Hopefully, this is the, more or less, final version of the second chapter. When I was eight years old, I wondered why cavemen were unable to invent the atom bomb and destroy the world a million years ago, which many consider a somewhat curious question, but is related to the Anthropic Principle. Specifically, what I was wondering was why our world is physically capable of supporting the evolution of even such a highly intelligent, yet, incredibly violent and destructive species. That we survived by dumb luck seemed implausible to me and, assuming there is no obvious divine intervention, then why do the laws of physics appear to be so predisposed as to preclude humanity from wiping themselves out in short order? Why has it proven so difficult to destroy the entire planet, drive our own species to extinction, or to become trapped in an endless dark age by our own mindless greed, violence, and sheer stupidity? Why does it require enormous populations, vast industries, and advanced technology to produce weapons of mass destruction such as atomic bombs and how, under the circumstances, has the advancement of our incredibly elaborate and unimaginably powerful technology managed to continue to be so conducive to the rapid rise of modern civilization? Down through the ages, myriad cultures have speculated upon exactly how and when God or humanity might destroy the entire species, while I've always wondered why they haven't done so already and why the universe continues to support widespread lowbrow slapstick, of even the Machiavellian and Hatfield’s and McCoy varieties. Forget about existentialist angst, as a small child it occurred to me that nature was entirely too forgiving of humanity’s worst mindless excesses, and by any reasonable standard, we should already be extinct as a species. Our science and technology have started to become so complex and powerful it truly boggles the imagination, yet humanity remains relatively brutal and savage, begging the question as to why we have not already become extinct or destroyed our own humanity beyond all recognition. Cavemen blowing up the entire world with atom bombs they quickly cobble together out of clay and rocks, before the radiation kills them, or becoming trapped in an endless dark age by their own mad inventions, are the kind of nightmare “Planet of the Apes” scenarios I might expect to arise in any number of arbitrary universes. Physicists have asked similar questions as well, such as why the laws of physics appear to be so perfect for supporting the evolution of human consciousness and why even our planetary orbit and ecology appear to be so ideal for intelligent life to evolve. Had the earth been significantly smaller or any number of parameters had been different, I reasoned as a small child, humanity as we know it might never have survived to establish anything remotely like modern civilization. The only plausible explanation I could think of was that "infinite echoes in infinity" would normalize one another, or smooth over each other’s rough spots, knocking off the worst bumps, and provide a sort of governor, or built-in regulator for reality, that would prevent the worst extremes from ever occurring so that, overall, everything keeps progressing no matter how complicated the lowbrow slapstick becomes. Decades later I discovered that, to varying degrees, half the planet shares my view and these "echoes in infinity" are what hippies refer to as instant karma, which is synonymous with yin-yang and the Two Faces of Janus. Instant karma is usually thought of as the belief that, in one form or another, whatever we put out into the universe can come back to either enrich our lives or haunt us, with a trivial example being kicking something in frustration and stubbing your toe. But, contracting lung cancer after decades of smoking is still another example, because the "instant" in the name merely serves to distinguish the concept from traditional beliefs in reincarnation. Untold millions, if not billions of people around the world, have frequently dismissed instant karma as just so much superstitious nonsense or one of the oldest attempts to use meaningless bullshit to mess with people's heads. Nonetheless, for over half a century, many of us have wondered why it has taken so long for modern science to establish instant karma as a law of nature, being all too keenly aware that the most interesting things grow out of manure… Bumbling upon the accidental discovery of quantum mechanics, whilst searching for a mathematical shortcut, the conservative German physicist, Max Planck, promptly begged his colleagues to please explain the joke; complaining that a sense of humor was never on his list of essential job requirements. In his later years, Planck’s colleagues noted that, perhaps wisely, he had succeeded in developing a quite agreeable sense of humor, however, he remained among the minority in the greater physics community at large where, for decades afterwards, the subject of how to design experiments to discourage practical jokers, became a popular topic at cocktail parties. The subject became so sensitive within the hallowed halls that, when a student mused out loud about it one day, Niels Bohr famously shouted out impatiently, “Shut up and calculate!” Bohr was thoroughly sick and tired of listening to utter and complete nonsense about his work, and proceeded to lobby congress and the entire physics community, to help him discourage professionals from babbling nonsensically about their work. Bohr realized that if there was any sort of sane explanation for quantum mechanics, then the physics community had merely to keep gathering data and crunching the numbers, until someone accidentally stumbled across a workable explanation for the continuing disaster. Like a hundred monkeys banging away on typewriters, all the scientists had to do was keep gathering data and crunching the numbers in their traditional rigorous fashion, on the assumption that the solution would eventually become blatantly obvious to everyone. Many took Bohr seriously and, whether by coincidence or not, progress in high energy theoretical physics slowed to a crawl for over half a century as, simultaneously, the average number of authors on significant papers, skyrocketed to over a hundred and twenty. While Bohr was busy clamoring for everybody to shut up already, in the meantime, desperate Japanese bullet train engineers invented the foundations for modern fuzzy logic, fully aware that their new invention contradicted classic logic and mathematics. But, like I said, they were desperate, with Japanese bullet trains to this day being so overcrowded they hire people to wear gloves and stand on the loading docks during rush hour, and gently shove the last passengers in far enough so the doors can close. Already overwhelmed by all the nonsense coming out of quantum mechanics, and contextual philosophers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein, for decades academia stubbornly refused to acknowledge the success of the Japanese engineers. Worldwide, the population had exploded along with the technology to support enormous populations, and academia was expanding so rapidly they could hardly keep up, and in less than a century, for example, the US went from five percent of the population being literate to over thirty percent having degrees. In the rush to cash in on all the newly emerging technology, even wisdom philosophy has not been popular in the hallowed halls in over a century, and the ongoing lowbrow slapstick involving fuzzy logic and quantum mechanics has only grown more divisive, elaborate, and mindbogglingly stupefying over the intervening decades. Philosophers and physicists alike are increasingly dependent on theories they either can’t explain or don’t believe in, while experimental physicists encountered a similar problem in reverse, requiring machines of increasingly byzantine size and complexity, only to have the results contradict all their theories. Except, of course, for the vaguest theory of them all, “Quantum Field Theory” and, adding insult to injury, the number of utterly ludicrous theories being proposed, which nonetheless appeared to fit all the facts, steadily grew into a mountain overnight. As if echoing Niels Bohr and Ernst Rutherford before him, Sir Steven Hawking publicly declared that philosophy is dead, and he intended to know the mind of God, then he proudly donned the traditional jester’s cap and someone hit him with a pie-in-the-face. Naturally, many of us who happen to believe in karma and enjoy following the progress of modern physics, merely assumed it was academia’s usual willful stubbornness and lack of a sense of humor that was preventing the physics community from making faster progress and, at long last, declaring instant karma a law of nature. Some of my friends are trained physicists and other scientists, who just happen to believe in instant karma, but little did any of my friends or I know just how dire the situation was becoming until, upon my gathering and collating data for this book, I was shocked by the sheer number of pie-in-the-face results researchers are currently encountering in their work. Upon closer examination, I realized all these pies-in-the-face are rapidly multiplying wildly out of control, beginning within the foundations of the physical and cognitive sciences, and are currently threatening to produce an avalanche of incredibly mind-numbing lowbrow slapstick, that will ensure neither academia, Vaudeville, nor the rest of the world will ever be the same again, because reality is stranger than fiction, and even Hollywood writers could never make this shit up! Upon closer examination, it became obvious these pie-in-the-face results are steadily worming their way into all the other branches of the sciences, and have been increasing in frequency ever since Planck’s original discovery. But, what really made me go cross-eyed, was the slowly dawning revelation that the brightest minds on the planet were consistently failing to get the punch lines to jokes that a two-year-old can grasp. Like a reject episode of the “Twilight Zone Comedy Hour”, the researchers are performing downright infantile lowbrow slapstick that even Vaudeville can’t compete with and “News of the Weird” can’t keep up with. After three centuries of concerted efforts worldwide, it appears the modern sciences are finally poised to assemble the Big Picture of life, the universe, and everything and, in the process, are unwittingly exposing all of their own worst lowbrow slapstick. Will Rogers famously complained to his manager that audiences would only laugh at his stupid jokes if they contained the truth while, apparently, the researchers all failed to get the simplest jokes, which implied the truth is a joke. The truth hurts for a reason, and its as if the harder the researchers demand everything must make sense, the less sense the researchers themselves made to any outside observers. They are expressing the Two Faces of Janus, the intrinsic beauty and humor of nature, reflected in the awareness of the observers themselves. Being ultimately contradictory, nature must present these researchers with endless opportunities to bang their heads against the wall by failing to get the punch lines to the jokes, however, she must also provide them with endless opportunities to get the punch lines as well. For example, after decades of failed attempts, physicists finally succeeded in simulating a phase transition from quantum mechanical to classical, only to be puzzled by the results. Contrary to all their theories and calculations, the results indicated the Big Bang was neither too hot nor too cold, but just right for the researchers to take all their careful measurements. Soberly, the researchers confided that it could be years or longer before anybody could figure out how a Goldilocks universe works, as if they had never heard the story in their lives. Assuming the researchers have no choice but to perform slapstick, the more thoroughly they succeed in eliminating any alternative explanations, the more unintentional lowbrow slapstick they must express, whether they want to or not, because their compelling mysteries must inevitably transform into humble slapstick, thus, expressing the Two Faces of Janus. A toddler falling adorably on their butt, with the perfect timing that a professional comedian might envy, is an example of how the Two Faces of Janus are sometimes obviously displayed in equal measure. The more humble and elegant the display, the more obvious and endearing it can become, while the researchers are demonstrating how this aesthetic bias is actually intrinsic to the paradox of our existence, making it impossible to avoid performing lowbrow slapstick in some situations. Casting our gaze upon the night sky we might feel a sense of awe and wonder, and even feel as if our lives have more meaning while, conversely, looking down from a great height some people will literally scream and crap their pants. The less dramatic juxtapositions discovered by these researchers, should inevitably leave them with no choice, but to either laugh or throw their hands up in symbolic surrender. Ironically, ours appears to be the best of all possible worlds, if for no other reason, then because instant karma ensures that if the universe were any different, nobody would be around to ask the question. This is a humorous variation on John Wheeler’s “Participatory Anthropic Principle” that according to the evidence, reality is whatever you make of it, because reality without dreams is just somebody’s nightmare, while dreams without reality are everyone’s personal fantasy. The particle-wave duality of quantum mechanics can be considered a reminder that we can always focus on reality, but reality only has meaning within the broader context of sharing our dreams, and the two will inevitably transform into one another. Following how this works requires examining scalar differentials and tensor integrals, for how the smallest pond can shed invaluable light upon the Big Picture and, vice versa. Everything revolving around what’s missing from this picture means the laws of thought and the laws of physics are both self-organizing and self-correcting in a similar manner, that reflects our mortal fallibility. Pragmatically speaking, logic is better for correcting errors, and helpful for appreciating more beauty in anything, but only because it ignores the Big Picture in favor of focusing in on the details. The issue is whether we are moving away from or towards what we want, becoming aware of something new, or merely surrendering any pretense we are unaware, which resembles how the human nervous system and neurons work, treating sensation and thought, memory and thought, in an analog fashion that can conflate their identity like an abacus conflates the identity of its input and output. The visual centers of the brain organize around searching for what’s missing from this picture using, among other things, foveated vision that blurs our peripheral vision. In order for us to focus in on anything, either mentally, visually, or otherwise, we must actively ignore a great deal of the world around us on an ongoing basis, and by accounting for what’s missing from this picture, or low in entropy, our subconscious mind can quickly spot if anything is possibly amiss or of particular interest, prompting our conscious mind to focus in on whatever it is. Using this approach, the subconscious mind doesn’t have to know what it is examining, and treats our own thoughts and sensations in much the same manner, relying almost exclusively upon pattern matching. The specific neural networks responsible for all this pattern matching are already being documented, as has the fact our conscious thoughts emerge from our emotions, indicating a self-organizing and self-correcting systems logic is at work between the conscious and unconscious mind. Logic is great for adding details and crucial for correcting errors, but the puzzles in life can usually be assembled in very much the same manner as anyone might assemble a jig-saw puzzle, using a simple metaphoric systems logic a child can comprehend. Metaphorically speaking, our universe is a Goldilocks universe where the laws of physics themselves resemble the mind of a three year old telling her story. Three year old's don’t make clear distinctions between what is beautiful and funny, what makes sense and doesn’t, and one African tribe enjoys wryly summing up the human condition insisting, “Mother Nature’s love is irresistible, but she has a wicked sense of humor!” The beauty of life revolves around what’s missing from this picture, which can more frequently make all the difference in the world, precisely because 42 is as good an explanation as anyone is ever going to get, and the rule of nature is pay it forward sucker, or else! Everything being paradoxical, means mother nature comes with her own user manuals and complete tutorials, but a paradoxical version of Occam’s Razor applies to everything and you have to be careful what you wish for, because the simplest workable explanation is all that much more tempting. In our metaphorical reality, everything always works out for the universe as a whole, if not for Goldilocks herself who learned her lesson the hard way. The universe can be considered fated or totally random, united or divided, or whatever you prefer, but we ourselves appear to have limited freedom within the infinite sea to create our own local reality. Everything expressing particle-wave duality, the answer to the Liar’s Paradox, is that it will demonstrably transform into the Sorites Heap Paradox, and vice versa, depending on the context, because everything expresses both an explicit and a more vague dual identity, while the ultimate truth is that the bullshit that can be spoken of is not the enduring bullshit. The researchers were puzzled by their results resembling the Liar’s Paradox, while their humor expressed the vagueness of the Sorites Heap Paradox, bringing up the question of when exactly something is funny or serious, explicit or vague. Socrates believed in the memory of God, whom none may look upon and see in all his glory, and the ultimate Truth for mere mortals like ourselves, is we can only more fully appreciate the truth by living our truth, when we no longer make distinctions between who we are and what we are doing, becoming self-actualized poetry in motion, as we live our dreams. The resulting metaphorical universe resembles Maslow’s famous “Hierarchy of Needs” extrapolated into a Spectrum of Desires, and combined with the Jungian collective unconscious, which I cover in the next chapter. Goldilocks learned the hard way that reality and our dreams being indivisible, ensures that, as much fun as it is to play, joke around, and pretend, nothing beats being authentic and knowing when to just say no to yourself, no matter how great the temptation. Hippies often like to say, “We are all Ugly Ducklings ascending the stairway to heaven, and whenever harmony is lost, balance will be restored”. Ensuring that paradise lost will inevitably become paradise regained, just not necessarily in your lifetime. The symmetry of harmony and balance can be used to describe anything, including how the future normalizes the past and how the laws of physics and the laws of thought overlap to produce our own local reality, within the larger reality we all share. Gravity provides an elegant example of how this works, with each of us possessing our own meager gravity and inertia we share with the rest of the universe. The smallest pond can sometimes be the busiest place that can shed invaluable light upon the Big Picture, but the Big Picture always sheds invaluable light upon every small pond. Gravity spreads out in every direction, as if attempting to embrace the entire universe, while inertia is better for describing the smallest pond. Inertia can be in-your-face, and all too easy to measure, while gravity is much more nebulous, egalitarian, and difficult to pin down, implying gravity reflects the Big Picture more and by examining how inertia behaves in distinctive situations, we can get a better idea of how gravity works. Peering all the way back to the Big Bang, we can see Dark Energy suddenly accelerating the expansion of the universe half-way through, as if the Big Bang and Dark Energy represent the particle-wave duality of the universe, expanding without limit, while Dark Energy and Dark Matter are both similar to gravity, in that they possess extremely vague identities, and only appear to interact weakly with anything. Some theories have even implied Dark Matter and Dark Energy don’t exist, despite the preponderance of the evidence suggesting they do. A mathematical examination of the Big Bang concluded that, without gravity, the universe would have quickly dispersed while, without inertia, it would have quickly collapsed back on itself. Note how this particular discovery is the same as the discovery that Big Bang’s temperature was just right, and tells us absolutely nothing about the Big Bang except, it was just right. Einstein’s rubber sheet universe implies gravity doesn’t actually do anything, but merely provides the shortest distance between two points, allowing inertia to do the actual work. Thus, gravity occupies space, without taking up space, and facilitates life and bringing things together, without actually doing anything, because gravity is just right. Between them, gravity and inertia describe all the varieties of motion we can see in the world around us and, apparently, we cannot even really imagine a universe without both as more than a vague abstraction, with the gravity-less Big Bang quickly dispersing in every direction being equivalent to expanding to infinity and beyond, while gravity collapsing back on itself without inertia, is equivalent to a singularity. Particle-wave duality can therefore be thought of as a evidence we inhabit a paradoxical multiverse within a singularity, which could make it ultimately impossible to distinguish space from time. In particular, the collective motions of massive bodies in extreme situations should display similar particle-wave duality, and provide hints that space and time exchange identities according to a self-organizing and self-correcting systems logic. Ultimately, it could be impossible to distinguish anything, except the complex symmetry of the principle of identity, progressively vanishing down the nearest rabbit hole or toilet of your personal preference. Of course, in a somewhat orderly, if ultimately random, fashion. Everything expressing particle-wave duality, would mean half of everything observable would inevitably turn out to be inexplicable, and to humorously paraphrase the great Sherlock Holmes, “Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains can only be highly improbable!” Eliminating the impossible is impossible by definition, paradoxically making actually eliminating the impossible possible in reality, by simply ignoring nonsense whenever possible. The impossible defines what is possible and vice versa, and the two must inevitably transform into one another, just as everything should inevitably prove to be limited and unlimited, united and divided, etc. For example, an electron’s particle-like aspect is believed to be indivisible, while its wave-like aspect has proven to be infinitely divisible. The changing universe we see all around us, can be considered to be composed of an infinite number of possible time lines within an infinite number of universes, and it is our mortal fallibility that prevents us from appreciating them all simultaneously. A newborn infant in a crib knows nothing of time, and the neurological studies indicate they are tripping for all practical purposes, as if using psychedelics, but its much simpler to think of their internal clocks requiring that they first develop memory, humor, and self-awareness before they can synchronize their dreams properly and make more sense out of everything. The Simultaneity Paradox of Relativity illustrates the same problem, with two distant observers being capable of arguing forever whether the chicken or the egg came first, due to the light traveling at the same speed and reaching their telescopes at different times. The temptation is to think of this as merely an illusion but, according to Einstein, its impossible to create a perfect clock or to prove it is merely an illusion. The implication is that time can be thought of as flowing backwards as information, thus, producing the more easily recognizable forward arrow of time and the forces of nature we normally experience. Neither a backwards, random, nor utterly fated universe is more than vaguely comprehensible as an abstraction, implying we see the forward arrow of time, because that’s the default that makes the most sense to our conscious mind and, of course, if it were any different nobody would be around to ask the question. In quantum mechanical terms, three eigenstates are enough to produce the familiar three dimensional space-time and arrow of time we perceive around us, and these can be thought of as representing circular, linear, and self-organizing time. Different combinations produce the forces of nature and the world all around us, with time and geometry being indivisible yin and yang, that can lend everything its own internal clocks that help to determine how long anything endures. The chaos of the universe and the forces of nature both help to determine how long anything endures, but everything inevitably transforms into its indivisible complimentary-opposite. Neither geometry nor change makes any demonstrable sense without the other, and the issue keeps coming back to how everything moves collectively, as well as, independently. Inside a giant black hole, heavier objects fall faster because of not only the intense gravity, but their collective behavior, while the rotation of the galaxies don’t obey Newtonian mechanics, and they would fly apart if they did. A cosmologist recently discovered that galactic whirlpools like our galaxy obey the Schrodinger equation, indicating we are observing a fractal recursion of particle-wave duality over vast scales. Adrian Bejan noted the distribution of visible matter resembles heat induced stress fractures in flaking paint. At the furthest extremes our instruments are theoretically capable of, beyond even the cosmic microwave background, the gravitational pull from the other side of universe should be detectable as it expands away from us faster than the speed of light. As if we are gazing into the event horizon of black hole from inside and, assuming 42 is it, the eventual fate of every branch of the sciences is nonsensical and vague answers. Relativity indicates time stops at the event horizon, implying it could flow backwards as information while, simultaneously, energy and information are still dispersed throughout the universe in the normal manner. Time flowing backwards as information can also be thought of as a continuum and expresses that the wave-like aspects of particle-wave duality. Waves can be fun to watch, or put you to sleep, but a temporal continuum like the one I’m describing would often act more like a series of giant coffee filters or sieves that merely rule out any metaphysical and conceptual extremes. Time flowing backwards should resemble our own sense of smell, which is hardwired into the brain stem and is similar to a fancy peg board a child might put different shapes through, and its only job is to eliminate extremes like someone pounding a square peg into a round hole in order to create a naked singularity. In technobabble, space-time is hyperuniform or homogenized fractal cartoon heaven and hell, because nobody can ultimately say what space-time is. That automatically rules out the worst possible cartoons, as if the universe were a nursery for intelligent life. Rather than the future determining our individual fate, the future merely limits our choices to whatever actually supports the universe having a future, excluding such things as a perfect vacuum, a naked singularity, or anyone even imagining what it might really be like for God to create a rock so big he can’t pick it up. Time flowing backwards can be thought of as the multiverse enforcing the Goldilocks Principle that nothing can ever be too hot or too cold, too hard or too soft, too big or too small, too fast or too slow, etc. and that everything always works out for the universe as a whole, if not for Goldilocks herself. As bizarre as that sounds, it describes the quantum wave function of the modern Many Worlds Theory. We normally collect energy in order to gather information, while the future sends information into the past where it transforms into matter and energy, excluding any metaphysical extremes in the process. Thus, our past helps us to determine the countless possibilities the future might hold, while the future of the universe limits our possibilities, to exclude any physical or conceptual extremes. The end result that 42 is as good an explanation as anyone is ever going to get, but it also means there must be a wide variety of ways to manipulate space-time, including the one way the researchers demonstrated with their pie-in-the-face results, which can be compared to what physicists call “dimension squeezing”. The advent of fuzzy logic and quantum mechanics drove all of academia nuts, in part, because Fractal Geometry calls into question the classical definition of a dimension. Normally, we think of a dimension as being the distance between two points but, ironically, there is an actual recognized “Pointless Geometry”, that studies regions rather than points, while Fractal Geometry appears to combine the two. The exact mathematical equation for the kind of Metaphorical Fractal-Continuum I’m describing is for a multidimensional multifractal composed of a notably classical appearing Fractal Dragon and a humbler Mandelbrot pattern. The two resemble an hourglass shape blurred and twisted in the middle, and such a complex four and five fold symmetry is beyond human imagination, but mathematicians recently discovered that pi, or the Golden Ratio, actually describes a similar equation related to Time Crystals, now being studied in a university laboratory near you. Without going into all the physical evidence here, the mathematics for Relativity have turned out to be identical to those used for Thermodynamics, implying that a Theory of Everything can be produced by extrapolating the equivalences of Relativity into the supersymmetry of a four times broader metaphorical Goldilocks Principle, that can describe how energy and information, noise and data, space and time, are interchangeable. An atom bomb exploding over our heads is less information than it is raw energy, and too hot by anyone’s standards, while a star going supernova in a distant galaxy could be the next scientific breakthrough, but would not keep a fruit fly warm. The temptation is to view this as merely an illusion of scale but, as I pointed out in the case of gravity, it is the collective behavior of energy and information in extreme situations that gives away the secret, as requiring a more inclusive perspective of the Big Picture, as representing everything and nothing. Thankfully, mathematicians have already established the first quantifiable theory of humor as revolving around anything low in entropy, or low in content. In other words, today you can literally earn a bullshit degree in mathematics or physics, using academia’s first polite cuss words, and quoting Dr Seuss. Whatever your personal taste in comedy, it means we have an academically acknowledged means of measuring humor, and of measuring how the low Shannon information entropy of jokes, can transform into thermodynamic entropy as laughter. Assuming 42 is as good as it gets, that would make sparkling laughter the lowest possible energy state for the conscious mind, where low entropy information can be transformed into thermodynamic energy, and vice versa, and express their particle-wave duality. A few people have been documented as laughing uncontrollably for years at a time, but my father has what is euphemistically called “The Gift of Sparkling Laughter”, the infectious kind nobody can resist, and I’ve never heard of anyone with sparkling laughter that is uncontrollable. Babies only acquire a sense of humor after building up a significant database of patterns they can shuffle endlessly, and the light bulb finally comes on when they notice humor revolves around what’s missing from this picture. Our laughter can expresses the same low entropy as the jokes themselves, and the ancient Chinese noted that a mean man will sometimes laugh hysterically at the most insipid toddler jokes, because they can personally relate to same Three Stooges slapstick. My sisters and I have sometimes yelled at our father to stop laughing, so we could continue to argue amongst ourselves and, of course, that just makes him laugh all that much harder. What’s missing from this picture becomes a whole lot more interesting, once you realize what’s missing from my Dad’s laughter, which none of us would change for the world, is any judgment that our arguments are good or bad, right or wrong, or anything other than just plain silly to him. As serious as anyone’s arguments can be, my father’s laughter reveals the lighter side of our arguments to be childish nonsense, and the Two Faces of Janus being expressed in everything means humor reflects the neotenic tendencies in everything, or the retention of youthful features, including within the subconscious. Sparkling laughter is the laughter of the naive child at the funny naked man in the parade but, when expressed in an adult, it conveys more meaning and becomes infectious, helping to eliminate conceptual extremes, and can be considered mother nature’s way of ensuring that no group or individual takes themselves too seriously. Conversely, the more sarcastic any humor used, the more often people will deny their jokes are serious, and the more often their preferred humor will tend to explode into violence. The bridge between Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and a Rainbow Spectrum of desires, is revealed to be context dependent and related to the lowest possible energy state of the complete system and maximum entropy production. So long as researchers receiving pies-in-the-faces continue intently searching for answers, their needs will inevitably transform into desires in the form of humor, obeying the Goldilocks Principle that whenever harmony is lost, balance will be restored, and no need can ever be too great or too small, too desirable or undesirable, because needs and desires will inevitably transform into one another, just as our thoughts and emotions do. The Two Faces of Janus, or instant karma, being expressed in everything, including our subconscious mind, is what half the world recognizes as the Great Void, Jungian Collective Unconscious, and the Mother of All from whence all the myriad good things doth spring forth, including our sense of humor.
This is the second chapter and, its nice to finally see what it contains after ten years of attempting to figure it all out. This is the basic analog logic and physics of instant karma, and describes one way in which instant karma can be established with empirical evidence as a law of nature. Between the first chapter and this one it was enough to drive me insane trying to figure out how to start the book and what had to go in these first two chapters. That this chapter is only ten pages long, is a huge relief, because I can always add more physics and whatnot to later chapters, but this has to say an awful lot that contradicts conventional wisdom.
I read this. Would need some research/patience to get all of it. Do I need to? More than likely not. Will I? If it took you 10 years to formulate this------more than likely not. I admire your stick-to it've-ness for sure.
Its all just based on simple pattern matching, shuffling all the metaphors around for any humble and elegant simplicity, and the only requirement for writing this kind of thing is you have to be masochistic enough to do all the required editing. It required decades of studying six translations of the Tao Te Ching to be able to write this in ten years time and, without all that study, it could have easily taken a lifetime. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first clear proposal for how to establish instant karma as a law of nature. What you need and desire is something you'll have to decide for yourself, but instant karma's gonna getcha baby!
Thanks for that. Since I'm 79, interesting as I find what you've written-----my time for research is just about over! Perhaps Karma has relegated me to the ignorant--or was it my fault? Or are the two the same?
