Saturday, December 17, 2011

Running equations list


“self-taught” ≈ “not self-defeating”
“COMCAST” ≈ “INGSOC”
 love > fear
Comcast + Amazon => Comazon  or Amacast (aka Amercast) (also, Commu-cast is a contender)
low wisdom + high tech = ?,
(HAARP/chemtrails) ≈ (smoke/mirrors)  maybe

Monday, December 12, 2011

Mystical Thinking: Kundalini


The Shadow/unconscious and the Divine are the very same thing.  How else could we share dreams?  “Evil” is any mental/physiospiritual process or state that boots Ultimate Interconnectedness completely out of our sphere of awareness.  Compassion is a superpower.  It is when we sleep soundly in the dreamland unicorn picture show (thank you, Rick Hanson) of transiently arising ego functions – in the world of the self – that we do damage. 

Kundalini awakening is the mystical experience is Enlightening is direct connection with the Divine.  It is an evolutionary or developmental process of physiospiritual and neurological rebirth.  It is not to be "sought after" necessarily; as a developmental process, like puberty, it has prerequisites.  If there are the elements of faith, ever-deepening awareness, grounding in Nature and in community, and surrender to guidance by Spirit, it may be awakened safely.  The amount of pain and suffering experienced in such an Awakening is proportional to the amount of resistance to Spirit.  “…but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”  (Luke 3:17)  That which is anti-Relationship will either be cast off, or will cause further pain. 

The beauty of “this story” is that we, as humans, get to make the choice to come back to the Garden, to surrender to the deeper reality.  Hell is isolation from this deeper reality, my fellows.


 "All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well."  - Julian of Norwich

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Auto Antics: Anti-inchworm warrior

Today I call out from my perch to renounce the inchworm. 

Furthermore, though I do not presently possess any bumper stickers, “Anti-inchworm warrior” would be a serious candidate.

With great certainty very many among my fellowreadership will object with outrage, but they, too, may yet be charmed.  It is not that I have anything bad to say for the milky race of curly scrunch-munchers at all.  I do believe strongly, however, that they do not belong on freeways. 

[Example picture to come soon!]

Often when heavy traffic clogs a freeway, the many anxious and insecure drivers beating a clear path in neurotic, myopic stops and starts collectively behave like a coherent longitudinal wave, which is most easily perceived from the side and at some distance/with some perspective.   The readiest natural analog is the humble inchworm. 

*An anti-inchworm warrior is one who seeks to stabilize/buffer the speed of the horde of cars ("hairless and blind cavalry") behind them by driving at the average speed of the horde of cars in front of them in inchworm conditions only.  (One who drives at, say, 20 MPH at all times goes by other names.)

Imagine a six-lane interstate with heavy rush-hour traffic in the northbound lane.  In this scenario, only three lanes are available to accommodate the period of superexcessively heavy flow, so there is clearly no going around the traffic jam.  Nevertheless, most drivers feel a pressing and desperate need to close the gap between their vehicle and the one in front of them.  They are unaware that the mass of drivers they are a part of can only move as one unit.  They jump ahead at 40 miles per hour only to stop completely a few seconds later.  Let us assume for the sake of simplicity that the time spent at 40 MPH and the time spent at 0 MPH are roughly equal.  That makes the average speed of the drivers 20 MPH. 

This phenomenon, without a doubt, arises due to another inborn error of physics education, as we saw in the previous post.  Of course, it is also a variation on a common theme of the denial of interconnectedness or the (usually unexamined) assumption of personal physical separation, but that is another topic for another day.  Drivers have been demonstrably deceived by their mentors, instructors, professors, and the like into thinking that the easiest/safest way to achieve some average speed is to alternate equal periods of stopping and periods of driving at twice the speed they want to average. 
But this is not actually true.  The truth is that it is actually much easier to drive 20 MPH if that’s what your average speed is destined to be anyway because of the traffic jam.  I know this is a challenge, but try to stay with me here.

“But, Calm Canary!” you grumble, “the lanes move independently of each other!  You might get there faster if you find the fastest one and dart to and fro in front of other drivers and be more aggressive than everyone else!” 

To this I might say, “What was that all about?”

Of course, this conversation would be rendered completely unnecessary if the general public had a bit more interest in “carrying capacity” and “birth control.” 

I know how to settle this - with a pop quiz:

Q:  How might a driver best maximize their fuel efficiency? 
A:  By driving at a constant velocity, my fellows.  Thank you.

Auto Antics: Snow driving mythology

There is no magic to driving in the snow.  How can I make such a claim? 
It is generally accepted that driving in control involves maintaining something that we call “traction.”  Any number of rituals are employed to placate the traction gods and to keep them from taking this 'traction-chi-energy-juice' away from us.  One such ritual involves putting the vehicle into a low gear and using the compression of the engine to slow it down while driving downhill. 

To be read aloud:

CURLY DRIBBLEDRIVER:  "HARGGHhmb, kid, this is better than brakes.  The engine is slowing us down, GUHHBbbl.   It’s different.
KID:  “Oh.  How is it different?”
CURLY DRIBBLEDRIVER:  “HMMBGhhaaahh…complicated, kid...engine...traction.  You can’t do it with the brakes, kid.  Don't even try.”

The Calm Canary (KID) has alarm bells that go off at this point and you can’t guess the rest. 

Here’s the rest:
Unfortunately, the driver in the selection above has not given her assertion any conscious thought and thus is unaware that there is, in principle, no difference between slowing down with the brakes of a car or with the engine.  No laws of physics have changed.  The force of static friction is what does the work.  I think we all do hope that in the case of moving vehicles the only surfaces in contact with the road are four rubber tire treads.  This does not change when the engine is used to slow the vehicle instead of the brakes.  There are no new contact points established between the vehicle and the road by the sheer merit, virtue, and honor of using the engine to slow the car, and the surface area of the tires is certainly not extended or improved. 
However, what has just been debunked as a theoretical myth can strangely be a practical boon.  Using the compression of the engine can be very handy because of one mysterious wrench: operator error.  (Again, we see here an example of misconceptions due to inborn errors of physics education.)  The ‘smoothness’ of a gear is what actually and truly makes it useful.  Without it the tires would be dependent on the ‘smoothness’ of the foot of the operator on the brakes, which is not as reliable as a mechanical device.  So, the ability to slow the tires down slowly – that is, not in a herky-jerky fashion – is what makes the compression of the engine so special.  The tire faces in contact with the road do not decelerate so quickly as they might if a human were responsible for their course.  (The heel of modern man strikes hard.)
Of course, there is the problem of shifting.
And a driver can quite easily outpace his or her benefit (from using a low gear to go down a hill) by braking too hard or starting out too swiftly and boldly. 
All well and good, you say, but where’s the great revelation?
Here it is:
We clever monkeys know from coil-spring and woodblock experiments that the force due to static friction for an object on a given surface is always substantially greater than the force due to kinetic (sliding) friction for the same object and surface.  So it seems best to keep from skidding, yes?
That’s the secret/the only object of snow driving, my fellows: don’t slide!

Auto Antics: Speed is a rate is a rate is a rate is irate...

I implore you, my fellows, not to make the mistake of using such abominabautomobiable terms as “rate of speed.” 

The car was travelling at a high speed.  That’s all there is to it. 

Speed, of course, is the rate of change in position.  The rate of change of speed is actually called ‘acceleration’ – another mysterious term that has puzzled experts in the field since the dawn of experts in the field of awareness.  And let us not dwell on higher-order arithmetic and speak of scalars, vectors, derivatives, or knocks. 

Speed is a rate and always will be a rate.  The term “rate of speed” is crass, ugly, and redundant. 

“But, Calm Canary!” you urge and plead, “‘rate of speed’ is just like ‘Joan of Arc.’  It’s the best!  It’s on fire!” 

Sorry, Buttercup, [and many thanks to Robb Wolf for such useful language] but the similarities end with the ‘of’ in the middle.  To say ‘rate of speed’ is to utter vileness and contempt for all the ears of the living creatures of the Earth – it is akin to using ‘distance measurement of altitude’ in place of ‘altitude.’  My fellows, pray imagine what it might be like if your friend Thomas was being such a robot one day that he insisted on doing just that.  You would surely wish to twist his ear mercilessly.

Humans invented the word "speed" so that they didn't have to say "rate" so often.  

ROS dogma has infected driver’s education classrooms universally.  Such terms have obviously come about as the result of inborn errors of physics education.  Thank you.

Saturday, October 15, 2011

True Wit



“True Wit is Nature to advantage dress'd/ What oft was thought, but ne'er so well express'd;/ Something whose truth convinced at sight we find,/ That gives us back the image of our mind./ As shades more sweetly recommend the light,/ So modest plainness sets off sprightly wit.”



― Alexander Pope

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Burn the bird's nest!


Welcome to The Calm Canary Blog.  To you, my loyal readers, I hope to be a piece of litmus paper, a rhythmic beacon of uncommon sense, and a bringer of golden eggs.  In beginning this blog I invite my readers to “burn the bird’s nest” however they will.  Some posts will be written to expose myths, to disillusion the reader whenever possible, and to bring clarity to convoluted subjects or problems (birds' nests) by burning off tangled masses of fibers and unnecessary fluff and finding the golden eggs inside.  Other posts will simply involve the sharing of golden eggs – universal truths, goodnesses, or beauties. 

Here is a little handful of possible example subjects:
        
          - Paleonutrition, fitness, automobile antics
          - Wilderness survival, tracking, and awareness
          - Harpsichord
          - Certainty?
     - The evolution of people, technology, and society
     - E.T. Theory (a prerequisite for E.T. Practice)
-   -  Bohemian Grove antics
     - Enlightenment
     - Conspiracy Theory and Practice

Golden Egg Awards will be announced periodically.  The Golden Egg Hall of Fame will include names and mugshots from past awards. 

from an unknown author:

“When death knocks on your door, make sure he finds you alive.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------