Saturday, March 17, 2018

Well, Yes I believe It Will Be Solved

And I think I've shown the way to do it. As it happens. Whether any of you want to recognize it or not.


The problem inspired a famous physics bet and a "black hole war."

Friday, March 16, 2018

Another Layer Of Metaphor For The "One Ring To Rule Them All" From the Lord Of The Rings Story Arc

Why weren't you supposed to put the one ring of power on?

The movies made it pretty simple of course. It was an evil made thing of inevitable corrupting power; no matter what good you may start to wield it with, ultimately, its true purpose was to simply get you mainlining on one ultimate power drug. And of course, that worked just fine for the movies because they were just so well made all the way round, as storytelling vehicles.

But here's a thought for you. What if our being fundamentally involved in the expression of energy is that very ring of power (do I have to remind you of the whole "closed loop" of self sustaining iteration again?); meaning by default that it is neither good, nor evil, it is just us making choices all of the time.

And what as well if the real issue was between these two opposites: That neither the individual, or the many, in complete defiance of the other, should seize exclusive control of the ring's expressive power.

By the same token then, it should follow that only by having the ring's expressive power in joint control by an ongoing negotiation between the two sides, as to how best to use the ring's power; only by that it can then be used; only then with the one thing that can temper it's, way over the top, power: Compromise. By that, and by that alone, can it be used indefinitely.

Just in case you needed a handy reminder of why the, limited number of, (mostly) guys, who are fighting over the ring right now, should not be allowed to succeed. Frodo and Sam, and all the rest are not going to come along here and save you. You have to chose to do that yourself.

Wednesday, March 14, 2018

He's Exploring The Cosmos From Another Perspective Now

So you just have to know that his contribution will live on, even as he's missed here so personally.

David Parry / AP file
British physicist Stephen Hawking, among world's greatest minds of science, dies at 76

British physicist Stephen Hawking dies at 76

See Also:


There aren't very many scientists who achieved rock-star status. Stephen Hawking, who has died at the age of 76, family members told British media early Wednesday, was definitely a contender.

Tuesday, March 13, 2018

And Now For Something Absolutely Rediculous

Sometimes I have so many "serious" plates spinning in my head (an allusion to the old variety show act where the performer would attempt to keep an always impossible seeming number of plates spinning on vertical poles; rows and rows of them -- Something Ed Sullivan used to have on semi regularly) that I just have to bust out with something ridiculous or I will just explode. As fortune would have it, my lucky ability to fall back on ridiculous when I need to hasn't left me. Even more fortunately it has once again provided something quite useful in the process. Two new words.

Wigglewhammy and Wagglewhammy (#Wigglewhammy #Wagglewhammy).

What do they mean? What do they describe?

The impact effect from one side, or the other, of my primary elementals divide, of some major receipt of a realization, or new understanding, of great import, and significance; conceived cleverly of their side of meaning elements and connections (their meaning space stuff), and delivered through physical space, in an equally clever manner, so as to pass through, and saturate one, with the amazing effect worthy of these new words. And, unfortunately for us, the "Wigglewhammy" side of things, is an over large, hugely comprehensive, full body experience, that puts you through the reception of analogue signal assault we don't seem to appreciate nearly enough these days; but for which others are beginning to understand, and manipulate, far too well indeed. Though if you put the idea of suggestion into the mix, and the fact that hypnosis may be a great deal more involved than we have ever understood so far, maybe Father Fortress can be a lot trickier than we originally believed as well. But feces! There I go again. Getting all serious. Damn.

Well. Quick recovery. When you are down, and feeling depressed, just ask yourself if it was because of a major "Wigglewhammy" or "Wagglewhammy" event. I'm pretty sure that there's at least a good chance that a smile might come to your face. I mean, come on. Could you seriously keep a straight face if you asked the question: "Have I been Wagglewhammied here, or have I been Wigglewhammied?

And hey guys. Don't worry. No need to thank me. You are all quite welcome.

Friday, March 9, 2018

We Fritter Away Precious Time With All Of Our Spectacles

The various spectacles now, both real and synthetic;  Killing each other with immediate acts of stupidity, entertaining or otherwise. Or marginalizing each other to death for a more, slow burn, kind of destruction, even as we marginalize all of life around us. All because we are burning up inside with needs that are not being met. And we have come to this pass because we cannot see our way to understanding much of any of it because:

1. Expression itself has been corrupted by old ways of doing things.

2. We fear change so much we'll do almost anything to avoid it.

3. We seem unable to imagine our way out of the old norms of ignorant scarcity.

4. Our material, and technological advancement has given us not only new instrumentality with which to conceive with, but by which we could truly affect having our reach exceed our grasp. But that means accepting change as a way of life.

5. A few have become so reshaped, and reconstituted by grossly excessive privilege that they think no situation is beyond their ability to simply decree their way out of it; because hasn't power always been able to do that? Or at least, now that we can express our fantasies so prominently, and persistently, a lot of these people are now more convinced than ever, about this supposed truism for power; because they can entertain themselves with it endlessly.

And now, so much that was once absolutely unacceptable is commonplace.

The ice at the poles is disappearing. Our response, at least in part: expand tourism to these places so that we may watch the spectacle close up.

A forest the equivalent size of New Zealand burned up in 2016 and the biggest response so far may only have been the desire to make more apocalypse movies, with ever more spectacular ways of showing colossal amounts of natural beauty getting trashed.

And what may be only tens of thousands of us now, here and there, that starve, die of thirst. die of preventable disease, die of direct brutality and violence, or sit in wait of this process; even those numbers, already unacceptable,  those too will grow ever more horribly so.

Sometimes it's hard not being ashamed of be being human, but I do not let that discourage me. I do this because I still believe that the right expression, at the right time, even with the corruption that has occured to it, can be all the difference we need. Because all it takes is seeing a situation in the right frame of reference; a frame of reference that really surprising numbers of people can share, without necessarily giving up what they already believe in. And in all of it, all they have to do, is see that all it takes is a willingness to compromise so that we can cooperate again. Just cooperate; whether we dislike whatever others passionately or not. Just cooperate enough to start planting everywhere. To start building everywhere (because there will be other ways to take carbon out of the air, just as there will be new ways to combat drought). To start making transportation available everywhere to everyone who needs it. Just as we provide new habitat, and an energy source that does nothing but put more water back into play with its use. And drinkable water at that.

If we did that there wouldn't be any forest left to just burn, or left to just rot under new conditions we can't get ourselves agreeing enough to do anything about. Just as there would be no person left who will not be needed to take part in doing all of this desperately needed effort it will take to make how we must change possible. And I think, if we can get as involved as we need to get to start compromising, and cooperating, and making the unacceptable right again, we will find that the change we fear so much; the change we must endure; we will find it a great deal more bearable than we could have ever thought possible as well.

If there were such a new frame of reference, would you take the time to understand it better? Would you take the time to get everyone you know to try and do the same; and then have them get everyone they know on the same path?

As I have said before, I remain resolutely hopeful.

Up in Smoke

See Also:


Falsehoods almost always beat out the truth on Twitter, penetrating further, faster, and deeper into the social network than accurate information.

Tuesday, March 6, 2018

How Is Progress To Be Thought Of In Terms Of Self Sustaining Iteration

This gets tricky because we come into it with the already made prejudice of thinking of progress as simply our species expanding, and prospering, in some fashion. And in this the equation is too easily simply one of: There is material out there that can be made use of. We must go forth, make use of it, and create more structure for our prosperous advance to continue this loop indefinitely.

You have to think about this carefully though. On the one hand, for there to be choice makers, in the form of meaning processors at all, how can further structuring, to keep them going, not be allowed? Or expressed another way, we are meant to express because that's what happens when you make meaning objects, you express new representations of a new realizations, transformed of many levels of either energy, or mass, out of this vector, of experience association, we must assume has to keep doing something. We have to assume that or how else do we justify the idea of a self sustaining, iterative process at all?

The kicker to keep in mind here, though, is this: do too much in too close a concentration and you risk going back to a singularity. Do too little, over too much expansion, and you risk settling out to the last moment of a cosmos that did nothing much different, for far too long, to keep differential going at all.

That means finding the right sweet spot, along the right angle of attack, to keep creating something that allows you to keep the vector of expansion (of the what and when, or now the new plane of objectifying layer) going. Which also then begs the question of can we get outside our own, originating, objecticating resolution system? And of course the answer is: anything is possible because we also exist in the ultimate, unbounded entirety itself; which has the amazing property of infinite potential. So if we are fundamental to the duality of energy, and we are also, fundamentally, residents of the ultimate of our Elemental Intents: That thing for which no further objectification can be done. A thing, like zero itself, has to be a part of a well functioning Cosmological Model.

In any case, though, the point here is that you can now define "progress" in a lot of different ways. Ways you might not think of if you didn't read a lot of speculative fiction. Read that, though, and you realize that there are indeed a lot of ways we can try to do "progress."

There is one line of thought that suggests that, instead of going out, and seeing all manner of environment that does not suit us, and change it to one that does, why not change ourselves to better live in the environments we find; from which you see people doing genetic manipulation so that they can become the most wondrous of new forms of "meaning processor;" ones that might live in various layers of the upper atmospheres of gas giants, for instance; able to survive the hard radiation, perhaps float as some form of lighter than air leviathan, finding an energy to mass translation chain for sustaining ourselves in whatever convenient interaction matrix is up there, at those levels to be had. And there are lots of other examples as well, even a lot more fantastic than that.

Another line of thought might go like this: Suppose you took what I like to call the idealized frontiersman's way of life. Not the usual frontiersman that came, in large part, to find new places where wild game could be hunted, and the firs (or whatever other resource) exploited, but the one suggested by Hawkeye in "Last Of The Mohicans." The frontiersman who knew how to listen to the native people; didn't want to crowd them too much, and who also wanted to not concentrate all that much; because too many people, too much society, and too many rules; as well as which too many men who could see the beauty of nature only as a means for more power. That kind of Frontiersman, and that kind of limited development, and then explore to expand some more; that might be the balanced approach to reaching into every solar system, in every galaxy we can find. You certainly could think credibly that you could do that kind of expansion for quite a while. But truly indefinitely? But then, at those time scales are we worrying about how many angles can dance on the head of a pin?

Then there is the line of thought I have already suggested, and one, I have to admit, I am the more partial to. And that is that our angle of attack itself must change so that we see not not only expanding out, or conforming to, as an option, but one where we find the way to bend our imaginations around it just far enough so that we can grasp a new handle; a handle that cannot possible exist in this plane of objectification, but could in the next layer out because that is, somehow, where we experienced it; and experienced it so deeply that it allows us to make powerful suggestions to both sides of the Mind, Elemental Embrace, meaning space dichotomy. Suggestions so powerful, and the handle so complete, in fact, in its meaning makeup, that physical meaning space just makes it happen because it doesn't, in the larger frame of reference, break any unbreakable rules. A presto digi chango, are you then expressed, as a complete identity, will, soul, memory, dichotomy balancing system, sustaining itself in the laws that must necessarily come into place, in this new layer, to make your elegant new, existing self, work. And from within which you will begin creating a whole new kind of expressive possibility.

The science fiction books, and shows, have usually referenced this sort of line of progress in terms like "ascension;" which seems a bit too limiting to me. It suggests to me too much of a necessarily religious tone to the whole thing. Not that a religious avenue couldn't be possible, mind you, just that it is not at all the only avenue. One might ascend in a lot of ways, for a lot of reasons, and create quite different, new, higher layer, objectifying realms; which might then go off on their own, emphasize working with the lower level realities, or perhaps some combination of both (with there probably being other options I haven't even begun to consider yet).

Or is a particular vector of association, or a particular meaning processor for that matter, meant to process indefinitely at all? Anything is possible when self sustaining process is suggested at almost every metaphoric level one can think of. And we live in infinite potential, And we are a fundamental intent. And everything is relative.

How long, actually, is indefinitely? And how many different types of you might there then become, in an unbelievable sequence of being reborn in one sense or another. Is it really the same life, or self sustaining process that continues on? Or just a quite different version of you... To the point of maybe only remembering the slightest details of which; as a new visual icon to mark a new sense of time.

Like I always say, time, or some new sense of process altogether, will tell.

If You Are Born Half Woman And Half Something Else

And then you are brought up in this society? Are you kidding me? Of course you need therapy!

And let's be clear about something else. Empathy is absolutely essential for a society to work properly. The really interesting thing about empathy, however, is that it really doesn't come from either side of my primary duality relationship; that is to say that neither Father Fortress, or Mother Earth have it come to them naturally. No, this is something that results only when the two sides cooperate in a balanced way.

Because empathy is both an act of imagination, as well as a disciplined way of confronting the world. The always to be exercised act of trying to see things from the other person's point of view; of trying to imagine the full scope of a reality from that point of view. putting yourself into the shoes of the other person, so you can consider, in as real a fashion as you can, what everyday life would be like if you had to make the choices the other person has been faced with, in the circumstances they have to deal with,

For some reason we have a real problem with this. Too often it seems we equate understanding, with trying to condone other people's actions. When, of course, nothing could be further from the truth.

True, if you do understand more about a person, you may be more inclined to, shall we say, not take quite as much offense by it, but that's a discipline too; trying to do the understanding thing without making too many unwarranted assumptions on either end of the spectrum.

The real problem is that choice presents both the individual, and the many with corresponding responsibilities: the individual to make their choices, and then take responsibility for them, but also for the many to do everything they can to create individuals capable of making good choices in the first place because that is a big part of the many's responsibilities. And certainly the overlap there makes for one difficult journey through life if we want the advantages of social organization.

The bottom line here, for what, in my opinion is just two variants of a common starting point, is that both be able to express themselves both rationally, and emotionally; which means they both have to be both providers, and nurturers; both establishers of structure, but also keepers of all of the pain, and joy, of being alive, and wanting to be there to help the young, or the old, understand how to better weather the turbulent flow of how life makes us deal with pain and joy; because deal with them we must.

Doing business as usual for the last several hundred years has not been especially helpful in how we go about this process, for either side of the variant divide. And now the planet is ready to just be done with us. Coincidence? I don't think so, but then I'm just a biased, crazy old dreamer.


Emotionally stifled men who are afraid to sit with their own feelings, let alone someone else’s, can lack the ability to empathize with others.

See also:


I’m not sure what to think about what my dad tried to teach me. So what should I teach my sons?