Technical and more

Month, Day: 170, Will, Grandeur (Beauty)

I missed the whole month of Might, for several reasons. But, Knowledge (the month of the Bab) is right around the corner, so we'll resume. After that, the Motivational comes to fore.

---

When looking at the popular posts, we have the following order:

• Technical spirit (Sept 2, 2009) -- Motivated by articles in the ACM Communications. Turns out that this post has a similar sense (more below).
• We are not idempotent? (May 9, 2012) -- The concept can be applied to many situational themes, especially those related to the strangling mesh of a mathematical/computational origin that is being put over human kind. By whom? Those who have the wherewithal to do so. Now, the concern is not the reality of this type of thing with its being, naturally (and supernaturally), part of human nature. The problem is that Independent Investigation of the Truth applies here, with more connotative emphasis than some might have thought (way beyond the religious-based usages). Too, those doing IIofT must attune their heads and hearts, as needed. Part of this would be to properly filter processing of "residues" (see below).    
• Christopher Hitchens (Jan 21, 2012) -- He was of comprehension, more than most. The lesson is that we don't comprehend (as said von Neumann) many things; yet, those who build constructively (even though they still allow the use of infinity) do not grasp the underlying issue. How can they when the universe seems to  be reflecting right back to them what they are looking for? (see below)
• Audacious comment (Aug 3, 2013) -- Along the line of the prior bullet, on the BF&S page on Wikipedia, there is a listing of notions that seems to have appeared firstly in the Writings. The list ought to be (and will be, at some point) much longer. In fact, creative urges, unfounded otherwise, will result from the Words. However, one discussion, which is an example of how things can go awry, considered whether the Writings could be used logically (as in, from one view, embedded within the Writings, some string being able to support a reasoning chain). Well, given that humans are, in part, rationally based, the answer is yes. However, the modern trend is to discount that which cannot be Turing-based (not as hopeless as it might seem - see below).

 There is a fifth post, Yearly measure, on the list that remains open to discussion.

---

Now, the recent Communications (see first bullet) had an article that applies to the themes behind the blog. The article (by Mark Braverman, of Princeton University, "Computing with Real Numbers, from Archimedes to Turing and Beyond") is considered premium and is not available on-line (so, run down to the nearest library).

Mark uses the progression from the natural numbers upward to illustrate his points. We all have an intuitive sense for these numbers. The rationals may be a little more problematic. Some feel that they ought to be introduced earlier in the educational process. Going further, one gets into the reals and the more involved number systems, such as complex numbers.

As an aside, one thing that we see with the earlier types is a close correspondence between the thing and how we name it. For instance, for any lower-level number, we can easily say it and even demonstrate it with objects. Even with the more complicated numbers, there are times when we see "nice" ways to handle things. Mark uses an example of a simple harmonic oscillator. In fact, one finds closed-form opportunities in many places.  Prior to computation's emergence last century, humans did quite well this way.

The point, so far? Names and Attributes are one thing that we'll continue to bring up. Too, computation brings in complexity; approximations allow us some leeway; yet, at the core, there are the lessons from the Valleys (underdetermination, of sorts).

Mark gets into more complex notions that result from trying to model natural processes (and God's creation). Too, in order to get beyond undecidability and its influence, we have seen many creative schemes applied. For instance, with the spread of computers and systems, all sorts of algorithms exist that allow people to compute, and display, Julia sets which are great for illustrating issues related to convergence and its opposite.

A key notion deals with equivalence which is a very hard problem that has been, in part, conquered. One might say that dropping the whole notion has been the operational mode (it was phrased this way, as, other things have undergone equivalent (yes) parsing - all the way up to ...).

After Mark discusses how bringing in parameters allows further control including the continued existence of problematic issues, he suggests that allowing for noise can help reduce things to a tractable state. In a sense, one might see this as a parallel seen in the success of fuzzy methods.

But, then we get back to probabilistic issues which come from another use of numbers. So, computation is hard; too, though, it ought to be instructive to mathematics in a quasi-empirical sense. Perhaps, that hardness can be, in the long term, indicative of the limits that we need to understand. That is, being cannot be encompassed by this means (or, by any other of our way); but, given its growing usefulness, modelling can be considered essential to our future.

So, we're at a type of cusp. Describing this seems to be in order; perhaps, we'll get there at some point.  
Remarks:

09/30/2013 --


Modified: 09/30/2013

Bridge from the Operational

Month, Day: 170, Names, Power (Beauty)

Motivational. Haven't paid enough attention to this group. Have not even made a category for it.

Essentially: Power, Speech, Questions, Honour.

Perhaps, it's due to the intuitive appeal of the Operational. But, could leverage off the Twin Festivals which span Operational and Motivational.

Aside: Twin appears several times.


Remarks:

09/02/2013 -- Eyes, ears, self-ness.


03/25/2016 -- A change in the calendar will have these two adjusting. As well, we have a principal vector upon which to contemplate.


Modified: 03/23/2016

Eyes, ears, self-ness

Month, Day: 170, Names, Mercy (Beauty)

Being, now, in the Operational times, we can expect action. And, audacity would suggest that more information (abundantly so) awaits within the Writings.

---

Consider that we need to get a better handle on consciousness, for ourselves and the future. That "handle" would be of use several ways, including pushing back the frontiers.  As we wait for the world to wake up, we can have our own little musings.

Such as? Take the #11 Hidden Words (Persian): O SON OF DUST! Blind thine eyes, that thou mayest behold My beauty; stop thine ears, that thou mayest hearken unto the sweet melody of My voice; empty thyself of all learning, that thou mayest partake of My knowledge; and sanctify thyself from riches, that thou mayest obtain a lasting share from the ocean of My eternal wealth. Blind thine eyes, that is, to all save My beauty; stop thine ears to all save My word; empty thyself of all learning save the knowledge of Me; that with a clear vision, a pure heart and an attentive ear thou mayest enter the court of My holiness.

It suggests an operational framework with benefits beyond belief. In short, it separates out eyes, ears, and self (as thyself). Now, consider what the Master said about cognition (see spiritual powers - we could have a mapping seeing/imagination, hearing/thought, comprehension/self-ness) and wonder how this might apply in the modern reductionistic world where we're essentially thought of as a collection of particles and energies. 

---

In other words, we can see if we desire. The Words are there for our use. Then, we can know God.

Think of an argument as consonance exemplified if it is true (rings as such). Ears tied to rationality? The modern world has embraced dissonance (music, for example); such movements toward the random side do not remove what messages are there for us to identify.  

---

Another trend related to progress is toward enabling human efforts. And, such phenomena go beyond those things of concern to the elite view (and separatist's mindset). We like to use "savant" for unexplained talents; yet, it may very well be that latent talents will emerge more from non-elite situations than not. One case in point: numeracy (taking, for instance, STEM as the sole basis for our truth maintenance is wrongful - there are inverses of numeracy that are very interesting and potent - actually, those who bastardize mathematics have entrapped us heavily in ways that will take much effort to untangle). 

---

No Luddite am I; rather, I grate at the lop-sided worldviews that have such prominence, now.

Remarks:

08/25/2013 -- 

Modified: 08/25/2013

The Poets

Month, Day: 170, Perfection, Questions (Majesty)

Our best benefit is this Attribute, the foundation of science.

---

Earlier, we took a brief look at Either/Or. One either accepts something or not. This applies across the board; even, dear readers, in science where "faith" pertains to belief (perhaps, measured by comfort-ability with) in the system (methods, etc.), the players (credentials), and even one's own prowess (yes, the development of hubris is not uncommon). One of our 21st Century problems is that perceived effectiveness of quantitative methods (read, applied mathematics) leads toward a shroud that is appallingly deadening to the spirit (whatever that is? -- ah, audacity will cover that, to boot).

Now, given methods and their chief tendency (centralism), we see the necessity to demonstrate a broader sense of knowing (not an important issue?). These ways of knowing are accepted by some; how many of those who accept have any idea of the functional aspects?

---

So, given a Faith, one has Writings to consider. Of course, the believer accepts the Writings. The non-believer not; so, we have the need to address issues, many times, without using the Writings (to be discussed). So, given the choice, mentioned above, one would have Writings (inspired) on the one hand; on the other, it would be a matter of creativity, being clever, and other human approaches.

Now, can one obtain knowledge such that science (without some serious changes) cannot evaluate the source, the context, veracity, and more? Of course. Such really is what is behind success of the highest nature. Despite protestations otherwise, consciousness is not under anyone's thumb (that is, all materialistically motivated attempts are lacking -- and will continue to be -- that is one thing for audacity to bring out). 

 ---

One of the Writings is the Koran. It's an enormous amount of material that was spoken for a long while. Later, there were attempts to write what was recalled in a more permanent form.

There are other Sources, however we use the Koran due to its relationship with the Glory and the Master. They knew to quote from this source.

---

Now, using a nice Koran site, let's look at The Poets. In this Sura, there is a listing of earlier Prophets.

Why is this important? Well, the inspiration behind the Koran puts a strong basis behind its veracity. Okay? 

So, we could match up these Prophets with the Bible; we could also take a historical view.

---

We'll get back to this, but we can list a few and their times: Moses (ca. 1391 BCE), Eber/Hud (ca. ?), Lot (ca. 2000 BCE), Jethro (ca. Moses' father-in-law), Salih (ca. ?), Noah (ca. before Lot). This list is from only one sura. There are many more Prophets mentioned elsewhere in the Koran.

Again, given their mention, we can take them as historical fact. Filling in the details may, or may not, be of interest. 

---

The theme, in each case, is that the Prophet tried to get people to listen but failed, in general. There were those who listened; the majority did not (makes on think of the Return mentioned in the Iqan). Now, one could consider the repercussions of the failure, but we can go in other directions, too. Such as? How could have listening changed what was known?

Ah, in the ancient past, that is a long stretch. But, please consider. It is not hard to look at how things have unfolded with the past 200 years or so and, then, to ponder how things might have been different. In fact, one might argue that we are to do just that, using the Revelation time as a point of reflection (actually, it's more an issue of a symmetry of sorts).

Remarks:

08/15/2013 -- Abraham is not in the list? He's at the top.

Modified: 08/15/2013

Octaves?

Month, Day: 170, Perfection, Perfection (Majesty)

4 Attributes, 5 Groups

By having the yearly congruence, we can see a little closer.  Earlier, I mentioned sevenths (and other groupings) in the sense of chords.  However, the grouping went along only one axis in the discussion. That way, one might see Light/Knowledge/Loftiness, for example.

---

Seven is an interesting number. The week's length gives us work and rest days; of course, we got that from Genesis.

Today, I was thinking of going along the other axis. In that mode, one finds that Perfection would start the second group. As follows:

• Splendour, Glory, Beauty, Grandeur, Light, Mercy, Words
• Perfection, Names, Might, Will, Knowledge, Power, Speech
• Questions, Honour, Sovereignty, Dominion, ??, Loftiness

"??"? Yes, for the year, we have the intercalary period which ought to be of interest to a scientific view (more on this, over time). In the months, is there a "null" between Dominion and Loftiness?

Why ask? Well, we have two mappings, which would depend upon the choice. Light/Knowledge/Loftiness, as mentioned above. And, Light/Knowledge/??. Ah, like that?

You see, audacity would say that the models need to change to allow something like this, Great Undecidable (characterize it, or name it, as you wish -- at least, be respectful of the choice, if not for yourself, for others -- the choice? yes, a fundamental right for everyone to make for themselves).

However GU works, it has already led our technical prowess to a stalemate. That is, the technical, mathematical framework has come back upon itself. Well, as we can argue, people have to be central to a proper working of that framework. For some reason, modern hubris has chosen to throw out intuition and to allow computers to reign (many times).

All arguable, yet the whole issue is whether doing the above-suggested would have operational effects (note, please, that measurability would be subsumed under this, not drive it -- to rephrase, the change would be toward a mode in which mathematics participated but did not own the principle views). The key thing now would be to set up the proper experimentation.

And, that would not be within the context mentioned by the Master (miracles, where the Glory challenged the mullahs to ask for a miracle which, as we know, is only for those there). For such, those not there, either because of space or time, have the right to play the doubting Thomas.

Too, science's basis is public, repeatable, and several other things. It turns out that we do have something emerging that would provide the platform for experimentation (the web, in a very broad sense). This platform would, for one, break the barriers related to elitism that is so rampant in modern thought.  

That last statement? Consider, please, the imperative nature of the autodidact's contributions.

Remarks:

08/08/2013 -- Perfection/Perfection.

Modified: 08/08/2013