User talk:Infomaniac
Contents
Moved
I've just moved to the Amazon in Brazil. I suffer from anemic bandwidth, so currently I am a bit handicapped.
To Do
multilingual wiki
start brainstorming about best structure for multilingual wiki
- sisterwiki structure:
- en.host.com/wiki/page <-> pt.wiki.host.com/wiki/page
- one-to-one correspondence among languages via subdomains
- - requires administrator to create subdomain
- + symmetric and non-biased
- + subpage organization permitted
- + categories, templates, properties can be differentiated and translated
- - categories, templates, properties must be duplicated, making administration potentially chaotic
vs.
- subpage structure:
- single domain using subpages: host.com/wiki/page <-> host.com/wiki/page/pt
- dominated by English hub as default
- + does not require administrator to create language subdomains
- - ugly structure with one language at top of hierarchy
- - subpage organization not permitted
- + categories, templates, properties are unified into a single hierarchy
- - categories, templates, properties become complicated to render in multiple languages, require alternate renderings and additional complexity, possibly many redirects that could introduce chaos into the wiki
hosting
- Need a place to host SMW+ - preferably in the
southern hemisphereSouth America (aside from poor bandwidth in northern Brazil, latency to NZ is a problem). - Or use Osirus?
- Or what is the status of Diaspora?
best practices: user page, user talk
My user/talk pages are becoming disorganized and lack direction or standardization. What's the best practice for these pages? seems to me:
- user page (my page): what I have to say about myself and what I'm doing
- user talk: discussions and interactions between myself and other users.
any comments?
2012
- The Sovereign Individual book covers a lot of the foundations of the change to come, my interpretation is that this is about the days of centralisation coming to an end and the new distributed bottom-up paradigm coming about... One of the biggest breakthrough's for this new paradigm to really take off is that we need a secure p2p payment system which is an open standard. There's some notes on that at Currency and some at Human Ecology --nad 00:58, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
observations
dimensionality of spacetime
Observations that support the notion that spacetime in nature does not exceed 3 orthogonal dimensions
NFCM (New Foundations for Classical Mechanics) summary - David Hestenes Ch. 1
- P. 3 reciprocal identity of k-blade and k-vector only holds for [math]\mathcal{G}_n, n \leq 3[/math]
- "The completely antisymmetrized product of k vectors [math] a_1, a_2 \ldots a_k [/math] generates a new entity [math] a_1 \wedge a_2 \wedge \ldots \wedge a_k [/math] called a k-blade. The integer k is called the step (or grade of the blade.* A linear combination of blades with the same step is called a k-vector. Therefore, every k-blade is a k-vector. The converse that every k-vector is a k-blade holds only in the geometric algebras [math]\mathcal{G}_n[/math] with [math]n \leq 3[/math]." (Italics, mine)
- P. 8 Special and unique properties of i in 3-space, as unit pseudoscalar, as dual, as inverse space
- "The properties of geometric algebra which are peculiar to the three-dimensional case are summarized in this section. They all derive from special properties of the pseudoscalar and duality in [math]\mathcal{G}_3[/math].
- "The unit pseudoscalar for [math]\mathcal{G}_3[/math] is so important that the special symbol [math]i[/math] is reserved to denote it. This symbol is particularly apt because [math]i[/math] has the algebraic properties of a conventional unit imaginary. Thus, it satisfies the equations
- (2.1) [math]i^2 = -1 [/math]
- and
- (2.2) [math]i\mathbf{a} = \mathbf{a}i [/math]
- for any vector [math]\mathbf{a}[/math]. According to (2.2), the imaginary number [math]i[/math] commutes with vectors, just like the real numbers (scalars). It follows that [math]i[/math] commutes with every multivector in [math]\mathcal{G}_3[/math].
- The algebraic properties (2.1) and (2.2) allow us to treat [math]i[/math] as if it were an imaginary scalar, but [math]i[/math] has other properties deriving from the fact that it is the unit pseudoscalar. In particular, [math]i[/math] relates scalars and vectors in [math]\mathcal{G}_3[/math] to bivectors and pseudoscalars by duality."
- ...
- (2:4) [math]A = \alpha + \mathbf{a} + i\mathbf{b} + i\beta[/math]
- "This shows that [math]A[/math] has the formal algebraic structure of a complex scalar [math]\alpha + i\beta[/math] added to a complex vector [math]\mathbf{a} + i\mathbf{b}[/math]. The algebraic advantages of the "complex expanded form" (2.4) are such that we shall use the form often."
To Do: fix maths formula numbering without using tables''To Do: fix maths formula size inconsistencies
- Bott periodicity To Do: find reference
- Ardeshir Mehta on the impossibility of n>3 orthogonal directions To Do: find reference
Correlations betweeen The two domains & RST
I found Jack's / Nad's article on The two domains and the discussion thereof concerning the dichotomy of the Nodal model, as well as the notion of Fourier transform relating the space and time domains as inverses, intriguing. I see parallels to the concepts espoused in Dewey Larson's Reciprocal system of theory (RST).
To Do: expound...
Both 3-space and 3-time exist (David Wilcock)
- David says 3+1 and 1+3 both exist. Note similarity:
RST universe of motion shows motion to have two inversely-related, but isomorphic aspects. Expressed in terms of GA, 3-space is pseudoscalar whereas 3-time is only observable from our material frame of reference as a scalar. This is because it is transformed from 3-time + 1-space domain into a virtual space (analog of imaginary space) by observations from our "physical" domain.
The transformation is via the nexus between the two domains, i.e. singularity. 1-space or 1-time is only apparently 1-D because it is transformed into scalar.