Is Acupuncture "energy medicine"?
"Energy medicine" pertains to a method of treatment designed to address all of the components and complexities of a complete human being. In contrast to "trauma medicine," which is focused on the alleviation of symptoms due to trauma, energy medicine focuses on the restoration of the natural balances which predate and inform the body in all of its manifestations. The two approaches work, to the extent that each works, based upon fundamental and conceptual differences in the very definitions of "human being" and "trauma;" that is, differences not only in the definition of the object upon which a medical approach is to be applied, but also definitional differences which determine the applicability of the particular approach. In other words, the two approaches could not be more different. These differences give each of them differing strengths and weaknesses. From everything I have observed and learned of the two approaches, the practice of acupuncture aligns with the very definition of energy medicine: providing a means to balance the energetic fields of the body, consequently supporting the body's own bias to restore and maintain health.
Do we need Kirlian photography to prove the aura exists?
Kirlian photography is a photographic process that captures the auras of persons or objects within the photograph. It was itself developed in order to photograph these multicolored, glowing emanations known as auras. Therefore, we do not need Kirlian photography to prove the aura exists, since the desire alone to develop this process would ipso facto prove the aura exists, since otherwise there would have been no desire to develop a method to capture and record it. (Is this reasoning too "West"?)
What evidence can you find for the Biofield and Morphogenic Fields?
Four things come immediately to mind: The fact that the Western sciences fail in their self imposed roles of "explaining it all;" the life I knew of my Grandmother (see below, Synchronicity); my own experiences with acupuncture and massage; and looking into the eyes of a human being.
Monday, April 2, 2007
Life and Living Systems
I know I'm a "living system" because...
... the entity known to me as "I" exhibits all known characteristics we attribute to living systems: 1) "I" possesses senses and responds to changes in the external environment; 2) The cells and tissues of "I" propagate and transmit waves of excitation from one point to another within it; 3) "I" grows--there has been and continues to be increase in the size and number of the cells of "I;" 4) There has been and continues to be an exchange of gasses between "I" and the environment; 5) "I" breaks down and absorbs food; 6) "I" moves digested nutrients into its fluids for transportation to every cell of its body; 7) "I" is capable of secreting special substances which are required within its own body; 8) "I" is capable of excreting materials no longer required within it, as well as materials produced but not required by it; 9) "I" is capable of circulating fluids and other substances from one area of its body to another; and 10) "I" is able to reproduce most parts of itself for growth as well as for repair. (Credit and thanks to N. Collins and all physiologists, everywhere.)
But perhaps more importantly, I "know" I am a living system not only because I possess all characteristics currently ascribed to living systems, but because I feel I am a living system. I feel an indestructible connection between my "I" and the larger, living environment. Also, I know I am a living system because my mother told me so...
Biophysics and me
We expect our long and satisfying relationship to continue for some time yet. Till death do we part. Wait; probably not even then! Let me say instead: Till death do we reconfigure.
... the entity known to me as "I" exhibits all known characteristics we attribute to living systems: 1) "I" possesses senses and responds to changes in the external environment; 2) The cells and tissues of "I" propagate and transmit waves of excitation from one point to another within it; 3) "I" grows--there has been and continues to be increase in the size and number of the cells of "I;" 4) There has been and continues to be an exchange of gasses between "I" and the environment; 5) "I" breaks down and absorbs food; 6) "I" moves digested nutrients into its fluids for transportation to every cell of its body; 7) "I" is capable of secreting special substances which are required within its own body; 8) "I" is capable of excreting materials no longer required within it, as well as materials produced but not required by it; 9) "I" is capable of circulating fluids and other substances from one area of its body to another; and 10) "I" is able to reproduce most parts of itself for growth as well as for repair. (Credit and thanks to N. Collins and all physiologists, everywhere.)
But perhaps more importantly, I "know" I am a living system not only because I possess all characteristics currently ascribed to living systems, but because I feel I am a living system. I feel an indestructible connection between my "I" and the larger, living environment. Also, I know I am a living system because my mother told me so...
Biophysics and me
We expect our long and satisfying relationship to continue for some time yet. Till death do we part. Wait; probably not even then! Let me say instead: Till death do we reconfigure.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Towards a New Synthesis
My E-Prime Day
This title appears to request selection and recording of a partially random series of keystrokes in the curious attempt to describe experience without definitive statements of being and without a particular point of view. What fun! It seems possible. However, as I appear to struggle with the beginning, most thoughts seem to appear to include statements which slip outside the described parameters.
The morning seems nice and arrives somewhat early in the day. There appear to be requirements made of the organism. It looks like familiarity with these demands motivates the organism, for it appears to respond to them. Some elements outside the organism appear to disappear within it, while other elements seem to wrap it from neck to foot. The organism appears to leave its place of origin and wanders, apparently satisfying other external or internal requirements made upon it. What other reason for these behaviors might exist? Eventually, the organism appears to return from whence it came. The day's poor play, some might paraphrase, appears over. But who might know?
Can I synthesize East and West?
On a good day, with a quiet mind, rested and fed; yes. East and West are synthesized primarily by realizing that the basic qualities we ascribe to East and West are initially not really separated after all. It takes us some time to realize this, perhaps, and we always express surprise when what we originally think to be in opposition turns into the overlapped or complimentary. People everywhere are basically the same; it is only the externals which appear to make us separate. And there are some really strong powers which are invested in the development and maintenance of these separating externals. As we all have, I have felt the cultural and societal pressures of many of these externals of the West, but never felt particularly invested in some of them; they never "worked" for me. Some of the externals, of course, I must assume I remain blind to; to varying degrees we all still wear our cultural blinders. But the lack of investiture in some externals of the West, coupled with the known hypocrisy of some of their manifestations, has certainly kept me open to the possibility of new syntheses.
This title appears to request selection and recording of a partially random series of keystrokes in the curious attempt to describe experience without definitive statements of being and without a particular point of view. What fun! It seems possible. However, as I appear to struggle with the beginning, most thoughts seem to appear to include statements which slip outside the described parameters.
The morning seems nice and arrives somewhat early in the day. There appear to be requirements made of the organism. It looks like familiarity with these demands motivates the organism, for it appears to respond to them. Some elements outside the organism appear to disappear within it, while other elements seem to wrap it from neck to foot. The organism appears to leave its place of origin and wanders, apparently satisfying other external or internal requirements made upon it. What other reason for these behaviors might exist? Eventually, the organism appears to return from whence it came. The day's poor play, some might paraphrase, appears over. But who might know?
Can I synthesize East and West?
On a good day, with a quiet mind, rested and fed; yes. East and West are synthesized primarily by realizing that the basic qualities we ascribe to East and West are initially not really separated after all. It takes us some time to realize this, perhaps, and we always express surprise when what we originally think to be in opposition turns into the overlapped or complimentary. People everywhere are basically the same; it is only the externals which appear to make us separate. And there are some really strong powers which are invested in the development and maintenance of these separating externals. As we all have, I have felt the cultural and societal pressures of many of these externals of the West, but never felt particularly invested in some of them; they never "worked" for me. Some of the externals, of course, I must assume I remain blind to; to varying degrees we all still wear our cultural blinders. But the lack of investiture in some externals of the West, coupled with the known hypocrisy of some of their manifestations, has certainly kept me open to the possibility of new syntheses.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Classical Physics
Newton's Three Laws and me
Well snooze... Law 1: Every object continues in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it. Law 2: The acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force acting on the object, is in the direction of the net force, and is inversely proportional to the mass of the object. Law 3: Whenever one object exerts a force on a second object, the second object exerts an equal and opposite force on the first.
The study of Physics must start somewhere. As important as these laws are in the historical development of science and, if you will, the evolution of human consciousness separate from religious dogma, these observations now provide little more than a starting point for traditional study. They support rocket science. They remind me that I have an external presence in the world, to look both ways before crossing the street, and during an earthquake to be aware of falling objects. They are "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" while my interests have become more "Upstairs, Downstairs."
Our "Energy Efficient" Culture
Energy efficiency is a relative concept treated, in our culture, as a certain and widely attainable constant that will save us from spoiling our nest. Energy efficiency actually means little more than just a little less... exploiting or wasteful. "Energy efficient cars" is an oxymoron. "Saves energy" is fool's gold. The ideas we have of ourselves personally, collectively, and culturally will have to mutate from top to bottom before any cultural notion of using energy efficiently truly emerges. We may also need an entirely different universe.
Descartes has a lot to answer for!
Cartesian coordinates may have saved Descartes from the inner most rings of Hell. But in providing the basic philosophical framework for what became the duality of mind and body, that great mechanistic schism, he certainly has earned an eternal roasting!
Well snooze... Law 1: Every object continues in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it. Law 2: The acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force acting on the object, is in the direction of the net force, and is inversely proportional to the mass of the object. Law 3: Whenever one object exerts a force on a second object, the second object exerts an equal and opposite force on the first.
The study of Physics must start somewhere. As important as these laws are in the historical development of science and, if you will, the evolution of human consciousness separate from religious dogma, these observations now provide little more than a starting point for traditional study. They support rocket science. They remind me that I have an external presence in the world, to look both ways before crossing the street, and during an earthquake to be aware of falling objects. They are "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" while my interests have become more "Upstairs, Downstairs."
Our "Energy Efficient" Culture
Energy efficiency is a relative concept treated, in our culture, as a certain and widely attainable constant that will save us from spoiling our nest. Energy efficiency actually means little more than just a little less... exploiting or wasteful. "Energy efficient cars" is an oxymoron. "Saves energy" is fool's gold. The ideas we have of ourselves personally, collectively, and culturally will have to mutate from top to bottom before any cultural notion of using energy efficiently truly emerges. We may also need an entirely different universe.
Descartes has a lot to answer for!
Cartesian coordinates may have saved Descartes from the inner most rings of Hell. But in providing the basic philosophical framework for what became the duality of mind and body, that great mechanistic schism, he certainly has earned an eternal roasting!
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
CHAOS THEORY
"Ordered chaos"--does this sound familiar?
The pairing ordered chaos, due to the apparent contradictions of its terms, carries within it implications of movement and process far greater than either word alone. Ordered implies a recognizable pattern, or that everything is in its right place and functioning properly; definitions that presume expectation. Chaos implies there is no pattern and that there is no rightful place or function. It is without expectation. Taken separately then, the terms each postulate the existence of a viewer, one who is or is without some degree of expectation. And since it is only as a measure of this degree of expectation that the terms may be applied, the two concepts represent different points on a continuum determined solely by the knowledge (or expectation) the viewer brings to any system to be examined. The viewer's expectation of a system, then, affects its description. Or, again, we see what we are looking for. As humanity's ability in understanding complex systems evolves, the chaotic "becomes" orderly. As Stephen Hawking says, "...if we discover a complete [chaos] theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few... and just ordinary people [will] be able to take part in the discussion... why it is that we and the universe exist."
Fractals as patterns of complex systems
Fractals apparently opened the door to chaos theory. As common representative subsets of more complex systems appeared in seemingly unrelated systems (structurally similar spirals, for example), the curious became more interested in representing the unrepresentable. These increasing complex representations became even more so with the advent of accessible computer power, producing amazing graphs in organic shapes of infinite complexity. The graphs were found to correspond to such processes as plant growth, weather patterns, the development of embryos, and quantum theories of time and space. It is the study of these complex systems and their interrelationships that form the basis of chaos theory.
Consciousness out of chaos?
It might be that only a worldview dependent upon a minimal, occidental definition of consciousness would even pose the question this way. If every point in the space-time grid is conscious and the human brain only a focal point in the grid, shouldn't we be asking: Chaos out of consciousness?
The pairing ordered chaos, due to the apparent contradictions of its terms, carries within it implications of movement and process far greater than either word alone. Ordered implies a recognizable pattern, or that everything is in its right place and functioning properly; definitions that presume expectation. Chaos implies there is no pattern and that there is no rightful place or function. It is without expectation. Taken separately then, the terms each postulate the existence of a viewer, one who is or is without some degree of expectation. And since it is only as a measure of this degree of expectation that the terms may be applied, the two concepts represent different points on a continuum determined solely by the knowledge (or expectation) the viewer brings to any system to be examined. The viewer's expectation of a system, then, affects its description. Or, again, we see what we are looking for. As humanity's ability in understanding complex systems evolves, the chaotic "becomes" orderly. As Stephen Hawking says, "...if we discover a complete [chaos] theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few... and just ordinary people [will] be able to take part in the discussion... why it is that we and the universe exist."
Fractals as patterns of complex systems
Fractals apparently opened the door to chaos theory. As common representative subsets of more complex systems appeared in seemingly unrelated systems (structurally similar spirals, for example), the curious became more interested in representing the unrepresentable. These increasing complex representations became even more so with the advent of accessible computer power, producing amazing graphs in organic shapes of infinite complexity. The graphs were found to correspond to such processes as plant growth, weather patterns, the development of embryos, and quantum theories of time and space. It is the study of these complex systems and their interrelationships that form the basis of chaos theory.
Consciousness out of chaos?
It might be that only a worldview dependent upon a minimal, occidental definition of consciousness would even pose the question this way. If every point in the space-time grid is conscious and the human brain only a focal point in the grid, shouldn't we be asking: Chaos out of consciousness?
Monday, February 26, 2007
Vibrations
Are all vibrations "good"?
Although all Beach Boy vibrations are "good" (apologies to all; I just could not resist), it seems to me that vibrations just "are." "Good" implies a value judgment outside of our objective, "scientific" discussion of Vibrations. The results of vibrations might include discussion of "good" or "bad" effects, but "good" and "bad" are not descriptors inherent in the phenomena. One could argue that some vibrations have both qualities; for example, odor vibrations might be "good" for the hunter, but "bad" for the hunted. But in the overall scheme of things, where those eaten provide life for those doing the eating, even this example of a qualitative description of the phenomena falls short. There is no inherent "good" or "evil" in any natural phenomena.
Resonance in my world
Well, gosh, everything comes to us via vibrations! I was originally going to write that the most interesting aspects of resonance in my world are the non-verbal communiques or "energy fields" projecting outward from my fellow beings. I am intrigued by communications accomplished without the use of words; how feelings can be communicated, for instance. But then I thought about color! I used to paint in oils, and I still like to color. There is very real enjoyment to be found in color combination. But then I thought about music! Auditory stimulation alone can transport me to other times and places, can fill me with peace, or make me cry. And that makes me think about laughter, and the sound of a child's uncontrollable giggle! The miracle of it! And then there is dancing and the vibrating body! And the sight, the smell, the sound of a forest after an early morning rain! My world is made of vibrations!
Connections I can make between Energy and Qi?
One of the limitations of spelling words with letters rather than representing ideas through "pictures" is that we seem to be not always able to get at the deeper meanings inherent in our perceptions of the world. Our grammars often tie our hands, limit our minds. To make connections between Energy and Qi, other than the grammatically obvious, would require mind-expanding representations of the utmost subtlety and infinite variation. For now, in this language of spelling and metaphor, I am happy to settle upon an equivalence between them, remembering that concepts born of different languages almost always lose something in translation. "Energy" in English may include ideas not found in the Chinese "Qi." Likewise, the Chinese "Qi" may certainly include notions not to be found in the English "Energy."
Although all Beach Boy vibrations are "good" (apologies to all; I just could not resist), it seems to me that vibrations just "are." "Good" implies a value judgment outside of our objective, "scientific" discussion of Vibrations. The results of vibrations might include discussion of "good" or "bad" effects, but "good" and "bad" are not descriptors inherent in the phenomena. One could argue that some vibrations have both qualities; for example, odor vibrations might be "good" for the hunter, but "bad" for the hunted. But in the overall scheme of things, where those eaten provide life for those doing the eating, even this example of a qualitative description of the phenomena falls short. There is no inherent "good" or "evil" in any natural phenomena.
Resonance in my world
Well, gosh, everything comes to us via vibrations! I was originally going to write that the most interesting aspects of resonance in my world are the non-verbal communiques or "energy fields" projecting outward from my fellow beings. I am intrigued by communications accomplished without the use of words; how feelings can be communicated, for instance. But then I thought about color! I used to paint in oils, and I still like to color. There is very real enjoyment to be found in color combination. But then I thought about music! Auditory stimulation alone can transport me to other times and places, can fill me with peace, or make me cry. And that makes me think about laughter, and the sound of a child's uncontrollable giggle! The miracle of it! And then there is dancing and the vibrating body! And the sight, the smell, the sound of a forest after an early morning rain! My world is made of vibrations!
Connections I can make between Energy and Qi?
One of the limitations of spelling words with letters rather than representing ideas through "pictures" is that we seem to be not always able to get at the deeper meanings inherent in our perceptions of the world. Our grammars often tie our hands, limit our minds. To make connections between Energy and Qi, other than the grammatically obvious, would require mind-expanding representations of the utmost subtlety and infinite variation. For now, in this language of spelling and metaphor, I am happy to settle upon an equivalence between them, remembering that concepts born of different languages almost always lose something in translation. "Energy" in English may include ideas not found in the Chinese "Qi." Likewise, the Chinese "Qi" may certainly include notions not to be found in the English "Energy."
Monday, February 19, 2007
Symmetry and Sacred Geometry
My (A)Symmetrical World
During particular times, when events were explosive, out of control, whole periods of my life when I have suffered what felt to be unendurable and unending grief, as well as those times when the love and joy in my life have seemed effortless and boundless; my world seemed clearly asymmetrical. There was little balance. What was experienced in the extreme during these particular times has always remained jagged memories of isolating events thrust upon me by an unjust and meaningless world (kudos, always, to Shakespeare: "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune"). There are scars on my psyche, the sources of which I have hated very profoundly, for it is hard to see the beauty and balance of life when one is attacked from without or from within, assaulted physically, spiritually or sexually, or even just had one's good "Christian name" (kudos, always, to Joni) or educated nose rubbed in the dung heap.
No justice, no symmetry.
Now I am not really sure what happened. It is not that the "years have taken a toll" or that I have yet acquired the "wisdom that comes with age." I still have profound hatred for much that is in the world (kudos, always, to Bertoldt: "Change the world... she needs it!"). But I sense a profound symmetry now in my world. As more years go by, they move faster and faster, and I can feel their rhythm. Within the largest cycles there is a sense of containment. The great arc of my life I am able to see as from a distance, and I enjoy my experience of it. I dance. As the older folks I know leave this existence, the younger ones enter. Friends have gone and friends have come. Wherever I go, there I am. (Funny, but true!) I can see my reflection and know it to be illusory, for "I" am the illusion. The symmetry is perfect and complete.
This was really hard to write. I am very tired. It is late; good thing it is dark. Perfect symmetry.
Just what does this CP violation really mean?
It may very well be the reason there is an "is" here. Contrary to the symmetry theorem of quantum physics which states that all processes involving particles remain invariant if: 1) the particles are changed into antiparticles ("charge"), 2) the particle system is reversed left to right ("parity"), and 3) the particle system is run backward ("time"); it has been found that the rate of decay of one particular particle (a kaon) could be altered by changing it's charge and parity. CP was violated. Therefore for CPT to remain invariant, the system would have to change if time were run backward. In other words there is one tiny bit of matter which posits time as directional on a subatomic level.
CPT invariant declares the universe in perfect symmetry and there is... nothing. All matter is perfectly in balance with its opposite, anti-matter. But since one tiny bit of matter posits time as directional, by apparently behaving differently in forward and backward directions, the time required for things "to be separated" is brought into being. And we live.
Are there connections between Sacred Geometry and Physics?
The methods we use to get at the "truth" of the world around us, in our day, we call Physics. Physics, then, helps us develop our world-view. Physics is part and parcel of the technology used by our culture to approach "truth." Other societies, separated by time and space from our own, have developed different technologies to approach the universal questing after the "truth" of the world. We see their approaches as "Sacred Geometry" as we discover the usefulness and profound qualities inherent in these other technologies and as they show us "truth" beyond the limitations of our particular technology. Our tools reflect assumptions we make about the world, but the mysteries, the "truths" seem universal to all conscious beings. Physics has begun to connect us to Sacred Geometry. Perhaps all useful technologies do.
During particular times, when events were explosive, out of control, whole periods of my life when I have suffered what felt to be unendurable and unending grief, as well as those times when the love and joy in my life have seemed effortless and boundless; my world seemed clearly asymmetrical. There was little balance. What was experienced in the extreme during these particular times has always remained jagged memories of isolating events thrust upon me by an unjust and meaningless world (kudos, always, to Shakespeare: "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune"). There are scars on my psyche, the sources of which I have hated very profoundly, for it is hard to see the beauty and balance of life when one is attacked from without or from within, assaulted physically, spiritually or sexually, or even just had one's good "Christian name" (kudos, always, to Joni) or educated nose rubbed in the dung heap.
No justice, no symmetry.
Now I am not really sure what happened. It is not that the "years have taken a toll" or that I have yet acquired the "wisdom that comes with age." I still have profound hatred for much that is in the world (kudos, always, to Bertoldt: "Change the world... she needs it!"). But I sense a profound symmetry now in my world. As more years go by, they move faster and faster, and I can feel their rhythm. Within the largest cycles there is a sense of containment. The great arc of my life I am able to see as from a distance, and I enjoy my experience of it. I dance. As the older folks I know leave this existence, the younger ones enter. Friends have gone and friends have come. Wherever I go, there I am. (Funny, but true!) I can see my reflection and know it to be illusory, for "I" am the illusion. The symmetry is perfect and complete.
This was really hard to write. I am very tired. It is late; good thing it is dark. Perfect symmetry.
Just what does this CP violation really mean?
It may very well be the reason there is an "is" here. Contrary to the symmetry theorem of quantum physics which states that all processes involving particles remain invariant if: 1) the particles are changed into antiparticles ("charge"), 2) the particle system is reversed left to right ("parity"), and 3) the particle system is run backward ("time"); it has been found that the rate of decay of one particular particle (a kaon) could be altered by changing it's charge and parity. CP was violated. Therefore for CPT to remain invariant, the system would have to change if time were run backward. In other words there is one tiny bit of matter which posits time as directional on a subatomic level.
CPT invariant declares the universe in perfect symmetry and there is... nothing. All matter is perfectly in balance with its opposite, anti-matter. But since one tiny bit of matter posits time as directional, by apparently behaving differently in forward and backward directions, the time required for things "to be separated" is brought into being. And we live.
Are there connections between Sacred Geometry and Physics?
The methods we use to get at the "truth" of the world around us, in our day, we call Physics. Physics, then, helps us develop our world-view. Physics is part and parcel of the technology used by our culture to approach "truth." Other societies, separated by time and space from our own, have developed different technologies to approach the universal questing after the "truth" of the world. We see their approaches as "Sacred Geometry" as we discover the usefulness and profound qualities inherent in these other technologies and as they show us "truth" beyond the limitations of our particular technology. Our tools reflect assumptions we make about the world, but the mysteries, the "truths" seem universal to all conscious beings. Physics has begun to connect us to Sacred Geometry. Perhaps all useful technologies do.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Energy, Matter, and Force
How has e=mc2 affected you?
Short answer: "duck and cover." Except, in actuality (long answer:), the teachers at my elementary school never instructed us to dive under our desks. Rather, I remember sitting along the walls on the floor of inside hallways, head between knees and hands clasped firmly over head. We had to sit quietly. We were but thirty miles from the heart of the "motor city," and even I knew that our little practices were for naught. Later, during junior high school when I worked delivering our local weekly paper in the neighborhood, came the "Cuban missile crisis." I remember delivering my papers while dashing between houses, trying to keep a house between me and the direction of the Detroit skyline which we could see in the distance on a clear day. About this time I did a school presentation on the effects of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I learned what sorts of destruction occurred in successive concentric rings out from the center of the blast. I remember that nearest the blast all that remained of one individual was the shadow he made from the fireball. Further away I remember that people had their flesh melt from them. I learned that the government of the United States chose these cities because they had been largely spared previous bombing campaigns and that "our side" wanted to gain a clearer understanding of the effects of these new weapons. I learned then that I did not understand how anyone could hate someone else so much, and I still do not understand. Those born immediately afterward, worldwide, became the first generation of humankind ever to have so much radioactive material in our very bones. This certainly contributed to hippie-dom as well as widespread revolutionary movements.
The equation itself has always fascinated me. I realize it is a way of understanding the amount of energy packed within any bit of matter, but I've always fantasized the possibilities inherent in just getting stuff to... go fast enough! Now add to the fantasy the notion that velocity itself is relative and must be in relation to something else: Our solar system has a speed in relation to the center of the Milky Way, for instance; and the Milky Way has a velocity in relation to other Galaxies. Just sitting here then am I already zooming along at a velocity equal to a high percentage of the speed of light? Certainly not in relation to the light on my desk, but it is moving "with" me, as are all of our tools for measuring it. The implications are fascinating and apparently endless.
Someone in class mentioned mass and energy as another example of yin and yang. I really liked that, particularly as we discover the various states of qi energy, from aggregate (mass) to dispersed (energy). This is an amazing and wonderful way to see the world, and Einstein's formula states it well.
How would you compare the four "forces?"
Electromagnetism includes the phenomena of light, electricity, and magnetism, which I understand in terms of electrons and simple positive and negative attractions and repulsions. Weak nuclear forces I understand in terms of electrons, ions, and other charged particles which we explore more fully through the study of chemistry. These forces help us to understand how chemical elements and the substances they "make" interact or not, and form the basis for various shampoo formulas, for instance. It is relatively easy to understand that these two forces have been shown to be two aspects of a single "electroweak force." Strong nuclear forces are explored through accelerators and the like; they enter the discussion when we try to break atoms into component parts. We are no longer discussing the cure for split ends but the desire to split atoms, to discover the structure within structure, for example. Grand unified theories speculatively combine the electroweak force and the strong nuclear force, which I will have to accept as understandable to those who understand it.
The fourth of the fab four forces is gravity, and how to combine it with the three others in a grand unified theory is still a topic of research and debate. It is interesting to me that gravity, despite being the force with which humankind was first and foremost familiar, remains the force which has been the most misunderstood and the force most difficult to unite with the others into one unified force theory.
What is the function of gravity?
Gravity is a force of attraction that exists between any two masses, any two bodies, any two particles. Gravity is the attraction that exists between all objects. It is the pre-Big Bang calling out to itself.
By realizing that a force must make an apple fall from a tree, Sir Isaac Newton (1642--1727) discovered that a force is required to change the speed or direction of movement of an object. Further, he deduced that gravitational forces exist between all objects and found that some objects required more force to move than others, specifically that the force needed to push an object at a given acceleration was proportional to the object's mass (F=ma). Newton proposed that an artificial satellite could be made to encircle the Earth, if it was given enough speed in the correct direction.
Gravity keeps the Earth in its orbit around the sun. Gravity keeps the Earth's atmosphere, oceans, and inhabitants from drifting into space. Gravity pulls the rain to the rivers, and ultimately to the sea. Gravity guides the development and growth of plants and affects the way our bones and muscles develop and function. Gravity controls the fluid in our inner ear, giving us a sense of direction and the ability to balance. The specific mechanisms used by plant and animal cells, tissues, and organs to sense gravity is not fully understood. And the role of gravity in biological functions is only partially understood. (This paragraph is from www.yorku.ca/esse/veo/earth/sub1-6-2.htm.)
Also, the proper amount of gravity keeps us from laughing too hard, too long, or too embarrassingly. But that's another story...
Short answer: "duck and cover." Except, in actuality (long answer:), the teachers at my elementary school never instructed us to dive under our desks. Rather, I remember sitting along the walls on the floor of inside hallways, head between knees and hands clasped firmly over head. We had to sit quietly. We were but thirty miles from the heart of the "motor city," and even I knew that our little practices were for naught. Later, during junior high school when I worked delivering our local weekly paper in the neighborhood, came the "Cuban missile crisis." I remember delivering my papers while dashing between houses, trying to keep a house between me and the direction of the Detroit skyline which we could see in the distance on a clear day. About this time I did a school presentation on the effects of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I learned what sorts of destruction occurred in successive concentric rings out from the center of the blast. I remember that nearest the blast all that remained of one individual was the shadow he made from the fireball. Further away I remember that people had their flesh melt from them. I learned that the government of the United States chose these cities because they had been largely spared previous bombing campaigns and that "our side" wanted to gain a clearer understanding of the effects of these new weapons. I learned then that I did not understand how anyone could hate someone else so much, and I still do not understand. Those born immediately afterward, worldwide, became the first generation of humankind ever to have so much radioactive material in our very bones. This certainly contributed to hippie-dom as well as widespread revolutionary movements.
The equation itself has always fascinated me. I realize it is a way of understanding the amount of energy packed within any bit of matter, but I've always fantasized the possibilities inherent in just getting stuff to... go fast enough! Now add to the fantasy the notion that velocity itself is relative and must be in relation to something else: Our solar system has a speed in relation to the center of the Milky Way, for instance; and the Milky Way has a velocity in relation to other Galaxies. Just sitting here then am I already zooming along at a velocity equal to a high percentage of the speed of light? Certainly not in relation to the light on my desk, but it is moving "with" me, as are all of our tools for measuring it. The implications are fascinating and apparently endless.
Someone in class mentioned mass and energy as another example of yin and yang. I really liked that, particularly as we discover the various states of qi energy, from aggregate (mass) to dispersed (energy). This is an amazing and wonderful way to see the world, and Einstein's formula states it well.
How would you compare the four "forces?"
Electromagnetism includes the phenomena of light, electricity, and magnetism, which I understand in terms of electrons and simple positive and negative attractions and repulsions. Weak nuclear forces I understand in terms of electrons, ions, and other charged particles which we explore more fully through the study of chemistry. These forces help us to understand how chemical elements and the substances they "make" interact or not, and form the basis for various shampoo formulas, for instance. It is relatively easy to understand that these two forces have been shown to be two aspects of a single "electroweak force." Strong nuclear forces are explored through accelerators and the like; they enter the discussion when we try to break atoms into component parts. We are no longer discussing the cure for split ends but the desire to split atoms, to discover the structure within structure, for example. Grand unified theories speculatively combine the electroweak force and the strong nuclear force, which I will have to accept as understandable to those who understand it.
The fourth of the fab four forces is gravity, and how to combine it with the three others in a grand unified theory is still a topic of research and debate. It is interesting to me that gravity, despite being the force with which humankind was first and foremost familiar, remains the force which has been the most misunderstood and the force most difficult to unite with the others into one unified force theory.
What is the function of gravity?
Gravity is a force of attraction that exists between any two masses, any two bodies, any two particles. Gravity is the attraction that exists between all objects. It is the pre-Big Bang calling out to itself.
By realizing that a force must make an apple fall from a tree, Sir Isaac Newton (1642--1727) discovered that a force is required to change the speed or direction of movement of an object. Further, he deduced that gravitational forces exist between all objects and found that some objects required more force to move than others, specifically that the force needed to push an object at a given acceleration was proportional to the object's mass (F=ma). Newton proposed that an artificial satellite could be made to encircle the Earth, if it was given enough speed in the correct direction.
Gravity keeps the Earth in its orbit around the sun. Gravity keeps the Earth's atmosphere, oceans, and inhabitants from drifting into space. Gravity pulls the rain to the rivers, and ultimately to the sea. Gravity guides the development and growth of plants and affects the way our bones and muscles develop and function. Gravity controls the fluid in our inner ear, giving us a sense of direction and the ability to balance. The specific mechanisms used by plant and animal cells, tissues, and organs to sense gravity is not fully understood. And the role of gravity in biological functions is only partially understood. (This paragraph is from www.yorku.ca/esse/veo/earth/sub1-6-2.htm.)
Also, the proper amount of gravity keeps us from laughing too hard, too long, or too embarrassingly. But that's another story...
Monday, February 5, 2007
Synchronicity
What evidence can you find for synchronicity?
Evidence is best evidenced through example. In early December this past year, a friend with whom I had often danced in Afro-Haitian classes at CCSF sent me an invitation to a party via email. As busy as I was during this period, struggling to get my application into ACCHS, writing to folks to ask for recommendations, looking for work, and attempting to send Holiday Greeting cards in a timely fashion; I failed to respond to her invitation. Tuesday afternoons I am still found at CCSF where I have a Tango class. After class my usual route off campus is through the library, where one can enter the rear set of doors at a lower ground level, take the elevator to the fourth floor, exit through the front set of doors at a higher ground level, and thereby avoid climbing the hill in which the library building itself is nestled. Last Tuesday after class this friend was heavy on my mind and I was reminding myself that I really needed to contact her, thank her for the invite, and just learn how things were going with her. Riding up the elevator, I suddenly decided to get off on the third floor because the third floor restroom usually has paper towels whereas the fourth floor restroom does not. I found the third floor restroom closed for repairs and as I turned toward the stairway to climb the flight, there was the friend I was needing to contact.
In this example, what had prompted my change in route (a preferred restroom) became a tertiary relation (a “trick” of the Universe?) connecting the objective outer Event (meeting my friend) and my inner psychological State (needing to meet her). The Event and my State did not cause one the other, or vice versa, but they certainly were a-causally related through meaning.
My best example (one of the favorite stories of my life), however, goes back to a previous century when I was but a lad in high school. My Grandmother took my cousin and myself on a summer trip to
Staying in the huge old house near
In this example, though, there was a-causal relational meaning given to the connection between my Grandmother’s pre-existing knowledge of an Event (age, gender, initial letter of a deceased) and the confirmation of the Event, by me, which induced my inner psychological State (love, awe, respect, belief, etc.). In this way, I learned there is no such thing as coincidence.
Based on what you know, how would you explain connectivity?
Connectivity is there from the beginning. We are taught to be unconnected, from the Earth and from each other, in order to sell us more refrigerators. The question would better be: How do we relearn our truer nature of connection? How do we explain to those we hope will be able to follow us what the hell happened?
Friday, January 26, 2007
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Quantum Mechanics
To What Extent Is the Universe Uncertain?
When our discussion group first assembled and read this question, into the initial silence I half jokingly blurted "100%." We were all amused I thought. As we discussed further, I think we all basically agreed that 100% was actually a pretty good answer. Someone mentioned individual death as a certainty, but as someone else mentioned it does depend on the definition of death. If viewed as a "termination," it does appear certain. If viewed as "transformation," it becomes only one segment of a larger flux or cloud of possibility where nothing is certain except change. In other words we get certainty only by definition. Now we did not mention taxes which is often paired with death as the only two things which are certain. This one is easier to determine as uncertain; think corporate welfare in capitalist society and the existence of taxes for the rich becomes as uncertain as the weather.
However, if the Universe is 100% uncertain, there is implication that the statement itself is certain. The statement is in the Universe, and is therefore uncertain by definition. If the Universe is 100% uncertain, then change is the only certainly and couldn't by definition exist in the Universe. And we see again that everything holds the kernel of its opposite.
How would one go about proving a certainty? Infinite trials? Maybe we can only really conclude there is a mix of certainty and uncertainty in the Universe. For practical purposes, we do live our lives as if there is certainty. Aren't we here studying (and teaching) CM because we do rely on some degree of certainty in the Universe? Particular herbs have particular properties, and those who have studied herbs will tell us with certainty that we must begin to know these properties. Maybe the paradox is best approached by distinguishing "certainty" from "really so highly probable that we may functionally remove from consideration the likelihood of anything unexpected." In other words: Live with expectation, but remain flexible.
When our discussion group first assembled and read this question, into the initial silence I half jokingly blurted "100%." We were all amused I thought. As we discussed further, I think we all basically agreed that 100% was actually a pretty good answer. Someone mentioned individual death as a certainty, but as someone else mentioned it does depend on the definition of death. If viewed as a "termination," it does appear certain. If viewed as "transformation," it becomes only one segment of a larger flux or cloud of possibility where nothing is certain except change. In other words we get certainty only by definition. Now we did not mention taxes which is often paired with death as the only two things which are certain. This one is easier to determine as uncertain; think corporate welfare in capitalist society and the existence of taxes for the rich becomes as uncertain as the weather.
However, if the Universe is 100% uncertain, there is implication that the statement itself is certain. The statement is in the Universe, and is therefore uncertain by definition. If the Universe is 100% uncertain, then change is the only certainly and couldn't by definition exist in the Universe. And we see again that everything holds the kernel of its opposite.
How would one go about proving a certainty? Infinite trials? Maybe we can only really conclude there is a mix of certainty and uncertainty in the Universe. For practical purposes, we do live our lives as if there is certainty. Aren't we here studying (and teaching) CM because we do rely on some degree of certainty in the Universe? Particular herbs have particular properties, and those who have studied herbs will tell us with certainty that we must begin to know these properties. Maybe the paradox is best approached by distinguishing "certainty" from "really so highly probable that we may functionally remove from consideration the likelihood of anything unexpected." In other words: Live with expectation, but remain flexible.
Do Particles Have No Definite States Before Measurement?
The question, I think, begins with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which states that on the atomic level one can not be certain of both momentum and position of a particular particle at the same time. In other words, we can not with certainty measure both at the same time. But, as a thought problem, does this mean that the particle, before we measure it, has neither momentum or position at the same time? Is it characteristic of particles to have neither attribute at the same time independent of our observations? Or have we just figured out that we are incapable of measuring these attributes of particles at the same time? We might be able to prove mathematically that we are incapable of measuring these attributes at the same time, but wouldn't a secondary proof be necessary to prove that the attributes can not exist in the same particle at the same time when we weren't looking?
If observation invariably influences what is observed, then in some way we are very limited in our senses. Gosh, I suddenly feel a bit trapped in the seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and touching machine. Thank goodness our minds can wander (and wonder!).
Another aspect to this question, and it bothered me in the discussion of Schrodinger's cat, is the near approach to a solipsistic view of the Universe engendered in some of the conclusions. Just concluding that we are only able to determine the characteristics of the world "out there" by using senses which appear to be only "in here" and therefore subject to any number of, well, pernicious influences, does not justify the conclusion that there is no objective reality "out there." In any realm of the unknown which may present an infinite array of possibility, there still are things that "are," which, although their apparent characteristics are influenced by our observations of them, still have realities in their own right.
On the one hand, the reader may challenge me to prove the existence of this independent (of measurement and/or human preception) reality, and I will counter by indicating the "western" nature of the challenge. On the other hand, if we do not accept that there is an objective reality beyond our perhaps poor and constantly interfering perceptions of it, we get such ridiculous manifestations on the macroscopic level as Clinton's infamous, "It depends on what your definition of is, is."
What Does This Tell Us About Causality?
Cause and effect are useful constructs of the human mind, although we may not understand the dynamics of either independently, nor the true character of the ways in which they are linked. Our energies and the constraints on our perceptions influence the way we observe causes and effects (and everything else). We have to assume, though, that the Universe was here long before us, and that it will continue long after we are gone. To quote a once popular television program: The truth is out there! Perhaps we are not really here in order to study the Universe, but rather the Universe places us (and everything else) within the Universe to learn about its Self. The Universe obeys its own rules independent of the inadvertently skewed impressions we obtain of it.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
The Meaning of Time
Periodically, every so often, interesting discussions or ideas really blow my mind, make me sit up and wonder... It happened in class Tuesday night: The notion of a variable rate to the Big Bang had never occurred to me, I had not heard it before. The wind just raced through my mind! That theories of physics are mostly "time reversible" was a virtual gale force. Actually, as I think of it, the notion that any video of molecules in motion would look the same run forward or backward only reinforces the feeling I have often had that "in reality" there is only the NOW.
If we begin with the idea of the Big Bang, then Time would only be a measure of Space. Space is what gets "expanded" as the initial infinitely small, infinitely dense "stuff" explodes. How far the "stuff" has traveled is determined by how much Time has passed. (Vice versa as well, I suppose.) All is One except as Time (Space) has separated us. Again, "in reality" there is only Space and the NOW; our usual, common sense of Time is only a mental construct useful in the function of our society. But again it is common sense to see Time as a measure of Space as in "I will be there in fifteen minutes."
It is also written that the original "stuff" was very hot with energy distributed uniformly and that as the Universe grows its temperature drops, leaving less energy to perform work in the future. Entropy, disorder, increases. The dictionary defines entropy as "a measure of the amount of energy unavailable for work in a thermodynamic system... a closed system, as the universe." Is the key word in the definition "unavailable?" If "unavailable" does that mean "not there" or just there and not available for work? With a different kind of technology could we harness the disorder and use its energy, which is currently defined as unavailable, to "restore" order? Would this technology make the Universe run in reverse? Or would this only reflect that video of molecules which appears the same run forward and backward?
I understand Einstein's curving space idea to explain gravitation attraction through a vacuum, as in the planets around the Sun. But representations of curved space I have seen are always two-dimensional "much like a stretched sheet of elastic material would accommodate itself to a heavy ball placed on its center area." So how does one represent curvature of space in three dimensions?
The discussion of a clock heading into a black hole and its apparent contradictions in appearance depending on the location of the viewer is also interesting. To an outside observer the clock's signals slow as the clock approaches the event horizon until, "past" the event horizon, its signals stop altogether. To an observer traveling with the clock, there is no slowing of signals approaching the event horizon. Although this discussion is an interesting way to understand some of the characteristics of a black hole, again, I think, the kind of Time measured by a clock is only a mental construct, there is only NOW.
"What if...?" Seems to me the Universe has to be either one of two things, either it is infinite and by definition includes every possibility and variation; or it is finite, and does not. If finite, then what is "outside" of it? Can anything which is conceived even be outside of it? And what does its boundary look like? If, on the other hand, it is infinite, well then, SURPRISE! Somewhere, our planet never had a moon, the dinosaurs never became extinct, Rome never fell, the Muslims conquered Europe, Germany won WW II, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
I certainly do not understand all of this, but I love it.
If we begin with the idea of the Big Bang, then Time would only be a measure of Space. Space is what gets "expanded" as the initial infinitely small, infinitely dense "stuff" explodes. How far the "stuff" has traveled is determined by how much Time has passed. (Vice versa as well, I suppose.) All is One except as Time (Space) has separated us. Again, "in reality" there is only Space and the NOW; our usual, common sense of Time is only a mental construct useful in the function of our society. But again it is common sense to see Time as a measure of Space as in "I will be there in fifteen minutes."
It is also written that the original "stuff" was very hot with energy distributed uniformly and that as the Universe grows its temperature drops, leaving less energy to perform work in the future. Entropy, disorder, increases. The dictionary defines entropy as "a measure of the amount of energy unavailable for work in a thermodynamic system... a closed system, as the universe." Is the key word in the definition "unavailable?" If "unavailable" does that mean "not there" or just there and not available for work? With a different kind of technology could we harness the disorder and use its energy, which is currently defined as unavailable, to "restore" order? Would this technology make the Universe run in reverse? Or would this only reflect that video of molecules which appears the same run forward and backward?
I understand Einstein's curving space idea to explain gravitation attraction through a vacuum, as in the planets around the Sun. But representations of curved space I have seen are always two-dimensional "much like a stretched sheet of elastic material would accommodate itself to a heavy ball placed on its center area." So how does one represent curvature of space in three dimensions?
The discussion of a clock heading into a black hole and its apparent contradictions in appearance depending on the location of the viewer is also interesting. To an outside observer the clock's signals slow as the clock approaches the event horizon until, "past" the event horizon, its signals stop altogether. To an observer traveling with the clock, there is no slowing of signals approaching the event horizon. Although this discussion is an interesting way to understand some of the characteristics of a black hole, again, I think, the kind of Time measured by a clock is only a mental construct, there is only NOW.
"What if...?" Seems to me the Universe has to be either one of two things, either it is infinite and by definition includes every possibility and variation; or it is finite, and does not. If finite, then what is "outside" of it? Can anything which is conceived even be outside of it? And what does its boundary look like? If, on the other hand, it is infinite, well then, SURPRISE! Somewhere, our planet never had a moon, the dinosaurs never became extinct, Rome never fell, the Muslims conquered Europe, Germany won WW II, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
I certainly do not understand all of this, but I love it.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Week One Quiz
What attracts me to Chinese Medicine?
Well right this moment the first thing that enters my mind when I ask myself what attracts me to Chinese Medicine is that there are no computers involved. I have discovered while struggling to even enter my blog tonight (thanks Emmendo! and thanks Lisa!) that I am a real hard-core Luddite! I think I mentioned in class that I feel both pulls (toward TCM) and pushes (away from the not TCM); computers are in the push column. I have wanted to throw this machine from the train so many times this weekend, but now I reveal another side of myself not yet seen by all my new mates, and I am suddenly way off topic. So...
Like most of the folks in class I have had amazing and wonderful experiences with both acupuncture and Chinese herbs. I have also gone directly from an acupuncture table via ambulance to Kaiser. On the other hand, western medical practices may have saved my life after my appendix burst, but they also caused a sudden outbreak of large, red boils all over my skin during an allergic reaction to a sulfa-based drug. We all have stories of the horrors that can be western medicine. Frankly, I am upset by and terrified of the vast chemical experiment that pharmacology has made of all of us. There is a story somewhere here in my newspaper clippings of a couple in Virginia, I think, who lost custody of their son because they all agreed to do "alternative" medicine instead of the recommended cutting and experimental chemistry. My lawyer friend a couple doors down tells me that the AMA is trying to push losing one's medical license should a western doctor be foolish enough to provide expert medical testimony against another western practitioner. The nutritionist who taught my nutrition class at CCSF told us that western doctors are usually not even required to take a single nutrition class while in medical school. I mentioned in our class already that my sister's handful of pills includes some to counteract the side-effects of others. These are all reasons I am attracted to Chinese medicine.
What do I honestly think of Physics, really?
Physics in high school, back in the day, was dreaded by everyone and provided me with my first note home from a teacher remarking my lack of, well, "achievement." I remember how impossible it seemed to me to determine which friggin formula applied to which friggin situation, all of it amazingly divorced from what seemed then anyway to be real life. Physics in college, circa 1969 or so, was a lesson in how I was certainly not ever going to amount to much, although I do remember playing around bending light in little precursors to CRTs which was interesting and fun. Physics in college, circa 2005 or so, was mostly watered down and disappointing because by then I'd read some interesting books and the class, frankly, came up a little short...
But if our first class is indicative, I think much is about to change. Physics is more than classes.
Now that I think about it, have I ever experiences time "slowing down?"
Even without thinking about it, I have experienced time slowing down. Actually, when I have really thought about it, I have experienced time as completely stopped. Time as a measurement that "moves forward" then (and now, when I really think about it) seems to be completely a mental construct instilled in us from the first day we are due in school. This is for job preparation and, what a funny phrase, punching the clock!
Well right this moment the first thing that enters my mind when I ask myself what attracts me to Chinese Medicine is that there are no computers involved. I have discovered while struggling to even enter my blog tonight (thanks Emmendo! and thanks Lisa!) that I am a real hard-core Luddite! I think I mentioned in class that I feel both pulls (toward TCM) and pushes (away from the not TCM); computers are in the push column. I have wanted to throw this machine from the train so many times this weekend, but now I reveal another side of myself not yet seen by all my new mates, and I am suddenly way off topic. So...
Like most of the folks in class I have had amazing and wonderful experiences with both acupuncture and Chinese herbs. I have also gone directly from an acupuncture table via ambulance to Kaiser. On the other hand, western medical practices may have saved my life after my appendix burst, but they also caused a sudden outbreak of large, red boils all over my skin during an allergic reaction to a sulfa-based drug. We all have stories of the horrors that can be western medicine. Frankly, I am upset by and terrified of the vast chemical experiment that pharmacology has made of all of us. There is a story somewhere here in my newspaper clippings of a couple in Virginia, I think, who lost custody of their son because they all agreed to do "alternative" medicine instead of the recommended cutting and experimental chemistry. My lawyer friend a couple doors down tells me that the AMA is trying to push losing one's medical license should a western doctor be foolish enough to provide expert medical testimony against another western practitioner. The nutritionist who taught my nutrition class at CCSF told us that western doctors are usually not even required to take a single nutrition class while in medical school. I mentioned in our class already that my sister's handful of pills includes some to counteract the side-effects of others. These are all reasons I am attracted to Chinese medicine.
What do I honestly think of Physics, really?
Physics in high school, back in the day, was dreaded by everyone and provided me with my first note home from a teacher remarking my lack of, well, "achievement." I remember how impossible it seemed to me to determine which friggin formula applied to which friggin situation, all of it amazingly divorced from what seemed then anyway to be real life. Physics in college, circa 1969 or so, was a lesson in how I was certainly not ever going to amount to much, although I do remember playing around bending light in little precursors to CRTs which was interesting and fun. Physics in college, circa 2005 or so, was mostly watered down and disappointing because by then I'd read some interesting books and the class, frankly, came up a little short...
But if our first class is indicative, I think much is about to change. Physics is more than classes.
Now that I think about it, have I ever experiences time "slowing down?"
Even without thinking about it, I have experienced time slowing down. Actually, when I have really thought about it, I have experienced time as completely stopped. Time as a measurement that "moves forward" then (and now, when I really think about it) seems to be completely a mental construct instilled in us from the first day we are due in school. This is for job preparation and, what a funny phrase, punching the clock!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)