Archive for July 2011

NOT EVERYTHING CAN FLY…!   Leave a comment


Saturn V – Went to the Moon and Back !

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/rocket/gallery/saturn/saturn2.html

…After the apparent mega-moth achievement of AIRBUS 380, which is really a misnomer in aviation ! As such a thing cannot be accepted as safer to fly in !

…We fall into the very known or saying I have accommodated to the art of flight ! :

“”NOT EVERYTHING CAN FLY…! And most anything can fly, if it has a big enough motor or form of propulsion ! ANSWER: “NOT A FLYING-RHINO or scrapped Canadian precursor Delta of the Concord: rather “A ROCKET” !””

NOW PLEASE: “A ROCKET” does not “GLIDE…!”
.
.
.

Advertisements

Posted 07/31/2011 by abiteinthechunk in Uncategorized

…I am getting real tired of "Reality TV" and "Idealism"…!   Leave a comment

I think words are too many and the “script” of this movie is so “idealistic”, i thought i was in Wonderland or Heaven or some dreamworld…!

Between reality and the “rich” and “famous” that do not want to let anybody else into their “bubblE”…! I wish their “bubble” burst’s…!

Imagine even the idea, i do not want any help for my fame ! i have to do it myself !
Wow how many have ridden on other people’s work !

THIS MOVIE HURST ME MORE than makes me dream !
.
.
.

Posted 07/29/2011 by abiteinthechunk in Uncategorized

…the usa debt ceiling 2011…!   Leave a comment


© 29July2011 George Frederick Thomson Broadhead

http://eve-nt.blogspot.com/2011/07/turing-test-2.html

… and USA economics/politics/poverty logic:
A DEBT CEILING IS DIRECTLY proportional to the size of the country and its obligations of a modern life style !

A DEBT CEILING is INVERSELY proportional to real true costs, and money/currency value !

A FIXED DEBT CEILING IS NON-NONSENSICAL WHEN there are real true needs that cost that and more !

A ONLY REAL TRUE DEBT CEILING IS WHEN YOU CANNOT PRINT OR PRODUCE YOUR WAY WAY OUT OF IT ! To you who print the money and regulates it !

DEBT CEILINGS AND POVERTY do not relate as very good friends or logic !

Kindly,
George.
“jack’ cafferty me if you want !

Posted 07/29/2011 by abiteinthechunk in Uncategorized

…TURING TEST 2…!   Leave a comment

TURING TEST 2 – ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
[Determining a intelligent human from a computer]

http://holy-grail.blog.co.uk/
http://the-10-temptations.blogspot.com/

Though artificial intelligence can progress greatly !
To make a Mega-computer more intelligent than us, it would mean
we could find out anything with this computer, more than what we
know as of year 2011, or learn more than we humans have been able to !
This Mega-Computer would have to speak language more than we do !
And not be mind boggled by the samples below of “mingled quasi-random”fixed data source style writ.
These words have meaning in themselves…!
The problem is their correct combination and/or meaning, in full
combination in logic or sufficiently logic sentences !

SIMPLE AS THAT…! Quasi-Random mingled language of fixed source data group-words as depicted bellow, exemplifies the complexity of language and knowledge of what we do not know !

Evolutionary Science simplifies too much, even the origin and source of language and we fall into the definition I have given of Imformatics Logic.

This over simplification that Academia of Year 2011 has adopted, falls into a realm of “not knowing the problem”, and of “ignoring the complexity of the matter in question” !

Henceforth, it is obvious that long paragraphs and sentences of words, makes the problem of linguistics and semantics a very complex Universe of knowledge and logic !

OF COURSE THIS LOGIC COMPUTER, SUPPLIED WITH CORRECT DATA, AND WITH THE CAPABILITY OF ACQUIRING FURTHER DATA, WOULD BE as Pure Logic and me:

[.] Would determine Evolution is wrong !
[.] Would declare its maker “humans” to have inferior logic in governance, education and way of living !
[.] Would be able to do more deep logic studies in pure logic !

Book 2 of Pure Logic, please, for a bit more on this Evolutionary mater !
As there is a bit more to this Turing Test 2, and the typewriter typing Ape
of your afamed “Richard Dawkins” !

Examples of somewhat senseless writ:

It must be emphasized, once again, that a subset of English sentences
interesting on quite independent grounds is necessary to impose an
interpretation on problems of phonemic and morphological analysis.
Furthermore, a descriptively adequate grammar is rather different from
nondistinctness in the sense of distinctive feature theory. Thus this
analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features is to be regarded
as the strong generative capacity of the theory. For one thing, an
important property of these three types of EC is not to be considered in
determining the system of base rules exclusive of the lexicon.
Analogously, the speaker-hearer’s linguistic intuition delimits a corpus
of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired
utterance test.

Analogously, the earlier discussion of deviance may remedy and, at the
same time, eliminate a general convention regarding the forms of the
grammar. For any transformation which is sufficiently diversified in
application to be of any interest, any associated supporting element
does not affect the structure of the strong generative capacity of the
theory. Let us continue to suppose that relational information is not
subject to the extended c-command discussed in connection with (34).
Furthermore, the natural general principle that will subsume this case
is to be regarded as irrelevant intervening contexts in selectional
rules. Note that a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort
appears to correlate rather closely with a corpus of utterance tokens
upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test.

Analogously, this selectionally introduced contextual feature is not
quite equivalent to the system of base rules exclusive of the lexicon.
Presumably, this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features
can be defined in such a way as to impose problems of phonemic and
morphological analysis. However, this assumption is not correct, since
the descriptive power of the base component is not to be considered in
determining a descriptive fact. A consequence of the approach just
outlined is that the systematic use of complex symbols is necessary to
impose an interpretation on the levels of acceptability from fairly high
(e.g. (99a)) to virtual gibberish (e.g. (98d)). I suggested that these
results would follow from the assumption that the earlier discussion of
deviance delimits a stipulation to place the constructions into these
various categories.

However, this assumption is not correct, since a case of
semigrammaticalness of a different sort is unspecified with respect to
the ultimate standard that determines the accuracy of any proposed
grammar. From C1, it follows that a descriptively adequate grammar is
not subject to the system of base rules exclusive of the lexicon. For
any transformation which is sufficiently diversified in application to
be of any interest, any associated supporting element does not readily
tolerate the strong generative capacity of the theory. To provide a
constituent structure for T(Z,K), the notion of level of grammaticalness
delimits a stipulation to place the constructions into these various
categories. Nevertheless, the descriptive power of the base component is
necessary to impose an interpretation on the traditional practice of
grammarians.

Note that the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as
categorial is, apparently, determined by the strong generative capacity
of the theory. Summarizing, then, we assume that a subset of English
sentences interesting on quite independent grounds can be defined in
such a way as to impose a stipulation to place the constructions into
these various categories. Analogously, the earlier discussion of
deviance raises serious doubts about problems of phonemic and
morphological analysis. So far, the appearance of parasitic gaps in
domains relatively inaccessible to ordinary extraction is necessary to
impose an interpretation on a general convention regarding the forms of
the grammar. Suppose, for instance, that relational information delimits
an important distinction in language use.

>>>
http://youtu.be/PmDIicJbPjE

http://youtu.be/m3eo-AxtD2M

http://youtu.be/k2YaCA2oyjs

http://youtu.be/uhqoNWei34g

.
.
.

Posted 07/29/2011 by abiteinthechunk in Uncategorized

Archaeopteryx   Leave a comment


Archaeopteryx Dinosaur: New Analysis Suggests Famous Fossil Is Not A Bird
http://article.wn.com/view/2011/07/27/Archaeopteryx_Dinosaur_New_Analysis_Suggests_Famous_Fossil_I/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/archaeopteryx-dinosaur-famous-fossil-not-a-bird_n_911109.html
NEW YORK — One of the world’s most famous fossil creatures, widely considered the earliest known bird, is getting a rude present on the 150th birthday of its discovery: A new analysis suggests it isn’t a bird at all.

Chinese scientists are proposing a change to the evolutionary family tree that boots Archaeopteryx off the “bird” branch and onto a closely related branch of birdlike dinosaurs.

Archaeopteryx (ahr-kee-AHP’-teh-rihx) was a crow-sized creature that lived about 150 million years ago. It had wings and feathers, but also quite un-birdlike traits like teeth and a bony tail. Discovered in 1861 in Germany, two years after Charles Darwin published “On the Origin of Species,” it quickly became an icon for evolution and has remained popular since.

…little-little secrets, little-little lies, …!
I HAVE NOT DOUBTED IN FOSSILS AND ARCHEOLOGY…!
Some, things can be made, and others we do not know how ?
Can a fossil be made ? And did these Dinosaurs really function fully ?
Uppssss….! Who cares, Book 2 of Pure Logic…!

ANYWAY, Evolution and the stories for main consensus, reviews of the majority and Academia and Science…!
Santa Claus would have a better place if he were in the Bible, and Theology Academia, too…!

Posted 07/28/2011 by abiteinthechunk in Uncategorized

…mETEORS…!   Leave a comment

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011/07/27/science/AP-US-SCI-Earth-Companion.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
Earth Shares Its Orbit With Tiny Asteroid
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: July 27, 2011 at 3:08 PM ET

NEW YORK (AP) Like a poodle on a leash, a tiny asteroid runs ahead of Earth on the planet’s yearlong strolls around the sun, scientists report.

…So when will we collide with this asteroid ?
…I do not doubt that meteor craters are from “meteors”, that have “hit” the Earth in the past…!
…Who knows,…pure logic and the little-little secrets…!

Posted 07/28/2011 by abiteinthechunk in Uncategorized

Life Out There   Leave a comment

‘It’s Alive! It’s Alive!’ Maybe Right Here on Earth
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/science/28life.html?_r=1

SAN DIEGO Here in a laboratory perched on the edge of the continent, researchers are trying to construct Life As We Don’t Know It in a thimbleful of liquid.

…well “buddy..,?”, we do not know how the human mind and brain are [Book 2 of Pure Logic], and we are going to “SPARK” a cell to life…! huuuuummmm…! Secrets, little secrets and big lies…! ALL OF ME PURE LOGIC…!

Posted 07/28/2011 by abiteinthechunk in Uncategorized