Demon’s Theme

music,emotions,memories realised or formed anew in dreams,

the magic of belief,imagination,creativity



an urgency that pleads without alarming

the bead of sweat that  strokes the hairs on the back as it trickles languidly down the spine leaving an instantaneous quiver to evaporate away dissolving in a moment of ecstasy.

I just keep coming back to it,Demon’s Theme ,LTJ Bukem’s Finest…

in case youve forgotten what made this music great

Green shoots

One thing that can simply will not happen is for Israel to wipe out the Palestinian people.that is demographically and politically impossible no matter what the hardliners may want.
At a time when Israel can have kill ratios of between 10 and 100 to 1 it may seem cocky to dismiss the numbers.
But the Palestinians are here to stay courtesy of their underdog status and the Arab spring is the only hope for Israel to find a lasting solution.
That the newly empowered and self confident youth of the uprising might actually have more in common with the (broadly) secular values heralded (perhaps disingenuously) by Israel than the elders of their own once revered communities who now represent the inertia of the past status quo in eg the Egyptian society.
The boldness to question accepted norms will quickly dissolve the painstakingly constructed facade of elderly wisdom and the desire to question will drive the search into the heart of Islam.
And who knows what will come out.
Because without an explicitly nominated clergy,the hierarchy of respected Islamic thought has been dominated by self appointees and is it any wonder this has been complementary to a plethora of political state dictatorships throughout the Muslim world?
This really might be the time for Islam to show its democratic appeal in a way that ought to have much in common with Protestantism by motivating individual interpretations of a single unambiguous Koran.
An unlikely alliance some might say but one that may offer some intriguing re balances in a world where the scales are beginning to tip away from the West.
Religion as with Sport is something that pragmatists should be able to work with…

Dara’s science club

How many times do we hear cleverness or shrewdness equated with greed and self gratification?
Is there something evolutionarily attractive about those latter qualities that still draws a guarded admiration from those who lack a similar ruthlessness?
Would it be progress for humankind to lose these traits?
Do such facets still confer the best advantages in the modern competitive environment or are they now remnants of a nature that is counterproductive to the capacity for humankind to progress through cooperation.
Has the art of ruthlessness therefore evolved epigenetically and nuanced itself to this new need of greater political shrewdness rather than out and brutality or are those characteristics still one and the same expressed differently throughout the world only for the sake of the same ends.

And why is it such a shock to discover that environment can have a major impact on your body??
We have been using the moniker of “multifactorial” to apply to those same aspects that are now attributed to “epigenetics”.
Even the finding that poor health can be passed on for a few generations via epigenetic switches does not clarify the inheritance of the epigenetics themselves and why some people will be more predisposed to having them switched on and others having them off.
Is that tendency itself genetic-which would re establish the primacy of good and bad genes- or are those switches entirely external/exogenous in which case why doesn’t the environmental influence/intervention have the same effect on everyone ( many smokers live long and in good health)- or( mundanely likely) is it some – as of yet still unascertainable proportion of both- which is exactly where understanding is required and lacking in order to be able to make an iota of difference.
It all goes to show yet again that our ever more structured and linearly simplistic coping mechanism of necessity for dealing efficiently with an unprecedentedly huge amount of information is not able to offer anything more than statistical probabilities.And when it comes down to sizing up the individual,human intuition for “common sense” and creativity that comes from being detached from the microscopic and more attuned to the multiplicity of influences of “real life” can still offer that extra quantum ingredient for generating ideas and understanding about the nature of our nature and beyond.
As blandly as it goes,time and time again we are reminded never to underestimate the capacity for millions of years of complexity but still our egotistical arrogance is repeatedly flummoxed by its own failure to appreciate this fact and to simplify to the point of utter gullibility.

The Shining Path

Our internal world is such a well insulated shield we give it its own name.:the mind.
As opposed to any organ like the brain which is tangibly manifest and objective(as possible thru an internal lens)
It’s effectiveness is why mental illness and more prosaic subtler variations of apathy,low drive and common depression are so hard to recognise oneself and futhermore why one remains inherently distrustful of anyone else’s evaluation of the mental obstacles in our mental world.
The best chance of unchaining yourself from an insidious spiral is to understand ones own inherent lack of objectivity in assessing ones own mental state.

Any two minds are strictly seperate space times with no independent measure for comparability.
Our need to relate to each other is an arm reaching out thru an infinitely impenetrable barrier of our own minds and the best insight for us to survive the harm of isolation is to recognise that we have no insight.

all work and no play

jejenal juices onward floweth

more unsubstantiated musings
a proposal pertaining to Roger Penrose’s conjecture on the non computability of conscious thought
Let me suggest non computable as per binary mathematical logic
BUT that does not mean non simulateable
because surely the binary basis for practical computability depends on the semiconducting diode being effectively on or off.
when you follow that logic strictly you come to the problems of Godelian incompleteness as described in previous posts.
BUT the semiconducting device is a macroscopic element that is surely subject to the same quantum superpositions as any other quantum mechanical object that evidently undergoes state vector R reduction as a result of various postulated causes rangng from the many worlds options to sentient being dependence through to Roger Penrose’s own suggestion of U evolution instability and decay to R due to some threshold of energy differnce between the two superposed states – point is the cause is not my issue here,the issue is that these diodes are subject to the same quantum state superpositions that he suggests to constitute “consciousness” as the superpositions present within neuronal signalling.

now if he thinks that neuronal signals are able to maintain quantum coherence and evolve without state reduction upto quite significantly different superpositions in terms of potential end result (because of some biological mimicry of superconductivity at body temp or otherwise) then the only issue is whether a diode can maintain the same coherence upto significantly progressed complexly superposed U evolutions.

whether or not it can the principle surely remains that there is NO practical way of simulating a 100% yes/no system that would adhere to the rigor of mathematical computability when quantum dimensions are involved and therefore you may not be able to demonstrate the possibility of non computability using mathematical logic but you may be able to simulate it when using the “stuff” of nature ie semiconducting diodes,that share these quantum qualities with neurons and evrything else.

then why dont all objects have conscious thought?
well strictly speaking we dont know whether they do or dont.
but nevertheless the actual process of conscience may well depend on some sufficient threshold of quantum coherence being reached to allow for some kind of practical “pre emptive ” decision making and this may not be possible with current computers and the degree of quantum isolation that is achievable at present
but that is a different argument from Penrose who was proposing ,quite convincingly,that conscious thought is not simulateable at all by computers whereas what he means is not simulateable at all by means of mathematical logic

which brings me back to my bug bear of the limitations of logic and all the various skeletons in the cupboard that would be let out if we bring into question a limit to the concept of divisivility and the resultant ,albeit tiny,incompleteness of theories which are pinned down on the basis of infinite divisibility and the cornerstone of quantum theory which is complex analysis and its dependence on the equivalence of infinite sequences,exponential series,convergence and limits to infinity..

stars,sbtrkt and machinedrum
theres a superposition