Comment by 082349872349872

24 days ago

if there are no interiors (maybe edges but no faces nor volumes) then the vertices on the diagonals are truly independent: eg QM on small scales, GR on large ones.

[I'm currently pondering how the "main diagonal" of a transition matrix provides objects, while all the off-diagonal elements are the arrows. This implies that by rotating into an eigenframe (diagonalising), we're reducing the diversion to -∞ (generalised eigenvectors have nothing to lose but their Jordan chains) and hence back in the world of classical boolean logic?]

EDIT: https://mmozgovoy.dev/posts/solar-matter/

5 comments

082349872349872

Reply
gradschoolfail  22 days ago

[Righhht, maybe you can excite me even more by relating this to quantales?? Or maybe expand on fns vs distributions a bit more?]

L: quantal (quasiparticles)

  • 082349872349872  22 days ago

    Is this sufficient relation: rel'ns (matrices which are particularly "irrreducible"/"simple" in that they've forgotten their weights to the point where these are either identity or zero) are concrete models of abstract quantales?

    Lagniappe: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022404993...

    EDIT: I'm afraid I'm just learning fns vs distributions (curried fns?) myself.

    I wonder how quasiparticles might relate to ideals (nuclei in quantale-speak I believe)? Note that something very much like quasiparticles is how regexen turn exponential searches into polynomial...

    • gradschoolfail  22 days ago

      REDIT(s)

      I ought to get overly emotional (in a bittersweet way) about all this, and i almost did, but Teddy reminded me to stay ataraxic (i.e. keeping his role in formulating key management policies purely in the cortex )

      thank you for that blogpost about MPB (its one small step for fuzzablekind!)

      [as well as the nuclei hint, more tk]

      2 replies →