One the key ideas that Witten proposed in 1995 was the idea of dualities.
Thus the five recognised string theories - which initially were believed to be separate - were in fact connected by duality transformations, so that by using the appropriate key one theory could be mapped on to another (revealing precious new insights in the process).
Now interestingly my own holistic approach is based directly on polar dualities i.e. internal/external, whole/part and form/emptiness and immanence/transcendence.
In the Type 0 approach - which concurs with conventional scientific interpretation - these dualities are considered as separate; however the four other Types revealing increasing levels of complementarity (and ultimate identity) as between these opposites.
So in the (conventional) analytic approach the five recognised string theories provide unique perspectives on the ultimate nature of reality. Then through appropriate transformations they can be seen as in fact equivalent expressions.
Likewise from the holistic qualitative aspect each of the five dimensional Types (singled out as especially relevant) provide unique perspectives for attempted interpretation of this reality. Also through appropriate transformations we can show that they are equivalent (though using a different language of expression).
However the really interesting area is making closer links as between the analytic and holistic perspectives in the hope of ultimately applying intuitively satisfying explanations for all key string notions.
Now the first of the holistic models (Type 0) in fact represents the conventional scientific interpretation.
However though this Type is best in terms of detailed rational interpretation (of an analytic kind) it is least satisfactory in terms of providing the appropriate qualitative understanding to enable its concepts to resonate intuitively with (appropriate) psychological experience of reality.
So there is a huge role - of which my own limited attempts represent but a beginning - in terms of transforming present Type 0 understanding through the interpretative lenses of the other four Types.
Thus in a more complete understanding we should be able to immediately provide the equivalent qualitative interpretations for the Type 0 findings of conventional science through each of the four other models.
And of course the process would work both ways as one could move from qualitative appreciation at higher dimensions to its implications for the Type 0 level. In this way, highly creative new thinking could be better incorporated in standard string theory development.
However the key point must be repeated continually until its significance is eventually absorbed.
The time has clearly come for science to greatly enlarge its possible scope by at last admitting its - hidden - holistic dimension.
Whereas the standard conventional approach is directly suited for quantitative analysis of reality, the complementary holistic approach is best suited for qualitative synthesis of that same realty.
Like two blades of a scissors both aspects need to be incorporated in a more comprehensive vision of science (which I term radial).
However before such a comprehensive approach can prosper, considerable attention must be first given to development of the (neglected) holistic aspect.
Thus the five recognised string theories - which initially were believed to be separate - were in fact connected by duality transformations, so that by using the appropriate key one theory could be mapped on to another (revealing precious new insights in the process).
Now interestingly my own holistic approach is based directly on polar dualities i.e. internal/external, whole/part and form/emptiness and immanence/transcendence.
In the Type 0 approach - which concurs with conventional scientific interpretation - these dualities are considered as separate; however the four other Types revealing increasing levels of complementarity (and ultimate identity) as between these opposites.
So in the (conventional) analytic approach the five recognised string theories provide unique perspectives on the ultimate nature of reality. Then through appropriate transformations they can be seen as in fact equivalent expressions.
Likewise from the holistic qualitative aspect each of the five dimensional Types (singled out as especially relevant) provide unique perspectives for attempted interpretation of this reality. Also through appropriate transformations we can show that they are equivalent (though using a different language of expression).
However the really interesting area is making closer links as between the analytic and holistic perspectives in the hope of ultimately applying intuitively satisfying explanations for all key string notions.
Now the first of the holistic models (Type 0) in fact represents the conventional scientific interpretation.
However though this Type is best in terms of detailed rational interpretation (of an analytic kind) it is least satisfactory in terms of providing the appropriate qualitative understanding to enable its concepts to resonate intuitively with (appropriate) psychological experience of reality.
So there is a huge role - of which my own limited attempts represent but a beginning - in terms of transforming present Type 0 understanding through the interpretative lenses of the other four Types.
Thus in a more complete understanding we should be able to immediately provide the equivalent qualitative interpretations for the Type 0 findings of conventional science through each of the four other models.
And of course the process would work both ways as one could move from qualitative appreciation at higher dimensions to its implications for the Type 0 level. In this way, highly creative new thinking could be better incorporated in standard string theory development.
However the key point must be repeated continually until its significance is eventually absorbed.
The time has clearly come for science to greatly enlarge its possible scope by at last admitting its - hidden - holistic dimension.
Whereas the standard conventional approach is directly suited for quantitative analysis of reality, the complementary holistic approach is best suited for qualitative synthesis of that same realty.
Like two blades of a scissors both aspects need to be incorporated in a more comprehensive vision of science (which I term radial).
However before such a comprehensive approach can prosper, considerable attention must be first given to development of the (neglected) holistic aspect.
Comments
Post a Comment