Today you left for good.. You made me laugh and fortunately moved on from the Forbidden Planet, where I also laughed, but not in the same way.
And Shirley, I am being serious. Leslie Nielsen, RIP.
When Armstrong said those words (except I missed out the ‘a’), it looked like men & women would be walking tall on all sorts of astronomical bodies in a continuation of the Apollo programme. As we no know, things didn’t quite work out like that though, and the Moon is still the only place we’ve been except our dear Earth – although unmanned and earth-based exploration continues in great leaps and bounds.
But although announced with a small fanfare, the news that CERN has made antimatter atoms in the form of anti-hydrogen last for getting on for half a second made me blink twice. See BBC News item here.
It’s my guess that this is the real “small leap for mankind” that will eventually lead to the real “giant leap”.
We are now talking the Star Trek language that everyone understands; antimatter, containment fields, annihilation. Soon we’ll have dilithium crystals and the stock market to sell them in!
But seriously, it’s one hell of a leap. The big puzzle is why matter (and thus ourselves because we are made of it), is here.
Why is there any of it, anyway?
… … because in every experiment that we’ve done, matter and antimatter cancel each other out! Exactly!
So the physical laws that we’ve invented or discovered, right back to the Big Bang, all say that we should not be here. Any of us.
Current physics says that our universe should only contain the energy from the mutual annihilation of matter & antimatter. But there is also matter, which is tightly rolled up bits of energy….
Self-evidently, we are here, which means that matter had a slight excess over anti-matter just after the Big Bang.
So I think that somewhere within the physics of our creation of antimatter, lies the answer to the matter/antimatter conundrum, of that I’m sure.
We’ve made a few atoms so far and watched them annihilate with matter on contact. The next steps will be to make and keep zillions indefinitely until they are needed. What for?
Now suppose we make these starships. Our current selves are very destructive, both towards our environment and ourselves.
In short, though we may well have the technology and explorative urge for interstellar travel in the future, our present state of intense animality leaves us unsuited to such endeavours. It’s unlikely that any expedition would arrive at its destination intact. They’d self-destruct. It’s what people do.
We must change ourselves before we can aspire change our location in the universe, or else our present location (the Earth), will be a blackened desert. Un-departable.
Today is exactly the 80th anniversary of the Soka Gakkai.
It’s a Buddhist organisation with its philosophy wrapped up in its name of “Value Creation Society“.
Let us all use three words as tenets, a true mantra for a civilised survival on Earth for generations to come.
When the time arrives for the Earth’s ultimate destruction, if we haven’t made a “Value Creation Society” that would allow our escape, then we are quite simply, stuffed.
So join the millions of Soka Gakkai Buddhists today as they celebrate their inheritance from one man, then another and another.
Makiguchi was his name and he died for his principles in a Japanese gaol in 1944. He and his disciple Toda were hounded by the animality of the times and only Toda was left at the end of WW2.
From him, and then Ikeda, the Soka Gakkai owes its existence, and we all need such principles if the magic of antimatter creation and containment is to mean anything in the future. It’s a truly wonderful thing.
The few readers of these pages may have noticed some diminishment in content recently; specifically:
You’ll now find that these links no longer work.
The cause of all of this was a cease and desist request to me via email by a lawyer, Matt Thomson working at Kronenberger Burgoyne. They found me by the simple expedient of checking my WHOIS for this website. This public visibility is something that in his earlier business of Just Think Media and many of the websites run by him, Jesse Willms obviously failed to do – it being very well documented on-line in such places as the legal settlements with the various organisations and persons that he offended, say. Currently, his WHOIS is visible, and I’ve now discontinued those postings or comments and/or their threads above, as requested.
The cause of my postings was my observance of the extremely high level of complaints by users of Mr Willms services at his websites, and reported as such on a host of consumer-focussed websites and organisations, which I won’t list here for brevity, but are widely available. This is what attracted my attention and I would not have published anything without this high level of consumer complaint. (Obviously, why would I suddenly start spouting on a personal blog site about a Canadian about whom I knew nothing? Like der!)
The effect of the wide complaints, was that users of Mr Willms services complained to their finance organisation using such terms as “deceptive practices” and “unlawful withdrawals” from their bank or credit accounts. (n.b. this is the recommended procedure as reported here with a concert ticket selling scam – Added 12/11/10)
Whether we think that all these people were under the mass delusion that they all had the same experience, or not, the effect of this was that credit processing was limited to Mr Willms businesses which made transactional business difficult for him.
Mr Willms therefore sought to apportion blame to his customers and any organisation reporting their complaints for his downturn in business. ( His earlier businesses for which he reached a legal settlement with Oprah Winfrey et al he appears to have terminated.)
This, for all the above in this paragraph above entitled “Cause and Effect”, is my opinion of the history surrounding Jesse Willms and his businesses over the last few years. How he now conducts business is a different issue entirely, which is why I’m stating the fact here.
This “Cause and Effect” paragraph now ends.
I’ve published the full message to myself below, and it makes interesting reading for those interesting in such things.
A very interesting part of the threatening letter to myself from Matt, was the limits to my free speech on something that only they deem confidential and that may or may not be subject to copyright laws! Matt says:
This letter is without prejudice to the assertion of any and all rights and remedies of Mr.Willms, all of which are expressly reserved. This is a confidential legal communication and is not intended for publication, including publication on a website or via email distribution. Any republication of dissemination of any part of this letter will constitute infringement of copyright and a breach of confidentiality.
Remember, the letter was sent to me without my request. Now as far as I’m concerned, and as a subject of the United Kingdom of Great Britain etc, anything I receive, except something from HM Government in the UK that is subject to the Official Secrets Act, I can publish or copy as I see fit if I have a copyright. Is this letter copyrighted? Even if it is, and I profoundly disagree that it is…..I can still publish. How so?
Being a published musician with my copyright works being plundered on-line, I’m not unfamiliar with copyright law.
This is some Crawling Chaos music for you to enjoy and has Jeff Crowe at his finest and for which I have a Copyright that allows me to play it here etc.
A clause in the US version, which almost exactly follows that in the UK and elsewhere through international treaty and general agreements, is that it’s not illegal to reproduce copyright work under the “Fair use” clause for a host of reasons. This is the clause below, taken from the Cornell Uni. Law School website which is copied from the required US law. (They state: Title 17 of the US Code as currently published by the US Government reflects the laws passed by Congress as of Feb.1, 2010, and it is this version that is published here.)
§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
And here’s the cease and desist to myself Link, to which I’ve complied with all listed terms and by the removal of listed exhibits.
I’ve complied in that all of what I’ve said previously about Willms and a host of other on-line businesses and services, (don’t forget), is either
Now back to checking the internet to ensure that businesses are run fairly and that consumers (i.e. me, you and everyone else) do not suffer. This website, and all its contributors, will continue in this vein. All documentation and IP Addresses is available to any legal process, especially those that seek to protect the common man from the bad people and iniquities that exist in our fast-changing world.
After all, it’s always the common man that suffers from the actions and decisions of the creative types… Mostly, they just want to get on and live their lives free from harassment.
Here ends my bit for now.
© 2007-2013 Strangely Perfect All Rights Reserved