Category Archives: Technology

Death by Mathematics…

Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments,
and they wander off through equation after equation and
eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.”— Nikola Tesla

First published July 22, 2007 (

In the 20th century, physics underwent a transformation. No one would deny that. But normally the transformation is credited to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. And normally the transformation is seen as a great advance. In this paper I will argue the opposite. The transformation was due more to a transformation in mathematics, and that transformation has been almost wholly deleterious.

This transformation due to mathematics began in the 19th century, but it did not engulf physics until the 20th century. In the 19th century the stage was set: we had several abstract mathematical fields that reached “fruition”, including a math based on action variables and principles, a math based on curved space, a math based on matrices, a math based on tensors, a math based on i, and a math based on infinities.

As I have shown, 19th century mathematics inherited many unsolved problems from the past, including problems from Euclid and Newton. It made no progress in solving these problems because it did not recognize them as problems. It had already given up on foundational questions as “metaphysics”, and it preferred instead to create more and more abstract systems. The more abstract the mathematical system became, the more successful it could be in avoiding foundational questions.

The clearest example of this is the field of applied mathematics based on action variables. For the last hundred years we have heard an ever-increasing level of praise of action variables, culminating in the propaganda of Feynman. But action variables are just an abstraction of Newtonian variables. By abstraction, I mean that they do not add clarity, they cloak disclarity. Newtonian variables were never very rigorously defined, but action variables are very good at hiding Newtonian variables. Action variables do not replace Newtonian variables, as some appear to think. Action variables contain Newtonian variables. Action variables restate Newtonian variables in what is considered to be a more efficient form. But action variables are utterly dependent on Newtonian variables. If it were discovered that Newtonian variables were false, action variables would be, too, by definition. The action concept developed directly out of Newtonian mechanics, and action assumes the absolute validity of Newtonian mechanics. Action does not transcend Newton in any conceivable way, it only compresses his method. Just as velocity is a compression of distance and time, the Lagrangian is a compression of kinetic and potential energy. Each compression is a mathematical abstraction, because the individual variables are no longer expressed singly. They often do not appear in the equations at all. They are included only a parts of greater variables.

From an engineering standpoint, this is a real advance. As long as the greater variables express the changes of the individual variables in the right way, abstract systems like this can save a lot of time. But from a theoretical standpoint, abstract mathematics can be a great danger. Since the individual variables are no longer in the equations, it becomes much more difficult to see when they are being misused. Abstract mathematics must assume that all its original assumptions are applying with each new application, and with many new applications this may not be so. If time and distance are not behaving in normal ways, then the equations have no way of correcting for that, since they don’t have any way to express it. The equations rely on original definitions and assignments, and modern mathematicians and physicists do not usually bother to check to be sure that all these definitions and assignments hold for each new application. They don’t do this for two reasons. One, they often don’t know what the original definitions and assignments were. The mathematical systems are taught as abstract systems, where foundations are considered to be moveable. In the case of the Lagrangian, for instance, we are taught that the variables are general coordinates that we can apply to almost anything. Well, this is true to only a limited degree, and the limits have been ignored. Two, definitions and variable assignments are considered to be metaphysical, and therefore beneath the notice of mathematicians and scientists. Modern scientists cannot be bothered to look at foundational questions, since math is only the equations themselves. If you have mastered the manipulations, you have mastered the math, they think.

To be very clear, it is not action variables I object to. What I object to is their misuse. They are misused when they are applied to systems that do not match the time and distance assignments they were created for. I also object to the implied superiority of action variables. They are very efficient in some uses. But because they are abstract, they are prone to misuse. In this way they are actually inferior. They are inferior because they are less transparent than Newtonian variables. Newtonian variables are not always transparent either, but action variables are always less transparent. Action variables are the first cloaking of physics. And in some cases this cloaking is not an accident. Action variables and the math surrounding action is not always used to generate efficient solutions in familiar situations. It is now often used to blanket over holes in theory or math. Like many other mathematical systems, it is now used to mask purposeful fudges.

[Added February 2011: I have finally unwound the whole idea of action, via the Lagrangian, showing why it fails as mechanics. Go here to read how Lagrange pushed his math to match celestial mechanics, but failed to include the charge field.]

The next mathematical system that invaded physics is that of Gauss and Riemann, invading through the door of General Relativity. This was really the first major invasion, and the most important. Up until then, physicists had been wary of allowing mathematicians to define their fields, especially with the new abstract systems. The action principle had not yet invaded physics on a full scale, and would not until the arrival of quantum mechanics. Einstein himself was very wary of abstract math, purposely avoiding it until 1912. Put simply, he “did not trust it.” But in that year he discovered Gauss, and called on his friend Grossman to help him with the math. A couple of years later Einstein was hired in Berlin, and there he got even better help, from Hilbert and Klein, no less. Einstein had asked the wolf in at the front door.

I don’t think it is an accident or coincidence that the first thing the wolf tried to do is take over the house. Hilbert, after schooling Einstein on all the latest techniques, tried to beat Einstein to the punch by publishing the theory of General Relativity two weeks before him. He didn’t succeed in this dastardly trick, but amazingly history has not held it against him. Einstein quickly forgave him, and now Hilbert is treated as the greatest mathematician of the 20th century. But to me, this incident perfectly presaged the way the 20th century would go. The mathematics department, invited to consult, would see its opportunity to steal the show, and it has since stolen the show. Someone like Feynman could throw barbs at the math department, but this was only misdirection. The top mathematicians could look back over their shoulder in feigned opposition, only because they had already taken over the physics department. Feynman was not smirking at mathematics, he was smirking at mathematicians who were too narrow to crossover and become famous, like he had. It was as if to say, “We now own physics, the queen of the sciences and the modern kingmaker, and you guys prefer to argue over trivialities like Fermat. That will never win you a Nobel Prize or a trip to the White House.”

Einstein’s success with the tensor calculus called all the present demons out of the closet, invited them all into the kitchen, and gave them control of the fire. He showed the road to fame, and the first stop on that road was enlisting a new abstract mathematics. That has been the road ever since, and it defines the current low road of string theory, which had planned to awe all opposition with a math so great and so abstract there was no beginning or end to it (its plan is not moving as planned). Quantum Mechanics was the first to learn this lesson, though, and Heisenberg was the greatest student. Heisenberg understood first and best how to use mathematics to impress and cow the audience. He also understood first and best how to use mathematics as a tool of propaganda. A math of proper abstraction and complexity could be used to hide all error, to divert all effort, to deflect all criticism. It could be used like a very heavy, very highly decorated quilt, covering the bedbugs beneath. This new abstract math would come not with a foundation, but with a manifesto. It did not have axioms, it had public relations. It was not sold with an explanation, but with an “interpretation”, and this interpretation was to be accepted on authority.

The takeover in the 20th century was very quick once it began. The mathematician Minkowski reworked Special Relativity before the presses had even cooled on Einstein’s paper, expressing the field in complex and abstract terms. This reworking was completely unnecessary, but it was accepted just as fast as it was offered. The novelty of it was enough to complete the sale, although the price was steep indeed. The problem with Minkowski’s math is the same as the math of action: the danger is all in the loss of transparent variables. Again, I have nothing against complex math as long as it is used with discretion and complete honesty. But Minkowski fails miserably on both counts, as I have shown. The symmetry is a manufactured symmetry, and the loss of the time variable has been disastrous. The subtle errors in Einstein’s math were immediately cloaked under an abstract math, and that abstract math was in no way more elegant than the simple algebra of Einstein’s original paper. Einstein’s paper was dense, but that was Einstein’s fault, not the algebra. Minkowski’s unstated axioms were not only unstated and unnecessary, they were false. The time dimension does not travel orthogonally to the other three, and this is not a metaphysical subtlety. It is a physical and mathematical fact, easily proved. Even Einstein called Minkowski’s math “superfluous erudition.” He was only half right. Minkowski’s math was certainly superfluous, but it was false pedantry, not erudition. It was sciolism.

Even this unnecessary abstraction and obstruction was not enough to satisfy. Another level was soon added by the tensor calculus, a blanket ten times as heavy as the blanket of Minkowski. Although I have shown that General Relativity can be expressed with Newtonian variables, a Euclidean field, and high-school algebra, the worthies of the time preferred to express it with an undefined curved field and a hatful of unwieldy tensors. In his previous mood, Einstein had said, “You know, once you start calculating (with abstract mathematics) you shit yourself up before you know it.” But suddenly, in 1912, he developed a fondness for this mess. Perhaps he saw darkly what Heisenberg would see very clearly: the 20th century would have a love affair with shit. The century proved this in every field, from art to math to science to war to politics to entertainment to sex. The century loved nothing so much as watching someone foul himself in public, as long as that someone could sell the spectacle as a transcendent event.

Once again, a Gaussian field and tensors and all that has followed can be made to work. In some situations it is actually useful. I am not arguing that these fields or manipulations are necessarily false. What I am arguing is that physics doesn’t need them. The physical field is not that complex. We have invented maths that are much more complex than we need, and we have gotten lost in their mazes. The problem with the math of General Relativity is that it cloaks the mechanics involved. It is too abstract by several degrees. This means that although Einstein sometimes found a way to get the right answer with all this math, he just as often got the wrong answer. The math is so difficult that almost no one can sort through it and tell when the answer is right and when it is wrong. Even worse is the fact that the opacity of the math makes it impossible to unify it with any other math. The primary events are buried so deep and are so poorly defined that there is no hope of expressing them with the mathematical tools available, or isolating them so that they can be located in other fields. The mathematical manipulations become the primary events, and the mathematical field becomes reality. The math ends up usurping the mechanics. [See my paper on Non-Euclidean fields for more on this.]

This opacity causes another problem. Because the primary variables are buried under so many abstract layers, they cannot be studied when problems arise. Later repairs cannot be done at ground level, they have to be done in end-math that adds complexity. In QED this end-math is called renormalization. In GR it is called other things, but in either case it leads to an endless scholasticism and an endless and unsightly tinkering. It ends up providing physics with equations that are post-dictive instead of pre-dictive. Every new experiment requires a new fix, and each new fix is pasted over all the others. You then end up with what we have: a physical math that is burdened with so many fields and operators and manipulations and names that it makes Medieval biblical exegesis look like a cakewalk. And it leads to the absurd situation of having physicists who invoke Occam’s razor and the beauty of simplicity offer us a proliferation of fields and manipulations that is truly mind-numbing. When I see a string theorist invoke Occam’s razor, I can’t help feeling queasy. It is like Fox News invoking honesty in reportage.

Next came Quantum Mechanics. Heisenberg saw Einstein’s success with the matrices and voila, the matrix moved to QM, making it even more famous than GR. But this time we got a confluence of new abstract maths: the turn of the screw. It was feared the matrix would not be enough to wow the world, and so the matrix was joined by the Hamiltonian and Hilbert Space and Hermitian operators and eigenvalues and so on. It was never explained why quanta could not travel in Euclidean spaces under transparent variables, just as it was never explained why gravity required tensors. It was never explained because no one needed an explanation. All were quite satisfied to have new things to do. The new math was the main draw. It gave the theory a required ballast and made everyone look smart. What was there not to like?

Well, there was the fact that everything was based on probabilities, that the mechanics was contradictory and unfathomable, that many insoluble paradoxes were created, and that the math required an infinite renormalization that was basically “hocus pocus.” But I mean, other than that, what was not to like? If we could just learn to accept that Nature no longer made sense, we would be just fine. After all, the math was big enough to make up for everything. What was Nature next to a math that could fill blackboards? [For a full critique of the math of QED, gauge theory, see my paper on the Weak Interaction.]

As David Politzer, Nobel laureate and inventor of asymptotic freedom put it,

English is just what we use to fill in between the equations.*

Which may explain why the equations have gotten ever longer and the English evermore tenuous and fleeting. Theory must be stated in English—we have no theory—therefore we need no English. Equations will do.

And now that QED is “perfect”, we graduate to the even bigger blackboard that is string theory. Since a huge unfathomable math was so successful in QED, string theory naturally developed an even huger and more unfathomable math, one with exponentially more paradoxes and contradictions and ad hoc fixes. If QED requires an infinite renormalization, string theory requires a trans-infinite renormalization. Since QED so successfully ignored mechanics, string theory ignores it even more thoroughly. QED had to state out loud that it was going to ignore mechanics, as a matter of some sort of principle (we are not sure what principle). But string theory goes to the next level of ignorance, which is ignoring that mechanics exists or ever did exist. Like Mephistopheles, the string theorist can call up any entity he likes, just by a simple conjuring. He doesn’t need an axiom or a proof or even a definition. All he needs is a need. Science is now defined by desire more than anything else. “I desire a ten-dimensional donut with spikes like a pufferfish, and a gauge theory in the shape of a wombat sitting in the corner smoking a cigar, therefore the universe and this computer model must supply me with one. Oh, and all this exists beneath the Planck limit. Except for the cigar, which disappears in the presence of a scanning microscope.”

Yes, modern physics has become a neo-scholasticism. It is the avoidance of real questions in the pursuit of trivial methodology. It is the memorization of an endless list of names and manipulations in lieu of understanding mechanics. It is the setting up in some black data hole and extemporizing on an endless string of evermore ridiculous hypotheses instead of looking at known physical problems closer at hand. It is the knee-jerk invocation of authority and the explicit squelching of dissent. It is the hiding behind tall gates and a million gatekeepers, and euphemizing it as “peer review.” It is the institutionalized acceptance of censorship and the creation of dogma. Grand Masters like Feynman say “shut up and calculate!” and everyone finds this amusing. No one finds it a clear instance of fascism and oppression. An internet search on “against Feynman” or “Feynman was wrong” or “disagree with Feynman” turns up nothing. The field is monolithic. It is completely controlled and one-dimensional. All discussion has been purged from the standard model, and all debate has been marginalized. Any non-standard opinion must be from a “crank” and blacklisting is widespread. Publishing is also controlled, both in academia and in the mainstream. Einstein already found science publishing too controlled for his taste in the 30’s, refusing to work with Physical Review. What would he think now? Can anyone imagine his early papers getting published in the current atmosphere?

If you are an insider at a major university, you can publish anything, the more absurd the better. You can say anything without fear of contradiction or analysis, since science most wants right now to be creative, and it thinks (like modern art) that absurdity is the most creative thing possible. The paradox is the highest distinction, the contradiction the surest sign of elevation. The contemporary physics paper has become like Dubuffet’s La Lunette Farcie, a purposeful mockery of all convention, a nothing packaged as a something. Soon the physicist may be expected to follow Duchamp, publishing a toilet seat as a TOE.

Contrary to what we are told, contemporary physics is not booming. It is not very near to omniscience, it is not the crown jewel of anything. In fact, it is near death. It has been damaged by any number of things, only a few of which I have mentioned by name here. But the prime murderer has been abstract mathematics. Physics has succumbed to a suffocation. It is the victim of a strangulation. It is in a not-so-shallow grave, and piled on top of it like dirt are a thousand fields and operators and variables and names and spaces and terms and eigenvalues and dimensions and criteria and functions and coordinates and conjugates and bases and bijective maps and automorphism groups and abelian gauge fields and Dirac spinors and Feynman diagrams and so on ad nauseum. The only way the grave could be any deeper and darker, in fact, is if we allowed Deconstruction to dump its transfinite dictionary of onanic terms on top of this one.

The only road out of this grave is to start digging in the upwards direction, clearing away all this schist. The sort of math that physics requires is a math of rigorous definitions and transparent variables, with as little abstraction as possible. We don’t need spaces of infinite dimensions, since we don’t have infinite physical dimensions. We don’t need abstract operators, we need direct representation of motions and entities. Taking the advice of Thoreau, we must “simplify, simplify, simplify.” That is our only hope of a Unified Field and a mechanical explanation of the universe.


Zero G Fakery: More Plausible Than You Thought….

This is a really great video, speculative to be sure, but speculative within the bounds of lots of corroborating perpendicular evidence. I really DO believe the I.S.S. is being faked, one way or another, and honestly when we consider what can be constructed in terms of things like CERN and so many other places, building a mock space station on Earth and employing fake zero gravity would be comparatively small potatoes. (I do think they use wires in some of the older ISS footage, however…)

“Meritocracy”, another anti-Establishment message brought to you by, the Establishment…

If you told me the following video was created as a clever piece of satire, I’d probably believe it, and find the whole thing to be a rather entertaining parody which quite adequately portrays how the an idealistic new political system might be advertised to a younger generation who “know all about the Elites, and hate them…”

Unfortunately, this is all completely real…

But really it serves as a terrific textbook example of Hegelianesque social engineering at work. One of the things of interest to me in this little video pitch, is how it all falls so nicely into the growing stream of millennial-generation political thought which one many levels has a greater awareness of there being an “Elite”, and on the surface seems to pushing back against a good many truly odious forces in our modern society. It is Zeitgeist phenomena trying to turn the corner into tangible political action. The “Occupy Movement” hoping to gain genuine traction and dethrone those pernicious “One-percenters”…

However… “There is nothing new under the sun”… It would seem that the Ecclesiastical Biblical maxim holds true, yet again. As a quote from Patrick Wood’s reads:

“In the heat of the Great Depression during the 1930s, prominent scientists and engineers proposed a utopian energy-based economic system called Technocracy that would be run by those same scientists and engineers instead of elected politicians. Although this radical movement lost momentum by 1940, it regained status when it was conceptually adopted by the elitist Trilateral Commission. (co-founded by Zbigniew Brzezinski and David Rockefeller) in 1973 to be become its so-called “New International Economic Order.”

As far as I can tell, the differences between Technocracy, and Meritocracy, are merely subtle discrepancies in the way the same core concept is being packaged and presented. As such, the basic tenets of Meritocracy are neither new, nor any genuine threat to the entrenched power brokers who originally spawned and funded such propositions in the first place, almost a hundred years ago. There are many interviews and lectures Wood has given, breaking down the elaborated definition of all that Technocracy was championed as in the past, as is finding a resurgence now once again. It does make a lot of sense that in our technologically-infused age, this kind of ideology would find an increasing amount of sympathy, where instead of spoiled billionaires and pompous politicians, people would welcome the suggestion of having engineers, scientists, (i.e., the “Technocrasts”) run things. After all, we’ve already seen people worship figures like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, for their perceived techno-revolutionary Buddha-like wisdom and philanthropic altruism, why not put people like that in charge…?

And so, the familiar Hegelian dance sashes on. Front foot thesis, back foot anti-thesis, everybody shuffle over into synthesis…

As has been before, in so many previous prepackaged “counter-culture” movements, the ideological seeds of this “grass-roots” were first nurtured under the warm lamps of an “Institutional Greenhouse” of thought manipulation. And, also like so many other “independent” and allegedly fight-the-Man groups and movements, we once again see how the same familiar kinds of long-used Establishment/Esoteric symbolism keep popping up as doubleheadedphoenixwell. The compass/rose of the main “Meritocracy” logo is telling in and of itself, yet I also found this other symbol that is supposedly affiliated with the Meritocracy political movement, and was rather amazed at how much it resembled a somewhat abstracted version of the double-headed eagle/phoenix, a symbol of Empire, secret societies and mystical ambitions of power which goes back who-knows-how-many millennia…

Of course, speculations involving symbolism is always just that in the end, speculation. But, what I would heavily argue is NOT speculation, is that the both the political mechanisms being proposed in the video above, as well as the broader almost Utopian vision being touted, is undeniable the very SAME vision that has been held by the very Elites which the naïve young believers in Meritocracy have convinced themselves they are going to break away from. It’s merely a different road to the same ultimate destination. Or maybe not even that far, maybe only more like a newly upgraded billboard, on the same road, to the same NWO destination…

I mean, come on, the guy is in his twenties after all, and he’s wearing a sport coat over a cool-looking graphic tee. You think stodgy old New World Order billionaires and aristocrats are hip to wearing graphic tees? No way man… 😉 Never mind that as the video goes on, it becomes increasingly hard to tell if the Illuminati-related images being shown in the background are included as examples of things intended to be done away with, or actually emulated and pursued, only in a younger, more hipster-friendly way. The Georgia Guidestones? Hey those are cool, as long the people putting their message of massive population reduction into effect are smart, educated, tech-savvy scientists, and not a bunch of stuffy lame media-mogul billionaires…

In the end, the only conclusion I am able to come to is that Meritocracy is simply Technocracy 2.0. It is a political ideology which ultimately seeks to establish the same globalist, totalitarian, privacy-eliminating, “data-omniscient”, State-worshipping goals already being advocated by the current batch of ruling “crats”, and only attempts to repackage it in such a way as to make it appear less threatening, more “scientifically-based”, more environmentally-friendly, and overall more attractive to a world embracing the integration of technology into every corner our everyday lives.

So… “Out with the Old, in with the New”, but then… “Everything that was old, is new again!” Please stop the merry-go-round sir, I want to get off. I think I just threw up a little bit on my graphic tee..

CERN: “It has a lot to do with you, and the Bible…”

The above is a fantastic RSE montage made from a recent sermon by Pastor Charles Lawson, the full sermon is here. Even though I’m usually not the hugest fan of “good ol’ fashioned Baptist preachin”, I have to admit that I am quite inspired to hear this man speaking out about this. I don’t think CERN is the kind of thing being addressed in too many pulpits these days…

But of course the “alternative media” is all over it. Gonz just had a fantastic interview with Stan Deyo about it, and the whole issue of the possibility of opening interdimensional portals/gates, and extra-dimensional beings possibly coming through etc.

Getting Ready to “Download Personalities from the Cloud”…

“Google patents robots with personalities in first step towards the singularity.”

This is not science fiction, this is “mainstream news“….

The story below is from the Independent:

Google has been awarded a patent for the ‘methods and systems for robot personality development’, a glimpse at a future where robots react based on data they mine from us and hopefully don’t unite and march on city hall.

The company outlines a process by which personalities by which personalities could be downloaded from the cloud to “provide states or moods representing transitory conditions of happiness, fear, surprise, perplexion, thoughtfulness, derision and so forth. ”

Its futuristic vision seems to be not of a personalized robot for each human but a set of personality traits that can be transferred between different robots.

“The personality and state may be shared with other robots so as to clone this robot within another device or devices,” it said in the patent.

“In this manner, a user may travel to another city, and download within a robot in that city (another “skin”) the personality and state matching the user’s “home location” robot. The robot personality thereby becomes transportable or transferable.”

It doesn’t sound dissimilar from the opening of a Will Smith sci-fi movie, with one robot’s evil data genes spreading via the cloud to all its other robot brethren.

While this sounds far-fetched, the technological singularity – the point at which artificial intelligence exceeds man’s intellectual capacity and produces a runaway effect – is something that Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates and Elon Musk have all expressed concern over.

Google is probably just safeguarding for the future, however, and is unlikely to release any products that require the patent to be employed anytime soon. We’ve still yet to create a robot that can convincingly walk up stairs, so an apocalyptic army is probably a long way off.



In light of the fact that they are now once again juicing up the flux capacitors at CERN (they use flux capacitors at CERN, right? I’m pretty sure they do…) in order to rip holes in the space-time continuum and collapse the dimensional divides, in order to usher in some Nephilim-horde army, I’ve been thinking about portals a fair bit lately. Well, I don’t really think all that, I was kidding of course. That’s silly. All those billions of dollars spent on a national-boundary-spanning hadron collider are so we can finally solve a theorem of quantum mechanics that 99.9999999% of humanity is too mathematically-challenged to understand in the first place. I think they’re hoping that enough power will be applied this time around so that they can finally know which final mark to make on that worn-out chalkboard at CERN, after which they’ll finally get to sit back and relax with a nice cup of tea and game of Sudoku…

cernportalsNah. Just kidding again. I am uCERNtain what exactly to make of it all, but I don’t think it’s something to be completely unconCERNed about. Ha, more shameless CERN-worldplay.

But ok… I know I’ve written about portals before, and here I go again, without having a whole heck of lot to try and say about the topic in any real “meaty” way (I’m no quantum-physicist, I confess) but what I DO find myself marveling at, again and again, is just how much this concept is just constantly showing up in entertainment/Hollywood etc., again and again. It’s something I see I don’t how many times in an average week, so, I finally sat down and tried to find images from all the recent examples I could remember, just to see what it would be. I wound up with folders within folders, literally, over a hundred images. I couldn’t possibly use them all, so I chose a few of my favorites and had some photoshop playtime…


But wait… Science fiction films/shows for adults aren’t the only place you see copious amounts of portal-related entertainment. One thing that has seriously blown me away over the past several years now as a parent, is how much my KIDS have been completely reared by modern children’s entertainment to be so utterly familiar with the basic concept of inter-dimensional travel that they essentially have assumed it was REAL from the time they could speak. Think about that… I mean, if I were to sit down with one of my kids and try to explain to them with words things like “teleportation” or “quantum folds” etc., then they’d just stare at me drooling while I rambled for an hour and accomplished nothing. But alas, cartoons and movies and video games have easily achieved what wouldn’t even know how to attempt. It’s literally EVERYWHERE, from hit video games like Minecraft (a big favorite in our house) to the Lego Movie, even My Little Pony. (!) I mean, when my youngest son was like THREE, if he saw some image even remotely resembling some kind of “swirling spiral”, his immediate response was just, “Hey look, a portal”, just as nonchalantly as if he saw a representation of a house or a tree or a rainbow…

So anyhoo, about a week ago I finally got to sit down and watch “Big Hero 6” with my ninos, and what “sci fi” concept happens to feature prominently in the storyline, yet again….? Yeah, you guessed it.

I dunno what to make of it all exactly, but one thing I do know is that if suddenly tomorrow it was announced that the “greatest scientific achievement in history” had finally been accomplished and interstellar travel was not proven to be possible through some incredible breakthrough in quantum mechanics, my children would almost certainly not be glued to the television, having their minds blown.

They’d probably just say something like “well DUH Dad, it’s just a portal…”

The Truth is stranger than Radio…. (project in the works…)

truthradioOk, so I’ve been kicking around the idea of doing some kind of podcast / radio project / “radio” sort of thang / for quite some time now, but still haven’t quite got there, although I am constantly playing around with sounds/music for “intros”, as that seems to be fun to do just for it’s own sake, and so perhaps that is even half my motive for wanting to do such a thing in the first place.  🙂  But anyhow, I’m still in the “brainstorming” phase really, (I suppose I more or less live in the that phase, but no matter…) and really I don’t know exactly where it might go, but all I think I do know at this point is that I’d want it to be something different, something very free and open in it’s format, and honestly I don’t think I’m looking to do another “let’s sit and interview this author/speaker/person” show, not because I don’t like those types of podcasts, because I love em, it’s just that I don’t necessarily think that’s either my “strength” or my cup o’ tea necessarily…

I think I’m more envisioning something more compilation-oriented, in the vein of say, NPR radio-shows such as “This American Life”, or “Radiolab”, if you’re familiar with those. Just more like little collections of “sound vignettes” and more like just random recorded conversations with people, about, well, all the fun/weird/crazy/prophetic stuff that typically finds it’s way onto the blog here, only I think I’d actually be hoping to collaborate with a lot of my fellow YOUs out there, in a project like this, my friends (and just anybody really) out there in the ‘sphere who might want to talk about, well, anything… How’s that sound? I’d love to just get recordings of stuff like, people’s testimonies, views on what’s going on in the world, governments, pop culture, music, art, the Bible, “spirituality”, conspiracies, NWO, movies, books, and of course, TRUTH!

I already have several of you specifically in mind, so be prepared to start getting some emails peeps, and please, do take the time to let me know what kinds of things YOU’D be interested in talking about, listening to, and just seeing tried overall. It’s not intended to be the most amazing thing you’ve ever heard in terms of “production value” or anything, nor is it hoped to be something that would garner some massive audience. It’s just, like this blog, another small outlet, a way of hopefully being able connect in a slightly “deeper” way with lots of other people out there, collaborate, get creative, and actually be able to hear the tones in each other’s voices…. Here’s one of the “intros” I’ve come up with:

WordPress Reader Woes…

6636556953_08a05f7fe2No, not talking about you, a reader of wordpress blogs, talkin about the “WordPress Reader”, which allows all WP bloggers to customize their own hub of blogs “followed”, which then pop up in your Reader the second they are published.

The thing is, when I first started using wordpress, (as opposed to Google’s blogger, which I tried first) I loved the whole Reader component. Ol’ BlogSpot never had anything like it when I was over there, not sure if they do now. But anyhow, the ability to have all your followed blogs be tossed like the morning paper on your digital doorstep was a fantastic idea to a person as lazy as myself. After a while, once I had established a wide enough range of followed blogs, I basically realized that more often than not, WP Reader was my go-to news aggregator, veritably eliminating the need to really go anywhere else to hear about anything of much import. In fact, a quick glance at my WP Reader usually gave me a greater awareness of what’s going on in the world (of true import) than a look at any “official” news syndicate. Very cool.

But then, you start to encounter hiccups… First, I began to realize that when I would follow certain blogs that I did indeed find interesting, the fact that sometimes those particular blogs were so, um, “prolific” that they would essentially fill up my Reader to such an extent that I’d be regularly completely missing posts from other blogs I truly loved. I don’t mean “prolific” in the sense of those bloggers who find the time to actually themselves write several amazing posts a day. I mean the ones who will post (or re-post) like 20 things a day. Sometimes they will rarely write a single word of their own, just post copious amounts of material from elsewhere along some singular theme…

Now, I’m not trying to dog these folks, after all, I chose to follow them, I could very well un-follow them, but then, at the same time I DO find interesting stuff in the mix every now then from those aggressive re-posters, stuff I would’ve never come across otherwise, and so, it creates a bit of a pickle…bookface

Do I cull the mega-posters from my Reader, so as to make sure I don’t miss posts from the those I know are worth the read every time they post? Or do I continue on trying to weed through the morass of stuff in my Reader every day, because I’m ever so addicted to encountering that odd and unexpected tidbit of information…?

What IS the generally-accepted sustainable number of followed blogs in a WP Reader anyhow? Any thoughts fellow WP’ers? Any tricks you’ve learned that maybe I’m missing here? I more or less wish there was some way that I could categorize my followed blogs into different subsections, ya know? Like, click this and see my favorite followeds, click that and see everything, click there and see the weird stuff, etc….


integratron0While watching an older episode of Anthony Bourdain last night we stumbled an interesting bit of Americana. Bourdain was cruising around the Californian desert with the frontman for Queens of the Stone Age, and one of the places they stopped was a place named “The Integratron”, a dome-shaped building out in the middle of nowhere, built out of wood and interlaced with copper wires and other things, where they stopped for a “sound bath”, basically a meditative session where they lay in the dome and the hosts created chakra-opening tones using crystal bowls…

The interesting thing to me is the history of this “Integration” design, and it’s builder, Mr. George Van Tassell, who I confess I’d never heard of before this. (I’m sure amongst UFO buffs he’s super old news, but hey)

106084077_medium_6b2e6dThe Integratron is built in close proximity to “Giant Rock”, which is where it all begins. The massive boulder is (of course) a site long considered sacred to Natives for it’s spiritual properties, which wound up being the “home” of a man named Frank Critzer. Critzer was a homeless prospector who somehow came across Giant Rock and, much like Patrick the starfish from SpongeBob Squarepants, proceeded to carve out a little domicile for himself underneath the humongiant_rock1gous stone. Van Tassell had become friends with Critzer shortly before he dug out his little cave-dwelling, and after some time became a frequent participant in group meditation sessions that Critzer would hold in his underground home.

Then Van Tassell is visited by a “space man”, who tells him all sorts of things, including a “formula” for time travel, and the design schematics for what would eventually take shape as the Integratron structure.

Now to me, when you look at the broader sequence of how the history of this place unfolds, I think it serves as a rather telling example of how the “UFO phenomenon” is indeed real, but ultimately of a very spiritual nature. The place existed for ages as a known epicenter of “energies”, and as such it functioned as a location whereby meditation and communication with the spirit realm was enhanced. While the Integratron design given to Van Tassell fails achieve “time travel” in the classic sense, it nevertheless proves to indeed exhibit all kinds of strange and pronounced effects in relation to meditative practices. So again, we see a very familiar pattern that emerges quite often when examining the Ufology, this sort of boomerang effect, where there is often an initial connection to some ancient shamanic location or practice, which then in the 50’s or 60’s is tied to some experience involving “spacemen” or “spacecraft” or both, from which is gleaned some form of information that ultimately points people BACK to ancient, shamanic beliefs and practices…

Integratron-(2)-500The figure of Van Tassell is of further curiousity when it is noted that not only was he (like so many others) a military man involved in the aerospace industry, but he actually worked for/with “eccentric billionaire” (and CIA asset) Howard Hughes, there are apparently also correlations between the designs of the Integratron with the technologies of the much speculated over Nikola Tesla. Heck, even Billy Corgan thought the place was cool enough to shoot a video there…