Get out of my life! But first give me a good trade deal.
It was suggested that Donald Trump should be treated like a two year old toddler whose bad behaviour could be controlled with "twitter time-out" and a naughty corner so that he could be free to howl for forty minutes before being let loose in public or allowed to climb a podium and give a speech. Or, as P.J. O'Rourke suggested in The Daily Beast last week, Like a toddler in a home with a loaded handgun, sooner or later Donald will find the briefcase with the nuclear launch codes. Better set the combination lock code to "411" before he does—he'll never think of that. Donald hates information.
…therefore it must get out of their lives as quickly as possible.
Remember those dreadful teenage years between the age of, say, 12 and 16? Are you hugely relieved that those years are long in the past? Even happier that you were not a teenager in the age of FB, Instagram or Twitter? Comforted that you did not have to forge your fragile, emerging, easily crushed identity in the glare of social media where every mistake, mishap or achievement could be picked to pieces in an on-line forum by your brutal peers facing the same insecurities as you? All I can say is that we few, we happy few, who came of age long before that geeky nerd Zuckerberg penned his first code had it easy in comparison to today's teenagers.
Back in the day it was bad enough knowing that your "Frenemy" received 24 Christmas cards to your three or at that your B.F.F. was the recipient of 15 valentine cards to your, err, none. Today's teenagers, the poor buggers, have to contend with on-line ratings, the number of followers they can muster and how many likes they can squeeze out of a selfie taken in front of a mirror- all year round and not just at Christmas. Today's popular Petronella or the dude Dudley can boast thousands of likes or followers no matter how inane or boring a vlogger they are. So too the modern Trumpesque politician. In the same way that a modern teenager believes their value is dependant on the amount of followers or likes they can garner so too the modern politician in the mould of Mr Donald Trump who is quite convinced that a retweet is sweeter than a democratic vote cast on polling day. It helps of course that twitter allows you to compose short soundbites such as: "I HATE YOU" "YOU'RE SO UNFAIR" "HYPROCRITE" or "GO AWAY AND DIE".
Man, back in the day, how the establishment drove you crazy with their interferring ways and petty rules. It really made you want to show the middle finger to all those irritating figures of authority telling you how to live your life. If only it were possible to sweep them aside with a waft of the hand. You would then be well positioned to mould a new world order and refashion your sovereign, personal space in your own best interests. All outside concerns be damned. You would pull up the draw-bridge, baton down the hatches, build a huge wall around your comfort zone thus preventing any chance of anyone intruding in your personal space where you could be the sovereign, independent master of your very own teenage dump – damp towels, unchanged sheets and chocolate wrappers included.
Not all of you may have felt like that. A lot of us did. Then we grew up. We got married or formed relationships. We had kids. Or our siblings did. Or our friends did. We got jobs. Our world view shifted. We discovered that engaging with the outside world was actually more interesting then being left moribund in our bedroom. That we were more valued when we learned to muck in cheerfully as opposed to fighting every last bent banana until they were curved again. In fact we had more free time to pursue our own interests if we conceded a point now and then rather than venting a spleen over the imposition of straight cucumbers on our sandwiches.
We discovered we enjoyed realities other than those afforded by the four walls of our bedroom or the four corners of an electronic screen. That damp towel lying on the floor grew smelly. The stock of prawn cocktail crisps ran out. Funds to replenish said crisps had to be renegotiated outside of our sovereign bedroom. After a while we began to realise that our Frenemy is just boring, that the vlogger is full of hot air and that your B.F.F. moved on years ago and is now a well regarded member of the establishment. We are still critical of the establishment and do not assume that the figure of authority is always right but we have learned that to engage is the best path to change or getting our own way than to smash the system and hide behind a wall of verbosity, name calling and blaming a fictional "other" for all our discomforts.
In short, what the Brexiteer is asking of you, the undecided voter, is to trust them. They are asking you to vote with your heart and free yourselves from some fictional, imposing empire crushing your soul. In reality, the EU is about as evil an empire as are Kevin the Teenagers parents. Yet, the Brexiteers are asking you to vote with your heart and have the courage to smash the system without telling you how it can be rebuilt. I agree that the undecided voter should vote with their hearts because in their heart of hearts they know that to leave the EU would be the equivalent to being left moribund in an unaired teen-age bedroom with the shutters firmly shut. To Vote Leave would be the equivalent of putting your faith in the likes of Kevin the Teenager who morphes into a bolshy, irrational teenager on the stroke of midnight.
If you truly value your freedom, if you truly value being sovereign within a community and if you believe in engaging with the outside world in order to offer reasoned arguments for reform, if you want to open the shutters wide and find common solutions to common problems then you should vote to Remain on 23 June 2016. In short, if you do not want Great Britain to turn, at the stroke of midnight, into Kevin the Teenager then you should vote to Remain on 23 June 2016.
Previous Previous post: British Bulldog 1,2,3!
Kathleen, well done it kept us laughing for a long time. It can be strongly recomended reading for all bolshy teen agers, We were never like that – of course!


text:
2022 / July 2022
Preparing for crisis management: The contact, direction, and distance approach for communication
– Dr. Deepti Ganapathy, Centre for Management Communication, IIMB
The role of communication as a strategic function is incomparable, especially during a crisis. Here's how carefully planned channels of communication serve as the conduit between the aggrieved and leadership teams for quick and fast relief and redressal of grievances
Golf is a game of contact, direction and distance. Lets call this CDD approach. Here, we look at how this CDD approach can help leadership teams identify routes that can be used as fast track channels when there is a criss
To illustrate how communication strategies need to change, let me cite the example of a golf club in a city with a population of 10 million. The club started with a small membership in a laid-back city. However, rapid growth and a boom in one of the sectors saw the membership growing. Slowly, with a membership of 4500, a total disconnect began between members and the club's managing committee. Hence an initiative was taken—Golf with the President. Members were invited to express their interest in this once-in-a-month event. This is like what a few organisations have adopted—Lunch with the CEO and other initiatives to ensure that the leadership team is in close contact with the ever-growing and expanding workforce.
In my last article, I emphasised the role played by government communication in times of crisis and reflected on how world leaders can set examples for business organisations to follow when faced with a crisis. The role of communication as a strategic function is viewed as a serious exercise by senior leadership. Organisations headed by leaders who value and commit to being active enablers in this process perform with ease and can face a crisis confidently.
Through this tri-series thought leadership article, we will identify how carefully planned channels of communication serve as the conduit between the aggrieved and leadership teams for quick and fast relief and redressal of grievances.
Golf is a game of contact, direction, and distance. Let's call this the CDD approach. Here, we look at how this CDD approach can help leadership teams identify routes that can be used as fast track channels when there is a crisis.
Before we do that, we must have tried and used the route/approach consistently, so that we know for certain that our audience will be present and involved whenever there is a communication going out in that route.
For any communication to reach the target audience, one must ponder upon this aspect of contact. How do you establish contact? How far do you see your communication go? Will you be able to perfectly connect with your audience and hit the right chords? In golf, cricket, tennis, and football, solid contact with the ball is key to determining the direction and distance traversed. It is quantifiable. Hence you will see sportspersons training with the right equipment that can help them gauge this contact—be it swing analysers fitted with sensors that figure out your precise swing speed, smash factor, and so on. However, in this age of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), big data can be lost if not translated and interpreted for individual/organisation needs.
A few indicators for establishing contact are: What is the flow of communication in the organisation? Is it hierarchical, or is it lateral? Have these been tried and tested? Has the effort been measured?
Once solid contact has been established, the communication can fly in any direction. The position, stance and disciplined approach of the sender of the communication often determine the direction he/she chooses. The direction is largely influenced by (in the case of the sport) wind conditions, trajectory, local rules, and a constant lookout for obstacles. Similarly, in a workplace, there can be innumerable barriers, and therefore, a one-size-fits-all approach doesn't work.
Distance is determined by how much of contact you want to give (to the message) and in which direction. If one can apply the mathematical formulae of measuring distance (speed multiplied by time), the timing of the contact also determines the speed with which the communication can take off.
Having understood that communication pans out through the CDD technique, let's juxtapose this to a crisis and see how this works.
A typhoon has hit a manufacturing facility of a company that plans to launch a booster dose of an infectious disease. The company is listed and has been touting that this booster dose is the only remedy for an epidemic that has besieged a region. When this news hits the world, the stocks of the company plummet. Internally, its employees are uncertain of how they will report for work to meet tight deadlines. How should the company go about handling this crisis?
Contact – The leadership team should hit the ground running. They should identify the right stakeholders, decide what information is crucial for each stakeholder group and start relentlessly bombarding with information. All the while, keeping a keen watch for feedback to facilitate two-way communication. Observe how the message is being understood by the receivers.
Direction – The organisation should aim for a downward communication flow, making the communication sound credible, authentic, honest and not authoritative.
Distance – The initial contact and direction create a trajectory that sets the shortest distance to reach the farthest stakeholder while traversing the nearest and closest stakeholder in the chain of events as they unfold. The distance should also factor in the not so obvious audience that matters in the larger scheme of things.
Source: Forbes India

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Essay outside of the NMT (No-Me Teaching) series 19 a
Quantum Reality – Time 5 – metaphysical B:
Further comparing Tensed vs. Tenseless theories of Time, we recall that the (B–series) offers only a non-temporal relation of Precedence between 2 events such as: "E precedes F". This does not change with Time for the (B–series). That contrasts with the (A–series) of "Past, Present, Future" where "E" or "F" does change with Time since the Future becomes the Present, & the Present becomes the Past. This (majority view) choice of an (A–series) can be further divided into 3 alternatives referred to as Presentism, & a Growing Block Universe.
Both of the (A–series) sub-categories just mentioned include an objective Present, but Presentism specifically assumes that only Present objects exist. The Growing Block Universe assumes both Present & Past objects exist, but no Future objects yet exist. So to the singular Present of Presentism the Growing Block Universe adds a real Past (which increases as a "growing" block), though neither accepts a reality for the not-yet occurring Future.
So while there is no objective Present in the (B-theory), there is a "friendlier" general attitude toward the Future. The (B-theory) in turn has it's own (not exactly contrasting or separate) over-lapping subdivisions of Eternalism [which confusingly preceded the above (A-theory) "growing" block in being also called the Block Universe but just not "growing"] & an also closely related 4–Dimensionalism. Without putting too fine a point on it, the essentially identical terms (B-theory) terms Eternalism & Block Universe, precede, but then were later confirmed by the 4–Dimensionalism of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (SR). [McTaggart & Einstein published at similar times, but the former was not yet familiar with the later.] Einstein's SR depicts a "static" 4-D Space-Time. Here, the Future, designated relative to a specified Observer, claims the same ontological status as some distant point in Space.
Eternalism (just prior to SR) was a philosophical approach to the ontological nature of Time. Eternalism took the view that all points in Time as equally "real", as opposed to the Presentist idea that only the Present is real. Philosophy's Eternalism or the equivalent 4–Dimensionalism of Relativity Physics means that Time is just another dimension. Future events are "already there", & that there is no objective flow of Time. It was sometimes referred to as the "Block Time" or "Block Universe" theory, due to its description of Space-Time as an unchanging 4-D "block", as opposed to the view of the world as a 3-D Space "modulated" by a "passage" of Time. [But again, this differs from the later-named "Growing Block Universe" of the (A-theory) that is not Presentism.]
Reviewing again that (A-theory) Presentism, we note again that there are only the events & entities in the Present, along with some timeless objects or ideas like numbers & Mathematical sets. These latter additions are also taken to occur & exist in the Present. Furthermore, for Presentism, the so-called events & entities that are wholly Past or wholly Future do not exist at all.
The (A-theory) Presentism contrasts with the (A-theory) Growing Block Universe & also contrast with the (B-theory) Block Universe, more usually called Eternalism, or more clearly called 4–Dimensionalism. Cutting across both (A-theory) & (B-theory) we see that Growing Block Universe & Eternalism, respectively are the Metaphysical theories that extends to Future events. Referring back to the early centuries A.D., we saw that Augustine spoke of the Present "knife edge" between Past & Future which itself could not not contain any "extended" period of Time. Injecting that concept into pure Presentism (without a "growing" Block of the Past) would dissolve Time as essentiall un-real, according to the even more ancient doctrine of the "3-Times" described earlier.
But the "Father of Psychology" William James argued that conscious experience is naturally extended in Time, in that there is "the short duration of which we are immediately & incessantly sensible". With his own earlier form of Presentism, James further concurred that: "everything Past is unreal, everything Future is unreal, everything imagined, absent, or mental is unreal. Ultimately real is only the Present moment of physical "efficiency" which we would now call "efficacy". The latter refers to the ability to participate on as a "cause" in Causation, Cause & Effect.
or with Caps-sensitive:
http://sdrv.ms.YPOgkX/
Duplicates have been available on:
[But from now on, they will be different & still usually daily.]
"There is no Creation, no Destruction, no Bondage, no longing to be freed from Bondage, no striving for Liberation, nor anyone who has attained Liberation. Know that this to be Ultimate Truth." – the "no creation" school of Gaudapada, Shankara, Ramana, Nome – Ajata Vada
Essay outside of the NMT (No-Me Teaching) series 18
Quantum Reality 3 (cont) – Time 4 – physics B – metaphysical A:
The previous discussion of Linguistic Tense (which also continues) compares to Metaphysical Tense in McTaggart's A-series (mentioned below). More closely allied to his B-series are more relative than absolute references to Time. Expressions in the vein of the more relative expressions include "earlier than", "extended", "punctual", :coinciding with", occuring wholly within", "partially overlapping with". In this B-series there is no strict marker indicating the Present moment, but a range of Time may include the Present moment if it is currently ongoing.
To say someone "dances" [present perfect] is to locate an ongoing event in a Time period that includes the Present. To say someone danced [simple past] is to locate an event in the Past as completed. Both statements concern the Past but the former describes an event in terms of its temporal constituency: habitual, continuous, ongoing, progressive or non-progressive, having or lacking continued relevance to Present moment. In this way such "perfect" Tenses are combinations of Tense & Aspect which relates the even to some other (unstated) reference point. To say "will have been dancing" [future perfect] locates an ongoing Future event earlier than some additional reference point. To say "has been dancing" [pluperfect] locates an even in the Past, earlier than an additional reference point.
When the Aspect is concerned with internal temporal constituency (A-series) of events & also the temporal relational network (B-series) in which events & times stand to each other, then unlike Tense the expression is non-deictic. When the internal temporal constituency of event, or relation it stands in to other events & times, is independent of its Time & Tense relation (B-series) to a Present moment, then the elements of Aspect combined with elements of Tense produce an overall deictic result even though the Aspect is non-deictic. [enough of all that bewildering babble]
Now besides Grammatical Tense, there are diverse other ways of locating events in Time if different languages. Time location can be indicated with tone, adjectives, nouns with verb endings, & even hand position in some concept-based sign languages, such as British.
There are various parts of speech that express Time & temporal location, including Adjectives like past, present, future, but also: brand-new, old, fledgling, mint [condition], experimental, modern, latter-day, up-to-date, topical, traditional, ancient, bygone, obsolete, elapsed, brief, outgoing, punctual, eventual, venerable. Then there are Nouns like: date, hour, millennium, epoch, morning, day, week, year, season, etc. Some such Nouns are proper names like: January , Thursday , etc., or general notions like: tenure, period, interim, lull, interlude, adjournment, perpetuity, delay, aftermath, successor, occasion, relic, fossil. Then there are Prepositions like: during, throughout, until, up to, before, after, since; & Conjunctions like: when, whenever, while; & other items that function as Prepositions like: until, before, after, since. There are parts of words, or affixes that express Time relationships through Prefixes like: ante-, proto-, pre-, post-, ex-, fore-, re-(as in re-build), neo-, palaeo-; & also causative suffixes, such as -en (as in frighten) & -ify (as in beautify).
There are also tenseless languages like various Southeast Asian languages including Chinese. This means that in such languages the expression of the temporal relation between the event & speech act is not grammaticalized. But as we have seen, this means of referring to the temporal location of an event is but a small subset of the ways in which a grammatical Tense can be deictic, that is: involving implicit reference to the moment of utterance. Tenses can be imprecise & insensitive to degrees of pastness & futurity. Other linguistic resources, in both deictic & non-deictic terms, can provide information about the temporal contours of events & relations between them.
So much for a sketch of Grammatical Tense & its alternatives. All that must be separated from the other issue of Metaphysical Tense which concerns Quantum Reality & the Philosophy of Science in general.
Metaphysical Tense deals with temporal reality as location in the Past, Present, or Future. A simple date like "Sep 11, 2001" doesn't pick out Tense, it doesn't specify where "we are" temporally, in the scenario. A term like "ago" picks out Tense, referring to the Past, in a manner of "non-relational" tenses, giving properties of Pastness, Presentness, & Futurity in a less explicit way.
One key Metaphysical question surrounding these issues is regards strict Scientific Realism: "Had humans (or observers of any kind) never evolved, would threw have been an objectively Present moment, & absolute distinction between Past, Present, & Future? The Yes or No answer to that question is one way to distinguish 2 major points of view regarding Tense & Time.
Those who think Tenses are real think there would have been such a distinction, even in the absence of any perceivers to designate events as Past, Present, or Future.
Those who think Tenses are not real think that temporal reality is constituted merely by the network of temporal relations in which events & times stand to each other, with no Time being marked out as an ontologically privileged Present moment (meaning it has special status). In other words, no distinction between Past, Present, & Future is characteristic of Time; no distinction is so projected onto Time, from our perspective.
The (A-theorist) holding to an Observer-Independent distinction between Past, Present, & Future see Time flowing inexorably with respect Present moment distinction. The ontological privilege of being the objective Present moment continually passes from one moment to next. In this sense the A-series is dynamic.
Philosopher, John M. E. McTaggart's 2-part ordering of positions in Time: into an (A-series) [with tenses & meta-time] is a Metaphysical rather than grammatical Tense distinction. Times are thereby ordered in regard to relative positions in Past, Present, & Future. The (A-series) of positions run from distant Past, through ever-less-distant Pastness, to Present, to proximate (near) Future, & on through to ever-more-remote Future, a Continuum with a distinct, though ever-shifting Present zero-point Origin in its 1-D Space.
In contrast, McTaggart's (B-series)is less ordered, with Moments distinguished only into relative positions to each other, in a series from earlier to later. The (B-theorists) hold to no objective distinction between Past, Present, Future. For them there is no objective flow of Time. The ordinary distinction we draw between Past, Present, & Future is explained as as a Projection (what philosopher Immanuel Kant called it) with which we perceive reality from an mind–imposed temporal perspective, by which we locate events in our Past, Present, & Future. They would say we wrongly project that perspective on Time itself, mistakenly concluding that events are Past, Present, or Future, independent of our knowledge or existence. For (B-theorists) there is no associated temporal flow, no ontological privilege bestowed upon a Present moment, no such "privilege" as passes from one moment to the next for the (A-series).
The (B-theorists) admit no genuine A-properties in the World, such as: being Past, being Present, being Future, & of finer gradations between them. They do hold to the existence of analogous properties in the World that would be reducible to, analyzable in terms of B-relations such as: being earlier than , being simultaneous with, being later than. It just doesn't work that way for the (B-theorists).
For the (A-theorists) times & events are constantly change with respect to those A-properties they possess, their futurity, which they shed to acquire Presentness, which is instantly shed to acquire Pastness. This acquiring & shedding of A-properties is, for (A-theorists), the passage of Time.
For the (B-theorists), there are no A-properties in the World. Their B-series consists only of temporal relations of Precedence, Succession, & Simultaneity.
In one modified (B-series), a "present moment" is added to the pattern of events to capture some of what the A-theory thinks Time is like. But for the (A-theorist), the (B-series) lacks their essential feature of time, the true distinction between Past, Present, & Future, so it would add this feature to the B-series to generate an A-series. Thus different kinds of linguistic expression for locating events in Time (as reviewed previously for Grammatical – Linguistic Tense) can also be used to represent Time as conceived Metaphysically by the A-theory & the B-theory, given the proper additions or subtractions.
There is thus a correlation between different kinds of linguistic expression on the one hand, & the different Metaphysical views of the nature of Time on the other hand. But this correlation cannot resolve the Metaphysical debate about the nature of Time. We previously noted that some linguistic
Expressions of temporal location were deictic – that is with reference point in Time that is dependent on context in which the expression is used. If we pick out & refer to some feature of context of utterance, [here, you, I, me, over there, that one, the next one], such can be deictic in Grammatical Tense. Such context locates the temporal event that a sentence is about. It is labeled with some time relative to the time of utterance. Thus the meaning of grammatically tensed sentences is dependent on the temporal context in which they are uttered. Those previously mentioned lexical items like now, today, yesterday, & tomorrow locate the event at a particular Time in an A-series. The infinite number of additional lexically composite expressions in an (A-series) further diversify a "tensed sentence" that is grammatically tensed.
In some sentences, however, there can be non-deictic expressions for locating events in Time, such as: after dinner, moments before, at the start of, or any kind of date. Those non-deictic expressions convey no information about (A-series) locations. But a combination of non-deictic expression with deictic expression does amount to a net deictic expression with information regarding the (A-series) location of event.
In isolation however, the deictic quality correlate with the (A-series), whereas the non-deictic correlates with the (B-series). But again, any series of temporal positions in continual transformation, imply temporal perspective of the person uttering, & thus constitutes an (A-series) ordering of events. Contrariwise, ordering a series of temporal positions by way of 2-term relations that are asymmetric, irreflexive, & transitive, such as: "comes before" (precedes) & "comes after" (follows) accords with the (B-series) of Time.
Essay outside of the NMT (No-Me Teaching) series 17 b
Quantum Reality (cont) – Time 3 – physics A - Science:
Continuing at first our previous "common-sensical" notions about Time, we note that in our every sense of it, Time "marches on" out of our control. Time "flows" & "goes by" [ as Sam played it again in "Casblanca"]. Even in Science & Philosophy, Time is put "before" the Big-Bang as potentially existent & "ready to go", even put beyond God who is placed in Time that contains Him [like Cronos on Mt. Olypmus was given primacy & seniority, as the father of Zeus – but that common reference is not really fair because Chronos (different spelling) was Time, not Cronos].
The predictable trajectory of moving objects described by Classical Mechanics reinforces that impressions. For such simple systems, we can "predict the Future" when given initial Velocity vector & applied Force & resulting applicable Acceleration (such as, of Gravity). Physics frequently sets Time as the abscissa or horizontal Coordinate on graphs, especially since it cn be considered an extensive "independent" Coordinate [2 criteria, preferred for though neither absolutely essential for, the horizontal Coordinate].
Furthermore, Thermodynamics (though not the microscopic irreversibility of Statistical Mechanics) bestows upon Time an "arrow" – a direction from Past on into the Future. Drop Humptey Dumptey, or any other egg, & the process will not go backwards so as to decrease rather than increase Entropy. [Science admits other "arrows" for Time, but this one for eggs, human bodies, anything, is the simplest & most "straightforward" (excuse the pun)]. Depicting 2 states of a system, we can often recognize which "came first" simply by ordering lesser to greater Entropy of disorder.
So flew the "arrow of Time" in Newton's Absolute Space & Time [both are really "there" even when nothing else is around] until that "apple-cart" (again excuse the pun) was overturned by Einstein's Special Relativity (SR) Space-Time continuum. In the provably truer model of SR, Space itself was replaced by the distances between objects [relative to the observer(s)] & Time was replaced by the durations between events. In other words, there really was no "Nothing", Void between objects & events [in agreement with the Eleatic Philosophers], just the "naked measurements".
Time in SR (like Space) could be stretched-out (dilated) or compressed in the comparison between the experience of 2 Observers with large Velocities relative to the observed event. Even the "arrow of Time" could seem to be reversed for high Velocities (& high Acceleration in General Relativity (GR) [all subject to party-pooping disclaimers about the transfer of efficacious Information].
Backing up to the moment of the Big Bang & at the Event Horizon of every Black Hole [they have been verified for a long time now] Time of course "stands still" (like in an X-men movie).
Our mundane sense & measurement of Time is often determined by uniformly repetitive motion such as in: atomic transitions, the Sun, the Moon, a pendulum, a spring ratchet, an electro-magnetic field, sand or water through an hour-glass, & so on. On the larger scale we use observed evidence to mark points in historical time. Some evergreens date back 6 millennia. Ice cores in Greenland set dates of a hundred millennia. Ice cores in Anartical set dates of a almost a ½ Million years, certain sediments to almost a Million. Certain Tidal information sets dates of a ½ Billion years.
Radioactive nuclides (isomers of various elements) can extend the clock in ½–life increments of ¾ of a Billion years with 235U, & in 1 ¼ Billion year increments with 40K. The more slowly decaying 238U increments are 4 ½ Billion, while those of 176Lu are 36 Billion, those of 187Re are 43 Billion, & while those of 87Rb are almost 50 Billion.
The last practical "clock" 147Sm, offers up increments of a 100 Billion years. Of course "just" 4 ½ Billion takes us through the Age of the Earth while 14 Billion takes us back past the Big Bang. But even this limited variety of Time-measuring tools allows for multiply redundant confirmation of Geological Time estimates.
SR relative–Velocity red-shifts in the frequency (~ color) of astronomical Light, GR relative–Acceleration red-shifts, & more importantly, Inflation & other expansion red-shifts measure Space-Time intervals that combine spatial distance with temporal measurements of Time. "Standard Candle" measurements come into play at these scales also. From the Pit (black hole) to the Pendulum, through red-shifts (& blue), Big Bang, Inflation–Expansion & all that we sketch a few details at a later point [including a review of the famous 1st 3 minutes]. But next we brave the mind-numbing perils of Philosophy to compare to our prior Grammatical/Linguistic Tense & Time to that of Metaphysics.
Quantum Reality 3 (cont) – Time 2 – casual [not causal]:
Quantum Reality diverted to the topic of Time (our sense of flowing Consciousness; later for Space – fundamental analogy for Existence), & we started with Grammatical of Linguistic Time as Tense (which will continue a bit later as Metaphysical Time & Tense), & we will soon follow with the Science of Time. But for the moment, we lighten up with some casual, common-sensical ideas about Time.
We readily use hearing to measure Time as beat & sequence of sounds. Visually marking a series of positions for a "moving" object measures our Time as movement, from everyday objects to the movement of the Sun & Moon to measure Clock & Calendar Time. But in the short term, even if all our senses were prevented from functioning for a while, we could still notice the passing of Time through the changing pattern of our thoughts. But what is the "Perception" of Time ? We do not actually perceive Time as such, but rather only indirectly infer Time from the changes or events we consider to be strung out in Time. And yet again, we do not perceive events only, but also their temporal relations, analogous to the spatial distances & relations between objects in Space (again a topic for another day).
In fact as we measure the Time between positions along the length of a perceived object we thus estimate that length in terms of the Time of our scan. In this way, our visual sense creates 1-D Space from the Time of the visual scan. The same in a perpendicular directions widens the 1-D length (with the help of similar width) to 2-D area. Repeating the same again in a 3rd mutually perpendicular direction adds depth & thickens our 2-D area to 3-D volume & thus 3-D Space. Tactile senses roughen up & ultimately fill out that visually perceived 3-D with a sense of substance. Thus we use the sense of Time to project the sense of Space with the Senses.
But when we turn the Senses at Time & seem to perceive one event following another, what we actually perceive is each Moment as the Present Moment in its own Time. We then mentally apply Memory & Anticipation to stretch out the infinitesimal Present into Past-Present-Future Time. But what we actually perceive, we perceive as Present – as what is going on right Now.
But can we perceive a relation between 2 events without also perceiving the events themselves ? No we cannot, but we perceive both events as Present, in which case we must perceive them as simultaneous, & so not as successive after all. There is thus paradox in the notion of perceiving an event as occurring after another. When we perceive B as coming after A, we have, surely, ceased to perceive A. In that case, A is merely an item in our memory. Now if we wanted to construe "perception" narrowly, excluding any element of memory, then we would have to say that we do not, after all, perceive B as following A.
If we were to construe "perception" more broadly, we would need to include a wide range of experiences of Time that essentially involve the Senses in a wide manner of perceiving a variety of temporal aspects of the World. In the late '70's, Ernst Pöppel enumerated "elementary time experiences" like: (i) duration, non-simultaneity, order, past & present, change, & the passage of Time. Non-simultaneity, for instance, is the same as the experience of Time Order when 2 events occur very close together in Time. We can be aware that they occur at different times without being able to say which one came first. The perception of Order depends on the distinction between Past & Present. In a subsequent segment we continue to contrast the experience of Tense (discussed previously in linguistic terms) & this experience of order (McTaggart's A-series versus B-series).
Like the "meditation on the 3 Times" (found both in Vedanta & Augustine of Hippo) Memory is an essential mental construct in the (either or) any Time series. All taking up that contemplation recognize that Past & Future exist only in the Mind.
One alternative remedy to compare with the role of Memory is the "specious Present" of William James, "the prototype of all conceived times" which is "the short duration of which we are immediately & incessantly sensible." In that conjecture, James psychologically quantized Subjective Time, stipulating some temporal "width" for the Present moment. "We are constantly aware of a certain duration – the specious present varying from a few seconds to probably not more than a minute, & this duration (with its content perceived as having one part earlier & another part later) is the original intuition of Time" – such was the insight of William James.
Quantum Reality 3 – Time 1 – linguistic::
Time is discussed in terms of grammatical Tense, & in terms of Metaphysical Tense. With grammatical Tense, such as seen in verb vowels & endings & auxiliary words (sank, sink, will have sunk; did, have done, am doing, do, will have done, will do), we also consider a somewhat overlapping category of Linguistic Tense, where Tense appears in modifications of verb form, adverbs, adjectives, & nouns.
Tense as modifications of verb form includes simple tenses: Past, Present, Future & "Perfect" Tenses: Pluperfect, Present Perfect, Future Perfect.
Aside from Tense, grammar includes Mood (or Modality, either way expressing a degree of necessity, obligation, probability, ability, & sometimes evidentiality) such as Indicative, Subjunctive, Conditional, Optative, Imperative, Jussive, Potential, Inferential, Interrogative, & related Exclamatory Interjection. Some consider the Future Tense to be merely a variant of Mood, due to uncertainty surrounding an occurrence that has not yet come to pass (as in comparing "will" with "would").
The auxiliary verbs will (+ the present tense) with the simple infinitive as in: I will go to compares to combinations of verbs such as: to be going to, to be about to & also modal auxiliary (subjunctive) verbs: must, should, can, may, might which elements of uncertainty.
Linguistic Tense includes "lexical" items like: now , today , yesterday, presently. There are also "lexically composite" expressions such as: moments before, after dinner, 3 weeks hence, during, ago. These lexical & lexically composite expressions include grammatical categories of both Tense & Aspect. This Aspect provides context to extend the range of Tense & / or to add specificity.
Linguistic Tense is a grammaticalised expression of location in Time that is comparatively insensitive, whereas lexically composite expressions can locate in Time with a higher precision, using words like: after & ago. Simple Verbal Tense is unable to locate events in Time with as much specificity, being unable to distinguish degrees of remoteness in the Past or Future. Tense is relatively limited for locating events in Time, compared to other linguistic expressions. There are inherent constraints on the range of expressions of location in Time that can be grammaticalized. Some constraints in grammatical Tense are tied to the notion of a deictic center reference point relative to which events are located in Time. Typically, events are located in Time relative to the moment of speech which often serves as a temporal reference point.
Many lexical & lexically composite expressions for locating events in time are also deictic [specifying identity/spatial/temporal location from the perspective of participants in speech or writing, in a context or external situation or surrounding discourse, as in: we, you, here, there, now, then, this, that, the former, the latter]. The same holds for 1 wk ago , 3 min hence, yesterday, today, [or not] & also 1 hr after the start of the session, at noon, during the ceremony, …).
Only Tense is constrained in this way since Tense locates the time of an event relative to time of utterance. In these & other issues of "context", Aspect (of which some 40–odd types are describe) is a feature of language concerned with "internal temporal constituency of situation".
[Pretty heavy going, for such is the lay of the land. But its sometimes good to see what we're up against. We speak casually about Time, but it's all not so easy if you want to be careful & precise. (too be continued)]
Quantum Reality 2:
Classical Physics aspired to be strongly objective, assuming that it could be interpreted as a description of mind-independent reality. But right from the start, when Galileo began to quantify "speed" in simple terms like (∆x/∆t), Western Science took a big step out of a Sense–Perceived World onto a page of Mathematical formulas. Instead of mind-independent reality, the focus, all the way through SR [special relativity], GR [general relativity], QM [quantum mechanics], QFT [quantum field theory], QED [quantum electro-dynamics], QG [quantum gravity] & String Theory shifted to a mind-created reality of Mathematical models. But only Quantum Mechanics, especially in the standard Copenhagen II Convention admitted explicitly to Consciousness-created Quantum Reality. Even so Quantum Mechanics claimed to be weakly objective in that "real" phenomena (if not real entities) were inter-subjectively valid, (shared experiences of many observers), but still referred to operations of the Mind that participated in an observed phenomenon or measurement. Delayed-Choice Double Slit, Quantum Erasure, & various Bell's Theorem – related experiments may occupy us another day, but suffice it to say for now, that such as these contradict any strongly objective descriptor for Quantum Mechanics.
What Quantum Mechanics did retain was the "Gold Standard" of Science Models, the ability to Predict previously unobserved or unmeasured phenomena. But conventional Scientific Realism remained denied by Quantum Mechanics, so that Hidden-Variable, Many-Worlds, Decoherence, & many other Realist alternative formulations have been adhered to now by a majority of leading Physicists – though not justifiably so. These Realists cling with strong Metaphysical bias for Realism that smacks of pseudo-religious fervor. Similarly, the Multi-Verse is fantastically held up as denial of any Strong Anthropic Principle explanation of the extreme Fine Tuning of our Universe. These Realist movements ceased being Science & have long become ideological, pseudo-political, pseudo-religious, metaphysical bastions of intolerance of any alternatives or opposition. Ad hominem put-downs of nay-sayers, non-funding, non-tenuring, non-hiring freeze-outs coral even Instrumenalist Anti-Realism, not to mention Quantum Idealism into the same academic prison-camp reserved for Young-Earth Creationists, Astrologists, Para-Psychologists, & so on.
The Scientific Realist swears to the objective reality of a RWOT real-world-out-there & even their invisible invented– entities like Electrons, Quarks, Strings, Branes, & so on. The Quantum Idealist, for one, established that such a Realist proposition is unprovable. At the same time all admit that the fact that a proposition can not be proven is not a proof that it is wrong.
Lines of force, action at a distance, various fields, & even "inertia" can neither be directly experienced or proven. More significantly, alternate interpretations always remain unexamined, even for Quantum Mechanics where dozens of interpretations have already been studied. Science, as we know it, amounts to (mathematically synthesized) relations between observed phenomena. Predictive & Prescriptive principles, of themselves, are not strictly objective.
In fact, Immanuel Kant, a defender of Realism in the end, still found "Time & Space" to be mental constructions that we project onto an otherwise real World. Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas & medieval Western Philosophers echoed, neo-Platonists, Plato, & the Eleatic Philosophers (Parmenides, Zeno, Melissus) in questioning the Reality of Time, as we conceive it. While "time" for instance, is a side-issue in Quantum Reality, we will divert to that discussion, in brief, if only because it is so accessible. Cause & Effect, Perception, & similar issues previously introduced here will also see the light of day before we finish with Quantum Reality.
For the moment we end for now with a quick review of the "3 Times" principle found throughout Eastern Philosophy for millennia & echoed again in the above mentioned Eleatic Philosophers, Plato, neo-Platonists, medieval philosophers, Kant, McTaggart, etc. What amounts to a Presentism (& beyond) goes as follows.
In the simplest Time Line with an infinitesimal Zero-Point Origin at "Now", the entire ray to the negative left-side of this 1-D space of Time is the Past which is gone forever & no longer has any reality. The entire ray to the positive right-side of this 1-D space of Time is the Future which has not yet come to be does not yet possess any reality. The so-called Present is an ever shrinking, thin slice between an unreal Past & an unreal Future. We can imagine this supposed slice of Present time to be vanishing to an infinitesimally short duration, bracketing & then merely consisting of the infinitesimal Zero-Point Origin of "Now", & then it's gone. Even one Planck Quantum of Time, ~ ½ x 10–43 sec, back into the Past is that which is gone forever. Even one Planck Quantum of Time forward into the Future is that which has not yet come to be. The Present vanishes as what Augustine called a "knife-edge", while some Eastern Philosophers referred to it as one version of a "razor's edge." It's gone, all with the Past, the Future, & Time itself. Non-Dual Absolute Reality is Timeless.
Consilience of Inductions
"Consilience of Inductions" was a quaint term coined by William Whewell in his 1840 Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences. Newton's term vera causa "true cause" supposedly lies at the center of the very best kinds of scientific theories. Some, the Empiricists held that a true cause is something that we ourselves experience directly. We know for instance that a force [Gravity] is pulling the Moon toward the Earth, because we have had direct experience of the tug of a string [tension] as we are whirling it around with a weight tied to its end. But Whewell was a Rationalist who characterized a true cause as something that is adequate to explain the empirical facts. Such a cause has tot be at the center of a scientific explanation, explaining all of the facts & in turn being explained by them. If such a cause can predict & explain new & unexpected facts, then so much the better. Such a fanlike construction, with the Cause at the apex, was a "Consilience of Inductions". Occam's Razor, that it be as simple as it is possible for a theory to be, suggests that a "true cause" is also marked by being the most economical of explanatory forces, with many parts being reduced to one fundamental mechanism.
The gravitational attraction within Newtonian mechanics, the wave theory of Light from Christiaan Huygens & Thomas Young's explained the Double-Slit experiment while Light Particles could not. Whewell's arguments impressed the young Charles Darwin, whose vera causa became Natural Selection. For Geologists, it became Plate Tectonics.
Secular Humanists hope for a "Consilience of Inductions" combining Human Cooperation with Environmentalism. True Non-Duality, underlying all that is positive, is the only Ultimate.
"Quantum Reality" refers to interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, in terms of what it has to say about our understanding of the World. One major bone of contention between competing interpretations concerns the issue of Quantum Mechanics being deterministic or not. Other issues include the objective "reality" of entities described by Quantum Mechanics. Many settle for the outstanding experimental success of the mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics without regard for the physical meaning of the mathematical entities in the theory.
One such entity is the "wavefunction" & matrix representations of the same.
Schrödinger associated the wavefunction with the Electron as a an electric Charge Density, a physical field spread out over infinite Space [though very thinly outside the conventional "size" of the Electron.
On the other hand, Max Born interpreted the same wavefunction as a Probability Distribution (more specifically – complex, in the Math function sense, Probability Amplitude whose mathematically real squared absolute value renders Probability).
Adding the now-so-controversial Wigner-Neumann Consciousness-created Quantum Reality to Born's Probability interpretation, the long-time, nearly unanimous "Copenhagen" (home of Quantum Mechanics committee chairman Neils Bohr) interpretation initially "competed" with some initially-unpopular Realist versions by David Bohm & Louis de Broglie, & others that followed in that vein. Also increasing have ever been the Instrumentalist positions that ignored all explanation & the accepted abstract mathematical structure of Hilbert spaces & Quantum Mechanical operators.
The culture of Science veered away from the Copenhagen Quantum Idealism in parallel with 2 inspirations to do so, One was the Analytical Philosophy that succeeded Logical Positivism (which had some idealist roots), with the former dedicated to annihilate the reigning Idealism of the previous century. The other was a aversion to fundamentalist religion & a dominant "sophistication" of Atheism among Scientist (to a degree contrasting with prior generations, including the Copenhagen group). Atheist Pragmatist Philosophy's dominance in higher education was instrumental in this shift.
[Steve Martin's 2nd comedy album included a skit were he dies & is shocked to find himself at some Last Judgment before the Pearly Gates. He complains: "but in college they said all this was bullshit."]
Grasping for any Realist alternative, over the same decades up through many Modal wing-clipped theories of Quantum Mechanics, decades in which Darwinism fought "Armageddon" with Creationism, one fantastic Realist alternative that gained majority standing was Hugh Everett's Many-Worlds interpretation, considered now by Max Tegmark & Michio Kaku to be 1 of 4 "levels of Multi-Verse".
Recognition of Anthropic Fine Tuning of the Universe & studies of Quantum Entanglement & Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser Double-Slit experiments have themselves exerted 2 opposing influences. On the one hand, they have hardened minority Quantum Idealist positions such as the Wheeler–Stapp Participatory-type Universes. At the same time those advances & others in Particle theory & Big-Bang Fundamental Forces issues have encouraged majority Realisms that are increasingly "unrealistic". The latter include String Theory, the Multi-Verse & also other complex Mathematical sleight-of-hand like Quantum Decoherence, Ensemble, Relational, Transactional, & Stochastic approaches, as well as Computational or Hologramic Universes (not that similar to David Bohm's earlier Holoverse Realism). Objective collapse theories attempt to "split the difference" by upholding Realism while including Idealist–like indeterminism without hidden-variables.
Somehow, nearly everyone honors the original Mathematical formalism but then scatter into a Tower of Babel chaos of a hundred different theories of interpretation. Advaita Vedantins find the original Copenhagen Consciousness-created Reality most interesting while understandably remaining disappointed in the limited objective understanding of "consciousness" & the at-least-Idealist RWOT retained. Not driven to the far hills by desperate Atheism, any more than to the 4 levels of Multi-Verse "antidote" to Anthropic fine Tuning, the Vedantins applaud Schrodinger, Bohr, Heisenberg, Dirac, Born, Wigner, von Neumann, Feynman & Wheeler (including both Idealists & Realists in that mix), yet maintain that all is Consciousness & the World is unreal.
Janaka & Ashtavakra:
A wandering Sage Ashtavakra, appearing as a vagrant had been abused by some citizens of the kingdom. The aged traveler was rescued when the king, Janaka extended his hospitality & protection. Later on, Janaka questioned the Sage about how "suddenly" could "sudden Enlightenment" possibly occur? In response, Ashtavakra declared that Enlightenment can happen in less time than it takes, having put one foot in the stirrup, to swing over the other leg & place the other foot in the 2nd stirrup. A bit dubious, the King continued by asking for Liberating Teaching that could result in such Enlightenment. Janaka in turn is questioned by Ashtavakra: "What customary offering will you give over that is worthy of this gift of Liberating Instruction?" Such a gift was traditional since renunciation of the Ego would include rather than exclude lesser renunciations, such as the giving over of some valuable treasure by an aspirant capable of such a gift. Enlightenment takes every drop of our Energy, not a bit less, but not a bit more. Any of that Energy misdirected as identification with the unreal Mind, Body, Possessions, & the rest of the World could better to be redirected toward the Supreme if one is to realize oneself to be one with that Supreme Absolute. The traditional offering made sense in the context of complete giving over of all delusion rooted in the Ego, surrendering all to the Absolute. The Guru would have no need for the offering or anything else in the World. Compassionately, he assists the disciple in complete giving over of illusory Ego identity.
As it happened, Janaka offered a succession of increasingly princely gifts. But the Sage Ashtavakra rejected each small fortune as insufficient for Janaka's offering. Increasing & increasing the value of offered treasure, Janaka eventually felt that he must offer his entire Kingdom & to his shock & amazement, Ashtavakra accepted. But again, accepting that much, the entire Kingdom, the Sage indicates that this is still not enough. Ashtavakra sees that he the Safe has surpassed Janaka's imagination. So he asks specifically for Janaka's family, wife, children, & finally; & finally Janaka's own Body & Mind. Absorbing his shock at this request for literally everything he had, Janaka remained determined & eager for Instruction, Janaka agreed & gave over ownership of all that he could call his own. Ashtavakra smiled & accepts this now complete offering.
The Sage, now ruler of the Kingdom, gives orders saddling of 2 of the former king's horses, that are now his own. Ashtavakra then says that he needs Janaka to ride along & guide him in a survey of his newly owned kingdom. With no other words spoken, the 2 are about to ride off. Remaining otherwise silent, the Sage begins to mount up, placing his 1st foot in a stirrup to do so. But at that moment, Janaka finally lost his patience & asked: "When do I get the Teaching?" Ashtavakra response was: "You have given over to me your Mind, so you have no right to ask questions." Taking in, finally, the completeness of his surrender, Janaka is suddenly Liberated. He notices that this has occurred in the blink of an eye, before the Sage's 2nd swinging foot could make it into other stirrup. Amazed that the Sage's previous prediction for Sudden Enlightenment came true, but primarily grateful, in his sudden joy, Janaka thanks Ashtavakra for the most precious gift of guidance beyond all other values. Ashtavakra promptly gave back family & Kingdom, Body & Mind into Janaka's hands for "safe-keeping" Stewardship. Nominally holding all in trust for his Guru, Janaka remained thus unchanged in is relative circumstance. Absolutely, Janaka was unchanged in Renunciation, internally now, regardless of the external situation. He remained free & blissful without any Attachment or Misidentification.
Ramana Maharshi would tell the Vedanta parable of the 10th:
Hiking the hills & needing to cross a raging snow-fed river in Spring, 10 traveling Fools made of themselves a human chain to safeguard their passage. Given the slippery stones underfoot & unexpected high water level & onrushing force, there was natural concern that they all had made it the other shore. The first one to think of it began a head count, pointing at each, calling out as he wagged his finger: "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9." Suddenly upset the poor Fool cried out: "That's it, only 9. Omigosh! Who did we lose?"
In horrified disbelief, another Fool repeated the head count: "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9." & so did another, & another, until everyone on shore gave it a try, all confirming the original tragic announcement. The confusing part for them, of course, was that no one could figure out who was the missing one. Easy for us, we aren't shivering & wet with freezing river water, exhausted & frightened. But then again, it was kind of silly. Given that they all followed the misguided example of the first, pointing only at other heads as they counted. If only one of them had kept track & counted the number of counts called, they would have be reassured when the full 10 counts were listed.
Their luck soon changed when just then an eminent spiritual master & teacher, a Guru much revered in the region, came walking down their shore, having seen the pantomime of their plight from the distance as he approached, not needing to be within earshot get the picture. But upon listening patiently & trying in vain to explain the proper Arithmetic to them, he decided to quickly demonstrate after kindly letting them off the hook, saying that many people experience confusion like this, as when told that such & such will occur in 10 days. some will ask: "Does that 10 count today, or do we start counting tomorrow as 1?" "But practical experience is best, so here we go" he said, & continuing: "when I tap your head with my staff, you the first one call out 1 & next 2 & so on until I've tapped the last one."
And so he did, & they called out, a bit nervous as they got to 9. But sure enough, they distinctly heard one last hollow bonk of the staff on a head & the call 10. There he was smiling & laughing with relief, the one the Guru had arranged to be last, the same first one the Guru saw start the counting, recognizing him now as had seen him from a distance. Smiling with kindness the Guru concluded for him: "Yes, Thou Art the 10th."
When equating the Non-Dual Self with Absolute Reality Brahman, the most authoritative Upanishads repeatedly intoned the Mahavakya or Great Proclamation "Thou Art That", with Absolute Reality, Brahman understood to be "That."
In "Thou Art the 10th!" the actual number 10 has no particular significance there other than in helping recall of the Parable. What matters is that each essentially makes the same mistake when failing to count himself, or more to the point, take himself into account. The remedy is to Inquire "who am I" in order to know oneself. Self-Knowledge, the direct result of Self-Inquiry, is also known as Self-Realization, Enlightenment, Liberation, & in the original languages: Moksha, Nirvana, Mukti, & so on. That is the ineffable Reality itself, ever inexplicable & beyond words. In that same Dream, the Maharshi continued to respond to a succession of questions about Self-Knowledge that were winding down-level to issues of their being two ways one forgets to take into account oneself. Both kinds of self-amnesia are modeled in slightly different ways by analogy based on the Parable about the 10th.
Robert Heinlein's hero in Stranger in a Strange Land drew from the same scriptures, without direct reference, when his planet-colony "visitor" was asked about the that colony's understanding of "God". Confused at first, that character, Michael Valentine, hesitated, pondered, & then realized what was being asked. Shaking his head in denial of the basic premise of the question, one about some separate super-being, the extra-terrestrial visitor responded: "Thou art God!" (Of course the "thou art" would not have been used unless the Mahavakya was being referenced. Thou Art … – Tat Tvam Asi, That Thou Art, is the one Mahavakya out of the tradition of 4 that is typically rendered in the archaic English thou and art to lend a "biblical" significance to the 3 short words. With far less understanding of the very deepest meaning, we can note sci-fi written at the close of the 1950's and published in the next decade by Robert Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land, in which another version of that Mahavakya appears. That story's Alien is seeking to decipher the earthling word "God" but is met with a confusing array of poorly conceived answers, as would still be the case. Only very slightly parallel to our own Alien, the old sci-fi version finally gets the drift of their stammering and he is stunned that they don't already know. He utters: "Thou Art God" – a nice honoring or the Mahavakya for the American 1950's even if Heinlein exhibits no further understanding of the Proclamation, in terms of Self-Knowledge, the primary concern. As for the partial equivalence of the word "God" compared to the assumed Brahman in the Mahavakya, it is worth noting that Meister Eckhart came closer with the term Gottheit "Godhead". Written in the late 1950's & then published in '61, this was pretty "far out" for an American sci–fi author.
Some more verses from a great Sage:
Advaita does not deal with opposites. When it says "non-objective", it does not mean "subjective" [in E-books here we have coined the term "trans-subjective"]. Negatives can never subsist independently, by themselves. They want a positive something, as their background – Absolute Brahman.
Desirelessness is the goal of all desires.
The Witness makes you selfless or egoless.
The Body does not exist, either when you stand separate from the Body,
or when you think about the Body.
Science starts upon the basic error of giving independent existence to the World of objects, leaving the True Subject & the thing nearest to it — the Mind — un-examined.
When an Object is perceived, the Object is not there & you are ever in the same "place".
The World is the One appearing as many.
The Guru takes you from phenomena to the Absolute Brahman. Disciples need not wonder what the Guru is doing for them. Disciples can never understand the real significance. They need only know that Love becomes Divine when Ego is not present.
In Deep Dreamless Sleep, no Mind exists. no Self ever leaves.
Mind & Senses are only names of mis-identified functions of Sat, Chit, Ananda —
manifested as Life, Thought, & Feeling.
When Brahman is visualized as Ultimate Truth, the World is reduced to mere appearance — making Brahman's title of destroyership literally significant.
Space begets objects, & objects beget Space. Science wants to establish oneness outside in objects perceived. But Vedanta wants to establish oneness inside, outside & everywhere.
When the thought that you are Atma [Self], the Reality, becomes as strong as your present thought that you are the body, then alone are you free.
Worldly knowledge is nothing other than giving a name to the unknown & dismissing it immediately from your mind.
Consciousness is the light of lights. Therefore Consciousness is self-luminous. Self-luminosity is the particular prerogative of Consciousness alone.
He who has destroyed the Ego in him knows neither doing nor non-doing.
Witnessing is silent awareness. Do not try to make it active in any way. Your knowership is objectless & can never be objectified. You should never try to know that you are the Knower.
The disinterested Witness alone enjoys the "picture" [of a World],
Spirituality replaces the Object by the Subject.
No amount of effort, taken on your own part, can ever take you to the Absolute.
The basic error is the false identification of the "I" with the Body, Senses or Mind — each at a different time. This is the pivot round which our worldly life revolves.
Personality rests with body, senses & mind. If you think you are impersonal, if you feel you are impersonal & if you act knowing that you are Impersonal, you are Impersonal.
Some of Master Nome's earliest aphorisms about the unreality of a World:
There has never been a single objective thing. (1.3)
The World is unreal. (1.16)
All that is objective is illusion. Illusion is that which is not. (1.34)
All things change. that which is not a thing is immutable. (1.63)
There is no World (any objective thing), & there is no one to experience or know it. (1.94)
It is you who say that anything is real. the object does not declare its own reality. to known the Reality, know yourself. (2.54)
Any object of experience has no more existence separate from the Self than printed letters from a page of paper, or waves from water. (3.24)
It is better to say the World in you than you are in the World. (3.42)
An unreal body performs unreal actions in an unreal World. (3.50)
Do not be afraid to let go of a World that does not really exist. (3.57)
Know the World to be unreal and yourself as not a character in it, & the dream is over. (2.93)
Regard all manifestation as an hallucination or as a daydream lasting but a moment. (3.30)
Regard all thought as an empty echo and the World as a dream. (3.67)
Ego, manifestation, form and ignorance: these are like an optical illusion, a mirage, a dream without substance, the life-history of a fictional character. (3.96)
The conception of space requires misidentification with the body. The conception of time requires misidentification with thought. The Self is neither the body nor thought. It is spaceless and timeless. (1.37 )
As space is endless, clear, formless, embracing all, bound by none, all-pervading, ungraspable, & has no within or without, so it is with the Self. (1.61)
The World, time, space, life, death, objective things, the mind, ignorance, bondage, & an experiencer of these are just concepts. Concepts are unreal. Absolute Being alone is. (2.55)
Spiritual notes of a great Sage 2
Reality remains unchanging states of Mind — Waking, Dream, & Deep Dreamless Sleep. Look to the common sense of Existence in all 3 States.
In every experience, the changing expression is the objective part, while the un changing Background is the subjective Consciousness part, which is the changeless Reality.
Bodies seem to be born & die, while the subjective Self transcends both.
Knowledge alone can know Knowledge, Brahman alone knows Brahman. That in you which knows you exist is Brahman.
Each is already Liberated, & he has only to know it.
Whatever you assume yourself, the Atma [Self] to be, so you will see the World "outside" you.
If you want Suffering, be attached to the World. If you want Happiness, be spiritual.
The vanishingly narrow "razor" of the "Present" moment is only a word representing the conceptual joining of a remembered, long-gone Past & an imagined, not-yet existing Future.
After Realization you may outwardly live exactly as before in terms of Objective appearance; but you cannot fail to know the Subjective transformation you have undergone.
Liberated Knowledge that dawns on the subsidence of the Ego can never cease to be.
Realization consists in becoming deeply aware of the fact that you have never been in Bondage.
Because Realization can never happen, it can never occur in Time. Only timeless self-awareness of the always-so Reality becomes vivid.
Self-Realization is not a case of understanding at all, but of being one with the Truth. Merging identity is a better hint at the inexpressible than any kind of thinking.
He who wants to get to the Truth does not crave for the fulfillment of individual desires.
Essay outside of the NMT (No-Me Teaching) series 1...
Essay outside of the NMT (No-Me Teaching) series: ...
NMT (No-Me Teaching) new series 38: Priorto excerp...
NMT (No-Me Teaching) new series 36: Priorto excer...
NMT (No-Me Teaching) new series 32:Priorto excerpt...
NMT (No-Me Teaching) new series 30: Reference: Fr...


text:
10 Top Android Apps Worth Trying
Take a quick look at the Google Play Store and you'll be overwhelmed by the sheer number of apps available. While some are definitely sketchy, others can help you get more out of your phone than you may have imagined. Here are 10 worth trying.
Viber Out
Viber Outis one of the most popular free messenger apps for a reason: It offers loads of exciting features including instant video chat, instant voice messaging, and group chats that let you talk to friends and family from all over. Viber is free to install and comes with tons of free features that transform the way you communicate. You can use the app to make cheap international calls, too.
Action Launcher
Hide folders behind attractive covers, use shutters to swipe shortcuts into app widgets, and customize your Google search bar so accessing favorite features is faster and easier than ever. Action Launcher offers a quick, easy way to customize your phone, and works with Android 4.1 and up.
It's the next best thing to Google Maps! HERE WeGo Offline Maps & GPS works even when you don't have an internet connection. If you drive or travel off the beaten path or are concerned about the amount of data you're using, then you might find this app to be life-changing. Download the map you'd like to use, and then search view satellite imagery, or find your way around via turn-by-turn navigation.
Less exciting than some other apps, but essential for on-the-go productivity, Google Drive works in sync with Google Docs. Many newer Androids have Google Drive built in, and users appreciate its ability to sync up with other devices where they use Docs or Drive. Give it a try if you need to store anything – it keeps videos, documents, and photos safe in the cloud and at your fingertips on demand.
NOAA Weather Radar & Alerts
No matter where you are or what you're up to, weather affects you. That's why you need at least one solid weather app. To be fair, there are more than a few good ones out there; however serious weather watchers are likely to appreciate NOAA Weather Radar & Alerts for its accurate forecasting, real-time conditions, and interactive radar maps. You can get push notifications when alerts are issued, and you can customize the app to meet your needs.
Who doesn't like a movie now and then? True, Netflix is meant for subscribers only, but once it's installed, you can watch anything the service has to offer no matter where you are. Watch instantly or download for later, when you don't have the best connection.
What do you want? What do you need? Wish helps you find the best price for whatever it is you're looking for, whether that's a new outfit or a cool fidget spinner for your favorite nephew. Hourly deals, promo codes, and a slide-to-pay checkout are just a few features. Don't miss the Wish List feature, which lets you create as many lists as you like for different areas of your life.
ESPN Fantasy Sports
If you're into fantasy football, basketball, hockey, or baseball, then you're going to love ESPN Fantasy Sports, a free app that makes league play simply for everyone. You can customize the app to provide you with push notifications or just get weekly notices, plus you can view player rankings, create your own leagues, and more.
CNN Breaking US & World News
Keep your finger on the world's pulse with this free app. CNN Breaking US & World News provides Live TV and video on demand to consumers located in the US, allowing them to check breaking news, view photo galleries, and more. Want to stay informed? Use this app to watch live CNN, CNNi, or HLN for 10 minutes free each day, or watch unlimited by logging in with paid subscription credentials from your satellite or cable provider.
DFNDR
Protect your passwords and apps, store sensitive photos securely, and browse without worry. DFNDR has achieved a top ranking as one of the best free antivirus apps available. It goes above and beyond by helping you keep your phone clean, and it provides a safe browsing environment as well as a WiFi checker that ensures connections are secure.
In this article:Android Apps
Thanks for reading this article. If you're new here, why don't you subscribe for regular updates via RSS feed or via email. You can also subscribe by following @techsling on Twitter or becoming our fan on Facebook. Thanks for visiting!
Top 10 Useful Apps You Won't Find In Google Play Store.
A wide selection of apps is one benefit the Android smartphone users have enjoyed, with over 2 million applications and games available on...
Henry NdubuisiFebruary 2, 2022
The Best 10 iPhone Apps of 2019
With mobile app development companies growing at a faster rate, every organization wants to launch their apps either on Google Play or iOS App...
Manish SharmaAugust 31, 2019
5 Best Streaming Apps For Android
Online content has almost replaced the cable subscriptions, furthermore technologies like; 4K and HDR and other future technologies have outlawed the conventional cable viewership.
Devin SmithJanuary 18, 2019
Android Apps that are Business-Worthy
Being Android app developers, it is but obvious for you to understand the market share and what keeps them on their toes to come...
Rakesh PatelDecember 23, 2017


The Duchess is a young widow who marries her steward, Antonio, (against her brother's wishes) and bears him with three children.
Her other brother, The Cardinal (a and of God) ensure that his spy, Bosola, in employed in her household.
Set in a patriarchal world of early modern England.
The Duchess surprisingly asserts her right to marry whom she pleases.
The Duchess seduces Antonio as well as conducting her own wedding ceremony, with her maid (Cariola) as their witness.
Women were challenging the patriarchy.
It's often said that women of this period had no power to own property, nor run their own households.
In the opening of Malfi, Antonio talks admirably to Delio of the court of France. he was praising the order and opens he witnessed there.
This low-key opening allows the audience to compare the court of Malfi and the French court.
Blackfriars Hall held 600 people and was indoors.
Didn't use the popular Globe Theatre (open top), holding up to 2000 people.
The scene in which Ferdinand visits the Duchess in her imprisonment was played in total darkness with all candles removed.
The same scene played in outdoor space, such as the Globe, would invite the audience to see the Duke's plot unfold.
it was only wen the Duchess called for lights that the audience had realised he had given her a dead man's hand in greeting, not his own.
Duchess of malfi critic quotes.


text:
Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes ofwebsite accessibility
TripAdvisor. That's why the travel site has compiled a list of the top 10 ice cream parlors in the United States."/>TripAdvisor. That's why the travel site has compiled a list of the top 10 ice cream parlors in the United States."/>. That's why the travel site has compiled a list of the top 10 ice cream parlors in the United States." }


text:
Well Known American Criminal Busted Running Arms To ISIS
TOPICS:Constitutionhillary clintonlou dobbsnewspolitics
The prime objective of the Democrat Party is to maintain the political gains, what patriots would correctly classify as the devolution under the Hussein Obama regime. That is only going to happen if Hillary Clinton is elected president so they are pulling out all the stops, doing whatever is necessary to see that she is elected to continue the anti-American onslaught.
The Clinton crimes and cover ups are many and now there's another one to add to the list, one that would have focused a bright spotlight on her activities in Benghazi. In that instance arms were shipped to terrorists plotting to overthrow Gaddafi. Some of those arms were directed by Clinton to other hotspots such as Syria and to our enemies, including al-Qaeda and ISIS.
Court discovery documents that proved unmistakably that Hillary Clinton and Hussein Obama were arming our terrorist enemies were seen as being potentially problematic for the establishment in power, so the easy decision was made. Forget the charges, let the arms dealer who was working in cahoots with Clinton of the hook. She hasn't faced any charges for her role so it does seem a little unfair that the middle man be prosecuted for doing what she contracted him to do. But then again there is that whole above the law thing protecting so comparisons can be deceptive.
Catherine Herridge reports that "Since the US could not sell directly to the Libyan opposition, the contractor, Mark Turi was to be the middle man. Herridge says he got "sidelined" and that the mission "spun out of control arming America's enemies." That's the official version, but it's more plausible to believe the intention may well have been to arm our enemies the whole time and that Turi was merely a government patsy.
The interview details how the plan was for the State Department to run the weapons using their people. When the shipment arrived in Libya, it was split in half, with half of it being smuggled to Syria. Included in the Clinton emails was a copy of an email between the arms dealer, Mark Turi, and Ambassador Chris Stevens, who would later be killed.
A Clinton email showed her involvement in the plot, with her stating, "FYI. The idea of using private security experts to arm the opposition should be considered." Noting that the charges have now been dropped after a five year, multi-million dollar investigation, Herridge notes "This means the Justice Department and the White House will avoid any litigation that shines a light on its efforts to arm the opposition during the height of the Arab Spring as well as Clinton's emails."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MudFcI-y3jc
Please like Rick on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/ and at Stop The Takeover, https://www.facebook.com/StopTheTakeover/ and please follow on Twitter @RickRWells I'd also appreciate it if you SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar on my website at http://RickWells.us.
Did She Sneak Into Her Dad's White House Stash?
Obama – Mandatory Voting So Every Ignorant Voter Will Vote As They're Told – Democrat
Corrupt DHS Honors The Enemy, Pro-Illegal Agitator Lawyer Given Service Award
Must Be A Racist White Redneck In The All Lives Matter Gorilla Suit, Right?


text:
Friday 29th September 2017
Welcome to your Weekly Roundup featuring articles from across Premier.
The Premier Camps Lesson Plans are now available to download here!
We've got some awesome new October lesson plans available for download - grab them below...
Premier Sport Lesson Plans
Premier Arts & Crafts Lesson Plans
Premier Arts Dance Lesson Plans
Premier Arts Drama Lesson Plans
Stay tuned for more Premier Camps updates...
Norwich 10K: You have raised...
One month on from the Norwich 10K run, we look back at the journey to race day, and how your incredible donations raised £3,687 for disadvantaged Young People across the country.
The Premier Foundation team is made up of sports enthusiasts from all different backgrounds, most of which haven't involved running in a long time... The challenge we set ourselves was not only to train for our first 10K in most cases, but somehow get race ready in only eight weeks. We decided to document our journey to show how powerful sport can be, you can read more about our journey below:
We would like to thank everyone who donated to help us on our journey, and more importantly thank you for helping us to change the lives of Young People across the country who are living in poverty, are homeless or disadvantaged within their community. Through the power of sport and physical activity we have helped many people to achieve what they previously thought was out of reach. We can't wait to get stuck into our next challenge and raise even more for our cause!
The Results!
Many of us had never run 10K before, and despite our training, the going was tough. But we all managed to run the entire race, and made some great times!
Ben - 43.12
Emma - 56.48
Dan - 56.49
Will - 58.50
Amelia - 1:01.49
Laura - 1:06.22
Steve - 1:08.53
Frankie - 1:14.18
Ricky - 1:26.06
Kick start your new school sales strategy using Anti Bullying Week!
We have created the below tools for you to use as a new and existing school sales strategy over the coming months.
Anti-Bullying Lesson Plan
Anti-Bullying eBook
Anti-Bullying VIP Ticket
Using Drama as a vehicle for learning, the attached plans have been created to spark an interest in schools to use as leverage to upsell your products.
We have done all the hard work, all you have to do is SELL, SELL, SELL!
The process we recommend you to follow using this campaign is...
Send a covering letter and voucher to the school – new or existing
Send a follow up email to book in taster sessions and send them a copy of our anti bullying eBook
Book in your taster session
Deliver your taster session by using our lesson plans!
The Premier network is expanding!
We're delighted to announce that Premier has two new franchise owners who started their journey with us this month. Daniel Woodvine and Paul Wraith will be operating in the Whitchurch and Mansfield areas respectively.
Daniel Woodvine
Dan is joining Premier with a wealth of experience in sales, customer services and finance. However, his passion for coaching and developing children was developed after teaching 'soccer' at Summer camps in Texas.
"I always wanted to run a business but I never knew where to start or what I'd want to do! After spending the Summer in Texas coaching and developing children, I knew this is something I wanted to pursue and researched how I could combine my passion for sports with a business model.
Premier were the perfect fit for me. It allows me to be involved with the development of children, while building and running a team at the same time. I'm delighted to be a part of Premier and can't wait to start making an impact on the local community".
Paul Wraith
With a strong background in finance, Paul decided to join Premier so he could turn his passion of sport into a business. Teaching and developing children is something he has always wanted to be involved with and saw a Premier franchise as the perfect opportunity to do so.
"I joined Premier because two of my best friends, James Jennison and Andrew Mellors have had successful franchises for over 10 years so this was a natural link for me. I have always been passionate about sport and have wanted to get into coaching/teaching children.
I am most looking forward to meeting lots of new people as a franchisee and influencing the next generation of children to become active and healthy!"
We would like to take this opportunity to welcome Daniel and Paul to the network and we're looking forward to seeing them develop and succeed as Premier franchise owners.
Premier, Shropham, Norfolk, NR17 1EJ


text:
// Copyright (c) 2018 PaddlePaddle Authors. All Rights Reserved.
//
// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
// you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
// You may obtain a copy of the License at
//
//     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
//
// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
// WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
// See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
// limitations under the License.

#include "paddle/fluid/inference/tests/api/tester_helper.h"

namespace paddle {
namespace inference {

struct DataRecord {
  std::vector<std::vector<int64_t>> query, title;
  std::vector<size_t> lod1, lod2;
  size_t batch_iter{0}, batch_size{1}, num_samples;  // total number of samples
  DataRecord() = default;
  explicit DataRecord(const std::string &path, int batch_size = 1)
      : batch_size(batch_size) {
    Load(path);
  }
  DataRecord NextBatch() {
    DataRecord data;
    size_t batch_end = batch_iter + batch_size;
    // NOTE skip the final batch, if no enough data is provided.
    if (batch_end <= query.size()) {
      GetInputPerBatch(query, &data.query, &data.lod1, batch_iter, batch_end);
      GetInputPerBatch(title, &data.title, &data.lod2, batch_iter, batch_end);
    }
    batch_iter += batch_size;
    return data;
  }
  void Load(const std::string &path) {
    std::ifstream file(path);
    std::string line;
    int num_lines = 0;
    while (std::getline(file, line)) {
      num_lines++;
      std::vector<std::string> data;
      split(line, '\t', &data);
      // load query data
      std::vector<int64_t> query_data;
      split_to_int64(data[0], ' ', &query_data);
      // load title data
      std::vector<int64_t> title_data;
      split_to_int64(data[1], ' ', &title_data);
      query.push_back(std::move(query_data));
      title.push_back(std::move(title_data));
    }
    num_samples = num_lines;
  }
};

void PrepareInputs(std::vector<PaddleTensor> *input_slots, DataRecord *data,
                   int batch_size) {
  PaddleTensor lod_query_tensor, lod_title_tensor;
  lod_query_tensor.name = "left";
  lod_title_tensor.name = "right";
  auto one_batch = data->NextBatch();
  // assign data
  TensorAssignData<int64_t>(&lod_query_tensor, one_batch.query, one_batch.lod1);
  TensorAssignData<int64_t>(&lod_title_tensor, one_batch.title, one_batch.lod2);
  // Set inputs.
  input_slots->assign({lod_query_tensor, lod_title_tensor});
  for (auto &tensor : *input_slots) {
    tensor.dtype = PaddleDType::INT64;
  }
}

void SetConfig(AnalysisConfig *cfg) {
  cfg->SetModel(FLAGS_infer_model);
  cfg->DisableGpu();
  cfg->SwitchSpecifyInputNames();
  cfg->SwitchIrOptim();
}

void SetInput(std::vector<std::vector<PaddleTensor>> *inputs) {
  DataRecord data(FLAGS_infer_data, FLAGS_batch_size);
  std::vector<PaddleTensor> input_slots;
  int epoch = FLAGS_test_all_data ? data.num_samples / FLAGS_batch_size : 1;
  LOG(INFO) << "number of samples: " << epoch * FLAGS_batch_size;
  for (int bid = 0; bid < epoch; ++bid) {
    PrepareInputs(&input_slots, &data, FLAGS_batch_size);
    (*inputs).emplace_back(input_slots);
  }
}

// Easy for profiling independently.
void profile(bool use_mkldnn = false) {
  AnalysisConfig cfg;
  SetConfig(&cfg);
  std::vector<std::vector<PaddleTensor>> outputs;

  if (use_mkldnn) {
    cfg.EnableMKLDNN();
  }

  std::vector<std::vector<PaddleTensor>> input_slots_all;
  SetInput(&input_slots_all);
  TestPrediction(reinterpret_cast<const PaddlePredictor::Config *>(&cfg),
                 input_slots_all, &outputs, FLAGS_num_threads);

  if (FLAGS_num_threads == 1 && !FLAGS_test_all_data) {
    PADDLE_ENFORCE_GT(outputs.size(), 0);
    PADDLE_ENFORCE_EQ(outputs.back().size(), 2UL);
    for (auto &output : outputs.back()) {
      size_t size = GetSize(output);
      PADDLE_ENFORCE_GT(size, 0);
      float *result = static_cast<float *>(output.data.data());
      // output is probability, which is in (-1, 1).
      for (size_t i = 0; i < size; i++) {
        EXPECT_GT(result[i], -1);
        EXPECT_LT(result[i], 1);
      }
    }
  }
}

TEST(Analyzer_MM_DNN, profile) { profile(); }
#ifdef PADDLE_WITH_MKLDNN
TEST(Analyzer_MM_DNN, profile_mkldnn) { profile(true /* use_mkldnn */); }
#endif

// Check the fuse status
TEST(Analyzer_MM_DNN, fuse_statis) {
  AnalysisConfig cfg;
  SetConfig(&cfg);

  int num_ops;
  auto predictor = CreatePaddlePredictor<AnalysisConfig>(cfg);
  auto fuse_statis = GetFuseStatis(
      static_cast<AnalysisPredictor *>(predictor.get()), &num_ops);
}

// Compare result of NativeConfig and AnalysisConfig
void compare(bool use_mkldnn = false) {
  AnalysisConfig cfg;
  SetConfig(&cfg);

  if (use_mkldnn) {
    cfg.EnableMKLDNN();
  }

  std::vector<std::vector<PaddleTensor>> input_slots_all;
  SetInput(&input_slots_all);
  CompareNativeAndAnalysis(
      reinterpret_cast<const PaddlePredictor::Config *>(&cfg), input_slots_all);
}

TEST(Analyzer_MM_DNN, compare) { compare(); }
#ifdef PADDLE_WITH_MKLDNN
TEST(Analyzer_MM_DNN, compare_mkldnn) { compare(true /* use_mkldnn */); }
#endif

// Compare Deterministic result
TEST(Analyzer_MM_DNN, compare_determine) {
  AnalysisConfig cfg;
  SetConfig(&cfg);

  std::vector<std::vector<PaddleTensor>> input_slots_all;
  SetInput(&input_slots_all);
  CompareDeterministic(reinterpret_cast<const PaddlePredictor::Config *>(&cfg),
                       input_slots_all);
}

}  // namespace inference
}  // namespace paddle

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Bedankt voor deze prachtige ATC's Ria en Coby!
Wat een mooie ATC's Gerrina! En met een mooie tekst.
Super mooi met die vogel Gerrina.
PS weekend 30/6 en 1/7 heb ik de opening van mijn winkeltje.
Het is mini maar super gezellig.
Oh Gerrina your ATC is beautiful - love how you have used the colour palette, and that quote is certainly truthful!
Your parrot and verse are botch beautiful on their own Gerrina, but combining the two together is fabulous and I love the softly spotted background too. Thanks for sharing with us at Just Add Ink this week.
Wat een wijze tekstjes van deze slimme papagaai! leuk zijn ze!
Very nice ATC! Thank you for joining in on the Lost Coast Designs Mini-Me Challenge!
I really love how this ATC turned out! The color palette is so unique and refreshing and I like those subtle dots in the background. The sentiment is one I'd never seen before, so I liked that and think it's very wise. The whole thing came together so nicely and I'm so glad you shared your talents with us for this week's Simon Says Stamp Monday Challenge!
Thanks for joining the Lost Coast Mini me challenge. Your ATC are fun.


Certification Program Promotes Early Detection and Treatment of Heart Attack Risk in Apparently Healthy People.
Houston (PRWEB) September 9, 2010 — SHAPE, The Society for Heart Attack Prevention and Eradication (http://www.shapesociety.org) , a nonprofit organization that promotes the early detection and treatment of heart attack risk in apparently healthy people, today announced that 34 medical providers from around the world are among the first to earn SHAPE Provider Certification. The program promotes the early detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) through identification of clinically appropriate patients for non-invasive CAD screening, and awards certification based on a rigorous process of training and examination.


text:
Q: Post message on Facebook wall I am trying to post a message on Facebook wall through my application. I want to post "yeehaa, you are on facebook now"
I am using this code:
btnPostToWall.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {
    @Override
    public void onClick(View v) {
        public void onClick(View v) {
            //postToWall();
            Bundle parameters = new Bundle();
            parameters.putString("message", "jk");
            try {
                facebook.request("me/feed", parameters, "POST");
            } catch (FileNotFoundException e) {
                // TODO Auto-generated catch block
                e.printStackTrace();
            } catch (MalformedURLException e) {
                // TODO Auto-generated catch block
                e.printStackTrace();
            } catch (IOException e) {
                // TODO Auto-generated catch block
                e.printStackTrace();
            }
        }

    }
});

The issue is-
This code opens my facebook wall for me where i write down a message, instead of it i want to post message through my application pragmatically. how can i do this?

A: This is called the message property of the feed. Unfortunately, you cannot add this parameter in case of the Feed Dialog, but if you use the Graph API you can add message.
Graph API to publish a feed: /me/feed, it has the message parameter, and other parameters used to publish a feed.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange