Another of the findings of M-theory is the realisation that 1-dimensional strings are not the only fundamental "objects". Rather a whole host of extended objects in higher dimensions also exist called p-branes, where p = no. of dimensions involved.

Also in 11 dimensional M-theory, where we have 10 spatial dimensions, the number of possible branes ranges from 0 - 9 dimensions.

In parallel fashion, I have long been aware of a similar situation with respect to its holistic counterpart, where we allow for differing dimensions of interpretation with respect to string concepts.

Because this understanding initially arose with respect to clarification of the stages of psychological development, I will discuss my findings in this context.

When understanding of a particular dimensional level unfolds, strictly one should refer to it as the default level of understanding.

So for example, when the rational linear stages properly unfold in experience, one thereby obtains default 1-dimensional understanding.

Then when - as with authentic contemplative progress - development evolves to the 2nd dimension, one now acquires the default understanding of that dimension.

Then as futher development unfolds, a new perspective unfolds by which its links with earlier stages can take place. Therefore as development passes beyond 2-dimensions, one now can establish an enhanced appreciation of earlier 1-dimensional understanding (from the perspective of the now attained higher 2nd dimension).

So strictly speaking, not alone can we have (default) 1-dimensional interpretation, but also a whole range of enhanced interpretations from the perspective of higher dimensions attained.

This was a revelation to me at the time, as I now realised that linear understanding was rooted - not only in its own dimension - but also in each of the higher dimensions (excluding the highest yet attained).

Now it would not be strictly possible for someone who has reached the 8th dimension - which coincides with pure contemplative awareness - to obtain an enhanced appreciation of earlier 1-dimensional interpretation (from the 8th dimension). While this (default) dimension is being consolidated in experience, one is unable to obtain an enhanced perspective of earlier dimensions! Put another way, while the default dimensional experience is unfolding, it remains somewhat closed (to other dimensions). However with further development it becomes more open. Thus the enhanced appreciation of the 1st dimension (from a higher dimension) reflects the fact that it thereby becomes temporarily constrained to this 1st dimension (providing that dimension with its enriched perspective).

Just to clarify what is involved here, I will briefly illustrate - with respect to the stages of development - the distinction as between (default) 1-dimensional interpretation (from the perspective of the 1st dimension) and enhanced 1-dimensional interpretation (from the perspective of the 2nd dimension).

In the former default case, one views the stages of development as unfolding essentially in a linear fashion (so that for example the lower necessarily unfolds before the higher stage).

However, in the enhanced view (from the perspective of the 2nd dimension) one realises that there are in fact two aspects (internal and external) involved. So one now envisages development taking place in linear terms with respect to (internal) stages relating to psychological development of the self and (external) physical stages relating to understanding of the world.

The value of this enhanced perspective is that in dynamic interaction both aspects will then operate - relatively - opposite to each other, introducing a circular paradoxical element to development. By contrast, in the default linear interpretation of stages, no such subtlety is involved.

Now this important finding - regarding a whole range of enhanced 1-dimensional interpretations (from the perspective of higher dimensions) - seems to me to equate pretty well with the corresponding discovery of extended objects within string theory.

Thus the 2-brane in string theory is the analytic correspondent of enhanced linear interpretation (from the 2nd dimension) in holistic terms.

Likewise, for example, a 4-brane would be the analytic correspondent of enhanced linear interpretation (from the perspective of the 4th dimension)!

However the holistic approach I have outlined would suggest that there are several more elements (that perhaps have not been generally recognised in M-theory).

For example, just as one can obtain enhanced appreciation in psychological terms of a lower dimension of understanding (from the perspective of a higher) likewise one can obtain a diminished appreciation of a higher dimension (from the perspective of a lower).

Now, if we were to try and suggest what this might imply for the analytic theory of strings, perhaps it would mean that what is - in truth - a p-brane (where p >1) would appear as a string!

Also in holistic terms, we can get an enhanced perspective of any lower dimension from a higher e.g. enhanced appreciation of 2-dimensional interpretation from the perspective - say - of the 4th. Likewise we can get a diminished appreciation of any higher dimension from a lower e.g. diminished interpretation of the 4th - say - from the perspective of the 2nd.

What the correspondent of this for analytic strings would be is hard to say! Perhaps it would imply in some way lower brane objects being transformed into higher (in the first case) and in the 2nd higher brane objects being transformed into lower.

So for example a 2 brane object could possibly transform into a 4-brane and in turn in other circumstances a 4-brane into a 2-brane!

Recently, there has been speculation regarding another class of "object" referred to as a 0-brane (wittingly referred to as a no-braner) which it is hoped will throw light on the fundamental origins of the Universe. However this for me is where M-theory - or more properly in this case Matrix theory - finally strays completely outside of its interpretative limits. Defining an object ultimately in terms of a point represents but another idealised conception that has no direct relationship to physical reality.

The corresponding psychological counterpart to a 0-brane would relate to understanding that is 0-dimensional i.e. non-dimensional.

However such understanding represents purely contemplative (empty) understanding of reality that is totally ineffable (and thereby incomprehensible in rational terms).

Though such experience indeed represents the zenith of qualitative type appreciation of reality it has no direct correspondent in linear understanding.

Once again whereas 1 represents linear understanding (amenable to reason), 0 by contrast represents circular understanding (amenable to intuition).

So the paradox for present physics is that true appreciation of 0-brane reality in physics, can only come through the extreme expression of qualitative - rather than quantitative - type interpretation.

However - whatever the specific merit of such ideas - string theorists need to accept that the current language of interpretation is largely meaningless from any coherent philosophical perspective.

I accept that - when interpreted in a 1-dimensional manner - the findings of string and now M-theory, portray reality accurately as it appears (through the interpretative lens of conventional science).

However the key point again is that this interpretation model is quite inadequate to properly describe the dynamic nature of reality involved.

Therefore, in my opinion, an enormous amount of interpretative decoding (of a holistic kind) is required to convert string theory into an acceptable physical model of reality.

## No comments:

## Post a Comment