Archive for June, 2008

Unified theory story

Tuesday, June 10th, 2008

The first clue was that the two fundamental theories of physics so far were incompatible. The maths just didn't work out. It wasn't practical to perform a direct experiment to find out what happened in a situation where the two theories disagreed (it would have required a tame black hole, or a particle accelerator the size of the galaxy) but it was what should have tipped us off that something was very very wrong with our understanding of the way things worked, fundamentally.

The second clue came when efforts to build a useful quantum computer failed. All the theories predicted it should work, but the outputs were random - it was as if the wavefunctions decohered above a certain number of qubits - once the system reached a critical level of complexity it seemed to just fall apart. But nobody could figure out what the source of the interference was. Physicists were excited at first - the discovery seemed to open up avenues to new physics. But whatever experiments were conceived, the results just didn't seem to make sense - almost as if the very complexity that caused these effects was obscuring what was really going on.

The breakthrough came, of all places, in the attempts to simulate the human brain. Despite the protests of those who claimed it was cruel or unethical to create a simulation of human brain, it didn't take long for people to start trying, once computers because powerful enough to simulate the activities of 100 billion neurons and 600 trillion synapses.

However, none of these experiments created anything that ever seemed to be conscious in the same way that humans are. The sim-brains had the same kinds of rhythms and unconscious functions as a real brain, they could respond to stimuli and even learn, but not matter what stimuli were applied or what initial connections were made, these brains never displayed any hint of sentience, consciousness, creativity or free will.

Eventually all other factors were ruled out and it was determined that some kind of quantum gravity effects must be influencing the human brain - effects that we did not know how to simulate.

And then finally it was figured out. Quantum gravity means that time itself is curved and intertwined with space on very small scales much as it is on very large scales. Events in the future can influence events in their own past to some extent, and this happens in the human brain. Consciousness can only manifest in the presence of these closed timelike curves, solving fantastically complicated systems of equations instantaneously by feeding the answer back in time. Essentially, collections of neurons were accessing some kind of consciousness oracle that our deterministic computers did not have access to.

The next problem, then, was to build something that manipulated quantum causality the same way that the human brain did. Nature achieved this so it only made sense to suppose that we could do. And we succeeded, but what we found made us realize that things were even more mysterious than we had imagined.

To be continued...

SpaceTime Algebra gravity

Monday, June 9th, 2008

The STA gauge theory of gravity substitues STA-multivector-valued linear functions of STA-multivectors for the rank 4 tensors of the usual treatment of GR. That is a quantity of (24×24=)256 real degrees of freedom.

I wonder if these quantities could be replaced by single multivectors in a geometric algebra with 8 basis vectors. These also have (28=)256 degrees of freedom, but they might make the equations simpler.

This would mean having a second set of 4 basis vectors in addition to the normal 4 (North, West, Up and Stopped). I wonder what the physical interpretation of these vectors would be? (Some sort of dual vectors perhaps?) Would they obey the normal rules of geometric algebra or would some generalization be required (perhaps to non-associativity like in the octonions or sedenions).

Weather for computers

Sunday, June 8th, 2008

I think some people who use computers daily find that there is something kind of monotonous about them. They're always the same, day in day out. Once you've got used to the quirks of your machine (which you need to do to be productive) there are no surprises anymore.

People who work in the big blue-ceilinged room however (in many places) have weather and seasons to deal with. I suspect the variation helps their job satisfaction.

Suppose one wrote an application for giving computers some equivalent of weather. It would subtly modify the desktop theme on a day-to-day basis (sometimes even more often), changing colours slightly, modifying the screen brightness, perhaps adding rain or snow effects in the background. Nothing that gets in the way of what you're doing too much, it just adds a little unpredictability and variation to ones day. I suspect such an application could be quite popular if done well.

How to find out is something is good or bad

Saturday, June 7th, 2008

When I want to know if something is good or bad, I often find that the fastest way is to look for the bad things that people have said about it. If the only bad things about it are obscure, contrived or ill-reasoned I know that it's likely the thing itself is good. If there are convincing arguments that something is bad, it probably is.

I suppose looking for the good things that people have said about it could be done in a similar way, but looking for the bad things seems to work better in my experience.

Complex analysis and Clifford algebra

Friday, June 6th, 2008

Complex analysis is a very beautiful and useful mathematical theory. Clifford (geometric) algebra is also very beautiful and useful. So it makes sense to wonder if they can be combined. Turns out that they can. I wonder why I haven't seen more stuff about this in the wild? Probably because it's pretty new as mathematics goes. I expect it will be part of every undergradaute mathematics degree in 50 years or so. But I suppose it depends if it turns out to be as useful as it seems, by rights, it ought to be.

Extending "The Elements"

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

Tom Lehrer's terrific song The Elements is unfortunately lacking in one respect - it is outdated as it does not include the elements discovered/named since the song was written.

Here is one attempt at bringing it up to date but I don't think just adding an extra verse fits well with the rest of the song. I wonder if it is possible to fit in the extra elements but keep the list format, perhaps at the expense of (part of) the last two lines. There is also some flexibility about where to put the "and"s - Lehrer doesn't use them consistently and even throws in an "also" in one place.

Rendering rings of teleportation

Wednesday, June 4th, 2008

Rings of teleportation are very handy things to have around. The surface bounded by one ring is equated with the surface bounded by the other, so if you put something through one ring it will come out through the other. (Like the portals in "Portal", but more portable). They don't exist, of course, but this technicality doesn't prevent us from drawing pictures of them.

Writing code to render these things is an interesting exercise. It's easy to do with a ray tracer - if a ray intersects the disc inside one ring, just continue it to the equivalent point on the other ring.

Once that's working, you can put the rings side-by-side so that light goes around in circles - if you put your eye point in the middle you can see an infinite tunnel.

A trick you can play is to reverse the orientation of one of the rings so that you look through one ring, out of the other to an object, the object will appear to you to be inverted, as in a mirror image.

Another trick is to make the rings different sizes, or shapes. As long as there is a 1:1 function equating points on one surface with points on the other, it works fine.

However, having rings of different sizes or non-circular shapes opens the possibility of putting one ring through the other. What happens then? It seems like the "infinite tunnel" then becomes a real thing rather than just an optical effect, but where does the second ring exist in real space? It seems that the only place it can appear is through the other side of the first ring, but that would mean that every point in space appears in an infinite number of places - this seems like it would have rather drastic consequences.

So it seems more likely that the second ring would be prevented from going through the first somehow (perhaps a ring edge would get in the way).

What I want from an HDR workflow

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008

Once I've got my HDR camera and my HDR monitor, I'll need new photographic workflow applications to get the images looking the way I want them. I expect that there will be a few parameters that I'll almost always want to tweak, much as I almost always re-crop my photos at the moment. These parameters are likely to be:

  • Colour balance (2D slider)
  • Exposure (slider)
  • Dynamic range compression (slider)
  • Tone mapping radius (slider)

The last two of these reproduce the functionality of current HDR applications, allowing creation of tone-mapped images for non-HDR output (like printing, or legacy monitors).

The high dynamic range revolution

Monday, June 2nd, 2008

Currently some people are making beautiful HDR images like these. This takes an input image with a high dynamic range (often composed of multiple exposures with different exposure times to get good colour resolution over a wide range of brightnesses) and "compresses" the range down to monitor or printout ranges. This can give an effect similar to an oil painting (painters use similar techniques).

But such techniques will soon become unnecessary as the dynamic range that monitors can display increases. As I've mentioned before I've seen this technology in action and it's seriously impressive - the pictures are incredibly realistic, like looking out of a window. As these monitors drop in price they will become ubiquitous and then we will want to take pictures that take full advantage of them.

Shooting RAW with a good digital SLR goes some way towards this, but I think that with the new generation of monitors will come a new generation of cameras optimized for taking HDR images. This might be as simple as reading the sensor several times over the course of the exposure, or it might be a completely new sensor design.

With new monitors and new cameras, the entire graphics pipeline will be re-engineered for HDR.

Photographic workflow

Sunday, June 1st, 2008

The workflow that I use for the photographs on my website has remained pretty much unchanged for many years.

  1. Copy the photos from the card to the computer and then delete them from the card.
  2. Open the folder of photos in ACDSee and delete any obvious duds.
  3. Open all the photos in Paint Shop Pro 4 (yes, I know it's ancient but it works well, I know my way around all the tools and it's fast).
  4. I look for similar photos and close the ones that are redundant or unattractive, eventually whittling it down to the set of photos that will form a nice album page.
  5. I rotate (sometimes by arbitrary angles) and crop. Sometimes I'll adjust brightness and/or contrast to save a poor photo if there's something in particular that I want to have a picture of. Sometimes I'll use a more sophistical program like Photoshop to remove redeye or do other colour manipulations.
  6. Very occasionally I will use the clone tool to erase something that I don't want in the photo.
  7. I'll resample the photos to the appropriate size and save them as jpgs.
  8. Finally I'll manipulate the directory listing in a text editor to create the html file, add captions and upload the lot.

Someday I'll trade in my trusty Olympus C3000Z and get a nice digital SLR. But I might wait a few years because the high dynamic range revolution is coming. More about that tomorrow.