Avalon Falling
All the world's a stage, and we're going behind the scenes
All the world's a stage, and we're going behind the scenes
Aug 6th
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT, offers old versions of several undergraduate and graduate courses on their OpenCourseWare website at this URL:
http://www.ocw.mit.edu/index.htm
There is a huge amount of information, and upon scanning a few courses, I can see that the material is of the highest quality. Just a note: If you want math courses (which I was going to look at first) you’re going to have to look under the science section.
Jul 28th
There has been a lot of talk thrown about of the BP Oil Spill Disaster being the worst oil spill ever to occur, or that it’s going to become this in the near future. Well just to clear the air about this situation is a picture that shows the volume of oil spilled in this current spill compared to other spills in history. I think you might be pleasantly surprised:

As you can see, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill pales in comparison to most of the major spills over the years. But once a spill threatens North America in any way, the media is right on it, around the clock, pushing every other news story aside, which leads some to wonder if it is being over-reported to conceal some other international developments. Of course, I am not downplaying the massive environmental effect that this oil spill will have, but this will not cause the end of all life in the ocean and slowly, all life on land as some people have posited, or else this would’ve happened a while ago based on the relative sizes of some of the other oil spills on the map.
If this image is too small to read, here’s the link to the full image:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1178/4597706316_f64f71de18_o.png
Jul 23rd
Is capturing a moment in time in two dimensions not good enough for you? Don’t have the funds for a three dimensional camera? Your memories can still be caught in pseudo-3d using a technique knows as wobbling. This requires two pictures of the same area taken from slightly different angles (just like your two eyes see from slightly different angles), and then shown to the viewer rapidly enough to create the illusion of a three dimensional image. In order for maximum realism, there should be a point of focus which does not change position between the two pictures, such as a pole or a person.
Here are some examples of awesome wobble GIFs.


This wobble gif has multiple images, each focussed on the grey basket.

This one is named “Old Stone Gate”, taken in Garrison, New York.

If you want some more examples, as well as the sources of these images, check out these websites:
http://www.well.com/~jimg/stereo/stereo_list.html
http://www.stereomaker.net/sample/ani/ani_e.htm
http://billmbabblefotostok.deviantart.com/art/Laundrette-3D-wobble-gif-53494042
In normal life, your brain seamlessly takes the two images from each eye and merges them to form a binocular, three-dimensional image, one that not only has width and height, but also depth, allowing you to determine how far objects are from your eyes. To create these pictures, first you’ll need two or more pictures taken as described above. Then you need to download a program that will create the animated gif for you. These are plentiful, but one that works quite well is Stereo Maker. The site contains a tutorial on how to create these images. Enjoy!
Jul 9th
Well it’s been a while, got kinda tired of the whole blog thing…well not exactly tired, but sidetracked. Anyways, there have been some interesting developments, one of which is the establishment of what I like to call the “Legendary Music School”. This is not the official name, nor is it one of the candidates for the name, per se… My friend from University and I were thinking about an original way to make some kind of a difference. The idea of teaching music was brought up, seeing as my friend was a professional, classically trained piano player, and I had, albeit through a much different route, also learned piano. The idea is currently in it’s planning stages; various implementation strategies, material that will be covered, how accelerated the learning process will be, etc., are all being considered. Oh yes, and this music school will be completely free, as it is a volunteer operation, and that’s the most exciting part, as well as the foundation on which we are confident rapid growth of the school will occur. Well then, that’s it for now, stay tuned for more in the near future.
Dec 20th
So, I just finished my political science exam, during which I uncovered what may be some kind of connection. You see, there are fundamentally two classes of people, according to a Mr. Karl Marx, the people who own the means of production, that is, the “Bourgeoisie”, and those who work in those means of production, the “Proletariat”. These bourgeoisie are essentially the owners of factories and companies and retail stores and any other kind of business you can think of, and the proletariat are the workers in these factors. The antagonism between these two classes stems from the fact that the proletariat’s work in the factory brings a certain amount of profit to the bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie pays the proletariat less than said profit. Therefore, the bourgeoisie get richer faster than the proletariat do, and the gap of inequality rises.
Of course, such cycles do not happen indefinitely, and are part of much larger cycles. This cycle is the cycle of mechanization. As the bourgeoisie get richer, and technology progresses, they realize they can replace many of their workers with robots and machines which can achieve much higher levels of efficiency for a fraction of the cost. Thus, unemployment rises as these machines take over huge swaths of jobs. These workers who are no longer getting paid are forced to lower their level of consumption, and this causes the bourgeoisie profits to start to drop, causing them to have to lay off more workers, and causing more underconsumption, more lay-offs until the whole cycle reaches a contingency in which there is a revolution. This revolution, according to Marx, involves the realization by the people that a private economy controlled by a lesser number of bourgeoisie is doomed to collapse, and that the only way to maintain order in the system is to have an impartial socialist government control the means of production.
The Cycle: mechanization–>underemployment–>underconsumption–>more mechanization–/–>revolution!
Now, such an outcome would be advantageous to the more numerous proletariat, but disadvantageous to the more powerful bourgeoisie. Since the bourgeoisie have more power, they can control this cycle, retarding it, even potentially stopping it. They can finance the representatives in government, lobbying for policy that helps them retain their position. What policies are these? They must be policies that maintain the current order, laws against research into new energy sources, or if these laws are deemed unconstitutional, propaganda making such claims out to be ridiculous. Such new energy sources would render the huge oil firms such as Exxon obsolete, and since these companies are among the most profitable in the world, it is highly doubtful that said energy sources would be permitted.
Other huge and profitable companies include those in the pharmaceutical industry. Why research one-time payment cures if you can keep the sick on medication for the rest of their lives and maintain a steady revenue? A PhD just coming out of university with a huge debt might have dreams of finding a cure for a disease, but in order to pay off the loans, he must instead resign to work in such an industry, causing a great influx of minds who could be well-conditioned to cure afflictions instead finding themselves fortifying the position of the bourgeoisie.
Now there are a number of other ways the bourgeoisie could hijack the social world in order to maintain their position, but volumes could be written on how they could do it and how they already have. I merely want to elicit some curiosity into this subject which could potentially explain a lot of fishy business that goes on everywhere.
Aug 4th
Anytime anybody asks me, I usually say I’ve been playing piano for 11 years, and there are two possible reactions. First is the simple “Woah”, incredulous stare, and then that’s about it. The second, which comes from somebody who “knows” something about music will be, “Oh, so you can sight read and _____________ (insert any complex musical technique)?”. I used to beat around the bush in reply to this question, but I’ve grown to simply say “No”. At this point, the asker will become rather perplexed, and will utter any series of words to express their confusion. After listening for a bit, I will add “I play by ear”. The exact meaning of this statement has become unknown to me over the years. I used to say it with full confidence, in that if I did not read notes, I played by ear. Notwithstanding, the person asking the question will then say “oohhhh…okay”, and may continue a conversation about music with you. However, for the whole time, they will act as if they have some esoteric knowledge, some great wisdom, something that sets them higher than you, and this will become apparent very quickly in the conversation. I nevertheless remain perfectly respectful in the conversation, unless they full-out call me something along the lines of a “fake” piano player, at which point I say “at least I didn’t spend tens of thousands of dollars on piano lessons”.
You may be somewhat put off by this statement. “The nerve of this boy”, you may be saying, “To rebuke the whole establishment of “academies” and “scholars” of pianists who will pass on their knowledge to children [for a fee]“. You may say, “You’ve never taken lessons…what do you know?”, though you would be incorrect in this statement, as I have actually taken piano lessons, for nearly three months, very recently. What I have learned is, quite simply, the great majority of the things that are taught in piano lessons can be self-taught from the books that you will also have to buy (they don’t mention the books until you start). Now, for a 4 year old just starting piano, the lessons will consist of, for the most part, proper fingering techniques, how to do scales, intervals, stuff like that. Very simple, very time consuming (12 basic major scales, countless variations on this theme). Later, songs are made using these scales and intervals, all the while stressing the proper fingerings. This is how the instructor “teaches” you the song. They put the sheet music in front of you, then they play it (around a minute) then you must go through the notes, trying to figure out which key each black dot on the staff corresponds to (10 seconds per note for a beginner). Then you’ll forget what you were doing after about 5 notes, and will have to invariably go back and re memorize the notes (because you aren’t really reading the sheet music yet). Before you know it, the lesson’s over, and you’re pretty much the same except your shoulders hurt, your eyes are stinging, and you are 20-50 dollars poorer (that’s the low-end price).
Anyways, that’s how it goes until maybe a year in, when it only takes you 5 seconds per note, and you’ve been moved up to slightly harder songs (also longer, thus wasting more time each instance the instructor plays it). In actuality, all this reading of the sheet music and trying to find out which key corresponds to which note can be done AT HOME. Proper fingering, scales, intervals… all that jazz, comes with playing songs.
I got my first keyboard when I was around 6 or 7, and I would spend hours at a time just fiddling around with it. In truth, the first things I started doing were intervals (seeing how different pairs of notes sounded depending on the distance they were from each other). I would find the intervals that sounded good together, and which point I realized I could play with two hands. At this point I was one month into playing. After I had begun to combine intervals, I realized that when I put some with others close to each other, they would sound good. I had discovered chords. I began to worry that I would forget everything I had discovered, so I devised a numbering system for all the notes and their respective chords. I would call a chord “1-happy” if it started on note 1 (which I had designated “E” as) and sounded happy (which I later found was major), or 1-sad, which is actually a “minor chord”. Anyways, I then learned about scales and arpeggios and cool sounding combinations and progressions of chords. I then learned that if I do chords and stuff with the left hand, and single notes with the right hand, I could make melodies, and later, songs. I then began to make a multitude of songs…and I would memorize them. Over the years I learned the intracies of the keyboard, the patterns that underly its simple appearance. I also began to learn mainstream songs. I would play them on my computer, and imitate them. At first it would take me so long that I would give up, having only learned an intro or a verse. Eventually, with a lot of practice, I was able to learn whole songs in this way, and in time only needed two to three playthroughs of the song to get a grasp of it.
All by myself, without any instructors or books or anything, I learned piano, and I can even read sheet music, it just took some practice. Music is written into our minds. Our very brains operate in a rhythm which is very precise and crucial to our complexity. Anybody can learn piano in this way, and in ways, I, and anyone who learns in this way, has an advantage. Most piano lesson veterans are nothing when taken away from their sheet music, taken away from their theory, and put in a situation where they have to improvise, or be original. Most of them don’t understand the connections and patterns, and thus cannot pass the limits that were set for them by their instructors.
In my self-teaching, I came across a lot of things about mainstream music that did somewhat disturb me, which I may post about in the future. Until then, buy your children, or yourself, a piano or keyboard, or a guitar, or a violin, or whatever other insturment you can think of, and learn on your own. Practice makes perfect.
I understand a lot of people may be insulted by this post. Please comment about it, and I will try to rectify the discrepancy:)
Jul 16th
There’s enough talk about who brought down the towers, whether their destruction was an inside job, and all that…however, there is an equally important cover-up that is still precipitating upon the people of New York City. When the buildings were destroyed, much of the building materials were vaporized, turning into a dense smoke that turned day into night. However, this smoke was actually made of particles of things such as asbestos, which, when inhaled, take quite some time to disappear from your lungs. Now, nobody could’ve predicted that this would happen, so nobody is guilty, until right after the buildings collapsed. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) was able to convince everybody that the thick black haze of particulate matter that was floating around the city was of no danger to anybody’s health. What they should’ve done was evacuate everybody from the city, or at least the area around the world trade centers until a real investigation into the composition of the smoke could be made.

Since then, there are a large number of people who have what could be called the “9/11 cough”, many of them firefighters who risked their lives to save other people, and who were not told of the dangers of inhaling the smoke. About the other 9/11 conspiracy, I’m afraid I have nothing to say at the moment
Jul 15th
At this point, it seems that the music legend, Michael Jackson, has his death shrouded in mystery. The original cause of death was supposed to be cardiac arrest; not an impossible affliction for a fifty-year-old. However, new details have emerged about “needle-marks” on Jackson’s neck and arms. These may or may not have been used to administer the drug called “Demerol” to him, which is a pain reliever. This medication may have had a role to play in his cardiac arrest, which would pit some of the blame on his doctors. However, the doctors can not know about every possible side effect of every possible drug. The human body has so many variables, so many parts dependent on each other…that to predict the effect of one drug on the whole body is next to impossible. Thus, this line of trying to pit the death of Michael Jackson on his doctor as a murder is highly suspect. However, one must never stop questioning the facts, and although unlikely, there is always the possibility of foul play in anything.
Jul 6th
After many years of thinking about the subject of cycles and their relevancy to human affairs, I believe that I have come to a simple conclusion. No civilization can last forever; it will, eventually and certainly, crumble underneath the weight of the very populace that supports it. Take the Mayan civilization for example. There is a great deal still unknown about that great and sprawling kingdom, but despite its size and relatively high level of scientific power, it still fell, and its culture and traditions fell with it. Take the ancient Greeks and Romans, with their huge empires, great armies, luxurious cities (at the time), and a general quality of life unparalleled by any other civilizations. Once again, they are nowhere to be seen; all that’s left are crumbling monuments, testaments to their achievements. Although it was quickly obvious that civilizations in the past had disappeared, it was not as obvious why…
These civilizations were on different continents, had vastly different cultures, traditions, gods, architecture, foods, etc, but they collapsed nonetheless. So it could not have been something specific like this that could have destroyed them. As I pondered on the issue, my mind wandered towards biology, and a discussion I had with my physics teacher (yes, physics teacher, about biology…it will make sense). He said that he could not understand how dinosaurs such as the brontosaurus, brachiosaurus, and all those huge long-necked herbivores could even stand up, at which point somebody in our class asked (me) “but don’t they have more muscle when they get bigger”. He answered, “yes, but if they get double the size, their weight increases as a function of their volume, while their strength does not increase at that rate”. So, in other words, if an organism gets twice as large, that means it will become more than twice as heavy, but it’s muscular strength will not increase more than two times. So at some point, an organism with conventional muscular structure will become too weak to carry its own weight. However, the dinosaurs were able to carry their own weight for millions of years, so my physics teacher believed that the Earth was not as big back then, thus, it would not have as much gravity, therefore, organisms could grow larger before being too heavy to hold themselves up.

On another, somewhat related note, cells also have this problem, but instead of mass being the troublemaker, it is surface area. You see, as a cell, which we will consider to be a sphere, becomes larger, its surface area does not rise at the same rate. Thus, at some point, the cell will become so large that its surface, which is used for absorbing nutrients and minerals, will not be able to support the vast city of organelles within the cell. Unlike an organism, however, the cell has a trick up its sleeve; it can split! So the cell splits its volume in half, and the surface area of the cell membrane (the wall around the cell), is now adequate for the volume of the cell.
So what in blazes does this have to do with civilization? I’m glad you asked! As a civilization gets larger, it gets more and more people, but its “surface area”, the resources present on the land they occupy cannot multiply at the rate of the population. Slowly, the natural renewal of resources is overtaken by the consumption of the population, and eventually it runs out, and everybody dies… Sad, but for the most part, true. These old civilizations some of the first to become so large could not have known the risk of exponential population growth without exponential territorial gain. To support a large population, you need an even larger land mass to grow crops and raise livestock. Once you have exhausted your available land, you must upgrade your agricultural techniques to the highest level to be able to get the most out of the land. After that, you’re on the road to the downfall of your civilization.
Now, in our current day and age, the whole world is the land mass, and everybody in it is pretty much one global civilization what with imports and exports, shipping across the oceans and all that. We have oil coming from the middle-east, cars coming from Japan, and oranges coming from California. At this point, we are told oil is running out, and that we must move to renewable sources of energy, and this is true. However, we must also work to foster peace between all nations of the Earth and cooperate as the human race as a whole, rather than individual nations. Now, don’t go around saying I want global government, because I don’t. The best governments would be individual, small governments for regions not bigger than the state of Kansas. That way, there is as much micromanagement of land as possible, and there can be a better web of cooperation between smaller regions; resources can get to where they need to be, when they need to be there.
There is one more factor that must be addressed; climate change. Although I have contested the cause in previous articles, there is undoubtedly climate change going on. This will cause climate zones, where specific crops can be grown, to be shuffled around. If we can keep on top of this changing, farms can shift their crops without much of a hitch, but once again, international cooperation is imperative.
We have numerous failed civilizations from whose mistakes we can learn. We must not make the same errors. I hope you enjoyed the article
Christopher