of the New ParadigmUploaded byБорис Богдановић
- Introduction to PsychologyUploaded bymanghose
- RonnieMiller_PHI_101_Paper2.docxUploaded byDustin Fleming
- The third world war.pdfUploaded bybewarkootcher
- Prabhanjan5Uploaded byAshutosh Kumar
- 5-math-unit-6Uploaded byapi-276678628
- 327377301 Flyers Leaflets at Promotional MaterialsUploaded byOng Jolliber
- Politics Essay FinalUploaded byJairo Cueto
- Latihan Ujian Tengah SemesterUploaded byIgusta Wibis Vidi Akbar
- Paavo Abstract TSC 2013Uploaded byPaavoFi
- Maths-Expected.pdfUploaded bySelvaraj Villy
- 2009_0314Uploaded byQuoc Tuan Le
- Self RealizationUploaded bysalatude
- a_5Uploaded bymert_atasoy
- Erasmus+_+Luther+-+Discourse+on+Free+Will (1)Uploaded byMaria Miranda
- Daily ChantsUploaded bymbaralscribd
- 12 kbUploaded byShubham Jain Modi
- Tut 004Uploaded byKurnia Bagoesdw

- John.andrews Correspondence SearchableUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Born q RelativityUploaded byjohn_k7408
- 1210.1446_sums of Square LawUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Three Space ShipsUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Chemical Physical and Mechanical Properties of NanomaterialsUploaded byjohn_k7408
- The Sum of Squares LawUploaded byStephanie Nadanarajah
- Čovjek i Žena u Svjetlu Duhovne ZnanostiUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Perner Et Al -- Hot-Electron Pressure in the Vibration of Metal NanoparticlesUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Academic Papers on QuasicrystalsUploaded byjohn_k7408
- On Infinite Curvature and the DevelopmenTUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Analysis of New Metal From RoswellUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Elser Sloane Quasi CrystalUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Generalized Kutta-Joukowski Theorem for Multi-VortexUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Definition of Space RevisedUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Molecular Dynamics Simulation of Lattice Vibration in NanoparticlesUploaded byjohn_k7408
- ELEMENTI - prva knjigaUploaded byDarkec Skradinjanac
- 9612084 Minimal Length-KempfUploaded byjohn_k7408
- astrophysics_41550-017.pdfUploaded byjohn_k7408
- astrophysics_41550-017.pdfUploaded byjohn_k7408
- On Infinite Curvature and the DevelopmenTUploaded byjohn_k7408
- ELEMENTI - prva knjigaUploaded byjohn_k7408
- DPN16oxf_Smith_On the Distances of Planetary NebulaeUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Karl F. Sundman WkpdUploaded byjohn_k7408
- On Infinite Curvature and the DevelopmenTUploaded byjohn_k7408
- On Infinite Curvature and the DevelopmenTUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Lecture 17 ExploringCosmos B.J.beckerUploaded byjohn_k7408
- John Amos Comenius - WikipediaUploaded byjohn_k7408
- Leavitt Note_by PickeringUploaded byjohn_k7408
- 19800013899_NASA_SundmanUploaded byjohn_k7408

- Casio Fx-500ES User ManualUploaded byaaf6
- The BigChaos Solution to the Netﬂix Grand PrizeUploaded byapi-25884893
- Blood Lead Levels in School Children in Chennai, IndiaUploaded bydrtpk
- APV.pdfUploaded bySam Sep A Sixtyone
- UbiCC Bouzid BookChapter 494Uploaded byUbiquitous Computing and Communication Journal
- GPSsignalqualtyUploaded bycomert
- ch25 - Vibrations and Waves.pdfUploaded byReyan Qowi Dzakyprasetyo
- M433 Center of Mass Location Throughout Fuze Arming CycleUploaded byNORDB
- 1996 Huseyin Slideway PressureUploaded byeholmes80
- BIS 155 All Quizzes Week 1 - 5Uploaded byBerthahrobinson
- Vincent Kenny - Life, The Multi Verse and Everything - An Introduction to the Ideas of Humberto MaturanaUploaded bydrleonunes
- chapt06(magnetic compass)Uploaded byapi-20017870
- Helmholtz, A. - The Origin and Meaning of Geometrical AxiomsUploaded bydiotrephes
- Analysis of Parallel SpeedupsUploaded byWenqi Wu
- Balanced Beam Load Deflection CurveUploaded byAnkit Patidar
- 4Uploaded bymifcom
- Chowdaiah M.Phil ThesisUploaded byChowdaiah
- GE263 Lecture NotesUploaded byFares
- Learning Deep Learning With KerasUploaded byAndres Tuells Jansson
- hcm2kIndexUploaded byHenry Bajaña
- TDC 41597 a (Mechanical Engg.)_2012Uploaded bybiotech_vidhya
- Alevel C3C4Uploaded bynuddin123
- My Philosophy as a Mathematics TeacherUploaded byJenny Grace Butac Sinadjan
- ics6manualUploaded byAlthea Arellano
- rlsUploaded byathos00
- Pages from HIS 9.8.pdfUploaded byAnonymous YcAZv5qF67
- Low Variance CirclesUploaded byConor Quinn
- CH 5 Simple MechanismsUploaded byPatel Nikhil
- Mathematical FormulaeUploaded byOui Siew Hian
- Turbo CodesUploaded byNghiep Le