Category: Uncategorized

This story describes the finding of a Homo Sapiens jawbone from before other fossils out of Africa. Makes sense locationally. Makes sense in a lot of ways but a single specimen can be ‘anecdotal’ in certain ways, even if the physical identification is correct. I mean you can attribute a lot of meaning but some of that attribution may be off.

One of the most interesting things about Israel is its location: it isn’t Africa or the Middle East, neither Europe nor Asia. This in-between-ness I think has influenced the way Monotheistic belief arose: the label of a ‘name’, the attribution of all meanings and names to the concept of unknowability and unnameable, comes from somewhere in Between places where meanings are more fixed. If indeed we’re correct in thinking the ancient Egyptians more directly personified God, as in Akhenaton believing himself to be Aten rather than a vessel in which Aten appears, then they held the conception of vastness to their chests, as opposed to the conception of nameable Gods being representable in some avatar or idol form. But of course Akhenaton was an aberration anyway in the line of nameable Gods being … What I think is more appealing as a location explanation is that different cultures seeing the names and powers of Gods appears more clearly when you’re in Between cultures, and that rather obviously can lead to the idea that maybe the fact that all these different cultures use different names and ideas for Gods, including different names for the same ones, means they’re all describing something that they can’t adequately name. That’s monotheism: we can’t adequately name God. So sayeth Jomi!

It even makes sense that Jerusalem and the Evan Stone – not the porn star but the rock – become the ‘center’ because it’s not the center but the point in Between. That makes it the origin.

As an aside, it makes no sense to call this the ‘furthest mosque’ or al-aqsa because that literalizes a spiritual location in a non-Islamic way. By that I mean the point of belief is so you understand the furthest mosque of al-aqsa is where the believer resides because Muhammed is meant to come to you. All religious versions of apparition come to you. Like Jesus to Saul of Tarsus. Like the Burning Bush to Moses. Literalizing Jerusalem makes sense to the conception of monotheism but not the conception of prophecy. Another problem is that making Jerusalem al-aqsa shifts the center from Mecca and the point of Muhammed is that this is the specific book of these believers, connected to this history and place. But this really gets to the deep idea that submission requires struggle within, not against others, and that you displace your internal struggle to accept by casting al-aqsa as a place. That converts struggle into something externally oriented. I have more to say about this but not now.

The equivalent of Tali or Talita in me is Jomi or Jomijo. I’ve never named myself that before. I use variants of my first and last name but I avoid the middle name, which is Mitchell. Except this opens up a question: which names do I use? In English, Jonathan Mitchel and in Hebrew Jonathan Moshe or Moses? I don’t know why they didn’t just give me the middle name Moses. I assume that was because it sounded so Hebraic and they didn’t expect having a Hebraic name would ‘help’, especially given the Holocaust. So that makes me Jomo or Jomojo. Jomo means flaming spear in Kenya – don’t remember the name of their language. I kind of like Jomi: it can be pronounced Jah-mi, which approaches Jamie, and Joh-mi. Thinking about it, I have avoided using this combination. Accepting it means accepting all that connects to it.

What is one thought? Since I’m working it out in public, the concept is that it connects areas by counting them with a specific label, so Jomi labels the two areas which were given to me specifically by my parents and which label me but conveyed across those an abstracted level away, so Jahmi or Johmi, to state the pronounced forms, are both abstracted to some level of what does that mean in broad senses, as Tali refers to Thali and Kali and so on, and intimately within the relationship of the names, and thus an abstracted level within myself which names the part of me that relates over the line Between inside and outside to the abstracted layer. Where does that go? If Tali is the embodiment in both what Tali is and bears and makes, so Tali is the maker and the object, then the same applies to Jomi.

Is this useful? That’s a very good question. I’ve been struggling with the concept of meter because it unites two separate forms of frequency, that which makes up the meter and then the frequency of the meter, so its manifestation within and its manifestation outside in ‘gross form’. That’s obviously the same as what I’m describing. So the meter is that which unites frequency within a Thing as it crosses over the line dividing its interior from its external manifestation with the frequency Between two Things bidirectionally in the idealized field. I may be getting ahead of myself, but when I invert CM64 over CM1, that generates the value at which a Thing becomes ‘visible’, and then that counts across so the meter across the idealized Taylor Field is the SBE which preserves that information so it passes to the other Thing. That means it would be 3 to some base10 minus some version of inverted CM64. I think. I have to think about that for a few minutes.

I see how it counts SBE 3 – because that means all states within tick-tock clock idealize. So as SBE3 magnifies, that enables a shorter meter because the difference between ideal and shorter contains the information transmitted from Thing to Thing. This next is not easy to say: the meter idealizes as a series of squares or circles fully rotated to appear ordered when counted across the context, meaning along that hypotenuse, and thus diameter, etc. Smaller circles reflect two things: the length of the arrow and the speed of rotation of the arrow. That’s all I can see at this moment. I’ll look again later.

Been drawing this out. Bringing up old lessons in a new light: SBE3 implies the fully radiative process by implying – well, I’d have to put in the drawings and I want to type here – but I mean it makes overlapping circles in which the origin of one implies the other, and these of course spin around, and I’ve done that a zillion times. Not sure why I had to go through this. Trying to isolate the information. It has to be the limit across Between, treating the Thing as composed of idealized reflection over CM1 and then relating to another Thing as the arms of Between touch, so that when rotated becomes the hypotenuse intersection. This raises the metering question in a different light: the depth to which the hypotenuse is extrapolated on the line extending through the imputed origin relative to the intersection. Treat as random in ideal. Then treat as entirely ordered where the ordering is a straight line through random points, meaning a count of the randomness at each layer. That in turn means the x-yR planes are shifted to line up as a ‘straight’, which then determines the extent of the wobble by drawing that as the ideal zK axis, when the count of random variation as average, etc. is compared. That becomes shape.

What does this have to do with the information exchanged. I had it once as Miea: minimum information exchange agreement. That reduced to the same stuff: SBE3 generates the bidirectionality necessary. (Problem I have with Reputation: when I listen to it, I get great thoughts but it absorbs me at so many levels I get distracted from my own work. Maybe that’s the answer too: you lift yourself to the level of the distraction.) Thing is, Miea works well: it passes a segment of CM64, literally the encoded inversion of CM64 along, because the absolute Miea, the Tali, is that which includes the depth of Thing – as in, it literally goes this big (or small) and this is where it becomes visible or where it disappears so it passes all its essence into the complexity beyond. I’ve done that work but I’ll have to be more specific. I think it’s in my Pages notes. I just reached a trust level I’ve never seen before this clearly. So Miea connects to Tali as that which exchanges the essence.

Going back to the the arms of Between. That connects tick-tock. And it idealizes to an ordering across the count so the more iterations the more effect of the inverted CM64, so when you increase the iterations the magnitude shifts. This makes sense but I don’t get the numbers. Why for example a change of 10^29, meaning if I use a known value for an SBE3? This looks at the aggregate. One possibility is pulling out the individual increase by dividing by frequency when frequency is determined by the amount of CMs layering, meaning direct translation of count over density. So how many ideal go into presumed? That’s just a division because this is orders of magnitude. I’d rather think about the meaning of the process. So there’s an ideal division, just how much the magnitude shifts up toward CM1. That translates into a number of bits. It’s a fuckload of bits. And I kind of mean the reproductive metaphor: it needs to be a huge load. Even if it were a smaller magnitude SBE3, the count reduces the same. I’m saying the reduction comes from a process welling up and that welling up has a specific effect within the SBEactual. There would be basic views of that as well: the radiative length shortens so the count drops or the count shrinks so the length shortens to fit the clock. If the latter, the clock goes faster and that’s the same as if there’s more stuff within the counted area because it counts at the same rate absolutely. If the former, then the amount counted is denser relative to the absolute ‘density’, which directly connects to the CMs lattice. This is getting better: more understanding and less matchy-match of patterns.

This story shows why. It explains how Israel is going to look at changing its corporate tax laws because now investing in the US and moving into the US is more attractive so they need to compete harder. I’ve long been in favor of lower corporate tax rates. Reasons: a) even though most big companies don’t pay the top rates, they engage in non-economic manipulations to lower taxes, b) high rates directly encourage companies to keep money overseas rather than bring it into the US, c) high rates indirectly encourage companies to invest overseas, simply because they have money there and they can either pay taxes on it or invest it there, and d) we encourage companies to invest overseas and to engage in non-economic manipulation to lower taxes, meaning other countries compete for investment by offering tax incentives. The Republican Party sees the Democratic Party as either not understanding how business works or, worse, that they actively want US companies to invest overseas rather than here and create jobs overseas rather than here.

In Mail, there’s a setting for alerts for mail from VIP’s. In Sounds, there are settings for Mail, like New Mail, Sent, etc. Why isn’t the VIP setting in Sounds? Is this over-thought? Like we think people will look in Mail for VIP settings. Or is it under-thought? Like we don’t realize these belong together.

This story is about a school bus sliding sideways on ice in Sutton, MA. This happened to me when I was a kid. We had a massive ice storm and the lawns and streets froze in our neighborhood. We skated on the yard. Second day, we were skating and our school bus came sliding down the street almost sideways. We went to Roeper City & Country, a private school – which didn’t cancel. Over what I thought were really well reasoned objections by me – like it’s dangerous! – our mother made us go*. We slid through the neighborhood, almost crashing several times. The main roads were clear. One pickup was off the main road: Howard and Laurie’s house. They lived in between two little hills. We slid down the one and partly up the next and that was the end of the bus ride. We spent the next several hours locked in their basement because Barbara, their mom, didn’t want a horde of kids upstairs. Thanks mom! (As an aside, their dad was one of my dad’s best friends. I really liked Joel, except he would drive 95 mph through traffic while talking animatedly. He would send my dad British newspapers with porn stuffed inside. My dad said it was a joke but I don’t know.) I was also in a bus crash. 2nd row. Looked up, saw the garage getting really big, and the driver cursing because the brakes failed and bang I’m on the floor with my brother’s foot in my face. It’s fascinating how stuff happen sort of slowly and then really fast.

*She was very lazy as a parent. Huge step up from the way her mother was to her, but really lazy.

1. The Eagles are a home stadium team. They are significantly different – both statistically and in focus – on the road. At home, perhaps because they are swept up in the excitement, they all perform better. And the attitude carries over to the opponent, who tends to play worse. This happens from time to time. It’s not the same as a ‘home field crowd’ advantage, meaning where the crowd is really loud and the other team can’t hear and communicate, though it’s related. The Eagles actually play better at home. I’ve never seen a good explanation for why this happens but it happens a lot: some teams are really good at home. The Eagles are really good at home. Other teams sensed that this year and played like they felt bad things would follow bad things. This kind of pressure to perform eats at you: make a mistake and you expect more mistakes or you expect the other team will simply get the breaks or whatever.

2. The Patriots have planted the idea that if you aren’t perfect, they will come back and beat you. This can inspire opponents to do as well as they can, but it creates a need for perfection that ramps up until it becomes nearly impossible not to make mistakes. You fear that if you aren’t able to go full out perfect for 60 minutes, that they’ll come back to win. It’s not just the last Super Bowl or this last weekend. Even when they’ve lost in the AFC Championship Game, they’ve come back. Could have beaten Denver on the last play and could have had another shot if a penalty was called. (That’s not a complaint, just a statement of how close they come: they remember losing to Carolina on the last play. Like I said, like Vince Lombardi teams, they believe they don’t lose, but rather run out of time to win.) As a note, yes, this isn’t always true, but you need to go back a ways to find counter examples like the Ravens and Jets.

3. The Patriots are better than people believe. Here, the media focuses on what they can’t do: linebackers aren’t fast enough to cover, they can get run over on the edge, the offensive line has trouble with the top pass rushers. Truth is more that the Patriot Method, which I described in another post, makes plays more competitive, more of a toss-up, because they don’t risk to win each play, and that enables them to rise to higher levels when they do need to take a risk to win a play. The Patriot Method makes them a bendable defense, but look at the scoring defense: one of the best in the league. Do I need to point out games are won and lost by the score on the board when the clock runs out? As for the offense, they score. Tom Brady leads an offense that scores. Give him healthy people and the offense will score more. Even in games where it’s obvious the team doesn’t have it – like Kansas City in the first game or Miami late in the season – the offense puts up points.

4. The Patriots are a really good road team. They only play badly in two places: Miami fairly regularly and sometimes in NY against the Jets. By contrast, teams with moxie can come into Foxborough and fight it out: there is no huge crowd advantage and the ‘home field advantage’ is really that you know they’re good and you have to play really well. Lots of teams have come into town and fought it out. The Patriots usually but not always win. They’ll go into your stadium and they’ll play as well or better there than they do at home. I remember watching them lose in Seattle and thinking ‘Seattle is really good’ – and this was a huge statement game for that franchise – but the Patriots fought it out. I don’t want to overstate this but the Patriots are genuinely tough, while I think the Eagles are more home tough. The Patriots expect close games against good teams and they expect they’ll win those games. The Eagles rely more on overwhelming the opponent mentally at home.

As my hair has gone from red to white blonde, I’ve become a fan of blonde guy jokes. A few, including one filled with non-blonde stereotypes

An Irishman, a Mexican and a blonde guy were doing construction work on scaffolding on the 20th floor of the building. They were eating lunch and the Irishman said, ‘Corned beef and cabbage. If I get corned beef and cabbage one more time for lunch I’m going to jump!’ The Mexican opened his lunch box again and exclaimed, ‘Burritos again! If I get burritos one more time I’m going to jump too.’ The blonde guy opened his lunch and said, ‘Bologna again! If I get one more bologna sandwich one more time I’m also going to jump.’

The next day the Irishman opened his lunch, saw corned beef and cabbage, and jumped to his death. The Mexican opened his lunch, saw a burrito, and leaped off the scaffold. The blonde guy opened his lunch, saw bologna again, and leaped to his death.

At the funeral the Irishman’s wife was weeping. She said, ‘If I’d known how really tired he was of corned beef and cabbage I never would have given it to him again.’ The Mexican’s wife also wept and said, ‘I could have given him tacos or enchiladas!’ Everyone turned and looked at the blond guy’s wife and she said, “Don’t look at me. He packed his own lunch.”

—

What do you call a blonde guy with an IQ of 35? Gifted.

Why don’t blonde guys eat more M & M’s? Too hard to peel.

What’s the difference between a blonde guy and government bonds? Bonds mature.

What do blonde guys have in common with beer bottles? They’re both empty from the neck up.

This piece describes the simple physics for hovering. For flight, the logic is simple too: big light wings generate more lift. The people-powered planes have enormous, very light wings to translate the relatively minimal rotation of a propellor spun by a person turning pedals into lift. I’m posting because it amuses me that lift is not, shall I say, easily understood by everyone: air passes over and under a wing and the curve of the wing means the air goes over more distance in the same time, so more distance means less air over any part of that distance, and that air has weight, so when the amount of weight ‘removed’ exceeds the weight of the airplane, it lifts up into that space. This kind of basic understanding of motion is, IMO, not taught well in school. Example: a big baseball pitcher has a longer lever, meaning arm, and the end of that arm extends further out than a shorter-armed pitcher, so if you move both long and short arms at the same speed, the hand at the end of the longer arm covers more distance in the same amount of time, which means it goes faster, which means it throws the ball harder at the equivalent arm speed. Big pitchers can throw harder with less effort and/or stress on the body. That potentially also gives greater control because it might be easier to control a motion done at a slower speed, but I’m doubtful about that in the reality of sports. I extend this to punching, that if you cock your hand and/or arm, you can add distance your hand travels in the same amount of time that an uncocked hand or arm does, and more distance traveled in the same time means greater speed, which means a harder punch or one that gets through the defense better. It also extends to snapping your wrist throwing a ball or swinging a golf club: you’ve built up a certain amount of speed in your motion and now you generate extra speed by adding the extra distance of your wrist snap to that motion. If you can concentrate that acceleration near but not at the point of impact, then you ideally hit as you are approaching the maximum speed. This is why people talk about twisting the hand at the end of a punch: it’s supposed to reference that added distance occurring within the movement, but unfortunately it’s taught often as a twist at the end and is typically wasted. If you look at old pictures of boxers, they stood with arms cocked – and legs splayed, which is another topic. It’s more obvious with bare-knuckle boxers but good fighters also tend to cock because they recognize that this position is the same as being loaded and ready to explode.

A man goes to the doctor and says “Doctor, wherever I touch it hurts.”

The doctor asks him what he means and the man says, ‘When I touch my shoulder it hurts. When I touch my knee it hurts. When I touch my forehead it hurts a lot.’

The doctor shook his head, and said, ‘I know exactly what the problem is. You’ve broken your finger.’

This story about the ballistic missile warning in Hawaii reminds me of a story my dad told. He turned on the radio and it said Martians had invaded, so he went to his dad. He said my grandfather paused for a second and said, ‘Is it on every station?’ Not exactly on point because you have to hide quickly from a missile. Duck & Cover! If you see the flash of a nuclear explosion without a warning siren, you duck & cover! Saw that movie like 30 times growing up.