Hello, Cy, hello, OMF II

First topic message reminder :

Testing.......

Yes, it is working.

Congratulations to Cyrellys & Co.!

I will be continuing the BPWH blog from Compass Morainn, which was a continuation from the original OMF site on ProBoards, which is in the process of being re-archived from that site.



(cont.)

Re: Hello, Cy, hello, OMF II
by dan Today at 11:02 am

Cy,

That would be correct.

Wow that explains a few things. I wonder how anyone can miss something like that?

on a previous note about virus and bacteria, Ed K. passed this to me over on Facebook and I thought it'd interest you when we were talking about how viruses and bacteria influence physical evolution:

http://www.messagetoeagle.com/prehistcyanobacteria.php#.UKETMvt6FG4.facebook

or

http://www.messagetoeagle.com/prehistcyanobacteria.php

It has diagrams you will need to view at the site but here is the text:

Possible Building Blocks Of Ancient Genetic Systems
That Governed Ancient Earth
12 November, 2012


Share this story:
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
2
Follow us:
MessageToEagle.com - We don't know much about possible genetic material that governed the world before DNA and RNA.

What came before these life-giving molecules?

Living organisms, we know, use DNA as the carrier of genetic material and RNA, as scientists believe, was prior to the advent of DNA as the earth’s primary genetic material.

One of many fascinating questions regarding building blocks of ancient genetic systems on our planet is: What sort of genetic molecules did life rely on before RNA?




DNA helix structure


The answer may be AEG, a small molecule when linked into chains form a hypothetical backbone for Peptide Nucleic Acids, which have been hypothesized as the first genetic molecules.

Synthetic AEG has been studied by the pharmaceutical industry as a possible genesilencer to stop or slow certain genetic diseases.

The only problem with the theory is that up to now, AEG has been unknown from nature.




Comparison of RNA and DNA. Credits: National Human Genome Research Institute


A team of scientists from the USA and Sweden announced that they have discovered AEG within cyanobacteria which are believed to be some of the most primitive organisms on earth. Cyanobacteria sometimes appear as mats or scums on the surface of reservoirs and lakes during hot summer months.

Their tolerance for extreme habitats is remarkable, ranging from the hot springs of Yellowstone to the tundra of the Arctic.




Artist's impression the Earth's early atmosphere and oceans Credits: Lunar and Planetary Institute:


“Our discovery of AEG in cyanobacteria was unexpected,” explains Dr. Paul Alan Cox, coauthor on the paper that just appeared in the journal PLOS ONE.
The American team, is based at the Institute for Ethnomedicine in Jackson Hole, and serve as adjunct faculty at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah.





“While we were writing our manuscript,” Cox says, “we learned that our colleagues at the Stockholm University Department of Analytical Chemistry had made a similar discovery, so we asked them to join us on the paper.”

To determine how widespread AEG production is among cyanobacteria, the scientists analyzed pristine cyanobacterial cultures from the Pasteur Culture Collection of Paris, France.

They also collected samples of cyanobacteria from Guam, Japan, Qatar, as well as in the Gobi desert of Mongolia, the latter sample being collected by famed Wyoming naturalist Derek Craighead. All were found to produce AEG.




Cyanobacteria evolved at least 2.4 billion years ago, but their morphology resembles the much more ancient structures found in the 3.5-billion-year-old Apex Chert. Credit: NASA


Professor Leopold Ilag and his student Liying Jiang at Stockholm University’s Department of Analytical Chemistry analyzed the same samples and came up with identical results: cyanobacteria produce AEG.

While the analysis is certain, its significance for studies of the earliest forms of life on earth remains unclear. Does the production of AEG by cyanobacteria represent an echo of the earliest life on earth?

“We just don’t have enough data yet to draw that sort of conclusion,” reports Dr. Cox.

“However the pharmaceutical industry has been exploring synthetic AEG polymers for potential use in gene silencing, so I suspect we have much more to learn.”

MessageToEagle.com

Jake Reason wrote:We interrupt this blogging with an important update....

Israel reports 'direct hit' on target in Syria, stoking fear of widening conflict

TEL HAZEKA, Golan Heights
published Nov. 12, 2012

Seems some people are not reverently concerned with Remembrance Day.

WWIII tripwire? NATO to defend Turkey, British troops may deploy to Syrian border, Israel fires on Syrian positions http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/11/12/wwiii-tripwire-nato-to-defend-turkey-british-troops-may-deploy-to-syrian-border-israel-fires-on-syrian-positions/

Cyrellys wrote:

Jake Reason wrote:We interrupt this blogging with an important update....

Israel reports 'direct hit' on target in Syria, stoking fear of widening conflict

TEL HAZEKA, Golan Heights
published Nov. 12, 2012

Seems some people are not reverently concerned with Remembrance Day.

WWIII tripwire? NATO to defend Turkey, British troops may deploy to Syrian border, Israel fires on Syrian positions http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/11/12/wwiii-tripwire-nato-to-defend-turkey-british-troops-may-deploy-to-syrian-border-israel-fires-on-syrian-positions/

Speaking of Synchronicity (a seemingly minor topic here) I was speaking just momentarily ago with Carolyn Rose Goyda over at Facebook about the massive explosion in Indianapolis and I had asked her what the cause of the explosion was said to be as i've seen many articles now about the event but no cause mentioned which is really odd as far as news alerts go....well guess what the next email was after she told me in my inbox? (keep in mind here this post by Jake and my convo with Dan about depopulation: http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/11/12/researchers-find-undersea-gas-leaks-off-israels-coast/

You wanted some insight into my cosmology Dan, well this is how my world works on a daily basis...synchronicity. Yeah I was very surprised to hear the muslim philosophy described above had no allowance or any equivalent?

Cy

Cy,

http://www.messagetoeagle.com/prehistcyanobacteria.php#.UKFDWKN5mSM

Yes, it may shed some light on the nature of atoms and molecules. We understand that viruses are opportunistic, but when does opportunism become synchronism? That is what the medieval Islamic philosophers were trying to ascertain. Aristotle had something to say about this.


2:20----------

Gas leaks............? Extinction protocol, 2012........

IMHO, Atlantis is an essential part of the A/O. It is both in our future, and in our past. The main goal of the BPWH is to optimize the connection of these two dots....... Alpha and Omega.


Back to Islam/Kalam........

For example, it was argued that if a body were continuous, then it would be divisible infinitely, in which case the body would have an actually infinite number of parts that all adhere together to form the body and that correspond with the infinite number of divisions. The existence of an actual infinite is absurd, however, and so the division of the body must terminate at a finite number of indivisible parts or atoms. It does no good to say that the body has only a potentially infinite number of parts corresponding to the divisions rather than an actually infinite number; for it was argued that if something is truly potential, then some agent, such as God, must have the power to bring about or actualize that potentiality.......


1.2 Space and Time

In addition to God, atoms and accidents, certain Muslim theologians also posited (empty) space. Averroes claimed that they did so in order for there to be a place in which God temporally creates the atoms and accidents, although such a claim is not clearly stated by the theologians themselves. Concerning space two questions were debated among the atomists: one, “Is space discrete (like the atoms that occupy it) or continuous?” and, two, “Is there any unoccupied space, or more exactly, could there be interstitial void spaces between atoms or is the cosmos a plenum?”

How many angels on the head of a pin? No. There would turn out to be much bigger stakes here.

As for instance, here.......

The philosopher Avicenna (980–1037), who was writing a little more than a generation later, commented on this view and noted that the moment-accident posited by certain theologians is what temporally locates an atom and that time is simply a collection of such accidents. The final theory of time, which was by far the most popular among the theologians, made the moment simply some conventionally specified event, such as someone's entering a house, and as such it has no special ontological status, whereas ‘time’ is just another name for the motion of the heavens. It should be noted, however, that if the motion in question had an atomic structure, then ipso facto time would be atomic, and indeed many of those who held this conception of time endorsed atomic motion. Although it not clear whether Muslim theologians explicitly espoused a theory of atomic time, as we shall see in the next section, some of them adopted a theory of occasionalism, which at least implicitly endorses such a view.

3:10-----------

From the NYT.......

But in an appearance on the “Morning Joe” show on MSNBC, Mr. King, a Republican, also said of the initial inquiry into the matter, “I don’t know how this rises to the level of an F.B.I. investigation.”

Ron was quite explicit in saying that there was something else, not being reported. Was the FBI simply being incompetently nosy, or were they being used for an elaborate cover?



Islam..... Stanford.edu.....

Associated with issues concerning motion and change was that of causality, namely, “What or who is the agent that brings about change?” Many of the earlier theologians subscribed to a theory of engenderment (tawallud), which preserved a degree of causal efficacy for humans, whereas most later theologians adopted an occasionalist worldview, which reserved all agency for God and God alone.

On the other hand, if the possibility is actualized, then the creature must be performing the correlative action, and will always be doing so when it possesses the actualized possibility, but of course created things sometimes act and sometimes do not. Therefore the possibility for a creature to perform any given action must be created for it at any time it acts, and it is God who is constantly creating the possibility to act, and so in effect the correlative action, at every moment something acts. In short, all agency must belong to God and God alone.

It may depend on how we define God. Are humans, in particular, an essential part of God/Creation? But, in the BPW, is there anything that is not essential?

Once again, I suspect this may have something to do with weak measurements (wiki)......

In quantum mechanics (and computation), weak measurements are a type of quantum measurement, where the measured system is very weakly coupled to the measuring device. After the measurement the measuring device pointer is shifted by what is called the "weak value", so that a pointer initially pointing at zero before the measurement would point at the weak value after the measurement. The system is not disturbed by the measurement. Although this may seem to contradict some basic aspects of quantum theory, the formalism lies within the boundaries of the theory and does not contradict any fundamental concept, in particular not Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

.... In 2011, weak measurements of many photons prepared in the same pure state, followed by strong measurements of a complementary variable, were used to reconstruct the state in which the photons were prepared.

Is this angels on a pin, or what?


4:30------------

1.4 An-Nazzam and Leaps

Again as a general rule most of the speculative theologians adopted an atomistic framework for explaining natural phenomena; however, such a position was not without its critics even within the kalam tradition itself, and the most notorious of these critics was Ibrahim an-Nazzam (d. ca. 840). An-Nazzam denied the atom-accident ontology of most theologians and instead maintained that with the one exception of the accident of motion everything else in our world was a body. Moreover, bodies, as well as space, did not have an atomic structure, but a continuous one according to an-Nazzam. Affirming continuous space and motion left an-Nazzam vulnerable to Zeno-style paradoxes, and indeed the atomist Abu Hudhayl openly confronted him with the ant-sandal paradox sketched above. An-Nazzam's solution was to maintain that a moving object, such as an ant, could cross a continuous space with its infinite number of halfway points by means of a leap (tafra). The general idea was that a moving body could cover a continuous space by making a finite number of leaps and that during each leap the moving body is not in the intervening spaces. In other words, a moving body leaps from some first place to a third place on a continuous magnitude without having passed through any second place between the two.

...... In other words, some atoms that at the beginning of the motion had been next to other atoms would have moved away from each other as the ones nearer the rim kept moving in order to cover the greater distance and the ones nearer the hub rested in order to cover only their respective distance, and so by the atom's moving away from each other, the millstone as a whole would fragment and break up. Yet, argued an-Nazzam, it is directly observable that the stone does not fragment, and thus even the atomists must be committed to leaps.

It is refreshing to be able to get back to basics.

Now on to Falsafa: Neoplatonized Aristotelianism in the Islamic World......

The most common mathematical criticism against atomism was that if atomism were correct, then one could not even approximate the Pythagorean theorem, and yet the Pythagorean theorem is the best attested theorem in mathematics (e.g., Avicenna 1983, III.4, 190).

And then this........

Consequently, there must be something, x, in virtue of which B is in contact with A and something, y, in virtue of which B is in contact with C, and x and y must be separate from each other, otherwise A and C would not be separate from each other. In that case, however, B can be conceptually divided into x and y, and yet B was assumed to be a conceptually indivisible, and so there is a contradiction. In short, the conceptually indivisible parts of the atomists are inadequate to explain the existence of the physical bodies that we observe around us.

And, thusly, do the Islamic philosophers anticipate Mach's 'paradox', by about 1,000 years.....

Virtually all Arabic-speaking philosophers adopted Aristotle's account of place as the limit of a containing body, and so the challenge was to explain whether the universe as a whole has a place and in what sense it can be said to move. There were two approaches to this issue: one was to deny that the universe had a place and then explain in what sense it could be said to move, while the other was to assert that the universe has a place and then show how its having a place is consistent with Aristotle's definition of place.

(cont.)

Good Morning Dan,

in regards to place as you described above have you ever looked at one austrian Dr. Ronald Richter's work in Argentina? Post WWII. ?

quote: Dr. Richter has, on the basis of his experiments, projected conceptions that will only occur decades later, namely the idea that space-time has a lattice-like or cellular structure, which, when distorted, becomes the source of physical forces, energy, and action, and that the means to do this lies through shock waves in a turbulent plasma, i.e. via rotation.

Ron was quite explicit in saying that there was something else, not being reported. Was the FBI simply being incompetently nosy, or were they being used for an elaborate cover?

So the head honcho of the most nefarious gov't agency in the world gallantly steps down in deep remorse after making a "big mistake" from a job he's dreamed about and worked to get his entire life all for the sake of winning back his long-suffering wife he's been married to for almost 40 yrs... [sniff] It's like something out of a Hallmark movie! Thanks to real-life stories like this, my faith in humanity has been restored!

Cy,

I have read the following accounts of Richter's work........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Richter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huemul_Project

In regards to his lattice theory of cold-fusion, I see the following article.......

http://gizadeathstar.com/2012/06/rossis-e-cat-cold-fusion-equipment-surpasses-900-hours-of-continuous-operation/

If we wish to make a case for the Establishment's neglect of fringe research, I would begin with cold-fusion. The jury is still out, in this endeavor. It would be an interesting study in the politics of science.



Hi, 99,

I do detect more than a bit of sarcasm in your post. Gary B. has also taken an interest in this case. I agree that there does seem to me more at stake here, than a couple of jilted lovers. I don't think it's likely to be just a case of espionage, either, it all being rather too much out in the open. If it is a cover for something else, it is an elaborate one, one that seems unlikely to be penetrated by outsiders. Does it indicate possible maneuvering wrt Disclosure? That is still a big stretch.
-------------



I find it interesting that the ontological issues raised by the Medieval thinkers keep coming back, albeit in new guises and contexts. Similar conundrums have reemerged in general relativity, quantum theory and biology. The historical tensions between Plato and Aristotle, and between atomism and continuity, continue to play out, in modern science.

The underlying problem, IMHO, is the tension between mind and matter, which, surprisingly, was not actually emphasized or even specified until Descartes.



(cont.)

@ 99, the problem with P is his testimony which was due this week on the Bengazi thing...he's not the only uniformed officer in hot water over Obama's choices in that matter. They managed to stave it off till after the election. Now shtf. Shrug. There's been quite a few heads rolled over the Bengazi business. Not just because of the Ambassadors death, but rather because the gun running involved makes Fast and Furious look like a beta test and would blow open the whole middle east effort exposing it for what it is thus shutting the elites down.

@ Dan, I've had it suggested to me that there is a fundamental flaw in our current mathematics upon which our advanced sciences are based and that the flaw is coloring our difficulties with advanced concepts about how things work. So it doesn't surprise me that we keep going back to the drawing board which was in Medieval Philosophy for the Greek intellectuals and their ideas which were carried forward into the Medieval age where they were further developed with exploration and experimentation is where our mathematics, modern philosophic methods, and principle based branches of governance, reason, and religion stem from.

The tension between mind and matter you mention reminds me of the phrase I mentioned some days back about the tension between "yes" and "no". Correlations that lead to small hopefully beneficial adjustments.

dan wrote:
Hi, 99,

..... Gary B. has also taken an interest in this case. I agree that there does seem to me more at stake here, than a couple of jilted lovers. I don't think it's likely to be just a case of espionage, either, it all being rather too much out in the open. If it is a cover for something else, it is an elaborate one, one that seems unlikely to be penetrated by outsiders.

Fulford is mouthing off again.....

Hillary Clinton is next? A new Admin?

And are any of these slated for the chopping block? .... Timothy Geithner, Eric Holder, Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette, US Army General Carter Ham, Brigadier General Jeffery A. Sinclair, and US Navy Commander Joseph E. Darlak?

Sources, Crystal balls and Tea leaves....with a sprinkling of Prozac


Que Sera Sera, the games of mice and men

Cy,

I'm not quite sure we're ready for the revolution. It would help if we knew what we were fighting for........ freedom from what, for what? Freedom to transcend........ from what, to what?

We need a miracle, according to most honest observers. Technological? Spiritual? A paradigm shift? Small beneficial adjustments? Will we muddle through, after all?

Cancer vs Chrysalis........? These are are two stark paradigms. Where do we fit?

Flaw in the mathematics......? We need to recover the Medieval intuition of wholeness, of connectedness. It is coming, in small doses. After this, the deluge......



Jake,

I guess we'd like to know who is calling the shots. Who is in the running for 2016? Is Netanyahu now on the skids? What was the Lebanese connection?



Mathematics is in the the middle of our thinking, about mind and matter. It has been pointed out that even though the quantum may not be the pineal gland between mind and matter, it does seem to function as the bridge between math and matter that has been the basis of Pythagoreanism and modern pantheism. Panpsychism comes to mind, along with the panpsychic catastrophe.

Mathematical and musical genius has a special hold on the human mind. Is this not quantum mediated, also? The autism spectrum provides insights into this mediation, but we have yet to make any sense of it.

How does the quantum bridge work? I have never seen this detailed. The resulting continuity of the wave-functions, does provide a purchase for the all-important symmetries that provide the basis of atomic and chemical physics. Trying to find the proper bridge for gravity has been the boon and bane of much of the recent theorizing about the alleged Multiverse.

This has to do with Noether's theorem....... Conservation laws, and the 'spontaneous' breaking thereof, lead to the forces that appear in the Lagrangian propagators of the various particles. There, does that help?

I had to look it up....... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon#The_photon_as_a_gauge_boson . It seems that the photon, and, so, electromagnetism, is the result of the quantum symmetry inherent in the requirement that the quantum wave function amplitudes require the use of imaginary numbers. These imaginary numbers drop out, when calculating probabilities from the amplitudes. So they are a hidden or unobservable symmetry. All that we can observe are the effects of the spontaneous breaking of this (imaginary, root(-1)) phase symmetry, which is electromagnetism.

It is the little insights like this that cause many physicists to question our naive sense of materialism. Taken together, they tend to push more than a few of us over the edge of physics, into metaphysics. But no one listens, because the rest of us have grown too comfortable, in our slumber of materialism. They don't stop to smell the flowers. They don't know there are any flowers. Most physicists shrug, and move on......

Imagine that......... Some mathematician once wondered about the conundrum of the square root of -1. It is both +/-1. Or, as Cy pointed out, it is both yes and no, true and false. Or, as Heisenberg pointed out, both particle and wave. This conundrum, or stone that was rejected, becomes the cornerstone of our reality. Someone is playing with our minds, and it turns out to be more than just mathematicians. Is God a mathematician? Is he autistic, or is he also merciful?

Does this mean that history will be completed within 200 years? Can the paradox of our eternal temporality be read into the tea leaf that is (-1)^(1/2)? Is that root also the root of the flower in the crannied wall? I remember when someone became almost incensed when I first referred to Tennyson's poem. Can we hug a flower without killing it? Biologists seem to have a similar problem wrt life. Vitalism hangs in the balance. When will there be the vitalist catastrophe?



2:15----------

Let us suppose that life can exist only in a regime of weak measurements. This is another statement of vitalism.

But I have also been supposing that weak measurements tend to keep the 'bandwidth' of reality within a human scale, given our ~10^10th 'redundancy' of the cosmic soul. A <~10^8th redundancy leads us into the dreamtime regimes in the vicinity of the A/O.

To what extent may technology increase or overload the necessary or apparent bandwidth? How might that apparent overload be rationalized? Can fractals do the trick? To what extinct do we have a memory stick or xerox problem? Might this not overload the cosmic memory? What am I actually perceiving, when watching a movie on a film or disc? How can we make sense of direct perception in these artificial circumstances? Can the deterioration of artifacts be subsumed under the rubric of organic cycles? How do weak measurements participate?

Can this, in any way, be related to the paleontology problem of the NEH?

When I see a tree, what is it that I'm directly perceiving? Some sort of collective memory? How do we sort out all the diverging memories? How does any given object take on its individual aspect within that collectivity? From whence come personhood and objecthood?

Each of our trajectories is like a possible history, in the Feyman picture. A&O are the endpoints of our quasi-circular history. Which is more real, the individual or the collective perceptual memory? Where does the bandwidth bottleneck apply? Is personhood more real than objecthood?

With the advent of 'cloud' computing, we may end up with only one copy of all content. How would this differ from the akashic record? How does the BPW differ from the Mandelbrot? Aren't you and I just little 'brots'?

How does nature manage to improve upon fractals? How is the time dimension incorporated? Cause and effect? Blowing stuff up, in virtual reality. A lazy-person's special effects? Watching the grass grow, then mowing it. There is never a blade out of place. But what is place vs position? Ask a medieval philosopher?



4:30---------

Where do all the quantums go, when we're not watching? But we're never not. We're always weakly watching. Weekly watching? If a tree falls in the woods, and realizes that no one was watching, does it get back up, and try again? Hey, don't laugh, this what keeps us immaterialists awake at night. Which is the tougher job? Being a tree, or being an immaterialist?

What counts as God watching? God never sees anything, until you decide to cheat at solitaire.

What if trees only fell when being watched? Do watched pots boil? There is a quantum proof that they don't. Google it. But weakly watched pots, can. Trust me, I've seen it!

How can a weak watcher become a strong watcher? Get crucified? It might help.

The rapture is an NDE. NDE's can be strong, like the anthropic principle. Rapture is like boiling....... a lot of weak facts become a strong one.

How do they keep from getting too weak? You need to have an augmented Alpha. That's why we have the Ouroboros. What if I step on a crack in the sidewalk? Will my mother's back be broken? Will a butterfly cause a hurricane? Is our fate written in the stars? There is truth in all of those. Paranoia reigns? Or can we have faith? Or must we? Mind over matter? Faith over fear? In God we trust, all others........

Space is a vacuum. The pleroma abhors a vacuum. Nothing cannot exist because potentiality reigns. Ask a physicist. Space and time are only relatively real, not absolutely.

Does potency require a vacuum, or just a primordial soup? From whence came the soup, if not from potency? From whence came potency? Anyone for stone soup? That was it. From whence came the stone. It was the building-block that was rejected. It was kited, like a hope check. You and I are still getting the dividends.



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

Is Creation a free lunch, or a free feast? How big should the banquet table be? How big is love? How big is the tent?

What is the difference between an NDE/life-review and a precognitive lucid dream? Should there be a difference, in the long run? When will the dreamtime start? When did it end?

Can math fill the vacuum? Is math the shortest distance between two weak observations? Is this what Leibniz' maximal action principle is about? That is what the Lagrangian is about.

What is the maximal action, if not the BPW? But how can there logically be a BPW? Whatever you can do, I can do better. But where does that buck stop, if not in eternity? Does eternity not exist? Is it only a perpetual potential? What is love, if not the actualizing of potency? Must it be unrequited? Can it be? For how long can we operate on the fumes of love? Are we human, or are we superhuman?


How did we get here? Without a miracle? How will we get out of here, without a miracle?

Which miracle came first? Can there be an egg without a chicken? Can the circle be unbroken? Can it be broken? Who will break it? Death? Where would life be without death? Death, where is thy sting?



6:40-----------

Every modern existentialist supposes that we are here by accident....... that life is an absurdity in a meaningless universe...... that we are lost in an infinite space and time. I cannot prove otherwise. But is it plausible? Is it implausible that we are not so lost? Prove that it is.

So what should we believe? That the glass is half full, or half empty?


6:38------- 8'.......

Paula's 'email' account had been secured using al-Queda level protocols. The FBI would be unable to find out who was accessing the info. This had nothing to do with Jill's 30K pages of junk. The issue with the announcement of the silly investigation was that it preempted the criminal investigation. Are you happy, now, Gary? Does this relate to the driver's ID? It was brought up.


But should we truly suppose that the guys and gals at McLean failed to notice that one of their boss's many girl friends, and her sister, were millions in arrears? Well, he did try to keep a low profile, after the fact. But, if I were accessing that account, I might recollect...... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mincemeat . But, hey, I'm paranoid.



(cont.)

I am persuaded it is all about avoiding World War III. Politicking to quell the machinations of those who want to "bring it on".

How could any Black President (especially the first) want history to remember him as the one who royally f'd it up. A Nobel Peace Award recipient, no less. Wouldn't they shoot their own for a sell-out like that? Chicago boys know better.

Stevens' was/is a potential Ferdinand. We've been there done that.

Second terms are a charm, aren't they. No more worries about being re-elected. The pinnacle is the pinnacle, there is no higher prize in Politics after that. This is the only time a President can cut some of the puppet strings previously encumbering him.

And OMG, the stakes are so very high. Have they ever been higher?

My soul travails. Oh, that we may have just five more years. I pray the Trumpet does not sound 'til 2017, if G-d may will.

.... Que Sera Sera

Jake,

Yes, this post election moment does provide an excuse for all of us to take stock.....

Politicking to avoid Armageddon........? Yes, this is the Gorilla that continues to wait in the wings, and, yes, it does seem to only become more restless, more impatient with our dithering, our business as usual.

Sam and I just spent four hours recapitulating our respective concerns....... agreeing thay we have gotten ourselves into a situation that will require a 'miracle' to save us. This miracle might be technological and/or spiritual.

I recapped my situation with Ron....... It remains at a standstill, while even, or only, threatening to regress. Nonetheless, it still provides a possible vehicle for a minimalist version of divine intervention. God would only have to lift a finger, to start a ball rolling. The silence is deafening, for those of us on the front lines. We are one obvious canary in the coal mine, looking for a breath of oxygen, even while holding our breath.


Have either Sam or I left any stones unturned, in our quest to have the Titanic turn on a dime, before striking the Iceberg? We know many of the players, in our respective fields. We have our ears to the rails. There is nothing appearing, on our fairly broad horizon. And the countdown continues.


6pm----------

So, here I am, doing the only thing I know how to do....... just the one-trick pony.

Everything stays the same, except for the minute-hand, which keeps moving closer..... to something. There may be a conceptual breakthrough, wrt immaterialism, that remains just beyond my limited grasp. The bandwidth/memory problem is still the main obstacle. This is also the appearance of high-resolution, with a low-resolution storage ability. Or, IOW, how to account for the scientific appearances, without resorting to atoms. How do we 'save' the scientific appearances, without accepting all of that ontological baggage?

I suppose that we can hope for a more holistic reinterpretation of mathematics. This reinterpretation will leave the door open to a more transcendental interpretation of physics than is presently available. An organic mathematics will provide a bridge from physics to metaphysics, or, perhaps from deism to theism.


Sam was hopeful that the BPWH could be watered down. That there could be stepping stones between materialism and immaterialism, such as a reversion to dualism. That there would be some way to render the MoAPS more conceptually amenable. I was unable to offer that hope. It will be a quantum leap, no matter how we attempt to soft-peddle it.

If there were an easy way to save the world, it would have already been done. Jesus showed us the way to individual salvation..... being born again, if you will. But the global solution was left to be undertaken only in an eschatological context. There's the rub.




(cont.)

What seems to be the bottom line of materialism, is the alleged objectivity of matter. The materialists, however, have no direct proof of that claim, but, yes, there is vast, even overwhelming, body of evidence that does seem to put that claim beyond any reasonable doubt. Is it any surprise, then, that I may currently be the leading exponent of immaterialism? Surely it is a fool's errand.

I do not dispute any one of the myriad facts presented by the materialists, I only dispute their implication of the implausibility of any other PoV, and I'm one of the least of the critics of their supposed hegemony wrt truth.

In my own continuing struggle to reach a rationale for, or a reflective equilibrium wrt, immaterialism, I tend to focus on the larger, conceptual issues that seem to seriously undermine the supposed fortress of scientific materialism. For instance, the very heart of materialism is their claim of objectivity, and, yet, where is the objectivity in 'objective'? Can any object be posited, other than by a subject? And where can a line be drawn between the two? I'm certainly not the first to point out this problem. Has it made a dent in the juggernaut? Hardly, it would seem.

The other main challenge to materialism is to draw an objective line between waking and dreaming. These two are the perennial favorites of us skeptics. Need the scientists pay us any heed? Of course, not! They remain free and unperturbed, in getting on with their scientific endeavors. Bless their perseverence!

IMHO, only in an eschatological context might there be any practical reason to make this challenge. That we might be in such a situation, is a major component of the BPWH.

And just, here, is the final rub........ That we might be in an eschatological situation can fully be appreciated only from an immaterialist perspective. So, yes, the BPWH is stuck in its own little conceptual hole. It can be of any value only in the extreme circumstance that it, alone, can take seriously. This is definitely a no-win situation.


9:30---------

Allow me, please, to revisit the 'bandwidth' problem........ How much information is there in the world, and where is that information stored, if not in the atoms? I am supposing that the world may be likened to a virtual reality, wherein the atoms are merely abstract entities, which raises the problem of finding an alternate substrate for all that information. Where is God's memory bank, where is his graphical rendering device? Clearly the demand vastly exceeds the capacity of our tiny little brains.

But it has occurred to me that this problem may not be entirely unrelated to those mentioned above. Wherein, for instance, resides the objectivity of information? And what exactly is its measure?

Information is actually a novel notion within physics, and, there, only within cosmology. The question arose in connection with the physics of black-holes. What happens to all the stuff that seemingly disappears in the hole? But why worry? Nobody did, until Stephen Hawking decided to take a look inside that Pandora's box. More than a few wish that he hadn't.

What we start with is this....... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox . And what we end up with is...... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle , to the effect that, yes, indeed, it does seem that we may inhabit something like a holograph. This principle speaks to the maximum amount of information that may be contained within any given volume of space, which happens to be that quantity that could be contained in the surface fluctuations of a black-hole contained in that volume. But this limiting correlation between surface and volume information holds for arbitrary configurations of matter. Does this lend any insight into our bandwidth problem? Perhaps.........

How much information is contained in any mundane portion of our reality? One simplistic answer would be the digital content of an 'adequate' simulation of that piece of the world. A more technical answer would speak to the information content of the quantum states of the contained particles. Would this be TMI? Well, now, at least, we have a precise definition of TMI..... it is that quantity of data that would cause us to collapse into a black-hole. Yes, that is what they call a data overload! Talk about an eschaton.......




(cont.)

If there were an easy way to save the world, it would have already been done. Jesus showed us the way to individual salvation..... being born again, if you will. But the global solution was left to be undertaken only in an scatological context. There's the rub.

We need to attempt to interpret Christian Eschatology through the lens of pre-christian mythology that existed in all cultures and I appreciate that the
BPWH has incorporated those elements as being an intrinsic part of that paradigm so there's no need for me to extrapolate on
any of that.
I agree with you that there is no easy way to save the world because certainly, the only way to do that would involve the eradication of all modern technology
and that's a near impossible thing too do because the national hubris of every developed nation out there in the world rests on its technological
developments, which in turn has a profound effect on the mentality and culture of the those who live in those societies. The more technologically advanced
a nation is, the greater its hubris resulting in an out of control hunger that can only be relinquished momentarily by gobbling up
those nations it seeks that have something they can use to gain more power and control over the world.

But what they failed to see was that one of the
unwritten laws of nature is that "Pride, comes before the fall" and that's where we are now.

It would be too much to ask of humanity to give up their technology and to instead go back to a time when man coexisted with nature and respected
the laws of nature in order to survive in harmony with it... and back in those days, they knew the rules because they were articulated in their mythology
and traditions
that were orally passed on from one generation to the next.
You break the rules, you suffer the consequences of a divine authority that not only rules the roost but created those rules for men to heed by to be able
to live in harmony with HER. Back in those days, there was an all encompassing "knowing" that our planetary consciousness was another face of G-d. That the
spark of G-d is in everything. That G-d is not just 'out there' but is 'in us' and in all of HER creation. That nature runs in cycles and that there are
circles within circles and one of those circles is the cycle of life we are currently living in on our planet where history tells us that
everything it will someday be demolished where a new cycle then begins. This Reminds me of Ezekiel and the wheel... the wheels within wheels churning away
that may have something to do with the Akashic Records. So in this sense, everything continues and nothing ends because there are many mansions
within each cycle and here things get really complicated that go way beyond human comprehension...

But at the end of the day, we have to ask, what causes the end of each planetary cycle only for it to begin anew again as a new cycle? And will ours be
the first one where man is the main contributor to the end of that cycle through its own self-destructive tendencies? Because man is deeply flawed, both
intellectually and spiritually, it would seem that the cycle which we are now living in will end with a press of the button before our planet is rendered
unlivable due to our destruction of our planets environment. But the bottom line is that modern technology plays a major role in both "ends".. so if
we eradicate that, we may be able to save not only our planet and every living thing on it but our very souls too.

Dan,
As an immaterialist, why not abandon particle theories all together? I trust you'll find that once relinquished, resolving your problems will come easier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory

Hi, 99.......

I don't think you want to claim, nor are you claiming, that technology is an unalloyed evil.

Can it lead to our destruction? There is no doubt that it can, or that it will, if left unchecked or unmitigated. The question before us, then, is how might our technology be mitigated? You suggest that the only sure way to mitigate it is to eradicate it! And, yes, that is the only sure way.

I believe, however, that there is a better possibility........ And hold that thought, a minute.......



Jake,

Atoms.......? Can't live with them, can't live without them...... Yes, it is passing strange, that I should spend so much time worrying about those little buggers, when I don't even believe that they exist!

String theory and M-theory........? Yes, both strings and membranes do figure into the Information paradox that I am attempting to address, or exploit(!), as a means to extricate ourselves from the tyranny of atoms. I just want to ensure that we are not jumping from the frying pan, into the fire! Now, hold that thought......



Back to 99, and the evils of technology.........

Ok, can we have our technology and our Spirit, too? In the BPW, yes, we can have our cake, and eat it, too! Is this magic? Sure it is.

The real problem, 99, is that we don't appreciate how lucky we are. In fact, our 'luck' is so great that it surpasses luck. It is a miracle that you and I exist. Should we suppose otherwise?

The point of the BPWH is just that since our merely being here is such an incredible miracle, we are all just being dogs in the Manger, when we doubt that there is a plan to extricate us from our own little peccadilloes. Saving the world is child's play, compared to creating the world. No? Can anyone seriously contest this?

If somebody went to all the trouble to put this thing together, do you seriously suggest that they are going to sit by, while we tear it down, in our own little temper tantrum? That just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Now, yes, I do kind of understand, 99, that you are not a complete creationist. But I do have a difficult time make any sense of the alternative PoV. IMHO, no one has made any sense of the alternative. If they have, they have done a good job of keeping it secret.

On the one hand there are the scientific materialists, and, OTOH, there are the pantheists, bless both of their hearts! I can make some sense out of SM, but, between the two of them, there is a kind of cosmic shell-game that can be quite frustrating, when one is a seeker of truth, such as I sometimes pretend to be.


Fortunately, 99, there is a scream-stopper, in all this mystagoguery....... Do you have a soul?

If so, from whence did it come? Is there not a Source? Are you and I not, quite plausibly, created in the image of that Source.

Now, don't get me wrong, 99, and trust my belief that the Buddha was one of the greatest avatars, but, nonetheless, he had a blind spot, when it came to the human soul. IOW, one of the greatest teachers in history was simply not playing with a full deck. How could this be? Are we dealing with an idiot savant? Is it a sacrilege to even suggest this possibility? Or, is it possible that his oversight was a key component in our salvation history? Have stranger things happened?

Back to you, 99...........


Well, then, there is the issue of Atlantis, and of the endless wheeling of karma and rebirth, etc, etc........ after awhile, it does get downright tedious. Stop the world, I want to get off!

But all of that paganism and pantheism assumes that there is no Source. Does that make sense? Yes, actually, it makes a little bit of sense, if we understand the Bootstrap nature of Creation. We are, to a substantial degree, self-created. This is what the Deists deny, and the theists stumble over. My only job is to point this out, historically. There is only one coherent answer to the conundrum of existence. But, hey, I don't want to give away the plot.



2:20----------

How much information is in the flower in the crannied wall? How much information is in the brot of the Mandelbrot? Can we understand the cosmos without understanding the the microcosm, or vise-versa? And, if we understand one, do we not understand the other? We understand ourselves by understanding God, and vise-versa.

To understand immaterialism is to understand relationalism. To understand relationalism is to understand the Monad, which is love. To know love is to know everything. How much information is in love? It defies quantification. It is simply the quality that is the end of all qualities. That's where atoms come from, and where they go. How much information is contained in a square foot of meadow? Better get out your slide-rule. A reductionist might have an answer. A holist has another answer. Perhaps a different kind of answer.

Is there any information that is redundant? Are we redundant? If we've seen one human, have we seen them all? We are nothing, if not social animals. You cannot understand me, without understanding society.

(1 + 1) contains all of mathematics. Every number contains every other, including, especially, infinity, pace the constructivists. Quine understood all of this, back in 1950. Why did he not make something of it? He did, but he thought better than to make a cosmic case of it. Fools rush in.......

So what happened to the bandwidth problem? What happened to the Akashic record? Each of us has access to unlimited information, in the cloud. How many yottabits is that? It may depend on your PoV. It may be subjective. When you explain the difference between objective and subjective, I'll tell you how much information is in the Cloud.



4pm----------

The Rapture is a collective NDE, and so is the world. It is our waking, walking dream. We suppose that we are awake, but wakefulness, like everything else may be relative.


6:30----------

It took me quite awhile of searching to find the guillotine dream of Alfred Maury, reported by himself and Freud. It raises questions about causality in dreams, if not also about causality generally.




(cont.)

Some of what you are saying here reminds me of what's showing in the video below: Water, Consciousness & Intent: Dr. Masaru Emoto


It is through the power of the Logos that we are able to create
our own reality because after all, didn't G-d create us and the
universe that way?
And because G-d is self-perpetuating where She has no beginning nor end, the same goes for the universe and everything that's
in it.
Even science is showing us that this self-perpetuation phenomenon
exists in nature, so yes, I understand what you are talking about.

I will comment more on what's in your last post later.
In the mean time, let me say this. Last night, just as I was
waking up in the middle of the night like I always do, you popped into my mind's eye and said "Hi!". No kidding!
You popped into a lucid dream one time before in the past... ...one other time too...
Hmmmm, very strange. Causes me to ask, "Who/What are you?" which in fact is the first thing I asked after I saw you last night!

Strange, indeed...... Me? I'm just chicken-little...... WYSIWYG.....



10am-------------

While I was thinking about my answer to 99, early this morning, another thought occurred to me.......

I need a more systemic way to characterize the limits of phenomenology, limits that could be applied to both the macro- and micro-cosms. One conclusion was that we need an 'event horizon' for both the macro- and micro-cosms.

There already is an event horizon for the micro-cosm. It is called the plank-length, which is 10^-35m. That is much too small to have a phenomenological relevance. What we need is some of actual/phenomena microscopic dimension, which would be more like 10^-6m, or of bacterial dimensions. How could this horizon be characterized or 'implemented'?


My intuition is that the Schroedinger's quantum wave equation is too dependent upon an absolutist conception of space and time. We need something more like Heisenberg's matrix mechanics operating at the cellular level. I think of it more as 'bio-cycle mechanics', where these cycles become the fundamental phenomenological units. This is also motivated, in part, by my recent reading of Islamic philosophy...... http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/arabic-islamic-natural/ .

Is it possible that there could be a systemics at the biological level that has been missed by the biologists, any more than there could be an astronomical systemics missed by the astronomers?

The micro-horizon is a bigger problem, because of the much larger bandwidth involved. With reference to the bio-cycles, see the BPW site, under 'cycles'.

Yes, what I'm thinking about, here, is something along the lines or morphogenetic resonance, but actually on a more fundamental or ontological level.



(cont.)

A request: Next time your 'higher self' or whatever decides to make another nocturnal excursion to my neck-of-the-woods, write out the letter "D" or "DS" or "Dan" in the sand I have spread out on the surface of a small wooden table I have by my bed with a lamp on it, Ok? This way I will have proof that you showed up here!

No need to comment here on my above request. Just keep it in mind...

99,

I've not experienced an OBE, or even a lucid dream. But I never say never.......



If there is only one electron and one soul, is there also just one bacteria? That's what I need to explore.........

Perhaps I need a better understanding of the organicism of Whitehead and Leibniz........



2:15----------

There is a great deal of apparent redundancy in the world. How can this redundancy be used to reduce the bandwidth? If we've seen one tree, have we seen them all? Or is it that we can't see the forest, for all the trees?

A closely related claim is that inheritance involves more than genes. Epigenetics is another term.

Or, am I only suggesting that there exist archetypes? Do we not have archetypal thoughts?

Our collective archetypal thoughts contribute very significantly to the phenomenal world. It could hardly exist without them. Atoms are a case in point. So is mathematics and mathematical physics.

Direct perception necessarily involves archetypes. And there is no other kind of perception. How then do we explain individuation? I would suppose it is a relational/contextual artifact. Everything else is noise, of a sort. Are our egos noise? That is a bit of an overstatement. Is the Mandelbrot noise? Are the brots? Seen one brot, seen them all? Nonetheless, each is essential to the whole.

I'm simply restating the truisms of the microcosm. Can I now explain the leaves on the lawn? The crack in the sidewalk? The lawnmower? The one that ran over the puppy, heaven forbid?

All we need is a 'mechanism' for individuation, which ought to be just a species of relationalism.

Is this not just another of a plethora of untestable holistic hypotheses? Untestability is a veritable syndrome, in the venue. Will the Easchaton be the only test? That is leaving a lot to faith!

Holism is all too subjective, but isn't that also the point? The world is Subjective, in a projective sort of way.

The fact that the leaves fall from trees, and get blown around....... does this overload our friendly VR computer in the Sky? Will this force us back into the fatal embrace of atoms?



5:40--------

It is the independence, unrelatedness, of those leaves that is causing the problem. It just adds to the bandwidth. All that computation just seems like a big waste of energy. But is there not an archetype for falling leaves? But when does one archetype stop, and the next one begin. How can they be combined? Is there not a overwhelming combinatorial problem?




(cont.)

I wrote this out last year sometime in another thread somewhere at OMF on those topics you are touching on in your last posts here. Might as well re-post some of it here...

Throughout the ages, philosophers and metaphysicians have said that there is a connection that exists between sound and form.
Even the Bible suggests this in John 1:1...
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word (Logos) was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men.”

Ostensibly, there are many other religious traditions that believe that tones derived from the “Music of the Sphere’s” are the source of creation only each have their own way of expressing that. In the Sanskrit tradition, for example, the sound vibration of “Om” is said to be the seed from which all creation came forth.

Rudolph Steiner talked about the simultaneous ‘everywhere’ ubiquitous tone or sound-ether that via the Word-cosmic speech “works within substances in an organized principle“.

INTERFERENCE PATTERNS
The notion that there is a relationship between sound and form is elegantly demonstrated in the study of Cymatics* where the sound vibrations will produce different patterns of sand on a Chladni glass plate. The higher the frequencies, the more complex the patterns are.

And as I recall, Tibetan Buddhists have been known to model their Mandela’s from similar type experiments that go as far back as the eighth century.

Dr. Hans Jenny, who is one of the pioneers in the field of Cymatics said that vibrations resulted in what he called “interference patterns” which would cause the chaotic dispersion of the sand on the plate to find order in response to those vibrations. He also discovered that these “interference patterns” are predictable because different tones/vibrations always produce the same kind of pattern.

So when we take this a step further and view the world around us, it becomes apparent that the energy of matter is held in place by unseen pre-defined “interference patterns” that are a response to subtle forces.
Where we can also surmise that as the vibrations slow down and continue to do so, they crystallize into those forms and structures that we see in our three dimensional world.

The writings of physicist Fred Allen Wolf echoed these same sentiments when he said that the universe is constructed by those “interference patterns” that exists between mind/consciousness and those frequencies located on the physical spectrum.#

MORPHIC FIELDS AND MORPHIC RESONANCE
In fact Rupert Sheldrake’s “morphic fields”# are also “interference patterns” in, as quantum physicist Bohm terms them, the “implicate order” and the “explicate order” presented in his model of the universe which is a holographic one.

The “explicate order” being comprised of everything in our local physical environment and the “implicate order” being understood as an all encompassing ‘consciousness’.

Sheldrake, referred to that all encompassing “consciousness” as the akashic records which are comprised of morphic fields and units from which the “explicate order”, draws from through a feedback mechanism that he calls “Morphic Resonance”.

Sheldrake’s “morphic field’s”, at least in this context, possesses a memory bank built up by humanity throughout all time, and are projections of intentions, thoughts and deeds that manifest dominant patterns where some of them are said to be archetypal. The more universal and dominant those patterns are, the more powerfully they can manifest in various ways into our explicate order.

For example, at least within the context that I'm talking about above, the BVM apparitions are a case in point. This Christian icon has been worshipped for the past couple of thousand years and has an enormously powerful morphogenetic field where we can speculate that anyone whose stochastic resonant vibration is on level with her’s, can entrian into her field to get new illuminations. Because of the strength of that field, a field that has been fortified by those thoughts and prayers of millions and millions of Christians throughout the ages, this may explain why there have been so many Marian apparitions and communications from her.




# Zukav, Gary, The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics, (NY, William Morrow & Company, 1980), p.296-99

# Fred Allen Wolf, Star Wave: Mind, Consciousness and Quantum Physics (New York: MacMillian, 1984)
# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake

For humans, there may be additional morphogenic fields of information radiating in a nested cyclical manner from any given DNA template that are generated after conception. Some say that those additional fields are influenced also by the positioning of planets and galaxies in our universe as well as those ongoing geophysical and magnetic changes that are taking place with our own planet too. And in that sense, those morphogenic fields that are generated in any given situation, may be a reflection of something having to do with the upcoming Eschaton.

But the above follows for everything else too… not just humans.

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

But when does one archetype stop, and the next one begin. How can they be combined? Is there not a overwhelming combinatorial problem?

Would it make sense that there are already mechanisms in place that make those adjustments necessary to prevent such redundancies from ever occurring? It would seem so.

But then again, maybe there are inherent limitations to those mechanisms... or rather, they are set with a timer that causes things to stop once it is inundated with too many informational redundancies where this triggers off a response bringing about an adjustment from a much larger cycle/information stream that makes those adjustments necessary to bring things up to date including any corrections that are needed wrt all of those nested cycles that are contained within it.

---------
----------
JC operats from that larger informational stream resulting in the event at Golgatha and that His Second Coming will be at the "end of the world". In fact, the Holy Spirit, who is also an immanent face of G-d, may, at this time in history, be even working overtime to change humanities consciousness, one by one, in some profound ways, to prepare us for the second coming of JC.

Who's to say that our 'visitors' are not vehicles through which the HS
is working through and is generating from to bring about a raising of humanities consciousness that will facilitate our transition from our physical realm to those realms that lie beyond ours?
That the "New Jerusalum" will be occupied by those who were chosen to be there when a new planetary cycle begins.

99,

Those are great posts, I can hardly tell you anything!

Ever since Creation, we have been in preparation for cosmic Disclosure. We need not have the slightest doubt that it will come off without a hitch. It will be the best thing that ever happened to us. The fact that I struggle with it, on a daily basis, speaks only to my own silliness and stubbornness. It need have nothing to do with anything else. Pay no heed.

There are many folks, much better equipped than I, who have been sweeping away the fog of our metaphysical ignorance. Any one of them only needs the slightest nudge from Sophia, to set us on the final track.

I thank you for your patience, 99.


I just came back from attending an local environmental meeting on climate change, with Sam. It was the most rousing such meeting I have attended. Nonetheless, the human response is still being dwarfed by the problem. Business as usual is not going to suffice.


It seems that nearly every conscientious thinker is struggling to grasp the Spirit. But, let me tell you, it is a slippery customer. All we hope for is to be able to grab a coattail.

.

Last night I got a possible inkling about yesterday's fascination with leaves blowing across the lawn. It has to do with galilean invariance. Yes, but, with deference to Kalam/falasafa (& Penrose lattice theory), it also has to do with the Bloch waves of solid-state physics. I hope to have more to say about this, after Bill's sunday school, which, today, is dealing with...... OMG....... the OEH. Will I get up enough nerve to ask for, nay, demand, equal time for the YEH/BPWH? We'll just have to stay tuned........

.

dan wrote:Last night I got a possible inkling about yesterday's fascination with leaves blowing across the lawn. It has to do with galilean invariance. Yes, but, with deference to Kalam/falasafa (& Penrose lattice theory), it also has to do with the Bloch waves of solid-state physics. I hope to have more to say about this, after Bill's sunday school, which, today, is dealing with...... OMG....... the OEH. Will I get up enough nerve to ask for, nay, demand, equal time for the YEH/BPWH? We'll just have to stay tuned........

You, ripple with waters?

If I could be a bird on the wall!