You Rot

What are parenthetical remarks?  I don’t know, I’m not a writer.  But, without parentheses, I will have to take many more words to say the same thing, and some of the logic is going to suffer altogether: “Some of the logic is going to suffer.”

It can be said that clan lab manuals are anathema to acquisition of the knowledge base.  New chemical information gets out of date. 

I can say that I am tired of defending myself.  However, the last person I asked if he was tired answers, “Do you mean mentally or physically?”  I can pretend, but I want it to be overly intellectual.  That gets old.  I had noticed the time of day.  It seemed late.  This means tired.  Defending just means having to be adversarial to still have a spine.

These difficulties of late were accompanied by flashes of ideation brought on by reading license plates again.  I have heard a lot of songs today, in the car alone, in my head and on the radio.  Extremely difficult moral choices to be made I suppose are common to everyone at some time or other, and a way of life for ones higher up the food chain.

Hey, 200 words.  I was thinking something about that royal we convention, what was it?  I have to tell you a license plate.  On the second plate, I had to think about not driving too close.  One character was a 7 or a Z.  They both had a 6 first.  I see that so often it is as if the car is to the owner as a dog is to the owner, and it is being sicced on the adversary.  However, this is information flow.  Now, damn it, I have a topic: tachyons.  Before I go get that, let’s look at the first thing about chemistry, the electron.  If you consider, execute, suffer and observe attacks, you are seeing what can only be electrons performing their savage dance.  They attack because the fastest thing attacks, with the highest mobility.  That means a low mass.  This was the first known pointlike particle. 

6AWR546 said the plate.  An earlier plate I am guessing as TXJ123.  For comparison, a pair said 666 and 999 respectively,  a partial license plate.  I lost the sense.  This is to seek out justification for supposing some physical law, description, animism or numerology.  It used to do that.  Now we can understand reasons for ordering up randomness.  By the way, a writer can’t get totally away from words that rhyme, or words closely related to each other by chance of spelling.  Reason ands reality are two such; as license plates we’d love to have REA.  Ugh!  I take that back.  It’s the one which says to “Re”, something: read up, re-up (sell enough drugs to afford another quantity), and to Re: A.  Fact Number A-OK*.

I was making a big deal while stoned about how I won’t ever find a job, I would not hire me, and how I wasn’t like any of the folks I saw working, which is what they call stressing out.  This is a constant subjective outlook, by that I mean once in a while.  It was apropos of reception of pity.  A round of “Awww”, was called for, so it said AW.  It said six in front because it sounds like the words, this, its, or is, as in the lead-in phrase used by the comedian Don Rickles, “I tell you this.”  Tachyons are the theoretical physics of the Nineteen Sixties.  It is best to consider this as a multiple of the speed of light, therefore able to carry information back in time.

The information in computer databases is probably something else, be that as it may.  The 546 part rhymed after I repeated it to myself in all inflections.  It seems to say for me to reason the following: If I force this—.  And, with an R in front (x), it became, “Our, ‘if I force this”, with a finish of your choosing.  I already had depicted pushes coming to shoving while (2x) still unable to observe this information.  I am having issues regarding trust and treachery, coercion and force, accusations of threats, in the usual spat format of domestic life, with lifestyle choices in the offing.  “Their” method, or to trade one’s lot in life with another, you may find grave consequences whichever way you go.

What if a distributed intelligence meet a distributed intelligence comin’ through the rye?  First, this type of distribution is that of animism, a belief system of ancient peoples.  Is an entire intelligence capable of going to war with itself?  If not, how does it happen that one’s attitude generally determines the treatment we receive in return?  I have noticed that if sounds and effects and signs come from bouncing off the wall itself, or, say, the peace of the graves we just visit, and these are never contradictory to our drives and instinct, but merely supplement and support them, the context is unambiguously upbeat, for there are positives abounding.  This indicated the presence of an alternative Other.  Real others should compete with it for survival.  Instead, they do not.  I think people accentuate inconsequential positive notions or oppose negative ones without ever offering a rational premise based on an overarching truth founded upon realistic expectations, but that’s me.  I was prepared.  These self-righteous either/or picayune genera are seductive, so, traps. 

As the pH of a solution changes from acid to neutral or basic to neutral, does it bear a record of where the pH was?  If it does, that would be an example of a memory effect.  Then I consider the logistic functon of a population of a species which differs from the trivial case of no information, the actual case, using some parameter.  The two sigmoid curves enclose an area referred to as hysteresis, and it appears in many forms: elastic, magnetic; if the new particle is permitted, tachyonic is the adjective.  What this is useful for is, again, a theory of mind-blowing proportions.  If I am seeing ahead in time, how can I write about it without sharing?  Do not push the button, Steve.

There are new physics theories all the time, so any one without a point made in another one will have that end of it dropped.  Being ahead of us in time is just a property of related events, and every use of a fundamental constant is a capitulation to having at most one assumption, here, that all arguments come out of the speed of light being a constant, as in limiting.  But, we do not get to borrow the speed of light and use it for other things.  If that constant appears, light is the physical manifestation involved.  Could there be anything about light that is unknown, since a physical thing with an unknowable component might introduce this component into experiments and/or calculations?  Is everything specified when something is real?  Bell’s theorem has coincidences in it, but it is the bifurcations giving us the two worlds which result when a given action is taken, or not taken.

Action. This technical term is an historic relic of the 17th century, before energy and momentum were understood. In modern terminology, action has the dimensions of energy×time. Planck’s constant has those dimensions, and is therefore sometimes called Planck’s quantum of action. Pairs of measurable quantities whose product has dimensions of energy×time are called conjugate quantities in quantum mechanics, and have a special relation to each other, expressed in Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Unfortunately the word action persists in textbooks in meaningless statements of Newton’s third law: “Action equals reaction.” This statement is useless to the modern student, who hasn’t the foggiest idea what action is. See: Newton’s 3rd law for a useful definition. Also see Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.

Rate. A quantity of one thing compared to a quantity of another. [Dictionary definition]

In physics the comparison is generally made by taking a quotient. Thus speed is defined to be the dx/dt, the ‘time rate of change of position’.

They’ve used speed in the definition for rate, but they haven’t got a separate definition for speed.  Notice it talks about the time rate, thus not every rate involves time.  There is something besides becoming observable which defines events, involved in catastrophes where somebody divided by zero for the rate.

I used to spell it T,A,C,H.  I want it over, so T,A,C will do.  Notice those variables I denoted before.  Those are of informational types of two conditions for the instantaneous likelihood that the next serial number will or will not turn over a pattern into irregluarity.  That is, what does it take to erase this information, what mod is it given the constant c?  What is the rate of that chance?  In stark human terms, what kind of pulse or signal do you want propagating forever?  Whatever happens permanently isn’t undoable and can be eliminated from the pool of actions left possible.  One code is aba, another is abc, and this in the lowbrow selection process of some syllogism using only front, back and middle, and two sides, if I have to get geographical.  It is a three part street.  One is already  named a pallindrome, the other I call rising.  “x” was word 656, and “2x” was word 678.

What I do, I don’t let a word sit there in context.  I hold it out and search its vicinity.  That’s why I preserve my natural speech.  It is in formation.  If I repeat that daily, I can take new insight from coincidence.  I understand completely the desire to denominate the irony in writing, but the foremost authority is the critic.  I judge writers whether they count on me being in my tree or not.  They all use esses, and they all use beez.  These letters fuck with them, we are all their slaves, and b sounds like a word.  We want to defend our position.  If they occur b, s, it is reading backwards.  If it makes no sense either way, fine, but if the ‘b’ follows the ‘s’, the next spaghettified ironization is going to be about me.

I have friends.  I’ll take a pass.

*The Right Stuff  —Tom Wolfe


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: