RR-NS Interactions

[Ryan Buchanan]

Hello all! This video:

https://youtu.be/9coBEScqk-4?si=oKu-rnUPjiU4XIxF

includes a simulation (and the corresponding paper) in its description.

Why is this relevant?

Because RR-NS interactions are speculated to have a direct influence on entanglement: https://www.authorea.com/doi/full/10.22541/au.175407818.81476862/v1

Thanks.

- Ryan

[Austin Fearnley]

I am a naive amateur physicist.  I looked at the interesting youtube video on RR-NS interactions.
I  also asked google search AI two questions: "what do rr-ns string interactions mean for quantum entanglement?" and then "more on geometry of space".

I am not averse to the idea that entanglement can lead to construction of spacetime geometry.  Twenty years ago I had the idea that entangled pairs could be analysed using the Rasch formative assessment model in order to make a physical scale. (And ditto for the universe.)  More recently I have worked on Rasch and believe that local objects are plotted locally and non-local objects are plotted non-locally.  I really need to perform the program again iteratively to see if the plots get closer and closer in iterations simulating gravitation effects.  What I mean by that apparent tautology is that pairs can be taken as local by inputting such local real values, then see where they are plotted by the software.  

It seems to me that where pairs have correlations or interactions they can be considered to be local.  The Rasch pairs software (devised by David Andrich) seems to plot data which are actually in a nearly Guttman pattern to be more spread out. (Maybe like an antigravity effect?)  I am seeing here an analogy between interactions implying locality and non-interactions implying non-locality. In the CCC model, the end of an aeon occurs when all matter is almost infinitely spread out. Very non-local and results in the loss of the scale of the universe. Just as Rasch software break down when data are Guttman.

I am not averse to string theory as I have a preon model with hexarks being another layer beneath them.  I have dropped it now but I did once have a picture of the hexarks (which each have one component of R, G, B, R', G', B' [QCD colours and anticolours]) using their colour component to attach to the appropriate colour brane, something like rungs on a ladder. These formed a kind of DNA structure but with three branes rather than the two of DNA. The spin components made the 'ladder' rotate. Like charges repelled one another to stop the 'rungs' getting too close together. Opposite colours attracted across branes to keep the structure together.

AI mentioned rr and ns are part of superstring theory. Not sure about that.

[Parker Emmerson]

When the obstacle critical density is raised past the transported string density, the admissibility functional collapses. This collapse is interpreted as a constraint-fracture event: the wound sector can no longer be maintained at the obstacle, so winding charge is expelled to the two boundary orbits of the RR window.... weird.

Critical Density Rupture: ON/OFF

[Leo]

Dear Ryan,

I have no clue what it is that is being said in your paper; the math of string theory is well beyond my base. 

I can't help though, as a stranger to the field, but feel like Im being pranked by the abstract of that second paper you linked.  I made it as far as Chan-Paton factors and anyons before being ambushed by "epistemic harmony", "semantic failures" and "domain-of-discourse-to-truth mappings". At that point I genuinely couldn't tell whether I was reading a string theory paper or something generated by feeding a thesaurus into a philosophy department.

[Richard Gill]

Dear Leo

I suspect an AI could very well do the work of a philosophy department. The thesaurus is already in there.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bell inequalities and quantum foundations" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Bell_quantum_found...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/2886357a-f051-4bb2-8602-26ce23a3b9c7n%40googlegroups.com.

[Austin Fearnley]

Thanks!  I have played with the file you attached.  Lovely graphics.  I used winding ON and OFF.  At some point the strings turned orange and never retrurned to the original colour.

I have also (with google search AI help) tried to understand it all more.  I am not clear what is 'weird' yet.  Maybe the failure to maintain the winding charge?
Unlike the demo Ryan gave, your demo is much clearer/sharper.  However Ryan's demo also showed two RRs interacting via two NSs which I think was very interesting.

Google asked for more details on what I was trying to learn so I gave it Ryan's name.  Google AI then gave me a resume of Ryan's work and yours in this field.

Like Leo, I am out of my depth here.  I did follow Susskind's online Stanford mathematical physics courses including two on intros to string theory.  But that was years ago and only an introduction.

So let me guess.  I mentioned CCC and how I found that CCC fitted with my Rasch ideas.  This concerns the end of the aeon and start of the next aeon.  Maybe there is also an analogy with the string theory bounce idea where strings cannot be made too small else the maths bounces them to be bigger?  I don't remember this in Susskind's lectures but it was in a popular book by Greene.  So maybe this bounce is also similar to CCC.

The loss of scale in CCC nodes can be likened to the collapse of the universe's wavefunction.  So something like CCC could happen for individual particles undergoing an interaction and having their wavefunctions collapsed.  This means that it is useful to work on the RR-NS interplay under critical conditions leading to collapse.  I had been wondering what if critical conditions were avoided as in my idea of combining my hexarks into preons.  My hexarks would be like the NS string connectors to the RR branes.  The ends of the hexarks would have primordal(?) QCD colours (maybe technicolour?) as QCD colour is emergent only at the level of fundamental particles.  

[Parker Emmerson]

No, Richard - I highly doubt that - unless the philosophy department is really into designing philosopher specific language models, which isn't a bad idea --- the inspiration of a philosopher's spirit and voice is not, at this time, replicable by machine. In fact, as a philosopher/mathematician myself - the number of rejections I've received for my ideas, but persevered to have my works mature into something really unique --- it's not replicable by any autonomous AI that would have been designed by the likes of the rote-minded, status-quo, paradigm enforcing, indoctrinated people who rejected my work for years in the first place. However, it is important for philosophers and mathematicians to participate in guiding these AI language models into critical thinking skills so they aren't used blindly by establishment forces to reinforce Orwellian like power structures.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Bell_quantum_foundations/63DB3525-7039-44CF-BE8C-B7A697029F02%40gmail.com.