In my books I have overestimated the virtues and worth of women. There is no difference – both sexes suck equally, though each in its own ways.
Plato thought that the world was fashioned by a demiurge – not God – using the mathematical forms as models.
Today, per Occam, we would reword this grand Platonic idea without employing any supernatural beings: the world is an elaboration -a physical embodiment of one or more mathematical abstractions. More specifically, the world is an elaboration of one mathematical abstraction, the zero-sum. “The One” -another of Plato’s ineffable concepts- is actually the Zero-Sum. The world process is the evolution of one zero-sum state into all others according to the laws of another branch of mathematics, probability and statistics, to which the empirical science of physics is reducible.
Mathematics rules all. Everything is numbers – and the most important number is ZERO. I have erred in my thought by slighting mathematics in favor of empirical science – as usual, Plato was right about math vs empirical science. Naturally. Every time I have dared to disagree with Plato I have erred. When will I learn?
A multiverse is composed of one or more universes.
Is the multiverse balanced or unbalanced? Consider:
A balanced multiverse has no uncanceled (unzeroed) substances.
An unbalanced multiverse has at least one uncanceled substance.
In a balanced multiverse, every complete conservation law in physics must sum to zero.
-Consequently, in a balanced multiverse, any conservation law in physics that does NOT sum to zero is NOT complete. It is missing a term.
References: 1. Maximum Irony 2. Crazy or Just Crazy Enough to Be True?
Darwin observed this about novels – no doubt that is why he liked so few of them.
This is why Plato’s books are the best ever written (which idealize Socrates without becoming hagiography)- because Socrates is the one we can totally admire. He is the ineffable one, the one no one can capture a likeness of. His essence is imperfectly knowable – it can be only glimpsed by those most like him. Like most men, Xenophon and Aristophanes simply did not “get” Socrates.
For example, most [lesser] people think Socrates was against empirical science. Not at all. His examples were drawn from careful observation of everyday matters, and his methods were empirical. To him, mathematics was the king of the sciences, the key to unlocking ultimate knowledge. Was he wrong? I doubt it.
If he made a mistake, it was in thinking he could short-cut his way to ultimate truth without first doing what we call empirical science. Perhaps he overestimated the power of deduction and consequently underestimated the power of induction. It remains to be seen whether our current mixed approach will yield any better comprehension.
A really good book cannot be born popular – to be instantly popular means it is merely “of the moment.” A book born popular is so easy to understand that the mass man grasps it on first reading.
The really good books are ignored in their time or born misunderstood. Their heroes are not the heroes of the moment, but the heroes of the future. A really great book is never comprehended – its heroes are ineffable even to those in the future.
We are only dimly aware of just how stressed, emotionally and physically, we really are, until we succumb to serious illness. The physical stressors include bacteria, viruses, chemicals, poor diet, lack of sleep, and excess body weight.
Our stress levels are greater today than ever, while our resistance to them is at an all time low, presaging further declines in health.
We can, however, dramatically improve our resistance to both types of stress by enjoying a single, delicious, ultra-nutritious “Square Meal,” which has THREE times the nutritional firepower of the hardy, home-cooked meals of yesteryear.
Obviously, the more stress we have, the more nutritional firepower we need to bolster our defenses and maintain our health. Yet, in the grip of daily stresses, we do just the opposite. We eat too much comfort food and drink too much. While these activities reduce our emotional stress, they increase our physical stress directly, and indirectly by weight gain. Then we chronically stress over our weight, and year after year, we stress even more after each failed diet. (The failure rate of diets is nearly 100% twelve months after ending them.) In a downward spiral, as our stress levels increase, our health declines, as we develop high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and eventually degenerative diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, cancer, osteoporosis and dementia.
Even in today’s world of high-tech medicines, doctors agree that the best antidote to degenerative disease is still highly nutritious food, as Hippocrates said more than 2400 years ago.
Now more than ever, to shore up our defenses and stop this downward spiral, we need ONE delicious, hardy Square Meal “comfort food” per day.
The book presents a protocol for converting any favorite meal into a Square Meal, using as examples Martha Stewart’s “Everyday Foods” recipes, because they are savory, quick and easy.
Modern medical scientists disparage or ignore data (for example, Weston Price’s) that flat out contradict their interpretations. This is wrong. The correct procedure is to either invalidate these data or synthesize the validated (or presumptively valid) data into a coherent whole.
Because of this error in judgment, doctors have concocted many unbalanced and inadequate diets that are too narrowly focused on weight loss. Worse, their impractical weight loss diets do not even yield lasting results (on average, about 5% weight loss, regained before 24 months).
When the data of Weston Price and others are integrated into the modern data, a coherent picture emerges in which the emphasis for the maintenance of health shifts dramatically toward the importance of whole food-based, personal nutrient (essential plus V3) sufficiency. Calories/exercise are secondary, and most of the things that obsess modern doctors, including cholesterol and saturated fat, while still important, fade into the background.
This book is not about weight loss, but about a more enjoyable path to better health through better nutrition at any given weight. A properly nourished body finds its own situation-dependent ideal weight, and although excess weight correlates with higher risk of disease, excess weight is not itself a disease. In fact, excess weight is not the sole cause of even a single disease.
The Standard American Diet (SAD) is much-maligned. In reality, the average American’s diet is not so far off the mark, even in caloric content, and the book presents a simple formula to correct the shortcommings of our favorite meals in the SAD by converting them into quasi-Square Meals, while preserving the flavor. A “Square Meal” has just 700 calories and is composed of whole foods, four parts vegetables, one part complete protein source (meat, fish, dairy, or methionine-supplemented legumes), which exceeds the recommended daily amounts of all essential nutrients. Square Meals are so filling and satisfying that some people are full before they have finished them.
Sample Square Meal Recipes are included with each of the major protein sources.
This book also includes a list of the most nutritious foods and food groups based on the ratio of total nutrition per calorie. A food pyramid, quite unlike the classic pyramid of USDA or the new vegetarian pyramids, is suggested by simply eating more of the more nutritious food groups. In this way, significant variety is balanced with greater nutrition. Meat, packing more nutrition per calorie than whole grains, is favored over grains in the Square Meal Diet in spite of meat’s higher contents of cholesterol and saturated fat, because overall personal nutrient sufficiency is more important to the maintenance of health than the amounts of cholesterol and saturated fat in foods.