Start the river of time wide open flowing in immemorial grandeur
Turn to the rivulets of blood compressed within mankind's veins
Fueling its central transformers into galvanic turbines set to receive
Arterial emanations streaming in sequence from quasars to hearts
A complicated recycling undergoes a perpetual Möbius circuit
Tracing exchanged laws of thermodynamics from nascent dissolution
Toward delivery of oblivion spun from infinitesimality to dominance
Through the spectrum of the most extreme to the imperceptible
Challenges of the vital material connecting the nexus of the whole
To the consummate webbing of the labyrinth of entanglement
Coursing between wavering oscillation and the staggering flux
Of the alternating polarities inherent to the voltaic firmament
Simultaneously completing the integrated culmination and division
Of the proliferating fractional multitude of creation constituting
The establishment of a regenerative foundation of fatal breath
Siring vitality's annihilation laid down to rest above and below
The stationary orbit of constant motion that surrounds the external
Manifestation of petrified incandescence in a transubstantiation
Of cardinal plasma siphoned from zero into the singular totality
Sustaining the deliverance of our manifestation of ordered chaos
12/12/17
11/26/17
Clairgnosis
photo by the author Seaside OR November 2017
The principle of inversion strung through its correlative conclusion argues both for and against the truth because what's real for one may not apply to another despite all views to the contrary. Another way of stating all things may be seen should the lens through which they must be observed necessarily be corrected or cleaned. I'm haunted by the idea. I'm persecuted by the thought, while I'm still alive, that our ordinary viewpoint of how we actually rest, in motion, upon a planet spinning about our Sun—a solitary star in our own galaxy already teeming with untold stars beyond counting—may fall short of the reality by a significant margin, denoting our chances of survival. But I won't let it stop me from dreaming.
That we are here, now remains all that we possess together during this turbulent time on Earth. Zoomed in and focused upon, our material universe knit together at the cellular level and stretched out into membranes which form the skin of the masks we wear on our journeys through the cold interstellar darkness remains outspread before us even as we hurl, tumbling in our waking and sleep, head over shoulders in sync racing along the same old spinning road as before.
There's no escaping this carousel, it's the only ride in town. It will lead you directly to Heaven or Hell, you best believe it, princess or clown. This I heard whispered in the left ear. An imp, apparently, leaving discreet suggestions. Either that or a manifestation of a base desire, dealt with externally. Only, looking about, it's not there. Just the insistent whispering in the ear, when passing by a window halfway open to the wind. An acoustic pareidolia of whispering sands. The cadence of a voice trying to make itself heard.
The merger with clairsentience appears on a scale of musical notes which either ascend or descend by orders of octaves describing this sonic passage known as the music of the spheres. A continuum referencing the form our manifestations must react upon here on this plane of physical existence we all find ourselves on. (This repetition. The first echo describing the ghost.)
The undying syllable repeated on the lips of those who live to pass on the story. The articulate heartbeat which keeps it alive: a ululation whose strident echoes eventually decay into the general electromagnetic signature. The reason both good and evil are only words made up by humans remains that all life appears harmonized on a scale of vibrating frequencies whose slope goes further up or farther down the spectrum, rendering those ideas as being merely of a higher or lower frequency to corresponding staves, and therefore of an entirely relative nature.
The Song of Light that is ourselves will continue its aria cascading against the alternating cacophany of the universe. The writing on the wall remains as a photoacoustic impression to dazzle and taunt us with its bioluminescense. When we reverse our expectation of our true places in the cosmos, we realize that the farthest distance from here becomes defined by the very parameters against our faces. When we begin to see ourselves as individual organisms expressed along a particular spacetime vector of this universe, each and every one of us ascribed to our own actual pin-point in time, then we may truly see each other as the only so-called "extraterrestrials" within reach worth giving a good god damn about, lost out here among the stars together.
When preceding to explore the unfathomable with inquiries, remember to first examine the questions themselves to likely find them wanting. What may we agree upon to be the definition of alien, for instance? That which operates on a different level and whose nature we may know nothing about? Analogous to this lies the question, how may we agree upon the all-encompassing definition of here?
We must recall what the process of alienation itself consists of, when examining our own nature. Once again this brings us to the moment of ourselves, and of looking in. Isn't that the very question? What does it mean to look in and what does it mean to look out? Looking without seeing. Knowing without reading. Seeing without knowing. Believing what we're seeing. Seeing what we believe.
One could just as easily point out that staring at the stars themselves describes the act of looking in and that examining cellular activity beneath our own skin through a microscope more accurately shows us the farthest ends of our universe in the very act of continuing to develop, in line with looking out from our perspective, in other words. Where we dwell upon an Outer Membrane, so to speak. Or rather, where we resonate throughout a section of the unfolding astral harmonies triggered by the age old lifelong interpenetrating cascade of spiraling galaxies.
To consider ourselves as infinitesimal parts of such a staggering scope may truly overwhelm us, which helps explain the merciful act of failing to comprehend it all. Meanwhile the manifestation of this unfettered, radiant symphonic creature continues to unwind amid the stars its long distance harmonic cry, a doppler song that should we take caution to hear on a dark and lonely night, we might hope to have our memory of what we heeded there erased, lest its howling haunt our occasional dreams, knowing we stand upon the fore decks of this creational ship.
By definition, anything we imagine cannot be classified as unreal, rendering the impossible to be a fleeting and prefatory condition. Only by interpersonal contact with each other may we reach the available population of the stars. All of the alien remains here together with us on this complicated planet from outer space. One reason for this: the unknown Other remains the only place which could render the alien moot. So-called "outer space" happens to not be how it appears to us.
We all feel its supercharged microvibration at the sub planck level. Copies of ourselves could be shredding into the past through black holes bleeding neutrinos fired back in time, re-undergoing the exact process once again, always the first time in a complete circuit loop of concordant stasis rendered as a reflection of a perfect capture of our distinctiveness: the living, holographic universe thrums with intricacy. And then again each and every one of those individual duplicates could still easily be every one of us continuing on our spiraling construct in this endless hallway of mirrors, every carbon drone thinking they're the only ones facing existence alone. Every carbon copy clone being the only ones in existence to be known.
4/30/17
BORNE AGAIN [Notes Toward Being]
Around what new bends of the human experience could we plot a new story?
What's the difference between an old story and a new one?
What if 5 different versions were told, of 5 different ways the same (old/new) story turned out?
What if 1 story were told--that of the 1 way all stories end up?
(This hints at the question of perspective. From what or whose perspective is the story being told? And for whom or what?)
If the fantastical story has reflected our present (or slipping away into historic) reality (as classic science fiction, for example, has functioned) would it be possible (or even desirable) to tell a story that does not? My answer is yes, because of our inherent fascination with (not to mention fear of) the unknown.
In order to write a story which effectively reveals the truly unknown it would take rendering one's imagination in a form previously unthought of.
In order to even begin venturing beyond our established borderlines of the known, it would have to be determined what the elements of the known primarily consist of.
We're familiar with these tropes thanks to the enduring work and studies of the likes of Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, and the great philosophers, poets, scientists, and writers of our time.
To begin with, time itself must be subjected to the scrutiny which reveals its nature in relation to space and their intersection with ourselves.
The computational power of the human brain may be seen as an ultimate reflection of the cosmos itself, just as the sophisticated complexity of a single leaf may remain comparable to that of humankind's most advanced technology.
Are dreams and death the only things which may unlock our bond to this current paradigm of ours? Imagination appears to be another possibility. It not only invites us to, but dares us to think up something new. Something which lies just around the bend. In a direction that was never foreseen.
Because that's exactly how impending reality arrives and manifests.
Perhaps strange new stories that should never happen need to be written in order to try to see to it that they don't ever come to fruition.
Stories help us navigate our way together into the unknown. By reiterating the familiar old stories, we help triangulate our location and position during this voyage. By invoking uncanny new tales, we help decide which way to point and steer our exploratory ship forward, and which ways to avoid.
Story telling appears to remain a necessary key by which we may unlock and attain our destiny. Come with me and I'll take you to a place where the most wonderful science fiction thriller tales are available online to read for free, simply follow the hyperlinked image below to the Freezine of Fantasy and Science Fiction and nevermind the suspended artwork: that will eventually make a slow comeback. Read away. They're only words after all.
What's the difference between an old story and a new one?
What if 5 different versions were told, of 5 different ways the same (old/new) story turned out?
What if 1 story were told--that of the 1 way all stories end up?
(This hints at the question of perspective. From what or whose perspective is the story being told? And for whom or what?)
If the fantastical story has reflected our present (or slipping away into historic) reality (as classic science fiction, for example, has functioned) would it be possible (or even desirable) to tell a story that does not? My answer is yes, because of our inherent fascination with (not to mention fear of) the unknown.
In order to write a story which effectively reveals the truly unknown it would take rendering one's imagination in a form previously unthought of.
In order to even begin venturing beyond our established borderlines of the known, it would have to be determined what the elements of the known primarily consist of.
We're familiar with these tropes thanks to the enduring work and studies of the likes of Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, and the great philosophers, poets, scientists, and writers of our time.
To begin with, time itself must be subjected to the scrutiny which reveals its nature in relation to space and their intersection with ourselves.
The computational power of the human brain may be seen as an ultimate reflection of the cosmos itself, just as the sophisticated complexity of a single leaf may remain comparable to that of humankind's most advanced technology.
Are dreams and death the only things which may unlock our bond to this current paradigm of ours? Imagination appears to be another possibility. It not only invites us to, but dares us to think up something new. Something which lies just around the bend. In a direction that was never foreseen.
Because that's exactly how impending reality arrives and manifests.
Perhaps strange new stories that should never happen need to be written in order to try to see to it that they don't ever come to fruition.
Stories help us navigate our way together into the unknown. By reiterating the familiar old stories, we help triangulate our location and position during this voyage. By invoking uncanny new tales, we help decide which way to point and steer our exploratory ship forward, and which ways to avoid.
Story telling appears to remain a necessary key by which we may unlock and attain our destiny. Come with me and I'll take you to a place where the most wonderful science fiction thriller tales are available online to read for free, simply follow the hyperlinked image below to the Freezine of Fantasy and Science Fiction and nevermind the suspended artwork: that will eventually make a slow comeback. Read away. They're only words after all.
3/4/17
The Re-Ionization of Methuselah
The recent article about Methuselah, the oldest star in our galaxy, over forty billion years old, shows how it's dated as being roughly 650 million years older than the universe itself.
Whether this be the skewed results of the differential between an age ascribed to a collective based on averaging the sum of its stars, or if its one of those inexplicable quantum paradoxes, who knows?
But I can't help but note the similarity in age difference between Methuselah and the known universe.
The first galaxies appeared after roughly six and a half million years or so, towards the end of the re-Ionization epoch.
Could one of those first early galaxies possibly have been our own?
Unless Methuselah were found to be a wandering star, left over from the end of the re-Ionization epoch. Perhaps only certain stars, extremely rare across the universe, manage to survive long enough to evolve past a nomadic stage in their development. There could be a case built for extragalactic stars within our own Milky Way, having rolled on over here from their former courses.
What does our oldest star tell us about ourselves that we don't already know?
Now I think it was four years ago that it was revealed new calculations show Methuselah is not older than the universe, after all. Unless this more recent article's intent remains to censure the quantum contradictions whose original calculations prove correct yet whose ministration into mass consensus must perforce be strained through a proper medium, if you will. And even if we won't. You get the picture. This line of reasoning isn't malevolent nor with a microgram of bitter intent. It's just the way my thinking went. Note to self. Look up more information about the star Methuselah and contrast and compare patterns with anything else that may be triggered to mind.
Whether this be the skewed results of the differential between an age ascribed to a collective based on averaging the sum of its stars, or if its one of those inexplicable quantum paradoxes, who knows?
But I can't help but note the similarity in age difference between Methuselah and the known universe.
The first galaxies appeared after roughly six and a half million years or so, towards the end of the re-Ionization epoch.
Could one of those first early galaxies possibly have been our own?
Unless Methuselah were found to be a wandering star, left over from the end of the re-Ionization epoch. Perhaps only certain stars, extremely rare across the universe, manage to survive long enough to evolve past a nomadic stage in their development. There could be a case built for extragalactic stars within our own Milky Way, having rolled on over here from their former courses.
What does our oldest star tell us about ourselves that we don't already know?
Now I think it was four years ago that it was revealed new calculations show Methuselah is not older than the universe, after all. Unless this more recent article's intent remains to censure the quantum contradictions whose original calculations prove correct yet whose ministration into mass consensus must perforce be strained through a proper medium, if you will. And even if we won't. You get the picture. This line of reasoning isn't malevolent nor with a microgram of bitter intent. It's just the way my thinking went. Note to self. Look up more information about the star Methuselah and contrast and compare patterns with anything else that may be triggered to mind.
2/17/17
The real me: Lacing Back Up
The real me: Lacing Back Up: The Singularity continues. As of the writing of this sentence, the Kurzweilian Singularity, known as the " Technological Singula...
2/3/17
Trending Toward The Tesseracentric
Beauty as an ideal in the ancient philosophical thought of our
forefathers reflects the necessary distinction of having to grant
context to our perspective.
Wouldn't it be ironic if the Heliocentric model of our solar system implemented in modern times in fact were to reflect mankind's more egocentric perspective yet again--that of fixating, this time our Sun, into our typically limited notion of centrality, consequently committing another mistake analogous to the first time when we placed Earth at the center--and that we still haven't bothered to factor in the actual nature of our spacetime continuum (as noted by Einstein and the theory of relativity) into our 'model'?
Indeed it remains deliciously ironic.
And that is because the new Heliocentric model remains false. Just look at the two .gifs side by side depicted below, and note the more elegant Spirograph patterns signifying the old Geocentric model. (Click here to go to the original article) We'll get back to those in a bit.
Breaking concurrently and adding to the subtle complexity of this post-modern irony, the cultural meme of 'alternative facts' arrives just in time to further blur the case--which is fine by me--because it adds such a beautiful tang of resonance to the whole 'argument'.
There is no argument. It should be kept in mind these are models, after all. They both fall short of the splendor of the reality they each try to represent.
And that reality remains, to the best of my ability to indicate it, a sort of fourth-dimensional centrist focal point perspective suggested by the idea that in so-called 'space' all points remain the center--which is precisely the context of perspective we need to glimpse the implication of the bigger picture.
Must humankind wait another several generations before discovering this? That in fact--although both models depicted here fall short of the reality--the Geocentric model appears curiously closer to the truth than the rendered flat 2-dimensional Heliocentric model, which as far as I can tell should really be described more accurately as 'Solarcentric.'
What might come closer to nailing it would be a sort of "Tesseracentric" or cosmocentric model incorporating both the Solar and Geo aspects of our system, in addition to our juxtaposition amidst our galaxy, and furthermore its relation to the rest of the universe. Every particle of which remains in constant motion...in direct successive relation to one another.
(.gif source: Malin Christersson 2015)
Wouldn't it be ironic if the Heliocentric model of our solar system implemented in modern times in fact were to reflect mankind's more egocentric perspective yet again--that of fixating, this time our Sun, into our typically limited notion of centrality, consequently committing another mistake analogous to the first time when we placed Earth at the center--and that we still haven't bothered to factor in the actual nature of our spacetime continuum (as noted by Einstein and the theory of relativity) into our 'model'?
Indeed it remains deliciously ironic.
And that is because the new Heliocentric model remains false. Just look at the two .gifs side by side depicted below, and note the more elegant Spirograph patterns signifying the old Geocentric model. (Click here to go to the original article) We'll get back to those in a bit.
Breaking concurrently and adding to the subtle complexity of this post-modern irony, the cultural meme of 'alternative facts' arrives just in time to further blur the case--which is fine by me--because it adds such a beautiful tang of resonance to the whole 'argument'.
There is no argument. It should be kept in mind these are models, after all. They both fall short of the splendor of the reality they each try to represent.
And that reality remains, to the best of my ability to indicate it, a sort of fourth-dimensional centrist focal point perspective suggested by the idea that in so-called 'space' all points remain the center--which is precisely the context of perspective we need to glimpse the implication of the bigger picture.
Must humankind wait another several generations before discovering this? That in fact--although both models depicted here fall short of the reality--the Geocentric model appears curiously closer to the truth than the rendered flat 2-dimensional Heliocentric model, which as far as I can tell should really be described more accurately as 'Solarcentric.'
What might come closer to nailing it would be a sort of "Tesseracentric" or cosmocentric model incorporating both the Solar and Geo aspects of our system, in addition to our juxtaposition amidst our galaxy, and furthermore its relation to the rest of the universe. Every particle of which remains in constant motion...in direct successive relation to one another.
(.gif source: Malin Christersson 2015)
1/5/17
DETERMINISM IN FLUX
Before sailing out too far into a general acceptance of what we mean by artificial intelligence we first need to remind ourselves we never really did come to an agreement about what intelligence itself may actually be, so it goes without saying that if we were to venture further into exploring the realm of our consciousness, that at the very least we might agree to agree that our lack of conception as to how they're designated may indicate that these subjects--intelligence and consciousness--should not necessarily be taken for granted, and neither must they be accepted as being perfectly defined, either.
Intelligence is loosely defined as 'the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills'. The definition of knowledge may be understood as 'facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education'. The key toward better understanding their significance, of course, lies with necessarily having to eliminate one's self--the proverbial personhood--from the equation, to see that everything continues with or without our individual selves along for the ride. Only then may we be led to understand how the world continues to remain whole without us.
from a Dec 14, 2016 NY Times article:
In the 1980s, a robotics researcher at Carnegie Mellon pointed out that it was easy to get computers to do adult things but nearly impossible to get them to do things a 1-year-old could do, like hold a ball or identify a cat.
Humans don’t learn to understand language by memorizing dictionaries and grammar books, so why should we possibly expect our computers to do so?
“The portion of evolution in which animals developed eyes was a big development,” Dean told me one day, with customary understatement. We were sitting, as usual, in a whiteboarded meeting room, on which he had drawn a crowded, snaking timeline of Google Brain and its relation to inflection points in the recent history of neural networks. “Now computers have eyes. We can build them around the capabilities that now exist to understand photos. Robots will be drastically transformed. They’ll be able to operate in an unknown environment, on much different problems.”
An average brain has something on the order of 100 billion neurons. Each neuron is connected to up to 10,000 other neurons, which means that the number of synapses is between 100 trillion and 1,000 trillion. For a simple artificial neural network of the sort proposed in the 1940s, the attempt to even try to replicate this was unimaginable. We’re still far from the construction of a network of that size, but Google Brain’s investment allowed for the creation of artificial neural networks comparable to the brains of mice.
Everyone with an interest in sharpening their minds should really take the time to read this excellent article by Gideon Lewis-Kraus. The mere effort of assimilating the information he writes so clearly about should suffice to upgrade our own brains, even while the AI Google interface evolves at a pace which will soon outstrip our own. This is the real nature of the oncoming technological 'Singularity,' the term coined by Ray Kurzweil which references the rapid advancement of technology in shorter increments of time. The idea being, artificial 'intelligence' will soon surpass the average human IQ--which according to our current understanding, has its limit--and in the near future, its multifaceted and various applications (which we are already beginning to experience right now) will begin impacting our lives in new and unexpected ways.
Remember, as we sail on into the developing future, to distinguish between the meaning and implications of the following terms:
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Discrimination
Artificial Perception
Artificial Aptitude
Artificial Sensibility
Artificial Recognition
Artificial Judgment
Artificial Circumspection
Artificial Consciousness
Artificial Wisdom
Simulated Intelligence
Simulated Discrimination
Simulated Perception
Simulated Aptitude
Simulated Sensibility
Simulated Recognition
Simulated Judgment
Simulated Circumspection
Simulated Consciousness
Simulated Wisdom
All of which is to remind us that we are dealing here with a sort of manufactured apperception when it comes to our rapidly developing technology in the fields of robotics and artificial intelligence. We must retain a sense of humility and in my opinion, a sense of non-discrimination when dealing with having to necessarily process this technological development we're all caught up in the midst of. Age old fears instilled by thousands of years of human religious, spiritual, and political culture have shaped us into zealous beings largely controlled by our various dogmas. The additional influence of literature and the arts have also shaped our understandings of the roles we play on the natural stage of evolution, and in many instances, have exacerbated our deeply instilled fears of the unknown. This is how we get reactionary apprehensions of "SkyNet" scenarios engendered by popular movies and novels. I've jotted this all down here in my [scratchYpost] blog merely as a bookmark for my own purposes--to remind me that this ongoing adventure of existence we're all in together continues to surprise and amaze us with many unexpected and wondrous developments--and for reasons I can only hope readers of this blog will infer on their own, may require each one of us to have successfully developed an optimistic and courageous attitude in order to get through the advanced augmentations of our ripening progress here on this Earth. In my view, it will require not only a certain suspension of disbelief, but also a savvy accumulation of a particular degree of faith that things have a way of working themselves out.
Considering advancements in our comprehension of quantum dynamics in the field of physics, the ability for each one of us as individuals to develop even the slightest amount of counter-intuition will become extremely helpful as we rush collectively toward the gradually establishing 'Singularity' currently in the process of assimilating us all into its gathering assembly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)