Posted by: Sk | February 15, 2009

2 The approximative location of the problem

Russell used to say that it’s not that difficult to solve a problem once it has been clearly determined. The question is how to name a problem. (Although I do fundamentally not agree with Russell, I have to admit that he must have been right somehow concerning this point…)

What is a problem? Quite generally we may say that the appearance of a certain number of disturbing factors may make us think a non defined bad side effect having perhaps disastrous consequences may be the final consequence of them. A rational being does proceed in thought supposing that even disturbing factors do have logic. Even if a cancer is a destroying factor, it has a certain logic. The determination of the logic of the dysfunction is the path that may lead to solve the problem, if we consider the general frame the healthy ‘environment’ is supposed to be found in. A cancer has got no meaning if not considered as ‘illness’ of a healthy organism. In order to determine the illness, you need to understand what the healthy is.And this is exactly where things start becoming ambiguous. What do we take as ‘healthy or rational’ frame allowing the determination of the disturbing elements? Disturbing elements are up to a certain extent natural, and to get panicked to death because you start coughing as absurd as doing as if nothing would happen if you start spitting blood.As far as I understand the frame is somehow an illusion concerning the problems in question. A possible rainbow with an aura in the midst of mist: which is to say, an aleatory referential. It’s perhaps not the moment to start screaming about the obvious negligence towards those who may have worked at a frame earlier.

Even if you think progress determines the construction of the future, you can’t progress on emptiness, and it is an evidence, that thought is the only basis possibilities are built on. If there is one thing even dark middle ages did consider as dangerous, it was deviation in thought. Frames are to be kept and to be changed with enormous care. Thus, it took about 400 years to separate knowledge from the Church, or, to finally separate wisdom from technical know how. Movement starting in the 17th century, it is finally at the end of the 19th that knowledge or science is definitely cut off from the control of the Church. Even though, at that time still, metaphysics is declared ‘mother of all sciences’, as if still aware of the fact, that only a coherent formal and logical frame could warrant the rationality of scientific results. Not for long. Philosophy is pushed away by mathematical pretension to formal truth (Russell among them), so that philosophers are relegated to the subjective expression of personal inspirations. The fundamental work on basic concepts is never done. Up to now, there are about 10 serious pages written on the concept of time all over history (one by Plato in the Timée, three by Augustine in Confessions X, 2 or 3 by Newton, half by Kant in the Critique of Pure Reason, and a lot of nonsense in French XIXth Century philosophy). Nowadays we have a lot of figures and no words having common meaning allowing ordering figures. The rejection of the very basis science is built on, does progressively lead to uncontrolled innovations, alteration in main structures of understanding, violation of fundamental rules ordering nature, aso. The consequence is the opening of the possibility our firework may lead to a narcissistic self destruction.

I think perhaps sometimes, the very location of a material problem does oblige to reconstruct thought, there, where it becomes impossible to understand where and why the logical structures bombed up reason through irresponsible and negligent dealing with thought and word.It is perhaps thus inside of a more common effort to find a solution to a still undetermined problem, that should become obvious what thought is, what understanding means, what common word involves.If trying at least to locate the problems as vaguely considered in ‘Splitters’ (http://soniakasten.wordpress.com), and I say vaguely because the description of what is happening is just that, a description and certainly not a rationalization, it should be possible to differentiate the following:a.) programs do transfer information through the documents produced by them that is absorbed by a more or less amiable environment. This observation, made in 2003 with a CV form that kept the ‘English corrector’ in a computer that had no installed English correction function, is confirmed by the appearance of a whole editing program sent in by editor ‘Le manuscrit’ in Paris, while copy requested for correction. (Legally you can’t be accused of stealing something that is generously provided by the one who sends you the document. Nor may you be forbidden further use or commercialization.)b) This ‘bizarrerie’ takes incredible proportions with the Word Press program. It looks as if WP was eating up tons and tons of programs by just absorbing the information once introduced into it. Thus, it seems to have problems to absorb pasted information (see the whole block of http://ideabstracta.wordpress.com), but gets slowly used to it, until it becomes even possible to paste colors and other innovations without further problem (Http://sonjakasten.wordpress.com). Stranger though, is that the fonts of Office 2007 are kept as a whole in a document inside. See: http://cleaningservice.wordpress.com. It is prepared on a computer that has installed Office 2007, and thus the fonts used are those. As no time is left, I just paste a whole text on a page and think to work on it after.

Later, I just ‘copy all’ of the same page and paste it on a Word Document of installed Office 2003. On the windows appear all the fonts of Office 2007, so that I can even alter them for other pages without the program being installed on the computer.- Why does a document transfer whole functions of a given program, it being enough to have a similar program installed in order to have a great number of them appearing?- Why does WP ‘eat up’ whole programs and has the ability of integrating them into the given program, thus somehow updating itself organically but without anyone’s permission? (I would personally think that WP was originally a very powerful spy program that has simply kept functions inside that are perhaps not even evaluated as such.)This first observation does lead to a second, concerning not only the security of sites, but also the legality of a certain number of functions:a.) a certain number of ‘legal’ steps do allow obtaining pictures or other from securized sites. I understand by ‘legal’ the simple use of functions as given in a computer ‘to copy’ for example, without the use of forbidden programs such as cracks or other. Quality of picture is strangely maintained by copying it first to Word, then into Adobe Illustrator, and the passing it to Adobe Photoshop and thus to a lighter format such as .gif or .jpeg. None of the steps taken to do so is illegal (except if intelligence is.)b) The use of cracks or other programs tending to violate the security of a program or site seems to produce gravest alterations in the very functioning of a computer. Repeatedly, I observe that the breaker of the computer ‘jumps’, were it by violating control programs (of internet, for example) or just by breaking the security of ‘games’. Strangely though, if the breaker ‘jumps’ in a computer that is linked to internet, it does not produce a break down in system.

Energy seems to be transformed in whole masses of ‘light’ by making appear white blank pages there where you were supposed to find a common internet address. Exposure though to what I call ‘high temperature’ does free toxic gas from concerned hard ware. First observed in 2003, phenomenon shows the same characteristics in different contexts. 2003: cracked movies. 2006: cracked internet regulating programs. 2007: cracked games. Toxic substances thus freed may be extremely dangerous for the nervous system, specially, I guess, for children.These observations are accompanied by a certain number of what may seem peculiar side effects even in the attempt of stopping side effects:a.) cigarette smoke and coffee do seem to diminish the effect of toxic substances on the organismb.) the so called ‘high radiation’ does produce alteration in behavior and seems to be blocked by a certain type of cloth (linen or natural wool)c.) alteration in behavior may lead to a complete break down of the functioning of nervous central system (incapacity of thought, leading back to ‘instinctive’ reaction), which seems to be compensated by a somewhat archaic therapy consisting in transforming into word (talk) the immediate physical effect of the interaction with the radiation in questiond.) a certain number of elements in interaction were it scanned stone (Agatha, diamond, etc) or varied electronic elements in their chemical interaction (colors) seem to act as ‘compensators’, having though strangest side effects: they seem to act as ’spy programs’. It seems impossible to know why exactly, and though evidence is more than sufficient for statement (’stolen’ Rothschild keyboard in 2004, and probably similar keyboards in my hands of unknown origin).

The interaction with colors does look for the time being the following way:while ’silver’ spreads itself on black ground, ‘golden’ shrinks on the same ground. To my understanding this means that the fundamental interaction with ‘light’ is determined by the use of specific colors.As partial general conclusion you may say, that you may obtain legally through outer intervention what causes general damage by violating inner codes and thus even help eventually to restore a certain number of obvious disorders.The probable root of the gravest dysfunctions, seem to be four:

a.) the use of programs allowing control of sold programs beyond the limits of the shop the program was bought in

b.) the use of illegal mechanisms of protection allowing attacks on hard disks at distance

c.) the incompatibility of different programs causing dysfunction as compatibility not having been further tested (called virus, it seems obviously to be very frequently nothing but ‘cheap’ programs causing frictions with ‘established’ programs)

d.) The generalization of cracks that seem to attract attacks coming from protecting programs, on elements that may be inserted in programs of general use and frequently to be found in internet

(Not to consider obvious gravest mistakes coming from so called technicians and programmers thinking things are ordered by themselves)

I would say that this ‘compound’ is at the origin of the production of erratic masses of energy that may not only affect health but even be at the origin of destructive explosions if considered that the introduction of anarchic innovations coming from little ‘program hooligans’ may have produced the construction of a ‘magnetic’ function attracting energy to poles of energetic power. (I would guess through fusion of formats under high radiation.)

Of course the whole is subjected to further investigation for validation. 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: