INNUMERATES JUDGE INNUMERATES, ILLITERATES JUDGE ILLITERATES

…It’s really funny. Again and again I watch news reports on the major TV cable stations lamenting the poor, frankly ridiculous, performance, achievements and levels of the young students of our nation, the leaders of our future.

…Again and again I hear things like “Good grief; 7th grade students lost 6 points in reading and 8 points in math, relative to last year,” or “Good grief; 7th grade students lost 6 points in reading and 8 points in math, relative to the year of the pandemic.” Yet no one even does so much as raise an eyebrow when hearing such information.

…The truth is that such statements themselves are LITERALLY at the level, at the grade level, of a young, intellectually naive child. Why? Because they are telling us NOTHING, even while using the impressive language and at least the “clothing” of mathematics and science, and purporting to tell us something sophisticated. Our key news reporters are standing in front of us and acting like YOUNG CHILDREN and nobody notices.

…By contrast, people literate (numerate) in mathematics know that numbers by themselves are almost always meaningless. There is always a need to provide RELATIVE and RELATIONAL information or context, or there is actually NO information conveyed. Sadly, the use of numbers in news stories and “scientific” presentations impresses most people, even when the numbers are being completely MISUSED since they convey NO information.

…So, in our case here, we are told, for example, the 7th grade students lost 8 points in math, relative to last year, and somehow the naive newscaster and public believes we HAVE actually been given “relative” information because of the phrase “relative to last year.” Yet THAT “relative” is meaningless by itself. To reach the level of meaning, we must ask question like, relative to WHAT KIND OF POINTS? What is the AVERAGE SCORE IN POINTS? What is the HIGHEST POSSIBLE SCORE IN POINTS? What is the STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE SCORE IN POINTS? What is the LOWEST POSSIBLE SCORE IN POINTS? Without THIS kind of relational information, do the presenters not realize they are giving us NO idea of what the loss actually IS or MEANS? How can this be, at the TOP levels of success in America, that people don’t even know what they are doing?

…Thus for example (and my numbers are all notional) I would actually KNOW something meaningful and critically important if instead a newscaster, despite having a pretty or handsome face, would say, “Our 7th graders across the nation lost 8 points in math compared to last year. This loss is on our national math assessment test where the mean value score last year was 137 points, and this year was 129 points, where the lowest possible score was zero, and where the highest, perfect score is 200 points.” HOW can they stand in front of us, with no shame or self consciousness, and give us numbers with NONE of the context I have just presented, and look at us as if they are communicating meaningful INFORMATION to us? This stunning phenomenon of astounding ignorance in a news presentation, IS ITSELF ironically the longer term result of mass and severe lack of genuine education in ARITHMETIC AND MATHEMATICS, such that even our top news presenters are INNUMERATE and live mathematically at the level of a young CHILD. Oh dear, what will our nation become? Will it become a zoo of squabbling children who know not even that their Tower Of Babel with all its never ending quarrels and polarization is largely the result of their having never been taught how to THINK? They were stuffed with something like information, e.g., taught WHAT to regurgitate, but never taught how to THINK. This is TRULY THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND. OK, that’s a cliche phrase, I know. But here’s another one, this time of my own creation: WHEN THE ENTIRE POPULATION BECOMES BLIND, THEN THERE IS NO LONGER EVEN ANY WORD FOR BLINDNESS. THE VERY WORD DISAPPEARS FROM THE VOCABULARY.” GEEZ, am I one of a minority who still remembers that there is such a thing as the word “blind”? On my Hermosa Beach, CA City Council building walls, we see the quote “Where there is no vision the people perish.” YOU are perishing. Do YOU realize it?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ROTATION PROBLEM FOR PHYSICS

I seem to remember watching a physicist on TV, possibly Dr. Richard Gott, say that a time machine for traveling to the past might be possible if we could build an infinitely long rotating cylinder. Alternatively, I believe he said, we might be able to do the same thing if the entire universe were rotating. But, he added, we have no evidence that the universe is rotating and it seems that the universe is not rotating.

Rotating? Rotating with respect to WHAT? If there is no other reference point, how could we say whether the universe is rotating or not? More generally, if there were only ONE object in the entire cosmos, would we even be able to tell whether it was rotating or not? Or, for that matter, how could we even DEFINE rotation in the absence of another reference body?

This brings up the related question, is there such a thing as “ABSOLUTE ZERO ROTATION,” analogous to an inertial platform which was not moving at all along a linear path, and was absolutely stationary, at zero velocity in absolute terms? Einstein (And probably Newton too) said there is no favored inertial reference platform which in absolute terms has zero velocity. I tend to agree myself. Would not the same be true of rotation? But then, on the other hand, what about our intuition that a rotating body experiences centrifugal force, and that if it rotates rapidly enough it will fall apart? Would this intuition be violated if there was no second body for reference? I think these questions are beyond my present ability to answer. I simply do not know how to answer them. I wonder if there are any physicists, cosmologists or philosophers who DO know how to answer them. Neither answer seems satisfactory. What do you think?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ROOTS EVOLUTION GLORY

Hands, fists

Sticks, stones

Spears, knives, swords

Bows, arrows

Guns, cannons

Planes, bombs

Missiles, rockets

Thermonuclear bombs, glory

Blood

I’m just a glorified ape, a glorified monkey

The piano is just a glorified harp

This glorified monkey plays a glorified harp

We’ve come a long way, baby.

The end? The beginning?

Consciousness has no name

Silence is forever.

Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

BIAS, INTEGRITY, BIAS1 (BIAST) AND BIAS2 (BIASF)

The media are biased. For example, when I watch Fox I see bias to the Right, but when I watch CNN or MSNBC I see bias to the Left.
Often we hear that “All of us are biased,” but I’m not so sure that’s true. At the very least, not all of us are biased about everything. And some have even learned about tools which help fight against bias, e.g., the scientific method, even if only imperfectly.
But, the problem for me, and the reason I’m writing this post, is that the word “bias” seems to reflect one of those (rare?) poverties of the English language, and that poverty may be related to an error in our thinking.
Integrity, honesty, sincerity, truth are words with positive value for most of us. A person with integrity, for example, will generally wish to tell the truth, both to others and to herself, even when it might be contrary to agendas, wishes and perhaps to values and ideologies which she may hold.
We HOPE that journalists have integrity. We HOPE to see integrity in the media, in academia and in Hollywood. I’m not sure that we always do.
But now, what about this thing called “bias”? If you are biased, then are you necessarily sacrificing your integrity to the extent you are biased? Or, perhaps, can you lean to the Left or to the Right, for example, and yet still honor your integrity? If you used ALL the rules and principles of critical thinking, objectivity, fair argumentation and debate, dialectic and so forth, both during your internal self-talk and during your speaking and conversing with others, could you still even BE biased? I’m not positive about the answer to this question, but I believe that even if everyone used all these tools of integrity and objectivity, we would for many reasons probably still be left with a population of widely divergent thinkers who would hold diverging, even opposing, views on many things.
So, without further ado, and perhaps without answering the above question, I’ll say that where I am leading is that I wish to suggest the use of two additional words: bias1 and bias2, or, if you will, biast and biasf. A person with bias1 may be biased in a certain area of thought, for example she may be a conservative. Yet her integrity is so strong that she avoids lying, sins of omission, and other errors in critical thinking and the other tools of integrity, whenever talking to others or herself, even when these dishonesties support her bias and/or her agendas. (“Biast”=”bias-truth.”) On the other hand, with bias2, she would use the same bias as an excuse to dispense with her integrity and, well, basically, to lie, to herself and to others. (“Biasf”=”bias-falsehood.”)
OK. Does that seem clear enough, and am I talking about a logically coherent, realistic “parsing of reality”? Maybe, maybe not. I believe so, though, or I would not be writing this.
With my “new” words, I can say that the opinion talkers (Hosts of opinion segments on news stations) and even the straight-ahead journalists may be Left-biased at CNN and MSNBC and Right-biased at Fox News. But, for example, the Left-biased ones may be bias2=biasf while the Right-biased ones may be bias1=biast, at least notionally.
But wait! The fact that I even chose that particular example might show that I am Right-biased, and even biasf, because I did not disclose my bias or give fair and balanced examples! And maybe that is true. And I did that on purpose, because, today, when I watch Fox I perceive Right-bias1 more often than Right-bias2, yet when I watch CNN or MSNBC I perceive Left-bias2 more often than Left-bias1. And the difference is substantial, to me. Does that reflect again merely my own bias, which perhaps is not consciously available to me, or does it reflect a reality, an objective reality? I have my own opinions there, but for now, I leave you with merely the new words and a new way of thinking about bias–or perhaps, at least, a new way.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

TORAH TALMUD NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Alan DiCenzo

Hi FFs,

…I thought this was worth posting on Facebook today:

****************

TORAH TALMUD NUCLEAR WEAPONS

…Putting these four words together evokes all kinds of direct, indirect, contextual and even artistic and unconscious associations inside our complicated brains. That’s part of my intent. But the most direct motivation I have for this is that I want to make a certain logical comparison, which talks about the survival of humanity on Earth.

…The Torah is supposed to be the original word of God, directly from God’s mouth. I personally do not believe that it is that at all, or that there even IS such a God. But for those who DO believe in that way, the Torah tells you in the most absolute terms possible, about things you must do and things you must NOT do: Period. Metaphorically, the Torah defines the non-negotiable edge of the cliff, a relentless, digital delimiter which will bring you certain disaster if you go off the edge of that cliff. The “edge” defined in the metaphor is the boundary between, e.g., doing things which are OK and doing things which God specifically tells you in absolute terms you must NOT do.

…To help Jews later in their history in NOT falling off this terrible cliff, the rabbis eventually produced a book called the Talmud. I’m told that this, second book, created by mortal men by the way, was written to alert Jews (and anyone else too, I suppose) when they were even getting CLOSE to the cliff so that they would then have nearly ZERO risk of actually falling off the cliff. For example, a “command” or “firm suggestion” in the Talmud might say, metaphorically, “This sign shows you that you are within 100 feet of the cliff. Turn back NOW!” Leaving the metaphor behind, I might say notionally that to prevent you from sleeping with another person’s spouse (A firm, Torah cliff edge), the Talmud might “command” you to never even go out alone with another person’s spouse. (This is notional; I don’t know if the Talmud actually says this, but we can see why it could.)

…And now, the NUCLEAR TORAH. The Nuclear Torah says, “Don’t start or have a nuclear war, PERIOD.” This is, I confess immediately, NOT the word of God, who does not even exist in that way to me. But it is a command which many, perhaps most, human beings will say, is one we MUST follow or we will indeed fall of the edge of a terrible cliff.

…I have increasingly come to a realization over many years, but only today, got the idea to share this realization on Facebook, which says that there is a NUCLEAR TALMUD as well. And I realize that the Nuclear Talmud includes a command which humanity has not been following at all. The fundamental Nuclear Talmud command is “You can no longer have a WAR, period, because ANY war, no matter how “deeply conventional,” brings you very close to the EDGE OF THE NUCLEAR CLIFF.”

…We now need about 8 billion people on Planet Earth to somehow realize that, NOW that we are in the nuclear age, we can NO LONGER fight ANY WAR at any time, anywhere, on Earth. THAT is what nuclear weapons have done to us. But we don’t realize it yet.

…”A time for war; a time for peace.” That time is NOW. Can we wake up in time?

**********************

…Right now the war in Ukraine has Putin talking of nukes.  HELLO???

…Thanks readers, Alan

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

VETERANS KILL THEMSELVES EVERY DAY

FOX SAID TODAY (SUNDAY) THAT 17 VETERANS KILL THEMSELVES EVERY DAY.

…I’m not a veteran. I’m 4F, for those who remember, because I’m cross-eyed and blind in my left eye. They’d never take me. But that fact about suicide, which was later in the same episode shown to be far too LOW an estimate, especially since Reserve and National Guard members kill themselves at even higher rates, was just a bit too much for me, and I’ll confess, I started to cry, as happens sometimes these days. I’m sorry, so sorry, my brothers and my sisters.

…The father of one such veteran said, “There are plenty of resources out there,” and the mother said “He had a hard time adapting to making his own decisions about what to do every day instead of just being told.” Can’t argue with that.

…But veterans and active members don’t need “resources.” They need LOVE, the same as ALL of us need it. Ironically, they HAD that experience of PEER love, perhaps for the first time, while on active deployment, because of the “friends” in their unit. Translation: “Friends” means “Lovers.” NOT sexual or romantic lovers. Of course not. Can no one else be a lover?

…Once, long ago perhaps in our history, we understood that a “friend” is someone who loves you, and whom you love too. Maybe that’s easier to both understand and to realize in a true tribe, or a true tribe culture. A military unit is a tribe. Of course we murder the tribe immediately after discharge.

…I would estimate that this “discharge” from tribe is especially poignant and painful for the young males, who are then thrust full speed back into the brutal reality of also being on the bottom of the estrus system hierarchy, and who thus experience that lack of love being set on fire by the additional anguish of a hopeless sex drive as well, a sex drive which, for the male, is linked with love in a way I don’t think females understand very accurately. (I’ve written about that separately in my blog, and elsewhere here on Facebook, and why the reproductive drives are really so completely different in the two genders, something I believe is not yet understood well enough and thus becomes a deep human tragedy.)

…However, female vets and actives kill themselves at high rates too. In fact, in the general population, I’ve heard that women try to kill themselves twice as often as we men do, but they fail so much more often, that males end up having a higher SUCCESSFUL suicide rate. I’d like to unpack those facts but don’t want to do so here. For now, let me just say that, in my opinion, both males and females, in fact ALL human beings, DESPERATELY NEED LOVE as a biological reality, even before we come to the “spiritual,” whatever that is.

…OK, yes, there may be multiple reasons for depression, anxiety, terrible suffering and suicide, but I think we CAN say wisely that lack of love doesn’t help. I suspect that people don’t kill themselves as often, regardless of what may be likely to go on in the “chemistry” of their brain, when they are bathed in love.

…I don’t know how to change the world, and am having a hard time even changing myself. But, without worrying about grandiose schemes and big, big plans and schemes, how can we somehow find ways, even little ways, to realize that others need love just as we do, and begin to contemplate how to ferret out and find those who need it the most, and LOVE them? “It’s gonna take a whole lot of love.” A WHOLE LOT OF LOVE. I know I need it myself. And I’m not very good at loving others.

…”Spiritual traditions,” such as Buddhism, teach us how to meditate and how to be content and even thrive, or so they say, by searching inside, being silent, and finding oneness from inside, even without getting external love from others. Even monks living alone in mountain caves are said to be extremely happy. Maybe that’s possible, for a precious few, and I advocate those practices and do them myself. But for most of us, our biology is very strong. What can we do?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ABOUT JAN 6 2021 AND RELATED SMELLS

Alan DiCenzo·

FROM a Facebook post of mine today: Shared with Public

ABOUT JANUARY 6 2021

Today I used duckduckgo to try to answer a question I had about what actually happened on Jan 6 2021. After the vicious speech by Joe Biden this past Thursday, in which he tried to define this new and strange category, “MAGA Republicans,” and to judge that category as “EXTREMIST AND DANGEROUS TO DEMOCRACY,” I wanted to get my own idea of what happened Jan 6 and see if that could help me understand why Biden seemed to be filled with so much hate. It seemed to me that Biden may have insulted 75 million or more Americans with his crude and cruel remarks that evening. So I just wanted to understand things a little better.

The main question I had was, what proportion of the MAGA protestors on Jan 6 2021 even came close to fitting Biden’s hateful description of them. Let me cut to the quick. So far, even today, only about 700 people have even been CHARGED with crimes from entering the Capitol on Jan 6, and the high estimate of how many may have actually been involved with the violent activities at the Capitol is now perhaps around 1,200. On the other hand, the number of MAGA marchers on that same day of Jan 6 2021 is estimated as clearly around 120,000. In other words, at worst, about 1% of that huge MAGA Republican crowd of Jan 6 2021 could be interpreted as fitting Biden’s hateful description of “DANGEROUS EXTREMISTS.”

Repeat: Using perhaps the most damning possible example, namely the Jan 6 MAGA crowd, at worst about 1% of those Biden calls “EXTREMISTS” might actually fit that label. So what the hell is going on here? So where is the real danger coming from?

Sources: The best source I found for my questions was Newsweek with an article on the site

newsweekDOTcom/exclusive-classified-documents-reveal-number-january-6-protestors-1661296

which was entitled “Exclusive: Classified Documents Reveal the Number of January 6 Protestors,” by William M. Arkin, and which appeared on 12/23/21. In that article we read that although originally only about 20,000 protesters were expected for that day, “Six times as many protestors—as many as 120,000—would show up on the Mall on January 6, according to classified numbers still not released by the Secret Service and the FBI but seen by Newsweek.” Also, there was confusion even about the 700 to 1,200 supposedly violent Capitol building vandals. After all, in videos you can even see Capitol Police inviting peaceful protestors and other routine visitors into the Capitol at the same time and through the same entrances as used by the vandals; clearly many of the people entering the Capitol building at that time were simply tourists wanting to see our national seat of government. Geez, readers, if I didn’t know better I might feel that certain types were deliberately trying to distort what happened on Jan 6 because of an agenda they had, causing them to replace the truth with some very highly politicized propaganda and demagoguery. Ya think? So then what the hell are all these one-sided kangaroo “hearings” we’ve been seeing on TV, really about?

5 Comments

Alan DiCenzo

Alan DiCenzo

Another question which comes to mind (to my mind, at least) is, WHY would any of this information about the NUMBER of protestors marching toward the Capitol on Jan 6 2021, and the NUMBER in that crowd which were actually “extremist” violent thugs, NEED TO BE CLASSIFIED AT ALL?? Does not any of this make you wonder? Does not your nose begin to detect ANYTHING? If your nose still detects nothing after years of persecution of Trump culminating in this sensational raid on Mar A Lago, after the FBI running a “Russia Russia hoax,” after the FBI running an “insurance policy against Trump,” spying on Trump, 2 strange impeachments, geez I don’t know where to stop. Should I go back to Lois Lerner weaponizing the IRS against conservatives under Obama? How’s that nose of yours doing anyway?

Alan DiCenzo

  • Reply
  • 8m

From friend EAT: call me paranoid but I am open to the FALSE FLAG HYPOTHESIS –more govt conspiracy against DJT and the ULTRA MAGA-ITES.

Alan DiCenzo Well, we KNOW now, don’t we, that there were FBI agents, FBI agitators, at both the Jan 6 2021 so-called “Insurrection” and the supposed kidnapping plot of Michigan Governor Whitmer?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

INNUMERACY: A GREAT AMERICAN TRAGEDY

Alan DiCenzo ·

Shared with Public

“Innumeracy” means illiteracy in mathematics, or, more honestly, illiteracy in arithmetic. The appalling degree of innumeracy in America today is to me one of our most effective methods for committing national suicide.

Let’s illustrate this monumental tragedy with an ironic and depressing example. I watched Fox News this morning (It might as well have been CNN; no matter) and learned that our national math scores, I believe for 9 year olds, declined by 6 points, and our national reading scores declined by 11 points. (I’ve forgotten the actual numbers, but these will be close enough for our purposes.) I’ve heard this same fact repeated in news story after news story, over and over by now, regardless of which TV channel I’m watching, and always with the same glib smoothness and calmness without any indication whatsoever that ANYBODY perceives the ABSURDITY of what they are all repeating like mechanical, sleeping idiots.

The absurdity of what they are all repeating in this way, is that it SHOWS ITSELF the very innumeracy they are complaining about in terms of the decline in scores. It could ONLY be in a country plagued so deeply by innumeracy that the very news networks charged supposedly with the crucially important task of giving quality news to adults, would keep sharing such a meaningless piece of information.

To say, e.g., that national reading scores declined by 11 points tells us virtually NOTHING at all. And we are all so INNUMERATE that apparently no one even notices or complains, whether the broadcasters themselves or the listening audience. To say “declined by 11 points” and with a dignified air to simply leave it at that, is like little kids in kindergarten talking on the playground and saying the same thing. That’s because we can have NO idea what that number, 11 points, means AT ALL, without some context or explanation. Doesn’t ANYBODY in this great country simply see that?

For that figure to be meaningful and convey ANY information at all, we’d need context and comparison, often in the form of ratios or the supplying of additional information to establish actual meaning and information content. Since none of this information was supplied, I’ll have to simply guess and make up some possible examples of what WOULD be meaningful conveyance of information when discussing numbers. So please let me do that here.

I might have some understanding of what the hell that number even means, say that 11 points, if I were told in the same news story that the total number of points possible in that measurement score was 1,000 points, say. But even that would hardly tell me anything meaningful or really revealing. I might understand then that the reading score declined about 1 per cent of its possible MAXIMUM value, but I still would not understand what that maximum value meant, or what the current average value for 9 year olds might be (837?) which declined by 11 points. A decline of 11 points relative to a notional average score of 837 would of course be somewhat larger than a 1% decline.

But even there we are not close to anything like full understanding. It might be still more useful to know that this average score of 837 was expected to go up by about 5 points per each year of age advancement under normal historical conditions. Thus, in two years, when 9 year olds would become 11 year olds, we would normally expect their raw “point” scores to go up from 837 to 847: That is, they would normally gain 5 points each year, for a total of 10 points over two years of age growth. Then and only then, we would be able to see that what this 11 points of loss really means is that our 9 year olds actually lost about two years, actually more than two years, of normally expected advancement in reading capability.

Now again, I just made up all these numbers. But the points I’m making should be clear. Only in a nation of mathematical CHILDREN, even among those aged 40 years or more, could news reporters blindly report the number “11 points” with apparent dignity and solemnity, without seemingly having the slightest idea of how absurd, ridiculous and meaningless spewing out that number in isolation really is. And only in such a nation of CHILDREN would it need to take a professional mathematician Ph.D. like me, to even point this out.

Come on man. This is ridiculous. We are terribly INNUMERATE. In reading, by analogy, that would be like having an entire population of adults who NEVER even learned to read. Are you SERIOUS? And you intend to complete with China and Russia and NoKo and Cuba and Venezuela and Nicaragua, or for that matter, Finland, like THIS? I can promise you, China would not DREAM of letting that happen to them.

I might say, only in a nation of such childish innumerates, could a President give a speech saying “MAGA Republicans are the greatest threat to our democracy” without the listeners (mass public) even realizing that all that that proves is that the President and his party THEMSELVES are in truth probably the greatest threat to democracy, and certainly not the MAGA Republicans toward whom he is spewing hate, and who also happen to be about as much as half the country.

“National reading scoresd declined by GAGAGOOGOOLULU!” Yeah, right, very dignified.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

IT IS TIME TO RENAME EARTH

All the other planets of our Solar System have fascinating and exotic names, like Jupiter or Uranus or Mercury. But our own planet, perhaps the most fascinating and exotic of ALL, we choose to name “EARTH,” which is a not-much-more-dignified term than, uh “DIRT.” Why should we settle for THAT as the name of our Blue Jewel? Hell with that!

If the astronomers (and NOT the planetary scientists, to my knowledge) can callously assassinate Pluto into sub-planet status, then we certainly should have the right to rename Earth. This society is perhaps one of the most appropriate to invite to participate in this kind of renaming activity.

Just to humbly get things rolling, I propose that we rename Earth instead as “ZEUS.” After all, the generation of life is a thunderous event in anyone’s book.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

FIRST EVER FBI RAID ON AN EX-PRESIDENT

Active

Alan DiCenzo

38m  ·

Shared with Public

FIRST EVER FBI RAID ON AN EX- PRESIDENT

Some almost random comments:

Well, first, this is SO obviously about keeping Trump out of the hands of American VOTERS, who should be the ones to decide if he should be President again (If he even decides to run in 2024). But on that score, I think it is certain to fail, because of what we all know about our legal system: Even if they bring charges against him immediately, the wealth of legal delays and blockages available to T will mean that a legal case and conviction could not possibly reach fruition until AFTER T is re-elected and already serving again as President.

Second the problem of anti-T bias and unequal application of the law has made a total mockery of DOJ and the FBI. Just think D Trump H Clinton B Clinton H Biden J Biden S Berger etc., etc., ad infinitum and ad nauseum. This inequality will create major problems, including legal challenges, which will make it impossible for J Biden, AG Garland, the DOJ and the FBI to carry out any meaningful prosecution of T, AT LEAST IF the institutions which make America America and guard our freedoms (?), principally the courts now, continue to act as institutions of integrity, truth and equal application of the law.

Next, T had complete declassification authority when he left the WH, just as does every President, and you can NOT prosecute someone or claim obstruction of justice when there is no possible crime. Nixon said it’s not illegal if the President does it. If he meant that generally, we know how wrong he was. But he was 100% right in one sense: The President has absolute authority to control classification, to classify and declassify any document or documents he/she might wish to, so at the very least it’s HEAVILY debatable whether a President could ever be charge with anything for taking home whatever documents he/she wished when leaving the WH.

Then, what about this “terrifying security risk” if T kept in his home SCI and “higher” docs including even info which could endanger the identities and lives of some of our clandestine personnel abroad or at home (e.g., Mafia and Cartel protected witnesses), and that some of these docs were casually “mixed” with unclassified, etc., docs? Are you SERIOUS? This is at Mar A Lago, a heavily guarded compound where the President always has Secret Service protection and other secure institutions for the rest of his life. And back when there was clearly open and cooperative negotiation with NARA, T even conversed with and offered for them to take any docs they wished and all they “wished” was for him to install a safer lock on the door of a room where this stuff was stored. Then he got raided with no warning. REALLY?

If I were a Chinese or Russian operative, MAL would be one of the LAST places where I’d ever try to get my hands on classified info. I’d much rather go after those 33,000 H Clinton emails, already hacked and stolen by Russia, or the classified server she maintained, completely illegally, and again already hacked by the Russians, etc.. Come on, man. MAL, that’s ridiculous.

And do ANY of us believe, even in the corners of our mind, that T took this stuff home specifically by intention with full awareness that he was taking home extremely “dangerous” spy into, etc.? Really? You can pretty much almost call it a fact that no T personal awareness and involvement was involved here at all. Staffers and other pack all this stuff up, under the general direction of someone like T; some of these staffers might even have been NARA employees. Come on man! Are you serious? NO charges against T will have the least staying power in light of these considerations.

Finally, assuming even that somehow T DID deliberately chose “sources and methods” docs to take home, then what does that mean? If that is even true (and we still have SO much more to learn), then apart from Presidential declassification authority, I am unable at this point to see a good reason for taking such information home and keeping it. This does NOT mean there could NOT be such a good reason. I just don’t see it in my mind’s eye at the moment. IF that even ever becomes an issue, THEN HOW could it ever go anywhere, unless we take EVERY ex-President in modern times, “raid” or negotiate a “visit,” and check all their holdings for perhaps similarly classified information. Again, under “equal” justice, how can there be this obsession with T until we know if this is what EVERY President did when they left office, for whatever reasons? For example, didn’t I hear B Clinton kept MILLIONS of pages of such info, not thousands like T. Come on man.

Well, there’s SO much to learn. There are SO many very concerning Q about why DOJ/FBI did what they did in the WAY that they did it. Why raid after all that apparent communication and cooperation? Why not use one of the many “lesser” alternatives, such as subpoeanas (Can some human being actually SPELL that word?) or notices of intent to come and search and remove docs; it could all have been worked out amicably and so routinely and peacefully. This wrangling has taken place every time a President left office. Was T so difficult that these universal methods could no longer be applied with him? We didn’t see any raids on H Clinton, B Clinton, S Berger, etc., and their situations appear MUCH more risky to me, plus that had no declassification powers. There are SO many other ways. Then, why wait 18 months if this is so terrible, and then wait as much as 2 weeks after the warrant, and then still wait over the weekend before actually raiding? Come on man. Listen to what your NOSE is telling you. Does your nose work?

My guess is that if they tell T about these “dangerous” sources, etc., docs, he would answer simply, “Oh really, you found those? Please, take them back immediately; I don’t need them and didn’t even know about them.” Come on man. Use your common (?) sense.

But, after all this, YES, there is still the possibility (NOT a PROBABILITY IMO) that when (or IF) this finally plays out all the way, I will come to regard T as a truly guilty man who behaved in ways truly unacceptable to me, obviously intentionally illegal and obviously showing a blatant disregard for the well-being and security of the country he appears to love, and says he loves. Time will tell. Right now, Sat 27 Aug 022, 1010 am, I plan to still vote for him in 2024 if he will run. Let’s see what happens…..

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UNDOING REDACTIONS IN AFFIDAVIT USED FOR TRUMP WARRANT VIA DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING

COPIED from a post of mine on Facebook today:

Alan DiCenzo

14m  ·

Shared with Public

DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING EXPERTISE

You all know by now, and will know if you don’t already, from my own Facebook page and sections about me, my Ph.D. and extensive career with heavy emphasis on SAR digital signal and digital image processing, general digital signal and digital image processing, and substantial experience in orbit calculation, satellite tracking and signals-based geolocation, THAT I have MAJOR expertise in, for example DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING.

Why do I suddenly mention this now? I do because over a period of months and even years, I felt, in fact I KNEW, that I could devise ways of using my expertise to apply digital image processing to be able to READ THROUGH COMPLETELY REDACTED PORTIONS OF DOCUMENTS SUPPLIED TO THE PUBLIC. A good while ago, I actually discovered exactly how to do this, and verified empirically with many actual redacted documents, that my digital image processing techniques, which I may someday still publish in refereed journals, are essentially 100% effective in this regard.

I’ve mostly kept the results of this discovery and invention to myself. But today I have already gone through about 38% of the redacted sections (online) of the FBI affidavit used to “justify” getting the warrant used to raid President Trump’s Mar A Lago private home. I will soon post the ENTIRE affidavit on Facebook, and in other places which Facebook does NOT control.

I can already see, from what I’ve “X-rayed” already, that this whole thing stinks to high heaven so badly, and is so obviously another unjustified effort to “get” our former President, that all the crap you’re hearing on the news today, INCLUDING what you’re hearing on Fox News, is nothing but rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, to hide the stinking reality of what they are REALLY doing over at DOJ and the FBI with the FULL approval of AG Garland and “President” Joe Biden, who “won” a “stolen” election in 2020.

If ANY of you are interested, please let me know.

1 Comment

Alan DiCenzo

So, I use a combination of edge detection techniques, application of differential equations of the kind used in neural networks, some general AI methods based on machine learning, and some surprisingly simple digital image enhancement techniques, along with some amazingly fertile Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT) techniques, e.g. increasing the numerical intensity in the OUTER edge regions of the 2-D DFT which contain a disproportionate percentage of the energy in the high spatial frequencies, TO SLICE COMPLETELY THROUGH the seemingly opaque, blackened regions of redacted documents. You’d BETTER BELIEVE that I have actually done this and will soon be sharing things with you, if you are interested.

For now, I can see beyond doubt from what I’ve uncovered in the redacted affidavit portions, that this sensational Mar A Lago raid was COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY AND UNJUSTIFIED and, if all the information comes out, there will be some people completely unconnected to Trump but who are amazingly biased against him, who will clearly merit being prosecuted for despicable felonies.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A VERY WEIGHTY TOPIC IN PIANO PLAYING

The more I think about it, the more I come to feel that the single most important feature of technique we pianists want to pay attention to at all times, or as often as possible, during both practice and performance, and during slow playing as well as fast playing, is the sensation of WEIGHT, BUT ONLY A TINY BIT OF WEIGHT, NEARLY ZERO WEIGHT, ALL THE TIME.

The great pianist Paul Smith (longtime accompanist for Ella Fitzgerald, for example) once told me, you never need more than the relaxed weight of the arm, mainly the forearm, to play even the loudest notes. People who push harder than that are not really playing any louder. I believe he was right.

Letting the relaxed weight of your arm “rest” on the keys is all you’ll ever need in passage work. But the little extra trick is that you want to keep that weight minimized to ALMOST ZERO, i.e., just enough weight to have all the notes go down. This way your wrist can remain (again, aided by some awareness of sensation) completely freed and relaxed, which allows for nearly miraculous velocity. For those of us chronologically accomplished enough to remember, think of the image of a phonograph needle on a vinyl record. The needle needs a tine bit of backup weight to stay in the groove and in contact with the surface variations, but not too much or the record will be damaged. THAT’S similar to the sensation you want of PART of your arm weight resting on the keys.

Once you can actually sense this condition, you will LOVE it, I promise.

Of course you also will probably like using other guidelines, such as keeping the position of the hand, wrist, and forearm “unit” invariant as a function of register. For example, if the arm points straight at the keyboard for passages around middle C, then the arm should also point straight at the keyboard, i.e., with the elbow far out to the right, for passages near the highest C on the piano, and not angling out to the right. Also, you’ll want to keep your forearm, wrist, hand and fingers all aligned pretty close to a straight line to avoid creating strain and tension; think of your forearm, write, hand and fingers as being like a more or less solid unit and more or all all in a line with each other almost all of the time.

Of course if we think of this forearm “unit” as an arrow, then certain passage my suggest aiming the arrow out to the right as seen from above, rather than straight forward; at other times you may even aim the arrow a little bit to the left. A good example of aiming the arrow to the right is the right hand in Chopin’s Etude in 3rds, during ascending passages, so the fingers can “crawl over each other.” However, at all or almost all times, I like to keep my hand LEVEL, i.e., so that my fingers go roughly straight down at the keys. The extreme opposite of this, and obviously wrong thing to do, is to “unlevel” your hand by rotating it to the right as if you were going to deliver a karate chop to the keyboard. In that case you’d be playing all your notes into thin air instead of into the keys.

By the way, for leveling the hand this way, don’t rotate your wrist and hand, but instead, bring your elbow out and up from the side of your body, so that your hand is naturally leveled with no strain in the forearm, wrist, hand or fingers.

A few other “smaller” pointers: When crossing the thumb under or over, DO indeed been the thumb to get under or over; don’t rely just on hand shifting. Also, don’t just cross under or over to the next note, but rather to the next entire sequence of notes the hand and fingers will need to play after the cross. An exercise to facilitate and help understand this, is to play arpeggios as block chords instead of sequences of notes, using the same thumb passing techniques; this will get you accustomed to moving all at once for readiness for the entire next sequence of notes rather than just the one note you crossed to.

Are exercises useful and helpful? Hell, I don’t know for sure. But I do sometimes feel like using them. If master teachers and concert pianists suggest them, then they probably know something. Mostly, I don’t bother with a lot of Czerny or Tausig or Hanon; instead I make exercises out of the passage in the piece I am learning or practicing instead. For example, I already mentioned the exercise of crossing under over over the thumb and then ALL THE WAY to the next several notes of an arpeggio or scale.

Another great exercise if the 4 rhythms exercise. Pick a short passage or passage segment, and stop for longer every 4th note, say, starting on the first note. Do this maybe 4 times. Then maybe use the 2nd note in the passage for the “stopping” or long delay, and again stop on every 4th note. Most passages are in units of 4 notes, so you will go through 4 rhythms in this way. For this exercise, I can actually se some meaning, for it helps you to “stop” long enough on each note of the passage to not get the hand confused or rushed to the point where you foul up the passage.

Another exercise I love, but use less often, is “aller et retour,” or “go and return,” which I learned from Mme Aline Van Barentzen in Paris. For that exercise, you use shorter groups of notes from the passage and go both forward and back, holding to the actual fingering of the passage in both forward and back (reverse) directions. Mme VB taught me to do these exercises in 3 note groups, 5, 7, and 9 note groups. Thus, numbering the notes in sequence (NOT the fingers used), I might first play 12321 a few time for the separate groups of 3 note in the passage. Then I’d do 123454321. Finally, I’d be doing 12345678987654321. She said once you practice a passage in this way, you’ll have it as solid as can be.

Yet another natural exercise is, for double note passages as in Chopin’s Etude in 3rd, or the one in 6ths, is to practice only the upper voice of the passage for a while. Then practice the lower voice of the passage for a while. Again, we must hold to the actual fingerings used when playing both voices together in the same hand.

Another very good exercise, or at least it FEELS like it must be valuable, is to practice separately all the different fingerings you might use on a given passage or short motive. I like to get “concert speed fluent” in all the fingerings I may have discovered for a passage, not just the one I plan to use in a concert.

Then, I don’t know if we’d call this an exercise, but practice a passage not only slowly, but at ALL different tempi, very slow, slow, medium, fast, very fast, so you can play it at any tempo and so your hand and fingers learn “physically” what the real challenges of that passage are. Thus you might repeat a passage, e.g., short segment, or entire phrase, or even entire section, at all these various tempi, a few times. For example, I might practice a 12 or 16 note grouping 6 times while paying close attention to the important sensations: First time slow, 2nd time a bit faster; then by the 6th time maybe at concert tempo, or close to it. Or you might use 8 repetitions. Don’t repeat a passage forever, blindly. I’m not sure that accomplishes anything. Spread such repetition groups across different times of the day in your practice; not all at once.

Speaking the most generally, when you practice at various tempi like this, you can “sense” with your body, especially at the “medium” tempo, what is causing the difficulty of the passage and can then adjust to deal with that difficulty. Practicing intelligently like that, you won’t need as much time repeating passages. As you adjusting to deal with the specific difficulty you uncovered, you can also devise special exercises of your own to focus on that difficulty. An example might be the exercise I mentioned earlier on arpeggios, where you cross over or under and then play the entire chord, not just the next note.

Normally I might sequence my practicing in this way: Very short groups of notes, e.g., 8, 12 or 16 or so, repeating a few times, e.g., 6-8, varying the tempo across all tempi. Then practice the entire phrase in the same way. Don’t practice any one thing for too, too long. Usually 5 minutes is far more than enough, say, for a short group. Come back to it later in the day or the week if you want, after your physical brain has had time to build the new cells and connections.

And ALWAYS remember that wonderful feeling of weight, but almost zero weight, like an old phonograph needle, with the wrist thus always relaxed and always a feeling of ease and freedom from any tension, even at fff times..

I think if you do all these things suggested here, you may become a VIRTUOSO! (At least in classical, or serious, piano playing. Jazz and pop improvising have their own separate issues of course.)

Love and best wishes to all of you who are foolish enough to try to play the piano!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

LOST-NOT-STOLEN: GINSBERG

I have now completely read through and thoroughly analyzed this document:

“LOST, NOT STOLEN:
The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden
Won the 2020 Presidential Election
Senator John Danforth
Benjamin Ginsberg
The Honorable Thomas B. Griffith
David Hoppe
The Honorable J. Michael Luttig
The Honorable Michael W. McConnell
The Honorable Theodore B. Olson
Senator Gordon H. Smith
July, 2022″

often referred to as “The Ginsberg Report”; here I’ll refer to it as simply the G report, or just the G. It took me several weeks. I do NOT find its refutation of the 2020 stolen election claims to be valid.

I cite first that nowhere in the G are the direct claims from some of my primary sources, e.g., “The Navarro Report, The Powell Report, The Lindell Video Absolute Proof, The True AZ Audit Results From Wendy Rogers, State Senator,” and then certain later audits and examples, including even logical math papers showing certain impossibilities, EVER DIRECTLY AND EXPLICITLY ADDRESSED. Nowhere in G will you find something like a two-column table pitting very potent points in my previously mentioned primary sources, in the first column, against refutations in the second.

For just one powerful example, in “Absolute Proof” Lindell and several recognized forensic cyber experts and mathematicians displayed a very long table, along with a dynamic map, showing as an unfolding sub-video, exactly how each internet intrusion which switched large volumes of votes from outside the appropriate election district, occurred, when it occurred, and from where it originated. To even MY surprise, a huge volume of these pernicious intrusions came from China. I already knew that China wanted Biden. This is a very simple example: G would EITHER need to assert that this table and the powerful dynamic map unfolding in real time (replayed), was a TOTAL FRAUD ITSELF AND WAS NOTHING BUT A MEANINGLESS, ARTIFICIAL CREATION of these reputable forensic cybercrime experts and mathematicians (identified right there on the video), to me a very difficult proposition; OR ELSE frankly and honestly acknowledge that the database of intrusions built in real time along with its accompanying, correlated and intrusion-by-intrusion dynamic map of the same intrusions as they occurred, was real and that that ONE source of data alone was enough to invalidate the results of the 2020 Presidential Election. G did not even MENTION THIS EVIDENCE, much less address and refute it. This represents a VERY SIMPLE dichotomy: Either the intrusion video with its database and dynamic map MUST be shown to be a total, nefarious, arbitrary creation of these respected experts, or the 2020 Election steal must be ACKNOWLEDGE. There is NO other choice here.

And there were examples after examples in my “Steal” evidence sources which were similarly ignored and never addressed directly with the kind of refutation that would have meaning by its direct analysis of the points in those primary sources of mine. For example, deductive, incontrovertible math papers on the impossibility even of certain voting patterns, were never even brought up in G. And my own personal observation on TV of a sudden DECLINE in Trump’s vote numbers on the back Reuters screen, during Election Night, was never addressed. A non-fraudulent count can NEVER go down; that’s a mathematical impossibility.

What WAS addressed were EITHER trivial problems which I (and presumably most of you) already knew about but in the final analysis were not at all the pivotal and massive fraud projects in my sources, OR ELSE COMPLAINTS which courts rejected only on technical grounds such as standing, jurisdiction, or timeliness, none of which could could justify an interpretation of invalidity for these “pro-steal” claims.

Then, next, the panel of co-authors or contributors to G correspond only to known and strongly biased Left supporting or RINO-type members, even though they tried to represent themselves as a conservative panel (Yeah, conservative like Liz Cheney), which detracted heavily and probably fatally from the validity of the G, for me. Other sources I’ve examined have criticized this same “kangaroo aspect” of the generators of this G.

There were many other flaws as well, some fatal. The bottom line is that the VERY DETAILED AND OFTEN SELF-PROVING AND INTERWOVEN points in MY primary sources were NOT TOUCHED by G and I remain in the same position I was in before: I believe quite strongly that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen and that the evidence sources I have cited on multiple occasions represent powerful instruments of proof of this theft of an entire American Presidential election.

The smell continues as horrendous. Let all my sources and other similar ones become massively public knowledge so that Americans can truly look at the evidence and begin to act as a meaningful de facto jury, instead of allowing the main media to continue hypnotizing them into accepting that they NEVER truly examine the actual EVIDENCE for the steal, but always only the propaganda against it. In this disgraceful PROPAGANDA AND DEMAGOGUERY classification, I include this latest G Report.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment