I am in Blocker, studying for finals, occasionally getting sidetracked mentally by the LED Matrix project. I walked outside for a smoke. Two girls sat on the bench, one braiding another's hair. Common scene? Maybe in high school or junior high, or amongst female siblings. These were 18 or 19 yr old girls, possibly friends for no longer than the duration of the semester, sitting on a bench socially grooming one another. This is great ape behavior: social grooming to strengthen the social bond. You never see 30 yr old women sitting around doing each other's hair, unless maybe it's girl's night after the terrible breakup in some Hollywood movie scene. I remember watching my sister braid her friend's hair and the inverse, watching female classmates in elementary and junior high, and watching freshman girls in the dorm do the same. I think this behavior can be a big marker in the process of social conditioning and maturation described as the college induced "growing-up" period. These girl's two years from now, will be interacting with other adults in a more 'conditioned' manner after the realization that this social behavior is not the norm amongst and between adult women.
I think we should retire the phrase 'maternal instinct' as used in this situation. It should be 'primatial instinct'.
Score one for Universal Darwinism.
15.11.10
From Macroscopic to the Microscopic.
When electronics get smaller, when components get hotter, when we start replacing the meter with diameters of atoms as a unit of measurement, we enter into a world where the human engineering and science processes of deduction down from the macroscopic world meet up with the Darwinian construction of complex mechanisms from the microscopic world. I'm talking about nanotechnology and nanobiology.
Effectively, if you start looking at electrical components in terms of individual electrons, the systems begin acting like simple machines, analogous to many principles of hydraulics. If you start looking at biology not at the ecological or cellular level, but at the atomic level, the biochemical level, you also see the systems acting like simple machines, analogous to many principles of mechanics: statics and dynamics.
What are the outcomes of this?
Lets look some current research:
1) Computation DNA.
2) Protein data storage. ** Lets focus on this!
Protein data storage:
http://www.getusb.info/50-terabyte-flash-drive-made-of-bug-protein/
http://news.discovery.com/videos/tech-nano-storage.html
Effectively, if you start looking at electrical components in terms of individual electrons, the systems begin acting like simple machines, analogous to many principles of hydraulics. If you start looking at biology not at the ecological or cellular level, but at the atomic level, the biochemical level, you also see the systems acting like simple machines, analogous to many principles of mechanics: statics and dynamics.
What are the outcomes of this?
Lets look some current research:
1) Computation DNA.
2) Protein data storage. ** Lets focus on this!
Protein data storage:
http://www.getusb.info/50-terabyte-flash-drive-made-of-bug-protein/
http://news.discovery.com/videos/tech-nano-storage.html
1.11.10
2.8.10
Developing a Sound Worldview
Science is drenched in the tradition of ignoring the big picture to solve the big picture. Often a small example of the big picture is analyzed, modeled, tested, and determined to be either a good or bad theory for how the big picture, or system, works. But I use science too specifically, and I want to talk about logic.
Logic is personal. It's a personal experience. It is a series of thoughts processed by yourself, however sometimes with guidance via conversation or study, which brings you to a conclusion. Logic can be taught. The mathematics of logic are robust and powerful. However, there are holes. Big holes, that still linger in the world of modern man that range across all cultures, religions, philosophies.
I want to propose the first question I have battled with. A question I didn't know (consciously) was going unanswered in my mind.
Question #1:
"How small is small enough?"
Generally small enough is decided with a degree of sufficiency based on contentment. For example, I perform an experiment and the result is found to have tiny magnitudes of error when compared to an accepted model. It is close enough? Or does this answer point to some small enigma of the unfounded complete model we are to discover later on? Is it due to chaos and unpredicted players in the equation?
Most likely the latter.
But we can never be positive.
But we generally say, close enough, I've hit it on the head.
This method of logic is still useful in this case, and can lead to further discovery.
This question is very often asked unknowingly by people who argue against the Theory of Evolution. "Well, where is the missing link for species X?" What missing link? As if an entire world-wide ecosystem of animals, showing gradual change, all linked together and laid out in a great hierarchy and a beautiful untainted perfectly-ordered fossil record timestamped by geological layers which go unattacked by unfounded scrutiny (or founded scrutiny for that matter ) isn't proof enough.
This is a flaw in logic in this case. To assume that every intermediate state in a continuous state-space should be the necessary and sufficient proof for an idea would disprove basic abstracts such as lines, circles, and even numbers.
Nothing would be accepted as plausible with this logic. The world as we know it today shouldn't exist by that logic.
Physics is an interesting case of this. Physics continues to pursue, not only a TOE, but an answer to this question in the case of particle physics. How small is small enough? Short answer: small enough so that we have a model of the universe which predicts every causality and result with 100% accuracy. More precise answer: when we find the most basic objects which make everything or we find that everything is continuous and not quantized (quantized being the currently accepted idea).
A Philosophical Mind Experiment for Question #1
I always enjoyed stories which included a great teacher, a master of some enigmatic knowledge, a sage. So I decided I would create a mind-experiment similar to the seemingly impossible riddles they give their students to teach lessons. This mind experiment is meant to show the participant that the knowledge of all the intermediate stages of a greater picture are unimportant, as long as it is known that there are an infinite number of intermediate stages, but that the whole picture is finite. This is a fractal abstract. Even more important is how this discovery effects your life as someone looking for the truth in life, meaning in life, and importance in life.
You are standing on one side of a bridge looking to the other side. You cross the bridge once counting your steps. Every step you take is an exact distance and exactly the same every time. It took 20 steps to get across this small bridge. A man on the other side tells you to walk back doubling the amount of steps you take, making your strides half the length. 40 steps. He instructs you to continue to do this. The tenth time you do it, it takes you 20,480 steps. You are very tired and sit down to rest. The man asks, "How small is small enough effectively determine how long the bridge is?"
You would reply, this is ridiculous, the 20 steps was perfectly sufficient for measuring the bridge. The wise man would reply, "Do you take into account the minute edges of the bridge? Correct for errors on your shoes sliding ever so imperceptibly back or forth as you break friction?" You reply "That is not useful for measuring a bridge used for walking across, why are those small distances important?" The wise man replies, "Not important to you."
Measurement is meant to be useful, not perfect. No measurement is perfect, exact, or lacking room for improvement. We can only use measurements to guess. That is the way it has always worked in the history of science. Measurements are used to support theories.
The wise man ends with his lesson of the day. "Every decision we make in life, every choice we make is supported with measurements we either know to some degree, assume, guess, extrapolate, or fabricate. And on the best decisions, the rest of the details we fill in with logic, scrutiny, comparison, a good measure of pessimism, a good measure then of optimism (either coming first), and generally the 'all-species-important' luck."
Logic is personal. It's a personal experience. It is a series of thoughts processed by yourself, however sometimes with guidance via conversation or study, which brings you to a conclusion. Logic can be taught. The mathematics of logic are robust and powerful. However, there are holes. Big holes, that still linger in the world of modern man that range across all cultures, religions, philosophies.
I want to propose the first question I have battled with. A question I didn't know (consciously) was going unanswered in my mind.
Question #1:
"How small is small enough?"
Generally small enough is decided with a degree of sufficiency based on contentment. For example, I perform an experiment and the result is found to have tiny magnitudes of error when compared to an accepted model. It is close enough? Or does this answer point to some small enigma of the unfounded complete model we are to discover later on? Is it due to chaos and unpredicted players in the equation?
Most likely the latter.
But we can never be positive.
But we generally say, close enough, I've hit it on the head.
This method of logic is still useful in this case, and can lead to further discovery.
This question is very often asked unknowingly by people who argue against the Theory of Evolution. "Well, where is the missing link for species X?" What missing link? As if an entire world-wide ecosystem of animals, showing gradual change, all linked together and laid out in a great hierarchy and a beautiful untainted perfectly-ordered fossil record timestamped by geological layers which go unattacked by unfounded scrutiny (or founded scrutiny for that matter ) isn't proof enough.
This is a flaw in logic in this case. To assume that every intermediate state in a continuous state-space should be the necessary and sufficient proof for an idea would disprove basic abstracts such as lines, circles, and even numbers.
Nothing would be accepted as plausible with this logic. The world as we know it today shouldn't exist by that logic.
Physics is an interesting case of this. Physics continues to pursue, not only a TOE, but an answer to this question in the case of particle physics. How small is small enough? Short answer: small enough so that we have a model of the universe which predicts every causality and result with 100% accuracy. More precise answer: when we find the most basic objects which make everything or we find that everything is continuous and not quantized (quantized being the currently accepted idea).
A Philosophical Mind Experiment for Question #1
I always enjoyed stories which included a great teacher, a master of some enigmatic knowledge, a sage. So I decided I would create a mind-experiment similar to the seemingly impossible riddles they give their students to teach lessons. This mind experiment is meant to show the participant that the knowledge of all the intermediate stages of a greater picture are unimportant, as long as it is known that there are an infinite number of intermediate stages, but that the whole picture is finite. This is a fractal abstract. Even more important is how this discovery effects your life as someone looking for the truth in life, meaning in life, and importance in life.
You are standing on one side of a bridge looking to the other side. You cross the bridge once counting your steps. Every step you take is an exact distance and exactly the same every time. It took 20 steps to get across this small bridge. A man on the other side tells you to walk back doubling the amount of steps you take, making your strides half the length. 40 steps. He instructs you to continue to do this. The tenth time you do it, it takes you 20,480 steps. You are very tired and sit down to rest. The man asks, "How small is small enough effectively determine how long the bridge is?"
You would reply, this is ridiculous, the 20 steps was perfectly sufficient for measuring the bridge. The wise man would reply, "Do you take into account the minute edges of the bridge? Correct for errors on your shoes sliding ever so imperceptibly back or forth as you break friction?" You reply "That is not useful for measuring a bridge used for walking across, why are those small distances important?" The wise man replies, "Not important to you."
Measurement is meant to be useful, not perfect. No measurement is perfect, exact, or lacking room for improvement. We can only use measurements to guess. That is the way it has always worked in the history of science. Measurements are used to support theories.
- Theories will always be supported only by measurements.
- Theories will only always be implemented and applied with the help of measurements.
The wise man ends with his lesson of the day. "Every decision we make in life, every choice we make is supported with measurements we either know to some degree, assume, guess, extrapolate, or fabricate. And on the best decisions, the rest of the details we fill in with logic, scrutiny, comparison, a good measure of pessimism, a good measure then of optimism (either coming first), and generally the 'all-species-important' luck."
Balance
I just finished watching a documentary about the Frenchman who hung a tight rope across the World Trade Center towers and performed for nearly an hour. Balance is the theme of the week. I inherited a bicycle from my good friend who just moved out and have spent the entire day today riding around, thinking about nothing but the wind in my face and the burning in my thighs. I stopped in park near my house where I found a group of free spirits playing some live-action role-playing game. Generally I wouldn't join in, but I had nothing else to do, and had recently adopted an even more intense 'go with the flow' attitude. It was fun, and I met some interesting characters.
That evening on a separate ride, I returned to the park to listen to a small Asian man play the pan flute. He has been performing at the park every evening all week.
Yesterday evening, I went to the park to listen to the man play his flute for the first time. His performance had drawn me to the park from my house. You see, he stands nearly unmoving for hours playing his flute in a steel-concrete pagoda structure which has some amazing acoustic properties. It resonates with his flute. The structure resembles a starfish if it could stand on its 'tippy-toes.'
I laid in the field of grass tossing a stick for my dog while I relished the atmosphere. The temperature was warm and muggy but pleasant, the humidity produced a diffuse glow around the street lights which were popping on one by one, the orange and pink sunset was bringing out the green in the grass, and for what seemed like hours (but what was really a few minutes of reflection), I felt like I was the man's flute and the world was my pagoda.
That evening on a separate ride, I returned to the park to listen to a small Asian man play the pan flute. He has been performing at the park every evening all week.
Yesterday evening, I went to the park to listen to the man play his flute for the first time. His performance had drawn me to the park from my house. You see, he stands nearly unmoving for hours playing his flute in a steel-concrete pagoda structure which has some amazing acoustic properties. It resonates with his flute. The structure resembles a starfish if it could stand on its 'tippy-toes.'
I laid in the field of grass tossing a stick for my dog while I relished the atmosphere. The temperature was warm and muggy but pleasant, the humidity produced a diffuse glow around the street lights which were popping on one by one, the orange and pink sunset was bringing out the green in the grass, and for what seemed like hours (but what was really a few minutes of reflection), I felt like I was the man's flute and the world was my pagoda.
10.3.10
28.1.10
Glimpse at the book...
Here are a couple of excerpts from the novel I'm working on.
From chapter one, one of the many log recordings of Dr. Wilde:
"I love you Dr. Wilde, the children announced in unison.
I love you too.
-----------
The Uploads were particularly glitchy today. Verbal was good, motor was good, but the daily math assessment was the first I had received with sub-perfect scores since I could remember. Machine informs me that it was truncation errors due to this month's solar flare activity. I guess that explains Machine's temporary hicup in development. It's expected to resume after the solar storm. The statistical analysis shows variation in answers but all on the same question and due to interuptions to different solution methods. Incubation as a whole is ahead of schedule and upload may actually get the chance to fall on Machine's scheduled date for once.
Nur. Thomas Wilde, Log 85.32, 21.34.56
-----------"
From chapter 6, an interesting breaking point:
"Thomas languished and stumbled to the curb, emersed in the pulsing hum of the Machine, kicking at the frozen ground to delay the monotony setting in. Looming on the horizon like the tentacles of some ashen hypersymmetric sea creature, the Machine's comm towers blinked green with epileptic perfect frequency. The wind was cold but comfortable, moist but lifeless. Scentless. He ran his fingers through his beard, around the back of his head, and down the trail of hair to his shoulders. His fingernails peeled and deposited along the fine topography of the concrete. His jaws clenched building a tension at the back of his neck. His heart pumped slowly conjuring the might of gods what must be at all odds to this. Chest heaving. His eyes welled filling his cavernous sockets only after minutes breaching and drenching his gaunt cheeks, adhering to his matted beard. The vague holographic spectres loomed in the sky taunting his sanity, defacing the stars, and disembowling his gutteral notions of beauty and organic. "
From chapter one, one of the many log recordings of Dr. Wilde:
"I love you Dr. Wilde, the children announced in unison.
I love you too.
-----------
The Uploads were particularly glitchy today. Verbal was good, motor was good, but the daily math assessment was the first I had received with sub-perfect scores since I could remember. Machine informs me that it was truncation errors due to this month's solar flare activity. I guess that explains Machine's temporary hicup in development. It's expected to resume after the solar storm. The statistical analysis shows variation in answers but all on the same question and due to interuptions to different solution methods. Incubation as a whole is ahead of schedule and upload may actually get the chance to fall on Machine's scheduled date for once.
Nur. Thomas Wilde, Log 85.32, 21.34.56
-----------"
From chapter 6, an interesting breaking point:
"Thomas languished and stumbled to the curb, emersed in the pulsing hum of the Machine, kicking at the frozen ground to delay the monotony setting in. Looming on the horizon like the tentacles of some ashen hypersymmetric sea creature, the Machine's comm towers blinked green with epileptic perfect frequency. The wind was cold but comfortable, moist but lifeless. Scentless. He ran his fingers through his beard, around the back of his head, and down the trail of hair to his shoulders. His fingernails peeled and deposited along the fine topography of the concrete. His jaws clenched building a tension at the back of his neck. His heart pumped slowly conjuring the might of gods what must be at all odds to this. Chest heaving. His eyes welled filling his cavernous sockets only after minutes breaching and drenching his gaunt cheeks, adhering to his matted beard. The vague holographic spectres loomed in the sky taunting his sanity, defacing the stars, and disembowling his gutteral notions of beauty and organic. "
Noteworthy sites.
I've stumbled across several cool links that point to public domain research and design, open source software, etc... here's a couple... I'm looking RIGHT now... I'll add more later. Pretty cool stuff.
http://spacehack.org/
http://citizensci.com/
http://spacehack.org/
http://citizensci.com/
25.1.10
This is your brain on leisure.
I was thinking tonight that there must be some mechanical explanation for my different view on life. It's obvious at this point, I have a capacity to divulge my, what seems very simplistic and frankly dull, goals for life without regarding much of the social recoil I receive from other people. Not to say I don't acknowledge their reactions. They make their views blatently clear, almost humorously clear, after regurgitating their own meticulously laid out goals for life as if to say with a raised eyebrow and a puffed-chest pomp, "Wow. Anyway, so, I hope you heard what I want to do with my life, because that's what everyone should be doing. I'm doing it right. I think you're brave. But you're going to fail. What you are doing will not work, and shouldn't work for that matter."
The jury's out on that. Actions speak. We'll see when I'm done.
Here's the question for myself. Why am I capable of this? Why am I capable of 'not caring'? I've been reading all night... here's what I've come up with.
The prefrontal cortex of our brain, the most evolutionary advanced part of our brain, is responsible for many of the behaviors we consider human, personality, and the like. As studies show, one of the main functions of our prefrontal cortex is to do one thing. And I'll sum it up. The prefrontal cortex tells the rest of your brain:
1. "Do the things that suck so you can do the things that don't."
but it also says this, almost equivalently.
2. "Do the right thing, even though it goes against your nature or might be harder to do."
This is what our evolution has gifted us with.
As we age however, our prefrontal cortex does less of that, and kind of settles into a maintenance stage, where it simply regulates: do what is correct in this situation.
So what does my brain do?
My brain does #2 very well. I think I'm capable of sacrificing a lot to do the right thing. Personally, I think my prefrontal cortex is doing a magnificent job with that in the face of much opposing stimulus (constant: "Wow. That's dumb man. You're fucking up.")
But... maybe I'm not doing #1. I want to live life now, and let it suck when I'm old, when it will suck anyway. It's known as pleasure postponement. And it's the reason it is harder for older people to go back to school. They no longer care. And it's not their fault.
SO... do I have an old brain? Is it aging? Is it damaged? Maybe; maybe not.
BUT! Maybe I do meet both criteria: #1 and #2.
Perhaps I am doing something that sucks to do something that doesn't suck later. Experiencing life as it is while I am at this stage so that, later on, after it has sucked, I can know with a higher degree of certainty what I can do that won't suck.
I think the word 'suck' has reached an certain elegance in this post.
Maybe that's an explanation: "I'm capable of sucking elegantly."
The jury's out on that. Actions speak. We'll see when I'm done.
Here's the question for myself. Why am I capable of this? Why am I capable of 'not caring'? I've been reading all night... here's what I've come up with.
The prefrontal cortex of our brain, the most evolutionary advanced part of our brain, is responsible for many of the behaviors we consider human, personality, and the like. As studies show, one of the main functions of our prefrontal cortex is to do one thing. And I'll sum it up. The prefrontal cortex tells the rest of your brain:
1. "Do the things that suck so you can do the things that don't."
but it also says this, almost equivalently.
2. "Do the right thing, even though it goes against your nature or might be harder to do."
This is what our evolution has gifted us with.
As we age however, our prefrontal cortex does less of that, and kind of settles into a maintenance stage, where it simply regulates: do what is correct in this situation.
So what does my brain do?
My brain does #2 very well. I think I'm capable of sacrificing a lot to do the right thing. Personally, I think my prefrontal cortex is doing a magnificent job with that in the face of much opposing stimulus (constant: "Wow. That's dumb man. You're fucking up.")
But... maybe I'm not doing #1. I want to live life now, and let it suck when I'm old, when it will suck anyway. It's known as pleasure postponement. And it's the reason it is harder for older people to go back to school. They no longer care. And it's not their fault.
SO... do I have an old brain? Is it aging? Is it damaged? Maybe; maybe not.
BUT! Maybe I do meet both criteria: #1 and #2.
Perhaps I am doing something that sucks to do something that doesn't suck later. Experiencing life as it is while I am at this stage so that, later on, after it has sucked, I can know with a higher degree of certainty what I can do that won't suck.
I think the word 'suck' has reached an certain elegance in this post.
Maybe that's an explanation: "I'm capable of sucking elegantly."
21.1.10
20.1.10
It's 3:20 AM... and I have found something to do for a while.
I'm at a really cool point in my life.
I know a lot about things that interest me. Finally! Doors let to other doors which led to others. I'm not ignorant, though. I don't know jack shit. But neither does anyone else. So I'm content with that. That'll get me by for now. So what am I doing now? I asked myself that earlier today. "So you're going to just drop everything and chill for a while... cool, man... then what?" SO... I've decided not to drop everything... but to pick up all the things I've thrown aside along the way while I was losing myself.
I picked her up... best choice, best inspiration ever. My perfect companion.
I have several projects in the making...
1. Developing a set of imaginary, contrived, and completely alien physics and a computer simulation of those physics.
*In the notebook, doodle stages. I have some interesting mathematical frameworks which I like to mess with on the toilet
2. A book dealing with the self-organization of the universe as dealing with non-linear systems and networks.
* An exercise in organizing and applying patterns to concise knowledge. This has probably been the most productive and beneficial project. It's opened up so many doors along the way.
3. A novel based on my view of the technological singularity.
* A great artistic outlet! Working on a screenplay as well as a soundtrack!
4. Practicing mental math techniques before I go to bed.
* Instead of counting sheep, I calculate logs. You should watch Dmitri Martin's "If I" if you haven't. He has a great spill on "useless talents."
But to the point...
A new project which might take up more of my "toilet-time":
5. Trying my hand at a quantum model of E8 Theory... of course... I'm going to need to understand E8 mathematics, Lisi's theory, as well as add to my knowledge of the math behind quantum mechanics... on an impossibly monstrous scale. Baby steps, though. Baby steps.
* I should be staying busy enough I guess.
I know a lot about things that interest me. Finally! Doors let to other doors which led to others. I'm not ignorant, though. I don't know jack shit. But neither does anyone else. So I'm content with that. That'll get me by for now. So what am I doing now? I asked myself that earlier today. "So you're going to just drop everything and chill for a while... cool, man... then what?" SO... I've decided not to drop everything... but to pick up all the things I've thrown aside along the way while I was losing myself.
I picked her up... best choice, best inspiration ever. My perfect companion.
I have several projects in the making...
1. Developing a set of imaginary, contrived, and completely alien physics and a computer simulation of those physics.
*In the notebook, doodle stages. I have some interesting mathematical frameworks which I like to mess with on the toilet
2. A book dealing with the self-organization of the universe as dealing with non-linear systems and networks.
* An exercise in organizing and applying patterns to concise knowledge. This has probably been the most productive and beneficial project. It's opened up so many doors along the way.
3. A novel based on my view of the technological singularity.
* A great artistic outlet! Working on a screenplay as well as a soundtrack!
4. Practicing mental math techniques before I go to bed.
* Instead of counting sheep, I calculate logs. You should watch Dmitri Martin's "If I" if you haven't. He has a great spill on "useless talents."
But to the point...
A new project which might take up more of my "toilet-time":
5. Trying my hand at a quantum model of E8 Theory... of course... I'm going to need to understand E8 mathematics, Lisi's theory, as well as add to my knowledge of the math behind quantum mechanics... on an impossibly monstrous scale. Baby steps, though. Baby steps.
* I should be staying busy enough I guess.
19.1.10
15.1.10
Spring
Reminds me of a poem I read several years ago...
---------------------------
The mountains, the pines, the shore... they call.
The red tide lingers.
| A Prayer in Spring by Robert Frost |
| Oh, give us pleasure in the flowers today; And give us not to think so far away As the uncertain harvest; keep us here All simply in the springing of the year. Oh, gives us pleasure in the orchard white, Like nothing else by day, like ghosts by night; And make us happy in the happy bees, The swarm dilating round the perfect trees. And make us happy in the darting bird Tha suddenly above the bees is heard, The meteor that thrusts in with needle bill, And off a blossom in mid-air stands still. For this is love and nothing else is love, The which it is reversed for God above To sanctify to what far ends He will, But which it only needs that we fulfill. |
---------------------------
The mountains, the pines, the shore... they call.
The red tide lingers.
On the recursive nature of the universe.
I know I have said this before. But I want to say it again. To put it into stone so that maybe one day I will either stand or fall as a giant.
The universe is recursive. Fractal in nature. Universal rules apply across all scales, across all dimensions, across all space and time. Mirrors of mirrors and microcosms within microcosms. This is the true nature of Nature.
Too many ideas point to the grand symmetry of it all. Way too fucking many.
The universe is recursive. Fractal in nature. Universal rules apply across all scales, across all dimensions, across all space and time. Mirrors of mirrors and microcosms within microcosms. This is the true nature of Nature.
Too many ideas point to the grand symmetry of it all. Way too fucking many.
Keep it coming. I am ecstatic.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107143909.htm
This is like a dream come true.
Here comes a new chapter to my book!!!
If you're interested in the real implications of this finding, take a good look at this TOE, by Garrett Lisi. Perfect geometric relationship between fundamental forces and attributes. Based on the E8 Lie algebra. Fucking amazing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything
If that tickles your fancy, take a look even deeper into the face of E8:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%E2%82%88
All this covered in the book I'm working on, the new resonant interactions will be undoubtedly amended.
This is like a dream come true.
Here comes a new chapter to my book!!!
If you're interested in the real implications of this finding, take a good look at this TOE, by Garrett Lisi. Perfect geometric relationship between fundamental forces and attributes. Based on the E8 Lie algebra. Fucking amazing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything
If that tickles your fancy, take a look even deeper into the face of E8:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%E2%82%88
All this covered in the book I'm working on, the new resonant interactions will be undoubtedly amended.
14.1.10
Poll
How would you perform this calculation in your head?
10,000 - 3,349 = ?
a. intuition
b. math trick
c. systematic mental (pencil and paper in head)
d. pencil and paper
just curious.
at first, i thought i did it intuitively... a very simple common calculation that i do all the time (i always calculate my change when buying something - point of the game? to beat the cashier to it - im kind of OCD about it)... but then slowing down the thought process, i realize i subtract the first 3 digits of 3,349 (3, 3, and 4) from nine and the last (9) from 10...
this is a very common math trick... and if my memory serves me... i did this trick before practicing math tricks for school competitions...
just goes to show that the brain adapts very quickly... it optimizes... its a very impressive little ongoing evolutionary process.
shortest distance between two points? a line... but more specifically a line of length 0... there's always a trick...
quick note on calculating change:
you are always breaking a dollar at some point (assuming you're paying with whole dollars at the time... which i rarely use my change except at the coinstar)
at some point when practicing this you start feeling relative distances when thinking of the digits between 1 and 100. math can become very intuitive with repetition. lightening fast. subconscious.
these are probably the easiest and most familiar and common calculations and everyone should be able to do these very quickly...
$1.00 - $0.64 = $0.36... it pops right in baby. but it also follows the rules of the math trick above.
not an impressive post whatsoever... im trying to pick apart my brain right now...
10,000 - 3,349 = ?
a. intuition
b. math trick
c. systematic mental (pencil and paper in head)
d. pencil and paper
just curious.
at first, i thought i did it intuitively... a very simple common calculation that i do all the time (i always calculate my change when buying something - point of the game? to beat the cashier to it - im kind of OCD about it)... but then slowing down the thought process, i realize i subtract the first 3 digits of 3,349 (3, 3, and 4) from nine and the last (9) from 10...
this is a very common math trick... and if my memory serves me... i did this trick before practicing math tricks for school competitions...
just goes to show that the brain adapts very quickly... it optimizes... its a very impressive little ongoing evolutionary process.
shortest distance between two points? a line... but more specifically a line of length 0... there's always a trick...
quick note on calculating change:
you are always breaking a dollar at some point (assuming you're paying with whole dollars at the time... which i rarely use my change except at the coinstar)
at some point when practicing this you start feeling relative distances when thinking of the digits between 1 and 100. math can become very intuitive with repetition. lightening fast. subconscious.
these are probably the easiest and most familiar and common calculations and everyone should be able to do these very quickly...
$1.00 - $0.64 = $0.36... it pops right in baby. but it also follows the rules of the math trick above.
not an impressive post whatsoever... im trying to pick apart my brain right now...
Independent Studies
So I'm taking a break form school, right? Right. My brain is still going 100 mph all the time. I realized how much better my brain functions in terms of finding and recognizing important information last night, compared to my dad, when I was skimming tech documents for my dad while we were trying to troubleshoot his elaborate makeshift home network and new linux install. But now might be the time to try to downshift and work on some new skills which, even though pretty sharp by this point, coul easily be improved on in just a few days.
I've downloaded several books of math puzzles. Each puzzle represents a neat little shortcut in math, and I've noticed (even after solving 3 and a half of them... this one is a bitch for some reason... even though it has the easiest rating) that each one programs a new path in my brain for solving all kinds of other math problems in my head. These will no doubt be very important skills if I decide to switch over to Mathematics when I return to school.
Mental math was something I was always interested in. I competed in number sense several years in grade school and mathematics in high school. I mean, you get a more intuitive notion of how math works when you kick away the systematic pencil and paper approach and start crunching them in your head.
I stumbled on this link today... pretty cool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Bharati_Krishna_Tirtha%27s_Vedic_mathematics
Math tricks based on the the old Hindu Vedic texts (The Vedas, another one of my pet interests!) Most of the tricks I use or have used in the past and never knew their origin.
I guess the inspiration behind all this was the few scenes in the movie Pi where Maximillian computes some somewhat impressive arithmetic in his head for his seemingly bright little Asian neighbor. I was curious as to how he could come to repeating decimals so quickly, there must have been a trick. And there is. There are many.
On a different note. My dog is having a dream right now. Probably of chasing cats at the farm or following me around endlessly all day while I do strange monkey things. He's wimpering like he's been locked in a cage for days. Maybe he's having flashbacks of the animal shelter. I've never been much of an animal activist. Nature is cruel you know. But I love this little creature.
On a similar note. I have found a another very interesting little creature to love. Even more so. It's always been in the back of my mind. She's beautiful. I guess you have to turn on a few times to realize what's back there, eh Chris?
Well back to the obsessive grind. It feels like a personality disorder. But it feels good.
I've downloaded several books of math puzzles. Each puzzle represents a neat little shortcut in math, and I've noticed (even after solving 3 and a half of them... this one is a bitch for some reason... even though it has the easiest rating) that each one programs a new path in my brain for solving all kinds of other math problems in my head. These will no doubt be very important skills if I decide to switch over to Mathematics when I return to school.
Mental math was something I was always interested in. I competed in number sense several years in grade school and mathematics in high school. I mean, you get a more intuitive notion of how math works when you kick away the systematic pencil and paper approach and start crunching them in your head.
I stumbled on this link today... pretty cool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Bharati_Krishna_Tirtha%27s_Vedic_mathematics
Math tricks based on the the old Hindu Vedic texts (The Vedas, another one of my pet interests!) Most of the tricks I use or have used in the past and never knew their origin.
I guess the inspiration behind all this was the few scenes in the movie Pi where Maximillian computes some somewhat impressive arithmetic in his head for his seemingly bright little Asian neighbor. I was curious as to how he could come to repeating decimals so quickly, there must have been a trick. And there is. There are many.
On a different note. My dog is having a dream right now. Probably of chasing cats at the farm or following me around endlessly all day while I do strange monkey things. He's wimpering like he's been locked in a cage for days. Maybe he's having flashbacks of the animal shelter. I've never been much of an animal activist. Nature is cruel you know. But I love this little creature.
On a similar note. I have found a another very interesting little creature to love. Even more so. It's always been in the back of my mind. She's beautiful. I guess you have to turn on a few times to realize what's back there, eh Chris?
Well back to the obsessive grind. It feels like a personality disorder. But it feels good.
13.1.10
The Two Most Incorrigible People Who Are Friends
Dear Chris,
And so it begins... we have finally fell into ontology and epistemology... the most vile of debates.
First off, I would like you to define "I" and "love" in any other language, any language you choose, wholly and absolutely. If you can then you win. I give you the crown. And I will be the first to fund and then buy the book you write on it. And then buy you a new car every year the rest of your life. If you can't then your argument is weak for this reason: the concepts of love and "I" are entirely subjective, and you experience them only because of the how, here's the kicker: and because of this these ideas are incommunicable. You can communicate to the object of your love the how, but you cannot wholly explain the experience. That is the reason for the term love, and why it really has no synonyms and one of the shortest definitions in any dictionary. It is a vague, ambiguous term and is only used to denote someone's experience with someone else (the object of love) in the most indirect way possible. We use "I" all the time, and in our usage (the subject noun usage) mathematics would easily represent you as a single variable. Now, to say that mathematics could define "I" in it's entirety, the summation of all things that make you "you", would be a feat. But, it's the idea of a state space I like to refer to: all variables that make you and all the variables defined over the course of your existence. But to do this requires knowledge of yourself, complete knowledge.
But lets jump back to languages. All languages are merely symbols, meaningless objects, which represent abstract concepts in the mind. From English, Spanish, German, to Music, to Art, all of these are symbols which cause our minds to formulate abstractions and ideals in our heads. So to say that any language actually defines anything would be ridiculous. The thing, for lack of a better word, that defines objects is knowledge.
Back to math as a language. Assembly is the lowest level language I know of in computers as well. Any program written in a higher level language can be (and is, realistically, when interpreted and compiled) written in assembly. I could just as easily represent English, or any other written language, using mathematics and write a nice equation or set up a nice matrix to represent each word, and from there summon up abstract knowledge from the reader (or really the person calculating). I could even put this on a nice graph, and given that you are knowledgeable enough in my math representation, you could read it like a book.
Music: I could use math to describe a beautiful symphony.
Art: I could use math to draw a beautiful picture, to sculpt a beautiful figure.
[This reminds me of that The Mercury Program song "It's a Data, Learn the Language"]
I guess what makes me think math is the lowest level language known by man (perhaps not even in the same hierarchy of other human languages like written language, music, art, but I'll make the assumption that it is) is that it wholly and absolutely defines ideal concepts. Knowledge emerges from these concepts, and all other languages use this knowledge to summon abstracts.
I thought maybe a weakness in my argument would be that other languages can define mathematics as well, but then I realized it only strengthens my argument, because then all languages would be inseparable from mathematics.
Tear me apart,
Kyle
PS Ontology and epistemology suck, because no one knows anything for sure, and somehow my comment on math was really an inquiry into "what can we really know?"
And so it begins... we have finally fell into ontology and epistemology... the most vile of debates.
First off, I would like you to define "I" and "love" in any other language, any language you choose, wholly and absolutely. If you can then you win. I give you the crown. And I will be the first to fund and then buy the book you write on it. And then buy you a new car every year the rest of your life. If you can't then your argument is weak for this reason: the concepts of love and "I" are entirely subjective, and you experience them only because of the how, here's the kicker: and because of this these ideas are incommunicable. You can communicate to the object of your love the how, but you cannot wholly explain the experience. That is the reason for the term love, and why it really has no synonyms and one of the shortest definitions in any dictionary. It is a vague, ambiguous term and is only used to denote someone's experience with someone else (the object of love) in the most indirect way possible. We use "I" all the time, and in our usage (the subject noun usage) mathematics would easily represent you as a single variable. Now, to say that mathematics could define "I" in it's entirety, the summation of all things that make you "you", would be a feat. But, it's the idea of a state space I like to refer to: all variables that make you and all the variables defined over the course of your existence. But to do this requires knowledge of yourself, complete knowledge.
But lets jump back to languages. All languages are merely symbols, meaningless objects, which represent abstract concepts in the mind. From English, Spanish, German, to Music, to Art, all of these are symbols which cause our minds to formulate abstractions and ideals in our heads. So to say that any language actually defines anything would be ridiculous. The thing, for lack of a better word, that defines objects is knowledge.
Back to math as a language. Assembly is the lowest level language I know of in computers as well. Any program written in a higher level language can be (and is, realistically, when interpreted and compiled) written in assembly. I could just as easily represent English, or any other written language, using mathematics and write a nice equation or set up a nice matrix to represent each word, and from there summon up abstract knowledge from the reader (or really the person calculating). I could even put this on a nice graph, and given that you are knowledgeable enough in my math representation, you could read it like a book.
Music: I could use math to describe a beautiful symphony.
Art: I could use math to draw a beautiful picture, to sculpt a beautiful figure.
[This reminds me of that The Mercury Program song "It's a Data, Learn the Language"]
I guess what makes me think math is the lowest level language known by man (perhaps not even in the same hierarchy of other human languages like written language, music, art, but I'll make the assumption that it is) is that it wholly and absolutely defines ideal concepts. Knowledge emerges from these concepts, and all other languages use this knowledge to summon abstracts.
I thought maybe a weakness in my argument would be that other languages can define mathematics as well, but then I realized it only strengthens my argument, because then all languages would be inseparable from mathematics.
Tear me apart,
Kyle
PS Ontology and epistemology suck, because no one knows anything for sure, and somehow my comment on math was really an inquiry into "what can we really know?"
10.1.10
You begin to think you've seen everything...
..then your friends describe beautiful geothermal springs lit under the aurora borealis that they tell you to visit while you're near them 3 months from now... they describe fishing on the arctic seas surrounded by sheared monoliths of granite and peering into the crystal clear depths surrounded by whales... and then you walk into your backyard so your dog can take a shit somewhere other than your bedroom, and you find these exotic formations surrounding what I believe to be some species of milkweed (or at least some winter hardy perennial) that has sprung up lately: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frost_flower
I am very happy in this moment. No profound revelations. No joy. No loathing. Just being.
I am very happy in this moment. No profound revelations. No joy. No loathing. Just being.
(From Wikipedia, not my backyard)
Delicate. A kiss from nature.
(Look at the form. Gradual. Systematic. Iterative. A rare natural fractal.)
6.1.10
Things Are Looking Up
Taking a break from school. Crunching numbers and looking for jobs in Alaska or British Columbia. Looking for a good school to take several German classes online when the time comes. Adopted an awesome little mutt to keep me company on my journeys. Saving money for some elaborate camping/hiking trips. Considering a short trip to Europe. Blown away at the support and encouragement I have received.
Baby steps. I don't have far to go.
Baby steps. I don't have far to go.
5.1.10
Paradigm Shift.
The massive amount of cultural and intellectual growth I have been exposed to the past 12 months lit a fuse. I have exploded into a new human being with new concrete desires and points of view. My friend Chris calls it 'turning on'. Once I make the proper preparations, those who know me may not see me for a while. Perhaps my blonde hair and blue eyes were always phenotypical pointers to some repressed nordic gene responsible for a nomadic temperament. I've developed a disdain for governed society and a love for nature and solitude. Now, to set the plans in motion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
