Redshift theory and, quantizing speech.
Shea F. Kenny
a star or galaxy, or in fact any object is moving towards or away from
the observer. The same can apply to people.
In fact, if you want to prove that human psychology and
development is dependent upon universal laws, redshift theory provides
a template for a matrixed model. The field of spectometry, relies
upon mathematical formulae developed by Maxwell Born. And, quantum
mechanics derived it's theories from there.
He developed the "Spectral lines matrix algebra", that allows
numerous fields of study to analyze chemical composition. Which is
what redshift theory does.
But, you need to know the entire spectrum before you can so
much as discover redshift in the first place.
A spectrum is a gradient, or scale, of change from one
extreme to the other. A matrix provides for phenomenon that accounts
for varying commbinations of each element on the scale, with other
points on the scale.
For example. Oxygen has a specific point on the spectrum.
Combine it with hydrogen and you might get water. Heat it up to the
point where it emits light, and you can measure it using spectral
lines matrix algebra and determine that water is the element emitting
light. Actually, it's much more complex than that but it's a start.
So. In human terms it starts out that you can tell whether a
person is moving towards you or away from you, just as you can a star.
By the "light" they emit.
And actually, you can tell two things. One, the aforementioned
and two, their character. What elements they are composed of.
Now, this takes one of two things. Study, or the accumulation
of knowledge, or technology, ie the application of knowledge. Stuff
you already know.
So, when people talk, they emit light. And you can analyze
it's content. You can make fair determinations of what kind of person
they are, or what they are composed of in terms of various social
attributes.
Now we get into the more complex observations. Meaning, you
start out by observing those that speak, "voluntarily". Or of their
own violition. Then you can end up in the realm of various
enterprises where you observe those that are induced to speak. Where
you say something just to induce a reaction so as to increase the
array of elements that are addressed and are compelled to emit, a
thought.
These enterprises, can be valid or criminal. And so there's a
spectrum of observation there as well.
But the point is human conversation can be read much like
light from the stars. People are moving towards you or away from you.
All revealed by what they say.
And right there is a telling point, and a bone of contention.
Does that make you feel more, or less.
Secure?
--
Live from Camp Labor, the Moon....
This has been, Lunar Network News....
Click for the audio: http://web3.foxinternet.com/lunarchy01/signoff.wav
Skip
--------------
"Base not your joy upon the deeds of others, for what is given can be taken away."
--------------
Shea F. Kenny
>Wow Shea. Have you been taking night classes?
about?
And actually, I thoroughly messed it up. Someone more
knowledgeable would think so. I didn't go into enough detail. But, it
was something to do...
Al Smith
"Shea F. Kenny" wrote:
>
> Redshift is the term used by astronomers to determine whether
> a star or galaxy, or in fact any object is moving towards or away from
> the observer. The same can apply to people.
The people that are coming towards you are commies.
Shea F. Kenny
If that were true they wouldn't be red.
Next?
Shea F. Kenny
any form of analysis. It can be simplified and generally, it must be.
But, there are times when it's critical to be very, very precise in
evaluating what kind of person you're dealing with.
Generally, it's sufficient to determine whether someone is
moving closer to you or further away. But now's a good time to define
just what they are moving to or away from.
Here things get a little simpler. People are always
gravitating towards, concepts. And although there are any variety of
those, it's helpful to know in broad terms what any given situation
revolves around.
People either do or do not, share concepts. And that is the
fundamental aspect of any relationship.
So, guess what? The idea behind determining the value of any
relationship, is defining the concepts that are shared between the
individuals in question.
Now, amongst humans, concepts are what define, reality.
Reality, is a function of things that work to provide the
greatest level of productivity, amongst people who come into contact
with each other and interact.
Thus, reality is what actually occurs. Thus, reality, is
truth.
So, concepts are truth. But, only in the fundamental sense.
People can concieve of any variety of things. Only those concepts
that pan out what they propose, get considered as being the truth.
So, concepts require development. And so do human beings.
They have this or idea about how things should be. But those concepts
change, as those people develop.
And "so" again, you have a possible system of measuring
development.
Redshift can determine whether or not an individual is
approximating what is already tried and true, or wheeling off in some
other direction to points un-known.
And then various other factors need to be applied in terms of
figuring out whether or not it's worth the risk, even being around
them.
But, at least there's a basis for friendships and various
other relationships. And one that can be fundamentally understood.
They simply share the same concepts or perceptions.
Now, that seems simple enough. And it is. And it's likely
supposed to be.
But the question is, what do you do with those that don't
share your concepts? Not just individually, but socially.
You see, when people don't share concepts, conflicts arise.
Concepts, are all about how resources are used. Time. Time is the
biggest resource. Or if you preffer, most significant. We're all
limited by that factor alone. Then it's a matter of the material.
So then comes the concept of, efficiency. The most, being
produced from the least, amount of resources.
And now the ball should be rollin'.
Efficiency, requires formulae. Hard and fast rules, that
don't change. Don't make excuses.
And that's hard for human beings to endure.
So, there's a conflict right there.
Efficiency often requires a sacrifice of comfort, or immediate
security. Personal interest or well being. And more often than that,
the security of someone else.
So you see, a lot of "sorting" has to be done. Sifting
through information and evaluation.
Now, what I'm trying to do here is "simply" encompass the
entire spectrum of human relationships. The one on one, to the many
upon one, and the one upon many.
And it starts with the idea of what a relationship is. The
concept or perception of reality, shared between the various points of
origin.
So, it begins where? With the other guy?
Or, you?
I think it's you. You, defining your concepts of reality.
Your expectations of others. And then defining what others expect of
you.
And how the two shall meet....;-)
Al Smith
Shea F. Kenny wrote:
> Al Smith <caddys...@my-deja.com>, (AKA Osama bin Sleepin) sez:
>
>>
>>"Shea F. Kenny" wrote:
>>
>>> Redshift is the term used by astronomers to determine whether
>>>a star or galaxy, or in fact any object is moving towards or away from
>>>the observer. The same can apply to people.
>>>
>>The people that are coming towards you are commies.
>>
>
> If that were true they wouldn't be red.
They have flowers in their hands.
Shea F. Kenny
>They have flowers in their hands.
Yes, and full of poisonous pollen. You should stay well clear
of them.
And me too, while you're at it....
Wim Lewis
Well, things that are moving *away* from you appear redshifted. So people
who are moving away from you should appear to be commies. But if someone
is coming towards you and is not noticeably aristocratic (blue-blood-shifted),
then they must have started out red, and so they are commies in disguise.
The Hubble Constant explains why countries which are far away (such as
Russia, Sweden, and New Zealand) appear to be communistic.
--
Wim Lewis <wi...@hhhh.org>, Seattle, WA, USA. PGP keyID 27F772C1
My ambition is to have all [my] arguments seem annoyingly plausible -Joe Slater
Shea F. Kenny
>The Hubble Constant explains why countries which are far away (such as
>Russia, Sweden, and New Zealand) appear to be communistic.
Yeah? You clowns wanna give the lectures? Fine. I'm sure we'll
all end up much better informed with this stuff. You people can't
tell the difference between astronomy and geology and then go on and
try and throw in politics.
Morons.