I really cannot explain why I enjoy the Western genre so much. Even though these movies are a complete lie historically I still watch them whenever I come across one on television. I find them exciting and fun to watch. My life is boring so I enjoy watching some loose cannon tough guy who does not play by the rules. Whenever I see actors in a saloon with swinging doors drinking, playing cards, and shooting each other I get this great nostalgic feeling for what was and will never again be. On the real people in the Old West: they dreamed of living our life but of their life we can only dream.
At first I was disappointed that Midnight Cowboy was the not archetypical Western I had thought of but I can think of no better consolation prize. In a sense that also demystified the American Old West because it showed that cowboy life is not as glamorous as one might think. Although it was set in 1970 New York, which can hardly pass for the Old West, Joe Buck is not the stud he envisioned in Texas. In the archetypical Western the drifter is usually a tough guy who kills the less tough (but not weak) bad guy and gets the girl. Joe Buck is exactly the opposite. He is a clown in a cowboy hat who has a problem attracting women. Maybe the life of a cowboy is not what we thought it was.
Anyway I was greatly pleased Mr. Bennett showed a more traditional Western last week. There were saloons and shootouts, the sines qua non of any Western. When Will Munny says, “It’s a hell of a thing killing a man. You take away all he's got, and all he's ever gonna have.” In every other Western shootouts and duels seem to be glorified but never does a cowboy pause amid the chaos and think about what it means to kill a man. This quote which is from another Clint Westwood Western offers a clue to Will Munny’s, the Schofield Kid’s, and Ned Logan’s motivation: “Where life had no value, death, sometimes, had its price. That is why the bounty killers appeared.”
As far as the distortion of history goes in Unforgiven, in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence a man gains legendary status after getting credit for something he never did, and the man who deserved the credit fell into obscurity. I hate to spoil this movie but most of us including myself probably have no desire to watch this film. By the way I do not like John Wayne but this is the first Western I ever saw so it will always have a special place in my heart. After a city slicker goes into the Wild Wild West Liberty Valence terrorizes this town and eventually challenges the Eastener to a duel. This duel takes place at night in the shadows next to the saloon. Several shots ring out and after the smoke clears Liberty Valence is dead. Wayne reveals that he shot Liberty Valence and goes on to live a sad lonely life. The Eastener becomes a Senator and eventually a legendary part of the territory's folklore as The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence.
Here some questions I come away with after seeing Unforgiven. Although I am no expert one would probably not want to be drunk when expecting a shootout. Also in my genius memory of The American Pageant, cowboys herded cattle on the long drives from Texas or Oklahoma along the Chisholm Trail or Western Trail to the cities that had the transcontinental railroads running through them such as Abilene or Dodge City. Maybe they shot wild animals for food and to keep their cattle safe but I doubt any cowboy much less homesteader rode around the Old West looking for people with rewards on their heads.
Since I have a deep admiration for classic movies and absolutely no social life I made some spaghetti and meatballs and saw several Linguine Westerns over the weekend. The first two were entertaining but The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly was absolutely outstanding. Besides hearing the perfectly composed movie song (according to Sandbag) I was able to make several quasi-pseudo-original imbroglios, excuse me, observations. One thing I noticed about The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly is that Eli Wallach’s performance as Tuco (The Ugly) is as comedic and endearing as Johnny Depp’s Captain Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean. Both play comedic double-crossing outlaws who will do whatever it takes to get their payday. Both are good at what they do but they can never seem to beat The Good (Blondie or Turner) to the money or girl. They also try to double cross the good but they always team up again after they are double crossed by The Bad (Angel Eyes and Barbossa).
Mr. Bennett himself suggested that The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly are ironic titles for the three stars. Mr. Bennett noted that the first time we see The Good he shoots three people and uses Tuco to collect several thousand in reward money. This is hardly what one calls good.
The Good and The Bad remain enigmas throughout the film. They are both nameless because Blondie and Angel Eyes are dubious names for anyone. Rather, they are nicknames so people have some way of addressing them. We also do not know their families or where they came from so it is difficult to warm up to these characters. However we get to know Tuco well throughout the film and he is the person who breathes life and comedy into this otherwise dry but still exciting film.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Just A Thought
After listening to the Schofield Kid brag to William Munny about his model XYZ Smith and Wesson super duper .45 caliber Colt revolver with the kung fu grip I could not help remembering Mr. Bennett talking about how all things are significant in movies. For example, the picture of Abraham Lincoln above the clock would be significant if the director took several seconds to include it in a movie. A gun would be significant if the actor said this was his grandfather's buntline special Winchester .50 caliber rifle with the tae kwon do grip and golden trigger the way the Schofield Kid did.
As further proof for my case think about Dirty Harry when Clint Eastwood gives his most famous speech: Do I feel lucky?.
Now I am waiting in eager anticipation for that gun and William Munny to see some action or poker.......
Preferably draw.
As further proof for my case think about Dirty Harry when Clint Eastwood gives his most famous speech: Do I feel lucky?.
Now I am waiting in eager anticipation for that gun and William Munny to see some action or poker.......
Preferably draw.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Declaration of Principles
After today's class I court martialed myself and have reached a verdict of guilty. I apologize for my mutinous behavior on my previous post. I praise and thank Mr. Bennett for bestowing his mercy and clemency upon me. The standard punsihment for such behavior should have entailed the Cat o' nine tails (I miss this one), keelhauling (my personal favorite), caning, walking the plank, or even hanging.
So here are the principles:
-"Always keep your mouth shut," GoodFellas.
-After all Mr. Bennett has done for me I think I owe him a great deal of respect, courtesy, and trust. I should have trusted his good judgment and given Top Hat a chance before I said anything stupid.
-Even though I said an afterlife probably does not exist one should still have a code of honor and ethics to give one's life meaning and direction. My last post was not the thanks Mr. Bennett deserved after showing such a fantastic selection of films. Even if Mr. Bennett shows a movie where we just watch grass grow or paint dry I will give him the benefit of the doubt.
-There will never be a mutiny on the HMS Bennett again.
-Lastly I will post only positive comments from now on.
So here are the principles:
-"Always keep your mouth shut," GoodFellas.
-After all Mr. Bennett has done for me I think I owe him a great deal of respect, courtesy, and trust. I should have trusted his good judgment and given Top Hat a chance before I said anything stupid.
-Even though I said an afterlife probably does not exist one should still have a code of honor and ethics to give one's life meaning and direction. My last post was not the thanks Mr. Bennett deserved after showing such a fantastic selection of films. Even if Mr. Bennett shows a movie where we just watch grass grow or paint dry I will give him the benefit of the doubt.
-There will never be a mutiny on the HMS Bennett again.
-Lastly I will post only positive comments from now on.
Monday, April 6, 2009
A Brief History of Quanta and Relativity and a Treatise on the Possibility of an Afterlife, Religion, and Death
Midnight Cowboy was a superb movie that was worthy of a serious thought so I am thoroughly ashamed I could not add anything more than a bad joke. The “frankly I couldn’t…” part of my last blog entry is plagiarized from homework 13 for AP American History. Runaway Train is certainly among my favorite movies and I cannot say anything original because we tore it to pieces. I hope Mr. Bennett and I can have a modus vivendi because this blog in contrast to my last three is a serious exploration of a common theme in all the movies we have seen so far…death.
No I do not know what a treatise or modus vivendi is anymore than I know what imbroglio means but it is pretentious and intelligent sounding so I included it in my research.
The first postulate and sine qua non of my irrefutable theory is that quantum mechanics correctly describes our universe. Postulate and sine qua non are other pretentious words that make this argument seem more intelligent than it really is. My proof for quantum mechanics is that it was truly necessity’s daughter. Classical physics simply could not explain the atomic world. Enter Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, and others. They showed classical physics to be a special case of the new all-encompassing quantum mechanics.
Quantum mechanics is a new mathematical model describing our world. It operates on probability and uncertainty rather than absolutes and confidence. In response to this new theory Einstein famously said that God does not play with dice. However Stephen Hawking said that not only does God play dice but he throws them where they cannot be seen. Werner Heisenberg “uncertainly” said that the universe is not stranger than we think but rather stranger than we can think. I will put him to the test.
Please view Dr. Quantum's explanation of the double slit experiment (link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc) if you do not have a solid understanding of what it is. Remember what Heisenberg said about the world.
Henceforth when I mention waves, think of water rippling in a pool, and when I mention particles, think of a bullet shot out of a gun. Light exhibits wavelike phenomena such as diffraction, polarization, and interference. By 1900 physicists still could not explain the photoelectric effect on the basis of wave theory. Einstein said that light comes in discrete packets of energy called photons (particles). So if light is a photon of electromagnetic radiation (a wave and particle) and there is symmetry to the universe than matter should behave like a wave (a particle and wave). The only reason we do not detect our wavelength is that it is impossible to detect a wavelength on the order of 10-34 meters because it is too small. But an electron is small enough to have a wavelength on the order of 10-10 meters, which is detectable. When electrons are sent through a diffraction grating we observe an interference pattern similar to that produced by monochromatic light which is a wave. However if we look at which slit it goes through the electron suddenly becomes a particle and produces two lines of electrons equivalent to each slit.
This is what the uncertainty in quantum mechanics is all about. As Dr. Quantum said scientists superimpose all possibilities, called wave functions (for obvious reasons), because the truth is we do not know what the electron is doing. We see all possible outcomes called eigenstates but the very instant we observe we force all wave functions to collapse except one and this one becomes reality. (Eigen is German for own and my use of German makes this argument more credible than it is).
Quantum uncertainty comes from nature rather than an imperfection in our measuring devices. It is impossible to know velocity and position because we have to disturb the object even ever so slightly to make a measurement. Quantum uncertainty dictates that we superimpose all eigenstates until we make an observation and force one out of all eigenstates to become reality. A concrete example would be determining our future. Even the most reliable measuring device cannot exactly determine the outcome of a lifetime. All possible eigenstates exist in the future. There is a version of us as billionaires, homeless people, doctors, killers, bankers, thieves, and so on. As time marches on we observe our future and thereby force an eigenstate of ourselves to become reality. Our future like the electron knows when it is being observed and chooses an eigenstate, but when left to the imagination all realities are possible. Quantum mechanics is useful because it determines the probability of a particular outcome. As I said all of those eigenstates exist in the future but some are more probable outcomes than others. Probably most of us will not be billionaires, homeless people, or murderers. However we need not concern ourselves with the complex mathematics of predicting our futures because it will take lifetimes to develop.
At this point the intelligent reader asks, well what the hell does this have to do with the possibility of an afterlife, religion, and death. At this point I shall make an intellectual leap so great that no one has ever attempted it until me.
The fact is that we can never know if an afterlife exists until we die. Since we have no means of detecting it all eigenstates exist. There is both an afterlife and not an afterlife. I am fully aware of the fact that we do not know about an afterlife; however, I did prove that we can never know until we die and observe or not observe an afterlife. So for all dead people it is one or the other, but for all us who are alive it is both. I know this led to a disappointing conclusion but we will now qualitatively determine the probability of an afterlife. We have tried since our existence to detect an afterlife but we have still failed to do so. Our failure to detect an afterlife implies the absence of an afterlife. We would like to think there is an afterlife but if we cannot detect it the probability of an afterlife is slim at most. All visions and thoughts about an afterlife are simply speculation and guesswork.
Now we shall apply quantum uncertainty to religion. As with our future or the afterlife, we can never know for sure about religion. All eigenstates exist until we can observe proof of a certain religion. This stems not from of a lack of sensitive technology but because that uncertainty is inherent in nature. Since we cannot know for sure people pick from an organized set of superstitions and allow themselves to be brainwashed until they believe whatever they are told without any sort of questioning. Nietzsche and the wise man remember that faith is not wanting to know what is true. Beware of anyone who forces you to believe in something improvable.
Since few religions are atheistic I will qualitatively determine the probability of god and use this probability to determine whether or not the religion is mistaken. Nietzsche wondered if man was one of God's blunders or if God was one of man's blunders? Quantum uncertainty will answer his timeless question. Let us assume that god is a supreme being and not just an idol of our fears as Antonius Block said. I do not think fear or anything in nature is a deity because it can be manipulated and used by man. A true deity should exist independent of nature or man. In our universe (there can be others but we do not know about them) there seems to be an absence of any deity or other supreme beings. The absence of any evidence for god, other than shaky coincidences combined with a wild imagination, implies the absence of a deity. If we cannot detect it then it is probably not there. God is really an abstract concept dreamt up by humans in order to feel more important and to feel that we have a divine protector looking out for us. I conclude all religions are meaningless, empty, and false. Nietzsche was correct. God is our blunder. I think therefore I am so I only believe in myself because I am all I know to be true.
I went to the greatest laboratory ever crafted by the hand of nature which is nowhere other than Einstein’s mind. I had to recreate his famous gedankenexperiment of riding a beam of light because we simply do not have the technology to make an object of substantial mass approach that speed. So thinking is the next best thing. I could have easily said thought but gedanken is German for thought, pretentious sounding, and adds artificial intelligence to this essay.
Einstein published his special theory of relativity in 1905 and his theory of general relativity in 1916. We will not concern ourselves with the mathematics of general relativity but I shall use special relativity to show how to outwit death briefly and then entirely. My next postulates are that special and general relativity are correct because experiments confirm the mathematics of these theories.
I view death as the permanent termination of the conscious mind as well as biological functions. Nietzsche reminds us that death is not the opposite of life. The living being is only a species of the dead, and a very rare species. To prevent death one can improve health and medicine or simply slow down time. I cannot do the first two but I will make some suggestions on how to accomplish the third. First of all move quickly. Clocks moving relative to an observer are measured by that observer to run more slowly than clocks at rest. By moving from New York City to the equator you can increase your speed by 63 meters/second. Assuming you will have the same lifespan at New York City and the equator you can increase your lifespan because of special relativity. After using geometry, Einstein’s special theory of relativity, a very powerful calculator, and the assumption that we will all live 80 years, I calculated the time difference. People in New York City will be dead for 2.23 x 10-4 seconds at the instant you die on the equator. In real time that is about one thousandth of the blink of an eye. Einstein’s prediction of time dilation is Δt=Δt0/√1-v2/c2 ≈ Δt0(1+v2/2c2). Δt is the time the observer measures and Δt0 is the time the person moving measures. Since v is much less than the speed of light the time dilation is immeasurably small. But if you can travel significantly close to the speed of light (say .5c or greater) time dilation will be significant, if you can travel at c time will stop, and if you can travel faster than c time will go backward. Unfortunately special relativity says that as you approach c, mass approaches infinity which means that it would take an infinite amount of energy to continue speeding up. In short it is impossible to travel at c.
According to general relativity you can experience time dilation by entering a strong gravitational field. Remember that the principle of equivalence in general relativity states that acceleration is the same as gravity acting in the opposite direction. As special relativity has shown time is not independent of our familiar three dimensional world. All objects that have mass curve and distort the spacetime continuum. I just had to get that one in. The more distorted spacetime is, the slower time marches. By going near the event horizon of a black hole time will slow down and then stop altogether. A black hole is a celestial object so dense its surface escape velocity is the speed of light or greater. If the earth were to be a black hole it would have to be compressed to a diameter of 7mm. If the sun were going to be compressed into a black hole it would have a diameter of about 1.5 miles. Do not go too close because to these black holes because if you pass the event horizon there is no escape from its clutches. Unfortunately in order to survive long enough to travel to a black hole we must travel at a speed significantly close to c because there are no black holes within light-years of the earth.
No I do not know what a treatise or modus vivendi is anymore than I know what imbroglio means but it is pretentious and intelligent sounding so I included it in my research.
The first postulate and sine qua non of my irrefutable theory is that quantum mechanics correctly describes our universe. Postulate and sine qua non are other pretentious words that make this argument seem more intelligent than it really is. My proof for quantum mechanics is that it was truly necessity’s daughter. Classical physics simply could not explain the atomic world. Enter Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, and others. They showed classical physics to be a special case of the new all-encompassing quantum mechanics.
Quantum mechanics is a new mathematical model describing our world. It operates on probability and uncertainty rather than absolutes and confidence. In response to this new theory Einstein famously said that God does not play with dice. However Stephen Hawking said that not only does God play dice but he throws them where they cannot be seen. Werner Heisenberg “uncertainly” said that the universe is not stranger than we think but rather stranger than we can think. I will put him to the test.
Please view Dr. Quantum's explanation of the double slit experiment (link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc) if you do not have a solid understanding of what it is. Remember what Heisenberg said about the world.
Henceforth when I mention waves, think of water rippling in a pool, and when I mention particles, think of a bullet shot out of a gun. Light exhibits wavelike phenomena such as diffraction, polarization, and interference. By 1900 physicists still could not explain the photoelectric effect on the basis of wave theory. Einstein said that light comes in discrete packets of energy called photons (particles). So if light is a photon of electromagnetic radiation (a wave and particle) and there is symmetry to the universe than matter should behave like a wave (a particle and wave). The only reason we do not detect our wavelength is that it is impossible to detect a wavelength on the order of 10-34 meters because it is too small. But an electron is small enough to have a wavelength on the order of 10-10 meters, which is detectable. When electrons are sent through a diffraction grating we observe an interference pattern similar to that produced by monochromatic light which is a wave. However if we look at which slit it goes through the electron suddenly becomes a particle and produces two lines of electrons equivalent to each slit.
This is what the uncertainty in quantum mechanics is all about. As Dr. Quantum said scientists superimpose all possibilities, called wave functions (for obvious reasons), because the truth is we do not know what the electron is doing. We see all possible outcomes called eigenstates but the very instant we observe we force all wave functions to collapse except one and this one becomes reality. (Eigen is German for own and my use of German makes this argument more credible than it is).
Quantum uncertainty comes from nature rather than an imperfection in our measuring devices. It is impossible to know velocity and position because we have to disturb the object even ever so slightly to make a measurement. Quantum uncertainty dictates that we superimpose all eigenstates until we make an observation and force one out of all eigenstates to become reality. A concrete example would be determining our future. Even the most reliable measuring device cannot exactly determine the outcome of a lifetime. All possible eigenstates exist in the future. There is a version of us as billionaires, homeless people, doctors, killers, bankers, thieves, and so on. As time marches on we observe our future and thereby force an eigenstate of ourselves to become reality. Our future like the electron knows when it is being observed and chooses an eigenstate, but when left to the imagination all realities are possible. Quantum mechanics is useful because it determines the probability of a particular outcome. As I said all of those eigenstates exist in the future but some are more probable outcomes than others. Probably most of us will not be billionaires, homeless people, or murderers. However we need not concern ourselves with the complex mathematics of predicting our futures because it will take lifetimes to develop.
At this point the intelligent reader asks, well what the hell does this have to do with the possibility of an afterlife, religion, and death. At this point I shall make an intellectual leap so great that no one has ever attempted it until me.
The fact is that we can never know if an afterlife exists until we die. Since we have no means of detecting it all eigenstates exist. There is both an afterlife and not an afterlife. I am fully aware of the fact that we do not know about an afterlife; however, I did prove that we can never know until we die and observe or not observe an afterlife. So for all dead people it is one or the other, but for all us who are alive it is both. I know this led to a disappointing conclusion but we will now qualitatively determine the probability of an afterlife. We have tried since our existence to detect an afterlife but we have still failed to do so. Our failure to detect an afterlife implies the absence of an afterlife. We would like to think there is an afterlife but if we cannot detect it the probability of an afterlife is slim at most. All visions and thoughts about an afterlife are simply speculation and guesswork.
Now we shall apply quantum uncertainty to religion. As with our future or the afterlife, we can never know for sure about religion. All eigenstates exist until we can observe proof of a certain religion. This stems not from of a lack of sensitive technology but because that uncertainty is inherent in nature. Since we cannot know for sure people pick from an organized set of superstitions and allow themselves to be brainwashed until they believe whatever they are told without any sort of questioning. Nietzsche and the wise man remember that faith is not wanting to know what is true. Beware of anyone who forces you to believe in something improvable.
Since few religions are atheistic I will qualitatively determine the probability of god and use this probability to determine whether or not the religion is mistaken. Nietzsche wondered if man was one of God's blunders or if God was one of man's blunders? Quantum uncertainty will answer his timeless question. Let us assume that god is a supreme being and not just an idol of our fears as Antonius Block said. I do not think fear or anything in nature is a deity because it can be manipulated and used by man. A true deity should exist independent of nature or man. In our universe (there can be others but we do not know about them) there seems to be an absence of any deity or other supreme beings. The absence of any evidence for god, other than shaky coincidences combined with a wild imagination, implies the absence of a deity. If we cannot detect it then it is probably not there. God is really an abstract concept dreamt up by humans in order to feel more important and to feel that we have a divine protector looking out for us. I conclude all religions are meaningless, empty, and false. Nietzsche was correct. God is our blunder. I think therefore I am so I only believe in myself because I am all I know to be true.
I went to the greatest laboratory ever crafted by the hand of nature which is nowhere other than Einstein’s mind. I had to recreate his famous gedankenexperiment of riding a beam of light because we simply do not have the technology to make an object of substantial mass approach that speed. So thinking is the next best thing. I could have easily said thought but gedanken is German for thought, pretentious sounding, and adds artificial intelligence to this essay.
Einstein published his special theory of relativity in 1905 and his theory of general relativity in 1916. We will not concern ourselves with the mathematics of general relativity but I shall use special relativity to show how to outwit death briefly and then entirely. My next postulates are that special and general relativity are correct because experiments confirm the mathematics of these theories.
I view death as the permanent termination of the conscious mind as well as biological functions. Nietzsche reminds us that death is not the opposite of life. The living being is only a species of the dead, and a very rare species. To prevent death one can improve health and medicine or simply slow down time. I cannot do the first two but I will make some suggestions on how to accomplish the third. First of all move quickly. Clocks moving relative to an observer are measured by that observer to run more slowly than clocks at rest. By moving from New York City to the equator you can increase your speed by 63 meters/second. Assuming you will have the same lifespan at New York City and the equator you can increase your lifespan because of special relativity. After using geometry, Einstein’s special theory of relativity, a very powerful calculator, and the assumption that we will all live 80 years, I calculated the time difference. People in New York City will be dead for 2.23 x 10-4 seconds at the instant you die on the equator. In real time that is about one thousandth of the blink of an eye. Einstein’s prediction of time dilation is Δt=Δt0/√1-v2/c2 ≈ Δt0(1+v2/2c2). Δt is the time the observer measures and Δt0 is the time the person moving measures. Since v is much less than the speed of light the time dilation is immeasurably small. But if you can travel significantly close to the speed of light (say .5c or greater) time dilation will be significant, if you can travel at c time will stop, and if you can travel faster than c time will go backward. Unfortunately special relativity says that as you approach c, mass approaches infinity which means that it would take an infinite amount of energy to continue speeding up. In short it is impossible to travel at c.
According to general relativity you can experience time dilation by entering a strong gravitational field. Remember that the principle of equivalence in general relativity states that acceleration is the same as gravity acting in the opposite direction. As special relativity has shown time is not independent of our familiar three dimensional world. All objects that have mass curve and distort the spacetime continuum. I just had to get that one in. The more distorted spacetime is, the slower time marches. By going near the event horizon of a black hole time will slow down and then stop altogether. A black hole is a celestial object so dense its surface escape velocity is the speed of light or greater. If the earth were to be a black hole it would have to be compressed to a diameter of 7mm. If the sun were going to be compressed into a black hole it would have a diameter of about 1.5 miles. Do not go too close because to these black holes because if you pass the event horizon there is no escape from its clutches. Unfortunately in order to survive long enough to travel to a black hole we must travel at a speed significantly close to c because there are no black holes within light-years of the earth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
