You are currently browsing the monthly archive for August 2008.

To rephrase; If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, did it make a noise?……………… That this question is framed in those terms speaks directly of the reality we live in. On some level, the query remains relevant only because we have ears to hear. If we theorize that one: the only way for us determine that a tree actually falls is to hear the sound waves created by the falling tree, and two: that humans as a species lacked the organic apparatuses with which to pick up sound information in any manner; then given the sphere of perception we have available, the question ‘If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, did it make a noise’ becomes to us ‘If a crubnic sproks in meta-ether and no one vibes it, did it make a gimpik’. Of course, if we suppose that a crubnik did indeed sprok, we would still be unable to fathom that it did because we have no viberoos with which to vibe.

One can say the same of human eyes or lack thereof. If the human species never evolved photosensitive nerve endings capable of picking up light, or that our evolution; in its relative deterministic nature, was not influenced by certain external forces and elements such as photons, then it is possible to proposition we would not have evolved eyes with which to see; hence the nature of light would, at least by default, be invisible to the human psyche. Now taking that all other laws of physics are maintained, the hypothetical human species’ lack of light-sensitive nerve endings does not mean light, and its properties as currently understood, does not exist because it inhibits a spectrum outside what a ‘blind’ human species are able to perceive. It certainly does not mean that a machine cannot be created that converts some essence present in the “darkness” around us into electric signals that can be used to power a cathode ray tube, but try explaining that to the intrinsically photo-insensitive.

The immediate and most important implications seem to be pointing to the possibility of some other essence/attribute of our universe existing outside the sphere of any conscious, physical, molecular perception available to us merely because of how little affect, if any, such a property of the universe has on our immediate cognitive capabilities and observable surroundings. If the mechanism of evolution has neither free will nor purpose and operates within the boundaries of physical laws governing interactions on a molecular level and as such can only be reactionary in nature. At the same time if evolution is unbiased and will follow an infinite number of evolutionary branches that would create equilibrium or stability within a system that exists outside of the influences of another system. Then in so far as one force is capable of exerting influence on another or not, our entire universe could have unfolded along an evolutionary path which could and did achieve equilibrium outside of another equally extant yet, in that instance, unnecessary set of universal properties.


Not knowing is a natural state of being. A body in a languid state of not knowing will continue to not know until acted on by external influences.

All jokes aside

how can light and darkness exist in the same place at the same time? .......close one eye

Asides on…

- 'The Devil In The White City' by Erik Larson. Architect, Serial Killer, History, Non-fiction.
- 'The Blank Slate' by Steve Pinker.
- Bernay's Propaganda
- 'Quantum Pshycology' RAW
- 'A Confederacy of Dunces' J.K.Toole
- 'Infinate Jest' D.F.Wallace
- 'The Budos Band' - The Budos Band
- 'Silent Movie' - Quiet Village
- 'u're a woman, i'm a machine' - DFA1979
- 'Diary of an Afro Warrior' - Benga
- 'Skylon' - Ott
- 'Antidotes' - The Foals
- 'Last Days of Gravity' - Younger Brother
- 'third' by Portishead
- 'walking backwards' - Clutchy Hopkins
- 'Los Angeles' - Flying Lotus
- 'Peaceblaster' - STS9
- 'Nothing Lasts but Nothing is Lost' - Shpongle