all of a sudden

What would we do if all of a sudden we had to communicate without asking questions?

Someone would have to invent the question and then give the shocking news to the world of the discovery of a new golden tool and how it works. If questions hadn’t come into existence, we might be going around giving each other commands like: Give me your opinion! And I mean it!

Were there questions before language? Perhaps using body language, a gesture, or grunts of a certain tone? I wonder about the moments when a human first asked a question as we do today and got an answer.

Do animals ask questions? Do insects? Earthlings like us couldn’t function properly without them. Are questions instinctual?

Does our type of civilization require questions? Asking for something in a courteous and polite way generally gets the information or object we want or need.

The questions of science aren’t that easy because the answers are usually unknown to everyone. Sometimes in science, it’s like asking for a sweetener, but no one knows for sure if a plant like sugarcane exists, and the search begins.

There are at least nineteen forms of the word question, five noun-definitions, two verb-definitions, and the word is used in the expression of at least nine different phrases.

hat’s next?

hat about doing ithout diphpherent letters of the alphabet?

Advertisements

sharks

Imagine two sharks taking a break from their hunting to take a few moments to rest. They are floating facing each other and the smaller one says…

Food is getting less and less each year. There’s a rumor going ‘round there’s better hunting over close by the shore this time of year.

The other shark replies…

We know better than to mess with the humans, but their constant pollution of our home is the last straw. They don’t realize what we’ll do to live another day.

general relativity

According to General Relativity, as specifically stated by its author Albert Einstein, “Without matter there can be no space-time.” That is because space-time is relational (not a physical thing), and without matter there are no relations between physical things.

General Relativity is our most elegant and by far the best-tested theory of how matter, gravitation and space-time work.

So, in the beginning, some physical thing was needed for time and space to exist. Today our talented bodies exist as this trio. And we answers to names are complex entities having no matter and are relational and very useful tools created by our bodies to deal the social world. We identities are our animal’s response to the world.

What came first the chicken or the egg? The egg of course. Or did they both coexist all along the way to chicken-hood? They are expressions of the same thing: the egg/chicken. Is it that “you can’t have one without the other” as the song says.

We can’t even have a zero unless we have a one. Nor can we have a good without a bad. “I’m stuck in the middle with you.” Song after song after song. What if music would never stop? Would we all find ways to escape for rapturous periods of non-music?

Is contrast the essential element and discrimination the essential talent?

broken glass

One day I asked my son a question as he put on his socks and shoes “Why don’t you go ahead and put a shoe over the sock you’ve just put on?”

He said “I don’t know…I guess it’s because I haven’t ever thought about it much.”

I then asked “If you had a reason to wait to put a shoe on a socked foot, what would it be?

He paused for a while and said “I think it would be better to run around in an emergency having two socks on than having one foot protected and the other bare.” He paused and said “You never know how much broken glass you might have to go through during and emergency.”

Then I said “The broken glass would come right through your socks plus you could hop around on the protected foot having a shoe and…”

He interrupted me and said “Dad you’re impossible…think about this way, wouldn’t it be better to have a protected foot and the other foot with a sock or two feet with socks you can use to skate with instead of a bare foot trying to skate through broken glass, besides if I’m hopping around on one leg, I could easily loose my balance and crash my whole body onto the broken glass.”

End of story.

 

the great diversity

Is it that total diversity is the only fixed thing? Is the idea that each thing is somehow different from all other things probably true but still at bottom a belief — a theory that can never be proven beyond a shadow?

Is trying to prove total diversity a crazy adventure? Is the answer yes because every thing in the universe would have to be examined and recorded and compared with everything else in existence? What about the tools that it would take to measure the biggest and smallest of things?

And isn’t there then the impossible problem of all the measuring tools needed for each category of objects to be measured having to be exactly the same? Then who will measure the measuring tools to make sure they will yield correct results, etc.? Since all of that is impossible, we would be left with having to create one super tool to measure everything.

What about the tool problem again and the huge crew of robot operators needed to keep the super tool calibrated and free from wear? Let’s say all this happens and off the tool goes on its impossible task and billions of years later it reports back to say that the “diversity belief” now should read … “No two things are exactly alike at the same time. But this too has to be investigated.”

So, why not use the standard idea? Isn’t it probable enough from what’s been observed so far that no two things are exactly alike? No. Well yes if you have to have it be easy. Can all quarks be different from all other quarks and can all of the atoms of the same element be different too? What about energy? Is all energy the same at its simplest? Are all viewpoints unique? Of course language is tricky and slippery.

Is there no end to exactness in the real world? And if we have to have it, doesn’t it create one impossible situation after another? Is it that physical exactness has to be relative and if so where does the real non relative form of exactness reside — the type that’s the same no matter whose mind it’s in?

Do we live in a self-created area thinking mostly about the tips of the edges? Are all-or-nothing thoughts natural mental traps which automatically blur the vast middle ground? Are we all part of the great diversity?

 

quick and dirty

If I (the identity) am created by the human animal, is it probable that I will end at its death? Should I be grateful to the universe and to earth my home and to life and thankful of my position of occupying the captain’s chair of this my ride?

How do I give back? Commune with the (my) being? Commune with the universe? How? Both at the same time?

The sages say to find a way to become silent for a little while every day.

There are no secrets about meditation? It’s good for us regardless of our motives. It’s easy? Pretty much. There’s lots of good and free advice and instruction on the web and there are some rip offs. You don’t have to pay to get good instruction.

The quick and dirty instructions: Sit down and shut up. (A joke of course.)

Better instructions: Sitting down in a comfortable chair with both feet flat on the floor and relaxing with slow deep breaths resting one’s hands in one’s lap and begin by repeating a mantra. “Om” is the classical mantra. One repeats the mantra when the vibration of the letter “m” finally dies down. The mantra can be pronounced out loud or pronounced only in the mind.

Most importantly, one’s meditation will be interrupted again and again by trains of thought. When this happens, know that this is normal, and treat it as an opportunity to get back to the mantra by dismissing it with a humorous comment like “Ah hah, there I go again.”

Once or twice a day is good. Once for about 30 minutes and if twice a day, meditate for about 20 minutes each time. Expect calmness, the lessening of stress, and a more positive outlook and you won’t be disappointed.

One last note: A regular practice is what you are after because a regular practice allows the calming effect to build over time and one becomes more mindful the longer one has had a regular practice.

 

“good foods” for a bomb shelter

What is the one word that could be the spearhead to better health?

How about the word cruciferous? But what if someone said “What about organic as the one word?”

Would the reply be that the word cruciferous points to the key group of vegetables having the greatest number and variety of micronutrients along with very few calories? And the word organic has the added step of having to ask organic what? Cruciferous vegetables? But one might one say “Small difference, it’s almost a tie.” Hold on…?

Does the word organic rule out the bad fats and the white carbohydrates, the two huge groups of low-nutrient and high-calorie poisons? Is poisons too harsh a word? Probably, but we are debating here with a straw man. OK, they are “good foods” for a bomb shelter.