Sporadically speaking

Firstly, coming back to read this domino_effect_ log when I woke up at random over an hour ago was either the perfect idea or an absolutely terrible one. Terrible in the sense that it’s going to keep me awake while I consider it or rather what it says but doesn’t say. It’s a section of conversation about Mutou family history in a few different connotations of the word and regardless of domino_effect_ being an AU YuGiOh RPG it’s one of those wonderful pieces of writing that are a rare enough find that they’re worth reading without extra context, though context does more often than not; help.
Anway, what I’m really enthusing about is probably best surmised in a single line from the above log:

"...it's what you believe that's important. Be careful what you might betray..."

( Read more... )


Moving on then, in the course of that random chain of events which is known for it’s suspiciously coherent links, officialgaiman dumped upon me a very interesting Economist article about jinn, which in of itself is interesting before it made me consider by own brand of critical path theory and the links in the chain again.

( Read more... )

Just a thought for the afternoon.
( Fiction, non-fiction, reality... )

The further away from the current time an event is the greater number of possibilities that lie between current time and the past event. Therefore it’s possible that if the past event were to occur in any given timeline it still might not have any bearing on any projected event in the future. What I’m trying to say is that while that key event might be the trigger to set a number of possibilities in motion, it does not necessarily guarantee that a future projection will occur.
Particularly if there are rather determining factors between the original key event and the future projected event. Therefore if certain events were to have already occured at given points in the timeline and certain other parties were not to exist to contribute then the projected event loses it’s validity because it is based on a series of assumptions that are incorrect in the given quantum pathway.
And of course if the data is unsubstantiated, the projections drawn from it are tenuous at best.

Besides, if one of the major results of the projected event were to have already occurred then wouldn’t that remove the necessity of the projected event from the critical path? Though if all indication were to suggest that the projected event hadn’t happened would that necessarily also negate the presence of people involved in that projected event?

Now I just need to get these exams out of the way and wait for my Feynman book to arrive. ^_^


And I got up in the middle of the night to do finance equations. Just so you know.


Edit:
In the theme of obfuscation, if you’re plugging in different variables to the same experiment of course you’re going to get a different result! And if the actual given environment is effected by those variables anyway everything, from reagents to compound product is going to differ. The only thing that stays the same is the quick-fit equipment or the sealed biosphere, if you wish.

To take that analogy a step further, if you have two non-reacting reagents and then change one of them so that they do react then the product is going to be something rather than simply two non-reacting reagents sitting there doing nothing. Change both reagents and the end product is something entirely different than any initial data set might suggest, since it’s presuming certain reactions from the given reagents.
Basically, it’s one of those cases where regardless of a few throw-away similarities everything else has changed. You’re running an entirely different experiment!
Marvellous.