Re: The case for and against genius
From: ZZBunker (zzbunker_at_netscape.net)
Date: 10/16/04
- Next message: Igor: "Re: Fine work by our new Nobelist"
- Previous message: John Steinsvold: "Re: Let’s face it; the usefulness of money is over"
- In reply to: Fabrizio J. Bonsignore: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Next in thread: Joe: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 15 Oct 2004 18:17:50 -0700
fbonsignore@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message news:<768f7623.0410150416.56f8799f@posting.google.com>...
> zzbunker@netscape.net (ZZBunker) wrote in message news:<e4a0829b.0410141220.1a4850f0@posting.google.com>...
> > fbonsignore@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message news:<768f7623.0410050507.14bb12fa@posting.google.com>...
> > > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > > t=infinite)
> > >
> > > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > > out of an university is near impossibility. All instances of multi
> > > genius generation can be explained sociologically by envy. For
> > > instance, Voltaire writing the Encyclopedia, Bacon writing
> > > Shakespeare, Mendelssohn giving away compositions/themes to his
> > > friends, Hegel (Kant? Fichte?) giving away ideas to other
> > > philosophers, Heisenberg (Bohr?) in the quantum mechanics generation,
> > > etc.
> >
> > Genius is the most overrated quantity, "science"
> > has ever invented. Which is the one positve
> > result from Einstien's Gedanker experimente's
> > which the QM paychos of 26 + ch dimensions.
> >
> > Since as he was ever quick to point-out to the
> > mathematical cretins of the fields of mathematical-muscial
> > schema of the heavens:
> >
> > Tonality is banality in the hands of the
> > mathematically untutored.
> >
> > So, in the greater truths of the universe,
> > tonality = banality. And it is the
> > harmony of the music relative to
> > space that is music's message, and
> > not the fork's of the mathematical
> > road to readiness. Which is simply
> > an economic equation, to be solved
> > by a patent clerk, rather than a
> > mathematian with imaginary particles
> > in his mind and no waves of matter,
> > to make a matter to matter.
> >
> >
> >
> > Education is the source of all human error,
> > and thus requires merely an Engineer
> > and a rubber eraser to correct it, rather than
> > the assistance of an inebriated aether-army
> > of the sectretaries of mathematicians,
> > and their logic of flat space to correct it.
> >
> > Since what begins in flat-space, will end
> > in flat-space.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > And, artistic flurish is merely the means to
> > a means, and is intended for only the lonely,
> > as Astophysicists would be, since they are
> > merely Mecury's companion matrix of Mars.
> > And thusly are seriously in error in
> > their bio-genuis theory of Black Holes,
> > and the push-pull nature of gravity forces.
> >
> > And Bohr was the ONLY genius of the quantum mechanics generation.
> > Since he is still the ONLY Physicist on record
> > in the whole of the 20th Century that ever told
> > Einstein that he should take a long mathematical walk on
> > the shoulders of a Goedel or a Newton rather than making
> > foppish pretenses that he is familiar
> > with the science of probability theory.
> >
>
> Bravo! So it was Bohr the source... and the rest...
And the rest, of the dark matter Newton evangelical
Astrologers of the Big Fart would say:
is History with a twist.
Since Bohr's atom is still the leading contender
for putting moronic Einstone photon-economics
out-of-buisness permanently.
>
> >
> > >
> > > We can envision each generation as a hyperplane in the space of human
> > > possibility where there is (at some moments in time, with certain
> > > frequency) a high peak, global macimum, followed by other minor peaks
> > > and a continuum varying about an average, (for the intelligence
> > > measure, whatever it is taken).
> > >
> > > That the works of genius get distributed, voluntarily or forcefully,
> > > would be an expression of th euniversal motive of envy...
> > >
> > > (The equation is just to impress! Easy way to take notes, though I
> > > guess it can be expressed more formally in a model of gene trait
> > > distribution along whole populations).
- Next message: Igor: "Re: Fine work by our new Nobelist"
- Previous message: John Steinsvold: "Re: Let’s face it; the usefulness of money is over"
- In reply to: Fabrizio J. Bonsignore: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Next in thread: Joe: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
