Question About Forms in The Philosophy of Space

Certain basic questions exist regarding the physics of space. These might be regarded as philosophical questions though they often are developed upon the basis of physics. Philosophical questions of cosmology and theology (the latter in regard to the metaphysics of God) pertain to the unknown, or at least to other than physically contiguous approaches to regarding then known such as mathematical physicists might develop.

I reread a book on the history of mathematical symmetry in the development of geometry and algebra recently. That topic leads to M-Theory via topology, Lie algebras and exceptional Killing groups. It was learned that there are a finite number (in a sort of Cantorian way) of root forms for non-Euclidian geometries, as Euclid found a limited number of geometrical shapes mathematicians discovered that geometries and forms can be represented algebraically in matrices and groups.

Extra dimensions in these algebras are variables rather than considered as actually in the real world. Yet the equations may actually work in quantum physics. M-Theory draws together several groups that exist in superstring theory. The super in string theory was a progress from supersymmetry.

Standard Orthogonal 1 dimensions SO(1), Unitary 1 and so on refer to forms for quantum structures in 1 dimension. An illustration given was the use of a two-dimensional flat paper with one axis representing space and the other time. If a ring were to make contact on the surface of that paper two-dimensional world it might resemble a one-dimensional point from one angle, or from another angle it might resemble a line segment or string. The ring of course goes up vertically from the flat paper laying on a table into a third dimension that the 2 dimensional dwellers don't see yet might infer exists. The loop/ring in extra dimensions could be considered to be like a drum surface that gives off vibrations, and those vibrations are quantum loops that comprise the mass-energy of the steady-state Universe we live in.

The math for superstring and M-Theory seems to correspond better toward the real world supposing ten or more dimensions exist. Progress in math useful for those cosmology researches continues. One may wonder philosophically if some of the mathematical theories even if successful at modeling a good level of a unified physics would exhaust the possibilities for what might be known at deeper levels of the Existential Universe 1 and of course of the metaphysics of a Supreme Being that allows anything extensible to exist at all, for one winders with the neo-Platonist philosopher Plotinus, why?

There are 238 possible forms of crystal structures and 226 possible forms of syllogisms. Is it entirely a coincidence that human capacity for developing argumentation forms of syllogism are so close to the maximum number of possible crystal forms? It seems entirely coincidental, yet such symmetries in unrelated fields are interesting to consider, as is...

If there is an infinite amount of space, then mass must be comparatively finite.

 or

 If mass and space are convertible then, there may be an infinite amount of space and an infinite amount of mass, yet not at the same time. If there were an infinite amount of mass then there would be no space, and if there were an infinite amount of space then there would be no mass.

Could an infinite amount of space be reduced? Could an infinite amount of mass be diminished?

Is a very large amount of space comparable to an infinite amount of space?

Can a finite amount of absolute space exist? Mustn't absolute space be infinite?

Mass, space and energy as convertibles may require different dimensional structures or configurations. The form or cohesiveness of structures in space-time are epiphenomenal locality...dreams of a universe in-themselves.