A link between the Aztec calendar and elementary particles?

reply to post by bsbray11




Hi there friend,

would you could you please post an overlay of the particles in more of a bolder type colour onto the mayan calender, i only ask because i am completely computer illiterate,

I would really appreciate your help in this matter as i wish to visibly see the missing particles and the shape that is missing from it.


Icanseeatoms.

Originally posted by bsbray11
So I read your post, watched the TED video and then checked out the image:

Putting all of those things together, this really is an amazing coincidence, if it's really a coincidence at all!

The image you integrated in your "Mayan Calendar Image" isn't an image of elementary particles. It's a map of a field of mathematics called the "Lie Group." (pronounced "lee")

The title of the picture (on Wikipedia) which is the same one referenced in the video says "Detail Description:

This is the e8default (Petrie) projection in 2-dimensions consisting of the 6720 edges of 8-dimensional length sqrt(2). Edge line colors are varied based on their projected edge lengths. Also, the 2 projection vectors which produce the diagram from the 240 vertices of this split real even E8 are taken from specific "Richter" rotations of the roots of:
rt[x]:=1+5f[x](1+f[x])
where:
f[x]:=3x^2(x-1)(x+1)

Specifically, these are:
X=[0., -0.556793440452, 0.19694925177, -0.19694925177, 0.0805477263944, -0.385290876171, 0., 0.385290876171]
Y=[0.180913155536, 0., 0.160212955043, 0.160212955043, 0., 0.0990170516545, 0.766360424875, 0.0990170516"
Wikipedia source for image

Translated, it says "this is a two dimensional diagram (drawing on a paper) of the mathematical appearance of a type of algebra that is used in studying geometry. Under the rules of this strange type of algebra, you use formulas (I'm trying to make this simple and it really isn't) which help you examine very tiny changes in a topological map (like a 2 D map of your city.) Each of these "maps" is lumped into a more complicated structure called an "atlas" (just like you could have world maps in an atlas.) So it's a map of mathematical formulas. It's not a map of elementary particles. And the colored lines are NOT the actual lengths to the points, because if you drew the real distance, some of those points would be completely off the paper while others would be jammed together so close that you couldn't see them.

(I wish I could sit down with you and explain to you just what that is. You can work through all the links on the page about the theory and all the links on the sub pages and so forth (it takes quite awhile) to understand what he is really saying. But many people seem to be so very interested in their own "spin" on complex topics and don't seem to be willing to learn what a Lie algebra is or what a topology is and what the difference is between a manifold and other kinds of spaces.

I don't know if you're the kind of person who would do such a complete investigation. I hope that you are -- I hope that other readers will do more than just look at the video and point to an image and go "oooh! I understand!" In this case, you haven't got the correct picture. The computer drew a pattern and said "red is really short stuff that would actually look like a huge blob at the center and that pale blue stuff there is really way beyond the edges of the paper and so forth, so the colors just mean how long a line is. This isn't really the way it looks."

If you looked into it, you can find a lot of things with that pattern (including some flowers)... but that doesn't mean that dandelions are a secret calendar code and that the Mayans took the calendar design from plants that didn't exist in the Americas at the time they were carving the calendar or invented a spirograph. It's a calendar for designating very long periods of time.

Here's a list of resources for readers. Some of them are difficult reads because this is a very difficult (and very very strange in ways that most people can't imagine) topic:

A very readable page on 'what is a Lie group' (includes E8)

Wolfram's explanation (not easy to read through)

An atlas of Lie groups (this is a real head-spinner)

Free chapters of book on Lie Groups by physicist

Lie Groups and quantum physics (beware: Math Ahead!)

Simple Lie Groups

I hope some of you will take a deep breath, overcome that "AAAGH! IT'S MATH!!!" (which, by the way, is one of my problems) and read over at least some of the Wikipedia pages and get a glimmer of this strange and fascinating world of complex math.

(I'm having to stumble through complex maths right now in my school work... it's actually a rather exhausting but fun read.)

What the guy in the TED conference said makes sense to me in a spiritual sense.

It even makes sense to me that such a theory could LOOK like string theory.

Originally posted by Byrd
The image you integrated in your "Mayan Calendar Image" isn't an image of elementary particles. It's a map of a field of mathematics called the "Lie Group." (pronounced "lee")

Yeah, it's a 2D representation of a multi-dimensional object. I understand what it is. Even though the guy in the OP's video also explained it, I've been familiar with multi-dimensionality both in mathematics and in theoretical physics for a while.

There is no way to try to represent it with accuracy in all of its dimensions, when we can only find 3 or 4 traditionally, depending on whether or not you considered time a dimension like Einstein did. Einstein proposed space and time were a related phenomena in his theory of relativity. That's the bottom technical line of it, and he uses the unit "space-time."

I don't know what you think of Wikipedia, but here's their synopsis of it:

Special relativity is a theory of the structure of spacetime. It was introduced in Einstein's 1905 paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" (for the contributions of many other physicists see History of special relativity). Special relativity is based on two postulates which are contradictory in classical mechanics:

1. The laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion relative to one another (principle of relativity),
2. The speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion or of the motion of the source of the light.

The resultant theory agrees with experiment better than classical mechanics, e.g. in the Michelson-Morley experiment that supports postulate 2, but also has many surprising consequences. Some of these are:

* Relativity of simultaneity: Two events, simultaneous for one observer, may not be simultaneous for another observer if the observers are in relative motion.
* Time dilation: Moving clocks are measured to tick more slowly than an observer's "stationary" clock.
* Length contraction: Objects are measured to be shortened in the direction that they are moving with respect to the observer.
* Mass–energy equivalence: E = mc2, energy and mass are equivalent and transmutable.
* Maximum speed is finite: No physical object or message or field line can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.

secure.wikimedia.org...

Moving to 5, 6, 7, 8 dimensions introduces complexities that truly are difficult to comprehend. I'm still trying to figure out the 2D representations in the TED video, as to what that could actually "look like," but it's a totally alien concept to a 3D being I suppose. It involves a lot of imagine at any rate. But anyway the point the guy in that video is making is, if the E8 model is verified experimentally like Einstein's theory at the new collider they're building, then it'll be the next breakthrough in using multi-dimensional models to predict nature.

If it correctly predicts the new particles at the collider, then it worked. If it doesn't, then it didn't, and they'll have to try to find some other way of finding patterns in the data.

reply to post by Icanseeatoms


Here's another image:




the-messiahs-blog.blogspot.com...


White circles are around the new particles the model is predicting.


I wonder what was desirable about this particular representation that they chose it, because it looks like it's predicting new particles in very structurally significant parts of this pattern to me. But maybe that also has to do with the greater mass that's being expected from the larger particles, too.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Byrd
The image you integrated in your "Mayan Calendar Image" isn't an image of elementary particles. It's a map of a field of mathematics called the "Lie Group." (pronounced "lee")

Yeah, it's a 2D representation of a multi-dimensional object. I understand what it is. Even though the guy in the OP's video also explained it, I've been familiar with multi-dimensionality both in mathematics and in theoretical physics for a while.

(smile) After reading the rest of your post, I can see that you understand what's going on. I confused you with the original poster.

I am generally in favor of Wikipedia articles, though some really do need editing... so I'm careful about the ones that I select (well, usually. If I'm not in a screaming hurry.)

Moving to 5, 6, 7, 8 dimensions introduces complexities that truly are difficult to comprehend. I'm still trying to figure out the 2D representations in the TED video, as to what that could actually "look like," but it's a totally alien concept to a 3D being I suppose. It involves a lot of imagine at any rate. But anyway the point the guy in that video is making is, if the E8 model is verified experimentally like Einstein's theory at the new collider they're building, then it'll be the next breakthrough in using multi-dimensional models to predict nature.

I love the ideas... but the problem with them showing it in Pretty Pictures is (as you can see) people just don't understand what's really going on. They make a connection with the pattern and make some assumptions (I was trying to educate folks about what the whole thing meant... as you see, though, some folks look at the dots and the pattern makes a satisfying connection for them, although their interpretation doesn't have a thing to do with what the image actually means.)

I think the notion of using Lie Algebras really is rather brilliant in trying to integrate special relativity and general relativity, though, like you I'm not sure why he chose those particular vertices (it wasn't distance.) I haven't read enough of his work to be able to tell what his logic was (and it's going to be some VERY heavy going to get to them.)

Time will tell.

But... in any case, I think we can both agree that the Mayan calendar really has no correlation other than it "kinda sorta" looks similar.

reply to post by bsbray11




Thank you very much for that, much appreciated.

It was not my intention to " see " the pattern as such but rather to further understand the exact positions of the " missing elementary particles " , and i will leave it at that eh .


Icanseeatoms.

aztecs aren't real