tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post6128958353711477816..comments2023-09-10T08:35:25.739-07:00Comments on Street Rat Crazy Saloon: Zero SumDinkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10907199567928816652noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-59303258242606273262009-09-25T08:55:26.166-07:002009-09-25T08:55:26.166-07:00Amend "last post" to "last comment&...Amend "last post" to "last comment" in above.Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-7247158157710055732009-09-25T08:54:43.501-07:002009-09-25T08:54:43.501-07:00I'm bridling, Thai.
You sound kind of condesce...I'm bridling, Thai.<br />You sound kind of condescending in your last post. <br />I get touchy about condescension. (Remember the exclusion post, above ?)<br />And I don't understand your last comment either.<br />You make Sudden Debt sound like some kind of cute little club where everybody has the latest info on physics.<br />I don' think that's true.<br />But then I know nothing about the history of Sudden Debt.<br />Maybe y'all meet after hours in smoky bars and slug it out over physics ?<br />Although geographical location could possibly render this impossible.<br />Don't worry. I can handle MY agression, and YOURS, too, by the way. It's no big deal, right ?Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-5651594784072951172009-09-25T06:46:46.683-07:002009-09-25T06:46:46.683-07:00Re: #1 "Does a system ever really collapse in...Re: #1 "Does a system ever really collapse in that spectacular way that apocalypts think"<br /><br /><br />Re: #2 "And since it is a long slow process, what is taking the place of the system is also progressively coming into being ?"<br /><br /><br />This is kind of fun for me to "read" someone else's mind race into all the same nooks and crannies mine has and everyone else' I know who studies this stuff has.<br /><br />You will make other "discoveries"/"observations" as well in time, of that I am sure and pretty soon the economics discussions will start to make a new level of sense, and you might stop getting angry at everyone else for not seeing the problem with "filth lucre".<br /><br />Having said that let me see if I can help you with a few points.<br /><br />1. Change (or collapse) can be gradual.<br /><br />2. Abrupt or sudden unexpected change is just as real.<br /><br />Indeed, this is the same science that predicting the future is impossible (since if you knew the future you would change your behavior and become part of the system and therefore change the system)<br /><br />This is the same science that says markets are not efficient<br /><br />This is the same science that says risk is scale invariant or infinite (indeed, remember my post <a href="http://streetratcrazysaloon.blogspot.com/2009/06/part-ii-conservation-of-risk.html" rel="nofollow">The Conservation of Risk</a>.)<br /><br />Basically that means things like being wealthy is just as risky as being poor, etc... and that you just need to look at the problem more carefully (in particular you need to factor in time, etc...)<br /><br />It means that the dinosaurs can have sudden extinction<br /><br />It is what the global warming people are discussing when they talk about the risk of "abrupt climate change"<br /><br />It is why bubbles form in complex systems that can lead to disasterous results for everyone when they pop<br /><br />It is why volcanoes like Yellowstone can suddenly erupt and cause potential extinction level events.<br /><br />It is why the human brain can never make a truly rational choice, etc...Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-48645543076420625452009-09-24T23:55:13.262-07:002009-09-24T23:55:13.262-07:00How do you work in these complexity theories while...How do you work in these complexity theories while taking into account that Nature seems to further complexity and diversity, without being apocalpytic, Thai ?<br />Does a system ever really collapse in that spectacular way that apocalypts think, or is its demise always a long slow process that has been at work for a long time BEFORE any perceived EVENT comes around ?<br />And since it is a long slow process, what is taking the place of the system is also progressively coming into being ?<br />Empathy is not a logical "thought" process.<br />It is the result of identification, in Freudian lingo.<br />I said on Hell's blog that I despise nationalism, and I maintain that.<br />And as I stated... why settle for belonging to a small group, when you can have the whole wide world, and fellow man (and not necessarily as abstractions...) ?<br />Invariably we come back to the exclusion question. Where we started.Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-48479034276588264512009-09-24T13:53:39.456-07:002009-09-24T13:53:39.456-07:00Opps, sorry. My wife was using my computer.Opps, sorry. My wife was using my computer.Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-58071018623953649442009-09-24T13:46:43.631-07:002009-09-24T13:46:43.631-07:00Re: "This debate for me is about the reductio...Re: "This debate for me is about the reductionist tendency to overrate RATIONAL, LOGICAL thought, promoting it as the ONLY kind of valuable thought process that SHOULD permit us to see the world, and relate to our fellow being (and hence reducing what we are capable of seeing in the world, by the way...)."<br /><br />I don't disagree with this on one level, but it is not very helpful on another.<br /><br />We all want to exist on this planet and in order to do we need the assistance of others. To the extent we can see and tangibly feel that assistance, we accept (shall we call them flaws?) flaws in each other.<br /><br />To the extent we do not see them, we do not.<br /><br />Of course we don't see all the connections we all need (even the positive ones) and therefore it is highly likely we can shoot ourselves in the foot; but is there really any alternative?<br /><br />You were the one who both said "A shared project or a common goal" and then took it back as you realized such a event is really impossible with very large groups, no?<br /><br />You need to propose an alternative that also works.<br /><br />We are all held together by "hubs" remember?<br /><br />Personally I think it is actually impossible to truly "know" what those hubs are as you can only see what they are to you and not to others with very different moral filters. <br /><br />It is almost like a black hole in astrophysics, you can see its event horizon and its behavior on the system but you can never truly see a black hole.<br /><br />(And this might go past you but in case not) physicist are pretty sure there is a maximum amount of information a black hole's event horizon can contain before it collapses.<br /><br />Kind of reminds me of how complexity scientists feel there is a maximum amount of information a complex system can store before it's hubs (and the complex system) also collapses.Kathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12335635522613306573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-90123692921523366462009-09-24T10:09:03.867-07:002009-09-24T10:09:03.867-07:00I'm preening..
I think I'm OK with erector...I'm preening..<br />I think I'm OK with erector sets.Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-46117569308140477002009-09-24T10:08:37.262-07:002009-09-24T10:08:37.262-07:00Actually, Thai, I kind of pride myself on the idea...Actually, Thai, I kind of pride myself on the idea that for me, this debate is not about the existence of a supernatural being who created the Earth in seven days.<br />This debate for me is about the reductionist tendency to overrate RATIONAL, LOGICAL thought, promoting it as the ONLY kind of valuable thought process that SHOULD permit us to see the world, and relate to our fellow being (and hence reducing what we are capable of seeing in the world, by the way...).<br />As irony would have it, Freud pinpointed what he called the primary thought processes, which correspond to the logic of the unconscious (the unconscious is NOT a place, it is like what those particles produce when they are projected on a surface, OK ?) <br />He could see that it was possible to think in another way from "rational" thought, which he called secondary thought processes. But he always had a hard time NOT JUDGING between the two types of thought.<br />And... as you can probably tell, the hardest part of all of this is the NOT JUDGING.<br />Like... in the last comment you talked about ego and competition because you had come to a judgment about what I was saying, or what you were saying, I can't remember.<br />And... nobody ever really invents anything or any thought. We just keep rediscovering what other people have already thought, and reappropriating it for ourselves...Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-13534368605099644702009-09-23T21:33:40.616-07:002009-09-23T21:33:40.616-07:00Sorry for the spelling typosSorry for the spelling typosThaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-26560827260076526892009-09-23T21:33:07.952-07:002009-09-23T21:33:07.952-07:00Then I am impressed.
I had to read about this stu...Then I am impressed.<br /><br />I had to read about this stuff one my own and then think about it a little.<br /><br />And you are absolutely correct to note that scientist are definitely finding "faith" or "god".<br /><br />There version may not exactly agree with an anthropomorphic god taught to certain children on Sunday school, but I know no wise physicists that completely disagree with major tenets of religion anymore, as evidence by the very honest ability of the National Academy of Science to write stuff like <a href="http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11876&page=1" rel="nofollow">this</a>.<br /><br />... Their basic message is that they are simply different systems for looking at information structures ;-)Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-57344993478188266432009-09-23T10:21:21.403-07:002009-09-23T10:21:21.403-07:00So what if it is an ego thing and/or (LOL LOL LOL)...So what if it is an ego thing and/or (LOL LOL LOL) competition ?<br />What's BAD about ego and competition ?<br />Is that one of your prejudices showing ?<br />I'm going to offer myself a treat and say that I thought up a lot of what I'm saying without referring to the scientists.<br />The scientists sound just like the Jewish rabbis, Thai...Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-90995853474395637772009-09-23T06:15:24.638-07:002009-09-23T06:15:24.638-07:00I understood it to mean convoluted.
I am sorry. I...I understood it to mean convoluted.<br /><br />I am sorry. I really hope this is not perceived as an ego or competition thing. It is not so convoluted to me at all- it is simply "n" dimensional, which is infinite dimensions.<br /><br />I tend to always see a sphere and just tell myself: "which side (or part) or the sphere am I looking at today and do I need (or want) to look at another part"?<br /><br />I have spent forever trying to get out of the prison of the conservation of energy- really, years as it's implications are SO profound. So far no success. <br /><br />Understand there are entire departments devoted to this stuff in Universities today. Similarly there are <a href="http://www.santafe.edu/" rel="nofollow">theoretical scientific institutes</a> that do the same employing many of the same people who build atomic bombs, etc...<br /><br />Look up for yourself in Google words like, "econophysics", "complexity science", "the Santa Fe Institute", etc... and you will see this is a real field of science and not just Thai's random thoughts.<br /><br />They study/model things like "faith", trust", "cooperation", etc... <br /><br />Like when I said to SS, has he ever thought of religion as an advantageous adaption to improve cooperation all in the setting of a zero sum system", which is the theory behind evolutionary religious studies.<br /><br />I really did not think of these things myself- honest. I just happen to understand what the people in these fields are saying (because I was a scientist before I became an MD- which is really a kind of engineer- and I have always found the <br /><br />Indeed there have been physicists that have been driven mad by the implications of this.<br /><br /><br />We really can move on from the subject now, I really am not trying to "rape" you or anyone else with the idea. Indeed, I am mostly trying to show "someone" I am not crazy nor amoral. In some ways I wish I had never made the realization... of course the conservation of energy might not be true, and then all observations we have in this are interesting but incomplete. <br /><br />But we do talk on the computers or fly on the aircraft we build with these tools. <br /><br />And we continue to notice that things like war, jealousy, greed, love, death, etc... are eternal (indeed the econophysicists have shown fractal) and we keep asking ask "why?"<br /><br />And I will continue to use its tools in my daily work to take care of people as that is my life's chosen work and my duty to the collective... which incidentally starts in a few hours so I have to go. ;-)<br /><br />Be wellThaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-67601380967731385142009-09-23T05:42:25.108-07:002009-09-23T05:42:25.108-07:00Oops, typo : that should read convoluted, NOT conv...Oops, typo : that should read convoluted, NOT convulted...Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-15740869474013872262009-09-23T00:17:53.457-07:002009-09-23T00:17:53.457-07:00Thai, you certainly have a convulted mind.
I'm...Thai, you certainly have a convulted mind.<br />I'm jealous.<br />Every step I take, you seem to have already been there before...<br />And I prided myself on my intelligence.<br />Sigh...<br />It's back to Ecclesiastes for me.<br />When hubris threatens, nothing like a little shot of Ecclesiastes.Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-20343057262748112182009-09-22T18:57:07.313-07:002009-09-22T18:57:07.313-07:00Der re: (Sudden Debt comment)
"Just WHAT is a...Der re: (Sudden Debt comment)<br />"Just WHAT is a shared project/goal in the case of large numbers of people ?<br />The idea certainly sounds seductive enough, but I'm not sure that it works..."<br /><br />That is my point if it was not clear.<br /><br />Why do you think faith developed in humans?<br /><br />If you were unaware, <a href="http://www.science.org.au/nova/newscientist/094ns_002.htm" rel="nofollow">ccomplexity theorists are the very first to say complex systems can get so complex they collapse simply of their own complexity</a>.<br /><br />And re: "conservation of energy will not save you from..."<br /><br />True, but its tools are how we conjure the weapons and defenses we do have.<br /><br />Every system can be broken, but there is also always a defense for a particular offense, etc...Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-75833216501591551512009-09-22T05:14:15.639-07:002009-09-22T05:14:15.639-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-80295390755909061132009-09-21T15:11:49.848-07:002009-09-21T15:11:49.848-07:00This occurs as a result of the conservation of ene...<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE58K4IQ20090921" rel="nofollow">This occurs as a result of the conservation of energy and bounded systems</a>.<br /><br />And when it happens, it would look like a butterfly effect to certain observersThaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-32854748007842530352009-09-21T14:57:52.732-07:002009-09-21T14:57:52.732-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-40485494127067081602009-09-21T14:49:47.731-07:002009-09-21T14:49:47.731-07:00Well, I'm really leery on the "going vira...Well, I'm really leery on the "going viral" metaphor because it is as old as the world, nothing new about it whatsoever. Every age has its own equivalent to "going viral" ; it is the backbone of "Mein Kampf". <br />Jung MAY have used the concept of synchronicity to translate the "going viral".<br />Susan Boyle's appearance on that show was a reenactement of the Cinderalla fairy tale.<br />The world latched on to it because these days there is a great hunger to perceive man as a noble and good force with talent and free will.<br />This hunger has been frustrated for quite some time now, due to simplistic "scientific" theories which date way back into the 19th century (and yes, I am including Darwin's theory here...).Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-76295997877003300262009-09-21T14:38:39.889-07:002009-09-21T14:38:39.889-07:00The video clip comes from a movie made for main st...The video clip comes from a movie made for main stream theaters here in the US titled <a href="http://www.whatthebleep.com/" rel="nofollow">What the Bleep do we know!?</a>.<br /><br />It is made for average everyday Americans (IQ approx 100) which is why it takes that particular tone.<br /><br />But it also does a good job explaining the subject to people unfamiliar with it which is why I chose it.<br /><br /><a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1501838765715417418#" rel="nofollow">If you want to watch Richard Feynman</a> by all means... but he does not discuss the philosophy of science so you may forget to shift manifolds after you watch it ;-)<br /><br />At the simplest level, these are all different ways of talking about what scientists call <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1501838765715417418#docid=2197011107436852083" rel="nofollow">The Heisenberg uncertainty principle</a> which basically says there are limits to the amount of information we can know about a system.<br /><br />For once you enter a manifold or system and become part of it, anything you do always changes the system itself (remember how the electron went back from being a wave to a particle when the scientists actually followed it?).<br /><br /><br />And where this confusion arises in humans most often is in systems or manifolds where the boundaries are very large; it is hard to see how our own behavior effects the system somewhere else as we do not view those events.<br /><br />Which if course is why smaller groups are much easier to manage and get agreement around.<br /><br />And is why we see things like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect" rel="nofollow">The Butterfly Effect</a>, where <i><b>"the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas".</b></i> <br /><br />Think about how we now hear linguistic colloquialisms such as "going viral" (what is the equivalent in French?)- which I am sure you are aware is when something like a simple idea or news clip or piece of information spreads all over the world very rapidly, such as <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPZh4AnWyk" rel="nofollow">Susan Boyle performance</a> on Britain's got talent.<br /><br />Or why scientists now have to develop ideas like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory" rel="nofollow">string and super string theory</a>, etc... in order to capture the larger and large relationships we see between things if we expand the manifold to the universe, etc... and try to explain all the phenomena we see within a boundary where the conservation of energy holds true.<br /><br />Manifolds within manifolds within manifolds, etc...<br /><br />What is energy?<br /><br />It is such a fascinating subject to me.Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-37750772592616635312009-09-21T12:55:15.419-07:002009-09-21T12:55:15.419-07:00I checked out the video. Pretty mind boggling.
But...I checked out the video. Pretty mind boggling.<br />But why do presenters have to talk to you as though you are an idiot ???<br />It's not for kiddies because it's too difficult for them to follow.<br />So... why the condescending tone ?Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-35154513146598439482009-09-21T12:45:39.487-07:002009-09-21T12:45:39.487-07:00AWWWWWWWW....
Thai, How... UNPOETIC of you.
Person...AWWWWWWWW....<br />Thai, How... UNPOETIC of you.<br />Personally, I prefer Ali Baba's flying carpet. <br />I've never flown one before, but who knows ?<br />And I got thinking about it.<br />My personal history is chock full of reasons why I am an EITHER/OR person, rather than an BOTH/AND one.<br />And I have lots of company, you can be sure of that.Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-14112564671483415372009-09-21T12:01:42.901-07:002009-09-21T12:01:42.901-07:00Deb, re: and/or
Here is a short video
Welcome to ...Deb, re: and/or<br /><br />Here is a short video<br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc" rel="nofollow">Welcome to the world of quantum mechanics</a><br /><br />... understand this is the "stuff" that built the computers we now share thoughts (Energy?) over.<br /><br />Or as I like to say: "In the end you always have to chose a side"<br /><br />Do I know the conservation of energy is invariant for sure?<br /><br />No<br /><br />But when I fly at 30,000 feet on an airplane, you can guess my mind's true leanings by the fact that I am on the plane in the first place and not Ali Babba's flying carpet.<br /><br />;-)Thaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700253024420397221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-89734629729883472512009-09-21T11:04:31.626-07:002009-09-21T11:04:31.626-07:00LOL, Thai, we are/were on the same wavelength !!!
...LOL, Thai, we are/were on the same wavelength !!!<br />When I finished typing MY comment, I saw yours that was posted BEFORE, but NOT when I was writing !!!Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8206677169397293052.post-33606589458295639392009-09-21T11:02:43.081-07:002009-09-21T11:02:43.081-07:00By the use of language to create a consensual iden...By the use of language to create a consensual identity, I mean the throwing off of professional jargon by TWO (at least) parties who assume that they are talking about the same thing because they are using the same word.<br />Take, for example... the word "psychosis".<br />This word, since it was "minted" has changed hands SO MANY TIMES, in so many different contexts that you can be sure that the person you are speaking to, (even if he or she is a shrink, and you are too) does not have the same understanding of it as you.<br />And this, even without taking into consideration the positional words that you bring up, Thai.<br />But it is evident to many people (and obviously to you, Thai...) that one way that people feel that they belong in a group is to use the same words that the group uses. This gives a kind of legitimacy within the group. And... people in order to belong to the group, will use the group's words without necessarily knowing what they mean... (Look at me on SuddenDebt, lol...)<br />And obviously, that fact has an influence on what the words mean within the group, and exerts a constant pressure on their meaning. <br />My husband and I have come up with an expression describing OUR reaction to language : to a certain extent we are "non dupe" of the way language works, which is kind of a tough place to be, Thai.<br />It gets a little... lonely sometimes, you know what I mean ?<br />For the idea that the brain perceives things consecutively, I read it somewhere. But in terms of sensory perception, this idea is painfully logical, Thai.<br />One last thought to blow your mind :<br />What you mention about NOT being able to see behind and in front AT THE SAME TIME suggests that there are indeed situations where it is not AND, but... OR.<br />I am very very interested, not in the position words, Thai ; we can get back to this if you like, but in the... COORDINATING CONJUNCTIONS.<br />Like... how do we put things together, and LINK ourselves to them ? What does our coordinating logic look like ?<br />Gotta coordinate. And it seems to take the form of AND... or EITHER/OR.<br />There's a world of difference between the two.Debrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01510189619803992336noreply@blogger.com