Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

First topic message reminder :

And for the insane, or other wise, we present:

Schroedinger's Cat is not Alone

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1004.4206v4

Beatriz Gato, Beatriz Gato-Rivera
(Submitted on 23 Apr 2010 (v1), last revised 31 Mar 2011 (this version, v4))
We introduce the `Complete Wave Function' and deduce that all living beings, not just Schroedinger's cat, are actually described by a superposition of `alive' and `dead' quantum states; otherwise they would never die. Therefore this proposal provides a quantum mechanical explanation to the world-wide observation that we all pass away. Next we consider the Measurement problem in the framework of M-theory. For this purpose, together with Schroedinger's cat we also place inside the box Rasputin's cat, which is unaffected by poison. We analyse the system identifying its excitations (catons and catinos) and we discuss its evolution: either to a classical fight or to a quantum entanglement. We also propose the BSVΨ scenario, which implements the Complete Wave Function as well as the Big Bang and the String Landscape in a very (super)natural way. Then we test the gravitational decoherence of the entangled system applying an experimental setting due to Galileo. We also discuss the Information Loss paradox. For this purpose we consider a massless black cat falling inside a massive black hole. After that we outline a method to compute the contribution of black cats to the dark matter of the universe. Finally, in the spirit of Schroedinger, we propose that next generation double-slit experiments should use cats as projectiles. Cat interferometry will inevitably lead to the `Many Cats' interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, allowing to shed new light on old mysteries and paradoxes. For example, according to this interpretation, conservative estimates show that decision making of a single domestic cat will create about 550 billion whole universes every day, with as many replicas of itself.

As of Tuesday, none of us had heard back from Bob about his being on the show.  It is understandable, but still too bad, for the sake of history.  

Because, yes, there is no reason to suppose that history will not be made, tomorrow, Bob or no Bob.  

So, if the MJ12 tree falls in the forest, will anyone hear it?  It's a fair bet that not more than a dozen or two will be tuned in tomorrow, but there are always the archives.  

Will Friday be the long awaited D-day?  Yes, possibly, in retrospect.  

This is Ron's show.  If there still exists something like the original putative 'MJ12', and he actually knows something about it, then, yes, this will have to count as D-day.  I'd give it a better than even chance.  

But what will it take to get from Rick's blogtalk to...... stopping the presses?  

Some reporter will have to be designated to raise the question at the WHPB.  That could take months, even years.  I could be long gone.  The blogtalk could still be the shot heard around the world, after the fact of the WHPB.  

Is it probable, then, given the above, that the pope would be MJ1?  That would be the best bet, IMHO.  

Did I mention that CK has stated that CB, rather than OP, would be the man on the spot wrt rome, stateside?  OP would be the personal liaison, nonetheless.  I was already blackballed once by CB, twenty-some years ago.  And, yes, he has surmized that I'm not 'Armando'.  Still no date.  Prior to embarkment?  

And, yes, this whole thing could also be a decoy operation, but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you factor in the MoAPS.   Does it?  

But, yes, this has been a long haul.  There is just a glimmer of light, which, optimistically, portends the end of the tunnel.  


There was supposed to be a conference call with four of us wrt the Academia site. No word yet.

I volunteered to work on the physics section, and to do a syllabus outline for the rest of the sciences, presumably based on the new gestalt.

Physics will have to take the brunt of the MoAPS. The rest of the physical and life sciences will be struggling to get reoriented in that backwash. With the BPWH, we will have stood the entire scientific enterprise on it's head, or on our heads, more acurately. Yes, 'man', with VALIS' help, is the measure of all things. Every science must be recast as normative wrt that inversion.

This is an intersubjective idealism that includes the cosmic Cs as a prime subject.



(cont.)

From: Ron
Date: November 20, 2014 at 8:41:53 PM EST
To: Paul Price
Cc: Princess Aliyah, Dan Smith
Subject: Disclosure on Paul Price Show

There will be a formal announcement tomorrow on the Paul Price Show that we have nominated Dan Smith to assume leadership of MS-13.  He will accept the position and direct all members of the organization to immediately accept his leadership. Then he will command they begin work to improve the world.  Shortly after Dan Smith transform MS-13 into the worlds largest and most effective charitable work force, he will be invited to the Vatican to discuss next steps with MJ-13.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-13

Hmmm......... Surely this was just a typo.  Or was it?


10:20-----------

This could well be a sanity test, but then I'm not noted for my sanity, now am I?  And I have been advised to stick to my protocol, come you know what.  

Ron is not taking calls, just now.  I'm not sure by what stretch the MSers might find this amusing.  Au contraire, might it not be considered an unwarranted provocation?  Might it not be considered 'disrespectful', an attitude not much tolerated in that community.  

What is a body to do?  If Ron wants to set up a meeting, and is willing to participate, then, sure.  I would have little excuse to go AWOL.  In for a dime, in for a dollar, as they say.  Apres vous, Ronaldo.  Is this going to be our next contingent of interns?    


More likely we are seeing a measured bit of walking back of the latest MJ gambit by grasping onto this MS alternative, tricksterish that it seems.  Does this likelihood change anything that I can say or not say?  Do Paul and I take this latest gambit at face value?  Do I simply report my own reactions?  Are we just stalling for time?  


On the fifth or sixth reading of the above, it could easily be interpreted as a significant put-down wrt my rising expectations.  Do I call this bluff?  Instead of heading to Penn Ave, do I head on over to Takoma Park?  Is there any other interpretation?  And what about the putative embarkment?  


Have the best and brightest decided that there is no way to avoid armageddon/ele? No point in throwing good money after bad. Any point in laying down in front of a juggernaut?




(cont.)

Yesterday was not a complete disaster.  I could, still, conceivably, qualify as D-day, despite the final MS13 monkey-wrench missive from Ron.  

However, I am leaning away from the sea-cruise.  In a post-show missive, copied to Mark P, Ron asks me encourage Mark to join us on the cruise.  It occurs to me, even just now, that all of this business of MJ/S13 is just a write-off/down scheme, as far as Ron is concered.  Should I be angry about that?  It would be within my rights.  If I have to apologize for Hitler, I can probably find it within myself to apologize for Ron, as well.  

But let's get back to the 'Rick Factor', BlogTalkRadio show..........

Earlier this week, on a museum outing to Amherst, Paul urged me to read Bill Rose's 'The Future of Existence'.  Excellent book, I wish I had known about it sooner, like before Bill died, a couple of years ago.  Paul and I could have spent the whole two hours on just that book.  

We could have easily spent two hours on any one of Bill's chapters, especially from chapter 8 - on, or the last half of the book.  

In chapter 8, Bill introduces Plato's cave.  Strange to say, I don't think I've ever mentioned the Cave in any of my writings, and I have no excuse for not having done so.  

That cave is the beginning and end of all philosophy.  Everything else is just rhetoric.  All the rest of philsophy is a footnote to the Allegory of the cave.  I knew that.  I was first told that as a freshman in college, and I understood it then, perfectly intuitively.  

Does anyone not understand the Cave?  Has anyone not paused at its entrance....... not wanted to turn around, just once?  

The Cave explains everything that has been happening in this forum for the last ten years.  It explains everying in the last >12,000 years of human history......,  with one slight caveat, that we understand that this is the best possible Cave.  And, no, Plato did not understand that.  No one did, until my buddy, Gottfried L.  

Yes, ours is, besides being the only planet of choice, a prison planet.  I do not dispute this.  My only caveat is that this is the best possible prison.  Not many get this, besides Gottfried and chicken little.  

My further point is that we can have freewill, and we can have freedom, it's just that we can't have them both at the same time.  

IOW, when we go out of the prison, we can only do so, while on our best behavior.  We get time off for good behavior.  

The other point is that God probably has less freewill than you or I.  He's not in a good place for making mistakes, now is he?  Even when he incarnates directly, not through us, he has to be really careful.  If you want freewill, try satan.  

If this is a prison planet, it stands to reason that various of our overlord's, i.e. the PtB are acting as our wardens-in-locus.  So, we have nothing to lose, but our chains.  My dear departed sister believed that Jesus was the warden-in-chief.  She was certainly not the only one operating under that impression.  And with the Pope as his Vicar.  

And so here I am, ostensibly representing both the PtB and Jesus, while seeking an audience with the Pope.  What do I expect folks to think?  

Ok, so we are the galley slaves on the spaceship Earth.  Of couse, when the galleys became warships, slaves were not very effective.  They had nothing to lose but their chains.  

Thus has our galley Master gone to some lengths to give us the illusion of freedom....... yes, this is what existentalism is all about.  We're not prisoners, we're just here by accident, freewill and all.  We are simply lost in space and time.  But did Sartre ever suggest that we turn around?  Not even Kierkegaard, actually.  His advice was patience.  Mine is to turn around, finally, and then face the eschatological music.  


1pm---------

Are we ready to face the music?  Does God want to be a party-pooper?  Do I?  Should we not wait until the historical abyss is more obvious to more people?  Sure, if that's God's call, and he has his hand firmly on the tiller, fine.  But, as I've pointed out, there are the are the gold bugs to consider.  

In investing, there is the greater-fool theory.  People keep investing long after they have lost faith, simply supposing that there must be a greater fool, waiting in line.  

I hope and pray that God does not subscribe to that theory.  

Bill Rose does not blame God, he blames us for not 'remembering' our Source, outside the cave.  I guess that Bill is not a theist.  He seems a sort of gnostic xian.  Jesus was trying to warn us against the demiurge.  Then the priests bound him to that cross.  Poor guy.  

I'm a sort of gnostic xian, but a different sort.  A Leibnizian sort.  What did Gottfried miss?  He missed the CTC, but just barely, I think.  Is that a big deal?  Well, it was part of his non-eschatology.  I'd better google that.......

I'm reading this........ http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/moore-origen.shtml ... Origen of Alexandria and apokatastasis: Some Notes on the Development of a Noble Notion.



(cont.)

Good points, Dan ... about the "warden", but what about where Jesus says he sets us free? Why would we need a warden? But, your mention of "his vicar" would indicate perhaps a context, a history of this "warden" business. I wonder what it's all about.

Skai,  

It is a good question as to how the x-event relates to the general idea of God as our warden.  

Is God our Warden?  

Some say it is the demiurge, or Satan.  That is a convenient explanation, but I'm not a dualist.  I'm a monist/monotheist and then a trinitarian.  I sometimes equate ourselves to the demiurge, we being the co-Creators, and actually responsible, teleologically, for most of that work.  Yes, we do a pretty good job of keeping ourselves down on the Farm.  

Did Jesus not set us free?  

Yes, and no.  There was going to be much suffering up until the Millennium and/or the resurrection.  Until then, our spirits would be free through faith.  I am suggesting that the 4M/K/SoT/X2-event/MoAPS will usher in the Millennial kingdom, wherein we will have unprecedented physical freedom from fear and deprivation.  


2:10----------

I spent much of yesterday afternoon looking at meliorism. This started out by wondering about Leibniz' eschatology. He followed Augustine in believing in an evangelical progression until the second coming at the end of history. There was the city of God and the city of man. The former would gradually replace the latter. Augustine was writing to defend christians from the accusation that they had caused to downfall of Rome.

This has remained the official doctrine of the Church. Early on there were the Alogi, a heretical sect in asia minor. They, like the Church were anti-enthusiasts, rejecting its manifestation in both of the Johannine scriptures. The Church, however, did not follow their elisions of the scripture.



(cont.)

Some time ago, Paul Z pointed out that Leibniz, besides being a monadist, was also a monist.  I wondered then if he and I differed in the apocatastaic eschatology.  

More recently I was reminded of the similarity between Plato's cave allegory and the holographic model.  

These points brought up the point of our enforced ignorance/exile and so our status as prisoners.  

In the process of researching these items, yesterday, I ran into Alan Segal's 'Two Powers in Heaven' and then Michael Heiser's work on the Divine Council.  Michael is also a ufologist, and I believe that I first heard of him in that connection.  

Alan's point is that there was an expectation of a visitation amongst the hebrew speaking population at the time of the x-event.  Only thus may we explain the immediate response to that event.  


11:10--------

The amazon blurb on the 2-powers book is not helpful.  The book itself is not available, even in part, online.  The review twists the plot, to say that, because of the popular expectations, the jewish authorities were well prepared to quash the nascent xian stirrings.  Well, almost.  The johannine account shows how they were bannished from the synagogue, if not from the community itself.  

I'm reading some of Margaret Barker's material that is available online.  She gives a fuller account, and contrasts the first and second temple beliefs, suggesting that the earlier beliefs were preserved and revived by the earliest followers of jesus.  

According to Margaret, the cult of Mary goes back to the queen of heaven who ruled in the first temple.  She was replaced by the Mosaic/legalist tradition, in the second temple.  Her revival is seen in the Johannine/nasorist tradition.  



(cont.)

Dear diary and back to work........

I have a thought about the cruise...  Instead of MJ12 or MS13, we could just focus on the four of us, and what we could do to save the world.  

I'm suggesting that the four of us could provide the nucleus for a new MJ12-type group, if the original edition refuses to show up.  I would be allotted 2hr/day to make the case for that.  No drinking until the end of the class.  

In the meantime, Sam has graciously invited me to give a presentation at the BGF on 12/28, and has suggested the the topic of 'What should God do to save the world?'  Notice the similarity of these two topics.  

My counter suggestion is to broaden this topic somewhat.....

What could anyone or any entity do under any circumstances to save the world?  I would also broaden the time frame to include anytime in the past, up to and including locking Adam and Eve in the garden, so to speak.  

I will take suggestions from the floor, and will present a selection of past ideas, including, of course, the BPWH/SWH.  

We can consider coercive and non-coercive strategies, including capitalism, communism, facism, feudalism, tribalism, etc.  

Of couse, there is the background question of whether the world actually needs to be saved.  Is there not a muddle on through option?  

One can think also of various alterntive historical and technological scenarios, including more progress or less.  

We should also consider the (John) Rawlsian solution....... agreeing to be dictated to by a disinterested committee operating out of an 'original position', following some version of postmodern/green utilitarianism.  

Mutually agreed upon (hypothetical?) genetic modifications would also be open to discussion, including especially our selfish and/or God gene(s).  


12:40------

But, yes, for most of us, this excersize will seem much too hypothetical. I could, quite as easily, decline Sam's generous offer of a meeting slot at the BGF.

Ron reminded me that I was supposed to have come up with five questions to pose to some equally hypothetical group. That may just have to stand as his counter-offer wrt this hypothetical cruise. And, yes, I was supposed to be helping Colton with the Academia section of KWF, which still remains unlinked.




(cont.)

Particularly well crafted, Dan.

Skai,  

I thank you.  

I do see that Colton has added several items since I last checked, just over a week ago.  These are additions mainly to sections B, C and D.

https://sites.google.com/a/kashmirworldfoundation.org/academia/best-possible-world  

I'm supposed to be working on the syllabus, which is now section A.  The problem is to outline a curriculum for a non-standard approach to science, in particular.  Such materials barely exist, even or especially at an introductory level.  Introductory biology was all about memorizing anatomical details.  There may now be more emphasis on the functional aspects of organisms.  

The physical sciences still have to start with the basic concepts of mechanics.  It is only in the higher level courses that one might get into relativity and quantum concepts that might have some bearing on the metaphysical issues that are crucial to the BPWH.  

One way around this impasse would be to take an historical approach to general science.  There would be a focus on the paradigm shifts that have occurred in the past.  But then the problem is that we would end up with the popular idea of scientific progress wherein science approaches some objective limit of a maximum or optimum understanding of nature, albeit in discrete steps rather than in just one steady progression of accumulated facts and proven hypotheses.  

We could lay out a broad case against the above model of scientific progress.  Such a curriculum would hardly pass muster with any sort of standard credentialling body.  There would appear to be an anti-scientific bias.  Where would be the spot in the technological job market for such a contrarian view of the world?  

Rather than philosophy or science per-se, Colton is hoping to pursue his broader interest in cultural studies.  This background would be useful to any and all problems of cross-cultural communication.  

Having the basis for an optimistic, intercultural worldview in times of global political and economic stress could be important for any individual, but imagine trying to explain the BPWH to an employer or to a customer.  


5pm------

The simple fact is that the BPWH does not have a research program. With a holistic approach, phenomena do not lend themselves to being analyzed into individually solvable problems. Everything has to depend on everything else.

With genetics, the typical approach is to knock out a gene and see how the behavior of the organism is degraded. But, yes, there is a holistic health industry that is gradually making inroads into the traditional health system. There is much competition for every dollar of preventative medical care. Trying to deal with the whole patient can be difficult to measure in terms of costs and benefits.



(cont.)

My working assumption is that R&D is back to square one wrt MJ12.....  There is no cruise, for me, and no meeting with CB.  Not my choice, of course.  It was taken off the table for reasons obscure.  Was any of it ever actually on the table?  We can only speculate.  If there ever was any substance to R&D, then there was, at the least, a reflection of it in the recent resurrection of MJ12.  I have to suspect that we were seeing more than just a reflection of a mirage.  The global outlook remains dire on several fronts.  If there was, c.'45, a renewed cosmic connex, due then to 'loose' nukes, we have every reason to suppose that whatever may have warranted attention then is back on the table, with seventy fewer years of slack, but still just a tiny little bit above my pay grade.  We just carry on, sports fans......


I need to get back to KWF/Academia and BPWiki, not to mention Paul Z&Co......

First to Academia......

I'm not sure how the recent R&D reset will effect the KWF connex.  It need not, not wrt Colton, at least.  


First I would like to address Colton's Ontology section...... https://sites.google.com/a/kashmirworldfoundation.org/academia/philosophy/ontology

Historically, the platonic distinction between universals and particulars has played a major role in philosophy, although that role has diminished in modern times.  In this regard, I refer you to... http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/universals-medieval/#10 ... The Separation of the viae, and the Breakdown of Scholastic Discourse in Late-Medieval Philosophy

By no small measure, the BPWH is an attempt to revive a Scholastic style discourse, perhaps w/o benefit of universals.  

The best possible universal is love.  What is its ontic status?  Surely, I'm no nominalist wrt love.  Or am I?  


noon---------

On the way back to universals, I ran into tropes.  Maybe I should be a tropist.  

How does tropism relate to OOPism?  I'll bet they could be given some alignment.  

Back to Plato..... I was about to say that Plato focused on the Good at the expense of love, but how could I forget platonic love?  

We may confuse platonic love with that depicted in Ode to a Grecian Urn.  That would not be fair.  We may suppose that eros was a shadow of its transcendantal form, and that John (ev) was picking up on that.  

Another modern confusion may be to distinguish between Plato's heaven and the mind of God.  I'm not sure that plato would have bought into this.  It was the gnostics who may have perpetrated this confusion, in their denegration of creation.  Plotinus, at least, moved beyond that dualistic gnosticism, with his chain of being.  


2:20--------

In my estimation, all is (cosmic) mind.  All perception is of, by and for that mind.   In as much as we may distinguish btw creator and creature, all creation is of, by and for the creatures, with sapience providing the preponderance thereof.  

In short, man is the measure(r).  We are, cosmically, the objectifiers, individuators and universalizers.  Love is the gluonic glue that holds it all togther.  Love is the alpha and omega of existence.  Everything else is parasitic thereupon.  

It seems that Plato, Leibniz and virtually everyone else agrees upon this.  Even or especially do the pantheists.  They only sometimes fail to grasp the functionality and eternality of creation, straying a bit too deeply into plato's cave.  

Where is the opposition?  What is there to oppose?  It would be like punching one's way out of a paper bag.  

There are nihilists and atomists, but what is their point?  

Atoms substantiate space and vice-versa.  Each is equally mysterious, from any and all pov's.  They each manifest the gluonic aether.  

The bigger mystery is what prevents the monadic collapse, the apocatastasis?  Or, what staves it off, 'til the omega?  

Or what causes the 'big-bang' at the Alpha?  Original sin?  Hmmm...... I'm just a tad sceptical about that story.  

I say that potentiality morphs to potency, pure and simple.  What can contain possibility?  The only thing that can contain a lesser possibility is a greater possibility, and we are the only measurers thereof.  





(cont.)

Hey Dan,

Wow Dan, talk about covering some mileage over into my end of the pool?

If I may offer a few tweaks (not all of them directed at yourself but rather your exterior audience).  For starters the Source does nothing but uphold for humanity opportunity and potential.  All else mankind is accountable for. While some may interpret it as being a slave on a galley, it's more like a puppy on a really long leash before he's old enough to go bird hunting.  That leash is long enough to hang himself with.  The accountability part is to learn to recognize the correct application of reason.

Dan Said: The Cave explains everything that has been happening in this forum for the last ten years.  It explains everything in the last >12,000 years of human history......

Yes and no.  Myopia is not monolithic...ah now there's the third product of the day for that term!  Synchronicity...

Now the MJ12 group's very continuation is in question.  They've faced many different parties hand in the cookie jar and learned how far down the totem pole they are in this 'cycle'.  That doesn't make survival impossible.  Only difficult.  I note the presentation of a certain "onion" seeking our understanding of information on the control mechanism of the "galactic ghoul"?  Seems everything from the glyph encrusted objects in New Mexico to the missing equipment in the Hall of Records has the group stumped?  Particularly as to the usefulness of the God gene in the equation.  I didn't figure they'd find much beneath the waterline in old Eire.

The loss of the genetic group from the last cataclysm is problematic but not surpassable.  What needs to be foremost on all minds is the very human tendency for leadership of any brand to overreact and become the very thing they are attempting crudely to prevent.  There are consequences for not trusting ones own people to rise to the occasion...i.e. 'too toxic to deal with'.  If the Source did business that way, mankind would not have had 12,000 years to rebound.

The barium applications is not the answer...is it and the associated morgellons infection a case of the cure being worse than the affliction?  To bad the mainframe in McMinnville never spit that one out.

Tell them to return the pieces of the mechanism to their appointed place.  Shall we not avoid making the same mistakes twice? When the Source called all parties to the SAME table, it had its reasons. Perhaps two heads being better than one. There were many facets to the constructions of the Source. Most of them in the process of deconstruction do to ignorance of the collective puzzle...this is how lack of transparency and collective integration of the masses comes back to bite old MJ12.

This is only constructive criticism with options or perhaps suggestions intertwined. It's not directed specifically at Dan. He's caught in the middle between a variety of behemoths. Those knowing precisely who they are.

From: Dan
Date: December 2, 2014 at 11:50:43 AM EST
To: Ronald
Subject: Re: Agenda for Sea Based Activities

Ron,

Unless there is already perceived to be a specific and immediate need for something rather like the BPWH, I don't see that my participation is called for.  

I am a one-trick pony, sorry.  

Dan


On Dec 2, 2014, at 11:18 AM, Ronald wrote:

Hi Dan,

You are responsible for the agenda for sea based intellectual activities including questions and formats. I prefer a Socratic process with well defined beginning and end points. We could accommodate Paul or another of your regulars. I do need the topics in the form of questions or answers in order to proceed with Operation [CB].

Ron

It is rather too little, rather too late, and rather too mixed up with tales of popes and MJ12.  

I am still willing to concede that if any known person knows anything about MJ12, it would be Ron.  And maybe a signal was sent, on down the line.  But, like chinese-whispers, it was garbled by the time it got to me.

Hey, if it was an important message, it can probably be resent. If not, well, que-sera.........

A member of a previous such outing has recently averred that Ron does not take me seriously.  Oh, horror!  I had figured that he would have to play anything cool.  But this is over-the-top cool.  

And so it goes........


Cy,

Allow me to respond after lunch, please.......



(cont.)

Cy,  

MJ12, such as it may still exist, has become severely cramped over the generations of its self-confinement.  Its struggle toward the surface is bound to come in fits and starts.  We all strive for patience amidst the general confusion, miscommunications and misstarts.  

Patience is one thing, overindulgence is quite another.  I'm just trying to be an internal reality check.  Coherence has to start someplace.  If it doesn't start with the BPWH, then where will it start?  

I know, Cy, that you have quite a different worldview. Your view is much more widely held than is mine. But this is not a popularity contest. This is, if it is anything coherent, about a gestalt switch, about the MoAPS. Only thus can we understand the ancient wisdom that refuses to die.




(cont.)

Back to the Cave..... the Allegory of the cave, that is......

In its postmodern setting, the Allegory becomes the metaphor of the Holographic universe.  To get a handle on this topic, just look at holographic-duality.  

I've been struggling with this topic for several years, and still am just scratching the mathematical surface of it.  Paul Z is digging deeper.  

The holographic model may also be cast into the frame of the Kantian and Bohmian dualities, i.e. the phenomenal/noumenal duality.  That is where I would like to take it.  

With this latter objective in mind, I am particularly interested in the more recent and mundane uses of this duality, in the context of condensed matter physics

But, right away, there is a conceptual problem......

There is the general requirement that the holographic duality must contain, as one of its elements, a gravitational component, since only thus may the Beckenstein bound be invoked, which concept lies at the heart of the duality.  

But it goes further than that...... Most generally, the gravitational side of the duality contains a 'black-hole', even in these decidedly non-cosmological models of the duality.  This is a strange leap of mathematical faith, which, after a day of dilligence, I have not seen addressed, other than to aver that the mathematics seems to work, so don't worry.  

That mathematical leap does nothing to aid my intuitive sensibility, which is my only compass in such abstract waters.  OTOH, one could infer that there is hereby granted a public poetic license wrt these models.  The 'black-hole' could be the philosopher's stone, for all that the mathematicians could care.  

Hey, give me an inch, and I will take a mile.  

All I have to do now is get my metaphors in a row, which, to be sure, is rather like herding cats.  But I do have to do something with that sore-thumb, BH, sitting right in the middle of the pie.  

And, then, on top of the BH pie, like so much whipped cream, we have the renormalization-group flow.  That flow generally has a source and a sink, which are the so-called UV and IR fixed points, respectively, and the flow is irreversible, although I'm not sure what that means, in this, again, very abstract context.  More license, anyone?  


Ok, so we have taken holography from cosmology to condensed matter.  What is preventing us from extending that domain into biology and neuroscience?  What do we have to lose, but our reductionistic nihilism, which is precisely nothing.  

More to the point is what do we have to gain?  Coherence??  


11am--------

I'm looking for something more specific than poetic license.  I'm looking for a physical loophole that will be amenable to, or an opening toward, metaphysical construction or extension.  

Previously, all that we had was the Cartesian 'pineal gland'.  After that came the quantum loophole in Newton's deistic, watchmaker universe.  There developed a cottage industry around the notion of the quantum-mind.  Our foot in that door was the question of whether the universe was more like a great machine or a great thought.  

With the BPWH, I stood on no one's ceremony, but Gottfried's, and barged right through the door...... slam, bam, thank you, ma'am.  But did anyone notice?  Seems not, hardly, now does it?  Even the Ronster, just last evening, asked, oh-so innocently, what is a 'moap'.  I said it's a MoAPS, and he said that he had thought the Princess was just lisping.  Do you think I could make this up?  

And now we have holographic duality on both the cosmic and microcosmic levels.  Will more people be tempted to venture through the quantum door?  To jump down the rabbit-hole?  To step into the Wardrobe?  Take the pink pill?  Turn around in the Cave to seek the Source?  Crash the gates of heaven?  I don't see the stampede, not quite yet.  But do you hear the sibilance of the long withdrawing roar, and of ignorant armies clashing by night?  What great beast slouches toward Bethlehem?  


One way to understand the license of the quantum is to understand the power of the imaginary unit, 'i', or the root of -1.  Up until Schroedinger wrote his wave equation, 'i' had just been a curious but powerful mathematical tool, but, now, especially with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, [p, x] = 'i'h, that little curiosity found its pride of place at the very heart of physics.  What hath God wrought?  

With the advent of 'i', analytic continuation became the bedrock reality of all physics.  Now, with holographic duality, we have another kind of analytic continuation.  But is that all..... just another fancy tool?  


noon--------

But is this continuation only analytic?  Might it not also have a 'synthetic' construal?  

Synthetic?  Holistic?  

What are the rules of the hologrphic 'continuation' game?  Here is one thing that I picked out of all the mathematical noise (also preening, yes, of course).......

In the context of condensed matter, the notorious 'landscape' problem of string theory, becomes a cornucopia of possibilities for the meta-materials of solid state physics.  

Well, excuse me, but, since when was biology not a meta-material?  

Where string theory gets lost in the desert of the unnavigable landscape ambiguities, biology finds its teleological mana, yes, Lamark, just follow the breadcrumbs.  

And let us not forget the hairless hole problem..... Could I make this up?  No, Johnny W did.  

On the cosmological side of holography, the black holes have no hair.  But, on our side of that coin, it's the shaggier the better, for those holistic holes.  Hey, could I make this up?  

Man may be the Measure(r), but who shaves the shaggy mathematician?  Bertrand R, or that guy from Saville, or was it on Fleet street?  

Like the poor wallflower, the mathematicians are sitting on a goldmine, and they don't even know it.  And, excuse me again, but what did Confucius say about the inverted pilot of that other persuasion?  

Srinivasa was able to catch glimpses of the Source.  We're still trying to make sense of those crumbs.  To what path do they point?  Where is the telos?  If we are not already on that path, then someone is asleep at the switch, and I don't mean us.  We are still supposed to be sleepwalking.  I mean the other gal, and not necessarily Amelia, either.  


2pm--------

I have a long-standing interest in the organicity of mathematics.  Holographic continuation might be where that rubber can finally meet the road.  

Speaking of the negative root, many folks suppose that this organicity begins with Euler's identity e^i*pi leading to z'=z^2 + C, the Mandelbrot.  The next stop on that path would be Witten's monster with E8xE8.  That is where the path becomes obsured in ambiguity.  We then pin hopes on the Fields medal and beyond.......  with Srinivasa still pointing the way.  

But how can biology get into that act?  With Jack S, it's all about the non-linearity of the quantum.  Can we point to the insufficiency of Jack's gambit?  

The fact that it does not make use of the Landscape. Or maybe it does, in his mind. Or, the organicity of math?




(cont.)

Ron, yesterday........

Dan, remember those times I called you 'Jesus'? Of course, you know that I was just kidding. Right?

Right you are, Ron. Of course, you were. I mean, do I look stupid, or what?!

Hmmm........

Oh, and besides, Ron, maybe we're not supposed to call the Pope.  Maybe we're supposed to let him call us.  

Just sayin'.....


5:30am---------

And this was was from a few days ago.......

From: Dan Smith
Date: December 2, 2014 at 11:50:43 AM EST
To: Ronald
Subject: Re: Agenda for Sea Based Activities

Ron,

Unless there is already perceived to be a specific and immediate need for something rather like the BPWH, I don't see that my participation is called for.

I am a one-trick pony, sorry.

Dan


On Dec 2, 2014, at 11:18 AM, Ronald > wrote:

Hi Dan,

You are responsible for the agenda for sea based intellectual activities including questions and formats. I prefer a Socratic process with well defined beginning and end points. We could accommodate Paul or another of your regulars. I do need the topics in the form of questions or answers in order to proceed with Operation [CB].

Ron

http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/12/sony-pictures-attackers-demand-stop-the-terrorist-film/

"We have already given our clear demand to the management team of SONY, however, they have refused to accept. It seems that you think everything will be well, if you find out the attacker, while no reacting to our demand. We are sending you our warning again. Do carry out our demand if you want to escape us. And, Stop immediately showing the movie of terrorism which can break the regional peace and cause the War! You, SONY & FBI, cannot find us. We are perfect as much. The destiny of SONY is totally up to the wise reaction & measure of SONY."

To Dan: Any sign of Pelican droppings on this topic?

Gary,

Thanks for this update, but, no, I've not heard anything else about it.

I could say that I'm relieved that rogue states and other actors are able to find non-lethal outlets for expressing anger. That is not to say the cyber war could not become lethal, however.

From: Dan
Date: December 9, 2014 at 9:21:51 AM EST
To: Ron
Cc: Princess Aliyah
Subject: Re: Good News...Roberto has approved the appointment of Armando without visit!

And who is Armando?  


On Dec 8, 2014, at 8:27 PM, Ron wrote:

(subject line.....)  

-----------------


Here's my question, sports fans........

With all this talk of holography, why can't we come up with a holographic model for 'visitation' and/or for paranormal phenomena, in general?  

The best guess we have, at present, for ufo's is that they employ 'wormholes' in the spacetime fabric.  Can we not do any better than this with 'postmodern' holography?  

We just need to write down a list of all the possible subterfuges that might enable interdimensional xport, by starting from a holographic model, rather than starting from a spacetime model.  


11:10-------------

For instance, we know that gravitons can 'tunnel' through the dimensional M-branes the way neutrinos can 'tunnel' through the Earth.  In fact, that is why gravity is such a small force on our 'brane', or so we are told by the best and the brightest.  

Might not ufo's be a special concoction of super-solitonic shape-shifting gravitons?  See, more than one can play these games, especially if we have a few PZ's whispering in our ear.  

And what would the special concoction of gravitons be, other than virtual/holographic black hole, intruding into our little branes?  

Yes, I'm also suggesting that, as would-be immaterialists, we should not automatically assume that branes and brains are worlds apart.  No, not even on a bet!  

IOW, if we can use black-hole physics to holographically model 'strange-metals', why can we not use our brains to model the world?  In fact, haven't we been doing this all along?  We are branes, and we don't know it, yet.    

From: Dan
Date: December 9, 2014 at 3:45:06 PM EST
To: Ron
Cc: Princess Aliyah
Subject: Re: Good News...Roberto has approved the appointment of Armando without visit!


And who is it who experiences this uncertainty?  


On Dec 9, 2014, at 1:13 PM, Ronald wrote:

You are Armando. Uncertainty involves the position of appointment.

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Dan wrote:

And who is Armando?

6:20--------

21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

TrueCompanion wrote:After reading John 4:23 please inform me what God is looking for?

Thanks,
Glen

(cont.)

A trip down (or through) the portal at memory lane

http://www.starpod.us/2006/04/12/the-psi-spy-where-brain-meets-brane/

Brain worlds” are the Multiverse of many worlds forming the mental landscape experienced by the gray matter that inhabits your head. On a potentially related topic, some physicists are proposing “brane worlds” as in membranes or sheets of space-time floating in a higher dimension.

What I am anticipating is a combination of both of these ideas in a new synthesis where brain meets brane.

Maybe this is why Sony was hacked?

SPOILER ALERT new plot details re: Kim Jong-un revealed at link below ...

A group which claims to have hacked Sony’s servers demanded Monday that its movie studio pull a soon-to-be-released comedy depicting a fictional CIA plot to kill North Korea’s leader, reports said.
North Korea Sunday denied involvement in the brazen cyber attack on Sony Pictures, but praised it as a “righteous deed” potentially orchestrated by supporters furious over the movie “The Interview,” due out on Christmas Day.

The following story includes details about [Kim's fate in] Sony’s film “The Interview,” which has yet to be released.

http://recode.net/2014/12/09/sony-brass-worried-over-kims-fate-in-the-interview-film-emails-show/

Gary,

Kim Jong's state of mind remains rather far above my pay grade.  

Is there a place for Kim Jong in the BPWH?  Evidently Hollywood finds entertainment value therein.  Unfortunately, however, his 25 million subjects appear to be much less amused by his antics.  


True C.,  

Sorry for the delay.  I must say that you have picked one of the more difficult of Jesus' statements.  You are correct to point to its potential significance, so I'm surprised that even within the orbit of my non-scholarship, I can recall no previous reference.  

I did ask David G, my sometimes bible scholar, for his opinion.  He was immediately caught up with the Samaritan reference, but I do not now recall even the gist of it.  The Samaritans do fall within the divide between the Israelites and the Judeans.  

David sees the Judeans, of the later rabinical persuasion, as usurpers of the Temple tradition, which went back to megalithic times, and did, in fact have a serious polytheistic/messianic strain.  Jesus came out of that aboriginal Temple/Isrealite tradition, according to David.  

If I can recall anything of my conversation with David......

But, wait, I'm now reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritan_woman_at_the_well .....


5:45-----------

Had another convo with David G........

It will be several more tries before I can even get the gist of this.  David is going to write up his side of the story.  

This is still mainly in response to TC's ref. to John 4:23.  

Who were the Samaritans?  They came out of the aboriginal land of Canaan, which was the source of much of the history of the Mideast.  

Also out of Canaan came the tribe of Dan, who were the prime seafarers, extending their reach to Greece and perhaps even Ireland.  

NB: the Minoan bronze age ended soon after Tera, at which point the Minoan sailors went freelance as pirates.  Phonecia and Canaan were the beneficiaries of the Danann pirates (scorpians?).  This was also the beginning of the iron age.  Denyen is seafarer.  

David traces his ancestry to Danann/Israel/Ireland.  

Then we have the monotheist tradition, which, still according to David, may be sourced with Egypt, Greece and Persia/Zoroaster.  

And then we have 'James the Brother of Jesus' - Robert Eiseman.

Putting all this together is no mean feat. It may be mainly about Jesus' cousins, including John the Baptist. They were miracle workers, going back to megalithic times. They would have been very sympathetic with the Samaritans. Jesus' two Samaritan stories would have been skewed by later redacters to reflect the nascent pauline view. Those encounters are treated as alien. They may not have been that.




(cont.)

2 Futures Can Explain Time's Mysterious Past

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/2-futures-can-explain-time-s-mysterious-past/

Tentative new work from Julian Barbour of the University of Oxford, Tim Koslowski of the University of New Brunswick and Flavio Mercati of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics suggests that perhaps the arrow of time doesn’t really require a fine-tuned, low-entropy initial state at all but is instead the inevitable product of the fundamental laws of physics.

Gary,

I've known of Julian Barbour for several decades.  I was introduced to his work through my Jesuit friends at Loyola/Baltimore.  He is a stalwart Machian and holds views somewhat reminiscent of Eddington.  Positivism is necessarily a form of immaterialism, though the positivists do not readily admit this.  Julian does see time as an illusion.  Events fall into place somewhat magically.  There is a cosmic ordering principle that produces the semblance of time.  

I would point to the normativity of time.  Cosmic normalcy must have a Source.  
-----------


Now, let's please get back to David Gladstone's view of the origins of prophecy.  At first blush, David is an atheist, but then a pantheist, and after that a panentheist, possibly.  

David is also into geneology.  He traces his ancestry back to England and Israel, rather separately.  He supposes that his common ancestry would be amongst the pirates that took over the Mediterranean after Tera and the fall of the Minoan civilization.  Some ended in the mountains of the Levant, others took off for the green pastures of England.  Our ancestry there may overlap, in the doubly regicidal Scropes.  

His roots would go back to Nazareth and Mount Gerizim in the Golan Heights.  It was out of Golan that Yaweh emerged right out of the indigenous and disappearing Canaanite civilzation, on the boundary of the bronze and iron ages.  There was neither invasion nor exodus.  It was something more spontaeous.  Mount Gerizim was the original temple mount.  Jerusalem came much later, after the Babylonian exiles returned to Jerusalem, the nascent capital of the usrurping southern kingdom of Judah.  

By Jesus' time, the northern kingdom of Israel had devolved into Samaria and the Samaritans.  Jesus' clan were Samaritans out of Nazareth.  They had precious little truck with the Philistines and Saducces of Judah/Jerusalem.  Jesus was not born in Bethlehem, on this view.  That was a later emendation to put him into the more rabbinical line of King David, cleaving to the oral tradition of the Talmud.  To this day, the Samaritan/Israelites eschew the Talmud, and maintain the Temple rites on Gerizim.  They, along with David G, exercise the gifts of the spirit.  The clan of John, Jesus and James belonged to that tradition.  James likely became the leader of the Essenes, and was killed by Paul's Herodian clan, thus precipitating the destruction of the 2nd Temple and the Diaspora.  Paul had managed to cut the cord.  He, almost single handedly, severed the knot that was monotheism.  The rest is history.  Our history.  


noon---------

True C,

So you see, with your reference to John 4:23, you have managed to stir our little teapot.  I hope you will join in this raucous caucus.  

I have asked David G to chime in, as well.  


We might also point to some similarities with the Princess' geneology, in a similar setting......

We speak of the Ladakh mountains. Influence came mainly out of Tibet, and secondarily from China, in recorded times, middle of the first millennium.




(cont.)

5pm------------

I'm just five minutes into....... http://www.gnosis.org/audio/Christ-Misunderstood-Redeemer.mp3

And this comes recommended by Bill L....... http://www.cristoraul.com/ENGLISH/readinghall/GalleryofHistory/SIMON-MAGUS.html



(cont.)