Re: The case for and against genius
From: Fabrizio J. Bonsignore (fbonsignore_at_beethoven.com)
Date: 10/15/04
- Next message: Paul Draper: "Re: Basics series proposed"
- Previous message: Andr? Michaud: "Re: what is the relation between force and energy?"
- In reply to: ZZBunker: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Next in thread: Morituri-Max: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Reply: Morituri-Max: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Reply: ZZBunker: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 15 Oct 2004 05:16:01 -0700
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...
>
> >
> > 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: Paul Draper: "Re: Basics series proposed"
- Previous message: Andr? Michaud: "Re: what is the relation between force and energy?"
- In reply to: ZZBunker: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Next in thread: Morituri-Max: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Reply: Morituri-Max: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Reply: ZZBunker: "Re: The case for and against genius"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
