Randomness verses Order

There are certain basic things I'd like to talk about with the Universe- - This Universe - not any other Universe, just to narrow the topic down for you people right off the bat.  First of all Randomness does not mean lack of mental discipline.  On the contrary Mathemeticians employ a great ammount of discipline when discussing random occurances.  Some would say that the Conservative assumes Order as an a priority reality, whereas the Liberal assumes randomness as an a priori reality.  I guess by that definition I'm a liberal.  Back when I was around six and we were still l living in Westchester,  I had one of these toy xylophone thing with keys the colors of the rainbow.  Then we got a bigger xylophone that was bigger with sharps and flats and all and my brother pointed out to me that the notes were compatable and that a note on one was the same as a note on the other.  This came as a surprise to me, and obviously it came as a surprise to my brother.  My Dad went on to explain how all of the orchestral instruments used the same Key pitch system and that an E on one instrument was the same as an E on any other instrument.  This is something I had to unlearn to a degree in the summer of 1961 when I first became exposed to band instruments and discovered that so many of them were pitched in B flat.  But when I was a kid I was naturally a believer in the steady state theory.  I believed that the Universe "went on forever" both in time and in space.  Because the minute you assume any START or STOP to the Universe you assume some outside Force somehow imposing Order on it.  Likewise in space- - the minute you assume there is some sort of Shape to the universe- this supposes Limits and Boundaries-- hence some kind of imposed Order.  I naturally assumed that none of the Stars were fixed but that all were migrating around randomly in a chaotic miandering.  Then around mid 1965 Nana, our grandmother broached the subject of astrology collums in the newspaper and that various signs like Taurus the bull were in things called signs or constelations.  Needless to say I had to research this and found that most ALL the stars in the universe were in relatively FIXED positions.  This was a major revelation to me and in my oppinion made the study of the Stars a whole lot simpler.  We assume that events are random.  For instance- - if suddenly there was a big Power Ball winner exactly every five days throughout the Country rain or shine, to me this would be suspicious.  In like manner if there were some geometric pattern to the winning Cities- - - like forming a gigantic "crop circle" accross the Map of the United States, to me this would be most curious.  In like manner- - what flagged my attention in Astrology was that it DID seem to predict Events.  Prior to this I assumed that the stars had no control but when I began seeing related coralations between planetary allignments and events- - this got my attention.  A psychologist would looking at me would say that "I continued with Astrology because I kept getting a positive Pay Off - - psychologically.  Of course Neil of KFI singles out astrology as "The one psychic science where there is the LEAST indication there is anything to it.  I would not have stuck with astrology all these years is doing so didn't contain some sort of "Pay Off".  This is in contravention to other pursuits such as- - the study of foreign languages- - or Religion.

We're taking a topic break right now to talk about discussion of the Russian invasion of Ukraine- - where Stephanie has taken to attacking Lindsey Graham and other patriots who believe in democracy and the sovreignty of governments.  I'm not really down with Vladimir Putin "apologists".   Actually if anybody wants to criticize President Obama for mushiness on this issue- - I'd line up right behind them because if the President can have these hour or longer phone conversations with Vladimir Putin for over an hour and the NEXT thing Putin does is invade a sovreign country- - I'd call the President soft, too.  Kerry and Hillary are people who stick up for the United States.  I get the idea that Kerry is not entirely happy serving this sponge-bob resolve of a President like Obama is on so many issues.

This next paragraph is largely "Problems with the Big Bang Theory".   Of course - - - some people, and I was among them can get really "messed up" by adopting a theory too quickly.  Some believe in this soap bubble version of the Universe like "Well of course it has no beginning and no end like the surface of a soap bubble but it gets bigger and bigger expanding "through" Time itself.  I have written many things on this myself like in the spring of 1997.   I came up with my Christmas ornament theory way back in September of 1976.  Then there is the "kite string' theory about light propigation.  In other words the reason why we never see the "edge" of the Universe is because like a roll of kite string it lays in on itself and just gets wrapped around in circles.  The problem with this thinking is- - that even IF it's true that light bends a little in its path over Great Distances - - - there should still be SOME direction in which you can travel to reach that perverbial "Edge" of the Universe.  Then if we skip up to 2007 I come up with my "cascading fountain" theory of the universe- - or what you could call "The perpetual falling machine' theory where-  - so this theory goes- - Black Holes suck up nearby matter so therefore it's only logical that if they do this - - then in time they will suck up all of the matter in THAT universe- - and other Black Holes will occurr in these black holes, which in turn will in time suck up all the material in Those Universes.   The problem of course is then I discovered what Greater Minds than I already knew about Einstein- - that- - Black Holes are not even a Theoretical Possability under Einstinian Math when it comes to the speed of light.  Take my word for it.  There is one Besetting Problem with the whole Big Bang Theory.  This is true even though it's part of my "theological system".  (The Stewart Sutcliffe "starburst" theological system)  Many are worried about the idea that the Universe is expanding more rapidly now than it used to, but as I have pointed out before and will again right now- - in the overall scheme of things- - the expansion rate of the Universe is of an infinitessable rate.  It's like watching paint dry or concrete expand on a hot day would be more exciting.  In some ways the Big Bang theory has this "neat and tidy package".  They can look back in time a billion years through their telescopes and see "infant galaxies that aren't yet maturely formed" like a visual documentation of the creation process.  They say "Well- - if a few Billion years ago (back) stars are receding at the speed of one third that of light- - then at 12 Billion years if we could see that- - we should reach the speed of light".   Right off the bat we have a problem if you're Neil of KFI and believe that the Universe can NEVER exceed the speed of light.  Because if the speed of light is fixed, and this assumes of course we are the ONLY point in the Whole Universe that is Perfectly Stationary- - and of course we are in the Exact Center of the Entire Universe- - - obviously the Universe CANNOT be expanding at a Greater Rate than it was because there is that self imposed Speed Limit to expansion, and needless to say that light travels at the speed of a slug or snail or something- - in the overall scheme of things- - as far as traversing space in the Universe.  HERE IS THE BIG PROBLEM   If you look over here in This portion of the sky according to the big bang theory  you can see "Where it all started" and those infant galaxies being formed- - but you can look over There or over There- - - or a dozen other places in the heavens- - and see the Same Thing.  You can see the "starting point where it all began".  Obviously the Universe could not have originated in ALL of those places.  So this imposes a problem if just why do you think one particular place you happen to be looking at through your Telescope at the time having RANDOMLY picked that spot-- - what makes you think "That Spot' and that spot along is "Where the Universe Began".  Nobody has ever satisfactorally explained this to me.

The Mc Laughlin group did have the Vladimir Putin invasion into Crimea in a major way.  Never has Pet Buchannon been more solidly emotionally identifying with Putin.  The same “wonderful” attributes of Putin could also be said of another despot, Adolph Hitler.  I mean “He’s trying to Christianize the country and bring it back to its former glory.  He has cleaned out all the homosexuals and bolstered security.  He has been a boost to the national economy with a skyrocketing Gross National Product,  and hopes to bring back Russia to its glory days when its territory was much larger.  He wants to include the Russian populations living in other nations under the Russian flag.  He doesn’t trust the United States or the rest of Europe and feels “encircled” and wants to establish “buffer zones”.   Again, so much of this sounds so much like Hitler with his jack booted thugs bashing homosexuals and other people who don’t fit in to his vision of Russia.   Mort Zuckerman is this perennial sour puss when it comes to the US economy and of course is against any increase in the minimum wage, calling it a jobs killer.  Nobody cares that a minimum wage hike is popular in the opinion polls.  The other topic they discussed was the action of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer.   If you wrote down the predictions each one routinely makes at the end of the program would have five fresh predictions every week to scrutinize in weeks and months hence.  Then it was Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune.  I got on the computer and watched some of “The Following” and I had the option of watching the whole thing but the plot was too complicated.   I watched two Yahoo music videos.  One was an elaborate Egyptian thing, and the other was this sexy babe on the beach with the waves lapping her, in black and white, and this other Black guy joining her after a while. 

I watched Meet the Press.  John Kerry was on first and breakfast was so delayed I actually tuned in late.  John Kerry is at least concerned about our national interests and the interests of NATO and now Putin is walking all over us now, thinking he controls everything.  Then Marco Rubio was on next and echoed and amplified on a lot of Kerry’s sentaments.  There were times when I felt David Gregory was trying to make some point almost goading one of the other guests “Does this mean we’re going to put boots on the ground there next week?” or something.  Then they had the round table.  People were saying that like Dad, Obama is just inherently afraid of any conflict, or what they used to call “getting your hands dirty”.  In fact President Obama is “gifted” with this almost ethereal aloofness when any really major comes along to just ignore it.  Jerry Brown was on later in the program and warned there would “be too many pot heads” if California ever totally legalized marijuana, and talked about fiscal tightness.  They said that “Twelve Years a Slave” has a two to five chance of taking Best Picture.  These are inverted odds meaning is you plunk down five dollars, you end up winning two.   I think the Hollywood community has always been valuable and instrumental in alerting the American people to social problems.   Breakfast with the Beatles was nothing out of the ordinary except they played this “The River Rhine” song from the Get Back sessions.  This included Billy Preston but was lacking John Lennon and George did all the jazz riff guitar work.  Paul sang lead.