Athena

Okay, can anyone explain how a matrix is used? What kind of information can be plugged into one and what kind of information can we expect to get back? The Chinese I Ching matrix has what we can imagine to be the 64 DNA code, if fits perfectly in the center of the Aztec matrix. I need to find better words for saying being able to build a bridge doesn't mean having math skills and physics theory. The ancient understanding of the matrix may have been very different, but I want to understand what we can understand today about the matrix.

Excellent point, and this is the big difference that the Greeks made. I don't think anyone, before the Greeks ventured into math, had what we would call math. I have attempted to explain this, but often my words fail me. They obviously had ways of measuring and accomplishing building feats, but this was not exactly math. I don't think it becomes math, until the Greeks asked "why is this so" and began developing explanations for things like Pi. Egyptians imagined gods had powers, and Greeks gave us a secular, mathematical explanation of the powers. It is the difference of my X being able to figure out a practical, hands on, physics problem, and not understand theory. Like people built bridges without the math to build a bridge. They know something, but it is not formal mathematics and theory. On the other hand, if the bridge had not already been built, someone with knowledge of theory, may not be able to build the bridge. Seriously, that instinctive problem solving ability is separate form knowledge of theory, and there is concerned that reliance on theory can prevent a person from intuitively knowing how to do something. We promote only those who comprehend theory, and exclude those who intuitively know, but are not good at learning theory.

Simple question, is there a creative and organizing force? If not how did the universe come to be?

Good idea, kill someone, shrink the head and wear it on a belt. That really puts our ideas about what is important in life in perspective. I love the suggestion of going into philosophy or psychology from math. I deeply envy the person who can do that. I would give just about anything to have a good understanding of the maths. Using it in combination with another interest, would make for a very rich life. Perhaps the kind of life Jefferson spoke of when he spoke of the pursuit of happiness. Which meant the pursuit of meaningful knowledge. I have heard, algebra can be used to figure out human behavior. Is that right? I grew up in LA in the 60ty's and street gangs and poverty remain big issues in my thinking. How different is it to wear a shrunken head, or to build a gang rep. by killing at least one person? What if math applied to what appears to instinctive behavior (desire for status), and only mildly controlled by civilization, revealed something really important, improving our decision making regarding this conflict between what a subculture thinks is important and what we think should be avoided? Seriously, should we blame gang killing on nature and the environment or bad parenting? You all don't seem to like the idea of math being sacred, but it sure cures the problem of having math knowledge and thinking one wasted time while achieving this knowledge. The book "A Beginner's Guide to Constructing the Universe" can spark a person's imagination and that seems to be what some people are missing, imagination. Einstein believed imagination to be very important, and I keep wondering, does education in math, or another science, kill a person's ability to be imaginative and creative? Genecks, those were some great suggestions!

I want to use "A Beginner's Guide to Constructing the Universe" to explain the Golden Mean is such away some here might have more appreciation for considering this information sacred. Further of explanation of the golden mean, may lead us to an understanding of the math used to build Stonehenge. Simple sticks can be used to create Golden mean calipers, which always show a changing, relative Phi relationship between pointers.

Perhaps for the same reason the Great Pyramid of Giza is better than the first pyramid built. The Stonehenge we see today is not the original one, but was reconstructed long after the first circle was made. So perhaps measurements were made from the existing circle and corrections were made. Or perhaps earlier experiments with stone circles perfected the skill. If this were a history forum I would look for more information. It is a very interesting subject, but obviously not for the people posting here. It could be interesting to measure Stonehenge and see if there is evidence of a tool like a Golden mean calipers having been used.

Walmart had so much buying power, it caused brand name companies to close down factories in the US and move their operations to places like China. Why is not possible for our government to do the same regarding medical supplies? I use a CPAP machine, to manage sleep apena. The cheapest head gear I can find is $89. Now get this. The real cost of this stuff may be a couple of dollars. There are several different styles of head gear. Mine is a modeled soft plastic piece that fits in my nose, attached to two tubes, that look like the tubes for an aquarium pump, and a hard plastic piece that these tubes fit onto, connecting them with another tube, that leads to the machine. Just the nose is over $30 and how much can really cost to make this? Then the process of getting this equipment if one is on medicare and has supplemental insurance is hell. The medical suppliers have some how convinced government that this combination of plastic parts can not be sold without a doctor's prescription! Yet the makers of cold medication, who use an ingredient that is used in making meth, (a seriously bad street drug) are able to block attempts to regulate this medication. Why? Why is a completely harmless but essential product so controlled, while a potentially very dangerous one that is shooting the cost of medicine (emergency room visits by people who can't buy) the cost of the criminal justice system and prisons sky high, remains uncontrolled? Either we need to prevent to government from regulating all this stuff, or we need to take the elected officials to dinner and explain reality to them. Possibly take them out and shoot them for makings such lousy decisions? What in blazes is going on in the White House? The decision making regarding these things is terrible. Big business is running the show and we are getting screwed. I swear, I am hunting down the tubing used for my head gear, and will buy it off the counter for a fraction of the price, and put together my head gear myself. I would like to learn how to make the plastic mold for the nose piece, and how to get the sold plastic liquid and make my own nose piece. Seriously, if these parts were sold at there true cost, we might save medicare. Those companies supplying medical supplies are on the government gravy train, and we need to derail this train. I know of people getting electric wheel chairs costing medicare thousands of dollars, who never use them. The system is out of control.

This sounds like a scientifically correct statement. However, after knowing stress can cause the elderly to die, I don't really care about the science of it. I just want to say, yes, an important loss can cause a person to die of a broken heart. It is not uncommon for couples to die within one year of each other. I have heard of grandparents dying when the state took their children from a parent and would not allow the grandparent to have the children, because I am a gerontologist and worked on getting the law changed in Oregon. Another elderly man died when the city took the house he had built with his own hands, because he refused to pay for a newly installed sewage line in the street, that he didn't intend to use. However, if you are a healthy young person, you probably won't die, even if you might wish you would, and years later, you will think it was silly to have been so upset.

You might want to read "A Beginner's Guide to Constructing the Universe- the Mathematical Archetypes of Nature, Art and Science" by Michael S. Schneider. Math is connected with many sacred ideas. Unfortunately, Christianity neglected this vast pool of information, and by cutting us from it, delayed our progress for hundreds of years. I know some of you will have a fit about the mention of sacred math, but get over it. There is more to life than your technological understanding of it, put in neat little boxes, of math, physics, and medical sciences. There is a connection between these things. "The triad has a special beauty and fairness beyond all numbers, primarily because it is the very first to make actual the potentialities of the Monad. " Iamblichus (c. 250-c 330) The triad is the number 3 and sacred for many, including the Celts, and central to the Chinese I Ching. The golden triangle is associated with the number five, the number of regeneration. It is behind sacred art, from Egypt to the building of Christian and Muslim holy places, as well as seen in nature. The Egyptian Ennead, or company of nine gods and goddesses, represents archetypical principles that regulate and rule the cosmos through the laws of number. Ancient mythologies are full of math, so don't get overly excited by one.

It might be important to understand Stonehenge in relation to two other circles. One is a wood circle representing life and another is blue stone circle representing death. Those blue stones could have represented ancestors and were moved a long distance. I believe your math needs to begin with the blue stone circle, where to original people brought their ancestors. Stonehenge would have come later, and if I remember correctly, the origin stones of Stonehenge were outside the present circle, and were brought inside at a much later date. For sure it was not the first circle, and we could assume things were learned in the process of building these circles, including a more careful observation of sun rise and sun set, which connected with life and death and associated with the river, moving from the circle of life (wood) down the river to the circle of death (blue stones). Not so different from the Egyptian river crossing between life and death. That is getting outside math, but for trying to figure out they came to the math, we need to evaluate the other circles. http://www.dailymail...tle-sister.html I also want to say, there might be a problem trying to understand these things with today's knowledge of math. Today's math begins with the Greeks. They learned from the Egyptians, who had perfected measuring land and building, but did so without math. Hum, how do I say? The math you all are doing is a totally different brain function, and is based on theory, which appears to be a Greek invention. What the Egyptians and others did was a skill, but not math. They could not explain what they were doing in the terms you use. To understand what they were doing, you need to do it. You need to know with your gut, not the math brain function in your head. Kind of like the difference between hearing about sex in a sex ed. class and doing it. A very different knowing. And about the slave thing. I would assume the leader was an on hands guy, leading by his actions. These early leaders had to rely on willing followers, and therefore, had to be personally liked. These circles are places of life and death, and ancestors, and of importance to everyone. These are works of love and community, connecting the people who made them with life, death and each other.

If the 64 DNA code is put in a matrix, what information might result?

I think if we accept or reject the notion of God, depends completely on how we define God. Missisippichen, I am sorry, but I am not willing to accept the truth of anything someone says, without good reason to believe it is true. That gravity causes things to fall to earth appears self evident. That there is a creative and controlling force also seems self evident to me, because I perceive an organized universe. However, the stories of holy books are not so self evident, and many are flat impossible to believe, unless interpreted abstractly. That is why we argue, to prove our arguments are good ones. So what is your argument that I should I believe what you say is true?

I love argumentation with you. I use this fancy word because awhile back someone assumed a negative meaning of the word "argument". I want to make a make point, that arguing is how we stimulate thinking, and it causes us to think about what we think, and the process improves our ability to think, our knowledge and hopefully, our decision making. And all this leads into my reply. For the sake of argument, I will say God is the creative and controlling force of the universe. This God is not a He, it is not a personality, it is not a Father, and it is not like a human. I am sure this is the concept of God many used when arguing for human autonomy. Is the God of Abraham the same God? I think not. There is a huge and important difference between the unknown God assumed to be creative and controlling force of the universe and the God of Abraham. How do we learn of the creative and controlling force of the universe? How do we come to understand cause and effect and make moral decisions? How do we learn of the God of Abraham and Shari Law?

Gross national product stopped products long ago. Interest rates and other non product things are added into our GNP, and we no longer have a industrial product based economy. We have an imaginary economy where millions of imagined dollars can disappear over night, unlike 12 box cars of manure that does not disappear. We are importing more than we export, and that means our wealth is leaving, and buying more importers, included imported oil is going to improve our economy. Oregon is up roar because of drastic cuts, especially in education cost. Other states have promised more in pension plans than they can cover. We been living in make believe economic world, and I am amazed we got away with it this long. You might begin with a question about how an economy grows? We seriously need to get real about how an economy works. We need to understand this before we can consider anything else. That doesn't work. Man, the bank wants those payments, car insurance is mandatory and medical insurance keeps rising, the price of milk goes up, etc.. A cut in pay means doing without and for some this means doing without to the degree of harming the well being of the family. Perhaps you should spend a year as a migrant farmer, and donate the cost of supporting two children to your favorite charity, then come back and tell us about economics. Or try one of this great jobs in an economic ghetto of a major city, where the laborer is exploited by both industry and property managers.

It tickles me when there appears to be agreement and then at the last second, the appearance of agreement disappears like a popped balloon. You don't Apollo comes from apo logos, and that there is no connection between the polis and reason? You don't don't think democracy is the method for us knowing logos? Logos being a concept of reason, as the controlling force of the universe, and arguing being the method of understanding reason. Democracy being an imitation of gods, and even the gods being subject to reason. There appears to be different ideas about Apollo's name. One of them given by Wikipedia is this "Doric απέλλα (apella), which means "assembly", so that Apollo would be the god of political life". It might just be a romantic notion, but democracy is a group mind. It is what we can know by coming together with all we know, and arguing about what is true, what is the law, so we can determine our laws, that we should live by? It has everything to do with logos.

Well, if you think what Germany did is a good thing, and agree with what the Republicans have done since Eisenhower is a good thing. This about oil and the economy right. The economy collapsed, because OPEC embargoed oil to the US. Carter has us conserving oil and did all he could to advance the development of alternative energy. Reagan lied to us about the oil and the cause of the economic troubles. This is how the Germans mobilized for war. We have gone so far down the German path, some of us are holding our breath in fear of having hyper inflation. What we have done is about destroying the family so there are more income tax payers to support a very expensive military force, and using that military force to defend economic interest around the world. I can understand how some people think this is a good thing, but then I can understand those who loved Bin Laden and don't think it was a good thing. On the other hand, may be everything would have gone better if we sided with Germany in the first world, instead of fighting two world wars against Germany and then imitating it. Marat, no I am not thinking of a theory. Join me at the U of O Knight library, and go through the government documents for 1958, with me. Then we can discuss the Military Industrial Complex. Yes, he did embed it in our civilization. He asked congress to pass the National Defense Education Act that replaced our liberal education with education for technology for military and industrial purpose. He praised the Germans for their contributions to democracy. He connect government with research and the media, making it possible for government to manipulate both. What I say is a result of studying documents, and anyone can do this. There is no secret, just a lack of interest and effort to understand bureaucratic changes that have radically shifted powers from the individual to the federal government. We adopted the German models of education and bureaucracy, and the two go together and manifest a democracy very different from the one we had.

Going from your mention of anarchy I think a few of words come from the Greek god Apollo, like apologize and politics. This deals with reason, as opposed to brute force. It is inclusive reasoning, as opposed to being self centered. Ideally democracy is rule by reason, and citizens do more than vote. They also engage in the process of reasoning, so when a decision is made they understand the reasoning of it, and have a chance to influence the best possible decision. On the other hand war is mass insanity. Individuals can lead us to war, and it is our fault if we allow this to happen, without making an effort to stop it. Hopefully, the Internet will make war obsolete. If people can share information, hopefully the people will resolve their differences, and not follow those who lead people to war. But then we also have to stop calling men of war Great. As we call call men like Alexander Great, we will have men like Cheney and Bush Jr. who want to go down in history as among the Great men who lead wars. I am not sure that following them is politics.

This thread should be in the political philosophy forum that does not exist. This link provides useful information to this discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss . In the 1950's when President Eisenhower established the Military Industrial Complex, he created new links between government and research and new links between government and the media. This allowed President Reagan to switch government funded research form a research of the causes of poverty, to research of welfare fraud and this was given to the media to blame the poor for our economic problems. This turned the war on poverty to a war on the poor, and made it possible for Reagan to slash domestic budgets and pour money into military spending. Which has everything to do with using our military to defend our economic interest. To be blunt we are on the path Germany followed and Germans are passionate about never taking this path again.

My sense of respect is along the line of Ego's. My grandmother lived by 3 values, which I think would resolve most human problems. 1. We respect everyone, because we are respectful people. It doesn't matter who the other is, because the other does not determine our behavior, we do. The other could be a bum or the mayor, we treat both the same, because of who we are. 2. We act with dignity and protect the dignity of others. I think this is highly important, and it brings out the best in others. 3. We act with integrity. This is beyond don't lie, steal or cheat, and includes being honorable. My grandmother was a school teacher when teachers believed they were defending democracy in the classroom. These teachers were bringing us to a very different experience of democracy than our experience since we replaced liberal education with education for democracy. We once understood we protect our liberty by being moral people. I don't think that is understood today, and I have concerns that we might be becoming a police state? The book "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order" by Samuel P. Huntington questions if all civilizations will fall to barbarianism. It was obviously this thread was started to resolve a conflict, and it might have been more effective if it remained where it was started. Obviously someone had bad manners and was not respectful, and someone was attempting to manage the problem, in a socially appropriate way. Now if we continue to be civilized or fall to barbarianism will depend on how we continue to deal with these conflicts, and the behaviors we encourage and discourage. It we think all that is needed is good policing, we stay on the path of a police state, and a decline into barbarianism. On the other hand, if we assume education and social pressure for good behavior is the path to take, we have a chance of maintaining our liberty while raising the human potential.

I don't know as much about this as I wish I did, but--- The first big knock for Christianity was the undeniable proof that the earth revolves around the sun, and the planets are not perfect orbs in the heavens. This was obvious when Galileo used a telescope to study the heavens, but the church refused to look through his telescope, and prevented him from telling the truth, by holding him under house arrest, and threatening to kill him if he didn't remain silent. When the truth could no longer be denied, it was more difficult for the Protestants to adjust to this scientific fact, because they thought reforming the church, meant interpreting the bible literally, and the Catholics had a more abstract approach to the bible. Newton made a big difference, and I think Deism was the result? I think Deism claims God made everything and it all continues to function like a machine. Once our mechanical universe was created by God, He steps back and just lets the machine run. On the one hand, there was a thrill that there are laws regulating everything, because this seems to prove there is a God. On the other, some are pleased with the idea that we are created equal, instead of God controlling everything, including who is born to be a master and who is born to be a slave. Making Newton partly responsible for a different way of understanding God, and also in part, for the acceptance of democracy. The most intense fight between Judaism had with the Hellenism is this idea that God chooses kings, etc., and the Hellenist rulers who spread to Israel didn't respect this, and appointed people to governing positions not respecting their birth right place in society. When the Greeks wrote the bible, they unfortunately locked us into the idea that God chose who will be masters and servants, and this held back democracy, until there was a place without an already established king. Christians remain divided on this issue, and not all of them support democracy. Darwin, of course, strongly impacted religion and this fight is still going on, with powerful people in Texas insisting school text should teach creationism along side evolution. Chardin, a Catholic priest wrote evolution is God's plan, several years ago, but the church refused to allow him to publish. His family had his book published when he died. The God of Abraham religions have a big, big problem with evolution, because maybe then we aren't born in sin, and don't need our souls saved. However, the religious people's ability to rationalize science with their beliefs is quite amazing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thank you all that information, Marat. I am so in agreement with you. I think this shows how much power Christians have had over education, and education for technology has not been the big improvement it could be. I think the religious folks would like to claim civilization begins with the Hebrews and the word of God, but the holy book mentions Egypt and Babylon so we can't avoid mentioning them. However, we do not mention earlier civilizations such as Sumer, and its explanation of the Garden of Eden and flood, so seriously how concerned are we are in presenting a non biased history? I seriously do not know how much longer a well educated public will passively accept a Christian biased history? Thanks to geology, archeology and related sciences, how much longer can our schools not reflect what we have learned through the sciences in the teaching of history? I am not as sure as you about the non existence of God, but think it is paramount we participate in the resurrection that is the work of geologist and archeologist, and use all the intelligence to we can muster to rethinking everything important to our survival on this planet.

Dstebbins, thank you for the question. Light Storm, thank you for a link to the possible answer.

There is a new book out titled "The God Biographers". I do not have it yet, but hope to have it soon, because I know the understanding of God has changed very much throughout history, and without question science is changing our understanding of God. If you know of any of the people listed below, would you please write what you know. The book is expensive and if you know enough, I won't buy the book.

Who is tying morality to religion? Not me. I believe the God of Abraham is mythology that prevents us from knowing truth, and prevents us from understanding democracy. This is an excellent question and one I would love to answer, however, your next statement appears to be an impertinent statement that causes me to doubt your sincerity. Do not badger me with insincere arguments. It is a waste of my time to respond to those who are not sincere and leads to bad things, like mods stepping in and using their power to the enforce rules. I love your reply! Especially this phrase "useful organizing principle to orient thinking about the world". The rest of your sentence, "it is ultimately just a hypothesis, an unproven 'what if' which provides no assurance that that orientation is valid." Is a good statement, and I guess I am lucky that I am okay with not being sure. I am okay with believing as soon as we think we know God, we know God not, but only what we think we know. To know God we must be okay with what we do not know. This is more a matter of feeling than intellect, isn't it? The holy books say God is beyond our comprehension and unknowable, and we should not be too sure about what we think we know. Christianity didn't give people the sense of assurance that they would have immortality in the good place, because most people feared going to hell! I guess they feared even more what humans would do without this fear? When all they had to read was the bible, and few had any schooling other than bible school, they could not know better, but then came literacy in Greek and Roman classics, and our Statue of Liberty holds a book for literacy and a torch for the enlightenment that results from being literate. We came to know ourselves and God without the mythology of the bible. Oh yeah, that is a good thing. What does proving there is or isn't a God have to do with laws about assisted suicide? That is something between the individual and God and government should stay out of it! This is a matter of a question of authority, and the most important reason for us to agree there is a God. Our liberty depends to a large degree, on believing in a higher authority, and being passionate about this, and therefore passionate about keeping government out of our private lives. Remember what happened to Germany. This is what I fear most. The horrors Germany committed in the past, are possible when people believe man is the highest authority. The Germans had become overly obedient to authority, and I fear in the US we are repeating this mistake, because we adopted the German model of education, and praise efficiency and worship the God of technology. On all levels we have become reliant on the experts, and have given up our sense of authority, to submit to the authority of another. The biggest problem I seem to have in these discussions is the lack of literacy in Greek and Roman classics, and I have notice at the college level German philosophy has replaced classical philosophy. What we do not know can hurt us. Now every discussion of morals is assumed to be a religious discussion, and every mention of God is assumed to be about the God of Abraham. You all have done better than people in other forums, but still I find the lack of literacy a barrier to discussion, and this frightens me. Kudos to the moderators here for not banning me for speaking of God as though God exist. They appear to have a better understanding of the importance of freedom of speech. Now if we can just work on what God has to do with the rest of our freedoms, I will be very happy. Cicero explained we are compelled to do the right thing. From many sources around the world, we are told man is a reasonable creature, and it is because of our capacity of reason that we are compelled to do the right thing. Our democracy was doing great, until we get to Freud and destroy the notion that we are reasonable creatures. When we did this, religion raised its ugly head, and shook a threatening figure at us, saying, "see I told you you are sinners", and education for technology dropped education for good moral judgement and left that to the church. We are in a real mess right now. My point is, we need literacy in the classics to discuss the human condition and God in a different way, and this is urgently important to our liberty and the future of democracy.

The link explains the ph level is different near the surface than it is near the bottom. So depending on which area of the ocean something lives, it has a better or worse chance of surviving. I assume the creatures that survived had a better place. Then when the big guys were gone, they could spread and multiple. When the dinosaurs died the mammals took their place, right? So as ocean conditions change, some loose the advantage and others gain. Moontanman, given your experience with aquariums, I expect you to say more about PH levels. This is from the link I posted. The spike of CO2 in the air, caused by the asteroid and volcano, mixes with the water, and changes the PH too fast for the creatures to adjust, so they die. I believe want lives closest to the surface is in the most danger and whatever feeds on what lives close to the surface. This explanation, of what acid rain does to water creatures, may help

I have a very romantic notion of being feminine, and it is different from what others have said. However, I will agree with insane alien about the effort being part of the pleasure. I discover this as young woman when I began gardening. I wish everyone could have a garden, because there are some things that we can know only through experience. Up to the experience of gardening, I thought pleasure came from partying, but knew that was a very temporary pleasure. However, the pleasure we get when we achieve something is like money in the bank earning interest. That is, the more we achieve, the better life feels. My image of feminine is influenced by the 50'tys ideal woman and 60'tys Earth Mother Goddess. A homemaker is one of the best things a woman can be. The happiness and success of those around her, are benefited by her homemaking skills and willingness to give of herself. Especially during my periods the feminine within me would peak, and it was if my nerve endings reached far beyond me. This got caught up with the Earth Mother Goddess image, and manifest as a desire to care for the world. I am convinced the best civilization is one in which the feminine aspect is encouraged and honored. This is so tied into gardening which connects us with the seasons and the earth. The height of femininity is the experience of love.