New Sonnets.

This sonnet sings about the Internet,

And Cyber-Space, where minds can wander free.

The Virtual Dimension makes 5-D;

We think we know its Nature, but you bet,

A tiny fragment’s all each ‘soul’ can ‘get’.

We each have just one life, in which ‘to be’ ‘?’

So live it to the full, and live it free,

But, ‘Never harm another!’ don’t forget.

“The way I see the world must be the truth? “

One day I’ll die, but until then I’ll thrive.

I’ll die a natural death, be slain, or euth-

-Enised.  For Universal Justice I shall strive

In health, or long beyond forgotten youth.

In Cyber- and real- Space I am alive!

Naum Tered

May 16

[Written when the first Surface wasn't working and hence forced to revert to a pen and paper.]

--------------

[Written to a former friend, 'A']

I’ll write a brand new poem just for you.

It’s written in this way because I can,

And when I force my mental thoughts to scan

They come out making sense and looking new.

Am I suggesting that we both renew

Our friendship?  I forget how it began.

Please see me as a person , not a man!

And share our years remaining – all too few.

A Sonnet for a Lady, nothing less,

For meaning is debased by mundane prose;

Though I have little meaning, I confess.

The future will transpire as time flows

And Fate or Heaven’s Will will either bless

Or not endorse the way that our life goes.

Naum Tered

May 16

---------------
[After a few lines of a normal letter, I suddenly felt a poem coming on.]

I used to know her then as just, ‘B.B.’

Her other name is Barbara Clinton Brown,

And by that name she’s known all over town.

She knows the world as only she can see

And lives her life authentically and free;

Though plagued by troubles, they don’t bring her down

“Outrageous fortune” does not make her frown;

And through it all she’s been a friend to me.

She sees the way the world might yet turn out

Although she might not live to see the end

And yet she understands without a doubt

The outcome of the present Social Trend.

She sees the truth and knows what life’s about

I’m blessed that such a person is my friend.

Naum Tered

May 16

-----------------------

[In the same letter, after a couple of prose lines, written at first without newlines, but only for a few lines..]

We could have met in town again today,

But I’m put off by cold and wind and rain,

It won’t be long before we meet again,

Right now when that might be I cannot say.

I’ll stop this now, I’ve nothing more to say,

And writing in bad light conflicts my brain.

Who thought a new computer could cause pain?

This is, without a doubt, a dismal day.

Though we’re apart, you see I think of you.

Outside my house and in my brain a storm

Is worse than any that I ever knew

But now the thought of you will help transform

My mood from dark to light; and help me through

I thank you, Yours sincerely, your friend Naum

Naum Tered

May 16

First Blog entry with the new Microsoft surface, a very noisy keyboard.
What a nightmare.
Spilt tea on the old one thursday night.  went to jb hifi friday arvo and got this, a microsoft surface. 
It didn't work, and after a frustrating saturday and a wait on sunday, just doing things here by candlelight, including three new sonnets, two to Barb and one to Anne, that I might not send at all. 
Anyway got a new one yesterday.
It is so different.
Can't make the ipod sync.
The whole thing has left me feeling flummoxed.  Brain not working now.

Installation: A Decord of Highs

And now I can't remember what it was.  I was having the best idea in the blue kitchen, but by the time I fired up Blogger and found my Minicipality, I had forgotten.
...

An Installation

I have literally heaps of match boxes in my kitchen.  they pile up round the bin where I have tossed them after they were emptied.  I have most of the dead matches, too.

I envision all the boxes with the dead matches in them, and half open, perhaps lined up in eight columns.  The title would be, "A Decade of Highs".

The boxes are all the same.  In the past, Redhead changed the design of the boxes as they appealed to collectors, but few people collect machboxes now.  There is a term for that.

Mine are in a random heap where they were badly and casually tossed.  However occasionally, if I see on that is showing the back, I turn it over carefully to be in the same position exactly, just reversed.

Hierarchy of awareness.

My new arithmetic.

1 + 1 = e

We have had exponential measuring scales, like dbs for ages, but they were empirically devised and used because they worked, without any fundamental understanding of why they worked, except that growth rate for almost everything is proportional to size.  The principle was not derived ‘a priori’ (by thought alone) from the fundamental theorems of logic. 

Mathematics has been at fault since Frege in the belief that integers have an ontological existence in the “real world” of aware sense experience equal to physical objects like rocks or pencils

Things exist or do not exist, so the concept of mathematical unity must exist, but zero does not exist in the real world as nothing is nothing.  It is reasonable to believe that the numbers e and pi are also “real” as their influence in the ways that energy-systems and “things” relate is obvious.  Most other integers are compounds or agglomerations of single things, not entities in themselves, not even the much loved Prime numbers and certainly not the fractions including irrational numbers.

The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.  Two separate things together in a pair has a much higher level energy-system than merely the arithmetic, or vector sum of the separate energy systems.  The example that is most evident to all people is the idea of two people becoming a “couple”, or the business success of Partnerships compared to just a lot of people working on the same project. One anything, paired properly with another is not two of them but “e” of them, for surely it is this astonishing number that is the result, which is why everything grows at that rate when it grows naturally.

That is why married couples pop out babies; they have more energy in their system than two people can maintain with stability, so produce offspring. 

This theory can obviously be extended to more than two, when it becomes a subject for micro-sociology and small-group theory.  But the complexity becomes challenging, like taking a mathematical concept to other higher dimensions and probably has little real-world significance.

Hierarchy of awareness.

It is possible to postulate a hierarchy of awareness.  Aristotle and the ancients did this, believing that people were the most aware creatures, but all living animals had a lower type of “soul” that extended down in degrees till it reached plants, and thence to inanimate objects themselves, like crystals and rocks, and even molten metal.

When it was first seen that all “knowledge” was everything that had been thought, but even before any person thought of something, it seemed to have existed, which is why the “mind of God” became a necessary part of “Creation” because without it there was no one to know all the things that were not yet (at any time) known by any people.

If Consciousness is a propert y of all “energy-systems”, then even simple systems must be self-aware, though the simple sense of being that a rock might hold is unimaginably basic, though possessing mass, there might be some sensation of acceleration though space-time.  Indeed, we experience it and believe it is a higher property of our advanced biology, but perhaps it is intrinsic in our physical existence.  
"Reality" only exists because it is known to exist by itself.  No "mind of God" is needed if we believe that matter itself is what is self-aware and hence can know of its own existence.

Much more interesting that looking downwards in this hierarchy is looking up.  We see ourselves as the pinnacle of the development of Consciousness.  If we accept the concept of the hierarchy, we see ourselves as having morphed or evolved out of lower forms, and have now reached the apotheosis. 

It is more logical to expect that the future will proceed with continued development instead of stagnation at the present level for ever.  In other words, our human consciousness and self-awareness might eventually be superceded by a higher level, that is as much above us as we are above the great apes and other “animals”, and they are above plants, etc.  These things are surely quantified in some way, so there are shells of stability at some order of magnitude and the next level is a vast jump away.  We, people, will not gradually develop our consciousness, but will all stay within the same range for many generations, then a new parallel form of higher consciousness will emerge.

Or, perhaps it already has and we just cannot yet communicate with it?

Bitdefender Request

Bitdefender Request

Please refund and cancel my purchase of Bitdefender Internet Security 2016.

It was the wrong product that I purchased in confusion.



Invoice No: BV22532365

28th March 2016

Order No: 48286829



I phoned Bitdefender Support to understand the annoying, endless eMails
to induce me to pay early and upgrade, which I would have done had it
been easy and I wasn't pestered. I was sent complex instructions and
spoke to Rebecca on 28th. All the versions of what to do were different.
Anything I tried did not match what appeared on the screen to the
instructions.



Despite my confusion I made a payment and received a receipt.  Next was a
long process that included removing the existing Bitdefender and
rebooting twice.



When Bitdefender reloaded, I was right back where I stareted with the
2015 version and still only the fifty or so days I still have left on my
old contract.  So my purchase was not reflected.  Yesterday I spoke
with David, but he just confused me more.  I told him I wanted a refund
and he seemed to agree that it was possible but that he was unable to
authorise it.



Bitdefender is too difficult to renew and I would like a refund, please.



Norman F Pollack

nfp@tered.com

+61 414 766 825

Mathematicians Discover Prime Conspiracy | Quanta Magazine

"If they were truly random, primes ending in 1 would be followed by a prime ending in one 25% of this time, instead the mathematicians foundthis order occurred in only 18.5 per cent of cases.

"The chance of a prime ending in 1 being followed by a prime ending in 3 or 7 was about 30 per cent, and about 22 per cent for 9. "

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/mathematicians-stunned-by-unrandomness-discovery-of-prime-numbers-20160315-gnjvcu.html#ixzz43CpFSlRK

This is all because of the false belief that numbers are somehow real objects.  It is a basic issue in Philosophy.  The "basic theorum of numbers" argues that every number must be either a prime or a unique product of factors.  But this is a truism if you don't assume numbers somehow exist out there to be examined, but are mental constructs with no other ontology.  Then we make up larger numbers by multiplying smaller numbers together, and the gaps where this does not produce a number to be slotted into the number line, are the Primes.  They are the empty spaces between our constructed numbers, but become the substance of later numbers as they are inscluded as a factor.

It stems from a principle (I forget the name) perhaps attributable to Popper, that if there is a good Scientific Theory, then everything within it must be equally true and correct, and everything outside it is excluded as non-existent.  The usual false conclusion from this is for Science to deny the existence of everything that is currently not covered by verifiable scientific theory.  Another consequence is the conclusion that because all Science is couched in Mathematical terms, then as part of the valid theory, the mathematics must be valid, including the consequent ontologically "real" existence of numbers.

There are not an infinite quatity of numbers "out there" somewhere whether we know about them or not, like undiscoverd planets in distant galaxies, but this is not so.  They come into existence when "observed" like Shroedinger's Cat, where the quantum probablity "breaks down" and an actual result is manifest when it is seen.  The same happens with numbers.  Science is still Platonic.

"Looking at prime numbers written in base 3 — in which roughly half the primes end in 1 and half end in 2 — he found that among primes smaller than 1,000, a prime ending in 1 is more than twice as likely to be followed by a prime ending in 2 than by another prime ending in 1. Likewise, a prime ending in 2 prefers to be followed a prime ending in 1."


Mathematicians Discover Prime Conspiracy | Quanta Magazine

Aparently discounted by mathematical theorists, the obvious reason is not because it is a property of the prime numbers themselves, but a consequnce of our cyclic numbering system, which in any base, repeats with the rhythm of the base-number.  Numbers are like ripples into the distance, with a ripple for each prime number as it becomes a possible factor in future numbers.  These ripples build on each other with bigger and bigger composite numbers, but occasionally there is a gap between the crests of the ripples where there is no ripple and there, in the gap is a prime.  When we look at this sea of numbers, we use the torchlight of our numbering system, in base three or base ten, and this has an inbuilt pattern that causes an interference pattern with the ripples of numbers so that the primes show up in a pattern of distribution, as here idscovered.  It is a kind of moire pattern.