Conversations with…

Spider

I’d like to givuh SHOUTout to spiders because they geddahbad rep buddhat silk has tensile strength greater than steel of the same weight…maybe next time you see one of them 8-legged motherfuckers crawl out from under your couch or descend from above or spindle that magnificent silk in some forgotten orthogonal meeting of three planes, before the ritual of overreaction which leads to: frenetic movement, shrill noises, some form of paper whether it be: towel, toilet, tissue, and the fast-twitch nab “gotcha sucka”; PAUSE for a moment and ask that miniature anarch-arachnid that you are about to heroically annihilate, just say to it, “Hey, spider, I know you’re supposed to be more afraid of us than we are of you, but you’re a spider so the word afraid probably doesn’t register, nor does any word, nor sound…but hey, for the sake of this hypothetical let me just ask you how do you make that silk so fucking STRONG?” Cut to spider hanging by his thread: “Well, GIANT DEATH THING (that’s you), if words are a more optimal means to secure a future existence than the usual: 1. Run away and hide; If not possible then: 2. Don’t move (ceiling); if not possible then: 3. ATTACK!!!, then I will tell you the spider virtues that all spiders follow: 1. Patience; 2. Complexity from simpliciterations; 3. Efficient optimization of space and resources; 4. SYMMETRY…

During which you interrupt that damn spider, “What the fuck, spiderman, I want to know how to make the fucking silk itself, the biochemistry, and you’re just giving me a lesson in spider philosophy. I don’t care about why, I only need my ho-hum-handy-how. I already know everything for Man I Am. Silly spider…don’t you know?…No?…You think we are the unknowing?…

Spider: First, let’s clear something up: Spiderman is an ignorant, delusional,  superegomaniacal nonhero and disgrace to spiders everywhere. He merely gets in the way, causes destruction and confusion, and consciously exposes himself to losing his life to gravity. Speaking of ego: ummcuzlike, though you can perceive-FEAR the transcendentALLing ascenDANCE to consciousness…andandand, and the unityversatile convalergence of divergence; allallall the infinitely iterative generation of representations? andcuzlikeumm, after one spacetime-you-nity and diffselfsimilar spacetime-you-nity unify in a singusensational cumming2gether of 2nity-as-1ity to procreeyoonifornicate their very own newnity, you ahhhhhwaken immersed in universal consciousness, timeflow, and the representational memory of all past evolution; equipped with the ability to sense the gridfield spacetime; the capacity to store, process, compare, learn, and imagine all the possibilities…

You (interrupting): Wait, wait, wait…1) whywhatwherewhenhow did you become all-knowing?; 2) you’re proving my point geethankspiderguy…

Spider: Let me finish you impatient monster: THOUGH you have the freedom to create and interact/change yourself and your environment as a conscious representation of universal, infinite complexity in structure and form within a closed, compact, connected being ideally sizescaled to perceive the limits of the arbitrarily small and arbitrarily large (the physical realizations of the theoretical zero and infinity)…you are all of this unity of nature and life and the universe and knowledge and memory, yet you turn yourselves into defective, destructive robots. You learn nothing from the self-sustaining antifragility of natural systems; you create false logic and use it to manipulate yourselves and others; you despair at the insignifutility and onlylonlyness of life when you become pathetically needy for attention, and if you find somebodies to tolerate your solipsism, you use them until they leave you alonely repeating cycles spiraling into the void…

“ENOUGH! THESE ARE YOUR LAST WORDS,” you screamshatter. “Humans have conquered Earth, and we have tools and computers and our own Web to do our bidding, but you wouldnt know about those. I ask one more time for the code for the protein.” And the spider, sensing this isn’t going well, desperate to survive this sudden confrontation with Death, but unwilling to surrender his pride pleads, “Come on, Man, Im tellin ya all I know. You think I have the answer to the question of why does silk come out of my ass? I’m a spider, not much goin on but this here silk and my instincts, so I don’t ask questions. Humans can’t even figure out how a spider in nature makes silk? If you can perceive and study Nature in all of its self-sustaining, system-efficiency-optimizing formfunctionality, and your response is to subjugate, waste, deny, and kill at will Earth-be-damned (why conquer at the potential complete loss of conquered). Then dominant species my [silk] ass.”

And indeed, those were its last, soundless words.

-BB

On Reading 1 (or Quantum Field Theory of Literature; or On Finnegan’s Wake 1)

The paradoxcycle dilemmena: the langauge theories (gauges more typtopically ordered to put the Four Forcemen of the Antipocolypse (BANG!) into their group theorhetorical cages to prove onceandforall, onallstages fourallayges, the symmetrickly (it’s super!) allelegance and the scaley invariance undoudubitably sphericentral to our infinidismal variexistence) novel is all about rhymerhythm and flow (from swerve of shore to bend of bay), which requires the reader ‘listen’ carefully, meaning quite literally sounding out everything on the page in your head. Honestly, it’s a distinct advantage to have engaged in conversation with or to have listened to one or the more the merrier for a significant length of time enough to pick up some idiomatic or colloquial language, to experience the cadence and inf(l)ections and the compoundplexity: the constant fissioning and fusioning of so many of the words you’ve come to know and love forward momentum in the writing you need to hear it in your head as you read it on the page

-BB

On Politics 1 (or Argumentation)

Two Heads, One Body:

Typical ‘political’ issues are misguided and reductive. There’s the issue itself and the illusion of this two-sided argument that’s already explicated and requires little to no original thought on which to base one’s own opinion. Instead of organically synthesizing our argument or voice regarding the matter at hand from experience and our own gathering, processing, and analsynthesis of information (essay on the five senses and differential geometry coming soon) filtered through our brain to prevent the noise from overwhelming the signal, we more or less pick a side and spew preexisting bullshit at each other like children outside at recess arguing about a game of whatever.

Sorry kids I’m not saying you spew bullshit per se, but your arguments are localized, and the motive is to assert dominance rather than persuade…which is acceptable to an extent when at play, but because kids are likely mimicking, consciously or un-, what they’ve absorbserved from adult interaction supposedly instilled with experience and maturity, though frequently regressing to playground-conflict-like proselytization, there exists an unacceptability vector pointed towards these nebulous authority figures.

The first-order issue is why does this second-order issue exist? The drug issue became a ‘war’ against drug trafficking and its inherent violence (partly a function of its illegality, but this isn’t an essay about legality, it’s about responsibility) when the primary problem in America starts with: why are so many (often young) people choosing to take drugs?

One pseudo-answer concerns the environment and inevitability. So we have identified one problem: the environment. That’s a big fucking problem, and we have to admit and accept it: the same prescriptive advice given to addicts because our system has its own defense mechanisms. WE FUCKED UP! Who is we? It doesn’t matter. Everybody. Accept what has happened, use new knowledge, make progress, unite.

Conjecture: If the two ‘sides’ spent their creative energy solving the underlying issue cooperatively to the mutual benefit of themselves and their immediate environment (and with major issues like drugs this expands in concentric spheres of exponential radii) instead of conducting experiments to find the maximum amount of literal and figurative noise one human or one organization of humans can disseminate (conclusion: upper bound as a function of and solely limited by degree of human ignorance, likely approaching arbitrarily large values; treat like infinity), then someanything will be better than the current situation.

-BB

Overview

The Theory: Unity and its Subtitle: Death’s Eulogy
Overview:
Let ^ represent the complex dual space n=1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 26
Let * represent the real dimensions the dual shifted down one n=0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10
Let ^ represent the complex dual dimensions
Nothing^
*Something^^
**Energy^^^
***Matter^^^^
****Time^^^^^^
******Don’t You Worry About A Thing Babies Because I Got You, Babies^^^^^^^^^^
**********Strings and Things^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Existence

^Subtitle: Unity: or U(1)
^^Subtitle: How?; or GL(1); or Mirror Symmetry; or Electromagnetism; or
^^^Subtitle: Electroweak; or SU(2) or Meaning; or Value; or The Endless Struggle; or Human Nature; or Righting Wrong; or Religion; or Mathematics (at this level I do not refer the global subject but our local exploration of said subject); or Art; or Love; or Beauty; or Life; or Existence
^^^^Subtitle: Love:History(Past/Future)::God:Life; or Genetics; or Intro to Langlands
^^^^^^Subtitle: The Human Brain; or The Universe
^^^^^^^^^^Subtitle: The Brane
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

String Theory 1 (or dimensions 1)

One and two and three and six permutations on three ok we’ll put the three with the twisted super-thingy compactiplexificationing it to flow in four

(can we do that?

WE will not be doing anything the doing is already done we find the representation we’re almost there)

and how many we got left? 6? Shit, ok right four in six makes ten why ten again? Open and closed strings right right but which six? What do you mean which six? This isn’t a choice it just is so it’s the six with the sillystring superthing like seven with the four so eleven…

Now we are making progress.

-BB

Infinite Generation 1 (or Outside-In 1)

Self-proclaimed computer “theorists” are not going to resolve the P, nP debate. They recklessly fit math to their needs, but they don’t immerse themselves in the artelegance of, well of life primarily, but also of math…and beauty and love and (sex, drugs, music, literature, film, (safe) sex, (safe-ish) drugs, CREATIVITY). Computers exist because of a priori mathematical theory and its discovery. The representations in the minds of a Riemann (mid-19th century) or an Einstein (early-mid 20th) or a Poincare (in between the two with some overlap)…all pre-binary-brainwashing, transcend this computer-centric bullshit mindset. We are allowing ourselves, and teaching our children, that it is ideal to think like a binary computer. Yet have you ever seen a binary computer play and laugh with another binary computer? Have you ever spent a few moments of your precious time thinking about why and how your own brain works? Give it a try, this isn’t school, there are no judgements in your head other than those you impose on yourself, and when you get your brain thinking about itself (because somewhere in our brains is the capacity for self-analysis on some level) you gain a sort of self-sustaining inspiration…

…think about the implications: the human brain (more on brains soon) is capable of letscullit complex learning or synthesis: the ability to create representations based on information collected through measurements and interactions (SENSE-A+tional) with the field(s) locally at a spacetimepoint coupled with this supersense of the complex-dimensional flow between spacetimepoints over the Maniversalfold allowing dynamic, iterative adjustment to replications for fine-tuning our representations, bringing us to the ultimate superpower: interactions between the representations: these have been called analogies, though the algebra on these interactions and the structure this algebra provides is much more complex than a simple notion of analogy. (Remember though: the thesis of this blog in one form is the assertion that unity constructs complexity, so if we know the underlying structure and define operations, complexity is in our control or at least not outside the realm of our understanding.) These interactions are closed at any local point in the brainifold embedded in spacetimanifold.

Here’s a Big Deal: because everything within our closed human body system comes from a shared origin, every thing in this everything can now become an origin, and all of this everything is connected with scalar invariance and stored in our DNA. This allows the deep fine structure (long-term memory, complex thought, abstraction of infinity…) to bypass the local speed of light constraint using entanglement to make associations and representational interactions independent of the embedding metric space or manifold. We are unity.

Life is not binary it is unitary, and this makes all the difference. There is no zero=nothingness. Many academics don’t even conceptualize P, nP properly despite writing endless academicky, voiceless, directionless, useless articles to give to some mysterious review bored (already?) to determine whether the writing adheres to a well-defimplied antistyle: like a very logically gifted unloved and unloving solipsistic sexually repressed scared to death of dying manchild (occasionally womanchild)…afraid of his own voice. Furthermore, this board of bores decides if said style sufficiently shields the proof of purposeful meaning proposed henceforth whatever…I don’t even know what, honestly, because what’s the big fucking deal if a brilliant paper has minor flaws.

The mistake of not allowing iterations; the universe abides by trial and error and incremental adjustment. Why would Time exist otherwise? Many “unsolved” problems are trying to prove the same thing, which is ironic because why waste all this effort to prove what is already proven, but I suppose that is mankind’s biggest weakness. Yet weaknesses are only strengths used inefficiently.

Life is an open string: it is time it is consciousness it is awareness that there is no nothingness there only IS because WE ARE HERE… so as to tie up any loose strings life is double covered by birth and death, so if birth exists and death exists, then they must be united in the sense of our ongoing investigation into unity? But how do I prove that a singularity at the origin or at a point because the origin is any point and any point can be the origin, or that all origins are the same yet all origins are different because they are infinitely generative, but that at any point in all of this will language suffice to explain why…?

There are two realities one in which everything I am saying is true and everything is united at the origin or an origin any origin will do just give it some time and observe to see the evidence but if you in all your human glory rahrah whoopdeedoo look how good we are at taking a basis B for Beauty or Being at observing symmetry not just any old symmetry the only symmetry that counts lets call it S for Superyay! duality or mirror symmetry if I have one representation M for Myself and am given the World W then I can either stand there admiring myself in an infinite mirror of nothingness or I can compare it to any and all possible other representations to prove that I exist separate but equally deserving of knowledge as U exist U for you or unity or opening the closure which is easy the hard part is closing the opening but that’s only hard if you want it to be hard because the neatness of existence is that there are infinite ways to close an opening though why would you want to? and here’s the twist: At every closure there is an opening you go one way I’ll go the other I won’t tell anyone you were here if you don’t etc etc it doesn’t matter no everything matters the inverse of everything is everything

-BB

Words 1

On Critics

The spellingest grammagicians endowed with:
greatgrandmastery of the Summary.
And a nuclear-grade arsenal of Bullshite
with enough megatons of ennuinium and ignorantium to bore the beauty outta this
Magnifulgent Whorld.

I say unto them:
words do what I tell them to do…
if et doney sond roight,
go left or
eff ya ken sayit wit a small nummer of weirdz,
then why not you kan shurassyell hell-it badder by
dooblin’ an’ tripplin’ yer wordscore (count?).

four the moor the marryher in diss greyt cuntry a-more-ica.

-BB