I couldn't agree with you more, but the problem is that kind of ground up infrastructure investment is the kind of thing that countries do when they are in an economic depression or serious recession or just have way too much money they need to invest. The US is the world empire and its economy is still driving everything else. Its empire baby, and this train ain't stopping until she derails. The US could seriously use the infrastructure upgrade, but within twenty years the costs of these kinds of things is about to go in the toilet and the US will likely not be doing all that much ground up improvements, but phased in ones.

The law of identity is the issue and so long as metaphysics rely upon the principle of the excluded middle there's nothing to be done except split semantic hairs. They simply don't reflect reality as modern science now describes it and are demonstrably merely pragmatic assumptions that are more or less useful in different contexts. For example, a recent mathematical examination of causal mathematics and physics revealed that any number of simple metaphors can describe them fully. You can describe the observable universe as causally composed of bouncing springs or whirling vortexes or vibrating rubber sheets for all I know and, at some point, metaphysicians must become pragmatists as their field is superseded by the realities of quantum mechanics.

The entire world needs to be re-plumbed and re-wired and everybody is putting it off as long as they can waiting for the technology to mature a bit and using every method they can to keep everything going in the meantime with so much string and bailing wire. For example, in recent years the technology to desalinate water has improved enough to cut the cost in half and, in fact, someone had the bright idea of turning every river that empty's into salt water into a battery as well as clean water. What is about to explode onto the scene is self-assembling solar power cells that can be printed out using reel-to-reel printing like a newpaper where you can cut production costs down to nothing and steadily improve upon the product.

Its about the mass production technology with every major corporation today investing in more analog scalar solutions including self-assembling and printing including half a dozen at least of the first 3D printers that print entire houses complete with the plumbing and wiring built in within a matter of hours. The technology we developed over the last century to achieve this next scientific revolution has all been the brute force approach and is now about to get some swing in its hips as well as going flat out Star Trek.

Recent studies of the brain have shown that, contrary to long held belief, the immune system is central to the functioning of the brain and appears to largely determine how social we might become. Its a rather odd revelation, but makes sense when considering just how at the mercy our bodies are to infections and, when it comes to animals, the idea that their conscious minds might know what's best for them in this regard is laughable.

My own view is that everything resembles the original creative impetus of the Big Bang and the human mind and brain are actually creative engines, hence, the reason they've driven all the psychologists, philosophers, physicists, and neurologists nuts. While reliability is great, creativity is more important in a universe of unceasing change explaining, for example, why the human brain has a theoretical memory storage capacity of over a petabyte, yet, human memory is notoriously fallible. This also fits in with mathematical examinations of evolution which have concluded that its about staying two steps ahead of the competition in guessing the punch lines coming, yet, evolutionary advances require generosity.

I'm just too easily amused writing the Book That Can Never Be Written. :)

Bohr said it in another quantum universe and I'm sure it just caught up with him.

What if consciousness can't ultimately be identified....
What if it is merely the continuing evolution of the Big Bang?
What if its just impossible to see the back of your own head clearly?

The Philosophy of Fun is Good... Sounds like a Hollywood comedy!

Again, if you can't use a search engine or a dictionary I give free lessons.

Easily Amused

What is the difference between acceptance and denial?
What is the difference between beautiful and hideous?
What is the difference between infinity and the void?
The usual clowns are festive as if attending a party,
Or frolicking about in the park upon a spring day,
While, my mind still wanders in ignorant bliss,
A newborn babe, yet to learn how to smile,
Alone without any real aim or purpose.
The zombies, have enough to spare,
Whereas, I have nothing at all,
And my heart remains foolish,
Muddy waters always cloudy.
Whereas I am dim and confused,
Others, are more often self-assured;
While I remain completely in the dark.
Aimless as a wave just drifting out to sea,
Bereft the slightest attachment, to anything,
Most people are busy getting necessary crap done,
Whereas I am often weird and impractical.
I don't share everybody else's concerns,
Being so easily amused by nature.

Argue all you want, but there is empirical evidence from more than one science with Quantum Cognition already having established itself. The question is not whether it exists, but how it operates physically and mentally and modern physics has just acquired the technology to explore such possibilities in earnest. The brain has turned out to possess a scalar analog architecture which displays no loyalty whatsoever to classical causal logic and every inclination to rely upon quantum mechanics instead for greater efficiency which can't be interpreted as classical.

The same is appearing to be true in preliminary examinations of proteins which, it turns out, rely upon ringing like a bell in order to expedite folding faster and, thus, displaying their particle-wave duality. It should also turn out to be much same with the mitochondria creating energy for the body. These kinds of findings of greater efficiency than classical physics can account for should eventually describe everything as revolving around quantum mechanics as the only way to produce the lowest possible energy state.

My own philosophy is based on primitive tribal potty humor where each word is treated as a variable with no intrinsic value. If you attempt to make the poems say anything they will mess with your head, sort of a mental-judo, and my friends who write the same kind of poetry treat it like a beloved pet perfectly capable of defending itself. Being mathematical, the poetry writes itself and we just do the footwork. :)

Chat rooms and one paper arguing against them are not proof against two experimental results showing empirical evidence of quantum mechanics in the brain. Either you have something that is a serious challenge to the evidence they have already presented or you're just blowing it out the rear. There is also evidence of quantum mechanics at work in more than one type of photosynthesis and bird navigation. Deny it all you want, but the growing body of evidence is that the theorists have been correct for over half a century that quantum mechanics are not confined to the subatomic and its not merely an issue of scale.

In a paradox of existence everything would organize around what's missing from this picture, or what is low in entropy. The human brain taping into quantum mechanics would mean it is capable of attaining the lowest possible energy state of the complete system which is consistent with other findings within the last twenty years or so. In physics, anything over ten years old is considered ancient history and if Penrose's vindication were overturned it would be huge news.

Muddy Waters

The best of man is like muddy waters,
Which benefits all living things, contending with none.
Flowing into those lowly places others disdain,
Where it burbles....
So, a true ignoramus,
Dwells, within bullshit,
Thinks inside deep bullshit,
Simply offers impartial bullshit.
Trusting others to own their personal bullshit,
And, to avoid pointless bullshit with a chuckle.

Nobody's ever heard of me and I'm rather partial to my own philosophy while, most other philosophers tend to bore me to death.

Popper is actually the quintessential academic clown bravely taking a pie-in-the-face literally for the cause of causality. You have to respect a popular philosopher of science who can promote a contradiction that even flies in the face of empirical evidence in the name of growth and progress and being reasonable. His philosophy is related to that of Niels Bohr who famously shouted, "Shut up and calculate!" The assumption being that, all nonsense aside, any academic slapstick will all be revealed in good time by merely accumulating more evidence!

Everything being context dependent means even whether you consider a pet rock conscious just depends upon the situation. Already experts as attempting to produce a super Von Neumann architecture, but mother nature having a sense of humor that rivals her beauty means consciousness itself can be considered merely another aspect of the original creative impetus of the Big Bang still expanding to this day.

I think Penrose may have missed the mark with the details of his theory, but within months two experiments confirmed these microwave vibrations are quantum mechanical in nature and produce some brainwaves and memories.

It's analog logic which almost nobody is taught because it has to be as equally artistic as it is rigorous and isn't as amenable to either classical logic or error correction.

I have a free standing offer to teach anyone how to use a dictionary and search engine.

http://phys.org/news/2014-01-discovery-quantum-vibrations-microtubules-corroborates.html

Roger Penrose's theory of quantum microwave vibrations within the microtubules or axions of the brain was proven twice last year and the brain is not classical, but quantum mechanical. Technically it resembles a distributed gain amplifier incorporating Bayesian probabilities vanishing into indeterminacy.

Its analog logic and, for example, on the most fundamental level of their organization the mind can substitute for the brain's inadequacies and malfunctions and vice versa because a mind without a brain and a brain without a mind are a contradiction. They are the particle-wave duality.

His philosophy is derived from Plato's forms and merely extends it to the idea of a causal systems logic. That is, that rational laws rule the universe and must give rise to rational thought. I'd compare him to Aristotle in that regard, much too literal minded.

Pattern matching is synonymous with yin-yang dynamics and self-organizing systems logic and, in recent years, all the doubts about it applying to language have been vanquished with even the first five neural networks responsible for pattern matching having already been mapped out in the brain. Noam Chomsky was just plain wrong and we don't inherit grammar because the human brain doesn't obey classical causal logic which is just way too inefficient to be survival oriented. There's even a new science known as Quantum Cognition that shows how we think is often blatantly quantum mechanical or context dependent.

The mathematics and logic are entirely different requiring fuzzy logic at the very least. My favorite example is Monty Hall on "Let's Make A Deal!" He has someone choose from door number one, two, or three and then shows them a booby prize behind one of the doors they didn't choose. Next he offers to trade them the door they choose for the other door they haven't seen yet. According to classical logic and probability there's no advantage in trading, but fuzzy logic insists that since your first choice was between three doors it was even more likely wrong than swapping between the two. Fuzzy logic is used in Backgammon, high speed elevators, and missile guidance systems today and has a big future when the next generation computers come out.

With Quantum Cognition it was sociologists who discovered even more surprising results. They offered people a fifty-fifty gamble where they would loose a hundred bucks or win two hundred. Such simple odds are easy for anyone to understand and they would keep playing even if they lost a few rounds, but the minute the researchers didn't tell them whether they had won or lost a particular round most stopped playing even though it was a "sure thing". According to quantum mechanics and how even your brain has been proven to work, without information on the last round you cannot predict the next.

So we do use additional logic to determine what language means other than merely deciding whether someone means what they say or is joking, but it gets complicated. However, metaphorically you could say sex is never about survival of the fittest, but the most creative and the human brain and languages are creative engines that only incidentally happen to resemble computers.

They're both causal theories that use this sort of geometric approach. Relativity is geometric as well and, from my point of view, its simply because classical causal approaches are so simplistic they lend themselves better to geometric perspectives. Theoretically, Intuitionistic mathematics can do better, but they're four times a complex. Its something I have difficulty explaining to people who don't understand systems logic or metaphoric logic, that geometry alone is insufficient for describing everything observable and attempts to isolate space from time or reconcile the two causally will inevitably produce nonsensical, mystical, or just plain worthless answers such as everything is fated.

While the "architecture" of Constructal Theory is vague, its systems logic and epistemology are not the least bit vague. He shows how geometry and change can both be derived from this "architecture" and how its related to the Golden Ratio somehow and can provide the arrow of time as well. Rocks rolling downhill will become smaller and more humble over time and push flatter rocks out of the way until they can build up to an avalanche and later convey heat and water within the soil efficiently enough to support life as we know it. The same thing for rivers and streams that either evolve to support the efficient flow of any subsequent streams or become replaced altogether.

You can think of it as also expressing the principle that for any truth to thrive and endure it must support each subsequent truth it leads to. The earth was thought to be flat and this can be considered a limited truth that had to be adapted to the eventual discovery that the world is round, however, it was not very adaptable to the idea and had to be replaced altogether. Hence, our private intuition and sensory information inform our worldviews as we grow and evolve over time with those that are more adaptable or timeless or whatever persisting the longest.

It also fits in with Donald Hoffman's discovery that, according to game theory, if the human mind and brain had ever resembled anything remotely like reality we would have become extinct as a species long ago. Its the idea that we use analog logic first and derive more formal logic from our sense impressions and, you could say, the map is not the territory, but merely an imitation.

Its actually been proven. Children acquire grammar the hard way by using pattern matching and an examination of how often people misinterpret each other showed that the frequency is rather high to say the least but, thankfully, language is forgiving and much of life is self-organizing. These are features of a self-organizing systems logic where roughly one quarter of the system is dedicated to maintenance, which is high, but the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. It also means language should prove to display the resilience of chaotic systems which can now be calculated. Its along the lines of being able to calculate the temperature at which water boils.

What Wittgenstein could not know at the time is he was describing a systems logic. A universal recursion in the law of identity, or paradox of existence such as quantum mechanics suggests, means that the foundations of classical logic must be built upon an analog systems logic that allows the law of identity and its own logic to inevitably go down the nearest rabbit hole or toilet of your personal preference. Its what everyone from Google to the US government wants and is fundamental to a Theory of Everything.

Theoretically it would reflect the organization of the human brain as well which can be described as a distributed gain amplifier incorporating Bayesian probabilities vanishing into indeterminacy. You could say within a paradox of existence everything would organize around what's missing from this picture because yin-yang dynamics apply and what is true must inevitably transform into B.S. because everything is context dependent, but knowing that allows the systems logic to express everything as both juxtapositions and bandwidth issues. It would mean things like Mach's Conjecture are merely nature begging the question because our classical mathematics are formulated for beauty at the exclusion of humor and what is required are Intuitionistic mathematics that are brand new and about four times as complex.

Such a systems logic should resemble a striking classical appearing fractal dragon equation within a larger and more subtle Mandelbrot pattern. I'm writing a book on the subject with this first book being extrapolated from the Tao Te Ching to represent the fractal dragon and its sequel would be the I-Ching that provides the Mandelbrot. Reconciling the two using metaphoric logic is a sort of top-down approach to the problem that must make both more and less sense out of more bottom-up metaphysically oriented classical logic. That's the way more holistic analog approaches work because they must reconcile any content with the greater context and require broader foundations.

In more classical terms it means mathematics and everything that exists can be considered to express a conservation of creativity and efficiency. Both a black hole and the neurons of our brains can convey any mass, energy, and information with the highest efficiency possible for anything their size, allowing them to transform their extreme efficiency into greater creative output allowing mathematics to become a pragmatic affair along with quantum mechanics that only has demonstrable meaning in specific contexts.

It says if we knew of a better way to use language than to normally assume someone either means what they say or are joking we'd use it.

Sounds similar to Adrian Bejan's Constructal Theory which attempts to provide an amendment to the second law of thermodynamics and proposes even flow dynamics can be credited to a mysterious architecture. He's well aware that its a causal perspective that doesn't describe modern physics and, as much as anything, introduces it as a way to generate ideas.

The paradox of our existence is that metaphysical extremes are always excluded because a context without any content or vice versa is impossible and all lesser truths will always transform into their complimentary-opposites. Dreams become reality and realities become dreams as our path shapes our feet and our feet the way. It also means Occam's Razor is paradoxical like everything else and, thanks to pattern matching or yin-yang dynamics ruling the universe the simplest explanation is either more useful or counterproductive because it is more often the most attractive. A simple analog systems logic that can describe both poetry in motion and crap rolling downhill becomes applicable to anything.

Reality without dreams is just somebody's nightmare, while dreams without reality are a contradiction explaining why its impossible to live without dreams. Stay awake long enough and you will merely hallucinate because the greater context always decides the truth. There are many lesser truths which are both contents and contexts and, then, there is the One Greater Truth of Socrates which he called the memory of God that none may look upon and remember in all its glory which, of course, is the greater context that the truth decides everything!

The idea that we get to decide what is real is a hoot. Reality without dreams is just somebody's nightmare and dreams without reality are a demonstrable contradiction. Stay awake long enough and you merely hallucinate.

A Jedi is one with his sphincter, thus he feels the force flow through him,
Knowing that great behinds always stink alike anonymously.

You cannot know anything if ya don't know nothing which makes everything more egalitarian, hence, supporting supersymmetry that vanishes into indeterminacy, or what can be described as a universal recursion in the law of identity. Its extreme egalitarian character and four fold yin-yang symmetry reflects what can be described as a nonsensical singular-infinity or paradoxical version of synergy where the greater context inevitably trumps any content. A simple geometric metaphor would be that everything should resemble both the creative impetus of the Big Bang and the relentless finale of Big Crunch because up and down, back and front, context and content will always define one another and everything being egalitarian the Big Bang and Big Crunch symbolize both the infinite and finite.

This is analog logic with an abacus being an excellent example. When Hewlett Packard attempted to film a commercial racing one of their calculators against an abacus they discovered the meaning of analog logic the hard way. Despite their input method requiring fewer key strokes than any other calculator the abacus beat them every time because its input is simultaneously its output and there is no equivalent function to = or enter. Analog logic produces analogs of what it is used to model and can also be described as pattern matching with the brain generating enormous patterns it then compares against one another, thus, allowing dumb neurons to organize and shift their focus without a clue as to what they are actually doing merely searching for what's missing from this picture or anything low in entropy. It also becomes the only viable way to organize when you start organizing neurons in enormous numbers.

Aristotle proved that the law of noncontradiction replies upon the law of identity if you want to get technical.

Any lynch mob can be polite until they decide not to be.

Since neither democrats nor republicans seem to be capable of making the distinction they are both part of the same lynch mob. The distinction, of course, between a democracy and a lynch mob being that a lynch mob can even hang their own majority and still be recognized as a lynch mob. In a democracy, that's what's call civil war when you no longer have a functional government.

Socrates became famous for endlessly repeating a barroom joke he told for drinks, "The only thing I know is that I know nothing!" This is known as the Law of Identity which Aristotle later used as the foundation of formal logic, meaning, all of logic is based on a joke. Hence, the reason quantum mechanics can casually turn both Zeno's paradoxes and calculus into indeterminate mush.

In over ten years of asking if anyone knows the simple distinction between a lynch mob and a democracy I have yet to hear the correct answer from even academics. Furthermore, I've discovered that over half the people online that I've spoken with are suspicious of the common dictionary and prefer to make up their own definitions for words despite being clueless the dictionary merely contains popular definitions. You simply can't have a democracy when nobody knows the meaning of the word and everyone is busy arguing their own definitions. Hence, the reason I suppose that these days its always the candidate who has more money for advertising that wins the election and we have people like Trump who is a long time huge professional wrestling fan and reality TV star running for office by spouting smack.

The idea that America is still a democracy is just more advertising as far as I'm concerned. Its empire baby, and this train ain't stopping until she derails. They've indefinitely suspended our constitutional rights, created the largest prison population in the history of world, and congress have given the military the right to round citizens up like cattle. The real thing to worry about is if the economy goes completely south because that's how Hitler came to power, when people were desperate.

Particle accelerators should be capable of testing the effect within a few years.

However, I would point out that the first quantifiable theory of humor has already established that humor is about perceiving anything low in entropy and this year the US federal government finally admitted that they have classified a few jokes as vital to the national defense. When is a joke no longer a joke? When it makes more sense than using classic logic.

Russel was a great admirer of his student Wittgenstein and the story goes when someone asked Witt what was the meaning of meaning itself he quipped, "What do you mean by what is the meaning of meaning?" It is now possible to earn your doctorate in comedy and the sciences will never be the same again. Ideas such as fasifiability are rapidly going down the toilet of your personal preference which is why I am writing "The Book That Can Never Be Written". If you have no personal truth there's simply no point in discussing the truth.

When Max Planck first discovered quantum mechanics he begged his colleges to explain the joke complaining that a sense of humor was never on his list of job requirements. The ripples from his discovery are still being felt today and, for example, Donald Hoffman is a Game theorist who spent ten years studying all the neurological evidence and running one computer simulation after another only to conclude that if the human mind and brain had ever resembled anything like reality we would have long ago become extinct as a species. Likewise, when mathematicians examined classical mathematics and causal physics they discovered that any number of simple metaphors can describe the universe causally and, for example, you can describe everything causally as merely consisting of bouncing springs, whirling vortexes, or vibrating rubber sheets if you prefer because all of them provide equally good analogies.

My own description of time is merely a model for that which ultimately makes no sense and the only issue is how useful are such models. When you can no longer identify that you have identified nothing you have personal issues to deal with.