Fwd: FANTASY or REALITY: IN and OUT of PLATO'S CAVE

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: b <rrdd3939@aol.com>
Date: Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:41 PM
Subject: Fwd: FANTASY or REALITY: IN and OUT of PLATO'S CAVE
To: citizenjournalistrd@gmail.com

 

-----Original Message-----
From: b <rrdd3939@aol.com>
To: rrdd3939 <rrdd3939@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 7, 2011 5:33 pm
Subject: Fwd: FANTASY or REALITY: IN and OUT of PLATO'S CAVE

Originally, appeared t www.cj-rickaddsite.blogspot.com , it is more

appropriate here. Take special note of Paul Davies toward the end.
 

                                 by Richard DePersio

 

PREFACE:
                                "Between the idea

                                 And the reality

                                 Between the motion

                                 And the act

                                               -T.S. Eliot

"PLATO'S CAVE - NEW VERSION ( a scientific/philosophical perspective

 available

at: comsat-ak.blogspot.com).

Dr. Walter Jacobson, psychiatrist- RE: "PLATO'S CAVE - NEW VERSION

(psychological perspective)

"this "common sense" world you speak of that we inhabit is NOT real. it is an illusion, we

are not bodies, we are  mind/consciousness. we have identified with an idea, that idea being

ego, and the ego believes in time and space and bodies and disease and death. we invented this

 world and then forgot that we made it up, and now we can't wake ourselves up out of it...."

Dr. Deepak Chopra (Editor's Note: strange chap, feeling British today), physician 

turned new-age spiritual/alternative medicine practitioner-"Global Spirit" on "CUNY

T.V.": Referring to ancient texts, "I'm not in the world, the world is in me. I'm not in the

 body, the body is in me. I'm not in the mind, the mind is in me.

The body, the world, the mind happen to me as I curve back within myself and

create again and again. This is scientific fact (Editor's Note: Why not? As we shall

soon see with Kaku). The world exists in your consciousness. The body exists

in your consciousness. Your thoughts exist in your consciousness. Consciousness

ultimate ground of being. The whole world rises and subsides. Shift of identity:

body from ego-based, separate self to unified universal self."

A nurse referring to what she considered a unique out-of-body experience in "Dealing

with Death" on "AmericanLife T.V.: (We paraphrase) They tell me that energy can't

be created or destroyed. Is consciousness like enery. Will it continue after death.

Maybe, you wouldn't be able to think about or order a pizza (Editor's Note: Tis a

pity; now editor feels Italian).

Physics or philosophical perspective: Our common sense world might be a corruption

 of reality. Reality might exist in the bizarre quantum world and ultimate reality in the stranger

quantum/relativity world - if we can find it! Plato with one foot in this world and the other

on a higher plane - so he thought. Will we have to except it, as well. (Brain singular or

Brain/Mind two sides of same coin. Compliment each other. Will we need to have one

foot in this world and the other in the quantum/relativity world?). 

BACK IN PLATO'S CAVE:

        IT's a commonsensical  world of classical physics, chemistry and biology (with

a physics and mathematical foundation). Albeit, a shadowy depiction of reality.

Unbeknownst to those looking forward at the shadows on the wall to the right is an

opening and beyond the cave is the world of relitivity and the world of quantum - both

nonsensical in nature with quantum even further from the cave then relativity. Quantum

is reality. If and when, we create quantum relativity, we will have ultimate reality.

Quantum Relativity plus concepts which are in lock-step: no constants - time and

mass; nothing traveling faster then light except space-time; singularities; bosons,

mass and energy - two forms of same thing; things with mass such as protons

and electrons and things without mass such as visible and invisible light              

some times behaving like waves and some times like particles; quarks, charm,          

strings, electrons in more then one place at the same time; twelve dimensions; many,

 perhaps, an infinite number of universes; an electron occupying a spot in space-time

in one universe while it does the same in ours.

      Brandon Carter proposed the philosophical concept known as the the anthropic 

principle in the early 1970's, wherein the universe appears to be fine-tuned for us to

 exist. He argued that if the big bang were slightly more energetic or the proton slightly

less massive or the constant in E=MC Squared  slightly larger or smaller or...well, you

get the idea...life based on carbon and water couldn't exist. In the

1980s, when they theorized that there were twelve spatial dimensions plus time

and that of the four fundamental forces in nature (electromagnetism, strong and

weak nuclear forces being the other three) gravity by far is the weakest- they had

an explanation - - gravity was spread over the twelve dimensions. Carter had to

rain on his colleague's parade: If that weren't the case, carbon-based life even

the simplest couldn't exist. Some biologists pointed out that trillions of evolutionary

steps occurred in a certain order leading to intelligent life, including, humans.

This suggested "Intelligent Design" or just plain luck - one in a google not that

google but a mathematical one) chance. This reporters favorite example is of two guys

examining plants and animals in a forest. One guy decides to leave message

for anybody that might happen by later. He gathers rocks and spells out "Good

Day" (He was British for an American would undoubtedly go with "Hello"). About

an hour later someone looks down from a cliff and sees the greeting and ponders:

I wonder if a stranger was kind enough to leave this greeting or if years ago or

millions of years ago there was an earthquake and the rocks fell from the cliff

and just happened to land spelling "Good Day"?

       Scientists were gnawing at this bedeviling problem for over  a couple of

decades when they felt they had came up with a satisfactory multi-verse 'theory.'

If there are a large number of universes, perhaps, infinite there could be many or

an infinite number of universes like ours with all of us existing in some or an infinite

number of them and other people in others, universes like ours without life, others

 like ours with intelligent carbon/water-based life but no humans,  universes with

just dust and gas and no stars and planets, universes with different constants or

particles or forces and life based a different solid and liquid.

      What was the stronger motivation for the 'creation' of multi-universes: science

or the possibility of God? Religion has to except science, the converse is not the case.

F. Lee Baily is representing cattle in a libel case against the "U.N. Council on

Climate Change" which claimed for over five years that cattle farts were a major

contributor to global warming. Recently, a janitor realized that the U.N. graph was

upside down or the bottom was up and the homosexual janitor reported his findings

to the top U.N. climatologists, meteorologists and atmospheric physicists -

the same hockey pucks (as Don Rickles would say) who created the infamous

'hockey stick' graph. A U.N. spokesman stated that a formal and official statement

of apology was forthcoming a long with a large heaping of oats.

      As anybody else noticed that something has changed over the past thirty years,

especially, ten led by physicist Michio Kaku.Science is based on Fact and Religion

is based on Faith. Many, if not most, would say that both are important and some

cases look at the same thing from a different perspective. You accept or reject

a scientific concept and you believe or disbelieve a religious one. Yet, over past thirty,

especially, ten more and more scientists, especially, physicists are using the

term 'believe' when talking about quarks, strings, brains (membranes), photons

electrons, inflation, dark matter and energy, faster then light travel, electrons,

bosons, etc. Much ado about nothing; it's just a matter of semantics. Leader of

the pack Kaku can't differentiate between speculation and fact. You might say

that religion is speculation. And, that there is scientific speculation backed up

by math or reasoning, theory, widely accepted theory and fact. It could take decades

to go from one step to the next or be disproved at some point on the path.

Sometimes, something could be proven on paper mathematically but it had to

remain speculation if we couldn't make the necessary observations or conduct

the required experiments until such capability became available?

      What in Heaven or Quantum happened? Precent-day global-warming is a fact

even though four of the seven major studies released over the past six years indicate

little or no global warming, one points toward global cooling and two moderate-

to large-scale global warming caused by humans or a change in the energy output

of the sun or both- they don't know. Where is Al Gore with his five mansions and

private planes? Increasing the size if his carbon footprint while he places sensors

near heat-generating sources! Cap-and-Trade and Global Warming are politics not

science!

      For God's Sake or Mother Nature's...Kaku and the gang are excepting 

mathematically-proven speculation as fact. Or they jump quickly from theory

to widely excepted theory or from widely excepted theory to fact. THEY BELIEVE

IN THINGS THAT THEY CAN'T DETECT! They sound more like scientific theologians,

evangelical ministers and fundamentalist preachers!

     On the other hand,out of opening to the left of the cave, you got the Bible. It contains

 God, angels, devils, and is, chock-full of miracles and prophecies. And, God can be

in more then one place at a time (sound familiar?!?) and He can't be detected, yet,

 people swear that He is there - intelligent people - - the ones the liberal elites (We

say callow sciolists) look down at from their ivory towers. Jesus can be flesh and spirit.

 Matter and anti-matter, magnetic north and south, positive and negative charges. Mind

 and Brain? Ying and Yang.

      When asked: who created God; the theologian responds that He always was, is

and will be. Ask astrophysicist the same question and he answers other universes

 were and that there will be universes forever. Or, our universe oscillates - expands,

contracts, expands - - always has and will. He'll tell you that you can't get something

from nothing. What was there before singularity banged? Space. Nothing became

something. No, space with twelve dimensions and potential regular and dark matter 

and energy, as well as potential anti- regular, anti dark and time.

    Some Hindu sects wonder if god created man or man created God and if God

is dreaming universe, including, us or if we are dreaming universe, including, God.

Sit back and think. Either it's all rather silly or duality: they are both true. Electrons

are in more then one place on Mondays, Wednesday and Fridays while God is on

Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays and they rest on Sundays but not absolute rest.

    Brain or duality: Mind/Brain?

                                "God's first Creature, which was Light."

                                                                  -Francis Bacon

This journalist maintains that environment creates mind - with a nod in the direction

of Kaku.

                                "For what a man would like to be true,

                                 that he more readily believes."

                                                                  -Francis Bacon

Nay; the journey must continue...

It's the next day and this here reporter is returning to this here cave(Editor's Note:

English teachers and professors would cry foul at this here construction but this here editor

cuts his ace reporter slack. And, he has no use for schools and colleges for

he contends that the genesis was in the 1920's and incline to the 1960's was only

about 5 degrees. The first and biggest teacher's union was created in the early

1960's and the incline got steep from 5 to 165-fell over left!...Is my A.D.D. showing?...

Public elementary and high schools

and to a lesser degree private schools, most of which are Christian, most of which

are Catholic, as well as, virtually all public and private and to a less degree 

Christian have gone from being institution of learning  to institutions of indoctrination

in liberal philosophy - starting with American history and now in all subjects,including,

math.!).

      Many Hindus believe that God creates universe for fun and see everyone having

fun while all he gets to do is sit back and watch and so he becomes part of univers

 and forgets his identity until next sleep period and while part of universe, therefore,

humans are god too.

      What about our friend Plato. The soul is eternal in heaven except to period it

occupies imperfect body. When we learn something new, we are actually

remembering something we knew on the higher plane or heaven but in an imperfect

way because of body. We make a point and it has a little bit of length, width and

depth while the real point doesn't and it doesn't exist anywhere in space and time.

Objects sch as chairs, circles and spheres (he latter two being the most perfect

geometrical shapes to Plato) or concepts such as justice and truth were perfect

forms in heaven. Some humans could perceive better then other (Plato: usually,

philosophers) let's say: between shadow and reality.

      Hey! Let's get back to anthropic principle.

      Paul Davies felt that there are seven possible consequences of Brandon Carter's

'AP.'

1. The absurd universe: Our universe just happens to be the way that it is;
2. The unique universe: There s a deep underlying unity in physics which 
3. necessitate the universe being the way that it is;                                        
4. Some "Theory ofEverything." will explain why the various features of the 
5. universe must have exactly the values that we see;
6. The multi-universe: Multiple universes exist, having all possible             
7.  combinations of characteristics and we inevitably find ourselves within a
8.  universe that allows for us to exist;
9. Creationism: A Creator designed the universe with the purpose of supporting 
10. complexity and the emergence of intelligence;
11.                             The life principle:There is an underlying principle that
12. constrains the universe toward life and mind;
13. The self-explaining universe: A closed explanatory loop "perhaps only 
14. universes with a capacity for consciousness can exist." This is Wheeler's
15.  "Participatory Anthropic Principle" ('PAP');
16. We live in a 'Virtual Reality Simulation.'

      What does the future hold? Either, various theories for generating eclectic

multi-universes will be will prove robust or evidence that the universe is fine-tuned 

When simpler earlier versions appeared they were shrugged off by scientists.  

Scientists said of Carter's Principle: It's philosophy not science; it's mere 

speculation; it can't be proven or dis-proven and, therefore resides outside of the

scientific realm.

Then why did it seem to trouble them so. Why does it appear that it was the

primary impetus in conceiving the concept of "Parallel Universes" - title of a Kaku

book. Why do they sound more and more like philosophers and theologians - similar

occupatiosns - don't feel like debating point - - scientists don't seem to feel like

their old selfs.s

       And what about Jacobson, Chopra (This reporter believes that he is Indian but

born in America and was once on a Hindu and once your writer heard him expound

crazy on the Middle East)...and the journalist!

       It would appear that they are heavy on 7, light on 4 with a pinch of Hinduism

We shall converse with Dr. Jacobson.(Chopra is in Plato's Cave discussing the

Middle East with his mummy)'

      As for the ace reporter, he isn't ready to commit at this time. CMT; fingers hurt.

Don't 'poor, baby' me. ORIGINAL PROPOSAL - THE MONO/GEMINI PRINCIPLE:

      Possibility One: Quantum Relativity is silly, fantasy, fairy tale world or makes

perfect sense if you think out of the box - way out of the box - - thousands of miles

from the cave;

     Possibility Two: The Bible is silly, fantasy, fairy tale world or makes perfect

sense and perfectly depicts reality - thousands of miles from the cave - - in the other

direction.

    Possibility Three:  If you except one, you have to except the other - it's quantum

relativity on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays while Spirituality prevails on Tuesdays,

Thursdays, Saturday and Brahma sleeps for one Brahma day.

    Possibilty Four: Our mind isn't capable of understanding it self and the greater

universe. 

    Possibility Five: We need to return to Plato's Cave real soon!

  

                                                                                                                                                                                                 

DEMETER PRESENTS...

URANIA: "I wish to go on record having lodged a protest. I shall save the details for the end."
They're Back!!! RD & CJ warned you that they would check in from time-to-time to
determine how you were doing.
The Bible tells a story of Adam. A few passages later it begins a new version. So shall we begin
 a new final episode...
                                             DEMETER PRESENTS PLATO'S CAVE:
                                                       A SECOND FINAL EPISODE
                                                               Sub-title: EATING
                                            by Richard DePersio Janus Citizen Journalist
(Reading previous installments not necessary to enjoy this installment but we wish that you
 would as we worked hard on them)
(RD/CJ are multi-tasking: As they compose this...another masterpiece...they are debating
 as to composing a short composition with a dramatic ending or go long and hope for
 another dramatic ending. Who will win: Short RD or Long CJ?).

       As the serpent said to the lady: Chew on this...
       In recent years, scientists have been talking about eternal life but not of the Christian
variety; a recent episode of "Through the Wormhole" on the Science Channel delt with this
very issue.
       One prospect seems worse than death: uploading and converting the electrical
 neurons in the neocortex (the top portion of the brain) where the higher functions reside
(intelligence, personality, memory, morality, self-awareness, etc.) into microchips into computer
 software --- eternity in a box! No sensory input or motor output...no enjoyment of sex or eating
or drinking or laughter. We reiterate: No sensory input and motor output. Could you haunt the
computer's of  your family or enemies as you float through cyberspace? Would you be able to
 find any type of pleasure in such activity? Eternal life in a box.
       Eternal life in a body: Others are talking in terms of growing the 78 organs of your body
from a few of your cells and then placing the microchips into your new body. When a body part
wears out or is beyond repair it will be replaced. Others have suggested placing the computer
 version of your brain into a android.

As deists, we don't put much stock in the Bible. We reiterate: As the serpent said to the lady:
Chew on this...
       Adam and his second woman, Eve, are forbidden from eating the fruit from the Tree
of  Knowledge of Good and Evil (it doesn't specify an apple as  many think). The serpent
successfully temps Eve who, in turn, seduces Adam to do the selfsame thing. Naturally,
our downfall is the result of a woman: they never listen! Close the hatch of this comsat for
the ravenous feminists are coming for thee! ( I shall instruct...nay, kindly request... that Ares
and Athena allow the rare attractive ones to pass so that I -RD- can act on the ravenous
feelings that I shall have and continue to asct until satiated).
       God says: "Behold, the man has become as on of us, to know good and evil; and now,
lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the Tree of Life, and eat and live forever" (Genesis
3:22), he must be driven out of the Garden.  God places cherubim with a flaming and floating
sword at eastern edge of Eden to guard the Tree of Life from the ambitions of man. Man plays a
heavy price for wanting to play God.
Are we ready to be god-like? Are we about to eat from the Tree of Life!?!

CJ wins. RD: "He better come up with a dramatic ending equal to mine. Or, I'll fire him!

"It's about time; it's about space. It's about two of the funniest people in the funniest place" is part
of the theme song of a short-lived '70s' series called "It's About Time" starring Sid Caesar. What
 would it be like for the first man and woman to be eternal?
What time is it?
       Let's look at a case study: God (assuming His existence). How does life-in-the-box correlate
with God's 'life.' Christians, Jews and Muslims believe Him to be eternal. Our friend Plato had a
profound influence on the development of Christian thought. The most real things weren't
susceptible to time: abstract  objects - numbers, love, justice, redness, tallness, perfect horse,
perfect chair, etc.; the realm of the abstract and the perfect. They didn't exist in space and time.
How old is the number 3? It just continues to exist. These concepts are eternal and unchanging.
They exist in heaven and outside of space and time. One Christian view of God is that He's
perfect, eternal, unchanging and outside of space and time. The BIG Guy being separate from
His creation. 
      Plato spoke of the soul existing in heaven and then within a corrupt body and after death
returning to heaven. Plato's view being similar and influencing but not identical to Christian
theology.  As heretofore stated (during a previous visit to Plato's Cave), renowned physicist
Roger Penrose (who collaborated with an anesthesiologist) posits that the soul may inhabit the
microtubulars (the skeleton which gives shape and size to the different cells in the body)  of the
central nervous system or just the neocortex part of said system.
      Getting back to God after our soul interrupted (A victim of A.D.D.)...These theologians hold
the view that God's now is an expanded now encompassing past, present and future
simultaneously. Plato and this Christian perspective of Plato is similar to the deist's position of a
God that doesn't interact or interfere with His cosmos except after death if there is a soul or if
one's memories, personality, etc. exist in the mind (are mind and soul one and the same? -Popes
have said: "No." Some Christian theologians -outside of Roman Catholic Church- think
 otherwise) and the brain (contingent on them not being  one and the same). It should be noted
 that Einstein's Relativity calls for space-time: space and time being one thing. Relativity
describes past, present and future occurring at the same time. Further, Roger suggests three
realms: Material (physical, matter/energy); Mental (Immaterial mind); Mathematical/
Informational. He also considers the possibility that only the latter might be real.
(You might want to glance at other installments after all. While you're there see what happens
when we have Hercules visit Plato's Cave amongst other things.).
      This is in contrast to another strain of Christian thinking wherein the Biblical God appears to
act sequentially in space and time. God is concrete and a type of person. He is intimately involved
with His creation via prophets, miracles and the answering of prayers. The problem with this mode
of thinking is that it necessitates a deity of the universe; a deity that would have to have begun with
 the universe; a non-eternal deity.
      Still other Christian theologians somehow imagine the our now is a subset of His expanded
 now and somehow the vastly different 'nows' can interact. It has elements in common with
 panentheism (not to be confused with pantheism).
      The man-in-the-box is feeling lonely and neglected... Would he exist in one computer or
throughout cyberspace? Would he have a location in space and our sense of flowing time? Would
his space-time be Einstein's space-time or Plato's space and time? Could he relate to us. In the
quantum world a particle can exist in many places simultaneously. Our present computers have
two bits: ones and zeroes. Soon we will have quantum computers with ones, zeroes and
'in-betweens'. Theoretically, a particle can even exist in numerous places and even an infinite
 numbers of places. Would our man-in-the-box be like Plato's Man-in-the-Cave after he went
outside. --- possessing a perfect understanding of reality? Will he be everywhere at the same time
in cyber-universe and all knowing --- separate from us and either not capable or desiring to interact
with us. Will he be god-like?
     Should we eat from the Tree of Life!?!

Food for thought...Can God or man-in-the-box be cognizant of where he is in space-time?
Would he know where he is only when observed? God can't be observed? (Cat-in-the box
 Paradox).
     Having a bio-body or android body would position and focus him in space-time. He would
likely  be in one place and experience flow of time like the rest of us.

Demeter: "Let's celebrate a thought provoking and Pulitzer Prize deserving article. I'll supply
the food if Dionysus will contribute the wine."

Urania: "I'll party after I register a complaint: I didn't complain when I had to share my
comsat with Hermes and Plato --- but now Demeter!!!
Momus: "To paraphrase Plato {'Wise women or muses speak because they have something to
say; fools} - women and muses - {because they have to say something.'} Truer words hath never
 been spoke."
Plato: "Don't employ my own words to get me into trouble with the powers that be. To quote
myself in most apropos fashion {"The beginning is the most important part of the work."}

RD: "CJ's job is secure."

Urania: "I'm going to have the final word!



     
     
       


 

A DEPRESSING JOB!

Dago Red: "I've been a contributor to CJCS Comsats. Now,
I find myself at the helm; the helm of what? I certainly
didn't ask for this - my first duty: Notify Urania of the DEATH
of our friend Richard DePersio! I gave her a gift: A beautiful
 tribute to her in the form of a painting. And, now the dirty deed!
I called upon Percy Shelley for assistance which he ably supplied
in the form of prose and I had the sad task of reading it to her!
     Most musical of mourners, weep again!
     Lament anew, Urania! --he died,
     Who was {the Bearer of Truth},
     ...'old' and lonely.
DR: "I departed when Hermes arrived to comfort her. Shove this
job up BO's BIG, black, booty!
                                   **************
                                                 "GOD" who should be here, got lost and wound up at groups.
                                                   google.com/group/rickcosmos-eclectic
                                                   Enjoy and relish Urania's gifts at this comsat: posts up to a
                                                   year and a half or more still as fresh as a babies bottom.
    

Fwd: Urania Presents: Optical & Radio

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: b <rrdd3939@aol.com>
To: rrdd3939 <rrdd3939@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, May 30, 2013 9:23 am
Subject: Urania Presents: Optical & Radio

             URANIA PRESENTS: OPTICAL & RADIO -

                              FUN & EDUCATION

               by Richard DePersio & Citizen Journalist

 

Can the moon be seen during the day?

First Quarter Moon - Rises at Noon and sets at midnight.

Full Moon - Rises at Sunset and sets at Sunrise.

Third Quarter Moon - Rises at Midnight and Sets at Noon.

 

Recommended Activities:

Visual: Eyes - You should have; Binoculars - You should have;

Telescope - You should have.

www.heaven-above.com Provided: Star Maps with days and

times - and guidance.

Radio: www.amsat.org Inside (CJ is homebound) or outside

(International Space Station and satellites).

Equipment: SatPC32 Electronic Download or CD -              $45

                   Broadband VHF/UHF/XS Satellite RX PreAmp - 50

                   ARRL Satellite Handbook -                                  25

                   Getting Started with Amateur Satellites -             15

                                                                                Total:   $135

Enjoy going from simple to complex activities.

Also: be a citizen-scientist and download seti@home screen-savor

         and help with search for ET. Join TEAM USA; we are

         presently in 5th place - do something about it!

 

Urania: "We Gods and Goddesses are competitive. Hermes did a book

review - CJCS Comsats first - at www.quasarpolitical.blogspot.com

Pan is doing one at www.pan-multiverse.blogspot.com I refuse to

be left behind!"

Glow-in-the-Dark Constellations: A Field Guide for Young Stargazers

by C.E. Thompson and Illustrated by Randy Chewning in cooperation

with Clint Hatchett (Urania: "That's a manly and tough name. Clint of

American Museum of Natural History/Hayden Planetarium,. Is he still

there?"...Sunflower Publishing, 1989). It tells you where to find my

friends for adults new to observing, children, especially, 7 to 13 and, it

is great for parents and children to enjoy together.

Do enjoy my astronomy and Plato's Man-in-the Cave philosophy below...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fwd: Hermes Goes Ballistic...

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: b <rrdd3939@aol.com>
To: rrdd3939 <rrdd3939@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, May 30, 2013 9:17 am
Subject: Hermes Goes Ballistic...

(Also here for greater exposure).

The planned Hermes/Urania Joint Parts 3 & 4 have been

placed on hold. Why? They are holding each other and don't wish

to be disturbed!

Preface One: Our King-God was a philanderer who had a

preference for Goddesses, nymphs and mortals alike. He even

fathered children with humans, including, Hercules. Hera, his

wife, decided to follow him around in a scheme to keep him from

the nymphs. Zeus got nymph Echo to engage Hera in conversation

so that he could pursue the other nymphs. This ruse succeeded

for awhile until Hera got wise to it. In her wrath, she punished

chatterer Echo by compelling her to wander the earth forever;

unable to speak until someone else spoke first, nor to remain

silent when someone else had spoken, and then only to repeat

that which had been said. She suffered unrequited love with

 Narcissus (who only loved you-know-who). In sadness, the

poor nymph pined away until nothing remained of her but her

voice. It is her voice that we hear coming back to us in certain

places. This returning sound is named after the lovelorn and

lonely nymph. (CJ: "When Momus told me this story, we laughed

and laughed and laughed; our sense of humor being strange.").

(Do you remember when we were famous for our extra-long

preface (s) at www.rickcmtsite.blogspot.com - of course, you are

- rhetorical question).

Preface Two: We all know what a 'fly-by-night' individual or company

is. Originally, it meant a witch, one who, as popularly supposed,

actually mounted her broom at midnight and went off on her round

of appointments ( including stealing infants or to meet secretly with

the devil himself for less than holy activities (some of which many

today find acceptable.

(You're welcome to supply your own appropriate preface; we're very

democratic here).

                         HERMES GOING BALLISTIC

              by Richard DePersio and Citizen Journalist

                                 (Part of Tri-fecta*)

(Hermes: "I'm finished and I'm back...You are well-advised to read or

reread the articles at qp on air flight and space flight, especially, for Part

Two of this article) --- or not. Who cares if you do - rhetorical question).

Some ballistic missiles reach space and are considered sub-orbital.

BMs (what are you thinking, that's, disgusting!) are classified by range:

Battlefield (up to 60 miles) and tactical; short-range ballistic missiles;

long-range; ICBMs (4,000 miles or greater).

We wondered for many years why we couldn't have conventionally-tipped

ICBMs, perhaps, even retro-fitting, if feasible, conventionally-tip for nuclear-

tip as we reduce nuclear warheads in compliance with arms treaties;

otherwise new type ICBM would be dictated

We just learned that Gates stated in 2010 that we have been secretly

developing such missiles to be launched from subs. We want mobile land-

based for we contend that the Air Force should dominate in our military

strategies. Would anyone be surprised if Air Force is doing just that.

Take 'secret' Air Force 37b. Air force denies larger manned-version is

under-development.

(Hermes: "Too bad Echo couldn't fly in the air and space like me. We

could have had fun. Forget you 100-mile High Club! Commercial

airliners fly at a cruising altitude of between 6 and 8 miles. {Why 100

mile club?} Echo, I can go much higher! Although, not as high as Priapus -

the BIG show-off!").

      "Stick and Rudder" (see our review below): "A pilot must judge things

less by the eye and more by his other senses than the ground man.

 (Hermes: "Poor Echo was a ground woman")...The pilot needs this

sense of buoyancy" the sense of lift and a feel for his angle of attack.

"..he can always sense whether he is doing right or wrong largely by the

 feel of the controls."

      Early planes didn't have many instruments, some didn't even have

radios and so you flew by the 'seat-of-your-pants': using all senses,

including, ass to estimate wind speed, outside temperature, overall condition

 of plane, etc. (Hermes: "The only way to fly!").

      Before digital computers, the yoke or control wheel was

connected to airplane control surfaces by cables which were difficult to

install - these were mechanical links. (Hermes: "Look, visitors to comsat,

do you see any mechanical parts on me!")

      Fly-by wire*: with the computer in the loop, there is no need for

mechanical connections. Pilot inputs command, computer translates into

an electrical signal, wires to various actuators, signal is converted into a

mechanical action - example: elevator moves. (late '60s; without mechanical

back-up in early '70s). (Hermes: "I say: to Hades with computers. Some

people think that they will be as smart as Gods/Goddesses some day.

Taurus shit!).

     Pilot doesn't feel resistance and pressure on joystick. Pilots want the

mechanical feedback. It's bone of contention between pilots and designers

(physicists and engineers) who often don't see things alike, including, the

nature of flight. One airline manufacturer, will others follow, has developed

springs which are controlled by the computer system and give pilots the same

 feel - though artificial - of the old mechanical linkages. This means that the

stick force and balance can be tuned by software. The designer argues: this is

extra hardware and thus weight (which means more fuel which is expensive)

just to make the pilot more comfortable. The pilot contends: his having this

capability makes flight safer.

     There is less and less for the pilot to do --- and more and more avionics and

computer systems. It has began to infiltrate private piloting - zapping out much

of the fun!

     Major airliners  have a flight management  computer for commercial transports

 with which a pilot can preprogram the flight from take-off to landing and never

have to touch the controls!

     What will happen to the glamour of being a pilot? Pilots are well-known for

picking up a lot of girls, especially, in bars after he reveals his occupation. Some

non-pilot-guys use the line "I'm a pilot" to get tail and we don't mean the tail

of an airplane!

You're in a plane now --- you too Hermes, rest your shoes!...To be Continued... 

*The first pure electronic aircraft with no mechanical back-up system was the

Apollo Lunar Landing Research Vehicle which was first flown in '64.

Connections; www.rickcmtsite.blogspot.com www.pan-multiverse.blogspot.com

Read one or two --- why not three, after all, you're a winner.

 

 

Fwd: PLANES, TRAINS & AUTOMOBILES...

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: b <rrdd3939@aol.com>
To: rrdd3939 <rrdd3939@aol.com>
Sent: Wed, May 15, 2013 4:16 pm
Subject: PLANES, TRAINS & AUTOMOBILES...

      BACK to PLATO's CAVE: A HERMES/URANIA JOINT - Part One

                      PLANES, TRAINS and AUTOMOBILES

                    MOMUS APPROVED/ALETHEIA BLESSED

    by Richard DePersio and Aphrodite/Citizen Journalist Janus Calliope

          (the first DePersio with the late 'Wolfman'* Collaboration;

              let's hope that it is a Harbinger of Things to Come**)

 

(Part Two follows...Part One will continue in Part Three). 

In part two, RD inadvertently offends Zeus; here, in part one, he

further apologies. Is time in reverse!?! There's a FOX NEWS ALERT

concerning it at www.rickcmtsite.blogspot.com 

RD: I got it! Saturn's (in Greek Mythology: Kronos --- BOO!!!; that should

please Zeus) Shepard's: Type One - moons outside of the ring system 

whose perturbations cause gaps in the rings - Daphnis is responsible for

 the Keeler Gap and our friend Pan (www.pan-multiverse.blogspot.com )

claims credit for the Encke Gap, both in the 'A' Ring; Type two - moons

near edge of a ring causes them to enjoy sharp, crisp/more definition

edges -- Promethesus' post is the inner while Ponderous (the first

human female created by Zeus) handles the outer 'F' Ring and it was

thought that Atlas*** was given boss duties regarding 'A' ring but it turns

out the that our buddy Janus and Epimetheus have that honor and power.

 (Atlas disgraced. HOORAY! That should please the King of the Gods

(capital 'G').

(RD: "When in high school, I was in college-level program at a planetarium

and was assigned a project regarding the Gaps (not jeans). This  section

afforded me the opportunity to brag! Never a slave to fashion: never wore

 jeans or dungarees. Boasting again!).

 

What does it have to do with Al's Relativity!?!

Wind Drift: What happens if there is wind blowing against your airplane?

 "Nothing works out as it ought to work out. In crosswind flight---does

the air press harder against the airplane's windward side than against its

leeward side?" When it comes to flight --- leave common sense on the

ground! A pilot would say: It is futile to try to counteract drift!!!

      "It helplessly participates in the motion of that air mass, it 'drifts'

with the wind." When force isn't force. The plane is moving because the

wind is pushing it. "The wind can't blow against the airplane because

the airplane doesn't present itself to be blown at; it yields without any

resistance: it moves with the air. A pure example of this kind of motion,

drift, is the travel of the free balloon. Here is one kind of aircraft that has

no motion at all through the air (other than perhaps climb or descent)

but moves only with the air. The free balloon has no 'air speed,' no

relative wind'. To its pilots, it always seems to be flying in a complete

dead calm. Even though it may be flying in a gale and drifting across the

country at 50 m.p.h., there still won't be even the gentlest breeze in the

basket. This is because it yields so completely to the motion of the air,

and it participates in it: the balloon does not push against the air, and

neither does the air push against the balloon; hence no forces arise."

WHAT!!! The wind can't exert a force on the balloon by virtue of the

fact that the balloon is drifting; drifting nullifies all wind forces on it. If

you blow against a ball, the ball moves as you placed a force in it. On the

other hand, if the air around the ball moves and the ball moves with it -

no force has been exerted on the balloon. No force; total surrender (or

yield. Still not convinced?

      You're no longer in an airplane or a balloon. Now, you're safely on

the ground, well, in a railroad car. You walking in the railroad car is

just like an airplane flying in a wind. Think in terms of steady motion:

you are moving at the same speed and in the same direction. You

wouldn't be able to tell if you were moving or standing still (for our

thought experiment (Al loved to think and explain by TE; we will ignore

 jolting and bouncing due to roughness of track).

      You find that you can walk forward or backwards or sideways with

ease; if you don't look outside you couldn't tell in which direction that

the train is moving. Draw the blinds. If the track were smooth, you

would wonder if you are moving or standing still. You don't even have

to struggle to balance if you move "cross-train," left to right in the car.

The motion of the train doesn't concern you.

      "When a pilot flies in a wind, the wind is his railroad coach, but we

shall see about that later."

      There is your motion relative to the train and the motion of the train

to the rest of the USA outside --- of course, you being carried by train

at say 75 m.p.h. You walk to the dining car, eat and return to your seat

and say, "I'm back where I started from" (we apologize, dear readers for

ending a sentence with a preposition. as regards, female readers,

no apology, consider it a strange proposition!). In one sense, you would

be right and in another wrong. The seat to which you have returned has

in the meantime moved something like 50 miles. It's a paradox. Whether

or not you are truly back to where you started from "depends, in highbrow

words" on your "frame of reference," that is which side of the facts {you}

choose to regard, and which side {you} choose to disregard; whether

{you} judge your position by reference to the train, or by reference to the

United States outside.

     "...an airplane that flies in moving air is like {you} who walks within a

moving train. Just as {you are} "contained" by the railroad coach {car}

and cut off from the scenery outside, so is the airplane, once in flight,

entirely "contained" by the surrounding air and cut off with all connection

with the ground. Its propeller {or engine} propels it, not by acting on the

ground, but by acting on the surrounding air. Its wings hold it up, not by

acting on the ground, but by acting on the surrounding air. Thus the

cubic mile or so of air in which the airplane {or jet} flies is to it exactly

what the railroad coach is to the train passenger {you}. The only

difference is that the railroad coach surrounds  {you} visibly, while the

air surrounds the airplane invisibly."

     Hence, whatever is true of you when you walk within a moving train

"is equally true of an airplane that flies within a mass of air which is

itself in motion. The airplane, too, has two motions, both at the same

time. It has a motion though the air, which corresponds to {you} walking

through the train. It has a motion with the air, called drift, which corresponds

to the travel of the train." A pilot can focus his attention on one motion

or the other and, with time, can hold both in mind simultaneously and not

experience confusion.

     "Look first at his motion through the air: in a sense this is the all-

important motion, since it is what makes the air strike his wing and

produce lift; what makes the air strike the tail surfaces and gives him

stability and control. And incidentally, it is the motion that registers on the

air-speed indicator."

    "This motion of the airplane through the air is in no way affected by the

fact that the air itself is in motion---any more than {you} walking within the

train is affected by the travel of the train." You walk in train in all directions

and experience no need for special balancing and no sensations. "In the

same way, the airplane can not 'feel' any difference between down-wind

and up-wind flight and cross-wind flight. It feels the same; the engine has

to pull no harder; the air-speed indicator indicates the same; the lift is

the same."

    You can draw the blinds and not know which way train is moving. Pilot

can draw the blinds --- not look at ground or get above a solid overcast.

The pilot would not know if he were flying in a gale or a calm. "In short,

the wind does not have any effect on air speed, lift, stability, and control:

an airplane, once in flight, can not 'feel' the wind.

    No matter what you do within train - you helplessly participate in its

motion; regardless of pilots maneuvers, he helplessly participates in the

motion of the air mass; it 'drifts' with the wind. It is helpless like the

free balloon discussed way back a the beginning; there is no force on

plane by wind because plane is completely yielding.

    Flying a Heading: direction on compass; Flying a Track: direction that

you are moving over the ground; Flying a Course: It is the intended path.

    Student pilot looks at ground and sees plane veering eastward and

wants to take action to 'counteract drift' by use of rudder. This is

a waste of time and could change your heading. Is the situation

hopeless; are we victims of DRIFT!  Nay! A trick can save the day.

"Nothing in the world will keep an airplane sliding eastward as long as

it is flowing in westward flowing air {crosswind)" Does it mean that a

plane can never reach its destination!?! "...you can outfox this effect,

and the experienced pilot does so automatically. Upon noticing the

eastward drift, he points his airplane slightly west of north...when the

eastward motion with the air adds itself to this northwesterly motion

through the air, the resulting motion over the ground will be exactly

north."

    Let's take it further...You're in a spacecraft with no windows. Is it

moving at a constant speed or accelerating at the same rate and

moving in the same direction --- or is craft sitting on the earth?

    CJ enters cars, sits and says, "I'm out of here - for now. To be

continued at Part Four...Part Two follows."

(*We so enjoyed working with the late Wolfman and enthusiastically

welcome him to CJCS staff. We review his "Stick and Rudder" in our

first ever book review in "To Hermes with Love Urania" at

www.quasarpolitical.blogspot.com and www.comsat-ak.blogspot.com

 Without explicitly saying so, the Wolf taught some Albert Relativity.

**Things to Come" was a book by H.G. Wells which was made into a

motion picture. Who knows, we made collaborate with H.G. in the

future --- he does have a "Time Machine." Enjoy our collaboration with

Sir Canon Doyle: "Citizen Journalist is Missing" (start with 'Gone Fishin'

and work you way backwards; "The Return of Citizen Journalist" here

and "Prequel: Citizen Journalist in the Diogenes Club" a quasarpolitical.

***Please don't tell Zeus but we have been sympathetic toward Atlas at

"Urania Moons You" - comsat and "Hermes Final Message" and

"Hermes BIG Challenge at quasarp. SHH!

{ } ours)