.....
////
///
//
/
.
.
.Stop looking. Stop listening. Think.
Stop spectating. Act.
||||
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:58 pm
Schrödinger's cat had/has Multiple Personality Disorder.
Anyway, isn't the whole Schrödinger's cat business
just another garden variety Gordian knot made of
Möbius strips?
It's like the infamous "glass half empty/half full" red herring.
The answer depends on information that is withheld
which implies that the answer will be found on the
MENSA acceptance criteria examination.
The vital evidence which is withheld is
whether or not the glass is IN A STATE
of being emptied OR A STATE of being filled.
And no, a glass being used in a still life is not
exempted by reason of simple evaporation.
Don't use your brain for a door stop
and you will be in a better position to
resist the efforts of Others [yep, Them]
to use your brain for nefarious schemes.
I can hear the n'er-do-well knuckles
snapping like packing bubbles as we speak.
Oh, cut that out, it's so OCD.
||||
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2015 2:04 pm
In the current issue of "Sophistry Quarterly Illustrated" Professor Curmudgeon Stew advances the following :
"To grasp the bare bones fundamentals of time travel requires a conference Vulcan mind meld comprised of
at least three humans [not necessarily terran], seven Vulcans, Lieutenant Commanander Worf, one and a half
Arcturians and at least four pan-galactic communications carriers. Even given these stringent protocols it is
quite possible that during the course of the conference/meld as many as five of the participants will have died
and/or disappeared and one hapless soul will have morphed into a mélange of Chewbacca and Waldo."
Professor Stew offered no theoretical framework for his clearly exhaustively researched assertions.
In the spirit of fair play fostered by "Sophistry Quarterly Illustrated" all statements are assumed
innocent until proven guilty. The Professor was, naturally, properly Mirandized.
||||
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:14 am
has it ever occurred to anyone that numbers are arbitrary?
the base ten system is absolutely arbitrary.
there is nothing inherent in base ten notation that
makes it more efficient than any other base notation.
i want my education back.
if prose is Newtonian word mechanics,
then poetry is quantum word mechanics.
and if you aren't thoroughly confused, there is always ...
www.academia.edu/4832069/Newtonian_Quantum_Gravity||||
Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2016 9:25 am
the referenced Stendahl quote :
"Mathematics allows for no hypocrisy and no vagueness." is of course without merit.
you may as well say "Words allow for no hypocrisy and no vagueness."
if it is anything mathematics is an extension and expressive
tool of logic to which all the laws of logic apply.
one of the basic concepts of logic
is that a line of reasoning must be
1 - internally consistent
2 - externally consistent.
both internal and external consistency have to do with the definition of terms.
for example "if A = B and B = C, then A = C."
IF mathematics is defined, as Stendahl does, as an inherently romantic notion, THEN Stendahl's deduction is true. However, since mathematics is only a human tool with no agency for action within itself, then it is wholly possible for mathematics-the-tool to be applied to a given set of phenomena according to the precepts of a set of untrue definitions. Romanticism is a scourge. sloppy thinking has always accompanied it. Consider an apothegm attributed to Benjamin Disraeli by Mark Twain :
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
interesting PDF on "sloppy thinking" as a characteristic
of the "firefighting mentality" in organizations. the Kepner-Trego PDF analyzes "firefighting mentality" as a passive coping technique rooted in a reactionary unwillingness to accept responsibilities associated with creative adaptation. sounds like romanticism to me ...
www.britannica.com/biography/Stendhal-French-authorwww.debate.org/…/Stendhals-The-Red-and-the-Black-…/1/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanticismwww.kepner-tregoe.com/…/70D2378A-FCDB-2656-BD044DC1…/The danger of refusing to think for yourself is that it exposes you to the possibility that you may be manipulated by a person who is stupider than you are. Bbbbrrrrr.
||||
Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:18 am
“All get what they want; they do not always like it.” - C.S.Lewis
.
.
.
\
\\
\\\
\\\\
.....