AuthorTopic: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation  (Read 10647 times)

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9069
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #90 on: July 09, 2017, 01:42:37 PM »
Randall Carlson will hook you up.
He's the sacred geometry go to guy.
Interview starts at the 36 min mark of the vid


<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/mI6xn2E_tOU&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/mI6xn2E_tOU&fs=1</a>
« Last Edit: July 09, 2017, 01:45:13 PM by azozeo »
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why youíre here. Youíre here because you know something. What you know you canít explain, but you feel it. Youíve felt it your entire life, that thereís something wrong with the world.
You donít know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #91 on: July 09, 2017, 01:45:03 PM »
AKA Fibonnaci Sequence and Golden Rectangles. I also am quite aware of Benoit Mandelbrot's Fractal & Chaos Theory, and Fourier Series and Fermat's Last Theorem too, and I can even actually DO the math on these things, for the most part although a lot of it is in the dim recesses of a fading brain and needs to be dredged up to do it.  With the possible exception of Palloy, I have more math background than any other Diner.   I go through Calc 4, Differential Equations, Partial Differential Equations, Linear Algebra & Matrix Algebra, and then numerous applications of those including Thermodynamics and Economics.  Far as Biology goes, I studied Biochemistry under Charlie Cantor.  I am not a Mathematical Dimwit.  ::)

Quote
Charles Cantor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with Charlie Cantor.
Charles Cantor
Born    1942
Nationality    American
Fields    Molecular genetics
Known for    Pulse field gel electrophoresis

Charles Cantor (born 1942) is an American molecular geneticist who, in conjunction with David Schwartz, developed pulse field gel electrophoresis for very large DNA molecules. His 3 vol book, biophysical chemistry, co-authored with Paul Schimmel, was an influential textbook in the 1980s and 1990s.

Charles Cantor is Director of the Center for Advanced Biotechnology at Boston University.[1] He is currently on a two-year sabbatical acting as Chief Scientific Officer at Sequenom, Inc.[2] However, his research laboratory at Boston University continues to be active, and he works there frequently. He is also a co-founder and Director of Retrotope, a US-based company using heavier isotopes of carbon (C13) and hydrogen (deuterium) to stabilize essential compounds like amino acids, nucleic acids and lipids to target age-related diseases.[3][4]

Cantor held positions at Columbia University and the University of California, Berkeley.

Cantorís laboratory at Boston University has developed methods for separating large DNA molecules, for studying structural relationships in complex proteins and nucleic acids, and for sensitive detection of proteins and nucleic acids in a variety of settings.

Professor Cantor has been director of the Department of Energy Human Genome Project and Chairman of the Department of Biomedical Engineering at Boston University.

Cantor is a consultant to more than 16 biotech firms, has published more than 400 peer reviewed articles, been granted 54 US patents, and co-authored a three-volume textbook on Biophysical Chemistry.

Cantor is an author of:

    Genomics : The Science and Technology Behind the Human Genome Project
    Biophysical Chemistry : The Behavior of Biological Macromolecules
    Techniques for the Study of Biological Structure and Function

Ref Schwartz DC, Cantor CR. " Separation of yeast chromosome-sized DNAs by pulsed field gradient gel electrophoresis ", in Cell, vol 37, pp. 67Ė75, May 1984 Similar work appeared almost at the same time from the lab of Maynard Olson at Washington University School of Medicine

I am perfectly aware of these biological examples of structures which can be well described with mathematics.  They are not however Human Consciousness or Sapience.  Some things are treatable by mathematics to provide a consistent explanation.  Others are not.


RE
« Last Edit: July 09, 2017, 01:50:15 PM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9069
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #92 on: July 09, 2017, 01:54:42 PM »
God is a tetragramaton (spell check doesn't even no this word) .....

Carry on  :icon_sunny:

RE,
We're not insulting your intelligence or knocking your credentials
we're simply stating that nature has only 1 set of rules. That is sacred geometry. The rest is bullshit & unnecessary.

Side note : At what frequency is the purest form of light created ?
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why youíre here. Youíre here because you know something. What you know you canít explain, but you feel it. Youíve felt it your entire life, that thereís something wrong with the world.
You donít know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #93 on: July 09, 2017, 02:03:46 PM »
we're simply stating that nature has only 1 set of rules.

What are those Rules?  Can Mathematics even describe all of them, much less create all the applications of them?  How does "Big Data Sociology" get any closer to the Truth with a Capital T than some Mystic in Tibet  sucking down the Ayuhuasca?  ???  :icon_scratch:

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline DoctorWhom

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #94 on: July 09, 2017, 02:17:14 PM »
AKA Fibonnaci Sequence and Golden Rectangles. I also am quite aware of Benoit Mandelbrot's Fractal & Chaos Theory, and Fourier Series and Fermat's Last Theorem too, and I can even actually DO the math on these things, for the most part although a lot of it is in the dim recesses of a fading brain and needs to be dredged up to do it.  With the possible exception of Palloy, I have more math background than any other Diner.   I go through Calc 4, Differential Equations, Partial Differential Equations, Linear Algebra & Matrix Algebra, and then numerous applications of those including Thermodynamics and Economics.  Far as Biology goes, I studied Biochemistry under Charlie Cantor.  I am not a Mathematical Dimwit.  ::)

Quote
Charles Cantor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with Charlie Cantor.
Charles Cantor
Born    1942
Nationality    American
Fields    Molecular genetics
Known for    Pulse field gel electrophoresis

Charles Cantor (born 1942) is an American molecular geneticist who, in conjunction with David Schwartz, developed pulse field gel electrophoresis for very large DNA molecules. His 3 vol book, biophysical chemistry, co-authored with Paul Schimmel, was an influential textbook in the 1980s and 1990s.

Charles Cantor is Director of the Center for Advanced Biotechnology at Boston University.[1] He is currently on a two-year sabbatical acting as Chief Scientific Officer at Sequenom, Inc.[2] However, his research laboratory at Boston University continues to be active, and he works there frequently. He is also a co-founder and Director of Retrotope, a US-based company using heavier isotopes of carbon (C13) and hydrogen (deuterium) to stabilize essential compounds like amino acids, nucleic acids and lipids to target age-related diseases.[3][4]

Cantor held positions at Columbia University and the University of California, Berkeley.

Cantorís laboratory at Boston University has developed methods for separating large DNA molecules, for studying structural relationships in complex proteins and nucleic acids, and for sensitive detection of proteins and nucleic acids in a variety of settings.

Professor Cantor has been director of the Department of Energy Human Genome Project and Chairman of the Department of Biomedical Engineering at Boston University.

Cantor is a consultant to more than 16 biotech firms, has published more than 400 peer reviewed articles, been granted 54 US patents, and co-authored a three-volume textbook on Biophysical Chemistry.

Cantor is an author of:

    Genomics : The Science and Technology Behind the Human Genome Project
    Biophysical Chemistry : The Behavior of Biological Macromolecules
    Techniques for the Study of Biological Structure and Function

Ref Schwartz DC, Cantor CR. " Separation of yeast chromosome-sized DNAs by pulsed field gradient gel electrophoresis ", in Cell, vol 37, pp. 67Ė75, May 1984 Similar work appeared almost at the same time from the lab of Maynard Olson at Washington University School of Medicine

I am perfectly aware of these biological examples of structures which can be well described with mathematics.  They are not however Human Consciousness or Sapience.  Some things are treatable by mathematics to provide a consistent explanation.  Others are not.


RE

Then you'll find biological scaling factors that run the range from bacterial to elephant mass that suggest that nature is taking advantage of the fractal quality of networks to maintain a certain level of efficiency. These relationships suggest universal bounds on what's possible from biological organisms. And human beings clearly have an upper bound on their intelligence, and perhaps this upper bound is partially explained by the optimization mechanisms involved in the creation of biological networks, whatever those may be. The brain is a network in competition with other resources the body needs, and in the end is limited by the resources it's able to use, which is also rooted in physiological limitations. If you studied biochemistry then you should be aware of the folding at home program that let's you devote computer resources to calculate protein configurations. Well, that's math cutting through a vast solution space to find something complicated.

Consciousness, whatever it is, seems intuitive informational. It's why you recognize rectangles in your visual field and why a tone of 880 Hz sounds the "same" as one of 440 or 220 Hz. It's intuitively clear there is order to consciousness, which suggests the tools of information apply. It appears consciousness can be "broken up". That suggests correlations with underlying neural mechanisms, and so on. There an unnecessary amount of "mystery-keeping" when we should acknowledge what seems amenable to mathematical techniques. The integrated information theory approach to consciousness assumes the kind of correlation I'm talking about as a framework. That doesn't mean it's true. It just means the ideas are reasonable enough to have serious research attention, and my intuition is in line with them.

And this approach should be taken. It's part of the whole "explore reality" thing instead of saying "it's too hard" or can't be done. A lot of people didn't think computers could do art, yet they can make already music that fools a lot of people. The longer we don't collapse, the more the "specialness" of our brains will be superseded.
I have nothing to ask but that you would remove to the other side, that you may not, by intercepting the sunshine, take from me what you cannot give.

~ Diogenes

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9069
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #95 on: July 09, 2017, 02:22:23 PM »
Tunes at the 440 hz look like a puddle of ooze in cymantics
440 isn't divisible to a prime single digit number.
Close but no cigar amigo.
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why youíre here. Youíre here because you know something. What you know you canít explain, but you feel it. Youíve felt it your entire life, that thereís something wrong with the world.
You donít know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9069
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #96 on: July 09, 2017, 02:23:52 PM »
A tetragramaton is a 3 dimensional star of david ....
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why youíre here. Youíre here because you know something. What you know you canít explain, but you feel it. Youíve felt it your entire life, that thereís something wrong with the world.
You donít know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #97 on: July 09, 2017, 02:25:21 PM »
The longer we don't collapse, the more the "specialness" of our brains will be superseded.

That is highly doubtful.  Besides, there isn't much time left before collapse becomes quite serious and such investigations will not be undertaken.  People will be more concerned with simply surviving.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9069
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #98 on: July 09, 2017, 02:32:56 PM »
We are in collapse !

Perhaps your universe hasn't imploded quite yet, but the financial signs of this past week
have shown the bus has now left the pavement & is in freefall on fire.
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why youíre here. Youíre here because you know something. What you know you canít explain, but you feel it. Youíve felt it your entire life, that thereís something wrong with the world.
You donít know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #99 on: July 09, 2017, 02:55:12 PM »
we're simply stating that nature has only 1 set of rules.

What are those Rules?  Can Mathematics even describe all of them, much less create all the applications of them?  How does "Big Data Sociology" get any closer to the Truth with a Capital T than some Mystic in Tibet  sucking down the Ayuhuasca?  ???  :icon_scratch:

RE

Wrong hemisphere for ayahuasca, but I take your point.

Also, nature may only have one set of rules but our understanding of them evolves. Euclid gave way to Newton who gave way to Einstein and quantum physics, etc.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline jdwheeler42

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
    • View Profile
    • Going Upslope
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #100 on: July 09, 2017, 03:10:43 PM »
we're simply stating that nature has only 1 set of rules.
What are those Rules?  Can Mathematics even describe all of them, much less create all the applications of them?  How does "Big Data Sociology" get any closer to the Truth with a Capital T than some Mystic in Tibet  sucking down the Ayuhuasca?  ???  :icon_scratch:
Wrong hemisphere for ayahuasca, but I take your point.

Also, nature may only have one set of rules but our understanding of them evolves. Euclid gave way to Newton who gave way to Einstein and quantum physics, etc.
It's worse than that... Goedel proved with his Incompleteness Theorem that for anything as complex as Arithmetic, it is impossible to have a set of All Possible True statements that contains only True statements.  Any set that contains All Possible True statements will also contain some False ones, and any set that contains only True statements will be missing some Possible True ones.
Making pigs fly is easy... that is, of course, after you have built the catapult....

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #101 on: July 09, 2017, 04:48:25 PM »
The longer we don't collapse, the more the "specialness" of our brains will be superseded.

That is highly doubtful.  Besides, there isn't much time left before collapse becomes quite serious and such investigations will not be undertaken.  People will be more concerned with simply surviving.

RE

Regimes allocate resources for research regardless of what is happening to the rest of the population. Note Dr spengler etc under Hitler even as the allies were closing in as an example of continuing siphoning away cream for certain things. Unless a country is defeated, so until we are ungovernable I expect them to urgently try brain transplant and downloading/uploading. 

But it is assabout to say no further knowledge happens due to collapse. The answers given by Padmasambhava that knarf posted were only possible WITHOUT distractions like a liquor store and walmart. The ancients would not have developed astronomy and astrology staring at the night sky if they had TV. There is a serious contention that splitting the atom and nuclear annihilation as described in the Mahabharata  was done in previous civilization by means of the mind, this corroborated by scorched buildings and radiactivity at archaeological finds.

Today they are slowly decoding the human genome,  yet these guys have done it already with no computer or microscope. They are not kidding about the level of understanding of the universe. I have several hard copy books sourced from India from the guys still practising all this. I have meditation friends who travel there first for a month,  then gone back there in tibet or nepal and are still there, until i suspect visa runs out. Here are just a few diagrams showing dna/genes and changes being unlocked like levels to get better weapons in a computer game. I have other books by yogis detailing  whole sciences of eg breath control.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2017, 05:04:38 PM by Uncle Bob »
ELEVATE YOUR GAME

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #102 on: July 09, 2017, 08:15:47 PM »
we're simply stating that nature has only 1 set of rules.

What are those Rules?  Can Mathematics even describe all of them, much less create all the applications of them?  How does "Big Data Sociology" get any closer to the Truth with a Capital T than some Mystic in Tibet  sucking down the Ayuhuasca?  ???  :icon_scratch:

RE

Wrong hemisphere for ayahuasca, but I take your point.

Also, nature may only have one set of rules but our understanding of them evolves. Euclid gave way to Newton who gave way to Einstein and quantum physics, etc.

Actually, Newton used Euclidian Geometry in his work.  That's where the famous quote comes from.


You encounter Riemann Geometry in General Relativity theory.

Quote
Riemannian geometry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Elliptic geometry is also sometimes called "Riemannian geometry".
Geometry

Riemannian geometry is the branch of differential geometry that studies Riemannian manifolds, smooth manifolds with a Riemannian metric, i.e. with an inner product on the tangent space at each point that varies smoothly from point to point. This gives, in particular, local notions of angle, length of curves, surface area and volume. From those, some other global quantities can be derived by integrating local contributions.

Riemannian geometry originated with the vision of Bernhard Riemann expressed in his inaugural lecture "Ueber die Hypothesen, welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen" ("On the Hypotheses on which Geometry is Based"). It is a very broad and abstract generalization of the differential geometry of surfaces in R3. Development of Riemannian geometry resulted in synthesis of diverse results concerning the geometry of surfaces and the behavior of geodesics on them, with techniques that can be applied to the study of differentiable manifolds of higher dimensions. It enabled the formulation of Einstein's general theory of relativity, made profound impact on group theory and representation theory, as well as analysis, and spurred the development of algebraic and differential topology.

Special Relativity Theory still isn't proven.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline DoctorWhom

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #103 on: July 09, 2017, 10:55:18 PM »

Special Relativity Theory still isn't proven.

RE

This is just the wikipedia summary, but apparently a large range of experimental results are consistent with the predictions of special relativity - experiments on scales of interactions where gravity isn't significant. You don't "prove" theories. You prove theorems in math, as you know. You find evidence for theories. And it's exciting to find something unexpected. It would be amazing if something paradigm-changing showed up at the Large Hadron Collider, for example. So in what sense to you find the evidence unsatisfactory?

And what do you mean you took Cal IV? Was it the calculus of variations or something? At ISU "Calc IV" was analysis, which is the rigorous justification of calculus, but there are related "preliminaries" like the construction the real numbers, which are bizarre as technically defined and not at all like people intuitively think, but people don't intuitively think that the point of real numbers is to satisfy what are called "field properties" if I recall correctly. I'm also perhaps somewhat of a "constructivist" when it comes to math - for now. I don't think the real numbers actually exist, for example. You can give me an algorithm and say "this algorithm will construct something we'll call the square root of 2 for as long as you run it". Or you can give me the nth digit, or whatever. But the number "square root of 2" can't exist. Because that would be infinite information. So where does the Universe "put that" information? How could such information actually manifest? Makes as little sense as the idea of "solid matter" making sense, which was an idea that sounded wrong to me in high school.
I have nothing to ask but that you would remove to the other side, that you may not, by intercepting the sunshine, take from me what you cannot give.

~ Diogenes

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Re: Requesting Knarf for Evaluation
« Reply #104 on: July 09, 2017, 11:06:42 PM »
And what do you mean you took Cal IV?

Calc I: Differential Calculus in one Variable
Calc II: Integral Calculus in one Variable
Calc III: Differential Calculus in multiple Variables
Calc IV: Integral Calculus in multiple Variables.

RE
« Last Edit: July 10, 2017, 02:51:45 AM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
31 Replies
13317 Views
Last post April 16, 2015, 06:52:25 PM
by RE
1 Replies
634 Views
Last post December 22, 2015, 01:06:33 AM
by Karpatok
104 Replies
14928 Views
Last post December 08, 2016, 06:55:15 AM
by luciddreams