因果 - 過去

最近發現，雖然未來嘅因果應該係先因後果，但過去嘅因果用先果後因會比較make sense。

只有「現在」係無可置疑嘅真實，所以先有而家嘅果，再倒推返過去嘅因，似乎係唯一選項。

用呢個方法去理解啲非唯物非客觀世界講嘅過去嘅因果，基本上可以係好似《虛構推理》嗰種故事創作，睇下邊個可以將過去發生嘅事，點解今日會變成咁，講到一個好聽得嚟又合理嘅故仔。

Brussels sprouts

 一時興起喺超市買咗一包 Brussels sprouts 

唔知係本身佢唔特別苦定點，我用啲類近中式煮法，i.e. 油鹽糖去調味，感覺同芥蘭差唔多咁苦，同樣嘅手方應該可以抵消啲苦味。

所以我而家好懷疑啲鬼佬煮 Brussel's sprouts 嘅方法都係有問題嘅，好地地用油炒兩下唔得，係都要擺入焗爐乾蒸，將啲苦味濃縮咗先安樂。 🤮

Anyway 遲啲可以正式試下中式炒 Brussels sprouts。 (當然係要將佢一嚿嚿菜切返片啦，唔通真係成嚿攞去炸咩。)

動態書

我就嚟相信啲書嘅內容都係動態根據我嘅狀況變出嚟㗎喇⋯

眉心

近排眉心好似冇咁大壓力

唔知係咪花咗大半個月寫program嘅原故.....

New theories on the horizon?

If the prophecies are true, the age of the dialectic, where contradicting ideas clash to form boundaries, must be over. There must be a totally new theory arising from the recognition that boundaries are imaginary constructs, and truth flows freely without bound.

And the implications are vast. We humans today do not know how to form coherent thought systems without having conflicting forces turn on each other -

Capitalism -> competition, race to the bottom economics;

Biology -> survival of the fittest;

Law -> adversarial system;

Politics -> adversarial elections;

Education -> systematic gatekeeping of students through examinations

[...]

(And maybe Maths.... law of excluded middle?)

Over-reliance on ideas like law of excluded middle gets us into these zero-sum situations where we are essentially set up to attack one another. We need more "why not both?" mindsets.

I might be too old to conceive of how things could possibly work without some kind of competition and survival of the fittest mindset. I hope to live long enough to witness the solution though.

---

And I wrote a reply (to a reply of the above) that seems even more interesting so I'll save it here as well:

To be perfectly honest I do have an idea of what those new theories might look like. One possibility is some way to get a good answer without going through a process of computing (which is, essentially, the process of battling things out whether physically or informationally). This implies P=NP=O(1+output).

It's my intuition that "why are there seemingly lower bounds for computation, although we basically can't prove them?" is a fundamentally deep problem that involves more than thinking very hard about logic systems that we invented ourselves.

But how is this actually possible (in practice)? That's the part I don't think I'll be able to figure out...

That said, it's very important to realize that not being able to figure out how something works, doesn't mean it can't work. We haven't figured out how our brain works, but nobody is seriously suggesting that we can't think with our brains... so yeah. Stuffs are possible as long as we admit we don't know shit.

ACIM x 道家

估唔到 ACIM 可以讀到《老子》嘅味道。

得閒補啲例子

道沖而用之或不盈。淵兮似萬物之宗。挫其銳，解其紛，和其光，同其塵。湛兮似或存。吾不知誰之子，象帝之先。

何謂貴大患若身？吾所以有大患者，為吾有身，及吾無身，吾有何患？故貴以身為天下，若可寄天下；愛以身為天下，若可託天下。

有物混成，先天地生。寂兮寥兮，獨立不改，周行而不殆，可以為天下母。吾不知其名，字之曰道，強為之名曰大。大曰逝，逝曰遠，遠曰反。故道大，天大，地大，人亦大。域中有四大，而人居其一焉。人法地，地法天，天法道，道法自然。

知其雄，守其雌，為天下谿。為天下谿，常德不離，復歸於嬰兒。知其白，守其黑，為天下式。為天下式，常德不忒，復歸於無極。知其榮，守其辱，為天下谷。為天下谷，常德乃足

道常無為而無不為。侯王若能守之，萬物將自化。化而欲作，吾將鎮之以無名之樸。無名之樸，夫亦將無欲。不欲以靜，天下將自定。

天下之至柔，馳騁天下之至堅。無有入無間，吾是以知無為之有益。不言之教，無為之益，天下希及之。

為學日益，為道日損。

天下有始，以為天下母。既得其母，以知其子，既知其子，復守其母，沒身不殆。

吾言甚易知，甚易行。天下莫能知，莫能行。言有宗，事有君。夫唯無知，是以不我知。知我者希，則我者貴。

十年

如果唔係呢十年努力學習略有所成，真係睇唔明嚟緊嘅嘢。

但有時亦係有少少無奈，啲嘢睇嚟睇去，一係幾年前就諗通咗，一係就完全唔撚明⋯