Math, the Universe, and Everything???

You guys suck (and any gender derecitives I have not offended yet... and, no, it ain’t about you...)

A recent post on one of my favorite sites showed up:

Quantamagazine.org - Neutrinos Lead To Unexpected Discovery in Basic Math

Synopsis: Some physicists were looking at data from the LHC and realized a “symmetrical feature” of their data. So they did the math.

The result was they discovered an unknown mathematical law about matrices that precisely describe neutrino oscillations through universe!

Freaked by their discovery, they seemed out one of the preeminent mathematicians in the world, Terrance Tao, who instantly provided a couple other solutions to the equation.

The result being that “abstract math” describes the real world!!!

Restating that, math is not “man-made”!!

Regardless of which intelligence observers it, an integer is an integer. And the physical world is depicted in equations!

So what, TEOT, (you freak)??

Math = real world stuff.

The other part is going to change our world.

(On phone, can’t do this justice... which is why everyone sucks for not posting this before...)

This is a section of math called “linear algebra” and deals with converting one tough equation to a simpler equation. That is how fiber optics works... and MP3s... and Amazon... and Pornhub... and GPS... and the rest of our modern world.

Hell, it is probably how we will solve the Riemann Hypothesis (the eignvectors of a random matrix can “heard” the Zeta Function and was going to post all this but have to start somewhere).

Sorry no math pictures. So no link to Terry Tao’s blog... and the Freeman Dyson unit circle quote on the RH and large random matrices... but on phone)

So, they say math world depicts an abstract space created by man (sic, mea culpa), but it seems that the real world is really math...

Seriously, this is big. We can do fusion. We can do clean up of our planet. We can go to the stars... it is all linear transformation and matrix math.

Hell, some believe that is how we got to the moo!

Thoughts?? (Sorry that this is not complete with more linear algebra and pictures of the math but am jazzed by the idea that we can derive details from abstract equations)! Because this is important...)

-TEOT

Have you perhaps seen Terrance Howard book 1x1=2?

Do you know who Terrance Howard is?

He's a pretty well-known and famous actor.



He's quitting acting to help share the truth.

Dude may be on to something...check it out...

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

You're behind.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

You said “behind”!!

So what do you mean??

Actually, the OP is late. But i ain’t no physicist... Just a math nerd..

And seriously, this is a cool idea...

If anybody else can help with the idea that would be nice!!!

(Drunken rageg not withstanding )

originally posted by: HiddenRay
Have you perhaps seen Terrance Howard book 1x1=2?

Do you know who Terrance Howard is?

He's a pretty well-known and famous actor.

He's quitting acting to help share the truth.

Dude may be on to something...check it out...

So that’s what you think? these Negative oscillations are the existence of the flower of life In neuron form?

So basically the universe is like an old PlayStation when gaming used polygons to create graphics? This theory believes that the flower of life pattern determines how life is rendered in the real world.

It’s a fancy way of saying this is the program used to model life in all its forms because It can fit all geometric shapes, square, triangle and complex ones like octahedron , tetrahedron, icosahedron.

It’s smells like new agey hocus pocus. But is interesting none the less

I'm struggling to follow without links to the specific maths and the inability to type proper equations on here (need MATLAB or similar). The article doesn't really state what he discovered but the quotes about being able to compute eigen vectors using purely eigenvalues has the possibility of opening new areas of mathematics if true.

I specialised in eigen vectors, eigen values, markov chains, hessian matrices when studying applied maths at Uni years ago - I can't see anything in the article wasn't basic maths ans standard practice then apart from maybe Hermertian Matrices but they were referred to as self-adjoints and far too basic, easy, and expected to solve them in your head on sight - the 90 degree matrix rotation 'trick/shortcut' the article uses as a visual was standard and is a basic law of matrices.

I'm not doubting the discovery or it's potential impacts - I'm highly interested in what it could be, just the article is poorly written pop-science and the calculation from eigen value to eigen vector in both real and imaginary space has been a simple calculation that takes 10 - 15 minutes and a couple of pages of A4 paper using bayesian markov chains which date back to the ealry 80s.

The paper abstract sounds interesting: arxiv.org... and hints at a new algebra ring which could lead to new bridges and completely revolutionise the understanding of mathematics and quantum physics with an actual proof, but it's a lemma, axiom that's obvious to anyone who's spent a couple of days working on eigenvalues/vectors and impossible to get a degree/pass tests in applied mathematics/vectors/scalars/tensors unless you use the same process or become familiar enough with the maths to do it with a quick glance of the eigen values/matrix and be able to discount 95% of the data as impossible saving time and energy.

It's incredibly simple mathematics that just involves adding, subtracting, dividing and multiplying - far easier than calculus or the different types of mathematical/physical 'space' - the second you stop to consider real world implications and how it's quantum physics it becomes nigh on impossible s it feels like your brain swimming through treacle with constant mind-blown feelings and impossible to even put pen to paper as you brain is going 'what? Noooo, how? huh? really? ouch! what? Nooo' as the implications go against every 'natural' feeling and experience of the world the human brain has evolved to perform and since birth the brain filters out that type of information so we can make sense and function in the world.

If you have access to the papers on arxiv.org I'm really interested in reading both the Eigen Vectors from Eigen Values paper (my specialism) and highly intruiged by the Eigenvalues: the Rosetta Stone for Neutrino Oscillations in Matter paper, I wouldn't understand a lot of it but interested to see what paticular technique differs from what we had to self derive at Uni.

Math = real world stuff.

NO math is description of world 'stuff'.

No amount of math can 'reality' bring into existence if you say otherwise you're volemort and I might be Harry potter.
Now let's play Quidditch and another freshman will bite the dust...

Math is just an variation of the bohemian Rapsodie ..

www.slashgear.com...

Roulette in Europe?

originally posted by: frenchfries

Math = real world stuff.

NO math is description of world 'stuff'.

No amount of math can 'reality' bring into existence if you say otherwise you're volemort and I might be Harry potter.
Now let's play Quidditch and another freshman will bite the dust...

Math is just an variation of the bohemian Rapsodie ..

Have to disagree there, abstract mathematics is the study of mathematical models and proof with no application in mind. It takes decades and some cases several centuries for technology to reach a level where the same mathematics is detected in physics experiments or is an essential tool or component to complete a Physics theory or model.

For example Riemann created abstract geometry of curved spaces and saddle points in 1850, it was all purely theoretical with no real world application, entirely based on mathematical induction and logic, none of it was based on real world observation or trying to describe real world 'stuff'. It wasn't until Einstein was working on the theory of General Relativity in 1915 that Riemann's discoveries were the perfect fit and essential tool for him to complete the model of how the Universe works.

The Higgs boson was shown to exist using maths in 1964, it wasn't until 2012 and billions of pounds building the LHC that it was detected in the real world. It would have been impossible to make the discovery and advance particle physics.

Without abstract mathematics we wouldn't be aware most physical phenomena even exists let alone be able to design and build the technology required to obtain real world proof and subsequent technological revolutions.

Maths is generally taught as a description of the real world in education up to age 16 but in higher education it's all about undoing all the falsehoods and oversimplification of early years education and learning the true nature of mathematics, the logic of it and equipping you with the tools to build, develop and prove completely new branches of mathematics independently.

I'm gonna' go out on a limb here and say...

Let me guess, this has something to do with...quantum physics.

Black is really white...quantum physics
One is really zero...quantum physics
You can go backwards in time...quantum physics
There really is a free lunch...quantum physics
Nothing is real...quantum physics
Einstein was wrong...quantum physics
Anything we don't understand...quantum physics

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Of course math describes the real world which idiots claim it doesn’t? It’s like the laws of physics, we discovered them not invented them.

a reply to: bastion

ok , we have a diference of opinion. Riemann hmmm ? 1850 . Riemann spheres , read about it in a book from penrose.

Basically math can do anything I agree with that. Also there are infinite mathematical ways to describe the universe. But a description is not 'reality'.

There is reality without descriptions. But descriptions don't generate 'reality' . also imaginary time in a complex plane is it real ?

Point here is that math is a superset and the laws of physic is a subset. But that superset cannot operate in that subset. Operations in that subset of 'reality' are always done in a realm that lies beyond math... e.g. one needs matter energy , space , time and taxes to generate reality...

Then again thanks for clearing things out.... new insights won !

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Yes and no. Eigen Vectors and Eigen values have applications in quantum mechanics but they're a few hundred years old core basis of engineering, mechanics, planetary motion, gyroscopes, music theory and why a bicycle doesn't fall over if you cycle over a particular speed.

In short they're a tool that shows if something is coherent (stable) or decoherent (unstable) which is critical to design of buildings, bridges, aircraft but work from the celestial to the subatomic states - though this shortcut only applies to 'real world' physics more advanced matrices are used for

This is a major shortcut to the mathematics behind it, instead of having to spend a few months of intensive study into several completely separate areas of mathematics, master them all before they can begin to learn how to do the calculations involved - 90% of the mathematics and calculations don't need to be done and it only takes a couple of minutes to calculate.

Having three independent proofs of a massive shortcut to an equation that's taught to all maths, engineering, mechanics, astrophysics, particle physics etc... students is a very, very rare thing to happen - the closest paper to it is this one from 1852 - archive.org...

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: Alien Abduct

You said “behind”!!

So what do you mean??

Actually, the OP is late. But i ain’t no physicist... Just a math nerd..

And seriously, this is a cool idea...

LOL! If I had to guess, I'd say that Alien Abduct's response is just a way of stating that this should all be common sense to people. All of creation has patterns of some sort that can be reduced to a mathematical formula. As you have pointed out in your original post, it's just a matter of being able to discover and determine what that formula is. Nothing is truly random. That's just a buzz word to describe what we haven't discovered yet.

a reply to: Deetermined

I have this written on the back of an envelope trying to spell out the “why” this is important (and is meaningful)... my work has all kinds of “security” measures in place and I have a hard time even reading ATS!!

@all

See Tao’s blog for the actual math from the Quanta article to see what they have discovered. If you know college level calculus then it shouldn’t be that difficult to suss out. If you can remember linear algebra then your wig will be flipped!!

The determinate of a matrix and eigenvalues is easy to find. The fact that you figure out the eigenvector from scant information is what is mind blowing.

@FCD, more than QM, everything we use in modern life has roots in matrix math. It is that this was discovered from QM data, figured out, then realized that is a universal law that was confirmed by mathematician, twice, is what is so cool!

It is like figuring out that you have your VCR actually play tapes of movies instead of just blinking “12:00” at you!!! lol...

Cool huh, math is not man made and the Scriptures also.......

Math permeates the Bible in a way we hgave to conclude it is a literary work from beyond our domain.....our math

domain he he

Ads got me blockedlater

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Hi Teot.
Admittedly: the math is beyond me, and not by a baby-step...

What about the human experience ? You know: Love; consciousness; intuition; the 'feels' ?
What about the death of Materialism ?

What about the convergence of QM, spirituality, and ancient wisdom, which is now showing us that this so-called "real-world-stuff", isn't 'real' at all ?
What about the idea that we all interpret the "real-world-stuff" differently ?
What about those that always say 'what about ?

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
Synopsis: Some physicists were looking at data from the LHC and realized a “symmetrical feature” of their data. So they did the math.
The result was they discovered an unknown mathematical law about matrices that precisely describe neutrino oscillations through universe!
Freaked by their discovery, they seemed out one of the preeminent mathematicians in the world, Terrance Tao, who instantly provided a couple other solutions to the equation.
The result being that “abstract math” describes the real world!!!
Restating that, math is not “man-made”!!
Regardless of which intelligence observers it, an integer is an integer. And the physical world is depicted in equations!
So what, TEOT, (you freak)??
Math = real world stuff.
Thoughts?? (Sorry that this is not complete with more linear algebra and pictures of the math but am jazzed by the idea that we can derive details from abstract equations)! Because this is important...)

Here is the problem with your way of thinking. Mathematics is a language. As a language, math is a representation of reality. The math itself is NOT the reality is represents. In other words. just because we have some math representing nature's behavior doesn't mean anything with regards to whether or not our language representing nature is accurate and complete in every possible case.

I would even go further and point out the ridiculousness of you holding math in such high esteem when you take into account all the math that doesn't correspond to behaviors in nature. Only a very small subset of the entire language of math has a correspondence with behaviors in nature. Most math is just abstract in the abstract.

What I think is more astounding is given the mathematical nature of reality, the level and degree of creativity we see in nature and lack of boredom with the way reality behaves is more profound than your point of view.

Reality is always way stranger than anything we could have ever possibly imagined!

originally posted by: bastion
If you have access to the papers on arxiv.org I'm really interested in reading both the Eigen Vectors from Eigen Values paper (my specialism) and highly intruiged by the Eigenvalues: the Rosetta Stone for Neutrino Oscillations in Matter paper, I wouldn't understand a lot of it but interested to see what paticular technique differs from what we had to self derive at Uni.

I am not sure if I understand what you mean here, but we all have access to the pre-prints on arxiv.org, just click on the "pdf" link in the download section (other formats is another option if you want to pursue that but the pdfs work great for me).

Whether the pre-print exactly matches the final paper published in the journal or not, I can't say, but I think it's usually close enough, for my purposes at least, maybe for yours too.

I'm sure Terrence Tao knows more math than I do so I can't dispute what he says in the article, unless the writer misrepresented what Tao said somehow.