Light - Darkness - Reality - and Subjectivity

If This Posting is too Heavy for You, move on to the next one

But first I'm like t talk about some simpler concepts like the meaning of Words and our use of them.  For instance the word Pure - - is the only word that gets Weaker when it has an -er attatched to it.  Think about it.  Certain words CANNOT mean a different thing when used as an adverb than as an adjitive.  The word WORTHY comes to mind.  The words Worthy or Unworthy can never be differeitiated by use as an Adverb because the word Worthy itself ALWAYS refers back to the physical state of being Worthy.  Some people speak in inexact terms or leave words out in verbal short form.  If we say "A pound of butter is 79 cents" (this is an old example) we know that the physical Butter is not money.  What we actually mean is that the Price of a pound of butter is 79 cents.  Many things people claim - - such as Einstein, use the phrasiology of "observed to be - - - ".  The big loophole here is that if we use a flawed medium such as Light to employ in our "observation" the state of the actual Thing observed may in fact be different (or unchanged) when we say "It has changed".  In my example below, if we call mobility and speed a Good thing - - we are unlimited in our employment of Speed (or some may say the Speed of progress of scientific discovery)  much as Newton originally said over 300 years ago.  This is what I believe.  But people today speak of having problems with their over the air TV channel reception and they say "It's that darned digital stuff".  No,  the "medium of transmission" is not altered with a Digital signal - - only the coding of the signal has been.  I have likened it o two foreign ambassadors traveling on the same Flight in the same Plane.  One may have documents in Russian and the other in Arabec but both are on the same Flight.  Long waves travel better than short waves either with sound - - as in earthquakes (a known fact) but also with light.  So some may say both digital and old analog are traveling in planes but one is a DC 5 and another is a Bowing 767.  The mode isn't that different but the one in the bigger jet is less suceptable to things like wind eddies and other distractions.  Capish?  Good.

Just to review about my Blogger Name.  Of course it isn't my real name but I love to give little hints.  For instance - - you have heard that my great great grandfather was Charles Miller.  I guess that's the name of a famous gambler and swindler who lived about the same time as Jesse James too, but they probably didn't know each other but may have heard of each other.  I think that's also the name of the saxophone player in WAR who died thirty years ago.  Check me out there.  As you may or may not know - - my real last name does not have a Single Letter in Common with M I L L E R.  For instance MILLER contains no O's no N's or S's in it.  And of course my middle name DOES contain, for you Wheel of Fortune fans, an I, and an L and an N and an S.  And it's also associated with a certain type of product you see in a lot of live television - - as well a being a proper English sir name, and it's my Mother's maiden name.  If nothing else I'm kind of a game player with you readers.  

I'd like to clarify something on the paragraph of that previous blog.  I never said you could NOT get messages from "the other side" or whatever.  But the big question to ask yourself is this.  "I KNOW I got THIS MESSAGE and it's a thought I never had before and I am NOT even sure whether it is TRUE - - but it's NOT my idea and I am NOT even sure whether I AGREE with it, but - - - because I know myself and I would have never come up with it in a million years on my own.   My final introductory thought is this.  Remember it.  Material things are judged by a whole different set of physical or metaphysical laws than are things NOT material or posessing any "substance".  We are not in their world and they are not in ours.  The idea that Energy is a bridge or conduit between the two worlds is an idea of Speculation and something I myself at this point am not entirely convinced of.  On he one hand according to Einstein's theory and stated overtly - - photons have no mass.  And if they did and since "everything that travels light speed has infinite mass" then it would follow in Einsteins own words that photons must have "infinite" mass, which they do not.  I intuitively believed that photons DO have mass but Einstein states that in their native state they do not.  Einstein would envision a form then of "Energy" that starts out Without mass, and somehow Acquires mass in its "travels".  To me this is a puzzle since an infinite ammount of nothing is still Nothing.  Let HIM explain it.  I would also remind you that "Ether " is not a conduit to the other world.  Ether as a type of "space incarnate", which is to say "Space as we know it - Itself".  But Ether while limited to THIS side of infinity or the PLUS side of the Cartesian equation - - is non the less an entity devoid of both mass and "viscosity".  Capish?  But I'll toss the idea out there anyhow.


Postscript Sunday morning:  Bill Cosby just gave the most Amazing closing speech on 'Meet the Press" that Every American should go to the NBC website and watch, if you do not listen to another piece of media commentary this week - - watch this one.  Obama really was faced with a big rock to push up a big, steep hill, and all his detractors can mutter is, "I hope he fails" and the big question is "Why".  Indeed Obama is working under a scoring handicap that seems to be uniquely faced by Black people.


Postscript II:  You puzzle people figured out from one clue that my "given" last name is not Owens.  Not that I haven't used that name a lot even in legal situations.  I don't kiss and tell.  Yes I adopted that name based on a particular 'story" or narritive - - when I was younger.  Kind of a Malcolm X type thing, I guess.  There are a lot of unsung heroes out there.  (Selah)

TRUTH: 

 GOOD IS INHERENTLY LIMITED IN ITS DEGREE IN THAT IT CANNOT EXCEED 100%  BUT THE BENEFITS OF GOODNESS CAN BE VIRTUALLY INFINITE IN THEIR INFLUENCE ON CREATION


EVIL IS INHERENTLY WITHOUT LIMIT AS ITS DEGREE OF INVOLVEMENT, BUT EVIL IS LIMITED INHERENTLY BY LOCALITY IN WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE "BLACK HOLE EFFECT"

It is said by preachers, "Do not doubt in the Darkness what you Believed in the Light".  Whereas I would say to you "Do not fear to doubt or disbelieve in the Light what you once Believed in the Darkness"

We all have mental "light bulb" moments where we finally "see" something and "Get it".  These moments of psychic clarity and Awakening need not only appear in good times but also in bad times of crisis, where such "light bulb" moments are of even heightened value.  For many regard a state where you come and relax and are overtly instructed to shot out the cares of the World and assume a state of psychic "unconsciousness" if you will, as NOT a state of being psychicly "Awake".  Indeed it is when we are in the World that often our very jobs depend on being Acutely aware of our surroundings and what is happening at every moment".  Less we get into a car wreck or possibly suffer some industrial accident.  Truth:  ACCIDENTS in the generic definition of the word, are God's way of reminding us that He is the one who ultimately "judges" and is In Charge of our Lives.

Optical and "Natural Trig" models of Infinity

Infinity is just a finite number if the eye of the beholder can perceive it.  You can have zero ammount of a quantity such as Three, but you can't have a quantity of Three of nothing and count on any quantative meaning, such as being Half of Six of Nothing.  (Selah)  In this way coefficients of quanties are different as factors than are other factors.  With circle trig tangents, you may have ANY quantitive ammount of Infinity.  But you may not have Infinity ammount of a quantity and expecting it to show up on a quantity scale.  Infinity is what's known as an "unsigned variable" to use "C" programming lingo, or a vectorless variable.

In optics what you have is a mirrored logarithm scale.  Picture this thought image.  Looking from the REAL side of the mirror "Infinity" (as in camera lens rating) has a value of ONE.  You may refer to it as a "factor of one" if you like.  (look up "factor" if you don't know)  Capish?   Looking from the other "subjective" side - - this same point has a value of- - - INFINITY.  Imagine that.  There is no hypothetical ammount too large in a lens focal length that would preclude one side of a logarithmic scale above "One" (infinity) being carried out in graph form to infinity. For objects in the material world any focal length would be below this value of ONE - - and below this value the chart space (to the left) goes on forever, hypothetically, but never (hypothetically) reaches pure zero.  The closer the object focused upon the longer the functional focal length. If you focus on object beyond infinity of course it's a different story. But in excess of "One" the numbers come closer together.  Twice Infinity if closer to Three Infinity than it is to One Infinity.  In apparent (Subjective sense) optics the mirror of this logarithmic scale runs the other way.  There is no limit to to the LACK of alteration of an image seen before (or Sub speed) Infinity. This is when the lens is closer to the eye than it's "natural" focal length for a Real image at infinity.  From the point of view of the natural eye - the "apparent" focal length of the lens may be lengthened to infinity by having the lens flush with (or right next to) viewed object. But far away objects have a "functional focal length" that nears the stated F stop rating of the lens, based on focus at infinity.  Hence in the realm of the subjective view - - an object goes from "no distortion" to "absolute distortion".  But this is NOT the end of the sequence.   On the other side where no "material object" focal length may go - - -  what starts off to the Eye as being infinitely big and unfocused shrinks first to a "ONE" but can never shrink to a Two or Twice Infinity- - because viewed size of said inverted object can never shrink to below zero. Objective or real focal length may exceed this Infinity figure if the object were "that far away".  But what happens with light at acceleration in space can NOT be "simulated" optically beyond mock two.  Since a mirrored speed vector can never exceed either side of light speed by more than one, it follows that at twice light speed the inverted (one dimension only) objects can only shrink to zero or expand to two (in classic Newtonian additive math) and then beyond that mock Two they cannot be seen.

"Material" laws verses "Non Material" laws are not compatible and one cannot affect the other. (this is a Truth)

Einsteins theory applies only to light perception.  If photons has independant mass then they could be infered to be part of the Material Universe, and laws applying to them would by inference have to apply to the rest of the material Universe.  But according to Einstein - - how I'm not sure but "photons" as entities have NO mass apart from such mass that is somehow (?) attained through their volocity since though photons do not have mass, Energy to move NOTHING still is required and Energy has mass.  (If this sounds silly you can liken it to HS males taking Home EC in high school being instructed to care for an "egg" pretending that it's a baby.  You go through it all as an "exercise' only but it still requires energy and discipline)  The energy generated by photons is transmitted as ether waves. This would be energy generated by something without mass being imparted to something else without mass and yet is real. (chew on that one for a bit) But photons are also better known for their "quantum" energy.  And ether is a massless entity which serves as a medium and carries waves.  Since ether has no Viscosity and is not Material - - it works under a different set of laws than that govern materiality.  What's intriguing in all of this as that the energy required to "move nothing" is real Energy and it is this Energy that can be perceived in the Material World, so it would seem that this "Energy" whatever it consists of - - is able to transcend both the material and the hyperbolic (non material) world.  In the world of concave space as opposed to convex space - - what is believed to be Real from the point of view of hyperbolic (or hyper-space) space, it is what is OUTSIDE the hyperbola that is perceived to be Real and not what is Inside of it.  Hence the term concave Space.  IN THIS MODEL - - hyperbolic space ONLY applies to LIGHT.  In the material world the logarithm extends up and (or "but" works well here, too) not down in terms of speed, with absolute zero being hard to define and logarithmically impossible to graph.  Whether concave verse convex space theory applies to the Material Universe is left to speculate on.  From God's point of view you run out of graph space before you'd ever run out of acceleration factors of material objects.  But at some point Beyond a speed too great to imagine may lie for Material Matter what exists about Light as a speed of Mock Two.  Capish?