The Use of Language, over Geometric Design?

One must realize that to further develope scenarios for the mind had to consider, created conversation. To use this to formulate new steps and expansion of thought. One needs to create the situation?

So what if, Plato in this case, is not real, and "the dialogues," using this figurative object, was used to create the dialogues? Can he have ever produced further thoughts for us to consider in dramas, without a bouncing board?

So is the situation real below?

Kansas Board Holds Evolution Hearings By JOHN HANNA

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) - As a State Board of Education subcommittee heard more testimony Friday on how evolution should be taught in Kansas classrooms, one member acknowledged that she hadn't read all of an evolution-friendly draft of science standards proposed by educators.

Kathy Martin of Clay Center made the comment while attempting to reassure a witness who said he hadn't read the entire proposal, just parts of it. Russell Carlson, a biochemistry and molecular biology professor at the University of Georgia, said he had reviewed an alternate proposal from intelligent design advocates.

Islamic Creationism In Turkey

Sometime in the mid 1980s, the Turkish Minister of Education, Mr. Vehbi Dinçerler [. . .] placed a call to ICR. [. . .] he wanted to eliminate the secular-based, evolution-only teaching dominant in their schools and replace it with a curriculum teaching the two models[.] As a result, several ICR books which dealt with the scientific (not Biblical) evidence for creation were translated into Turkish and distributed to all Turkey's public school teachers.

You have to wonder too, about thedistrust of and motivations seen in the Templeton foundation and the list of scientific personalities that contribute or those thinking of contributing?

This mistrust is seen by some as instigating such concerns as revealled in the issues above? Motivating society with fasle idealizations? I do not quite understand this. This is not a position I take, but was one of observance that I witnessed and relay here.

The whole issue around the Sokal Affair:

The essay you have just seen is completely meaningless and was randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator. To generate another essay, follow this link. If you like this particular essay and would like to return to it, follow this link for a bookmarkable page

.

Is it intentional, or are people easily fooled?

Is there a greater design behind and leading people into falsehoods? Is this what everyone fears could happen to them?



It's strange, but this post of yours sets up a complex scenario. About shadows and light? :)

That the tenable position would be, "the earth they stand on," some how intrudes on the surface of the moon, and from behind the earth, the sun.

A classic Plato story? :)

But lets say your post is about something else?

Not just the plain ideals of observance.



Might one believe beyond the scope of our scientific valuations? To see, that it might have some other answer to why life is the way it is. What is it's motivator? It's energy?



A higher perspective on what we know about earth is summed up in an overview of the globe. Are not the intricacies of earth's design, much more complex, then it's mere shadow causing presence?

The expansitory thinking beyond straight euclidean thinking, is much more versatile? Reveals geometrical design much more intricate then just two dimensional observances?

Thought and observance, is now telling us to think beyond the hard fact realities? You can still be a scientist and believe in God. :)

A tesserack or hypercube is a four dimensional analogue of a cube. See the figure on the left for a 2-D representation of this 4-D object. More information about these can be seen and found. Many people have difficulty believing such can exist which is why such books as Flatland (Abbott, 1884), Sphereland (Burgers, 1983), and Flatterland (Stewart, 2001) were written.

I tried to show leading indicators in this trial, further expanding it's boundry into todays world. No less than, "climate exchanges on Kyoto," and scientist to scientist, "battle for supremacy of ideology?" Intelligent design?

More abstract, the inclinations of the quote selected provided a opportunity. About what few people will ever understand? Are the roads leading to complex scenarios about the particle world.



The way Arthur Miller quote might have sufficed might be to say, "that we need to think differently about reductionistic processes."

These are all governed by geometrical consistancies although we rely on experimental process. The progression to topological forms, as abstract processes. These are relevant to our "dynamical way of thinking." If lead to fifth dimensional scenarios, you are beyond the limitations of our solid world, becasue it arose from some place else first?

The "Calorimetric view," addresses this. We create the scenario of particle collisions and measure, particle production.

None of you would know this, but the inherent "opera of image," leads you to ask, "what is a tesserack?" Non?

The last two picture gaves views from a fifth dimensional element, where gravity and light have been joined. Dali's painting, and relation to the wonder of God's son. Are these related to these higher geometrical figures and wonder about God?

We are not simple machines. As well, the computer screen is a work and play on fifth dimensional imagery. Some might assume a atheist approach to life and settle on proofs, and a s a scientist this is expected logic to validation.

Yet there is still room for thinking that within the spaces of thought, the inherent suttleness of God might pervade all things? That such thoughts could lead us to higher pinnacles above the solid world, and what is present around us now?

Why should we allocate such spiritual thinking to classes of religions like Islam and the Turkey scenario? You hurt the quest for theoretcial endeavors by limitations of ideology? When the world requires innovative thinking, "to push the boundaries of our envelope."

Without leading to these realization of the electromagnetic principles, Gauss and Maxwell relations, might we ever understand the simple visionistic world of the magnetic field?

Developing Character in Rhetoric and Composition

Francis Bacon (1561 - 1626)-----although not a rhetorician, contributed to the field in his writings. One of the concerns of the age was to find a suitable style for the discussion of scientific topics, which needed above all a clear exposition of facts and arguments, rather than the ornate style favored at the time. Bacon in his The Advancement of Learning criticized those who are preoccupied with style rather than "the weight of matter, worth of subject, soundness of argument, life of invention, or depth of judgment." On matters of style, he proposed that the style conform to the subject matter and to the audience, that simple words be employed whenever possible, and that the style should be agreeable.

Heck I am still learning. But if I only said what you wanted to hear, then would you have heard anything different? :) You try and incorporate the logic into the statement? Here in this case, there is no arguement, because the logic can not be further reduced?

Word Play

Word play is a literary technique in which the nature of the words used themselves become part of the subject of the work. Puns, obscure words and meanings, clever rhetorical excursions, oddly formed sentences, and telling character names are common examples of word play.

All writers engage in word play to some extent, but certain writers are particularly adept or committed to word play. Shakespeare was a noted punster. James Joyce, whose Ulysses, and even more so, his Finnegans Wake, are filled with brilliant writing and brilliant word play is another noted word-player. For example, Joyce's phrase "they were yung and easily freudened" clearly conveys the meaning "young and easily frightened", but it also makes puns on the names of two famous psychoanalysts, Jung and Freud.

But here is another context of character masking that was revealled? Thinking about Francis Bacon, that one wonders, who was Shakespeare?

THE SHAKESPEARE/BACON CONTROVERSYFAUSTIN BRAY: Do you think that academia will eventually recognize this?


Who Is Arthur Young





We know well that some writers take pen names before they become established? Or hide amidst the current dealings of society. To not call attention to their positions in life, while they strive to delve into the deeper meanings or hide a message for others?:)

I learnt this early, to not complicate life, while I could have free roam, to delve into all aspects of our human natures. Struggle for, the ideals that we develope in life. Rote systemic appearances constituted from our early histories, as well shape our perceptions of society. I knew well, that if we think a certain way, whether we like it or not, we desemminate thoses principals into society, how ever it materialized, might be perceived in different ways.

So can we be artistic about it? I am, in choosing my characters becuase I saw in rhetoric and dialogue, past performaces by independant scientific researchers, this incination to go back in time, and then move forward.

Plato's cave might have seem ole fashion and constantly wornout and used, but in the scientific mind of Gerard Hooft, and his explanation of Holographical design, he wanted to push other minds to consider?

And one in which I like to consider, that a three dimensional frame work, can be arrived at from higher perception abilities. In science, four dimensional characteristics here would have understood dynamcial feature to the nature of reality, yet pinning it down to coordinates, it becomes realizstic in our minds, as a object of perception.

Heisenberg made similar use of such inclination for historical reference. His uncertainty in movement became interesting references, once we assumed a position?:)

This logic has underpinnings in how we see what can be consittuted in life. How we choose to display our positions with clarity.

That we should then find ourselves engaged because of the inhernet dialogue and espressions between each other on the internet, then we know that progression and learning, the desire, and not flaws of character dispositon should reign.

But now onto some more references for consideration here to help people digest, what could have ever arrive in our coordinated frames of reference. That we saw, other means to arrive at this conclusion. One of these means, is a Calormetric view? I use this while I think about the space between the earth and the sun. While looking at insightful ways to generate more possiblities, in the minds, that are resistant to change.

Standard particle reductionist methods have detailed how we shall see these energy considerations. So to apply a global perspectve to energy valuations, we are left to consider simpler model reductionist figures here in our talks, about climate change? Visions of non-euclidean world that few will take hold of in our consverstions. etc.

Resistance to character, should be statistics or better information?

See also,

Rhetoric and Composition

The Holographical Mapping of the Standard Model onto the Blackhole Horizon

New paper that came out yesterday written by Gerard 't Hooft

Interactions between outgoing Hawking particles and ingoing matter are determined by gravitational forces and Standard Model interactions. In particular the gravitational interactions are responsible for the unitarity of the scattering against the horizon, as dictated by the holographic principle, but the Standard Model interactions also contribute, and understanding their effects is an important first step towards a complete understanding of the horizon’s dynamics. The relation between in- and outgoing states is described in terms of an operator algebra. In this paper, the first of a series, we describe the algebra induced on the horizon by U(1) vector fields and scalar fields, including the case of an Englert-Brout-Higgs mechanism, and a more careful consideration of the transverse vector field components.

But before I entertain this idea, I wanted to gain some perspective. I was immediately struck by something here that changes the way we have been doing things? Recognizing the blackhole evaporation and standard model production, we are saying that indeed these things already existed in the horizon?

Would M theory have then found it's experimental counterpart? The Bose Nova and Jet idea from collapsing bubbles has been part of the vision I speculated in what Heisenberg saw in the geometrodynamics of a nuclear explosion. See, not only were we detonating a nuclear reaction(gravitational collapse), but we were doing something beyond the perception, by going to the heart of these particle collisions.

What makes it diffuclt for me is that having seen the blackhole dynamics in relation to bubble technlogies, that I like to use as analogies, relate too, and contain the elements of the standard model without ever entering the blackhole? How is this possible and still see the three blane collapse of the blackhole here?

Dimensional Reduction in Quantum Gravity by Gerard 't Hooft

The requirement that physical phenomena associated with gravitational collapse should be duly reconciled with the postulates of quantum mechanics implies that at a Planckian scale our world is not 3+1 dimensional. Rather, the observable degrees of freedom can best be described as if they were Boolean variables defined on a two-dimensional lattice, evolving with time. This observation, deduced from not much more than unitarity, entropy and counting arguments, implies severe restrictions on possible models of quantum gravity. Using cellular automata as an example it is argued that this dimensional reduction implies more constraints than the freedom we have in constructing models. This is the main reason why so-far no completely consistent mathematical models of quantum black holes have been found.

Essay dedicated to Abdus Salam.

Gerard "t Hooft:No 'Quantum Computer' will ever be able to out perform a 'scaled up classical computer.'

Holding onto the sanity of why such computerization program will run into difficulties, has not undermined the position to included and create opportunities for seeing what is happening at such reductionistic levels? To have wondered, will we gain a dynamcial visulaization of what is happening within the context of the universe as it came into being?

With more computer power, scientists can also include more elements of the Earth's climate system, such as the oceans, the atmosphere, their chemistry and the carbon cycle.

This should make forecasts of future temperature rises more reliable. Keiko Takahashi, who works at the Earth Simulator Centre, says they have already carried out several experiments that look 50 years ahead.


There is difficulties with doing this, and like LIGO or a SEti work in progress, how shall this information allows us to see the interactions in a consistent model? So dealing with these difficulties has been part of Gerard 't Hoofts analysis to see that others too, work hard to deal with issues of information paradox?

Part of this difficulty in computerized model application, would have been transfer rates of information from such quantum levels. Lubos gives some insight here. Although it has been very nice that such visualization techiques could be applied to this data transfer, from what we understand of particle reductionsism. Within context of the larger universe, how detailed shall has our observations become of the world around us?

These images contrast the degree of interaction and collective motion, or "flow," among quarks in the predicted gaseous quark-gluon plasma state (Figure A, see mpeg animation) vs. the liquid state that has been observed in gold-gold collisions at RHIC (Figure B, see mpeg animation). The green "force lines" and collective motion (visible on the animated version only) show the much higher degree of interaction and flow among the quarks in what is now being described as a nearly "perfect" liquid. (Courtesy of Brookhaven National Laboratory)

The goal of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is to link roughly 6,000 scientists so they can perform large-scale experiments and simulations to help the world better understand subatomic particles. The grid will ultimately link more than 200 research institutions.

"This service challenge is a key step on the way to managing the torrents of data anticipated from the LHC," Jamie Shiers, manager of the service challenges at CERN, said in a statement. "When the LHC starts operating in 2007, it will be the most data-intensive physics instrument on the planet, producing more than 1,500 megabytes of data every second for over a decade."

Gerard 't Hooft recognized this problem and when we see such scattering ideas from blackhole standard model production particles, how shall we see this event in terms of what is sent back for examination? It would mean considering the context of Gerard's paper there is no information loss? No missing energy events?

Thus the consistent model frame, from blackhole production underlying framework would disavow any ideas relating to energy in and energy out imbalance held in context of gravitonic production as part of the standard model production? The horizon area would become a balanced view?

Using the ideas of Clementine and the graduation to Grace, it seemed that I was leading to a good comprehensive view of the bubble technicalities as they contained the missing energy, but moving too "this view of Gerard's" might endanger how we approximate the whole view of this missing energy, with the easy removal of that missing energy scenario? Would this be consistent with the overall encompassed view that the grvaiton has emerged from the extension of this standard model to say oh, it's okay we can remove this and fnd comfort with the existing framework without other contentions issues like missing energy to deal with this?

Do we have Proof of this Missing Energy? If the answer is yes, then the issue has not been resolved?

Rhetoric and Composition

I hope the time will be taken to patiently read and follow through as it will explain the dangers of what Sokal did, and the mistrust he place at the front door of media control. Censorship.

What were the motivations of people like Peter Woit to highly censor only what he wanted shown in regards to his views, or a Sean Carroll, who might disallow a Lubos Motl that rubs Sean the wrong way?

Both cases, the inherent right of bloggery ownership entitled, what views might be imparted and by this distinction alone, the character? Did this somehow contribute to a finer process of education developement? It certainly as I pointed out retained some integrity, if we thought the derogatory statements were less then appealing to our very natures and constitutions. But did we then censor more then the pride with which we see ourselves?

A little education on the Sokal Affair.

Modernity is fundamentally about order: about rationality and rationalization, creating order out of chaos. The assumption is that creating more rationality is conducive to creating more order, and that the more ordered a society is, the better it will function (the more rationally it will function). Because modernity is about the pursuit of ever-increasing levels of order, modern societies constantly are on guard against anything and everything labeled as "disorder," which might disrupt order. Thus modern societies rely on continually establishing a binary opposition between "order" and "disorder," so that they can assert the superiority of "order." But to do this, they have to have things that represent "disorder"--modern societies thus continually have to create/construct "disorder." In western culture, this disorder becomes "the other"--defined in relation to other binary oppositions. Thus anything non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual, non-hygienic, non-rational, (etc.) becomes part of "disorder," and has to be eliminated from the ordered, rational modern society.

Now of course I have to contend with some people in order to move forward the issues that I was trying to explain on the Kyoto, that would bring out a debunker that was brain washed, and who was careless about the content, without attacking it's substance.

This brings forth the nature of this thread to further enlighten not only myself, but people who are just plain obnoxious to the truth. A young mind that has wasted his talent on supposely protecting the interest of all us bloggers, forum particpators and who ever the like that would use this internet media.

Now I spoke in regards to this issue about Sokal becuase it cross referenced the issue that I would be leading too, and the relationships that curently are being talked about and developed in science. I use science to help further enlighten myself about how Einsteins views can be seen at work in a developing attitude in regards to the issue of Kyoto Accord. For and/or against.

I saw the content of Sokal generator application and submission as a deliberate attempt to cast doubt on all media and brought out the scum of the internet called debunkers.

Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity

Now you had to understand what Sokal did in order to understand the content of his submission.

The essay you have just seen is completely meaningless and was randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator. To generate another essay, follow this link. If you like this particular essay and would like to return to it, follow this link for a bookmarkable page.

The Postmodernism Generator was written by Andrew C. Bulhak using the Dada Engine, a system for generating random text from recursive grammars, and modified very slightly by Josh Larios (this version, anyway. There are others out there).

This installation of the Generator has delivered 1586990 essays since 25/Feb/2000 18:43:09 PST, when it became operational. It is being served from a machine in Seattle, Washington, USA.

More detailed technical information may be found in Monash University Department of Computer Science Technical Report 96/264: "On the Simulation of Postmodernism and Mental Debility Using Recursive Transition Networks". An on-line copy is available from Monash University.

More generated texts are linked to from the Communications From Elsewhere front page.

Now that we have discern the nature of the content of the Sokal reference how can we continue with the demands of science. How we measure the effect of Climate, using current technologcal advances? Applcations of these technologies would need to be lead through in order that we understand the science that had been developed.

Sokal instigated mistrust in media, and not the cautious apporach to verification most scientist would expect of delivering a comprehensive and systemic approach to the theoretical developement. They had to have a basis from which to present these views and they, in order to advance science, had to move from the foundations that had already been traversed and, move the mind deeper into these views developed abtractually. The basis of these pictures then was the math developed. The basis was a geometry that lead to a comprehensive view of what Einstein offered for view.

Sokal article was laying waste to all of this beautiful work being done. Brought out the immature debunkers who thought they would help society and instead, turned good people bad.

I wrote this in context of another media avenue, but the jest is the same when we think about those who would guard our interest on the internet. From developing in our research and education. I have been less then kind on how I work my compositions and grammar, but I was after the true spirit of information transferance between brains. Any math basis had this derivative function to it, that once math mathematically developed concealled under the larger expression was a scientific validation and objectivity to a long process to develpement.

Of course we say that the ultimate proof is it's validation. But in the mean time, who are they who shall gaurd my interest to follow the correct route to science developement, if debunking has been takng to new heights of arrogance and impedes the further developement of these theoreticcal positions?

Time-Variable Gravity Measurements

Mean Gravity Field

The Mean Gravity Field lets us work from this mass understanding and provides for, flunctuations in that Gravity field hence the understanding of Time Variable Gravity Field

On planet Earth, we tend to think of the gravitational effect as being the same no matter where we are on the planet. We certainly don't see variations anywhere near as dramatic as those between the Earth and the Moon. But the truth is, the Earth's topography is highly variable with mountains, valleys, plains, and deep ocean trenches. As a consequence of this variable topography, the density of Earth's surface varies. These fluctuations in density cause slight variations in the gravity field, which, remarkably, GRACE can detect from space.

I wanted to put this into perspective, since we can extend our vision of the gravity field, and how we would look at mass distribution. Using this method, we calibrate, understanding current topological features of hills and valleys that serve to remind us, of the mass distribtuion that has gone on in the formation of our planet Earth.

Since passing over these locations calculations recognize these density valuation of mass regions. This allows us to understand the current gravity standard placed on that location.

Time-Variable Gravity Measurements from the GRACE Satellite

NASA, in partnership with the German Space Agency DLR, launched the dedicated gravity satellite GRACE (the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) in March, 2002. This five year mission will map out the Earth's gravity field to unprecedented accuracy at monthly intervals. The temporal variations in gravity inferred from these data will allow people to study a wide range of processes, cutting across a variety of Earth science disciplines, that involve redistribution of mass within the Earth and at or near its surface. It will be possible, for example, to produce monthly estimates of changes in continental water storage anywhere in the world, averaged over scales of a few hundred km and greater, to accuracies of better than 1 cm water thickness.

I have referrred to the hill and valley perspectives that have arisen in relation to how we see the landscape(earth's). If this feature was not comprehended in some model application, would it not have served to settle minds who see no valuation in such landscape perspectives, as a basis to a much better understanding of the nature of the universe, and the reality around us?

Where has the extra energy gone? For some scientists this question highlights something interesting about what extra dimensions might have implied? You gauge the gravitational fields and learn to see time variability as a feature not just of mass consideration, but of energy determinations as well. It's only fitting?:)

The image above shows the many processes of the Earth’s hydrologic cycle that contribute to total changes in water storage

So setting up a comprehensive understanding of these differences, the mean gravitational field and Time Variable gravity field we see now some relationship to things finer in its constitution, and the relationship to Climate.


The Landscape?

What value might be assigned to this understanding, that we look at how such emissions and its effect on the information gathered. Would we see the effect of civilizations and the way this has effecedt those particular geographical regions.

Have we thus found a legitimate model, that current debates on the Kyoto protocals might serve to get everyone on base for determinations. Will this effectvely change the dialogue currently going on in our assessments, of the needed reduction of CO² emissions?

Neutrinos for Geophysics

I am always interested in seeing how the physics that has developed, could better induce minds to expand the potentials of these innovations to help the world's population in a most appropriate way.

The issues on climate and the ways in which we could measure this is far removed from the butterfly who flaps his wings, and the need for dramatic computerization functions to reveal model apprehensions of some predictable feature of that same climate. A pretty unsurmoutable problem in uncertainty? Gerard Hooft recognizes these problems, but while this uncertainty reigns alternative to using many computers to diagnosis,as in Seti and Ligo analysis.



A physicist in the US has proposed using a beam of neutrinos to measure the density of the Earth's core. Walter Winter of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton says that neutrinos could provide information about the Earth that is not available with other techniques (arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0502097).

So in this respect of information gathering, the idea here is to understand the mass density of the land mass regions to help people gather in potential spots of safety. Much like the recognition of tsunami revelations detected, so that escape from shores can be forewarn to people to move inland.

A Sphere that is Not so Round

Of course the most basic shape for me would be the sphere, but in our understanding of the earth and the images that we see of earth, our view is shattered by the first time we seen this enormous object, from the eyes of those who had always been earth bound and restricted to the calculation of a abstract world.

Now it is not so round, and the views we recieve of this information help us to understand a few things about the way in which we will look at the earth and its weak field manifestation, as one extreme of the whole gravitational framework we like to understand over this complex perspective of our cosmos from the very strong gravitational foreces, to the very weak.

Gravity is the force that pulls two masses together. Since the earth has varied features such as mountains, valleys, and underground caverns, the mass is not evenly distributed around the globe. The "lumps" observed in the Earth's gravitational field result from an uneven distribution of mass inside the Earth. The GRACE mission will give us a global map of Earth's gravity and how it changes as the mass distribution shifts. The two satellites will provide scientists from all over the world with an efficient and cost-effective way to map the Earth's gravity field.

The primary goal of the GRACE mission is to map the Earth's gravity field more accurately than has ever been done before. You might ask, how will GRACE do this? Two identical spacecraft will fly about 200 kilometers apart. As the two GRACE satellites orbit the Earth they are pulled by areas of higher or lower gravity and will move in relation to each other. The satellites are located by GPS and the distance between them is measured by microwave signals. The two satellites do not just carry science instruments, they become the science instrument. When mass moves from place to place within the Earth's atmosphere, ocean, land or frozen surface (the "cryosphere"), the gravity field changes.

Highlighting in bold, it would not be necessary to go into a full explanation if we considered in context the cosmic string and clumping in our universe? But I have moved to far from the point of reference of our two systems of consideration here so back to the next point.

NASA's Earth Science Enterprise funded this research as part of its mission to understand and protect our home planet by studying the primary causes of climate variability, including trends in solar radiation that may be a factor in global climate change.

One of the interesting ideas in these shapes is understanding what can cause disturbances within their fields and how we might look at these issues if we move our consideration from the normals views of measure stick and straight lines, to variations we have demonstrated on earth(hills and valleys). To how we would percieve "resonance" created in the sun, and use this, to determine the volatile solar coronas that would be ejected into space but of weather systems affected as well. This is a good monitoring tool fore warning system that could affect communication within the sphere of our own influence.



But let me take this one step further, in that we consider both these frames, in context of each other and ask the connection in lagrangian way. How would we see gravitational points of consideration related to each other? Would this help those less inclined to understand the variations in perspective of gravity to comprehend the value Einstein lead us through, to take us to a much more dynamical view of the cosmos?

So in the one sense to take what we know of the formulation at a euclidean level and move it accordingly, to cosmological perspectives. This is a apprehenson of Gr that we are geometrically lead through, to perspectives of the space we would now enjoy of Gauss. Having Reimann views here of spherical consideration, we understand well, the developing roads to mathematical perspective debated and shunned by Peter?:)

So looking at the way in which we entertain the earth view, and how we interpret the sun, we do not limit our views just to the spherical balls one might like to say is self evident, but having the knowledge of what we are lead through geometrically as well as toplogically, it becomes a much more interesting reality to entertain.

A Happy News Years to all those who visit:)