"There is no logical way to the discovery of elemental laws. There is only the way of intuition, which is helped by a feeling for the order lying behind the appearance."

I sometimes think that the order was what was left by the universe through time expansive. Now I'm thinking that this could reach beyod the current epoch of our universe, and the order that is perserved to some degree, has to have some deeper meaning behind it. Such points of thought is where words and symbolic language breaks done. It is clear that the inner meaning of the world, or a person or anything in totality, has to be come to grips with by a new type of understanding that the current set up. He would point that such thinking is fanciful and avoidance is cautioned. But had he been alive today, who knows how his thought would have been augmented by current developments. I like to think that he would continue to peek further into and behind the appearance given the opportunity to exist in body today.

You're correct that the time at place is different for different places, which also entails that two people in that same immediate region would agree on the time, unlike many who use the idea as a scientific extension to the claim that all that is depends on the person. Not true in special relativity! To each is not their own, but heh, that's strictly in the scientific scheme.

That's an interesting view of reality. I remember walking in the fields behind a wooded house when I was young and in highschool and jumping up to feel weighless when falling. I was convinced that I'd get new insight in that moment, one which could never be turned back. I would squint up at the sky or a particular star and jump until my legs said return in the long hours of the lit up night. Such wonders amongst the dark there was!

And about his couzin and neice, and the fact that this is a dating site, I'll venture to the point of saying give the man props. Genetically there is an increase of about 3% of birth defects, the same for a mother being over 40, or various other statistics, I'm sure. And he was democratic about it. He left the marriage arrangements up to the woman, he would let them decide. The cousin left it to her daughter and the daughter thought through it in a letter to a friend. They continued to have a strong relationship after, which wouldn't be the case if he was insistant. And face it, there is nothing wrong with either, besides opposition to social constriants.

As for noise, I find that just a little background is very nice for concentrating, because the mind has to tune it out to focus, and when it does that, any other possible disturbance falls to the wayside, and doesn't get through. It's like a bug net for the occasional biter. I think I have entertained a train of thought that I could recall constantly for a few months, to the degree that I could think about the weeks bygone by the progress of the thought. Once this happened in Highschool, and if I looked like a zombie, or was entirely unresponsive on the school bus, such was the cause. Another time had to do with time, and I ended up talking to a friend-type from grade school up to that college year, resulting in the opinion, coming through the mouth of her friend that I was involved with, that I was out there in my own world, a notion I don't deny. The girl I ran into, the friend-type, was so shaken (i guess?) that she called my brother and asked him to check up on me. So of course I had to tell him all the nonesense I told her that got me in trouble in the first place, and all I could muster for limp conclusion was "that's were thinking for months on months straight gets you..."

What happens to the 'lost' mass is the question. It is something of a wonder that black holes to seem to exhibit such extreme behavior. It also radiates, so that might be something of a weak explanation, and I think that it's temperature increases. My first thoughts on the matter is that what happens to the mass is that it itself is warped and changed something like the time, that is that the value of unit mass changes in respect to gravitation. Then the energy loss would be of no msytery. The fact that it happens so infrequently that bodies fall very slowly in or condense or whatnot, which is also exhibited perhaps most clearly in the light cone diagrams, would make it more reasonable as a limiting case, or why it doesn't have a shifting effect all the time. But the idea that you speak of that the discontinous nature of growth of the black hole, if such a vague term will be passed, is perhaps a mass constraint that could be used observationally. Such that a certain contraction process happens with only so much mass could be a stipulation of Smolin's Precedence or Progency principle. Read his Temperal Naturalism paper for a summary of his current theoretical and philosophical thinking. Another alternative is that black holes really aren't rare, that they exist in any discontinous process. I could drop anything around into a black hole without second thought.

About the time constraints, evidence in the cosmological background noise, which I think all can agree about its importance for physical thinking, or lack of it for a time changing development that would be expected with ideas of a meshy universe, if there were such an event it would likely be an accumulation of many.

However nice and thrilling it would be to meet a truly new life form, I don't think that it is neccessary for understanding a world view that has also in it the correct development of man. This stems in most part from the BELIEF that the true origins of reality having nothing to do with what human or life forms exhibit on it through thought or observation. I don't know if it will ever be known. And I think that the value of Darwin's scheme is what it will influence in the hard sciences and that people of thought will use it as a tool and analogy, also contributing to the borrow or give and take of physics and biological sciences that is currently increasing. So if Darwinism is to have it's place, it is in breeding the next one up on the ladder of theoretical physics, which would have it's place later when looking back at a history. Ultimately, it may not be the way to do science, and most absolute-reality explanations are generally regarded in the sphere religious experience, but if physics is an unruly teenager to philosophy or religion, it is not a phase that should be interfered with.

In sum of the black hole idea and other good points raised, I personally think that beholding order that could go beyond one event or universe is both natural and deeply religious.

I go by a river running,
It looks clean and very serene,
Wanderng, to not stare would be shunning,
The beauty of the gently frosted bank's green.

Farther, past shop and paved road's end,
Till the sun hung low like the mist,
Through a wood, and what transport rails send,
Zipped by, molded sky and drops with breeze chilled kissed.

Opened up further, to an old ill-used pave,
Lead quietly, to somewhere past one more hill,
But two decided better not three, so I caved,
Returned to mushy path, peed tried to hold still.

Yet back the wind gently returned me,
This time over rails and not under,
Still, condensed dew, shoe-stew steeped tea,
From sweat and dirt wrecked hygiene asunder!

Right? But it doesn't matter,
And reflecting on lichens moist turquoise,
Noticed among the cool grey-tumbled pitter-patter,
What from falls past, is now fossilized time's noise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNuNTciVLkA

A wife is sought for a certain liberation,
But really one must transcend isolated sensation,
What was fought for gladly makes one reminisce sadly,
But without peace for ourselves and all it ends badly.

“A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.”
― Albert Einstein

I think that this quote is remarkable. I try to embrace more than my immediate circle, and think that his message is quite clear. No ambiguity here, or explicit doctrine. I heard Sadhguru Jaggi say just the same thing. I don't think the spritual mindset should be limited in the public minds eye to just holy figures, though it could be argued Einstein was in a certain way.

So, there are so many interpretations of what he said, and multiple instances of using his name for support of views held in papers. But what did he really mean half the time. The Einstein I know from reading his own words, is one very capable of the creative type of genius that it takes to put forth language with ambiguity. So most often I take his words as not this or that, but shades of grey inbewteen. For example

"People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion"

When a life long friend died and he wrote the wife about following after and not being too concerned about it. Most people take it to mean that time is an illusion. This is what the physics of the time, and in majority today as well, support. Yet there is that stubborn part. TO me, it means that time is an illusion, like a ghost labeled time with a board around its neck, but it won't go away. Taken at face value, this is much the same, but what I interpret it as is the illusion of time must itself go away and be replaced by a different view, when the community and physics environment demands it at a later era. And I think it has arrived.

So post his sayings here and roominate on what he meant. A brief statement about the context is desirable, so readers unfamiliar with the quotes now in what situation it was said. But don't MLA or APA cite it or anything.

I look forward to hearing interpretations of what the spendid fellow and human being had to say.

So it's kind of odd lately, but I've been thinking, and thinkin' without figuring too much about it either. What appears to me evident is that science will borrow from biology greatly in the coming years. Historically, I think that this will raise Darwin's work above even the level of credit it recieves in the history of ideas today, which if you watch you tube video or the like on human future or past will run into easily enough. There are simple ideas that can be applied not so much as they specifically relate to life and DNA and whatever else comes to mind when one speaks of the nitty-gritty make up of life and the pieces of this evolution machine. But rather, a time when simple specks or parts of it are borrowed in the hopes that what worked in that department of science will also work in this one. Smolin uses a grandfather clause for the propogation of universes through or by black holes, which merely says one thing in common with Darwin's thinking, and that is an offspring is likely to come from fertile parents, which in his case mean universe came from a previous birth-source universe that had conditions for black holes. Interestingly, how ever far out this idea seems, it sets limits on the observation on expects in terms of mass of black holes in our current universe, none of which have been contridicted to date.

So those are neat ideas, and example what is called biological or evolutionary principles in physics. They look handy for the current job, which in my opinion is to set up a base or template for laws that evolve dynamically through time. This means that no absolutes or eternal truths exist in science, at least.

It doesn't really ease my gut about where things are going, though. Much is to be had in the way of satisfaction- actually feeling good about an ideas soundness deep down. The type of ideas that anwser the questions about consciousness or the like that haunt my soul. But the thinking is better than strings, whose tremendous beauty and attraction were really repulsive to me. Too much was the message that flashed between my eyes. Sometimes, if I'm feeling very generous with myself, I fancy that i'm movie cartoon romantic, but setting me down with a glass slipper is too kind. I'd rather make my own shoe, and know how to make it fit right, or hobble without grumblings aimed at a cobbler. Then again, I am a target customer for a "mender of bad soles."

What is interesting, or at leat the main importance here, is that the physical laws might evolve or arise through some selection method. Each momnet of time would be a deciding point that leads to some future event. The group behavoir described by the laws which we now encapsulate nature by is a development of occurences that happened in a casual relation to form simply the habits of nature. What is in experiment as witness in labs or elsewhere is a trend or trait of what nature likes to do, of what is efficient at the time. The passage of time is paramount because it is seen as the enabler from one state of reality, or the present situation, to another. Thinking vaguely and slightly mathematically, this could be seen as a trace of momentum from slices, but one that is not conserved. That is another thing, hit lightly on above, that namely all laws change at each event, or there is some point of participation in the universe that then lets us look for patterns of information. It's a tough nut to crack, and my thinking tells me it is a dream more than what makes up the usual experience of reality. So I'm trying to incorporate my dream substance into reality, but isn't that the objective of most psycho therapies? It will turn out or it won't.

What is really gnawing at me is that there might be some deeper meaning that I'm muddling through. I have to look at it instead of anything else. Another troublesome concern is what to think about gr? Some theorists, who I'm increasingly taken up by, want to look for substitutes for gr, and godspeed and all the power to them. I'm just not sure about my own primative ideas for it. Can analogy to magnetics evern be born out in a consistent or meaningful way logically? Is that just working with too few puzzle pieces? So it's a semi dark time, but the light of what is thought draws me out, or the poison in my soul. I almost pulled a Archimedes this morning when I thought of all these ideas, but no, I wasn't in the shower, or bath. Almost is no cake though, but such is ideal human hogwash anyway. I'm not worried about the sweets now anyway, I'll let them pass.

This pretty much leaves me in a daze. With one thought left last. The expansion took place, and it took time to get here. Throughout that it would develop, if any of that above rambling holds valid. A development entails change of limits, and the one that is the most important is the value of c. So light between development points, or events, would be something of a biological clock for evolution. The term ratio comes to mind, as it is illustrative, and how my mind works.

With that said, I can really only think of a guitar that I'm supposed to check out that I found for sale online. It's a cheapy, but if it plays well or decent, I might hop. That is, if the chap doesn't have a "change in plans" again. So I'm counting down the hours now. 3-5, maybe six? Ah, oh well, who needs efficiency anyway...

It's not even a matter of when.

I don't think it matters so much where it comes from or where it is going. It is bred new in the hearts of every young being and won't be too much different than today, besides possible upset, which decreases with maturity and age anyways. It's just currently suppressed. But heh, maybe that is just the product of a poor imagination.

Nifty! I wonder what else is in wait in the cold, dark and undiscovered abysmal ocean.

Healing works, or has some effect, and that scares me. I mean, I could do something and not 'set it' right or something. Yikes! It's too much tampering with the natural energy and flow of a life. Probably less of a headache to practice that it is for me to think about though!

Those moments tend to be painful for me, when it is evident that I'm practically blind. I like to think that science lets me see, but perhaps this is rash emotional interference. I wouldn't argue against that.

Lately, my moments of thinking differently about the world occur when I wake up, or half wake up, and then manage to scribble afterwords. I never thought that a dream writing would involve science instead of freudian interpretation, which I doubt less and less the more I look at myself objectively. Which is also something of a sin, when creativity comes into account.

I've always thought that the great scientists live on inside of the minds and hearts of the current thinkers and people they have influenced. Take Einstein for example. He put forth ideas that enable many common experiences and settings that characterize the life of people today commonly. Like the automatic sensors on doors, or the ones that stop your food from colliding into the register workers space when dealing with the customer that is just in front of you in line. There was also a patent that existed first by Bucky that was later ruled over in court, where Einstein said that the idea was first Bucky's over whoever was the opposing party. Einstein helped apply his theoretical knowledge and skills to a self adjusting camera that many later models were based on. I don't know enough about camera's to know if this is still the case, but it very well might be. Also, I vaguely remember a seminar where people were talking about a small device that measured some property of the blood, small enough to perform intraveiniously, which needed to be explained and further worked on using his ideas applied of a magnetic field and thermal properties. So in a real sense, as I waited for people to dismiss to tell the lecturer, and still managed to talk to a girl about her scientific dreams even afterwords, "Einstein is in our veins."

It's tough to say if their contributions affect the natural world, or greater universe in some way. In some way, yes, but only in the small way that individual and everyone is attached to the greater cosmos, and to the extent that these creative, technical and in some cases imaginative thinkers donned their caps to the society that provided for them moreso than other elite groups.

No, and I don't think anybody does either, for themselves, or what others want, especially in young relationships. I'm a blinding unknown.

I liked the stranger. To me, the main problem that may relate to today is that the events weren't tampered with just because the main guy was lame. And of course the whole rub is that it is his own fault, that he didn't object to what came his way, and acted as events just had to go down, and if his death was anything, it was an insignificant by product of some chain of events, ones he could accept but not change. I think a modern parellel is the general attitude that I've observed around me of seeing a point in the future, one of those future oasis or some other consequence, and then living it out self prophecy style. I guess that drives home his point of responsibilty.

Mortality is a quality of life that arose from a biological environment that needed adaptation through natural selection to arrive. A quick succession of generations made this amzing feat of biological endurance through the odd billions possible. However, the prevailing belief that i've picked up from looking at futurists is that technology will superseed that adaptation with augmentation of small devices, and ultimately better monitoring of blood nutrient levels and the like. In short, it will be a super brain addition to monitoring health and productivity, in an internal way, just like the industrial revolution lead to contruction workers being supermen compared to workers of a hundred years ago.

Whether from society pressures about confronting a relatively short life, or from a spiritual need, the will to die will still be apparent in much of the population for some time. People who have their inner sides dialed out and attuned, like yoggis, choose to die at certain times, and have mastered the human condition well enough to do this with dignity. On a lesser note, people eat or drink for the temporary relief it grants, much like the pleasure that a religious type can sustain without. In a small way, all people able to beget another practice the social habit that attempts to provide bliss and connectedness to eachother and the world. And the idea of death is so engrained into the world, and an early one in those struggling with health, that many will grudgingly hold onto it to the grave, early or late. While the idea of an individual identity with just soul and no body is still the product of a ridiculous ego to me, the extension of the life of the body is not.

A greek once compared aging to the rubbing of edges and damages a triangle recieved during it's life. The jist was that a shape or initial state was given to a human at birth, and the amount it would live was determined by the amount of damage it would take, and this lead to a short or long life. Now, many such ideas arise in genomics and health studies, a concept of the total calories consumed being a set point for the end event, with time as a variable depending on how much one eats, for example. The aging ends tieing DNA strands closed, like the glue or tape holding ones shoelace tight where the stop provid another idea of the aging process as gradual change to this moments conditiona. So with this mentality in mind, and the damage limiting technology predicted to be close at hand (a matter of decades) the crux of the argument for life prolongment is rested. While no one, least not the scientist who first conceptualize original ideas, can predict the future events and developments, along with the way other people will apply new ideas, the technology prediction for grades like speed increase and price decrease have held fairly accurate.

Population is a problem, but whether the current lives longer, and more efficiently, has little to do with the current crisis. Not having kids would be a blessing for others who depend on resources currently and perhaps in the future. My point is that whether or not we have a large population, nature will reset itself one way or another. Population will be a big factor in that run down, but longer and more enjoyable life is part of the solution, long term. Think about the mental contribution to the population that more people could have then.

I really don't know if I want to live longer or shorter than I'm going at the current rate, which is exactly why I'll try to clean up what I can until I decide, or time decides for me! Of course I've thought about it, some thinking being, or train of thought existing throught times, But i've always shut it out as a not yet does this person need to debate such matters. Given providence of a natural, universal kind, this may not be the case so long from now.

I think that it is all too common, and not as bad as people think, that one person is able to be with more than one person to let yourself get such a sore thumb over the likihood. Events play out, much out of anyone's ultimate control, and to try to be a puppeteer if even oneself seems to be the greater folly. I don't see the intensity of the situation as appropriate, and would see where it goes for a spell, so as not to act out of agner or intial instinctual inclinations, and moreso from how you think when you get you thoughts together. Even if the strings holding together your old warmth seem frail for a short time. Or if they are in too bad repair, cut them, but just try to do it in a way that you wouldn't be ashamed over someday.

On the personal level, I think that man is responsible for what environments he places himself in, but not for what happens there. So a guy can decide to go to a drinking party, but once there, he's hardly to blame for his drunkeness.