Does uncertainty exist in the past as well as in the future?

dx*dp > h/4pi

We cannot arbitrarily measure the position and momentum of a particle to infinite precision simultaneously.

In the past as well as in the future.

And that means that the past is uncertain just as much as the future is.

So what are memories made of?

Mathematics

What is mathematics? Why does it work in this world of chaos?
Mathematics is called an abstraction of reality, but in truth it is the essence of the reality that lies beyond the senses.
Only mathematics can tell you how to separate reality from delusion.
Here is my take on the nature of reality and the idea of mathematics in it: Let us assume that there are a finite number of operations that can occur between two points in space. It may even be possible that these operations are symmetry operations, and nothing beyond the symmetry operations can be possible.
The other part of reality are the observable phenomena, the sensations of force, time etc., are merely aids to the understanding of these operations. Matter only provides the inputs to these operations. All observable phenomena are therefore the symmetry operations (the mathematics) taking random sets of inputs and producing equally random sets of outputs.
Physical reality is the veil which hides the mathematics of symmetry operations which are always present in the background. Mathematics is the fabric of the underlying reality. All the rest are merely inputs and outputs.

Biology as you have never seen it before

It is animation, but an excellent depiction of cellular processes. Don't be critical of the few errors now. (Stating the obvious just fyi: It's a clip from Youtube and not my work at all! But I know something about biological mechanisms, and this illustrates somethings quite well.)

Understanding Structures and Systems - II

So, we have asserted that there are two different sets of systems and structures - living and non-living. There is something very interesting about the differences between these two sets. Living things generate structures which are arbitrary, in the sense that the rules which govern the living structures are entirely psychological, except for the limitations placed upon living structures by the laws of the non-living nature.
Entirely psychological? Seems to be true. But since the laws of non-living nature govern everything, including the living things, let us make the obvious assumption that there is nothing that living things can do (including creating systems), which can go beyond what the non-living nature can do. This is meant to suggest that it is the non-living nature's laws and operations of symmetry and energy which govern living structures - that living structures which may seem arbitrary are, in fact, merely different sets of laws of nature.
All living structures necessarily exhibit attractive forces between its average constituents.
All living structures necessarily exhibit repulsive forces between some of its constituents.
All living structures necessarily exhibit an average equilibrium space between its constituents - personal space for human beings.
All living structures necessarily exhibit atomic properties such as segregation, solution, vacancies, interstitials, dislocations, etc.
Thus, even while the living and non-living sets of systems and structures are apparently mutually exclusive, they share some fundamental mathematical similarities - such as the symmetry principles, the tools for creating order in chaos.
More later.

Really funny show on financial markets

Let's start a new session of blogging with some fun:

This is a clip from a British TV show called Bird and Fortune show / The Last Laugh - the irony (intended, I am sure) is that what these guys are saying IS true. They are not lying about anything! [Just posting one link - but there are more clips from them available on Youtube - some links are presented at the end of the clip.]

Understanding Structures and Systems

Now that we have learned the primary lesson (Of each thing, ask: What is it in itself?), we can move on to the method of understanding reality. My particular method (and every human being has his / her own method really), is through structures and systems. I define a structure as a static (or quasi-static) arrangement which is meant to direct some process, but doesn't provide any help (dynamism) to the process. (Any thing that "processes" somethings, be it materials or numbers, is a process). I can define a system as the sum total of a structure and the processes contained in it. So, a system is a dynamic quantity - it changes with time unless the inputs and outputs are in some sort of "equilibrium". A house is a structure, while a family living in the house would make the whole thing a system. The family provides the processes - motion, consumption, conversation, quarrels, studies etc. The point to see here is that the structure, even though it is passive (doesn't provide dynamism or force to anything), directs the processes still. The shape and feel of our surroundings dictate many if not most of our actions.
Now for a little bit of complication: humans (and living things) are different from non-living things. So, there are TWO sets of structures and systems on Earth - the living and the non-living. And these two sets are mutually incomprehensible. Almost. Life cares, but nature doesn't. By caring, I mean that life puts values on things which are utterly unconnected to the laws of nature. In a way, the laws of nature provide the structure for living things to operate in. But this is a structure that is inviolable - it cannot be broken or replaced or stepped out of. Life is limited by nature. Systems are limited by their structures.
So, what did life do to cope with nature? First of all, it spread far and wide and diversified - so that no single condition of nature can threaten it. It developed organisms with brains, parts of which could do calculations and figure out the laws of nature. Life is dynamism itself. It can adapt to a wide range of conditions. But it stays as fragile as it ever was in billions of years of its existence on Earth. (More on this topic in next post.)

Read Marcus Aurelius

This is a clip from a brilliant, but dark, movie called "The Silence of the Lambs".
I am putting it here as an introduction to Marcus Aurelius (or try here), a ruler of Roman empire before the Romans became Christians. Marcus Aurelius was a thinker, a philosopher and a wise ruler - all rolled up in one. He wrote a treatise called "Meditations" which deals with man, nature and all the things in between.
What this clip shows is Dr. Lecter (actor Anthony Hopkins) recommending to the FBI (USA's Federal Bureau of Investigation) agent Clarice Starling (actress Jodie Foster) that she read Meditations, in order to gain insights upon the nature of reality, which after all is one of our aims in this blog.
"Of each particular thing, ask: What is it in (and by) itself? What is its nature?"
(More quotes from Marcus Aurelius)
With that introduction to the method of Marcus Aurelius, here we go to the clip:

The Silence of the Lambs

(The good folks at Google have imposed restrictions on this particular video. Damn fascists! Hehe. Anyway, here is a longer clip (with some guy's interpretation of things in text interspersed. Ignore all the messages, and watch the movie clip for Dr. Lecter's discourse.)

Of each particular thing, ask: What is it in itself?
What is its nature?