Epistemology
Introduction E9F5FC Questions FFFFC0 Software |
Bott periodicity, Bott periodicity flavors, Lie group embeddings, Embedding UXU, Clifford algebras, Complex structures, Octonions, CT groups Understand how Bott periodicity models the eight divisions of everything Mental Perspectives as Linear Complex Structures. Bott Periodicity Update. Bott Periodicity Models Divisions of Everything Research plan
Model various features of divisions
Modeling divisions of everything
Make sense of various aspects of Bott periodicity
Divisions of everything
Lie group inverses
Six transformations
Adjunctions and Conceptions
Three Minds Super division algebras relate the two minds, unconscious and conscious, as odd and even subalgebras. See Todd Trimble's notes. I want to relate this to quantum symmetries. Squaring to {$-1$} or {$+1$} When generators {$e_k$} square {$e_k^2=1$}, then this directly yields a split of the vector space {$V=V_+\oplus V_-$}, and so the Clifford algebra is {$Cl_{1,0}=\mathbb{R}\oplus \mathbb{R}$}. Whereas if the generators {$e_k$} square {$e_k^2=-1$}, then we have to wait until we have the product of three generators squaring {$(e_1e_2e_3)^2=1$} to split the vector space, in which case the Clifford algebra is {$Cl_{1,0}=\mathbb{H}\oplus \mathbb{H}$}. Thus squaring to {$-1$} yields first internal structure, and only then external structure. Whereas squaring to {$+1$} yields first external structure, and then internal structure. They coincide with {$Cl_{4,0}=Cl_(0,4)=M_2(\mathbb{H})$}. Divisions of Everything A perspective is modeled by a linear complex structure {$J_k$}.
Distinct perspectives {$J_j$} and {$J_k$} are mutually anticommuting linear complex structures, which is to say, {$J_jJ_k=-J_kJ_j$}. A division of everything is modeled by a Clifford algebra {$Cl_{0,k}$} generated by mutually anticommuting {$J_1,J_2,\dots ,J_k$}. As we apply these structures sequentially to {$O(16r)$}, we can ask, which matrices they commute with, and which do they not commute with? In general, it seems that they commute with those which have no contextualization, and they do not commute with those which have a contextualization. But this notion changes as we keep applying a new, mutually anticommuting structure. Mental reflection is modeled variously, as inversion, as reflection, as complex conjugation, as antilinearity, as that which is culled away because of noncommutativity. Removing the contextualized The unfolding of the divisions of everything can be thought of as a process of continuously removing contextualized knowledge (what is not known) and restricting to actual raw experience (what is known). At a certain point this ends up restricting to a smaller and smaller portion of the vector space. Think of {$O(n)$} as describing experience. Applying a linear complex structure yields {$U(n)$} as uncontextualized, unreflected, known, raw experience, separating away the unknown, contextualized, reflected experience. Then further apply a second linear complex structure yielding {$Sp(n)$} as unreflected unreflected experience, knowledge, throwing away the reflected unreflected experience. Apply a third linear complex structure yielding {$Sp(n)\times Sp(n)$} as unreflected unreflected unreflected experience, twofold knowledge, which is to say, knowledge in two forms, Unconscious and Conscious, yet unrelated. These take us from {$O(n)$} to {$U(n)$}, from {$U(n)$} to {$Sp(n)$}, from {$Sp(n)$} to {$Sp(n)\times Sp(n)$}.
Then the split-biquaternionic structure equates isomorphically the two spaces, two kinds of knowledge, one reflecting the other, so there is no more throwing away the reflected. Then they develop separately and finally they are equated, identified as one and the same. Experience thus includes three levels of reflection which are stripped away. The reflection at each stage takes on different forms as the rotoreflections, the antilinear operator and the break down of the vector space {$V=V_+\oplus V_-$}. But then those two subspaces get equated so there is no more stripping away, we have hit bottom. This yields a three-cycle that returns back to where we started. This bottoming out of reflection, with the three-cycle, grounds 3 dimensions of space and the fourth dimension of time, which refers back to the first dimension and functions as a clock marking time on the three-cycle. So we experience time as lived internally. This is given by the fivesome, where the two axes relate whether, what, how, why, one of which is time. The present is the whole of it all. The gap evolves further with morality where there is a conscience, a concientious perspective upon the present. And this is one of three pairs defining perspectives, which by conscientiousness are equivalent to each other, by a three-cycle. Then further the gap evolves with the supposition of a hypothesis, where there exist known and unknown side-by-side. But this collapses when the hypothesis is affirmed. The contradiction of the eightsome: all are known and all are not known. Unconscious: {$O(n)$} all are known. Conscious: {$O(n)$} all are not known. The sevensome keeps them separate but the eightsome equates them, gives them opposite meanings. But the sevensome relates exists a known and exists an unknown. How is that interpreted here? Comparing {$O(n),U(n),Sp(n)$}. Comparing complex and real Bott periodicity. Beings have linear complex structure, knowledge has quaternionic structure. {$Cl_{0,0}=\mathbb{R}$} Nullsome. {$O(16)$} to {$O(16)$} {$Cl_{0,1}=\mathbb{C}$} Onesome. {$U(8)$} to {$O(16)$} Any linear complex structure functions as a perspective. {$Cl_{0,2}=\mathbb{H}$} Twosome. {$Sp(4)$} to {$O(16)$} Two mutually anticommuting linear complex structures define a quaternionic structure. A product of two linear complex structures functions as a shift in perspective. {$Cl_{0,3}=\mathbb{H}\oplus\mathbb{H}$} Threesome. {$Sp(2)\times Sp(2)$} to {$O(16)$} Pseudoscalar squares to {$+1$}. {$(J_1J_2J_3)^2=1$} We have that {$J_1J_2J_3=J_2J_3J_1=J_2J_3J_1$}. We also have that {$J_1J_2J_3$} splits {$V=V_+\oplus V_-$} where {$J_1J_2J_3v_+ = v_+$} for {$v_+\in V_+$} and {$J_1J_2J_3v_- = -v_-$} for {$v_-\in V_-$}. {$J_1J_2v_- = J_3v_-,\; J_2J_3v_-=J_1v_-,\; J_3J_1v_-=J_2v_-$} A product of three linear complex structures breaks up the vector space into two eigenspaces, {$S_+$} and {$S_-$}. Three mutually anticommuting linear complex structures define a split-biquaternionic structure. {$Cl_{0,4}=M_2(\mathbb{H})$} Foursome. {$Sp(2)$} to {$O(16)$} {$J_3J_4$} sets up an isometry between {$V_+$} and {$V_-$}. {$Cl_{0,5}=M_4(\mathbb{C})$} Fivesome. {$U(2)$} to {$O(16)$} {$J_1J_4J_5$} commutes with {$J_1J_2J_3$} and acts within {$V_+$} (or {$V_-$}) and divides it into mutually orthogonal eigenspaces {$W_\pm$} with {$W_-=J_2W_+$}. {$J_2$} interchanges the {$1$} and {$j$} so we are left with those matrices that only mix {$1$} and {$i$}, thus are complex. Can we think of the new operators as developing the gap in between? Or can we think of them as appearing on either end of the chain? {$Cl_{0,6}=M_8(\mathbb{R})$} Sixsome. {$O(2)$} to {$O(16)$} {$J_2J_4J_6$} commutes with {$J_1J_2J_3$} and with {$J_1J_4J_5$} and acts within {$W_\pm$} and splits it into {$X_\pm$} such that {$X_-=J_1X_+$}. {$J_1$} acts as {$i$}, thus we are left with those matrices that are without {$i$}. {$Cl_{0,7}=M_8(\mathbb{R})\oplus M_8(\mathbb{R})$} Sevensome. {$O(1)\times O(1)$} to {$O(16)$} {$J_1J_6J_7$} commutes with {$J_1J_2J_3$}, {$J_1J_4J_5$}, {$J_2J_4J_6$} and splits {$X_+$} into subspaces {$Y_\pm$} {$Cl_{0,8}=M_{16}(\mathbb{R})$} Eightsome. {$O(1)$} to {$O(16)$} {$J_7J_8$} commutes with {$J_1J_2J_3$}, {$J_1J_4J_5$}, {$J_2J_4J_6$} but anticommutes with {$J_1J_6J_7$} and thus sets up an isometry between {$Y_+$} and {$Y_-$}. Are there circumstances where this could be considered contradictory? Consider flavors of Bott periodicity where this collapses back to the nullsome. In particular, consider Morita equivalence. Yet Morita equivalence equates all matrix algebras of a division algebra, thus equates too many structures. Products of perspectives {$J_\alpha J_\beta$} relates Unconscious and Conscious. {$J_\alpha J_\gamma J_\delta$} divides the vector space into worlds where {$J_\alpha$} and {$J_\beta$} are experienced as How {$-v\rightarrow v$} and What {$v\rightarrow v$} (as in the How and What of an arrow by the Yoneda embedding). Whereas {$J_\gamma J_\delta$} is their framework which is not experienced but grounds the experience as Why and Whether. The homotopy groups {$\mathbb{Z}_2$} link the second mind with the first mind, and the third mind with the second mind. The fourth mind is linked to itself, yielding {$\mathbb{Z}$}. So is the eighth mind. Modeling physical systems Modeling biological systems Krebs cycle. Bott periodicity. Sulfur as an eight-cycle. The origin of life.
Ideas
Bott periodicity provides order to the homotopy groups of spheres and that reflects that we are left with Consciousness when we unplug the Unconscious and likewise unplug the Conscious. So the relation between n and m is the relation between the Unconscious and the Conscious and their content. Bott periodicity expresses the symmetry of mathematics
In Bott Periodicity, the matrix representations are related:
Loop spaces
Complex Bott periodicity, which relates U(n) and U(n+m)/U(n)xU(m), and goes back and forth between them, suggests that real Bott periodicity goes back and forth between O(n) and O(n+m)/O(n)xO(m). In one direction there is one step but in the other direction there are seven steps. In Bott periodicity, {$\mathbb{Z}_2$} may count the unconscious and the conscious. They are the two pieces of {$O(\infty)$}. The homotopy groups explain the different ways of relating them. A possible interpretation of the sequence. {$\mathbb{Z}$} expresses a hole as with the threesome and the sevensome. {$\mathbb{Z}_2$} describes the nullsome and the onesome.
Raw experience is the nullsome. Bott periodicity models the inherent contradiction in thinking. Thinking (reflection, contextualization) leads to a contradiction. The three-cycle arises when focused on half of the mind, the unreflected, uncontextualized half, as we discard, reject the other half.
|