The Merriam-Webster word of the day is a good one as this is what Tiresias must do to connect to Ezekiel as he and Ezekiel are more set in their own ‘modern’ times unlike Takis and Meir who are most ancient – more so than the Greek and Israeli cultures they have adopted. Pretty cool.
The Word of the Day for June 16 is:
efficacious \ef-uh-KAY-shus\ adjective: having the power to produce a desired effect
Examples:
Pam knew that the most efficacious remedy for her cold would be a steaming bowl of her grandmother's famous chicken soup.
"The following plan is efficacious in ridding fields not only of crows but of smaller birds and even domestic fowl: Make an imitation hawk, using a large potato and long turkey feathers.... Suspend it from a tall, bent pole. The wind will lend it realism by agitating it." -- From Jerry Mack Johnson's 2011 book Old-Time Wisdom and Country Lore: 1000s of Skills for Simple Living
Did you know?
"Effective," "efficient," and "effectual" are synonyms of "efficacious," but each of these words has a slightly different connotation. "Efficacious" suggests possession of a special quality or virtue that makes it possible to achieve a result ("a detergent that is efficacious in removing grease"). "Effective" stresses the power to produce or the actual production of a particular effect ("an effective rebuttal"), while "effectual" suggests the accomplishment of a desired result, especially as viewed after the fact ("measures taken to reduce underage drinking have proved effectual"). "Efficient" implies an acting or potential for acting that avoids loss or waste of energy ("an efficient small car").
** **
You realize, of course, that as it is your brain I am doing the picking from, coincidence has little to do with much of anything. The above is perhaps a coincidence that it may be a useful word for today’s writing, but you have read the Bible several times and took two religion classes at Otterbein, one being the general class all students were required to take and the other on the Prophets which you found interesting on your own. And, you also read the Old and New Testaments in modern Catholic and Protestant translations (late sixties) and read them again in the seventies as well as the Koran in the late seventies. And, other ancient religious texts, mainly Indian. So, when things seem to pop up from somewhere in the books and blog, they pop up from you, boy. Post, as a reminder. – Amorella.
Call from the doctor’s office: “test results: work on losing weight and watch your liver – see me in three months.” There you go, boy. Cut out the crap – have powder supplements (you already have) and skim milk for breakfast – not much of a handicap. – Amorella.
I was just thinking that.
Really.
You had a nap. Then read the rest of the new Discover. You thought the most interesting article coming up would be “How Information Became Everything” by James Gleick, but it wasn’t so much that you hadn’t seen before. However, the Questions/Answers on Anton Zeilinger by Eric Powell had a good couple of questions on page 84:
Have any philosophers picked up on the conceptual implications of your research [on quantum mechanics]?
I have a program where I invite philosophers to see what goes on in the lab, because it changes your intuition. A great majority of philosophers are realists, though sometimes naive realists. I often ask them, “Why are you so realistic? If you analyze your fundamental notions you might conclude that these things are more counterintuitive than you think.” Often the answer is, “Yes, but I want to describe reality.” And then I say, “I also want to describe reality, but why are you not satisfied with describing the reality of observations? Why do you want a hidden reality that exists independent of the observation?” And I don’t get satisfactory answers.
What is the most fascinating new scientific question you see looming on the horizon?
To me the most interesting question is how do we get to the next theory? I find it extremely unlikely that quantum mechanics will not be superseded some day by a deeper theory, because why not? So far in the history of physics we have always found something deeper. The deeper thing is usually more counterintuitive than what we had before and takes a while to get used to. Just compare relativity theory [which postulates that time is relative and depends on the observer] to Newtonian space-time. This is part of the motivation for our experiments. We want to peel out in as much detail as possible what the conceptual issues are.
And, a third: . . . Don’t you find the random nature of the quantum world a little disturbing?
Not at all. I find a reality where not everything is predefined much more comforting because it’s an open world. It’s much richer. To me, the most convincing indication of the existence of a world independent of us is the randomness of the individual quantum event. It is something we cannot influence. We have no power over it. There is no way to fully understand it. It just is.
From: Discover, July/August, 2011, page 84, Interview with Anton Zeilinger by Eric Powell.
** **
A glitch just forced you to not save what you had just written and now you don’t know how to replace it. You had said that the last three sentences in the last response was something all humans could relate to because being born into this universe relates just as it does to quantum mechanics.
[Being born] . . . It is something we cannot influence. We have no power over it. There is no way to fully understand it. It just is.
And I replied, “Who is to say being born cannot be compared to a quantum event?”
That’s right. I responded, “It is an absurd question.”
And I also responded, “Who are you, boy, to say it is absurd?”
Indeed, the above is the gist of it. I just find it impossible to think of human beings who are physical having any characteristics in common with a theory that relates to the sub-atomic world in this context.
What about the birth of an idea or concept? Who births it but a consciousness? What about your light and thought comparisons?
I am ready to stop now. My head hurts.
Post then, you do not need me to tell you what to do. – Amorella.
Later, after working in the yard and then splitting a large chicken teriyaki sub at Penn Station for supper you are back to the notebook. I have another question: “What about dying, is dying (at least in the books) a quantum experience?” – Amorella.
This is a really good question. It could be. I don’t think I have thought about this before. Well, I don’t remember if I have – a HeavenOrHellBothOrNeither as a kind of a quantum entanglement embracing heartansoulanminds. Recently you mentioned heart radiation but I don’t know about soul radiation – some element of light that can be put in a quantum perspective. This is interesting.
You said heart radiation reflected on the soul, but sometimes a candle is a symbol of soul light or radiation. There was an artist’s conception of a star being sucked into a black hole on BBC today. Can I do something with that in this context for me to better understand a possible analogy?
Place the NASA rendition below:
A better analogy here would be to think of the soul’s white spin peeling off what will become a human heart rather than the star being sucked in. – Amorella.
I cannot help but think of Ezekiel and a “wheel within a wheel” here.
From BBC, Science, 16 June 2011
** **
Also, there is another rendition that was on BBC Science today in reference to :
"The Spitzer space telescope [photo below] has snapped a striking false-colour image of the RCW 120 nebula, a vast cloud of gas and dust where stars have recently formed.
RCW 120 lies about 4,300 light-years away in the constellation Scorpius, just above the plane of the galaxy.
It emits a broad range of colours in the infrared region, with wavelengths far beyond those we can see.
The ring-shaped emission is believed to originate from the heat of giant "O" type stars at the ring's centre.
These are among the most massive, hottest and bright stars we know of. Infrared light is emitted from the surrounding gas and dust as these stars impart their enormous heat."
This photo above could represent the heartansoulanmind departing from the physical body at complete loss of consciousness combined with physical brainanbody death.
** **
You know what this reminds me of – the image of a three dimensional apple (from above) being dropped into two dimensional space.
That will work too. Post. – Amorella.
Ezekiel had his visions. Amorella and I have the BBC and NASA.
You have no idea, boy. - Amorella.
No comments:
Post a Comment