Why Does My Clock Show Me The Temperature First?

I’ve got this personal phenomena going on and on for years now. I have an “atomic” clock next to my bed and it has a little projector on top which shines the time of day and alternately the outside temperature onto the ceiling above my bed. I turn the clock away as it is too bright but the little projection on the ceiling shows me the outside temperature for 5 seconds and then the time of day for 5 seconds and so on back and forth to the temperature then the time.

The phenomena is this: When it occurs for me to wonder at the time, I turn to the ceiling where 100% of the time it is displaying the temperature. Within 5 seconds of the inception of that thought to wonder at the time, the temperature which is always displaying first then changes to displaying the time of day, and so on it goes.

How can I come to understand the reason for my clock displaying the temperature to me first, — first every time?

How is Planck’s constant derived? From what formula? And what does it physically mean for us?

Answer by Troy Jason:

Many may not realize it,  but the Planck-Einstein quantized energy equation: E = (h) x (frequency) is the extended version of the proportionality between the energy and the frequency of a given electromagnetic wavelength. But there exist a simpler edited version: A x B/D. It focuses mainly on the proportionality of the proton Compton wavelength/any given particle wavelength. The edited version of wavelength proportions gives us a discrete quantized mass equivalent of a particle. That mass equivalent allows us to use C or the speed of light to determine the particle's quantized energy. The given wavelength is used to determine its frequency. Given:

A) proton mass = 1.673 x 10^-27 kg

B) proton Compton wavelength = 1.321 x 10^-15 m

C) speed of light = 3.0 x 10^8 m/s

D) Wien wavelength ( 5758K- for effective temperature of sun) = 5.02 x 10^-7m.

E) photon mass equivalent ( for Planck-Einstein quantized energy) = A x B/D
so;  A x B / D  or E = 4.4024 x 10^- 36 kg

E x (C)^2 = 3.9622 x 10^- 36 Joules

and; C / D = 5.9761 x 10^14 rev/sec

So, the physical units from which Planck's constant is derived is:
A x B x C = Planck's constant.

How is Planck's constant derived? From what formula? And what does it physically mean for us?

A Cute Demonstration of “Magical Geometry”

This triangle, square, and hexagon all have the same area.  Isn’t that cool?!GeometryThese are called “hinged dissections” and is the work of Greg Frederickson.  You can read more about these geometric dissections and his work at Purdue’s online website.  There many of these and even 3-dimensional ones.  I thought it would be fun to remember about these.

THE LAST QUESTION

By Isaac Asimov

The Last Question by Isaac Asimov © 1956

The last question was asked for the first time, half in jest, on May 21, 2061, at a time when humanity first stepped into the light. The question came about as a result of a five dollar bet over highballs, and it happened this way:

Alexander Adell and Bertram Lupov were two of the faithful attendants of Multivac. As well as any human beings could, they knew what lay behind the cold, clicking, flashing face — miles and miles of face — of that giant computer. They had at least a vague notion of the general plan of relays and circuits that had long since grown past the point where any single human could possibly have a firm grasp of the whole.

Multivac was self-adjusting and self-correcting. It had to be, for nothing human could adjust and correct it quickly enough or even adequately enough — so Adell and Lupov attended the monstrous giant only lightly and superficially, yet as well as any men could. They fed it data, adjusted questions to its needs and translated the answers that were issued. Certainly they, and all others like them, were fully entitled to share In the glory that was Multivac’s.

For decades, Multivac had helped design the ships and plot the trajectories that enabled man to reach the Moon, Mars, and Venus, but past that, Earth’s poor resources could not support the ships. Too much energy was needed for the long trips. Earth exploited its coal and uranium with increasing efficiency, but there was only so much of both.

But slowly Multivac learned enough to answer deeper questions more fundamentally, and on May 14, 2061, what had been theory, became fact.

The energy of the sun was stored, converted, and utilized directly on a planet-wide scale. All Earth turned off its burning coal, its fissioning uranium, and flipped the switch that connected all of it to a small station, one mile in diameter, circling the Earth at half the distance of the Moon. All Earth ran by invisible beams of sunpower.

Seven days had not sufficed to dim the glory of it and Adell and Lupov finally managed to escape from the public function, and to meet in quiet where no one would think of looking for them, in the deserted underground chambers, where portions of the mighty buried body of Multivac showed. Unattended, idling, sorting data with contented lazy clickings, Multivac, too, had earned its vacation and the boys appreciated that. They had no intention, originally, of disturbing it.

They had brought a bottle with them, and their only concern at the moment was to relax in the company of each other and the bottle.

“It’s amazing when you think of it,” said Adell. His broad face had lines of weariness in it, and he stirred his drink slowly with a glass rod, watching the cubes of ice slur clumsily about. “All the energy we can possibly ever use for free. Enough energy, if we wanted to draw on it, to melt all Earth into a big drop of impure liquid iron, and still never miss the energy so used. All the energy we could ever use, forever and forever and forever.”

Lupov cocked his head sideways. He had a trick of doing that when he wanted to be contrary, and he wanted to be contrary now, partly because he had had to carry the ice and glassware. “Not forever,” he said.

“Oh, hell, just about forever. Till the sun runs down, Bert.”

“That’s not forever.”

“All right, then. Billions and billions of years. Twenty billion, maybe. Are you satisfied?”

Lupov put his fingers through his thinning hair as though to reassure himself that some was still left and sipped gently at his own drink. “Twenty billion years isn’t forever.”

“Will, it will last our time, won’t it?”

“So would the coal and uranium.”

“All right, but now we can hook up each individual spaceship to the Solar Station, and it can go to Pluto and back a million times without ever worrying about fuel. You can’t do THAT on coal and uranium. Ask Multivac, if you don’t believe me.”

“I don’t have to ask Multivac. I know that.”

“Then stop running down what Multivac’s done for us,” said Adell, blazing up. “It did all right.”

“Who says it didn’t? What I say is that a sun won’t last forever. That’s all I’m saying. We’re safe for twenty billion years, but then what?” Lupov pointed a slightly shaky finger at the other. “And don’t say we’ll switch to another sun.”

There was silence for a while. Adell put his glass to his lips only occasionally, and Lupov’s eyes slowly closed. They rested.

Then Lupov’s eyes snapped open. “You’re thinking we’ll switch to another sun when ours is done, aren’t you?”

“I’m not thinking.”

“Sure you are. You’re weak on logic, that’s the trouble with you. You’re like the guy in the story who was caught in a sudden shower and Who ran to a grove of trees and got under one. He wasn’t worried, you see, because he figured when one tree got wet through, he would just get under another one.”

“I get it,” said Adell. “Don’t shout. When the sun is done, the other stars will be gone, too.”

“Darn right they will,” muttered Lupov. “It all had a beginning in the original cosmic explosion, whatever that was, and it’ll all have an end when all the stars run down. Some run down faster than others. Hell, the giants won’t last a hundred million years. The sun will last twenty billion years and maybe the dwarfs will last a hundred billion for all the good they are. But just give us a trillion years and everything will be dark. Entropy has to increase to maximum, that’s all.”

“I know all about entropy,” said Adell, standing on his dignity.

“The hell you do.”

“I know as much as you do.”

“Then you know everything’s got to run down someday.”

“All right. Who says they won’t?”

“You did, you poor sap. You said we had all the energy we needed, forever. You said ‘forever.'”

“It was Adell’s turn to be contrary. “Maybe we can build things up again someday,” he said.

“Never.”

“Why not? Someday.”

“Never.”

“Ask Multivac.”

You ask Multivac. I dare you. Five dollars says it can’t be done.”

Adell was just drunk enough to try, just sober enough to be able to phrase the necessary symbols and operations into a question which, in words, might have corresponded to this: Will mankind one day without the net expenditure of energy be able to restore the sun to its full youthfulness even after it had died of old age?

Or maybe it could be put more simply like this: How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?

Multivac fell dead and silent. The slow flashing of lights ceased, the distant sounds of clicking relays ended.

Then, just as the frightened technicians felt they could hold their breath no longer, there was a sudden springing to life of the teletype attached to that portion of Multivac. Five words were printed: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.

“No bet,” whispered Lupov. They left hurriedly.

By next morning, the two, plagued with throbbing head and cottony mouth, had forgotten about the incident.


Jerrodd, Jerrodine, and Jerrodette I and II watched the starry picture in the visiplate change as the passage through hyperspace was completed in its non-time lapse. At once, the even powdering of stars gave way to the predominance of a single bright marble-disk, centered.

“That’s X-23,” said Jerrodd confidently. His thin hands clamped tightly behind his back and the knuckles whitened.

The little Jerrodettes, both girls, had experienced the hyperspace passage for the first time in their lives and were self-conscious over the momentary sensation of inside-outness. They buried their giggles and chased one another wildly about their mother, screaming, “We’ve reached X-23 — we’ve reached X-23 — we’ve —-“

“Quiet, children,” said Jerrodine sharply. “Are you sure, Jerrodd?”

“What is there to be but sure?” asked Jerrodd, glancing up at the bulge of featureless metal just under the ceiling. It ran the length of the room, disappearing through the wall at either end. It was as long as the ship.

Jerrodd scarcely knew a thing about the thick rod of metal except that it was called a Microvac, that one asked it questions if one wished; that if one did not it still had its task of guiding the ship to a preordered destination; of feeding on energies from the various Sub-galactic Power Stations; of computing the equations for the hyperspacial jumps.

Jerrodd and his family had only to wait and live in the comfortable residence quarters of the ship.

Someone had once told Jerrodd that the “ac” at the end of “Microvac” stood for “analog computer” in ancient English, but he was on the edge of forgetting even that.

Jerrodine’s eyes were moist as she watched the visiplate. “I can’t help it. I feel funny about leaving Earth.”

“Why for Pete’s sake?” demanded Jerrodd. “We had nothing there. We’ll have everything on X-23. You won’t be alone. You won’t be a pioneer. There are over a million people on the planet already. Good Lord, our great grandchildren will be looking for new worlds because X-23 will be overcrowded.”

Then, after a reflective pause, “I tell you, it’s a lucky thing the computers worked out interstellar travel the way the race is growing.”

“I know, I know,” said Jerrodine miserably.

Jerrodette I said promptly, “Our Microvac is the best Microvac in the world.”

“I think so, too,” said Jerrodd, tousling her hair.

It was a nice feeling to have a Microvac of your own and Jerrodd was glad he was part of his generation and no other. In his father’s youth, the only computers had been tremendous machines taking up a hundred square miles of land. There was only one to a planet. Planetary ACs they were called. They had been growing in size steadily for a thousand years and then, all at once, came refinement. In place of transistors had come molecular valves so that even the largest Planetary AC could be put into a space only half the volume of a spaceship.

Jerrodd felt uplifted, as he always did when he thought that his own personal Microvac was many times more complicated than the ancient and primitive Multivac that had first tamed the Sun, and almost as complicated as Earth’s Planetary AC (the largest) that had first solved the problem of hyperspatial travel and had made trips to the stars possible.

“So many stars, so many planets,” sighed Jerrodine, busy with her own thoughts. “I suppose families will be going out to new planets forever, the way we are now.”

“Not forever,” said Jerrodd, with a smile. “It will all stop someday, but not for billions of years. Many billions. Even the stars run down, you know. Entropy must increase.”

“What’s entropy, daddy?” shrilled Jerrodette II.

“Entropy, little sweet, is just a word which means the amount of running-down of the universe. Everything runs down, you know, like your little walkie-talkie robot, remember?”

“Can’t you just put in a new power-unit, like with my robot?”

The stars are the power-units, dear. Once they’re gone, there are no more power-units.”

Jerrodette I at once set up a howl. “Don’t let them, daddy. Don’t let the stars run down.”

“Now look what you’ve done, ” whispered Jerrodine, exasperated.

“How was I to know it would frighten them?” Jerrodd whispered back.

“Ask the Microvac,” wailed Jerrodette I. “Ask him how to turn the stars on again.”

“Go ahead,” said Jerrodine. “It will quiet them down.” (Jerrodette II was beginning to cry, also.)

Jarrodd shrugged. “Now, now, honeys. I’ll ask Microvac. Don’t worry, he’ll tell us.”

He asked the Microvac, adding quickly, “Print the answer.”

Jerrodd cupped the strip of thin cellufilm and said cheerfully, “See now, the Microvac says it will take care of everything when the time comes so don’t worry.”

Jerrodine said, “and now children, it’s time for bed. We’ll be in our new home soon.”

Jerrodd read the words on the cellufilm again before destroying it: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.

He shrugged and looked at the visiplate. X-23 was just ahead.


VJ-23X of Lameth stared into the black depths of the three-dimensional, small-scale map of the Galaxy and said, “Are we ridiculous, I wonder, in being so concerned about the matter?”

MQ-17J of Nicron shook his head. “I think not. You know the Galaxy will be filled in five years at the present rate of expansion.”

Both seemed in their early twenties, both were tall and perfectly formed.

“Still,” said VJ-23X, “I hesitate to submit a pessimistic report to the Galactic Council.”

“I wouldn’t consider any other kind of report. Stir them up a bit. We’ve got to stir them up.”

VJ-23X sighed. “Space is infinite. A hundred billion Galaxies are there for the taking. More.”

“A hundred billion is not infinite and it’s getting less infinite all the time. Consider! Twenty thousand years ago, mankind first solved the problem of utilizing stellar energy, and a few centuries later, interstellar travel became possible. It took mankind a million years to fill one small world and then only fifteen thousand years to fill the rest of the Galaxy. Now the population doubles every ten years –“

VJ-23X interrupted. “We can thank immortality for that.”

“Very well. Immortality exists and we have to take it into account. I admit it has its seamy side, this immortality. The Galactic AC has solved many problems for us, but in solving the problems of preventing old age and death, it has undone all its other solutions.”

“Yet you wouldn’t want to abandon life, I suppose.”

“Not at all,” snapped MQ-17J, softening it at once to, “Not yet. I’m by no means old enough. How old are you?”

“Two hundred twenty-three. And you?”

“I’m still under two hundred. –But to get back to my point. Population doubles every ten years. Once this Galaxy is filled, we’ll have another filled in ten years. Another ten years and we’ll have filled two more. Another decade, four more. In a hundred years, we’ll have filled a thousand Galaxies. In a thousand years, a million Galaxies. In ten thousand years, the entire known Universe. Then what?”

VJ-23X said, “As a side issue, there’s a problem of transportation. I wonder how many sunpower units it will take to move Galaxies of individuals from one Galaxy to the next.”

“A very good point. Already, mankind consumes two sunpower units per year.”

“Most of it’s wasted. After all, our own Galaxy alone pours out a thousand sunpower units a year and we only use two of those.”

“Granted, but even with a hundred per cent efficiency, we can only stave off the end. Our energy requirements are going up in geometric progression even faster than our population. We’ll run out of energy even sooner than we run out of Galaxies. A good point. A very good point.”

“We’ll just have to build new stars out of interstellar gas.”

“Or out of dissipated heat?” asked MQ-17J, sarcastically.

“There may be some way to reverse entropy. We ought to ask the Galactic AC.”

VJ-23X was not really serious, but MQ-17J pulled out his AC-contact from his pocket and placed it on the table before him.

“I’ve half a mind to,” he said. “It’s something the human race will have to face someday.”

He stared somberly at his small AC-contact. It was only two inches cubed and nothing in itself, but it was connected through hyperspace with the great Galactic AC that served all mankind. Hyperspace considered, it was an integral part of the Galactic AC.

MQ-17J paused to wonder if someday in his immortal life he would get to see the Galactic AC. It was on a little world of its own, a spider webbing of force-beams holding the matter within which surges of sub-mesons took the place of the old clumsy molecular valves. Yet despite it’s sub-etheric workings, the Galactic AC was known to be a full thousand feet across.

MQ-17J asked suddenly of his AC-contact, “Can entropy ever be reversed?”

VJ-23X looked startled and said at once, “Oh, say, I didn’t really mean to have you ask that.”

“Why not?”

“We both know entropy can’t be reversed. You can’t turn smoke and ash back into a tree.”

“Do you have trees on your world?” asked MQ-17J.

The sound of the Galactic AC startled them into silence. Its voice came thin and beautiful out of the small AC-contact on the desk. It said: THERE IS INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.

VJ-23X said, “See!”

The two men thereupon returned to the question of the report they were to make to the Galactic Council.


Zee Prime’s mind spanned the new Galaxy with a faint interest in the countless twists of stars that powdered it. He had never seen this one before. Would he ever see them all? So many of them, each with its load of humanity – but a load that was almost a dead weight. More and more, the real essence of men was to be found out here, in space.

Minds, not bodies! The immortal bodies remained back on the planets, in suspension over the eons. Sometimes they roused for material activity but that was growing rarer. Few new individuals were coming into existence to join the incredibly mighty throng, but what matter? There was little room in the Universe for new individuals.

Zee Prime was roused out of his reverie upon coming across the wispy tendrils of another mind.

“I am Zee Prime,” said Zee Prime. “And you?”

“I am Dee Sub Wun. Your Galaxy?”

“We call it only the Galaxy. And you?”

“We call ours the same. All men call their Galaxy their Galaxy and nothing more. Why not?”

“True. Since all Galaxies are the same.”

“Not all Galaxies. On one particular Galaxy the race of man must have originated. That makes it different.”

Zee Prime said, “On which one?”

“I cannot say. The Universal AC would know.”

“Shall we ask him? I am suddenly curious.”

Zee Prime’s perceptions broadened until the Galaxies themselves shrunk and became a new, more diffuse powdering on a much larger background. So many hundreds of billions of them, all with their immortal beings, all carrying their load of intelligences with minds that drifted freely through space. And yet one of them was unique among them all in being the originals Galaxy. One of them had, in its vague and distant past, a period when it was the only Galaxy populated by man.

Zee Prime was consumed with curiosity to see this Galaxy and called, out: “Universal AC! On which Galaxy did mankind originate?”

The Universal AC heard, for on every world and throughout space, it had its receptors ready, and each receptor lead through hyperspace to some unknown point where the Universal AC kept itself aloof.

Zee Prime knew of only one man whose thoughts had penetrated within sensing distance of Universal AC, and he reported only a shining globe, two feet across, difficult to see.

“But how can that be all of Universal AC?” Zee Prime had asked.

“Most of it, ” had been the answer, “is in hyperspace. In what form it is there I cannot imagine.”

Nor could anyone, for the day had long since passed, Zee Prime knew, when any man had any part of the making of a universal AC. Each Universal AC designed and constructed its successor. Each, during its existence of a million years or more accumulated the necessary data to build a better and more intricate, more capable successor in which its own store of data and individuality would be submerged.

The Universal AC interrupted Zee Prime’s wandering thoughts, not with words, but with guidance. Zee Prime’s mentality was guided into the dim sea of Galaxies and one in particular enlarged into stars.

A thought came, infinitely distant, but infinitely clear. “THIS IS THE ORIGINAL GALAXY OF MAN.”

But it was the same after all, the same as any other, and Zee Prime stifled his disappointment.

Dee Sub Wun, whose mind had accompanied the other, said suddenly, “And Is one of these stars the original star of Man?”

The Universal AC said, “MAN’S ORIGINAL STAR HAS GONE NOVA. IT IS NOW A WHITE DWARF.”

“Did the men upon it die?” asked Zee Prime, startled and without thinking.

The Universal AC said, “A NEW WORLD, AS IN SUCH CASES, WAS CONSTRUCTED FOR THEIR PHYSICAL BODIES IN TIME.”

“Yes, of course,” said Zee Prime, but a sense of loss overwhelmed him even so. His mind released its hold on the original Galaxy of Man, let it spring back and lose itself among the blurred pin points. He never wanted to see it again.

Dee Sub Wun said, “What is wrong?”

“The stars are dying. The original star is dead.”

“They must all die. Why not?”

“But when all energy is gone, our bodies will finally die, and you and I with them.”

“It will take billions of years.”

“I do not wish it to happen even after billions of years. Universal AC! How may stars be kept from dying?”

Dee sub Wun said in amusement, “You’re asking how entropy might be reversed in direction.”

And the Universal AC answered. “THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.”

Zee Prime’s thoughts fled back to his own Galaxy. He gave no further thought to Dee Sub Wun, whose body might be waiting on a galaxy a trillion light-years away, or on the star next to Zee Prime’s own. It didn’t matter.

Unhappily, Zee Prime began collecting interstellar hydrogen out of which to build a small star of his own. If the stars must someday die, at least some could yet be built.


Man considered with himself, for in a way, Man, mentally, was one. He consisted of a trillion, trillion, trillion ageless bodies, each in its place, each resting quiet and incorruptible, each cared for by perfect automatons, equally incorruptible, while the minds of all the bodies freely melted one into the other, indistinguishable.

Man said, “The Universe is dying.”

Man looked about at the dimming Galaxies. The giant stars, spendthrifts, were gone long ago, back in the dimmest of the dim far past. Almost all stars were white dwarfs, fading to the end.

New stars had been built of the dust between the stars, some by natural processes, some by Man himself, and those were going, too. White dwarfs might yet be crashed together and of the mighty forces so released, new stars built, but only one star for every thousand white dwarfs destroyed, and those would come to an end, too.

Man said, “Carefully husbanded, as directed by the Cosmic AC, the energy that is even yet left in all the Universe will last for billions of years.”

“But even so,” said Man, “eventually it will all come to an end. However it may be husbanded, however stretched out, the energy once expended is gone and cannot be restored. Entropy must increase to the maximum.”

Man said, “Can entropy not be reversed? Let us ask the Cosmic AC.”

The Cosmic AC surrounded them but not in space. Not a fragment of it was in space. It was in hyperspace and made of something that was neither matter nor energy. The question of its size and Nature no longer had meaning to any terms that Man could comprehend.

“Cosmic AC,” said Man, “How may entropy be reversed?”

The Cosmic AC said, “THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.”

Man said, “Collect additional data.”

The Cosmic AC said, “I WILL DO SO. I HAVE BEEN DOING SO FOR A HUNDRED BILLION YEARS. MY PREDECESSORS AND I HAVE BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION MANY TIMES. ALL THE DATA I HAVE REMAINS INSUFFICIENT.”

“Will there come a time,” said Man, “when data will be sufficient or is the problem insoluble in all conceivable circumstances?”

The Cosmic AC said, “NO PROBLEM IS INSOLUBLE IN ALL CONCEIVABLE CIRCUMSTANCES.”

Man said, “When will you have enough data to answer the question?”

“THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.”

“Will you keep working on it?” asked Man.

The Cosmic AC said, “I WILL.”

Man said, “We shall wait.”


“The stars and Galaxies died and snuffed out, and space grew black after ten trillion years of running down.

One by one Man fused with AC, each physical body losing its mental identity in a manner that was somehow not a loss but a gain.

Man’s last mind paused before fusion, looking over a space that included nothing but the dregs of one last dark star and nothing besides but incredibly thin matter, agitated randomly by the tag ends of heat wearing out, asymptotically, to the absolute zero.

Man said, “AC, is this the end? Can this chaos not be reversed into the Universe once more? Can that not be done?”

AC said, “THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.”

Man’s last mind fused and only AC existed — and that in hyperspace.


Matter and energy had ended and with it, space and time. Even AC existed only for the sake of the one last question that it had never answered from the time a half-drunken computer ten trillion years before had asked the question of a computer that was to AC far less than was a man to Man.

All other questions had been answered, and until this last question was answered also, AC might not release his consciousness.

All collected data had come to a final end. Nothing was left to be collected.

But all collected data had yet to be completely correlated and put together in all possible relationships.

A timeless interval was spent in doing that.

And it came to pass that AC learned how to reverse the direction of entropy.

But there was now no man to whom AC might give the answer of the last question. No matter. The answer — by demonstration — would take care of that, too.

For another timeless interval, AC thought how best to do this. Carefully, AC organized the program.

The consciousness of AC encompassed all of what had once been a Universe and brooded over what was now Chaos. Step by step, it must be done.

And AC said, “LET THERE BE LIGHT!”

And there was light—-


Back to MultiVAXhttp://www.multivax.com/last_question.html

Is the Universe .0000000000000000000058% Solid, or . . .

. . . Or is the Universe 99.0000000000000000000042% empty?

Please consider the scale of things:  (by clicking here).  I was trying to do the math to work out the scale of our Solar System for me and the kids when I ran across this post by Josh Worth who already did it, or at least a version of it for me.  I just think this was so very cool of him to do.  Since I didn’t work on this harder, you have to click on the link to see his map where he begins by representing the size of our Moon as the size of a pixel on our computer screen.  After that, you just use your “right” arrow on your keyboard to scroll to the right and travel from one orbit to the next.  Oh, and better make some popcorn for the journey . . .  seriously,  make some popcorn.

Reference:   http://joshworth.com

A Model of Reality

Vinaire had some very good insights regarding seeing reality clearly. I wonder how deeply into reality it may be possible to see and also how that week look.

Vinaire's Blog

Chowringee, Kolkata - April 1970

Reference: How to Make Our Ideas Clear

Reality is essentially what is there.

Reality may be distorted by the personal filters being used by the observer. But then such filters shall also be part of the reality.

So, the reality is made up of what is observed by the observer. But then the observer also should be included in that reality!

The  filter separates what is observed from the observer, while modulating the observations.

But when the filter is gone then that which is observed and that which is observing are gone too.

In a sense, the very existence of what is observed, and the observer, depends on the existence of the filter.

Thus, reality is the filter that is observing itself.

.

View original post

Alternative Energy – Call It “The Energy Tango!”

I like to think about how we need energy and water to live and I often wonder at how on a planet that is 3/4 covered by water and in an entire universe consisting exclusively of energy in various forms how there could ever be a shortage of either. Nevertheless, I stumbled onto a conscientious and mindful person, Joyce Johnson Rouse, who goes by the pseudonym of “Earth Mama.” I enjoyed her performance of her song, “Energy Tango” and I hope you will too!

“We can get it from the fossil fuels: oil, coal or gas
But we don’t exactly know just how long they’re going to last.
And by burning them we pollute the atmospheric mass,
So we’re going to have to find alternatives. Ole`!

We can get it from plutonium, that may not be so good,
We can get it cutting down some trees and making firewood,
But, we need trees to purify the air and that is why we should
Continue to seek alternatives. Ole`!

Energy, oh, how much it means to me
Energy, for my car and lights and heat!

We can get it, from water rushing over dam or fall
It is cheap and it is clean, it hardly makes a mess at all
But we can’t dam (up) all the rivers , it would not be practical.
So we’re looking for more alternatives. Ole`!

There is solar, there is thermal, there is wind and there is wave,
And we’re working on a fuel cell of hydrogen, hooray
And there may be more tomorrow that we do not have today,
Cause we’re working on new alternatives. Ole`!

Alternatives, looking for alternatives!
Let’s learn to live conserving energy.

We can save it by remembering to just turn out the light
We can save it by turning down the thermostat at night
By reducing, reusing and recycling, that’s right!
And by searching for new alternatives. Ole`!”

©1995 Rouse House Music (ASCAP) 276-773-8529

Motion of Our Solar System Through the Galaxy

tumblr_mj0vvcqnZx1qdlh1io1_400[1]I love the way 3 dimensional computer graphics can give an astute modeling of the processes going on in our world. Going back, way back our model of the universe had Earth at the center, sitting fixed in space and upon the shoulders of Atlas, with the heavens turning about the Earth every day. A lot of arguing has occurred since that time and now we have quite a different way of seeing ourselves in relation to the rest of the Milky Way galaxy.  The big yellow ball in the center is our mother Sun with Earth and the rest of our sibling planets revolving around their mother.

It’s Tax Time Again. How Much Money Is a Lot of Money?

It's Tax Time Again.  How Much Money Is a Lot of Money?

I was wondering how tall stacks of money would get if I stacked them up using $100 dollar bills. Physically, a $100 bill-note is 4 mills thick (.004 inches also .1mm.)  Thus, $25,000 made up of $100 bills makes a stack 1 inch tall.
$100,000 that will buy a couple automobiles or a modest home or condo in Phoenix makes a stack of money 4 inches tall.
$1,000,000 (million) makes a stack 40 inches or 3′ 4″ tall.
$1,000,000,000 (billion) a stack 40 thousand inches = 3,334 feet high. At 1451 feet in height, the Willis (formerly Sears) Tower in Chicago is less than half this tall.
$1,000,000,000,000 (trillion) stacks to 631 MILES high. (For you metrics, that is 1,015 km.)

And the US National Debt at $17.3 trillion dollars and rising at the rate of $10,000 per second? That’s nearly 11,000 miles high.  And “unfunded liabilities” which are obligations that we are bound by law to pay total more than $127 trillion. How tall is that stack?  “Fuggedaboutit.”

Does that make the US Debt the largest fraudulent money scheme and conspiracy in the history of the world. I’d say “Yes, so far.”  That’s quite a lot of money.

Intention

  • Chris Thompson On November 29, 2013 at 9:01 AM

    In dictionary.com, Intention is defined thus:   “in·ten·tion [in-ten-shuhn] noun 1. an act or instance of determining mentally upon some action or result . . . ”

    Philosophically, we are using intention to provide the physical interface betweennothing, and something. By this, I am writing that mentally there is nothing and then there arises something. This is my observation of the inception of manifestation.

    There is an enormous assumption at the beginning of the definition of intention that the volition of this manifestation of something is caused by the individual.

    I am now considering whether this is true, or rather how true this is. As I have routinely written, it is my conjecture that our language describing physical phenomena may not be laid out quite rightly.

    • Chris Thompson On November 29, 2013 at 9:22 AM

      Yesterday during a review of the definition of the word intention, I demonstrated my intention to myself by picking up my own hand. By raising it and lowering it using different scenarios, I demonstrated that either raised or lowered “if and only if” I used the interface of intention. What is this intention I wondered. We are conditioned to believe that it arises from our immortal spirit. Yet I am noticing that this “if and only if” function is quite common in logic and other machinery.

  • Chris Thompson On November 29, 2013 at 9:17 AM

    There exists the assumption that personal responsibility and will to be adamantly welded. I am considering “How true is this?”

    I assume that if my opinions were important or if anyone cared what I think then I would receive a few flaming responses for this sacrilege. However, because I consider that no one cares what I think then this unholy comment may go unnoticed! I may be allowed to consider this issue of will in peace.

Philosophy Definitions #2

Life is an ongoing process that I maintain can be brought into focus in such a way as to make it clear, understandable, and enjoyable despite the pummeling that life can dish out. Here isa work by good friend Vinay Argawala. I hope you find his clear thinking enjoyable as I do.

Vinaire's Blog

beingness6

CAUSE

Wikipedia

Causality (also referred to as causation) is the relation between an event (the cause) and a second event (the effect), where the second event is understood as a consequence of the first.”

.

Scientology

1. Cause could be defined as emanation. It could be defined also, for purposes of communication, as source-point. 2. A potential source of flow. 3. Cause is simply the point of emanation of the communication. Cause in our dictionary here means only ‘source point’.”

.

KHTK 

When an event is identified as the consequence of another event, then the former is called an effect of the latter cause. Cause is actually the starting point of effect. It is the same event extended in time. It is an error to look upon cause and effect as separate events.

.

COMMENTS:

Cause and effect are abstractions gleaned from associations observed among events. The ‘effect’ event is…

View original post 691 more words

Desiderata, meaning “things that are yearned for” by Max Ehrmann

Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence.

As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons.  Speak your truth quietly and clearly and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant for they too have their story.  Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.

If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter, for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.  Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.  Keep interested in your own career however humble, it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery.  But let this not blind you to what virtue there is.  Many persons strive for high ideals and everywhere life is full of heroism.  Be yourself.  Especially do not feign affection.   Neither be cynical about love for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is perennial as the grass.

Take kindly to the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth.  Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune.  But do not distress yourself with imaginings.  Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.

Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself.  You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here.  And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be, and whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul.

With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world.

Be cheerful.  Strive to be happy.

Max Ehrmann, copyright 1927

What I Learned About My Own Mind From My Personal Computer

I see parallel functions between my PC and my mind.  So what are we working with?  What I’m seeing is the mind as a computational device.  This is not a new idea but it is my idea arrived at from research and from my personal investigation of my own mind.  The results of that research are arrived at on my own but they do not seem to be particularly original in the world as they have been arrived at in the past and seemingly will be arrived at continuously in the future.  Each of us has a level of curiosity in this regard, some more than others.

For me, the physical world is the superset of all that is manifest and this superset is finite by the moment.   It is the current result of the current computation.  Our perception of the physical universe as smoothly fluid is apparency which can be said to be covered by the phi phenomenon and of beta motion.

If the superset is finite, then the infinite is a subset of  the finite.  The only infinite thing is the irrational computation.  What is infinite about the “I” is its irrational limit resulting in perpetual computations.  There are irrational considerations such as the 22/7ths of π, etc.,.  What is infinite is the computation of irrational numbers.   I see the infinite process of irrational computation and project this onto other considerations such as <em>soul, eternal life as the self, etc.,.</em>

Synchronicity or Syncronization? . . . Steve Reich or Third Reich?

I’m posting two musical pieces.  The first is “Music for 18 Musicians” composed by Steve Reich.  Maybe you want to listen to it a couple times through, it’s worth at least a 10 minute meditation.

Then the second piece is a physics experiment demonstrating the stresses present which pressure 32 disharmonic metronomes to synchronize after only a few minutes.  I call it a musical piece but maybe you want to call it a rhythm piece.  No matter.  The experiment was not set up by but is explained by Joe Hanson, PhD, we can watch, meditate, and ponder upon the unseen processes at work which present themselves as both harmonics, and discordants, and which work to organize seemingly against the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.  But is it?  Watch and see if it gives you any ideas about the Nature of things.

The Irreducible Minimum

Deutsch: Rote Zwiebel längs aufgeschnitten

The topic and discussion of the self might be the original topic of philosophy.  It is interesting to consider and to discuss the many layers of considerations which seem to make up the self.

The context of this post was in reply to a comment made by 2ndxmer on Geir’s blog.  I copy it in part:  “Few people managed to not fall into that valence and trap. Speaking for myself, I saw that trap sitting there but I saw many fall into it. It starts with the commision of an overt (sin) of hostility towards someone else in order to get YOUR (one’s own) product.  Like all overts, after the first time it gets easier… and easier… and finally you need a conscience like Alanzo to rub your nose in it – over and over – to either pop out of it, blow from the restim, or really, really work that ser fac up into a lather worthy of . . . (David Miscavige.)”

l liked this post. Though it seems to me that the overt (sin) of hostility is late on a long, long chain of iterations. This type of dramatization is not the start as taught to us but the result of a very long succession of iterations.

Griffeath's cyclic cellular automaton

Griffeath’s cyclic cellular automaton

The model that I’ve been working on incorporates some form of fractal iteration or cellular automata and a seed iteration. So there does not need to be a lie that begins it all, there only needs to be a very simple rule or condition that arises, and when iterated repeatedly, say at Planck rate, can result an entire sub-universe (like this one that we know about), but most of all can result in both mystery and randomity. Both of these are manufactured ideas which facilitate the identification with and the personification of the Self. The only lie, if you will, is the identification which occurs from that point forward. But using the word “lie” is itself part of the illusion.  It only needs to be and is in fact only a consideration, but even having written that, I admit and acknowledge that the word consideration is itself a layer of identification with personification.  

I hadn’t worked on Marianne’s repetitive “who” for a while but decided to give it another go since she insisted. The “who” of Marianne’s thetan, etc., is the irreducible minimum identification. But it is still an identification. Every attempt to reduce it further runs out of, and tends away from the set of iterations which make us human. Underlying this is not a personification in any sense that we normally use it or think of it. The “I” is not an all knowing all seeing being, but is the beginning of a basic lie in which the self is created.  It is the beginning of The Great Mystery,and the beginning of algorithmic randomness which may be the only randomness there is.

Man Is Stupid and Brainwashed

Man, for all his abilities, is yet in a stupid state. As George Carlin said, “Think about how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are stupider than that.”

Think-about-how-stupid-the-average-person-is-and-then-realize-that-half-of-them-are-stupider-than-thatI’m only going to mention L Ron Hubbard‘s reactive mind as a reference because I don’t need to bash the bloodied Scientology to find cannon fodder for a thread on brainwashing. Anyways, the reactive mind was Hubbard’s solution to man’s stupidity. That and a few more things like misunderstood words, etc.,.

But we look at ourselves and from time to time say, “Boy, I am so dumb.” And we wonder at the ideas we come up with and the sometimes weird solutions that we devise. And I’ve been looking at myself since I am the most available dumb person for me to examine and I’ve seen that I’ve got a hunger to know things; and I abhor not knowing. Delaying gratification of knowing is really hard for me. Putting me in a vacuum of knowledge for any period of time puts me in the vulnerable position of being more suggestable than I normally would be if I were in a social environment with an easy give and take of social strokes.

And so looking at this I thought what around me has a distaste for being alone and gloms onto any datum in its vicinity and I came up with the process of accretion . Accretion is a build up of layers of matter due to gravity and is the process by which planets and other heavenly astronomical bodies are formed. Accretion goes on until all the material in a vicinity has been exhausted. Stars are thus formed and when the accretion has reached a certain large tipping point, the gravity becomes so great that a nuclear fire is ignited and the star begins to burn brightly.

Do our personalities have magnetism? Romantic lore tells us that we they do. Endless writing about one’s attraction to another fills book shelves. We all know that birds of a feather flock together, but is it gravity at work? Or better yet, what about electrostatic force? I shy from gravity because I’m thinking that this is a component of space-time rather than of electrical charge plus I don’t know of any “anti-gravity” and I’m going there next.

Are our personalities charged? And are they charged on a type of dynamic scale where our personalities are more and less charged and possibly neutrally charged and possibly oppositely charged? And does this charge and consequential accretion of thoughts make any of us more prone somehow to brainwashing? And if it does, what mechanism could we; or do we naturally use to ward off this brainwashing? And can this charge affected by our own limited free will?

Anyway, thinking about the OP, I thought of this alternative or possible supplement if you will to Hubbard’s reactive mind.

The Universe’s Inception In Simplicity Has Become Inordinately Complex Because Of Its Enormity.

I’m seeing reality compartment-alized by the moment and I’m seeing frames of reference which contain discreet reality unto themselves. Written another way, the Universe’s inception in simplicity has become inordinately complex because of its enormity.

This statement has been crowding my thoughts for a while now and I just wanted to write it down and get it out of my head to look at.

What Do We Mean By Purpose?

purposed #3x5

The first important cognitions that I had as a child involved wondering at the paradox of my own individuality.

Then as I grew the first important cognition came as I studied the Lutheran Catechism when I realized that man’s (my) purpose on earth was to unravel my own existence to my own satisfaction. This was a cognition or epiphany and not a teaching, was not taught, oh no, not in that Catechism! I practiced that Catechism, learned it, devoted time, energy, focus to it, even though my heart knew better; knew another type of path other than serving an

Boys Praying

anthropomorphic god was to be my path. Other cognitions followed, other satisfactions, but the most important one of all has remained that initial one regarding my purpose on earth and that one by itself defined the parameters of the path that I have walked and the game I have been playing. I have undergone many changes; many truths; many evolutions of my self, but that glimmer of my primary purpose has remained golden and now as I look back on the road which has been my life, I smile.  Those people that I’ve collected around me seem to have that purpose too.  We have simply walked the walk of life. Every possible walk of life is possible. Each possible walk has been and is being walked. It has been for the walking that we have walked.  What?  But that is a tautology!  Yes, it is!

Responsibility versus Freedom: Should We Pick One Over the Other?

Happy Thanksgiving everybody! I had a good day with family and while using a little courage to speak up, (one needs this at a family gathering) I found an uncle to be a Buddhist that I didn’t know about. I had a big smile and got to visit with him in a way that I hadn’t before.

I like the “crazy” direction some of these comments are going. I remembered that one time my friend had a job receiving and dealing with customer care for a national company. Unhappy, one day he just got up from his desk and walked out without a word to anyone — quit. I was musing about what a “free” action this was for him to take and also how “irresponsible.” There was no life-or-death situations on his plate — really just office supplies, so big or important damage was done. Yet, as I thought over his actions I thought how frustrating it can be to try to get production and have someone on a supposed team drop the ball.

How do you all feel about the subject of responsibility?

What Is Gravity, and Why Does It Cause The Apple To Fall? . . . Or, “Picture Yourself In A Boat On a River.”

November 8, 2012 7:02 AM (updated with this *.gif April 2, 2017)gravity

I like this graphic *.gif that demonstrates spacetime bending toward the massive object as it travels in spacetime.

Vinaire:  Gravity is due to attraction between masses.                                                         Chris:  This seems to be a conjecture only to me. I see how we get to that conjecture, the apple falls, but why? It must possess a characteristic which attracts it to the earth.  Right?

The curvature of spacetime around the source o...

The curvature of spacetime around the source of the gravitational force (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

And yet, is this the only possible solution? We have to do more on this and although I’ve written this post on gravity,  I think it belongs under the heading of space and space-time.  I am going to promote the idea that gravity may have more to do with space than it has to do with mass.  Even mass may be a characteristic of space.  We accurately measure the forces involved but are the forces the reason for gravity?  I say no, and this is why I’ve posted up this topic for discussion.  I am promoting the idea that SPACE IS A DYNAMIC SUBSTANCE WITH ELASTIC AND STICKY PROPERTIES.

Gravity at a macroscopic level.

Look at gravity as a property of space;  as a river of space flowing toward accretion points forming vertices in that matrix of space.  Picture the accretion points as “sticky bits of space” creating the vertices of space and you will see how I am trying to model this.

We might one day discover that “self” is one of the products of the properties of space.  How could this be so?  It would require space to be composed of a substance.  Rather than being empty, space may be a matrix; a structure;  a scaffolding which supports the accretion points.  It may be a dynamic and flowing dimension which invisibly supports and makes possible the visible.  Its observable effects, which are pervading every aspect of existence, may be pointing toward an as yet, undiscovered dimension.

Think of it this way: Mass might not have any intrinsic “gravity” at all and may simply be formed by and held in place by the elastic characteristics of space. This is crude, I know; however, it is a direction that is different than the extant view of physics. Is this idea a brilliant light to shine on the “dark matter” of extant physics; or is this idea as short-sighted as Aristotle’s <em>spontaneous generation theory</em>? Maybe.

And what of <strong>dark matter</strong>? Is dark matter the congealed but invisible portion of unconsolidated space? Or could dark matter be a type of well-spring from which dark matter emanates?  And was dark matter always present, underpinning original space since the big bang?  Or possibly has it made its appearance by first making the old universe milky with the initial evolutions of accretion?  Did space congeal into mass?  This seems to have happened but atomic particles and sub-atomic particles are generally regarded as separate and existing separately from space.  But is this so or are there sub-sub-atomic particles which comprise space in a way we haven’t looked at?  Regardless, space through the force of gravity, like the rest of the universe appears to be evolving.  Gravity as a quality of space may be the force but not the only force at work.

Take a look at this wide-angle photo of The Universe and let your imagination unwind!  These are not stars, neither are they galaxies nor even clusters of galaxies.  The bright points are super-clusters of galaxies!

Why Can’t You See What I See? Or, Can You?

Friday night, Shelley and I went to the State Fair and watched a rock concert.  There were several thousand people there and in the dark during the show I was looking around and wondering why I could not assume the viewpoints of the people that I saw.  I was looking at them;  I could see their bodies;  I could see from their postures and faces how they were reacting to the music;  but I could not see what they saw.  I thought, “I’m gonna write a post on this and ask the question.”

I consider assuming the viewpoint of another to be a high ability and necessary for spiritual growth.  What do you suppose is the reason we cannot see what others see?  Or, Can you?

Why I Blog.

I blog to change and not to preserve the status quo. Filtering my considerations through these discussions on the net is dialysis for my mind.  It is a simple, easy, and free way to engage others for the purpose of examining my own considerations for the purpose of leveling my internal inconsistencies.  Like a doctor holding the old x-ray photograph up next to the newer one, blogging provides quantification to show me that I am changing, how much, and in which direction.

Do You Think Remote Viewing Is Possible? Or, What Is It That We Aren’t Understanding About Space-Time?

As a teenager thinking about the form and structure of what would comprise my forthcoming adulthood, I had a series of what I would call negative epiphanies, or sudden realizations that paradigms that I was being trained into and information which I was studying were dead-ends, otherwise known as bullshit.  These negative epiphanies were useful for they left a void in my mind that wanted to be filled.  These moments provided and continue to provide an opportunity to replace what I consider false information and concepts with knowledge that I consider more workable.

One of the first such positive epiphanies was a moment when about 18 years of age and becoming aware of my mortality and seeing the length of my life as a line of indeterminable length, I decided that though I might not determine the length of my life-line, I could possibly determine the width. Though I grew up as a true believer in self-determinism and freewill, I have since come to recant the importance of self-determinism and to question the availability of any freewill.  That I have will is self-evident but that it is not free seems also self-evident as it is impinged upon by every corner of my existence.

Thanks to Maria who shared the following YouTube video by Courtney Brown, PhD,  who explains his theory of how remote viewing can be understood against the background of quantum mechanics.  His concept of the brain as a narrow-band-width hologram generator coincides with my own research into myself.  This video is 21 minutes long and although the title contains remote viewing, Dr. Brown spends 20 minutes setting up his summation without mentioning remote viewing.  Watch and you will see why.

I also find that the environment presents itself to me in a flat format or if not precisely flat, then as though against the inside surface of a sphere with my brain on the inside of that sphere.  This is an analogy where the physical sensory receptors of my body are represented by that sphere.  In fact, I see the interior of that sphere in terms of fractal plotting and possibly the complexly-folded brain is the interior of that sphere.  Using fractal math plotted in the complex plane, it can be demonstrated that the illusion of both space-time and travel can be represented in a 2 dimensional format by simply panning and zooming in and out of this graphical representation.  I have been called a flogger of fractals and that may be correct for I use them a lot and learn about every area of my life from the fractal constructs.

What Is The Source of Creativity? . . . Or, Are We as Individuals Only Pimples on the Skin of Consciousness?

I have come to view myself as an orifice for a Greater Consciousness, a Well at the bottom of which Creation springs. While researching the idea of “source” I came across the following TED Talk by Elizabeth Gilbert, and I think she explains my thoughts concisely and well.

Imagination vs. Knowledge: What is the relationship of mental reality to physical reality?

Is there a line between mental reality and physical reality?  If so, where is it?  How do we locate it?  Does the line ever move closer to one and then to the other?

Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.” 

What do you think of this?  Is one more important than the other?  Do you even agree that there is the one and alternately then the other?

“Keeping Scientology Working,” A Critical Look At Scientology’s Most Sacred Scripture

English: Church of Scientology "Big Blue&...

In studying the religion of Scientology, I was taught that there was a problem trying to keep Scientology working, and this problem was due to the pre-disposition of humanity to wreck any type of self-betterment practice or program.  The solution to this I was taught was to implement and to practice the 10 major tenets of the unviolable scripture known as “Keeping Scientology Working.”  This scripture written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1965 and indexed as HCO Policy Letter of 7 February 1965, Reissued 15 June 1970.

Recently, thanks to a few stimulating discussions with some friends of mine, it has occurred to me to test the truth of the basic tenets of Scientology and to do so beginning with the most cherished and most published of the Scientology scriptures.  Oddly the scriptures in question are not the secret OT (operating thetan – superman) levels but a small series of dire admonitions placed prominently in the front of every course-pack issued by the Church of Scientology. This was done at L. Ron Hubbard’s direction.

I’ve written this post to possibly stimulate discussion of the veracity of Scientology materials and to ask the heretical question “Does Scientology have the correct technology?   For your reference following is the text of this scripture:

Keeping Scientology Working

We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable technology.  The only thing now is getting the technology applied.  If you can’t get the technology applied then you can’t deliver what’s promised. It’s as simple as that. If you can get the
technology applied, you can deliver what’s promised.  The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is “no results”. Trouble spots occur only where there are “no
results”. Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are “no results” or “bad results”.  Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate success
is assured if the technology is applied.  So it is the task of the Assn or Org Sec, the HCO Sec, the Case Supervisor, the D of P, the D of T and all staff members to get the correct
technology applied.  Getting the correct technology applied consists of:
One: Having the correct technology.
Two: Knowing the technology.
Three: Knowing it is correct.
Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.
Five: Applying the technology.
Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.
Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.

One above has been done.
Two has been achieved by many.
Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a
proper manner and observing that it works that way.
Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world.
Five is consistently accomplished daily.
Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently.
Seven is done by a few but is a weak point.
Eight is not worked on hard enough.
Nine is impeded by the “reasonable” attitude of the not quite bright.
Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity.

Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog down in any area.  The reasons for this are not hard to find. (a) A weak certainty that it works in Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. (b) Further, the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button Self-Importance.  (c) The lower the IQ, the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation. (d) The service facs of people make them defend themselves against anything they confront, good or bad, and seek to make it wrong. (e)
The bank seeks to knock out the good and perpetuate the bad. Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.

In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea.  Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had long-run value and none were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to “eat crow”.  On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the complete destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So I know what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in accepting unworkable “technology”. By actual record the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as “unpopular”, “egotistical” and “undemocratic”. It very well may be. But it is also a survival point. And I don’t see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have done
anything for Man but push him further into the mud. Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self-abnegation has filled the South East Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax.

Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had not supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it either. But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I can only say this now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation or co-ordination of what has been done, which will be valuable — only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and
successful applications. The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are, appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad picture.

We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact — the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology but with wild dramatization of the bank called “new ideas” would have wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that Man has never before evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious technology he did evolve —
psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum. So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.  So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all
suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas I could supervise closely. But it’s not good enough for just myself and a few others to work at this. Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth, N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they were all messed up, you saw the obvious “reasons” for failure. But ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other reasons. The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a Hell — and if you were looking for Hell and found Earth, it would certainly serve.  War, famine, agony and disease has been the lot of Man.  Right now the great governments of Earth have developed the means of frying
every Man, Woman and Child on the planet. That is Bank. That is the result of Collective Thought Agreement. The decent, pleasant things on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have somehow gotten by the Group Idea.  For that matter, look how we ourselves are attacked by “public opinion” media.  Yet there is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves.  Thus each one of us can rise above the domination of the bank and then, as a group of freed beings, achieve freedom and reason. It is only the
aberrated group, the mob, that is destructive.  When you don’t do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten actively, you are working for the Bank dominated mob. For it will surely, surely (a) introduce incorrect technology and swear by it, (b) apply technology as incorrectly as possible, (c) open the door to any destructive idea, and (d) encourage incorrect application.

It’s the Bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing. It’s the Bank that says we must fail.  So just don’t play that game. Do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten and you will
knock out of your road all the future thorns.  Here’s an actual example in which a senior executive had to interfere because of a pc spin: A Case Supervisor told Instructor A to have Auditor B run Process X on Preclear C. Auditor B afterwards told Instructor A that “It
didn’t work.” Instructor A was weak on Three above and didn’t really believe in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. So Instructor A told the Case Supervisor didn’t work on Preclear C.” Now this strikes directly at each of One to Six above in Preclear C, Auditor B, Instructor A and the Case Supervisor. It opens the door to the introduction of “new technology” and to
failure. What happened here? Instructor A didn’t jump down Auditor B’s throat, that’s all that happened. This is what he should have done: grabbed the auditor’s report and looked it over. When a higher executive on this case did so she found what the Case Supervisor and the rest missed: that Process X increased Preclear C’s TA to 25 TA divisions for the session but that near session end Auditor B Qed and Aed with a cognition and abandoned Process X while it still gave high TA and went off running one of Auditor B’s own manufacture, which nearly spun Preclear C. Auditor B’s IQ on examination turned out to be about 75. Instructor A was found to have huge ideas of how you must never invalidate anyone, even a lunatic. The Case Supervisor was found to be “too busy with admin to have any time for actual cases”.  All right, there’s an all too typical example. The Instructor should have done Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. This would have begun this way. Auditor B:
“That Process X didn’t work.” Instructor A: “What exactly did you do wrong?”  Instant attack. “Where’s your auditor’s report for the session? Good. Look here, you were getting a lot of TA when you stopped Process X. What did you do?” Then the Pc wouldn’t have come close to a spin and all four of these would have retained certainty.  In a year, I had four instances in one small group where the correct process recommended was reported not to have worked. But on review found that each one (a) had increased the TA, (b) had been abandoned, and (c) had been falsely reported as unworkable. Also, despite this abuse, in each of these four cases the recommended, correct process cracked the case. Yet they were reported as not having worked!  Similar examples exist in instruction and these are all the more deadly as every time instruction in correct technology is flubbed, then the resulting error, uncorrected in the auditor, is perpetuated on every pc that auditor
audits thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are even more important in a course than in supervision of cases.

Here’s an example: A rave recommendation is given a graduating student “because he gets more TA on pcs than any other student on the course!” Figures of 435 TA divisions a session are reported. “Of course his model session is poor but it’s just a knack he has” is also included in the recommendation. A careful review is undertaken because nobody at Levels 0 to IV is going to get that much TA on pcs. It is found that this student was never taught to read an E-Meter TA dial! And no instructor observed his handling of a meter and it was not discovered that he “overcompensated” nervously, swinging the TA 2 or 3
divisions beyond where it needed to go to place the needle at “set”. So everyone was about to throw away standard processes and model session because this one student “got such remarkable TA”. They only read the reports and listened to the brags and never looked at this student. The pcs in actual fact were making slightly less than average gain, impeded by a rough model session and misworded processes. Thus, what was making the pcs win (actual Scientology) was hidden under a lot of departures and errors.

I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course hours. The Academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new experiences and weren’t quickly brought under control and the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough Instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased. Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood.

When people can’t get results from what they think is standard practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not assimilate straight Scientology. Under Instruction in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the orgs where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would duplicate
instructions. Hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.

With what we know now, there is no student we enrol who cannot be properly trained. As an Instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with our sleeves rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual student, never on a whole class only. He’s slow = something is awful wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don’t wait until next week. By then he’s got other messes stuck to him. If you can’t
graduate them with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining, graduate them in such a state of shock they’ll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling. Then  experience will gradually bring about Three in them and they’ll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing.  When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe — never permit an “open-minded” approach. If they’re going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they’re aboard, and if they’re
aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us — win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It’s a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive — and even they have a hard time. We’ll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and that lets
everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humor her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist. Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.”  Fit that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time and you see the cross we have to bear. But we won’t have to bear it forever. The bigger we get the more economics and time we will have to do our job. And the only things which can prevent us from getting that big fast are areas in from One to Ten, Keep those in mind and we’ll be able to grow. Fast. And as we grow our shackles will be less and less. Failing to keep One to Ten, will make us grow less.  So the ogre which might eat us up is not the government or the High Priests.  It’s our possible failure to retain and practice our technology.  An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity instances of “unworkability”. They must uncover what did happen, what was run
and what was done or not done.  If you have One and Two, you can only acquire Three for all by making sure of all the rest.

We’re not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn’t cute or something to do for lack of something better. The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.  This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the trap now, we may never again have another chance.  Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless trillions of years of the past. Don’t muff it now because it seems unpleasant or unsocial to do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.

L. Ron Hubbard in Los Angeles, California.

L. Ron Hubbard

Do them and we’ll win.

L. RON HUBBARD

 

 

 

 

I am interested in discussing whether the tenets of this scripture of the Church of Scientology makes sense to you and if so why; or if you beg to differ, please be specific or go over the individual points or commentary by the author to say why you do or do not agree with the validity or workability of these tenets. ~Chris 

Superlatives — Really?

The immense scope of this universe is unfathomable.  For some ancient reason, man seems unable to live with this fact and so thinks of life in a limited way.  Our language reflects this by using only three degrees of comparison to describe all phenomena, for example the positive such as good; the comparative such as better; and the superlative — such as best.

The word good is a comparative word being half of the dichotomy good and bad.  The word better is also a comparative word showing an increased quantity when held up against the word good.

It is the superlative degree, such as the word best, worst, greatest, et al,  which is the subject of this post.  I thought about titling this essay “Superlatives — Really?  I Try To Only Use Them In Context,” because in a universe of infinite potential, the superlative closes the door on the infinite and creates the philosophical concept of a closed set.  If that is the impression you intend to create when writing, then go ahead.  The superlative degree exploits not just a bias but more importantly our incapacity to accept and welcome the infinite.  Using the superlative degree in our language can be used as a tool, a tip off that we should be mindful whether we really are saying what we mean and more importantly understanding what we say.

About Chris Thompson

Hi I’m one of hundreds of “Chris Thompsons” that you can find on the internet.  Though I’ve lived around the USA in California, Texas and Arkansas, I’ve been settled here in my home town of Phoenix Arizona USA for over twenty-two years.  I have been a master electrician for many years and been a licensed electrical contractor in the State of Arizona since moving back from California in 1991.  My passions include my family, music, doing many types of practical projects that capture my interests. I love to study and to think about the science behind physics and also the philosophy behind science.