hypothetical model for global brain transmission

in the same way that electromagnetic signals like the telephone signal or the wireless signal are transmitted we can also assume that brain signals are transmitted
once you have established a connection with the "receiver" you can exchange signals
if you are in a cogent state the signal will be transmitted clear and the text message will be just the epiphenomenal
if you are not in a cogent state your signal will be transmitted unclear and the text message will be translated confused

and some people don't even open that message "oh i didn't see it" or "i deleted by accident" and all those excuses that the conscious presents but the unconscious is that which directs or undirects to avoid that message
or go to that message

[locally we know in visual contact or even behind walls these signals are transmitted although are not translated to conscious effect
there will be a cough or a wild scream by a younger person]

how to have constant frequency in a group?

that's not possible, for every member

you can set down a certain frequency for one member, say every other chance and then set every other member around that

it's not possible to fit everyone in a certain frequency

e.g. another member every 3 and another every 4 etc

in special cases it might be possible like when you have only two members then everyone is alternating every other chance

thus their frequency of occurrence is 1/2

with 4 you could try to put the fourth element every fifth occurrence, the third element every fourth, the second element every third and the first element every other



in the above graph we first lay down the four elements and then try some way to have each as indicated above

we achieve 1/12 for the circle 3/12 for the triangle 2/12 for the square and 6/12 for the wiggly

it's only possible approximately and as a tendency as in n tends to infinity or 1/n tends to zero (if n tends to infinity)

in case of nine elements, if one were to fluctuate between every 8th and every 7th then the tendency would be towards the number



in n cycles we would have




and 0.133 is somewhere between 0.125=1/8 and 0.142=1/7

my thought is that that's impossible because all the frequencies added together will exceed 1 and as we know the total probability is 1

if you had 4 elements and wanted each to have its own frequency you would have to have

1/2+1/3+1/4+1/5

(1/1 does not exist since then one element would be there constantly thus rendering the whole idea of the group non-existing)




which is true

0.5(1/2)

0.5+0.33(1/3)=0.83

0.5+0.33+0.25(1/4)=1.08


Thus for any group larger than 2 we can't have constant frequencies for each member

american students

american students have had it with heidegger
they want semi-science expositions
wild thought experiments, what if, and parallel universes

Heidegger considers Kant as a wild eyed kook

considers his statements as (wild) suppositions that were at one time true or just as suppositions that were never proven (or decided)

enemies

I don't need to make enemies just to make enemies
i don't need to make enemies because i'm uncareful
what uncareful can mean is up to interpretation
for me it means being yourself even in the most unconspicuous of cases
and that brings be back to love
the face of love
the original love
for older people love means a need for companion it means "heeeeeelp"
but it can't really mean that
because help is for help
it means a distance that can be bridged
it means a distance that can't be bridged
the face stays there
with the open mouth
with the expression in the face
and it evaporates
i lost the poem

the field of measurable

when you enter the field of measurable you have to have a direction of goodness (and thus an undirection of ungoodness)
so that you know when you achieve optimization or even a single step dx of improvement
but what is the target? we can't know
we know the starting point
but there are infinite directions
of course we can try the thousand monkeys experiment let the monkeys try on their typewriters
and we may get something better some day
but that's what humans have done
you have thousands of writers who try their novels and poems and essays
and the better emerge
but who determines better?
do we have a single direction?
not
and then you have the middle level readers who read those funky novels with the funky covers
the higher novels don't have any meaning for them because they don't understand it they are put off
am I to say it's garbage? Yes I'm allowed to say it's garbage. Garbage for me
but you can't fail to see the light in their eyes
and that means a truth

Taylor series of nothing