Math, the Universe, and Everything???

While the eigenvalues are somewhat unavoidably tricky, this new result shows that the eigenvectors can be written down in a simple, compact and easy-to-remember form once the eigenvalues are calculated. For this reason, the trio called the eigenvalues “the Rosetta Stone” for neutrino oscillations in their original publication: “Once you have them, you know everything you want to know.”

Experts fully expected this formula to exist somewhere in the literature for centuries, but the team couldn’t find any evidence for it online or in textbooks. The trio of theorists were eventually directed to a similar result by UCLA mathematics professor Terence Tao, who has a Fields Medal and Breakthrough Prize to his name. When they presented Tao with their result, he cheerfully declared that it was, in fact, the discovery of a new identity, and he provided several mathematical proofs, which were recently published online. (Tao also discussed the new identity in his math blog.)

“I couldn’t believe it at first, because linear algebra has been studied for centuries,” Zhang said. “But Prof. Tao’s proofs show that our method, which was created to calculate neutrino oscillations quickly and with better precision, can also be expressed as a very elegant math formula.”

Univ. of Chicago News, Oct. 23, 2019 - Theorists discover the ‘Rosetta Stone’ for neutrino physics.

Terrance Tao's blog - Eigenvectors from eigenvalues.

Wikipedia - Matrix (mathematics) (a refresher on the math for those like me who forget how to spell 'determinate' when not actually doing the math).

Although the eigenvector/eigenvalue is not clear, you get the idea that the eigenvalue stretches or squished the matrix. The sub-matrices within the matrix are the eigenvectors (loosely stated, don't use in real world math situations! Consult a professional! lol).

What the physicist did, was take data gathered from neutrino studies, put them into a matrix to do the 3 transformations (plus a random 1 other when a neutrino interacts with an electron). They caught a symmetrical set of data, realized it probably caused by the eigenvector, looked at their data again, and realized they go from eigenvalue to eigenvector in one quick, and elegant step (basically what the quote states). They kind of knew Terrance Tao (but also not) and broke with etiquette and approached him directly. He looked over their work, went and thought about it, then said "here a geometrical argument" and "here is one completely derived from math".

That it was "real-world data" was a bonus. Universe is math. And that being said, you can start to see arguments for concepts like "universality" and "time emergence" from the string theory stuff as being a bit more realistic instead of "mental exercises".

Anyway, it was news to me (although it looks like I am a few months late to the party) and enough to get me excited and act foolish (you guy's don't suck! Just too giddy and half through a beer to stick with ATS etiquette and try and have fun with math...). I meant no harm!

Math is a bunch symbols that are supposed to make sense of life an crap, where life equals why, and crap equals X...

a reply to: Specimen88

Thou are ignorant and prove that Freemasons need to keep secrets from the profane like yourself!

originally posted by: frenchfries
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 !

It's a minor difference of opinion, I was taught and thought the same thing about maths myself until Uni level. I just have a major chip on my shoulder about the maths syllabus and it being taught incorrectly due to having to learn/unlearn the pointless over complication of the subject instead of the much easier and useful philosophy and logic of maths.

Completely agree with your post - I've use the same superset and subset explanation when tutoring. Applied maths is Physics, Applied Physics is Chemistry, Applied Chemistry is Biology. Mathematical Universes, Hilbert Space, etc... doesn't exist in reality - your time, taxes and Matter/Energy analogy is one of the best, most succinct descriptors I've read. It's what makes maths such a potentially efficient tool for discovering 'reality' but also why it should be taken with a hefty pinch of salt.

Personally I can't understand how theoretical mathematicians can spend 30+ years working every day on one equation knowing there's a 99.9% probability they're completely wrong but have major respect for those that do.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

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).

Thanks, had a major brainfart and completely forgot how to use arxiv, somehow didn't see the link despite regularly using the site for years - will have a proper look now. I can't say I'm familiar with Tao but given the status of those who approached him and the three independent proofs he certainly knows far more than I ever will and my doubt/confusion was over what information was lost in translation from Professors to journalists to 'dumbing down/making it interesting/search engine optimisation' to the target audience of the magazine.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

This doesn't surprise me at all - its like science is finally catching up...

Math was discovered by humans - math is a universal language - the physical fingerprint of the Divine Creator...

There are much clues in Math, we just have to re learn it. Its the quality of the numbers, not the quantity that matter...

Like this :-

Number 9 is particularly interesting... (using the reduction theorem)

9x1 = 9
9x2 = 18 = 1+8 = 9
9x3 = 27 = 2+7 = 9
9x4 = 36 = 3+6 = 9
9x5 = 45 = 4+5 = 9

and so on and so forth... 3 and 6 also are very interesting and have a fascinating relationship.

No wonder Tesla was so into his 3,6 and 9! I can see it a little bit now - lots more to research and learn tho!

A couple of my fave vids - love the numbers! Watch the top link first, then in the last 2 watch the numbers!!

a reply to: fluff007


There is a division of house in the math world.
Mathematics that describes resonant patterns gets repurposed.
Good example is the von Kármán vortex street phenomena.
Easy to get lost when they do this, but you can use deterministic techniques like superheterodyne reamplification to reverse engineer the results.

Yesterday Yesterday Yesterday

a day
a day in December
a day in December 1862

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: Specimen88

Thou are ignorant and prove that Freemasons need to keep secrets from the profane like yourself!

As far as the laws of mathematicsrefer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.” Einstein

So this is about freemason and my lack of concern about my math skills, that require me to show my work?

a reply to: Specimen88

The problem is that without the mathematical formalism there is too much room for misunderstanding.
Take for example the story of Salome demanding that she be served John the baptist head on a platter.
See the problem?

a reply to: Specimen88

Math shows an orderd mind. Simple math is not hard to understand... so called “sacred math” is nothing more than regular math with stuff that you can figure out for yourself if you try.

I am saying that you want answers without even trying. FM has nothing to do with it.

A Mason knows his circle of knowledge. Or inscribes him. With geometry at the center, G.

I am not much different in my thinking.

Learn how to talk about what you mean before you talk about the meaning of that meaning. And I starts with math....

My post is that it is all math... and I am sorry that I did not do this thread the justice it deserves. Here is something profound here (my suspicion) and the wider audience has more experience with this. Just trying to jumpstart the conversation...

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

As to the determination about what people like "John the Baptist" meant.
I believe it was *meant* to be self evident.
People get confused though, for example John was said to have written Revelation 4:7 which confuses some people.
In legend when Salome danced for Herod she was promised anything up to *half* of Herod's estate.
In Revelations John is obviously leaving us to infer constellations and angles to the ecliptic in "heaven's unearthly estate".
So you wouldn't choose a passage from Revelations to understand the Salome legend because it would be non sequitur.

Da vin3i resolved this problem in a simple self evident way without labeling anyone insane.
Self evident at least among peers.
Is it pancake Tuesday at your house?

This website:
smphillips.mysite.com...
proves the amazing, mathematical isomorphisms between sacred geometries of certain religions. It provides rigorous criteria for recognising what constitutes "sacred geometry". It shows how the group mathematics of E8xE8 heterotic superstring theory is embodied in this geometries and reveals how they express the map of all levels of reality (including space-time). It demonstrates how the mathematical pattern of the 64 codons and the note intervals of the seven diatonic musical scales (the historical basis of western music that originated in the seven Mesopotamian heptachords) is not only isomorphic but geometrically expressed in the Tree of Life, the Sri Yantra and the Platonic solids. Why is this? Because the research of the website demonstrates the existence of a universal, holistic pattern that manifests in music, particle physics and DNA - a pattern that these sacred geometries express in equivalent ways.

a reply to: micpsi

I clicked on the Pythagoras tag and got a page of junk that had nothing to do with Pythagoras?

Perhaps I'm the Elf King who met a venomous F8 and died for evermore einherjar?