Gumby on Miracle of music TheWhiteREabbot on Guardian Chance D. Saunders on The Functional Mind II Pat on Statins tom wil on Statins
- 03-The chaotic mind
- 04-Converting Mind
- 05-The Social Mind 1
- 06 The social mind 2
- 07 The Biased Mind
- 08-The Boxed Mind
- 09-The Healing Mind
- 10-The Aware Mind
- 11-The Healthy Mind
- 12-The Psychological Mind
- 14-The Deceived Mind
- 15-The Greedy Mind
- 16-The Warriors Mind
- 17-The Dreaming Mind
- About Me
- Art Therapy
- The Dreaming Mind
- The Greedy Mind
- The Legal Mind
- The Loco Mind
- The Psychological Mind
- The RAW mind
Category Archives: The X Files
I have found the most extraordinary thing. This is mind-boggling so it is going to require some setup. Keep your britches on lady, I’m getting there. I have found someone as smart as I am, perhaps even smarter. But how can this be, you may ask? How can someone like el Loco Gringo even consider the possibility? Someone so worldly yet urbane, masculine yet sensitive, intelligent yet smart and assertive yet humble, so very humble. This person is Ted Lumly, hereinafter referred to as Mr. Ted. (I use the honorific Mr. only with non-idiots (or non-stupido’s as Mr Ted would say)
There is indeed “a slavering beast devouring the minds of man” – Ayn Rand
I propose the formation of a group, A league of extra-temporal gentlemen to slay this beast. This is a multi-generational project. I hereby wish to nominate the following for this group. Mr. Walt (nexialist), Mr. Eva (temporalist), Mr. Ted (physicist), Mr. Geoff (macro-communications), Mr Teresa (micro-communications), Mr Jill (neurologist), Mr. Sir Ken (education), Mr. Kirby (mathematician)
The following is from Mr. Kirby>Although the concept of vector connotes something “advanced” to many ears, we should realize that even the lowly number line, first introduced in the elementary grades, is an application of Grassmann algebra — at least according to some formalist conceptions.
This is because the real numbers, by themselves, have no spatial component. As soon as you allow yourself the freedoms of space, you must piggy-back your reals atop some system of directed elements — the so-called “vectors”.
“Once a flowing river whose current we passively monitored, time is now more properly understood as something constructed by the brain and personalised by culture. We have relationships with time; we fight it and manipulate it.” – Eva Hoffman
By ellocogringo |
Bipolar Mood Swings
Putting the fun back in disfunctional
Centering is the ability to maintain balance between logos and mythos in a turbulent ether.
Plug in whichever bipolar model you prefer.
I chose Plato’s model because it is the earliest accurate description of the mind.
Kind of like a pop-off valve on a pressure cooker. An inability to remain centered because of the disjunct between the left and right minds. If centering = the ability to maintain balance between logos and mythos in a turbulent ether. (Plato’s model) or top down/bottom up/environment. I don’t see that psychology has made any advances since Plato. If fact they have regressed. In the same class as voodoo with the caveat that voodoo works better. when a naked priestess dances around you shaking her beads and rattles, it is definitely a mind altering experience. It is psychology/society which is psychotic, not the bipolar. We live in a pressure cooker, a slave society, and the bipolar just “popped” sooner than others. He has “gone off the reservation”, “caught the underground railroad”, “slipped the chains of slavery” His minds rebel against insanity. It’s a balancing act and society has it’s thumb on the scale. (The Aristotelean brain fart) Plato was centered, Aristotle was an idiot.
The right mind says “what about me?”
The left mind says “shut up”
Or…………. Maybe not, I am crazy, don’t you know? But it has kept me from going insane.
The Big Hoochie Koochie
“Something unknown is doing we don’t know what” – Sir Arthur Eddington The cosmic standing wave, is rotational in nature with a beat of eight and is negentropic (Kinda hard to put the universe in a lab) Past that I can’t say, I’m not a mathematician nor do I care to be, nor am I sure that mathematics is relevant until it can be used to quantify the frequency domain. (a new mathematics, maybe?) It has had many visualizations, ripple patterns in a pond, refractive patterns etc. I’d like to propose my own visualization “The big hoochie koochie”. It’s as good as any and better than most. She vibrates, is rotational in nature with a beat of eight and she can definitely get it together. Not very professional you may say. Why thank you, I consider professionalism to be a negative character trait.
Audio of BIG HOOCHIE KOOCHIE
How odd, it sounds just like the little hoochie koochie. Maybe they’re the same thing, our dual view of the universe projected outwards.
The big hitch in the giddyup here is that physicists are using an artificial quantification to evaluate an interpretation of of a perception. Put another way, they are measuring shadows of reality (Plato’s Cave) and they’re using a rubber ruler. Geoff and Milo Wolff are without a doubt correct as far as they go. Their view is certainly the “best answer to date”, and in view of the indeterminate nature of the frequency domain, may be the “best answer possible”. Should be fun. As I mentioned, my interest is in what the “big hoochie-koochie” is doing inside the skull. I prefer to leave physics and mathematics to those who are interested in such things. I challenge any mathematician or physicist to disprove the “Big Hoochie Koochie”. This then is where bottom up thinking comes into play. If you want understand finance, you start with the penny. if you want to understand the mind, you start with the neuron. If you want to understand the universe, you start with the sine wave. If you want to understand waves, you start with a geophysics. If you want to build a house, you start with the foundation. Else you have “sand castles in the air” – “Big Al” Einstein and “mankind has to start thinking differently if it is to survive” – Big Al I could use some help here, is koochie spelled with a k or a c? I couldn’t find a definitive answer on the internet. Observer The yin/yang wars duality
The Little Hoochie Koochie
More years ago than I care to remember in high school, I recall a lecture on the wave nature of matter that went eerily like this:
“Planck came up with a formula that agreed very closely with experimental data, but the formula only made sense if he assumed that the energy of a vibrating molecule was quantized–that is, it could only take on certain values. The energy would have to be proportional to the frequency of vibration, and it seemed to come in little “chunks” of the frequency multiplied by a certain constant. This constant came to be known as Planck’s constant, or h.”
“Einstein proposed that light also delivers its energy in chunks; light would then consist of little particles, or quanta, called photons, each with an energy of Planck’s constant times its frequency.”
The summary of this mental musing was> “Yes, I’m afraid it’s a bit more complicated than that. Some experimental results, like this one, seem to prove beyond all possible doubt that light consists of particles; others insist, just as irrefutably, that it’s waves. We can only conclude that light is somehow both a wave and a particle–or that it’s something else we can’t quite visualize, which appears to us as one or the other depending on how we look at it.”
Einstein sums it up well here >“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”
In the GEA talk the question was posed; “is space making electrons, or are electrons making space?”
This is asking the right question. The answer is YES, not A or B but both. The universe is negengropic.
This is beginning to look suspiciously like the brain fart, the built in logic and perception flaw in the brain.
Posing a question as A OR B IS the logic brain fart.
“It is obvious that (whatever)” IS the perception brain fart.
I prefer to leave math and physics to those interested in such things as I consider them meta-concepts. But it would seem, in view of the brain fart, is that somehow the logic has to be worked both ways.
Joel Williams must read> MCAS
“Something unknown is doing we don’t know what.” Sir ArthurEddington
Phase and group velocities of three electrons traveling in slow motion over a distance of 0.4 Ångstroms.
Why not just say; “Dunno” It’s not A or B it’s “something else”. Planck is talking about a perception, Einstein is talking about an interpretation. Neither is talking about reality IE The big and little hoochie koochie. Both are stretching and twisting their rubber ruler trying to measure something ENTIRELY INSIDE THE SKULL. What Mr. Ted would call (local forcing) The big and little hoochie koochie (same thing) are outside. (what Mr. Ted would call spacial forcing)
Please note I am speaking only of the thought processes.
So the big hoochie koochie must be equal to all of the little hoochie koockies
So, how do you quantify the un-quantifyable?
“It ain’t real” – el Loco Gringo
Audio of little hoochie koochie>
How odd, it sounds just like the big hoochie koochie. Maybe they’re the same thing, our dual view of the universe projected outwards?