The impact of the movie is tremendous. Barring the groundbreaking special effects, which was to be expected from James Cameron, the film was simply beautiful. He created a world which for some reason we could all fall in love with. Why? Because that is the world we used to live in before we decided it would just be easier to rape it to death. I wanted to cry after seeing it just knowing the absolute symmetry between this and what we did to the Native Americans. But the most important parts of the film were not the great acting, the CGI special effects, the soundtrack and sound engineering... these were all giant billboards on a cinematic highway to a forgotten place all saying "Look at the amazing ideas you fucking moron! This is what we are supposed to be!"
The subtle themes floating around in the movie was the true beauty of the film. Like Pandora, the life on our planet is networked, it does communicate, it does respond as a whole to what we do. It grants miracles and takes life, it keeps us balanced. The only problem we have is dealing with ourselves. We are a creative/destructive force which is simultaneously separate and connected to everything around us. I wish I could escape it. I'd like to think we would all love to transfer to an Avatar. To feel those real things. To recognize ourselves as animals rather than biological computers. To seek beauty rather than functionality and efficiency. To see true joy rather than fleeting happiness. To stop living to try to live forever - but rather live to be alive.
I am sad. I don't want to be a part of this fucking machine anymore. But where do I go? Where can I just be an animal? I don't know... I don't think there is a place anymore...
19.12.09
18.12.09
I watched Jesus Camp and then saw the movie Avatar in theatre tonight... 3D. It was beyond comprehension: beautiful. The graphics, themes, basis, plot, emergent emotions... all absolutely beautiful... It makes me want to separate from all of these disgusting human instincts. These destructive behaviors. Jesus Camp was all too familiar a representation of the likeness to a cult of American Christianity. I saw it growing up in small town Texas. It is so destructive to the mental growth of so many children... I've seen it first hand, it made me very sad. Avatar offers of familiar worldview of what humanity should be: when we were undeveloped, 'uncivilized'; primal: Actually beautiful and peaceful. I miss thinking the world is as beautiful as we thought it when I was a child. I wish it was a reality.
16.12.09
Puzzles and their necessity.
I like making puzzles.
Puzzles are simply iterative algorithms played in reverse. Like a Rubix Cube, which by knowing the algorithm used to 'reset' a rubix cube, you are very likely to solve it from any permutative state; if you knew the algorithms necessary to make organized objects such as organic molecules - even life, one could play a Rubix Cube-like game with the universe. And that's what we are doing with science, engineering, and technology. The interesting thing is that the universe naturally plays these perfect games with itself - by which I mean: the universe by nature produces objects with algorithms and with those new objects creates new algoriths to create even newer objects which utilize even newer algorithms ans so on.
But what drives the universe to do such things? Variability - Instability - Disorder. When mother nature has a lot of legos to play with she can build many things. And the legos she plays with are very complex and variable little objects themselves. But as the universe builds bigger and more orderly things - they lose their variability - and the possible permutations to solve the puzzle drastically approach zero.
What then?
Fuck. I don't know. One, big, pointless, universe filled with big pulsing spheres or something.
I really hope we're not just a square in some god's Tuesday morning Sudoku.
Puzzles are simply iterative algorithms played in reverse. Like a Rubix Cube, which by knowing the algorithm used to 'reset' a rubix cube, you are very likely to solve it from any permutative state; if you knew the algorithms necessary to make organized objects such as organic molecules - even life, one could play a Rubix Cube-like game with the universe. And that's what we are doing with science, engineering, and technology. The interesting thing is that the universe naturally plays these perfect games with itself - by which I mean: the universe by nature produces objects with algorithms and with those new objects creates new algoriths to create even newer objects which utilize even newer algorithms ans so on.
But what drives the universe to do such things? Variability - Instability - Disorder. When mother nature has a lot of legos to play with she can build many things. And the legos she plays with are very complex and variable little objects themselves. But as the universe builds bigger and more orderly things - they lose their variability - and the possible permutations to solve the puzzle drastically approach zero.
What then?
Fuck. I don't know. One, big, pointless, universe filled with big pulsing spheres or something.
I really hope we're not just a square in some god's Tuesday morning Sudoku.
3.12.09
23.11.09
The question.
"To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of disprized love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action." -Hamlet's soliloquy, Shakespeare's Hamlet
To me this rings truer than ever. How beautiful the words sing out, I do not only contemplate the content of this silioquy, but it's existence. These words are as real as the substance of the universe. It is an organization of its substance and thus is a real entity of the universe. In its creation William Shakespeare was the agent, the agent of creation. But was he the creator? The answer to that question is the answer to this:
"To reduce or deduce: that is is the question:
Whether 'tis more fitting to point
Downward or upward in the levels of science
Or to take arms against the very methods we hold so dear
And by opposing end them."
Reduction is the method we use to describe systems. Starting from the highest 'softest' sciences and always pointing downward, from sociology to psychology, from psychology to physiology, from physiology to biology, from biology to biochemistry, from biochemistry to chemistry, and (ultimately?) from chemistry to physics. Yet we haven't the methods yet to deduce the emergence of human beings from chemistry. We have yet to deduce the Navier-Stokes equations from quantum physics. However, there must be a connection.
The connection: complexity.
We often ignore complexity during reduction because we assume there is none... we assume only verifiable determinism within the system. However, in a complex system such as a human being, reducing to time zero would require an almost unfathomable permutation of possible initial state spaces, each point known along the path recorded and traced until we ultimately find the individual origin - the specific state space. Similarly, in the method of deduction, we must take into account fully the unpredictability of a complex system when deducing from a lower level science. An almost infinite number of paths leading to the current state of the human being. Generally speaking, the variables of any system must always depend on the variables of every other system. While we assume that we have a rock-solid control within most well designed experiments, there is always information leaking into our system other systems, and into those from other systems, and so on. This informational noise, the chaos, is often considered negligible, and so science has in the past, and for a long time in the past, turned a blind eye to implications of variation within experiments.
There is a profound implication of this: Deductively, complexity arises from order. Reductively, order arises from complexity.
I think an important note to make here is the distinguishability of chaos from complexity. Chaos within a system often occurs periodically on the path of time. Small convergences of order come from chaos. The inverse is true as well. The scale dependency of chaos also traverses this periodicity. Complexity is more often described, as my interpretation holds, as the magnitude of chaos involved in the evolution of a system.
Complexity becomes the glue of assumption. The bond between the generalized laws of the universe. In a sense, complexity is the creative force of the universe. And I intend, whole heartedly, if it takes my whole life and perhaps a thousand others, to show the existence of the glue of natural creation, the continuity of the sciences, or as Richard Feynman once put it, "the inconceivable nature of Nature!"
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of disprized love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action." -Hamlet's soliloquy, Shakespeare's Hamlet
To me this rings truer than ever. How beautiful the words sing out, I do not only contemplate the content of this silioquy, but it's existence. These words are as real as the substance of the universe. It is an organization of its substance and thus is a real entity of the universe. In its creation William Shakespeare was the agent, the agent of creation. But was he the creator? The answer to that question is the answer to this:
"To reduce or deduce: that is is the question:
Whether 'tis more fitting to point
Downward or upward in the levels of science
Or to take arms against the very methods we hold so dear
And by opposing end them."
Reduction is the method we use to describe systems. Starting from the highest 'softest' sciences and always pointing downward, from sociology to psychology, from psychology to physiology, from physiology to biology, from biology to biochemistry, from biochemistry to chemistry, and (ultimately?) from chemistry to physics. Yet we haven't the methods yet to deduce the emergence of human beings from chemistry. We have yet to deduce the Navier-Stokes equations from quantum physics. However, there must be a connection.
The connection: complexity.
We often ignore complexity during reduction because we assume there is none... we assume only verifiable determinism within the system. However, in a complex system such as a human being, reducing to time zero would require an almost unfathomable permutation of possible initial state spaces, each point known along the path recorded and traced until we ultimately find the individual origin - the specific state space. Similarly, in the method of deduction, we must take into account fully the unpredictability of a complex system when deducing from a lower level science. An almost infinite number of paths leading to the current state of the human being. Generally speaking, the variables of any system must always depend on the variables of every other system. While we assume that we have a rock-solid control within most well designed experiments, there is always information leaking into our system other systems, and into those from other systems, and so on. This informational noise, the chaos, is often considered negligible, and so science has in the past, and for a long time in the past, turned a blind eye to implications of variation within experiments.
There is a profound implication of this: Deductively, complexity arises from order. Reductively, order arises from complexity.
I think an important note to make here is the distinguishability of chaos from complexity. Chaos within a system often occurs periodically on the path of time. Small convergences of order come from chaos. The inverse is true as well. The scale dependency of chaos also traverses this periodicity. Complexity is more often described, as my interpretation holds, as the magnitude of chaos involved in the evolution of a system.
Complexity becomes the glue of assumption. The bond between the generalized laws of the universe. In a sense, complexity is the creative force of the universe. And I intend, whole heartedly, if it takes my whole life and perhaps a thousand others, to show the existence of the glue of natural creation, the continuity of the sciences, or as Richard Feynman once put it, "the inconceivable nature of Nature!"
20.11.09
I am fuming!
I picked up a copy of The Origin of Species 150th Anniversary Edition with Special Introduction by Ray Comfort today after reading online about the planned book release. The introduction disturbs me greatly. His arguments are laughable at best and pale in comparison with the scientific rigor that Darwin's theory has endured. Mostly his addition personally attacks Darwin's character. Typical of the circa 1800s ignorance he so graciously included and cited! My only objection to the book is its deceitful nature. Comfort could have easily handed out copies of his own book, as his introduction is just a series of quick summaries of his past work. However, he hid them in a great work of scientific discovery. Evolution Theory has come a long way since Darwin. It would have been nice to see him argue against one of the newer comprehensive works out there. A good look through his citations at the end of the introduction shows that very few works on evolution were cited; the ones that were cited were obviously limited in depth and breadth. At least, very few in contrast to the many citations comparable to "Christian arguments against evolution" and "The Scientific Method for Dummies."
Religion is a memetic virus. It's only purpose is to reproduce. Look at these people's tenacity. It an inherent property of these viral dogmatic ideas. The problem with it is that it reduces people to replicators of an idea, rather than creators.
Some of Darwin's opinions expressed in The Origin of Species should be taken as that - opinions. Opinions stemming from 1800s level scientific ignorance. And these opinions have no relationship with his scientific theory.
Whether accepted or not by the reader, Comfort's information should not be published within the covers of this book. Too many readers are not educated enough to realize that reason, not only that but scientifically rigorous reason, is required when comparing the two ideas - and sadly most will not read past the first 60 pages (the intro).
I believe very strongly that Darwin's theory, as it is improved on in time with parallel ideas such as complexity, non-linear systems, chaos and self-organizing systems, will prove to be an epiphenomenon of an underlying principle law of nature.
Religion is a memetic virus. It's only purpose is to reproduce. Look at these people's tenacity. It an inherent property of these viral dogmatic ideas. The problem with it is that it reduces people to replicators of an idea, rather than creators.
Some of Darwin's opinions expressed in The Origin of Species should be taken as that - opinions. Opinions stemming from 1800s level scientific ignorance. And these opinions have no relationship with his scientific theory.
Whether accepted or not by the reader, Comfort's information should not be published within the covers of this book. Too many readers are not educated enough to realize that reason, not only that but scientifically rigorous reason, is required when comparing the two ideas - and sadly most will not read past the first 60 pages (the intro).
I believe very strongly that Darwin's theory, as it is improved on in time with parallel ideas such as complexity, non-linear systems, chaos and self-organizing systems, will prove to be an epiphenomenon of an underlying principle law of nature.
"A deceitful witness speaketh lies" Proverbs 14:25
18.11.09
17.11.09
Look closer.
If I ask "What is mathematics?" most will answer: "The manipulation of numbers and structures." But if I ask you "What is music" most would not answer: "The manipulation of notes."
It's essential to take into account the beauty of a subject when considering it. It's joys will naturally come.
It's essential to take into account the beauty of a subject when considering it. It's joys will naturally come.
For Chris.
This is a graph of the convergence of 'my' formulation in the case that a = 1 and n1=1.
Think electrical... got it? You got it.
Take 2 and call me tomorrow. We have much to discuss with what we can do with this.
Discovering for yourself is the most exhilarating.
For some reason my friend and I have both been obsessing lately about the Fibonacci sequence and it's relationship with the golden ratio phi. Last fall I played around with the numbers, trying to find patterns and relationships. I came up with two: F[12] = 144 -> a case where the value of F[n] is n^2. Somewhat interesting. I remembered finding another relationship between numbers of the Fibonacci Sequence which provided phi other than the ratio of sequential Fibonacci numbers. I thought I had found something unique so I went to the library today to do some research to see if my formulation was unique. Alas, it wasn't, so I feel comfortable posting here. Here is what I came up with:
My formulation:
-----------------------------
lim(n -> inf): (F[n+a]/F[n])^(1/a) = phi for any initial value of n.
This means that if n is very large, then you can approximate phi from any two numbers in the sequence. 'a' is difference in location in the sequence of the two Fibonacci numbers. By taking the 'a'th root of the ratio of the two numbers, you get phi.
-----------------------------
The above is a more general case of the well known solution (where a=1):
lim(n -> inf): (F[n+1]/F[n]) = phi for any initial value of n
My formulation:
-----------------------------
lim(n -> inf): (F[n+a]/F[n])^(1/a) = phi for any initial value of n.
This means that if n is very large, then you can approximate phi from any two numbers in the sequence. 'a' is difference in location in the sequence of the two Fibonacci numbers. By taking the 'a'th root of the ratio of the two numbers, you get phi.
-----------------------------
The above is a more general case of the well known solution (where a=1):
lim(n -> inf): (F[n+1]/F[n]) = phi for any initial value of n
13.11.09
Finding Sources.
I'm finding many sources for the ideas I have. It's a nice feeling to know that you're not delusional.
12.11.09
We are nature's Rube Goldberg machines.
I've been up all night doing homework. I feel really blank. I ordered some books off of Amazon that I am very excited about. Until those come in I'll keep pulling the lever.
5.11.09
A Beautiful Mind
Carl Sagan
(1934 - 1996)
You should know about this man. You should hear what he has to say.
3.11.09
2.11.09
Growth by Creation.
I've felt an undeniably rapid growth intellectually that past month or so. I have been neglecting school religiously in order to pursue more artistic endeavors. Maybe artistic isn't the best choice of wording. Perhaps aesthetic would be a better adjective. I have been creating and experiencing, experiencing and creating: sharing things with people I have recently connected with. I feel that with every small thing I create, I add a new dimension to the concept of myself. As I manipulate the things around me, I manipulate my own point of view. I realize at this time in my life I am changing rapidly. I feel confident saying that those who believe people change more slowly as adults, nearly to zero change, are completely wrong. I wake up feeling like a new person every day. I feel like a stranger stares at me in the mirror. I find myself carrying conversations with myself from an outsider's perspective - testing the waters as to who is awake and active today. Not to say I feel vastly dissociated from myself, more amused at my ability to reprogram myself so quickly.
My responsibilities taunt me subconsciously. Tasks must be completed. Grades must be satisfactory. It all seems so ridiculous. I haven't the slightest clue who I will wake up as tomorrow. Why the hell am I devoting so much time to this? To be a cog in the economic system of the US? I know I have to feed and clothe myself. I know I need medical care. Why can't I be productive in my own ways and reap the benefits? I suppose I can. This most certainly will be an option I will keep open. Regardless of what I do, I suppose I'll never go hungry.
Intellectual growth has never put food on a table, I guess. It's time I figure out how to integrate functionality with this growth.
My responsibilities taunt me subconsciously. Tasks must be completed. Grades must be satisfactory. It all seems so ridiculous. I haven't the slightest clue who I will wake up as tomorrow. Why the hell am I devoting so much time to this? To be a cog in the economic system of the US? I know I have to feed and clothe myself. I know I need medical care. Why can't I be productive in my own ways and reap the benefits? I suppose I can. This most certainly will be an option I will keep open. Regardless of what I do, I suppose I'll never go hungry.
Intellectual growth has never put food on a table, I guess. It's time I figure out how to integrate functionality with this growth.
Blinded by Fall
It had never occurred to me
That through the breeze of burning leaves
Our eyes were open to wasps and weeds!
I cursed the fire – the weeds – the trees,
But the embers were not at fault,
It was the bees.
1.11.09
Book ideas
Thus far, these are the ideas I want to connect and relate.
A basic outline of the book I want to write.
Preface
Information
Physical Networks
-Interactions of Matter and Energy
Biological Networks
-Neurological Networks
-Cellular Networks
--Viral Information
---Viruses
---Viroids
---Plasmids
Memetic Networks
-Information in the Human Language
-Viral Ideas
-Abstract Ideas
-Evolution of Ideas
-Importance of Logic and Reason
Social Networks
-Communication Channels
-Convergence of Languages
Chaotic Systems
-Evolution of Dynamical Systems
-Cycles of Chaos and Order
--Time dependent
--Scale dependent
Cyclic Networks
-Firework Networks
-Implications for Inertia
Interconnectedness
The Human Macro-organism
-The Cell
-The Tissue
-The Organs
-The Organism
The Human Super-machine
Utilizing the Universal Network
-Realizing the Connections Required to Learn More
-Innate Nonsense: Filtering out Informational Noise
-Partitioning Matter & Energy for Computation of the Universe
To Be Human
-Building Connections
-Integration of Technology and Machines
-The Redefinition
-Universal Indistinguishableness: We are the manifestation of the contemplated universe. We are the projected observations of the universe. By the connections we make, we begin realize the indistinguishableness between us and the universe.
A basic outline of the book I want to write.
Preface
Information
Physical Networks
-Interactions of Matter and Energy
Biological Networks
-Neurological Networks
-Cellular Networks
--Viral Information
---Viruses
---Viroids
---Plasmids
Memetic Networks
-Information in the Human Language
-Viral Ideas
-Abstract Ideas
-Evolution of Ideas
-Importance of Logic and Reason
Social Networks
-Communication Channels
-Convergence of Languages
Chaotic Systems
-Evolution of Dynamical Systems
-Cycles of Chaos and Order
--Time dependent
--Scale dependent
Cyclic Networks
-Firework Networks
-Implications for Inertia
Interconnectedness
The Human Macro-organism
-The Cell
-The Tissue
-The Organs
-The Organism
The Human Super-machine
Utilizing the Universal Network
-Realizing the Connections Required to Learn More
-Innate Nonsense: Filtering out Informational Noise
-Partitioning Matter & Energy for Computation of the Universe
To Be Human
-Building Connections
-Integration of Technology and Machines
-The Redefinition
-Universal Indistinguishableness: We are the manifestation of the contemplated universe. We are the projected observations of the universe. By the connections we make, we begin realize the indistinguishableness between us and the universe.
Maybe.
I'm feeling it again. Feels like I've been woken up from a really good dream. The kind of dream where your day has gone perfectly, all the things you wanted to happen went directly your way. You find that wallet you lost a week ago and have been stressing about. You go buy groceries to fill the fridge. The tests for the week are studied for and passed. Then you wake up to realize everything is undone and life is about to re-roll the dice, the day will most likely end up less favorable.
I suppose my apathy has its limits. I just wish I knew how not to fall into that loop again.
But I guess the real question is do I wake up and take hold of life or continue to flow with the natural state of things. No one told me being intelligent would end up being such a burden to life. I always thought I would have the upper hand when looking for happiness.
I'm tired of people holding me against me.
I'm tired of being stretched in 50 directions.
I'm tired of this fucking cycle.
There is no quarter in this place.
I suppose my apathy has its limits. I just wish I knew how not to fall into that loop again.
But I guess the real question is do I wake up and take hold of life or continue to flow with the natural state of things. No one told me being intelligent would end up being such a burden to life. I always thought I would have the upper hand when looking for happiness.
I'm tired of people holding me against me.
I'm tired of being stretched in 50 directions.
I'm tired of this fucking cycle.
There is no quarter in this place.
28.10.09
Named yet undefined.
Mantra for simultaneous consideration:
Infinity becomes apparent as we count up and divide down. Ever larger and ever smaller. That is the reality in which we exist. This reality is our identity. In this identity we have a name. In this infinite complexity we are undefined. Named yet undefined: What do many call this?
God.
Infinity becomes apparent as we count up and divide down. Ever larger and ever smaller. That is the reality in which we exist. This reality is our identity. In this identity we have a name. In this infinite complexity we are undefined. Named yet undefined: What do many call this?
God.
19.10.09
The Red Tide
The red tide was almost of my own design.
5 other people mostly strangers:
One - a great friend - a philosopher and a seer - the reverberation of indistinguishable curiosity.
One - an admirable, hilarious, mirror of the turmoil of intelligence.
Three - dancing ocean sprites who suffered the tide, who battled the gods of the sea, who protected the beauty of their realm
I've been on a journey for a few years. Always testing a new path, seemingly reaching its dead end only to find the destination completely unsatisfactory. When things become stale, I long for, lunge forth to, the comforting pain, the range of parameters I'm capable of surviving, of what it means to be human, to be a primate, a mammal, an animal, alive. All this to hopefully stake out a place in this universe where I may find joy and occasional happiness. A place with the perfect parameters - the solution to that one differential equation I don't know of yet - the one that provides us each with our own lens into reality. What is the particular solution which describes me - in my simplicity, my convergence - in my complexity, my chaos?
The red tide brought duality:
Excitement vs. disappointment.
A taste of freedom vs. the realization of imprisonment
I was surrounded by flourishing vibrant people - at a point in their lives where things are hard, confusing - holding on for survival to the steering wheel in the sharpest turn they are going to take in their life. Each had a lesson to teach and one to learn. If was a growing experience.
The brevetoxin acted not only to test my admiration of this place. It acted as the required discomfort I need to feel alive.
5 other people mostly strangers:
One - a great friend - a philosopher and a seer - the reverberation of indistinguishable curiosity.
One - an admirable, hilarious, mirror of the turmoil of intelligence.
Three - dancing ocean sprites who suffered the tide, who battled the gods of the sea, who protected the beauty of their realm
I've been on a journey for a few years. Always testing a new path, seemingly reaching its dead end only to find the destination completely unsatisfactory. When things become stale, I long for, lunge forth to, the comforting pain, the range of parameters I'm capable of surviving, of what it means to be human, to be a primate, a mammal, an animal, alive. All this to hopefully stake out a place in this universe where I may find joy and occasional happiness. A place with the perfect parameters - the solution to that one differential equation I don't know of yet - the one that provides us each with our own lens into reality. What is the particular solution which describes me - in my simplicity, my convergence - in my complexity, my chaos?
The red tide brought duality:
Excitement vs. disappointment.
A taste of freedom vs. the realization of imprisonment
I was surrounded by flourishing vibrant people - at a point in their lives where things are hard, confusing - holding on for survival to the steering wheel in the sharpest turn they are going to take in their life. Each had a lesson to teach and one to learn. If was a growing experience.
The brevetoxin acted not only to test my admiration of this place. It acted as the required discomfort I need to feel alive.
The last day. The tide is receding. I wake before dawn. My back aches, burns, rejecting the sand implanted in my burned skin. My friend graciously applies aloe vera to my back. I sit in the water watching the sun rise. I remember my mother sitting in the surf with me, me in her lap. Feeling as innocent as the day I was born, I cried.
The red tide had met me that day, and he brought with him the beauty and turmoil of freedom. And with one gentle push of a small wave, he slid up the wet sand of the beach to my feet and with a comforting embrace of salty foam, I knew that this feeling was what I needed. This state is what I needed. This was my place. This was my particular solution to the great equation. This was what my lens is designed for. This is the lighting, the focus, the stop, the filter, the film of me.
Life. Give me a red tide. And in his wake of death and paralysis, allow me the comforts of intellect. Allow me the comforts of camaraderie. Allow me humanity.
9.9.09
The foundations.
I thought it might be useful to touch on a subject I pikced up from several good reads and a very helpful mathematics professor. There are different levels of understanding involved when solving scientific problems. These are levels I generally consider when pondering a physical problem (simple or complex):
1. Philosophy
2. Mathematics
3. Physics
4. Theory and Imagination
Interestingly enough though, the levels seem to form a Cartesian circle.
1. Philosophy
Without some basic axioms and foundations, mathematics would not exist. We take for granted to the scale to which our assumptions mold our ways of thinking.
2. Mathematics
A good read for a description of what I'm about to quickly cover is a book by Roger Penrose called The Road to Reality. A must read for any physics buff!
There are really three seperate 'worlds' that mathematics lives in.
a. The 'real world' - the world we live in
b. The 'mathematical world' - the world where all mathematics resides
c. The 'abstract world' - the world where mathematics lives, but has no relation to the real world. This would be the universe of ideal mathematical models and complex systems which do not and will never exist
All three of these 'worlds' are connected. The mathematical world lives in us, in our brains. We can come up with real math solutions for the 'real world', and abstract and ideal solutions to things which do not exist in 'real world'.
3. Physics - well, you know, you gotsta use da maths.
4. Theory and Imagination
These are the powers which drive scientific progress, and are the powers that are essential in making up your own science (mine is going to be part of the 'abstract world' :) )
1. Philosophy
2. Mathematics
3. Physics
4. Theory and Imagination
Interestingly enough though, the levels seem to form a Cartesian circle.
1. Philosophy
Without some basic axioms and foundations, mathematics would not exist. We take for granted to the scale to which our assumptions mold our ways of thinking.
2. Mathematics
A good read for a description of what I'm about to quickly cover is a book by Roger Penrose called The Road to Reality. A must read for any physics buff!
There are really three seperate 'worlds' that mathematics lives in.
a. The 'real world' - the world we live in
b. The 'mathematical world' - the world where all mathematics resides
c. The 'abstract world' - the world where mathematics lives, but has no relation to the real world. This would be the universe of ideal mathematical models and complex systems which do not and will never exist
All three of these 'worlds' are connected. The mathematical world lives in us, in our brains. We can come up with real math solutions for the 'real world', and abstract and ideal solutions to things which do not exist in 'real world'.
3. Physics - well, you know, you gotsta use da maths.
4. Theory and Imagination
These are the powers which drive scientific progress, and are the powers that are essential in making up your own science (mine is going to be part of the 'abstract world' :) )
8.9.09
The mathematical formalism.
So during electrical engineering class today, we covered voltage and current dividers... for the 100th time. I fell asleep then went outside and sat on a bench. I decided the best place to start when playing god is to make some rules for the game. How do you read a set of rules for the universe? With math silly. Being a visual person, I decided I would set up my dimensions.
Space... really a necessity to have if we're going to attempt to visualize or comprehend an already completely contrived imaginary universe.
So, how do we define space? Are we going to go with some ol'standbys? Euclidian geometry? Hyperbolic geometry? Elliptical geometry? Einsteinian space-time?
And how many dimensions of space? 1, 2, 3, 4???
1: One axis. Infinitely thin wire. Great for modelling, but falls short on the square-footage in my neighborhood.
2: Two axes. Infinitely thin plane. Bounded area (or unbounded). Seems nice enough. Is it just me or does this shirt make me look shorter in here?
3: X,Y,Z. Too easy and too familiar. I don't want a universe that is easy enough to drive around in my Geo Metro!
4: Four axes. One minute I'm passing you on the highway in my Geo Metro (as if.) the next I've disappeared from your review mirror somewhere down Highway 4. Do you think the review mirror message "Objects are closer than they appear." would be underestimated at this point?
I like 4 dimensions of space. That sounds fun.
Space... really a necessity to have if we're going to attempt to visualize or comprehend an already completely contrived imaginary universe.
So, how do we define space? Are we going to go with some ol'standbys? Euclidian geometry? Hyperbolic geometry? Elliptical geometry? Einsteinian space-time?
And how many dimensions of space? 1, 2, 3, 4???
1: One axis. Infinitely thin wire. Great for modelling, but falls short on the square-footage in my neighborhood.
2: Two axes. Infinitely thin plane. Bounded area (or unbounded). Seems nice enough. Is it just me or does this shirt make me look shorter in here?
3: X,Y,Z. Too easy and too familiar. I don't want a universe that is easy enough to drive around in my Geo Metro!
4: Four axes. One minute I'm passing you on the highway in my Geo Metro (as if.) the next I've disappeared from your review mirror somewhere down Highway 4. Do you think the review mirror message "Objects are closer than they appear." would be underestimated at this point?
I like 4 dimensions of space. That sounds fun.
7.9.09
The tools.
The tools required in such a task will most likely include:
1) Knowledge of math, physics, probability, and complexity
2) A broad knowledge-base of reference material
3) Sufficient computing software/hardware
4) Influences regarding the hypothetical laws and concepts (abstract mathematical models, philosophy, mysticism, imagination)
... that's all I can think of.
1) Knowledge of math, physics, probability, and complexity
2) A broad knowledge-base of reference material
3) Sufficient computing software/hardware
4) Influences regarding the hypothetical laws and concepts (abstract mathematical models, philosophy, mysticism, imagination)
... that's all I can think of.
The laws.
I sat down one evening in my backyard and, as usual, started reading through a chapter of some half-price bookstore theoretical physics book, hoping to get a glimpse of some new idea or some POV shattering message. I am a hard geek, and usually add a bit too much grandeur into my imaginations. But I wondered, "What if I could redo the entire set of laws of the universe?" Granted, we don't know them all, but what if I could make up my own set: a set of laws governing whatever I want them to govern. Would this give me a greater understanding or ability to understand how our universe works? So here it goes... I've gotta go sit around with a pack of marlboros and come up with, as-so-far, the very basic underlying principle of my universe.
The purpose.
The purpose of this blog is to provide a medium for myself to record random thoughts. Not really for anyone else to get anything from.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
