06.30.06

the truth, i swear

Posted in aphorisms, emotional math, physics notes, problem solving, psychology at 4:03 am by nonattender

overseen/overheard: 

“stephen hawking is the happiest guy on the planet and doesn’t even know it anymore.”

–card sent to him ” cheer up, buddy:  it’s all (…) ”

“you know that ”yes” moment?  why can’t we engineer ourselves to be more conscious on that level?”  – (bringing an uproar)  (i am too nice a person to take the cheap shot by mentioning that i left during this discussion, but i will say it was a momentous moment)

“name standardization standardizing.  tenses as linguistic meta-narratives representative of different states of being/reality”

“on a quantum level:  two (the numeral concept “2″) = “one” (the numeric concept 1)”

“i’ll just pretend to quote you”  -t

quanta, quantentity, qua(cK)antien, quantum, quan(t)imal

Posted in aphorisms, emotional math, physics notes, problem solving, psychology at 3:24 am by nonattender

(you know how some animals throw out signals to other animals to let them know they’re friendly?  let me blaze my trail:)

my very good (and completely un(screwed) definition of the term: 

any theme which attempts to describe with accuracy AND certainty will necessarily fail, falling short this amount (this amount will be what we give in return:  interest) - (aka confusionism, which, in some ways means i always get to make an interesting decision, but i am (if not “right”-which i’m not saying), at the least “never wrong”.

you cannot have a transaction without having two parties (unless both parties are secretly only one party).  The exchange between these parties = the concepts which, in a physical sense, make up “time”) - (aka creationism)

you only justify the way you want it to be (aka sophistry) - (see also:  love(-ly) (/) bullshit)

the logical 50.1% probabalistic certainty (i call this surety) of 50.1% self-definition.

(one of an infinite spread of spectrum spreading spectrum spreads)^2

06.25.06

taughtologies - reflectivity

Posted in aphorisms, emotional math at 2:25 am by nonattender

those who can do.  those who can’t teach.

(those who can do those who can’t teach.)

those who can’t do.  those who can teach.

(those who can’t do those who can teach.)

— 

those who can should. should those who can’t?

those who can’t shouldn’t.  should those who can?

those who can should those who can’t?

those who can’t shouldn’t those who can?

who shouldn’t does, who doesn’t shouldn’t.

who shouldn’t does who doesn’t shouldn’t.

who doesn’t shouldn’t, who does should.

who doesn’t shouldn’t, who doesn’t should. 

—

teachers, teach.  -(t minus each)

06.13.06

the (4)^2 -fold way of the pilgrim

Posted in emotional math at 8:40 pm by nonattender

assuming people are honest
assuming people are dishonest

one is the road to revolution
one is the road to innovation

(assume people are dishonest)
(assume people are honest) 

(one is the road to innovation)
(one is the road to revolution) 

—
which one is which one is which one is which one?

(which one is which one)^2

(=which one)?

—

alternate title:  the four-square gospel / where’s my infinity key