Re: specialization momentum


"Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:d9tb6l$1r0h$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "g" <gillawton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:d9rsms$1a3l$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>> > How refreshing that you compare yourself to Isaac Newton, taking
>> > special
>> > care to align yourself with his legendary modesty! You will fit right
>> > in
>> > here in sbe.
>>
>> Please quote the part where I compared myself with Sir Isaac, for if and
>> where I did, I am quite certain he came out the better man of us.
>
> I think that most of your readers understand the image of standing "on the
> shoulders of giants" as evocative of Newton. For example, see:
> http://www.cyber.com.au/users/conz/shoulders.html
>
> I recently produced a series of postings on OOL in which (among other
> things) I gave my own twist to some ideas of J. T. Wong regarding the
> evolution of the genetic code. But the idea didn't originate with Wong.
> A botanist named Dillon had previously written a book on the subject.
>
> Dillon's book bears the inscription, "If I have seen farther than other
> men, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants". Perhaps
> Dillon intended the inscription to seem modest. It wasn't received that
> way, at least not by me. I thought that Dillon was making a subliminal
> claim that his ideas were as significant as those of the man who
> first wrote those words.
>
> No one (besides me, and maybe Wong) even remembers who Dillon was, these
> days.
>
>> But please do not
>> discourage me from trying to learn from him and many others, and using,
>> if
>> I can, what I learn, because I don't think you will be able to discourage
>> me
>> from that.
>> >
>> > If you think that you can invent a terminology that will function as an
>> > engine to more efficiently lift biological thought into the wild
>> > blue yonder ..., well go right ahead.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> >I only suggest that you make the attempt to introduce and explain this
>> >marvelous new vocabulary by making use of the old vocabulary during
>> >the tutorial.
>>
>> Thank you. But please allow me to explain that there will be some
>> difficulty with some of the terms. Where such difficulty exists, I shall
>> explain what the difficulty is, and why I am suggesting and/or asking
>> others
>> for their input for a term free of insinutations that muddy the water.
>
> Ok, so let me ask: What difficulty exists with the ordinary word
> "connotations"
> such that you were led to substitute your own word "insinutations"?

Perhaps you are more perceptive than I and understand things in a way I do
not.

I recently told a patent attorney and some individuals who work in
pharmaceutical
research that I had used and Edisonian approach to arrive at one substance
out
of well over a hundred that is totally effective for a certain application,
where
not one of the other substances.

If there was any false insinuation in alluding to the shoulders of giants it
was only
this: that Newton stood on what he had learned in school. Today Newton is
ONE
OF those giants, although lots of people are unaware that, for example, most
of
the mathematical concepts applied by Newton in his mention of "the calculus"
ALREADY were in place, and had been accumulating for THOUSANDS of years
before he was even born. Many historians believe Newton PROBABLY thought
of "fluxions" (as he called them) before Leibniz did, and just sat on them
for years
and years and then got pissed because Leibniz published before he did.

But that does not cut to the full story either. When a student goes to
class and
begins to learn about calculus today, that is not "the calculus" of Newton.
It is
the contributions of hundreds of individuals both BEFORE AND AFTER Newton.

So, based upon your spin on this, not only have I "compared" myself now in
some
way to Newton, by alluding to the fact that we ALL stand on the shoulders of
giants
when we avail ourselves of the benefits of thousands of years of rigorous
and
original thinkers but in an egotistical way.

If I use the concept of Fibonacci numbers in describing an idea I have about
how
the conflict of spherical microexpansion "fills the gaps" within spherical
universal
expansion, perhaps then you can add Fibonacci to the list. And while you
are at
it, by all means include Darwin, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman and.. no
wait...
how about the guy who (so far) provided the only rigorous proof that there
is no
power other than 1 or 2 that will work for the exponent in the equation
a to the n power plus b to the n power = c to the n power.

Or gracious goodness ! I have just compared myself to a man whose name I
cannot
even recall at the moment. Was it Cole? Gotta look up his name, because it
would
be even a greater insult if I were to abuse him by comparing myself to him,
without
even spelling out his NAME ! Furthermore I can't be fair to them all if I
fail to list
ALL their names.

Oh MY ! I have just insinuated -- according to your spin -- that I have
"compared"
myself to ALL the great contributors to science, and mathematics and
philosophers --
with Socrates all the way through the positivists (yes I mentioned logical
and legal
positivism recently) so... oh, yes, I said something about historicity, so I
must begin
with Herodotus and work forward.

Oh NO, I just realize I said to someone lately that in any project involving
human
beings I would ascribe to a policy of "first, do no harm," so I have
COMPARED myself
to Hippocrates, and I mentioned rabies recently without citing Pasteur.

ARRRRGGGGG. I have COMPARED myself to every great thinker who ever lived,
because at some time or another I have made some allusion to something they
contributed without bothering to mention their name.

I compose and arrange music and write lyrics, so I have compared myself to
BACH!
I like Porgy and Bess, and am sure I must have whistled a few bars of "Bess,
you is my
woman now," or mentioned to a friend who has a (typically) smelly goat that
"now we
know how Porgy must have felt." (The allusion missed the mark, as he is
more into
country and western so... OH NO, I've just compared myself to Willie
Nelson.

Horrors !

It's getting worse and worse by the moment.

What shall I do about this incredible ego problem of mine?


g



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Wireless purchase
    ... Will ANY Lectro system deal with this problem better or only ... HIGH POWER 250mw Receiver UCR205D". ... and receivers and compare features, power requirements, etc. ...
    (rec.arts.movies.production.sound)
  • Re: Wireless purchase
    ... Will ANY Lectro system deal with this problem better or only ... HIGH POWER 250mw Receiver UCR205D". ... and receivers and compare features, power requirements, etc. ...
    (rec.arts.movies.production.sound)
  • Re: Read noise: get it 30x down?
    ... use the usual formula to calculate the change as 6 dB (4X the power). ... compared to the electrical power. ... It is *not* used to compare, ... produces a ratio itself that can be expressed in dB. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Stepping back from ANR
    ... headsets it has some of the highest passive attenuation though only ... I think you're still thinking of power not volts. ... Sound is logarithmic so I'm pretty sure that the 3 ... In an expample I found on the web and you compare say the Rifle ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: Stepping back from ANR
    ... headsets it has some of the highest passive attenuation though only ... I think you're still thinking of power not volts. ... Sound is logarithmic so I'm pretty sure that the 3 ... In an expample I found on the web and you compare say the Rifle ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)