Friday, February 24, 2017
time is reflected by changes in state in least bits of matter. if time is discrete, any change in the state of a least bit of matter is a discrete change. a least bit of matter "jumps" from one state to to another.
the concept of continuous time is far harder to think about, and perhaps therefore is false. in this concept there are infinitesimal time intervals for each state and therefore as the time interval tends toward zero, this means, in a sense, that a least bit of matter never has a "still" or definable state, does it not? which is not easy to imagine.
now, even if time is discrete, it may seem "continuous", because the time interval of each state is very little.
Saturday, February 4, 2017
"it's like, i read about consciousness, and the articles have questions like what is it and so forth, but i mean, surely to a conscious person, it's pretty obvious what it is, right? it's thought. it seems weird, it's like they deal with the subject as though it's like a non-conscious person is writing, who really doesn't know what it is. it's not that mysterious, right? i mean, i know what it is, it's what's inside my head, doing the thinking, it's a part of the person that is me."
"yes, it's a bit like people who believe in materialism, they can't therefore explain what consciousness is, if all that's real is physical atoms or whatever. it's where materialism fails, i think."
"right. that's the problem. materialism can't be reconciled entirely with the fact that consciousness exists."
"also, i think consciousness being an invisible thing. it's something that scientists can't exactly measure, while obviously as a living person, it's obvious it exists."
"with all the interest in simulation theory, i think the tide has turned against materialism, you know, that all there is is physical atoms and so on."
philosophical idealism puts that reality is a mental construct, while philosophical materialism puts that it is a material or physical construct. materialism may seem plausible but there is no denying that it is still the senses which would tell us about such a material world. idealism puts that we cannot know of anything other than that which we perceive.
when we see a material object, of course, we can touch it, feel its hardness and shape, but is that all it is, a visual construct and the sensation we have when we touch it? the simulation theory would have that there is no true external, material world, and that that is all it is, thus a virtual reality. however reality allows us to manipulate visual objects and so it is easy to believe that they are "real" as they seem. but what is a material object is it is not what it seems? it is certainly a kind of construct, a configuration of sorts.
if materialism is not true, then do we turn to idealism? but surely not everything in reality is strictly mental? that a person may only be aware of itself, its own mental parts, its thoughts, senses, emotions, etc is fine, but perhaps there are things that exist that might not be classified as mental? but because a person is a mental thing, it is less aware of these things, that does not mean they do not exist.
perhaps many common material objects are derived from a fixed source. perhaps for example there is a fixed tree that exists, if you like, a "statue" of a tree that exists fixed in space somewhere, the source from which variants of such trees are derived that we see as material objects. these things, these objects, are not exactly mental, or not parts of a person, but they may exist.
Saturday, January 7, 2017
people are creative. there are a lot of things in the world of Earth that were by design obviously, all the things that humans have made, and built, but was the creation of Earth itself by design? or was it an accident of fate?
if life on Earth is a simulation, in the sense that some people are not real, and are actually simulants, that is, what we see as a human might not be truly representative of a conscious other being, how were they created? were they gestated in the great unconscious, built from the memories and subconscious imagination of all involved? fragments of conversations, actions, a dose of personal spirit, randomly mutated and mixed together, become manifest in the world of Earth?
perhaps some things that you might suppose were created, were not, and existed always from time zero, like human itself, trees, houses, etc. if we suppose that material objects are actually only mental constructs in actuality, and by the fact that physical motion is not real, the whole mechanical motion in a material universe, this model, it could only be a virtual construct, does that not lead to the possibility that things could be altered very quickly? how fast does the mind change? perhaps so fast that it is, in a sense, out of control, not unlike a dream.
and if the simulation were completely by design, wouldn't it be a better simulation?
Monday, January 2, 2017
real space is not empty. it is composed of least bits of matter joined to each other fixed in position forever. and space is porous. it is inconceivable that it is fully densely packed throughout, that all of the surface of least bits of matter make contact with other least bits of matter.
there is the question whether a chain of least bits of matter could be in the shape of a loop with a vacuum in the middle where nothing exists. i think this is highly likely, as it is hard to imagine the case where this does not exist, space would look more like a tree's branches then.
certainly the zone containing consciousness, and the field of vision, seems dense. perhaps on a larger scale some parts of space are similarly dense, fields containing many points of consciousness, in other parts, more chain-like or like a tree, with obviously less connections. it is not much of a leap therefore to guess that where space is denser, commonalities occur, a common language comes about, etc. and so, to imagine it, one end of space is like, say, a field of poppies, joined by a tiny path to an orchard of apples, which in turn is joined to elsewhere by two other paths, say.
another question is whether some parts of space are so distant, that they have been little influenced by elsewhere, that there are points in space effectively independent of each other.
Saturday, December 17, 2016
posit that physical motion is not real, that it is actually virtual motion we see. everyone knows the 3D mechanical motion model. by now, it's hardwired in, so to speak. what things seem, that such motion looks as if it is happening, people moving, material objects moving, is not real, is not true. now this opens up a lot of sceptical ideas of course. am i a brain in a vat? what else is not real? etc.
but how does the actual projection of images in your eyesight work? when you walk forwards, objects move towards you. when you swing right, objects move to the left, and so on. posit that this 3D mechanical motion model was there right from the beginning, is eternal, then we didn't need to invent it, we always had it in mind. that would explain why it works so well, and how easily it operates. we could always imagine it, therefore it works.
so visually, objects move relative to us, not us to them. as a digression, speaking of relative, am i sure i actually grew several feet in my childhood? what if the material world actually shrank relative to me? maybe i grew a little, but in actuality, everything and everyone i saw became smaller as i aged to adult? perhaps not.
it seems a stretch to suppose that my eyesight, my projection field, is mapped by some kind of invisible computer, and that everything i see is computationally projected to precise coordinates as i move around. would this computer hold a micro image of everything in my range of sight and project this to my field of vision?
and what actually composes what is immediately in front of my head? we know we have the senses of sound and light, but obviously there is more than sound and light out there. again, calling all that exists matter, how much matter in front of me is actually light? 40%? 10%? 1%? say per clump of matter in front of my head, there are 100 parts, of which only 40 parts might be light or akin to light, 5 parts sound, but that leaves 55 parts we're not sure about. there are invisible least bits of matter we are little aware of surely? that that can be sensed is only so much.
Saturday, November 26, 2016
let us steer a middling course between the two extremes, of one, the solipsistic nightmare where no other human you see in your world is real, is in fact simulated, and the other, that everyone you meet is a real person, that what you see and hear, in person, is an accurate representation of another person somewhere else in reality. so we have a situation where some people are real, some are not, we are dealing with a confusing world where both cases exist.
what would you call a simulated human anyway? an illusion, a simulant, a robot, what? in any case, you cannot escape the conclusion that even though a simulated human may not be real, it is probably in some or most part just like someone real however. though perhaps some simulated people are what some people merely imagine a person could be like and that no one is really like that?
if we could categorize type and made a careful study of different personalities, well, we might say this simulant is a lot like so and so, who is real, and a little like someone else too, and partly like someone's imagination. maybe some simulated people are completely like someone real, yet we never meet the real person on whom it is based. it's like meeting a proxy of a real person, is it not? and how many types of personalities are there? maybe we could then guess or have an idea of how many real people there are.
the recent expansion in computing suggests perhaps there is more order than there is in reality. we can deduce that because computers now exist, there is something "computer" about reality, and always was, as a base assumption. however, that this whole concept of simulated humans is so strange, so weird, so not ideal, suggests that there was no orderly power behind the creation of all this on Earth, that there is something of chaos extent in the world.
of course, it is interesting to guess the numbers. what is the ratio of real to simulated humans? if it's extreme, it would not be that confusing, it would be like either they're all real, or they're all simulated! but what if it were 1:1? or 1:10? how do we work out who is real and who is simulated? if we assume Earth is more false and the ratio is more like 1:10,000 then we might never meet anyone real in our lifetime on Earth, yet they still exist!
Friday, November 25, 2016
everyone is familiar with the normal assumptions about Earth, of its age and population, that is, it is billions of years old with billions of people living on it. maybe its comforting to assume that everything is very old and there are lots of people to depend on, but what if it isn't and there aren't?
a metaphysical question, how fast could appearances change? well close your eyes, now you see nothing. how fast could what is presented on the computer screen in front of you change to something else? very fast. so we conclude that change in light could happen instantaneously. so you could reasonably be sceptical about the age of reality. once the elements of a fully populated Earth came about, the languages, the arts, the look of Earth, who is to say it was not created overnight and is only, say, two hundred years old? if Earth is to some extent populated by simulated humans, the first real human born on Earth would have been the only one at some point?
what if i can see a very long distance in front of me? yet my head is little in comparison to the distance i can see. what is my true size? and what composes me? do i assume that that is not conscious is not truly a lifeform? what about the hard to describe but apparent mood or expression or spirit or personal flavour we can see in objects, people and images?
of the population, i think you could assume it was large, certainly large enough to produce this much culture and language. there is something of an argument that the population must be very large to have produced so much but what if consciousness was not the engine of production of culture or a lot of thought even? what if the unconscious is very powerful, much larger, and is the main driver of everything? what consciousness is is clearer, but what the unconscious is is much harder to grasp.
Friday, November 11, 2016
first an argument about the word "simulation", a simulation, as opposed to what? a material, physical world where mechanical motion is real, that matter, the stuff of reality, really changes its spatial position, isn't that what they mean? well that is not real, so it is a simulation, because nothing really "moves", correct?
that is one aspect of the concept, one easily dealt with, the other is far weirder, that some people are simulated humans, they are not really 100% representatives of specific other, real people! i mean, to say it's a simulation because physical motion is not real is one thing, but maybe forms you see of other humans could represent real other people somewhere else? maybe not, and this possibility is one in which reality could be something of a strange, chaotic mystery to all.
assume the calendar is not really that far advanced, reality is actually only a few hundred years old. the problem we have is that there was a lot to begin with, humans, plants, trees, houses, all existed at the beginning, say, and because sudden changes can happen, and the unconscious is so large, it is always in motion and chaotic, it created Earth suddenly, as it is.
that dreams are chaotic is undisputed, a product of the unconscious, and are the portal to life on Earth, and i suppose the exit. that Earth is not quite what it seems, is not entirely normal really, the suspicion happens because of the existence of dreams principally.
on the question of simulated humans, if we assume that some of the people we meet are that, it does not mean that they are unlike any real people, the probability is that they are like someone real or several real people, because they must be based on someone! their speech, their actions, are derived from real people's. they may be a composite of several people plus some random factor, who knows? if we assume that the proportion of simulated humans to real humans is high, how high? 10000:1? that would mean there are only a few thousand real people around in any country! and in any case, the truth of reality becomes a confusing in between of belief in "normality" and a near solipsistic case. it would be naive to assume the extremes of one or another, actually, it's all real, simulated humans and real humans!
the interesting question becomes, how can you tell the difference between a real human and a simulated human? are real humans more coherent, more responsive? are simulated humans poorly programmed, if you like? do real humans have more of an aura, a presence? do they look different? do they have a unique glow? who knows?
and as for the ratio of real to simulated humans, how many real humans, the baseline from which these simulated humans are derived, does it require to produce the variety of people we see today? tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? it would be tending toward solipsism if you came up with a low number, surely? that would mean the collective unconscious of all real people was huge to produce the variety of people and the amount of media found on Earth! i do not doubt that the unconscious is large and capable but does it really dwarf the conscious minds of all of us? it seems unlikely that the number is low.
Sunday, October 2, 2016
to begin with, the world as a whole, or the universe, or reality, was much simpler, people were alone, if you like, but communications, the propagation of sounds and images, and later meetings, rapidly inflated the world, or the unconscious at least. if i state that i began alone, but met several people the first day, and lived eventually on earth, with a purported population of millions, you can see the course of history.
if we consider that earth is a simulation of some kind, that all is not quite as it seems, it is not quite "real", that some facts are not true, that indeed some people are not true, what of these people populating it? now false facts are easy to manufacture, the imagination works constantly, people are crazy, to be blunt, and dreams happen, and to acknowledge that birth on earth began itself as an awakening from a dream about earth, it is therefore easy to be sceptical about much of earth and the people populating it. what makes up a person or what represents them? a certain personality, emotions, and things they've said or done, their own personal light and sound perhaps, and what you might call a certain flavour or mood to a person, indeed how do we recognize people in dreams if we see them but indistinctly if not by the flavour they give off? if we posit that not all people we see and meet are representations of real people then what are they but random composites of real people, saying and doing things that real people have done plus perhaps some random causal factor? they are not "real" but they are just like someone real or several real people. perhaps some of these people have a biography, they are consistent, or perhaps some people, that we only see for a minute say, walking past us on the street, never appear again, and have none!
assume that the general speed of the world is fast, change can be almost instantaneous, communication is not perfect, for errors and mutation exist, giving rise to the random nature of the universe, and our own eyesight and hearing, or our projection field, is prone to inflation and errors too, all give credence to this argument of a simulated world. it wasn't meant to be this, but this is what happened.
Sunday, September 25, 2016
it is most likely naive to assume that everyone lives in the same world, with all the same people, also that when people meet, true correlation is the case when most likely it is not, that what is transmitted from another person regarding it, is not exactly received or that the signal carrying the data is not accurately interpreted about that person, that what we sense about another person does not correspond exactly to what that person is all about. real distance in space, and mutation of signal, signal loss, and inaccuracies in interpretation to replicate what is going on at a distance, mean that true correlation may be foolish fancy. that the system in place in this reality is well engineered is an assumption that must be undermined.
in the beginning, certainly, we were not in the same world, not by a long shot actually. constant communication and even rapid advances in communication in recent times still does not mean that we all live in the same world now even. indeed, we may still assume that everyone is still in their own world, an earth-like version, and though it might seem that two people are in the same world, one might be in an alternate dimension to the other, even though they meet. to apply numbers, for example, two people who meet may both believe they are on Earth, but the correlation figure for their two worlds might only be 86%, that the geography might not fully agree is one point, the other is that the two sets of the people in both worlds might not is the other point.
to give an example, two people might both walk along the same street in a busy city, but one sees fewer people than the other, and also sees people that the other does not see. we must admit that the sets or networks of people that the two are in may be different. why should they be the same in any case? social networks are formed by forging links between people in real space, are they not, and if we assume that this task is more difficult, that the system is not fully connected, then are individual networks not different?
that the system is far from perfect and that individual projection fields that render what we see and hear are prone to confusion and inaccuracies means that we cannot assume that we see and hear people truly. there are the factors of random application and inflation to consider also. that the signal must pass through all the personal zones between two people and in all probability must be flavored, if you like, or mutated, to take on that of the people in the middle or those closest in the most perhaps.
the plank underlying this argument is partial correlation, that errors exist in data transmission, that some data is not transferred, unrelated data is applied, and rendering or replication is an inexact science, so indeed, how could we all live in the same world with the same people?
Sunday, August 7, 2016
given that it is far from rare, and that the median social group is often thus, let us then examine the dynamic that exists between four people, although even transient it may be, and let not how it came to be, this gang of four, trouble us, rather so how it functions be the operative question. why four? is two or three not enough?
a gang, a party, an expeditionary force, to expedite matters in life or business, renders the individual qualms about being on your own, to rest, the total of a gang of four is more than the sum of each member parts, which is why! role playing, even board games, these things don't function for the player in isolation, not only are other people required to operate such, to state all gain from such! we need someone physically capable, we need someone cerebral, we need a wizard mayhap, we need someone adept, maybe we need more in this crew!
skills that contribute to the welfare of the party, for the mission in life, to the bitter end if need be, make up the set of talents core to the group. primary to the cohesive nature of the gang is a facility for easy interaction, an agreement on secular matters at least, there are a range of issues to debate over time.
why not less? why not be alone? and so searching for something, best described as moving toward a common goal is what molds the group and holds it fast.
a common identity becomes them. what trace the gang of four leaves remains within them.
Monday, July 25, 2016
for several times today, yet i feel myself again and for now, this once, i can do what i want! and i can do whatever i please. you know what i mean? what's new in my life? what's it like to have it all? why do i have to do this, this thing of mine, surely it could wait. the next level up!
o dear! what have we here? a reminder, shard. i can't believe it! why so sudden?! what's happened of late. surely i can escape the past? it's overrated, redress you me!
blocked ways, and for the guilty and the innocent, one mistake leads to another! when it happens, it seems it all happens at once! a sort of paranoic haze envelops the mind, in which it is difficult to escape. the paranoid mind is a trap in itself, to be honest, the mind just boggles! but what are the clues? to be meta about it!
a true 3D guide, we would conspire to get it! therefore avoid traps in general, not a downer, yet eventually we could learn to reflect upon life better and away from that.
what of it? what is it? where is it? how? cards we play, castles we love, and marriage, prosperity, serenity, tranquility, and friends forever, the life beyond mortality, the proving chamber, the track of life upon which we sweat our lives away. yet what of abandon, what of longing, and yet what of hope?
"Reis und Schein...auf dem...Hören die Welt...aus Geben...Du dar...Was Ist denn Los...aus!"
"Sie Kommt." "Welken Sie Bäde."
"Alles Ist Zehn auf zu Wissel Zehn."
"So Ist Denn Fahlen...Was Ist Los?"
"So Friede Seinen!" "Helga...Was Ist Los?"
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
the key issue in the future is whether anything continues or not so that what is not apparent might not happen at all. this is to say that that that is not well remembered may not even exist metaphysically and so that there is no need to dwell on it. what is past may recur only slightly in the future as a shaded repeat like an alternative timeline.
who is she? what will she do next? what is real and what is apparent is that she continues to say the least.
the size of the problem illustrated by the past for decades yet is what concerns mental convolutions. that is to say that i can yet still remember, whether fortuitously or not. lack of sufficient memory blocks further thought sometimes and only fragments of voices or mood of the past may remain.
weight that large then and the alternative nothing. am i prepared still?
clearly the size of mental capacity is what concern. what of my physical dexterity and emotional tolerance? who i am is clear to me. very much is the case that i do not dwell on the future but mayhap my present is certainly not wondrous to think of.
Saturday, July 16, 2016
the machine, the electricity that flows, the switch, the button, and what you see? take for example, the miniature plastic rubber doll, with heavy duty batteries, see it move, see it dance, hear it sing, a trophy doll in the presentation package.
persistent stress, persistent strain, peristrait in bed. what next? once i get out of bed, i need to level up!
emotionally speaking there is fear, anger, hate, love, want, happy, sorrow. not in any particular order. normal, what is it? the capacity to cope in the situation. however we are also guided by other forces, other emotions, other electric parts of ourselves. what of longing, what of hope, what of funny, indeed what new terms can there be?
electric, then perhaps lecre and ectra could explain motivation in life, if you know what i mean!
suggesting that emotions might be more important that reasoning, that some will not be held back by any logical argument preventing them from proceeding with their planning for life.
Friday, June 17, 2016
just like the past. fill in the gap. now onward. i sense something. don't get mixed up. streaming it. pulling it. don't slip. we are just sampling the past. the present. the future. fill in the pattern.
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
1 and 2 and 3
then 3 went on to 6
now 5 is preceded by 4 is it not
and 7 followed by 8
and 11 by 12
round to 8 again
how to get to 10?
well 10 divided by 5 is 2 is it not?
add 8 to get to 10 which is
besides 9 or rather
beside 9 which is
iff or if and only if you start at the end
which is 10
and it starts with 1 or zero
Saturday, May 21, 2016
which happened afterwards, all those things that we did, left behind in the past, to the town fair we went, i spoke, praising such, and show to you, behold this large event.
Saturday, May 7, 2016
post partum in excelsis, motive interest can be explained by short term demand which naturally expires, in short success or solution might be adequately provable by equation or formula over time.
in the event that nothing can explain duration, only that the past prevails and becomes more significant over time, not that time explains everything but which that happened.
to sense what is not observable exactly is a criteria of existence and what is it all about anyway?
Se + Li + So + Re < WHOLE
other theoretical motions indicate possibilities that can only be discounted by applying constraints, for in total consideration, not everything is observed to be in contact.
time in motor situation seems different from static and is not often memorable.
when situational change is not observed theoretically space is not stable and the line of travel indistinct.
Thursday, May 5, 2016
enzyme path reaction reduces complexes after relieving emitting pulse radiation and focus on NaCl in particular. route of particles from A to B through a close network of atomic structure of Na and Cl reduces chemicals. enzymes such as amylase and other peptides react with salts to produce such a chain reaction. now further study of reactions involves ketones, amino acids, platinum and ferric oxides, pentoxides, and aluminium, and sulphates, and a conceptually new chemical element varium and its trioxides and pentoxides. oxidation releases oxygen and reduction into equilibrium.
Friday, April 29, 2016
where personal gets close is where person begins.
what reason to be personal? and what is a person? how to behave? have a go, fuck it, do something. now the past prevails surely? if ever if became a concern, you must study past behaviour, surely it explains somewhat the present situation? get up and go, and start! what put this idea in my head, put a person on top? errors in the past restrict the future, indeed limit the present, why did someone not do?
have you seen the part where you noticed something and then it became personal?
Sunday, April 24, 2016
LD > 0 ; LD = W + T
what latent demand is about in general is clear. what is wanted to been seen and heard, already thought about, to be experienced in real life. the tourism business flourishes, people travel around the world.
the business makes decisions. they know it will sell once available. promotion helps.
imagine it this way, you will see that, and this is the start of the process...
D < LD
when demand is smaller than supply, business becomes poor. whether this is because people take advantage of knowledge of latent demand and are quick to supply is another question. when supply for latent demand is realized, it is rarely at a price that is just right to clear the market immediately.
Saturday, April 16, 2016
examine theoretically, an instance where 4 girls, name Julie, meet for a day out in London and eventually go their separate ways after lunch. they are at the same school and this is their day off.
what happens after lunch they visit a museum and shortly afterwards, one leaves to go back to school, and then two leave together, leaving the last one not knowing what to do exactly.
at school they sit in the same class, one in the front, one in the middle, and two together at the back.
why could this happen like this? suggest first that the two who pair off sit at the back together anyway and the situation becomes clearer.
whether the Julie who leaves first is the one at the front or the back is the question?
posit the Julie in the middle is probably neither very social nor very studious, the Julie at the front the most serious about class and therefore serious about the day out in London.
Friday, April 8, 2016
what is schizophrenia? how did it become 99th percentile measure? strange thoughts, hearing wild, what? your world unstable, you have, in a sense, disconnected, so well, what's the building like now, where am i?
how self aware are you? how do you, as a person, affect other people? some may never say to your face, they even know what you're thinking and what you're going to do, yet they not let slip...
and what were you like before? actually, you've lost something of yourself, perhaps you are inactive now, loss of affect about you.
qualms about the world, and, not coming up with any answers, after such happened and, it all goes quiet, what disturbs the mind means loss of affect?
Sunday, April 3, 2016
en quoi de vouloir, c'est quoi de choisir, surtout vous en prix, un jeu d'amour, ce qu'elles voient, mais en prix, de langue, et l'enfant, ce qu'il demande, quoi de chose?
de penser, et de comment, parce qu'un départ pour, par exemple, de marquis de Capet du Dionne, c'est un choix de vie, il y a beaucoup de choses, pour l'homme, pour la femme, pour choisir, peu de baisse, un peu de forte. qui est-ce et ce que quoi?
merveilleux et magnifique, la pointe, c'est de la gloire, remercier, toute de rapidement.
ce qu'on voit, c'est parce qu'ils aiment de quoi, pour le choix, pour la femme, de joue vous en prix.
Thursday, March 24, 2016
how to frame the argument? we find truths that we are certain of and we put them together and make conclusions and then act upon them. is it not a leap of faith to go on anything thought about? would only disaster strike prove the theory wrong?
we try to cover all aspects of the subject, search for clues from experience, and then we move to extrapolate perhaps and theorize and categorize data and information.
at times we are hard pushed to further the frame when a ton of distraction lies in our way and often it is hard to bang on down the line and not digress from the topic. it is rather hard to concentrate, to fully attack the problem and win.
lay out the grid, try further categories, what other examples are there? expand on it. do give it a go!
Saturday, March 19, 2016
you're in a mess, what can you do about it? not much you think, but still, what could the cloud of culture particles tell me? here i sit, soaked in the atmosphere of town life, the computer and the internet environment, but the world is unstable, much has passed and gone, and i'm stuck in the past about many things.
where does it come from? what does it mean? i can imagine much, but truth be told, i don't know. without force, i think of many things, but it goes around in a loop.
what is it all about? something pop culture, something life experience? anyway, just sitting here, www on, me thinking away... how does this make sense? need the keys to unlocking this, what idea, what concept could, if it occurred to me, would explain what the atmosphere, the cloud, here, all around me, is about?
is it travel? a car, a train, a boat, a ship? what? thought lies in the difficulty, usually. does it explain any parts i hadn't thought of already?
generally, turning on the PC, hooking up to the internet, and so on, inevitably you think about the social network, the business network, even programming, switches in electronics, current terminology, trendy themes in the media, buzzwords as they are called, now it's global or not, globalization, standards met, so on...
working on the blog, being regular and all, need ideas, fresh out of ideas, what do you do? go out, stew indoors, what exactly?
walking in the mist, pebbles and stones beneath feet, turning, around the bend
a figure crouched by a tree, a meeting, an instance, a precedent
now i see more, much more, the sun is rising, the colours bloom, irradiating my world
in the dusk, when i close my eyes, i still see yet
schizophrenia has begun
a rainbow swirl of colour in my world
Saturday, March 12, 2016
least bits of matter, adjoined to their neighbours, porosity of space a concept, that is, gaps in between where nothing exists, when each least bit of matter changes state, it affects its neighbours.
what is space but a heap of what looks like prickly gems connected to each other? when it changes, like it's saying become like me, or the same, speculatively, if a group of neighbours become similar, at the border, affect is less from the central least bit of matter, and what is beyond is affected by some other least bit of matter or is in itself experiencing sharp change.
the illusion of free movement, physical motion, shift, swivel, pull towards, push forwards.
Monday, March 7, 2016
entry server, combine, swell the cloud, target server, release, recombine, rebuild.
step by step, in stages, that's how it works, how the computers move before processing anything. really, how do computers interface with other computers, or printers, just for that matter? that was the question, and yet still is, although later it was certainly about the server and the internet, support for the server, addresses and IP.
could a computer replicate from the server? how does it interpret the signal?
technically speaking, is wireless radiation through space method of transmission? can it be embargoed or blockaded? what about the permeability of space, that the signal copied down the line, up to the server, is the same thing at the receiving end? is it a wide receiver, like a giant all band radio receiver? response time loading a page from the world wide web or www, for short, on the internet is critical in judging many things, not only the permeability of space, whether a signal can flow, how fast also, but also the distance of the server.
what would make life confusing? probably not the virtual reality helmet and all round treadmill to give the illusion of physical motion, but the 3D graphics generator for the ultimate PC, don't you think? could a computer do all that with the light? could it really talk? is the computer same as a human? here's a thought experiment, the basic player venue simulated on your PC, only to be delighted by the processing of speech bubbles! how my PC played me!
your computer move
Saturday, February 27, 2016
so, let's imagine you've just bought your ship for 4,000 credits, your basic starter starship at the dealer, and you've settled into the seat, you're the driver! check all the controls that adjust the view, the steer, for roll, up down for takeoff and landing, left right for turn, and throttles, check, navigation console, check. dunno how it happened, really, but with the starship they had to expand the rules of physics!
the motor car or automobile changed Earth! about moving parts, friction, heat, gauge, worn and torn parts. closed box system, how real are moving parts in the darkness?
now Kere, what system is this? why not Afik? or Edim? it seems brave, doesn't it, to jump to another system, based on a readout from a navigation console?
to think carefully on how hyperdrive works, perhaps the windows or observation panels contain image layers of arrival points to effect arrival from hyperspace, with the radio channel tuned in to destination.
well, is it dangerous? the voyage to somewhere else always carries inherent risk, even crossing the road is dangerous, why would you want to do it? as someone who went all the way buying a ship, that is a bit obvious. but can you really fly? how many times before you passed your atmosphere driving test? the advanced planetfall course?
Kere, lush forest, sandy beaches, rolling green hills, huge city. why not?
Saturday, February 20, 2016
and you pass through a place in London like Oxford Street, you have the buses, the taxis, tourists, a crowd of people that remind you that you are not alone. in the bus from Victoria Station, it is nice, Hyde Park Corner, Park Lane, then onto Oxford Street, everyone seems lively, a lot to say. if everyone is in a world of their own, perhaps here is where they meet.
where does the Earth population, growing, where's it come from? now Earth is one world, if you like, there was an alternate life before.
what does it seem? posh, worldly, experienced. and education is so expensive nowadays. people have a presence, what is that about, light, sound, accent, what?
i think everyone has heard of the Great Exhibition of 1851 and so London has continued, the streets a parade of people, everyone wondering what the latest thing is.
Wednesday, February 17, 2016
so it's true, it ain't no one man reality, my human ego is not that big. there are others, how many lifeforms could there be?
they say two is company, three's a crowd, one man two women or one woman and two men, but it ain't that kind of reality either so what can one say?
that sometimes nobody could help you, you're on your own, just seems true. that you could never be someone else with their individual senses is also true. like who saw what and when?
what's the polar opposite of solipsism? is it dependency without sense of self?
Monday, February 15, 2016
in '86, it was a fine time to be in London. it all seemed to be happening in most parts, in the East End, at Middlesex Street Market near Aldgate, the City of London, in the West End, though, it was much more quieter than now, the streets weren't heaving with bodies like Oxford Street now on a busy day.
I read The Guardian, The Times, the opticians were professional. later on, I spotted The Tatler in a newsagent in Charing Cross Road in Chinatown, a kind of highly detailed guide of what makes snob in England, interesting at first, fresh and new, but I couldn't keep up with my subscription much later on.
to me, London prices were cheap, I was so impressed by that, that prices have gone up times three or thereabouts in my time influences me.
Bromley, one of the other two, the other being Croydon, in the East and the South, is much changed. they place a large shopping mall in town, The Glades, it makes a lot of difference.
Thursday, February 11, 2016
"what i wanted to say to you, was, i thought you had something, not what i expected, but it worked out in the end."
"thank you for saying that."
"you were prepared. i thought you didn't have it in you at first, what you managed to do, was fantastic. i'm sorry if i offended you."
"it's all right."
"you're a nitpicker, you've got an eye for detail, obviously."
"do you need any more help?"
"i'll be all right. thanks."
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
in space, proximity or distance matters, always. the chain, the network, the group.
i'm right by you, i'm with you, and sometimes nothing else matters. the groups out there, they are so busy sometimes, and so are we too as well, sometimes.
well, i heard it man, and it seems true. in the meantime, guess what, i got a lot of things going on here, and good luck to you too!
we just started here, got a thing going on. thank you!
Tuesday, February 9, 2016
"well, there's the question, have i had enough of this? and you know, maybe there's a limit to everything, really how far did you want to go with this, anyway."
"go on, i mean, i have an idea how serious i am..."
"the question is, am i playing or not. let's get off this. i'm gonna introduce a new word, quodity, what is that about? really, you have to ask yourself, what does it want out of me? you know, when the girl or guy starts asking personal questions, you know they're interested. you're a commodity, i don't know about what."
"meaning what? is it like, this is just a game or when i walk out the door, i'm gonna find out how serious it is?"
"that's exactly it, there's an audience there, you know it. so you're thinking, what just happened? and i mean, really, if you're willing to go all the way, you want the universal ideal, it could happen pretty fast."
"i'll come back to it again. explain yourself to yourself first."
Sunday, February 7, 2016
let the null hypothesis be that separate realities hook up every night or day for some time and then leave eventually only to return again and again making a nonsense of universal time and space.
is this falsifiable? really?
note that this is reality where physical motion is not real. anyone who likes thinking about this might conclude that where physical motion is not even real such collisions and contact made are impossible.
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
on drawing speculative diagrams of what space might look like, considering the possible arrangement of least bits of matter, there are clearly two broad types of chains, single width and multiple width, judging on number of points of contact.
on macro scale, that is scaling up, personal space bubbles can so be considered as well. and why do we know so little about other people? because each personal bubble space is a zone of space where there is self involvement to a great degree, least bits of matter in the zone affect each other rather more than interact with external space. the field of think is closely connected to the senses and you can only know what you think. what happens further away you sense less, it is about proximity, just as eyesight declines at a distance. containment is the concept, obviously it is not total or we would never know anything about other people.
single width chains are perhaps rare, a blockade of transitional change or flow may occur easily. where there are multiple chains or rather where least bits of matter are tightly packed communication is freer as there are several routes of flow.
it seems that there must be vacuums in space, where matter does not exist. least bits of matter do not make complete contact with their neighbours. it is an interesting question whether chains could form a ring of least bits of matter with a vacuum in the middle, perhaps not.
as for personal space bubbles, a large one may contain personal space bubbles within itself. how alone do you feel? it is not easy for someone surrounded by other people in real space to experience solipsism you would think.
Friday, December 25, 2015
it is apparent that the conscious person is, if you like, in the driver's seat in life. you have, in fixed real space, an immobile clump of matter, call it consciousness, or think, surrounded by light, sound, in a working system, and consciousness manipulates the field around it. "brain in a vat" is quite a material description, and what is material, after all? light makes illusion and what seems material is in some sense a trick of the light, the material can be seen, first of all. indeed, the material involves light and its rules and the sense of touch. in reality the think matter in your head is surrounded by different matter, least bits of matter connected in a numerically huge network, all chained together.
you might think that consciousness is special, as it is the driver. it seems the field around it is all for the driver, so to speak. or you could think that the consciousness has a job, a responsibility, as it has control. but really, what can the consciousness know but its own consciousness first of all, is that why consciousness is special?
what is thought? well, you can think about light, sound, that is, other types of matter, very real things, or it could become abstract. why do we use language? what is the power of certain words? unique words change the think crystals in our heads a certain way, we arrive at something abstract. posit that our native languages are not truly learned with any effort, that such a language with its words naturally lead to certain states of meaning in our heads.
the question becomes what is the limit of abstract thought? it is noticeable, asleep, we have thoughts that we cannot define or easily explain, a general mood often being the only explanation. while we are awake, the think is less abstract, we often think about light and sound, that's where the bias is. asleep, it is more abstract.
what is the original state of consciousness? is there a cycle in which reset to the original states for each think least bit of matter happens? well, can we remember time zero? what is the original balance between real and abstract thought?
Saturday, October 24, 2015
to any student of history, contradictory or alternative accounts bring into the mind a certain dissonance, and thus doubt. is such history true record or merely rather abstract, imaginative collections of themes and stories that blend detail with archetype, action with motive, paranoia with ambition, event with hyperbole, and so on? are these myths or legends, are these historical characters alive all around us, and in us even? and do we play up to history?
i mean, if we assume that the worst, which we all think about in our most paranoid state, does not actually happen, what then? is this an existential problem? a lot of bad things don't happen to us personally, but could they be real for other people? war is a series of motions, to be quite neutral about it, but i digress. and exaggeration works to stimulate interest, and symbolism and imagery impress the reader.
now this is a world of complexes, this is a metaphysical truth, there are, if you like, bundles of ideas and words and images that come together, either without much conscious effort, or with. to lie down and let your imagination wander happens to everyone. to deconstruct and interpret the most gaudy work of history, we should recognize the ornamental nature of its exposition. imagine the bright, colourful illustrations, the portraits, the weapons, the machines, the vehicles, the maps, the treasure, the clothes, the food, the banquets, the marriages. it would deal with the themes of rivalry, war, romance, ambition, failure, birth, life and death, family, travel, religion, politics, and change. now all these things affect everyone. how much are you like anyone in history? how much of history is true about you?
to be philosophical, the truest record of history that you could truly know, without contact with anyone else, would be your own diary, if you kept one. also, that people think about false things is without doubt. that a crazy mind might see and read false things is the next logical step. and that any record is perhaps unstable and liable to mutation is also true, as time means change.
Monday, October 19, 2015
"so i think about my eyesight and hearing...we're audio visual animals, but i'm sure i'm not entirely what i see and hear right? there are other things, invisible to me, around me...the whole computer thing now, the cloud, i'm surrounded by an invisible cloud of information, and there's the whole machinery of everything that connects me to Earth, that controls what i see and hear, right? what do i call it, my eyesight and hearing? i think i'll call it the 3D audio visual projection field. and maybe everything you see exists in micro form, and it's encoded too, and then it is projected somehow in front of me, i can see it, and you know of course we can see what others see too."
"that's how we live in the same world, Earth."
"right. the problem i have is how does it seem so solid, what i see, that it seems like that's all that's there? i have a focus, i see what i focus on, the rest not so clear, but how can there be anything else that's there, in the focus area?"
"here i think we have to deal with the porosity of the field, what you see seems solid, seems a contiguous image with no gaps, but it's simply not true. the 3D audio visual projection field, the 3DAVPF, is porous, there are gaps."
"right, so maybe it seems there are no gaps, but an image that seems planar, seems contiguous, it's still projected at various distances so only seems non-porous."
"right. the question is how much of matter is used at the focus to render images and sound in the 3D audio visual projection field? 20%? 70%?"
"you know it seems most of it. it's ridiculous that it seems 100% of course. how much power does the 3DAVPF use, if we thought about it terms of electricity, like an electrical machine? i mean no wonder it's exhausting to be awake for a long time, it uses so much electrical power."
Saturday, October 17, 2015
what of love lost, a failed romance, to scar forever the hearts of the couple involved? and from heartbreak to the death of romantic feeling, Menemeides and Amronoeia turned away from each other, both abandoned, a vacuum where love once grew, now empty.
perhaps only the capricious in heart could fall in love so easily, for just as unaccountable as the end was when it came, so too was the premise of this romantic adventure. Menemeides, in temperament, was not a proud man, nor one for excessive vainglory in life. Fate placed the couple together, and for a time, it was wondrous in experience. Menemeides thought Amronoeia very nice and he validated her sense of self. Amronoeia was loquacious and had an easy charm about her. however she, and perhaps Menemeides too, in his own way, were both judgmental in nature and placed value in conversation.
now easy words from loose tongues turn, when angry, confused and frustrated, and in haste, and when enveloped by the toxic atmosphere of prejudice and envy, to harsh words. that a couple should come together, that two worlds should be connected, is not an unobserved event. perhaps the goddesses watch, perhaps there were antagonists at work? that Menemeides always hoped perchance to impress with his words, that it seemed Amronoeia cared not came as a cruel blow to him. that his pride suffered is not true, for he was not proud, and do very proud people ever fall in love, truly? he felt only sorrow. and his silence seemed to Amronoeia that he now cared little or nothing.
now the audience may judge that Menemeides did not feel respect adequately, neither for himself first of all, for his sorrow lessened his faith in his own capacity distorting his self opinion to a grotesque caricature of inadequacy, and of course secondly, for Amronoeia. he simply could not forgive nor accept Amronoeia for what she was, someone who makes mistakes she regrets. of course Menemeides was capable of more. he could not see himself as the provider of comfort or a person of responsibility. Amronoeia, searching for signs that his love was not killed by one instance of a horrible malefication of words was heartbroken by the seeming absence of his love now.
it should be stated that for anyone to hold the spoken word as important, always risks the chance that it will turn tragic for just as free thought is out of our control sometimes, so is the spoken word or speech.
Thursday, October 15, 2015
on meeting it is often somewhat surprising what transpires sometimes, is it mere exchange of words, a glance in the direction of another's face, or rather, much much more? what exactly is given? it is a fallacy that light is all the same, it is a fallacy then, much more obviously, that all words sound the same, that words may be delivered in an accent unique to the individual, is plain to all. a person has its own light, it may have its own sound, to remove the concept of the personal unique from science is a grave omission, is it not? what matter is here may not be what matter is elsewhere, it may not be the same or even similar in quality.
an emotional expression, often realized in the face of another, or cast in an aura that stretches across space, is not exactly easily definable, perhaps, but rather evident sometimes. what is it? is it about the other person's emotions, of want and happy perhaps, or their light, or some complex of thoughts and ideas, or a mixture?
it would be remiss of any final form of science or metaphysics, to make an omission of this, to refuse to deal with this subject at all. that we are affected by others' emotions is not to be refuted. the original state of people's minds and their emotions and thoughts is not to be neglected. modernity, meeting, change, all these things conspire to transform, what people originally were may be shocking, the unreconstructed form of the person at time zero.
on the obvious, most meetings are about exchange of words. we could muse whether we hear exactly the sound at the other end of the audio stream, the voice of the other person, but this seems futile. we attach great import to what is actually said, more than what they think. but why? people do not necessarily say what they truly want to say or believe. in an angry moment, they might make a complete nonsense of speech, and live to regret what they said.
emotional expression, hard to qualify, but easy to recognize, is rather a volatile condition, certainly at target distance. even for yourself, it is somewhat of a delicate balancing act.
Saturday, September 26, 2015
history may seem remote, it may seem dense, somewhat impenetrable, almost irrelevant in its obscurity, sometimes. with the advent of historical fiction, gross revisionism, and the change of focus in the media, what is history and what is legend, or myth, remains a matter of some confusion. how the historian deals with facts and figures of note, how he or she fashions it into a work of history, ready to be read, is a question that many have. the answer is that the historian writes about what is important or clear to him or her, in his or her own mind, primarily.
that truly the world population is static, or that the population of the universe never really changes is a concept. all the people that ever were, still are, and always will be. do people really change?
English history, with the Anglo Saxons, with their short, monosyllabic words, and halting style, the historical legends that everyone has heard of, Merlin the wizard, King Henry VIII and his marriage troubles, Robin Hood, the Magna Carta, and the English sense of fairness, in fair play, in a fair deal, and the Court of Elizabeth I and the favourite, Earl of Essex, and the Court of James I and the favourite, Duke of Buckingham. in all these historical legends, there is the faintest sense of failure in all these accounts. personal relationships are key, what is one without the other? how did the man who became Duke of Buckingham catch the eye of James I? and without the king, what of Buckingham?
that history itself survives is a testament to its relevance. types persist, circumstances repeat themselves, though granted, it is most shocking to see history replay itself in public!
Wednesday, September 23, 2015
"so i had this idea years ago, actually, several ideas, maybe a couple, you know, 2, maybe 3. and this idea just came to me. i was somewhere, maybe i was in public doing my shopping or whatever, and i just thought of this thing, and i've been wondering about this all my life."
"when did you have this idea?"
"i don't know, maybe 17 or 18 years ago. i had a full mental life then, you know? i don't know what happened. maybe i got tired, maybe i got old, or something."
"so, in your subconscious, or your unconscious? you've had this a long time. when other ideas attach themselves, i don't know, maybe you have something. it's a little dangerous."
"dangerous? i've never had a lot of time in my life, maybe if i had more time? anyway, i can see the danger in a lot of things."
"life is dangerous? so what? tell me about this idea."
"well, to go into it in any depth would only reveal my inadequacy at explaining things in detail. so, anyway, i put this old idea together with another idea, and bang, suddenly comprehension. you know what it seems?"
"anyone can do it? if you only thought about putting different ideas together, magic would happen? it's a tired story."
"really, i didn't say it was easy. you're too hard on yourself, i think. maybe i'm too easy. i don't know."
"you think i'm hard on myself? you have no idea. sometimes. i get bored and then i get angry. i think, you don't have the time for this. anyway, so you put a few ideas together in a new way and you get what? the realization that they are related concepts in reality?"
"exactly. so, you seem you know a lot about this. it's deceptive. you think, why didn't i think of this then. if only..."
"it's like history. history gets revised. it's called revisionism."
"well that's brutal. but true. i guess we're getting there. at least i hope so."
"let's hope so."
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
to have an ego is embarrassing at times, the big i am on the spot, the things you don't want other people to know about yourself necessarily. an ego may be an obstacle in human relations. when it's entirely about me how could it be about you therefore?
what does the ego want? can it happen? the ego is value judgmental, is obstinate, is inclined toward angry outbursts when it is frustrated. okay, i don't want all this...
when it is true, the ego provides a measure of security, to be clear about what you are is not always a bad thing. but to be self obsessed in company presents a difficult situation. to have a running battle with your own ego demand and what other people want in the situation is hard. you could wax lyrical about yourself but you remain without the sympathy of the crowd.
Saturday, September 5, 2015
he complained of recurring nightmares of school, the people unrecognizable and the school the same. typically, in senior school, in the corridors and not in class, identities remained as before. this was a reminder that he remained in some part, forever a pupil or undergraduate.
of his school report in the third year of primary school, ages six to seven, in Bermuda, it read thus that he was far too talkative, a disruptive influence on the other pupils. in Fifth Form, in Britain, his Chemistry master criticized his attitude in class.
attention to detail and a continuing interest in the arcane subjects separated him from others. expertise in one small area details your niche in life. unexpected success made his situation doubly ironic, for although he was noted for his study, he never attended graduation ceremony and he was famous in the world of academia, yet never had to speak of it in public.
Friday, August 28, 2015
how sleep first happened, let's examine that, so a lot to think about the first day, many questions, so we can conclude drowsiness led from mental exhaustion, originally. people who think a lot, who really push, fall asleep in a snap moment.
now a lot of people are into physical exercise, they find that works too, a slow slide to sleep.
traditionally, dinner was most important, from dusk into the early hours of the night, and it was huge compared to breakfast and lunch. after dinner, rather faint, stagger to bed, finding a position, and to sleep.
these ways kill the wide awake state.
what is being asleep? in my experience, cloudy vague thoughts, lucidity gone, and a reset in sensation or feeling.
Friday, August 21, 2015
and the world was
in that year
the people pondered thus
where was the world
to bridge all worlds
to divide all that was common
to share in the fruit of the harvest
that could be given without expense
the boys and the girls
a dancing party of men and women
here to say but nothing else
and at night
a shimmering image of person
a fork in the way
where to turn next
and the days passed
relaxing in the garden outside
a shining beacon of hope
turn away turn away
where to the future we move
crisscrossing real space is a network of these lines, these pipelines are lines of attack, composed of least bits of matter joined together changing their neighbours to transfer a difference in state through the pipeline. when the other side somewhere else is passive, a flurry of change near the start end lifts the pipeline, so to speak, forcing a delivery of change at the other end.
damage to the pipeline means it is blocked. when unblocked one end has reset.
the social network depends on the integrity of these pipelines. activity in zones in space can disrupt the pipelines.
Sunday, August 16, 2015
"it was so fascinating..."
"he is! well dodgy, inni, what a cunt! wonderful person!"
"well it's not that bad."
"isn't it? i know you think that. but i'm not sure."
"look. it's going well. there's no problem yet. it hasn't surfaced."
"so why's it like that? i think it will be all right...you know?"
"there must be something in it...why do i have to wait?"
"there's more to...maybe we should go."
"do i reek? i've been over there forever. really, i just want to get it all over with."
"come on Jessica. let's go."
"okay, i guess. we'll go. i can't wait around."
"oh hi...i'm Jessica. these are my acolytes."
"where are you going?"
"i don't know yet. it's getting really uncomfortable around here. do you have any ideas?"
"what about the library?"
"the library. sure, why not? Julie, my husband tells me I should loosen up. what do you think? i agree."
"oh i got married when i was five. let's go to the library!"
Sunday, August 9, 2015
"Das Mädchen. Hier."
"Wir haben ein grosse Menü. Das Hotel ist das grösste. Shopping. Clothes. Bar."
"Danke. Wir haben das set Menü bitte."
"Das Mädchen? Fräulein? Was haben Sie?"
"Die Rechnung? Was kostet das?"
"Ein moment. Hier."
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
the line of futile questioning goes something like this, why do i exist, of course, there is no explanation for why you or reality exists, you simply must accept that it does, that you exist, that other people exist, there is no why. for when does it make sense to ask why? the usual answer to why, actually, is that something came before, that before C and D came A and B. to think of all that exists in real space may boggle the mind, for you only knew so much at the beginning of time, barely yourself, actually.
in my case, as it began at time zero, a mist covered landscape, stones, trees, blue sky, dim light, walking forwards, in a dress, thinking, the sound of my name, this is my story. to deal with the personal in science seems almost a contradiction in terms, the bias in 20th Century AD science is that all is impersonal and that the same applies everywhere, only quantum mechanics seems to accept that the personal matters. in considering real space, composed of chains of least bits of matter, it would be simplistic to quickly divide up the total map of reality into personal zones, everyone in their own personal bubble space, space could look like a chained mass of soap bubbles, each soap bubble representing a person.
now very much hangs on the question, what is a person? now, i could see a lot at the beginning, i thought thoughts in my head, and what i saw was connected to my head. of course, i cannot see to infinity, at some point my vision ends. assume particle traffic between points in my own personal bubble space is high, internal communication is high. so what limits could there be between two people? the range of personal light? the range of personal think matter?
why are there many people? well, why are there many least bits of matter?
i admit i cannot remember thinking about other people at the beginning, at time zero. i held only myself in mind. that the population seemed ever higher with time was true, beyond what most people could think about. that other people are different in some ways seems true, if only in that they could not be the same as you yourself.
Saturday, August 1, 2015
"i'm made up of lots of parts. i am the sum total of my parts, right? are any of my parts alone? not really! so of course i can't really believe in this total aloneness. can i see what other people see? all i know is me and what comes from elsewhere."
"tell me about what you think of yourself. why do you think of yourself as a dependent person."
"maybe i know myself very well maybe i don't, sure, i surprise myself sometimes but i'm not as shocking as other people! the question is whether you think of all of this reality as a whole. i think of it as connected parts. so you see i read other people's work, stuff i couldn't possibly come up with on my own, so i know other people are real, in as far as i define a unique person. i depend on other people. of course, still, i have to manage my life."
"do you prefer your own company? what are your thoughts?"
"i don't know. other people are something i can't fully comprehend."
"your focus determines a lot. you can only think about so much at a time. where none of this concerns you could be happening right now and you might never know. where you become independent is when you realize you're on your own out there."
"i find solipsism very frightening. yet i know it can't be true."
"you're your own man. you look for company. but you should realize that sometimes all that matters is what's going on with you yourself."
Sunday, July 26, 2015
by this i mean really in the middle economically, it's both interesting from a behavioral economic view and from a social perspective, economists are interested in how they behave as agents in the economy, to judge what is happening right now and what will probably happen in the future.
by "level" read completely average, so employed, young probably or middle aged, a real consumer to be monitored. but how could an economically unactive or inactive person be considered middle class anyway? we assume that the middle class is the largest group today by income and wealth comparison.
what is the upper class? the richest, most powerful? economically this is true but social distinctions confuse the issue. there is a legacy that remains in the collective memory. that society economically observed is mobile or fluid is the case.
spending drives the economy. watch the young household, with children, they need all kinds of consumer goods and services, leisure and entertainment. the young tend to spend freely. older people, with retirement looming and no further income guaranteed, may be more cautious and become economically less important.
the level middle class make the pace. socially, of course, they are not necessarily a cohesive group, in that they mix only with each other, that's probably not the case. the 27 year old male, level middle class, working, average income, shops a lot, goes on holidays, has friends and family, may not stay in the same class all his life though.
level middle class demand is what determines a large proportion of supply in the economy.
as it is now, geographical navigation in abstract is according to map, two points enjoined in a linear fashion, one geographical unit has its neighbours, all contiguous and connected, and over long geographical distances, travel is tortuous with so many places in between that make disinterest.
imagine hyperdrive then, instead of travelling from one geographical unit to one beside, all the way, could you, in your hyperdrive fitted starship, in one short period of time leap to one geographical unit far away?
how would it appear? window shutters activated and down, so nothing to see outside, hyperdrive kicks in, the starship disappears from where it was, the leap complete, hyperdrive deactivated, the starship is somewhere else!
what is hyperdrive in this context? that visual based on geography and plan or map is a virtual construct, plugged into a world system, you see based on that. if only you could hack the visual system for everyone on board, change the system to allow hyperdrive leaps, why not?
scientifically how could it work? the engine is about light. if you saw on the shutters a 3D image of outside where the starship destination will be, relayed by telecommunications, if the hyperdrive circuitry contained images of the destination and that was displayed on screens inside all during the journey, maybe? someone in the ship from the destination, surely? and when the shutters open the passengers see outside at the destination point!
perhaps drawing up a map of planets and star systems in 2D would never be that satisfying and makes hyperdrive leap theory difficult. change one conventional assumption, that the map is stable! what if star systems and planets changed their relative positions all the time?
hyperdrive leap in an instant is, in effect, teleportation. if everyone could teleport, it would make hyperdrive all the more likely.
Saturday, July 25, 2015
"here i am. here to call out something. and you're here. what am i?"
"you're the one i see in front of me. what happens now?"
"well, i'm happy. spread the happy!"
"i guess i'll say something about me. what have i done? what can you do?"
"well, okay then. i guess i could, maybe that too."
"right. it's done then. i'll turn away right now."
"don't turn away from me! are you really leaving me now?"
"see you later!"
Sunday, July 19, 2015
"i like to watch the business parts, the day goes by fast, generally, in some cases, we go in completely unprepared. in slow time, i have to think about my part, especially. why should anyone have to wonder about their role, even it seems unorganized in the process of putting it all together?"
"what about the name?"
"it reminds me of a recurring sound in the background, sounds like hoema, but HoHoHemano sounds more jolly, more masculine, i don't know."
"it sounds Christmasy, not a bad thing, mind you. i'm imagining a jolly, formal Christmas."
"maybe. i don't think Santa minds!"
"tell me about this sound, a little more, please."
"well, it actually sounds a little medical, don't you think? like haemotosis or something. i've heard it loud, i don't know where it comes from, you know?"
"okay, great. i suppose business attaches itself to a name, why not? three Hs, that's new, i'm visualizing shiny and brand new!"
"right, the one thing, when you front someone, maybe it's a girl, maybe it's not, you really have got to be crystal clear about the idea of what you're about to say, okay? don't gush all over her. it's gonna sound blunt afterwards, even maybe during, but that's what i do."
"what does that mean?"
"it's not good staying off either end, you know what i mean, you have to put yourself at the front end. it's frightening at first, maybe every time actually, but that's the way it is. seem you have affection. any reaction is better than no reaction in my opinion."
"what if they say..."
"well, that's difficult. don't make them angry. if they don't agree with what you're saying, you're in trouble, i gotta admit, that's why it's like that."
"ha ha ha."
"what do you have in common? what do all people with a body have in common? you really have to think about things like this, i mean, come on."
"so i might say i just had a haircut, what's my story? you know, just go with it."
"so at the end, when it comes...you're not going to be prepared for it, the twist, that is."
"great, give me another."
"i mean it, when it hits you, you'll be wondering what happened!"
"really, go on."
"you see...it's about making a difference at the ending. if you end on the same note, the same scene, for example...what's different? everything that happened before, right? i mean, it could look exactly the same except for one part. that's just an example."
"you mean like something out of place? i don't think just repeating the first scene...with something different...maybe you're right."
"what i mean is, there has to be a something shockingly different that happens, that completely upsets the view of the audience at the end, from what they were led to believe, like what happened at the beginning."
"right, so, killing off the perception of the audience it had about the first half and starting something new."
"right, that's it, and it even leaves it wide open for a sequel. that's great, isn't it?"
Saturday, July 18, 2015
in the train, back to home, what crosses her mind? that home is best? that public transport is an effort in itself? that that inspires fantasy about travel is rather lost in the moment, the hurly burly of getting to the station, waiting on platform, thinking of something to do in the train, else stare out the window, why did she come here in the first place?
what called her there was out of her control mostly, this is what happens to type. that there is much attention is off putting, one of life's hurdles, to be dealt with seriously at the time.
that the prospectus was enticing, according to appearance. it was much mentioned, in the same breath as the other place, is the full answer. was it a social paradise? social types parading through the grounds and in the streets, living it up, R. and R. in town.
i've imagined it well, really well, actually! somewhere east of Tonbridge, in the Kent Downs, far downhill from Orpington, a fantastic house, overlooking the Downs, the serviceable rooms at the front, black and white checkerboard tiles, a magnificent staircase leading up to one continuous bedroom, a bed forty foot wide, pillars, and seemingly infinite at the rear! one day, perhaps, on a wild drive in the country, she will come upon it, down a winding tree littered rough road, exactly as i've imagined it!
take Col de Rett, a young man of London, for example, here we have a person, a noble young lad, full of good intentions, into business, into life, interested in everything and everyone, what has he to offer?
of life, quite a lot. judged by everyone older, he seems likely to succeed, personable, friendly, what an example to us all! marked by experience, wiser by the hour when it gets hard, maybe pushed on by his own ambition, when will he graduate to the next level up? does he get good service? of course! on and off, he wonders what will happen, will later life be as smooth as it is now?
apple of his father's eye? does he measure up? how much does he want?
of course, he's a vain man, and why not? always looking to be validated by his peers, always talking up the situation. it's one thing to think it, another to hear it from someone else!
Monday, July 13, 2015
"man, what am i looking at? do these numbers make sense to you? never mind. okay, original investment, sunk, to you, i guess that's goodwill now, huh? you know you owe me, right?"
"sure, i owe you business. it was a good deal, no doubt about that. but why are you calling me exactly? what is this about?"
"you see the figure i sent you? is that correct? what this is about is, i'm not sure, is that all of it?"
"sure, sure, that's all of it. we can talk tomorrow morning, okay?"
"you used me. okay, it was a fair deal. but i need staff. i need human capital, besides myself here. inventory checks out, that's fine. i'm having problems with the figures."
"revenue up? what are you so worried about?"
"why's it like that. i can't remember some things. anyway i'll call you tomorrow."
"fine. call me tomorrow."
Thursday, June 25, 2015
here was i in a muddle. not more than 10 seconds ago the thought lost. by no means cursed with poor memory but still agitated by this loss, a loss that made me feel i was losing my mind and not just a fragment of mental tissue, i felt done under, under the way i should be on, under a cloud of discontent and misfortune.
the struggle to remember has waylaid me often, a simple game of hopscotch showed me the way, a way that has found me often in tenuous circumstances, the mainstream of life and its glories bypassing me in a stroke it would seem.
the course of time is like a tide struggling against the headwind of the past. when the new is lost, what time period would it seem?
perhaps the struggle only engenders thoughts about the difficulty in mind and is not particularly helpful. the way ahead is fortuitously guided, like it or not, by the warnings of past mistakes, perhaps better in some cases by the glories of the past won.
Friday, June 19, 2015
of nectar bold, of the fountain of immortality and youth, slakest thy thirst, drinkest now, give me life immortal, that's really how the line goes! derived from all this culture, we have the vampire legend of today, someone who cannot leave this earth. it is well known.
they put that a vampire sleeps abnormally. how does say, a guy or girl over 120 years old, who only looks 17, live on earth? how does he or she lie about his or her age? because it's not normal is it, should it come out?
and while vampire legend permeates the entertainment media, we have the question, what exactly qualifies as vampire, because the legend is differentiated by different accounts? do they even eat? or do they just drink? drinkest of the finest, eat of the tastiest, silence the impatience within and without.
relate that to the popular notion of ghost. some houses seem haunted, haunted by that which happened, that that defined life lived at them. are vampires ghostly? do vampires haunt the streets, more aware of history, more subtle in negotiating their way in life, more circumspect about life and its problems? the legend permits all kinds of culture about magical transformation. they, the vampires, present continuity of power and allow tradition to continue.
"when i was a boy, i never drank coffee, i never drank tea, now look at me, cup after cup, you know. what i thought was true forever when i was a little kid stopped when i was like fifteen."
"you became a total cynic! me, i stopped believing all that when i was thirteen, really, just a teenager to begin with. i wasn't a princess anymore, i didn't live in a castle, you know, i felt i had to grow up."
"that's what i'm saying. i'm only forty something but it's like i've had several lifetimes already, really like what it was at kid level, when i was young, that life and all its expectations totally died. it completely cut off at eighteen, a whole new life starting. i still recognize the child in me, i'm not saying it's gone completely."
"right. but it's different for me, i had hopeless really what could only be called fantasies about life. i didn't fully believe them even as a little girl. that's my problem."
"why's it like that? are you saying i'm more realistic? i'm not more realistic, i don't think. what i'm saying is, it seemed like the whole world changed, you know, the 1970s were different, the atmosphere changed to what it is now."
"yeah, but did it really change or have you changed? that's the question. or both which is probably the true answer."
"right, yeah, okay, but i don't think i've changed. maybe i was delusional as a kid and that's the change. like you say you've changed but i don't think you've really changed not all the time i've known you. you're still the same."
"but you didn't know me when i was seven or eight years old!"
"true, but how different could you be?"
"different. i drink coffee now. there are so many choices, coffee houses, coffee shops, cafés. when is tea going to be like that? it's like there are more coffee places than bars. when will there be, you know, tea houses, tea shops, tea bars maybe?"
"you know, after i've had so much coffee, it all tastes the same to me. i'm disturbed by a lot of things happening that i feel i'm unprepared for, that i couldn't see coming. it's like life is peaceful for a while and then boom!, it all happens. all at once. good things, bad things."
"it's crazy. you have no way of knowing when it will happen or how you will react."
it seems that when one number is divided by another the result up top could continue with no end in sight after the decimal point, especially when you divide a prime number by another prime number, say 17/19.
the immediate question is whether this result up top continues to infinity. can you keep writing? some of the numbers up top become an eventual repeat after a certain point surely? because if at some point in the calculation when you subtract after writing down the next number up top and performing that multiplication giving you the remainder the same as before at the bottom, surely then from then on the numbers up top are a series repeat while the first few numbers may not be?
divide an even number by an even number, say 8/16, is much easier. most prime numbers are odd.
Wednesday, June 17, 2015
time and space may make the difference in meaning! in the here and now it causes a problem to have an opposition in the mind. to deconstruct what they may be about, their meanings, is to examine and amplify what the opposing meaning is about.
i am big, yeah!, compare to a six year old boy. understand that often things are relative to someone else, argument put forth on how to action forwards, debate on what to do, what is the best way, what is the most popular?
even a mistake in thinking is an opportunity to figure out what is going on in your own mind!
Monday, June 15, 2015
nursery school at the Rosebank at the age of three to four, the first day little remembered, then learning numbers, how eight was written, naps after lunch, play in the playground, waiting after the finish. the first day of school at Cavendish is clearer, name tags, the name of the teacher.
who gets along with who? who follows who? trouble in the second year, accusations, boys upset. rainy day, what to do at lunchtime? the long afternoons, struggling in English, waiting for schoolday to finish. the importance of the teacher's name and title, birthdays, writing about the weekend past.
knowing boys' names, speaking your mind, remembering who talks to who, all very uppermost in his mind. food was a big deal, what you had for recess, whether you drank milk and what kind, white or chocolate? how to get out of fluoride tablets? gossiping about other boys' parents, family, the teacher's daughter. did life ever really change?
what did you want to be? what could you do? follow interest on the school playground, make an effort in class, humour the teacher about what you did last weekend!
Friday, June 12, 2015
at top, at the summit of his formal academic life, he passed at eighteen from school to university. then his confidence collapsed! was he not interested? interest is what motivates at university.
in June 1990, 2 weeks to memorize the subject, up early the morning of the exam, slightly desperate but still confident. he was unprepared for the creative academic life. university demands creative thought in the end, a capacity to learn and the ability to create.
July 1990, after the last exams, the most free time at school ever. it was not compulsory to be there after A Levels, though he was not the only one who opted to be present. the last day, something he had always imagined, passed rather slowly. other boys' family, seen for the first time, a dread about the future at university.
A Levels, can you remember the terms, the vocabulary? GCSE, are you studying from the right materials? Special Papers, can you calculate, given the right info? is that the difference at university, you have to have your own ideas?
he found the pressure at university, social, financial, and academic, and his studying, shaped his ideas about career. well, the direction he got there remains, whilst that of school was vague. he liked to read, he liked to think more was possible in the world. he was admitted to read Mathematics & Economics. he read American novels from the college library. he neglected so much of the course materials, he avoided tutorials and lectures, it was no surprise he found the exams so hard. it did have one benefit though, for one paper on interest rates for tutorial, he wrote as he saw the subject, not what was taught at all, and passed.
the whole problem of academic life is that ideas run out at some time, the professional academic is supposed to be full of ideas and ways of putting things, the whole thing of dissertation, papers, books. the pressure is on to formulate a new way of thinking about the subject, not merely to rehash that from other sources, plagiarism the big no no of academia. what is the young academic to do? there are only so many ways of rewording passages or adding filler to reach the minimum limit of words required!
note that there are three components to academic, creation, memorization, and calculation. GCSE seemed to be about memory, A Levels about the last, and university about the first. they are not the same thing!
the collapse, in his mind, of not only interest, but also the feat of calculation in mathematics, affected him all the summer after the First Year, he had to resit in August. if only interest had been sustained!
of the young viscount, perhaps just 17 to 19 years old, now of the age to explore and experience the continental pleasures heard of and read about in youth, all exciting and foreign, exotic and heady, it is a case that, exposed to the harshness of travel and spun round by different phrases heard elsewhere, it might seem that it was unprepared and lacking in foresight. of misadventure, was it always a trap for gilded youth?
from his household, cavalier and ready, it sets off, sure in step, lusty and hungry for adventure. whom will she or he meet? will it change life forever? lady J. do make an appearance here, lord J. verily do meet all comers. in an instance of chance, go for the sure thing surely? and two days on, a sharp difference in atmosphere, hope that all is well back home.
one of the luxuries of being abroad is that warm bed, comfy and soft, in which you can collapse without thought for deadline and timetables. the food is new, it tastes richer than at home.
all the while whilst the young viscount is people watching, it becomes a case that it too is an exhibit in town, exotic meet and cheery talk. what of your home? what of your business?
the open way is the best way. the popular way is too. actually, the problem, on return, is readjusting to home life, all seems pallid and dry. the trip of a lifetime is over.
as to what history is, is it the facts of time, a chart of conquest and discovery, a dry list of events? like religion and myth and legend, popular history is often askew with details of personality, great and small, tales of adventure and high risk, power and presence, literated with drama and foretold of jealousy and envy, spite and revenge, ambition and duress.
what we have today of ancient history, of Egypt, Greece, China and England, the mythology of Roman and Norse hue, the panoply of great figures of legend, is not to be confused with facts of things that actually transpired. imagine a king of England, long ago, how did she or he conquer the realm? with its culture magically transported through the mist over the country? of battalions of haste and fortune, giving away all the wealth of the monarchy? of Greek myth with her heroes, Theseus, Perseus, Jason, Heracles or Hercules, Odysseus, all on adventure and discovery, aided sight unseen by powerful presence. of Amun Ra, father of Egypt, and of Thor, with the magical hammer, and of China, with its heroes fighting the odds.
onto premodern history then with its communities, early education and manufacturing, manuscripts and lettering, design and thinking about mechanics. and finally modern history, people actually meet different. and working systems, the sum becomes greater than the total of the parts, synergy, rhythm, and the new and the bold.
all the while, everyone wonders how everything really works. the imagination is wild, ambition is untamed. the false is discarded, therefore the past seems thin, what went down the wrong path is covered up and hidden. the decision is made whole in a new direction.
Thursday, June 11, 2015
good vibes, in tune, in resonance with, call it what you will, once established a line of contact, like a psychic wire, formed of like least bits of matter, makes a connexion and effects communication, allowing a stream of data particles to pass from one zone to another in real space.
it varies as one formation, maintaining near integrity throughout. how does it form? a line of attack may falter at a short distance if at the other end it is different, but similarity at both ends allows a line of contact to be built.
the network grid of lines of contact may change fast, connexions are lost, sometimes slow to be rebuilt. there is, if you like, a web of psychic wiring connecting reality, ever changing, dissolving and reforming, all the time.
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
"what's been going on is, i want to do it, but i don't know how? you know. nobody's telling me anything, like how to do this, how to do that. what i need is..."
"don't say it. we've heard this a thousand times. it's not going to get any better like this, is it?"
"what do you mean it's not going to get any better? come on!"
"how do i know? you're right on the way, man, but you need to hurry up. picture this, who you're thinking of, it's a pretty picture, right? how do you fit into that picture, you know what i'm saying? you, as yourself, how does that fit?"
"what are you saying? i should get in the picture?"
"right! it's all about you, not somebody else."
what makes us think? a million volt charger in our heads? we may have a generator ourselves, we may be reliant on what others have generated, or we may be carried by the field of "culture particles" in the cloud around us, invisible and inaudible, yet which promote thought. call it the cloud, or the Nebula, or the atmosphere, the mood, or the zeitgeist.
what is rude? what is temperamental? denial of our present ego? everyone wants the truth, however, the form it hits us might be unpalatable.
if we were to carefully deconstruct thought, what is related to image, what is related to sound, what is related to emotion, and so on, we might aspire to thinking greatness! the nasty, the good, the fine, the happy! for the conscious mind is a delirious, volatile person, fast to change, quick to build.
when we have exhausted the easy free thinking, it often helps to alter the frame, to introduce an entirely new component, to attach it to the present complex, and so by dismiss something old.
posit that a mere fact, like my name is such, is rather almost an abstract construct, facts about my life, passed through the conscious mind, do not define what i am very well, perhaps. to deconstruct my name, well, what if everyone has heard my name before? we have an opposition here, what if there are a million people who have heard my name? i am not other people!