F-theory Bottom-up Phenomenology

Sorry, this isn't really about theoretical physics. ;-)



(image borrowed from http://www.geocities.com/comicpostcards/BigButt.html)

Truth In Advertising

Here I Go Again

... spouting off about things I probably don't understand...

The law of diminishing returns and fractional-reserve banking

I've been trying to figure out how exactly our world has come to this global financial crisis. A lot of people are blaming Capitalism. A lot of people are blaming Greed. A lot of people are blaming Bush. And a lot of other people are blaming a lot of other things. I've done a bit of blaming too. ;-)

While it's pretty clear that greed, corruption, and irresponsibility are very big parts of this problem, I have to wonder why it was so easy for those things to take control. A lot of people blame "deregulation" and the "free market." Well, I guess you can try to regulate away some of the bad motives and poor choices of people, but after all these thousands of years of civilization it's apparent that man-made regulations and rules don't always work.

And in a truly free market the bad things would fail anyway because the benefits of the cheating, etc., always follow the law of diminishing returns, and also because people would eventually figure out who are the corrupt people and would not give them their business. Of course, we have to have some way of keeping all the bad guys from getting together and creating mafias and such, but in reality it probably could be argued that even mafias are better managed than many government entities. ;-)

Anyway, it is wrong to say that greed and corruption are inherent qualities of Capitalism. I think looking at history will show us that greed and corruption occur in all kinds of systems, probably in close-to-equal proportions. Greed is not the same thing as desiring a fair profit from hard work. On the other hand, greed could be defined as not wanting someone else to have a fair profit from his hard work, as is a motivation of communistic systems because all people expect the same profit regardless of how hard they work themselves. Greed and jealousy are often the motives for desiring everyone to have "economic parity" because some people just can't accept that others will have more than they.

Well, all of that isn't really the point I want to make. I want to discover the source of all the bad decisions that led to the collapse of the global banking system. What it all boils down to is that all of these banks were lending more money than they actually had. The official name of that is "fractional-reserve banking." (Please click the link above so I don't have to spend time explaining it.) As a principle this "fractional-reserve" is not really a bad thing. It has many benefits. However, as with any other principle it has to be properly applied.

Let me go off on a tangent here about the law of diminishing returns. This is a perfectly natural law that is consistent with the reality and the Laws of Nature that shape reality. All systems have some entropy. Economies are not so special that they can break this law. Some "intellectual" economists apparently think it's okay and fine to drop the assumption of diminishing returns, and one of them has even been awarded a Nobel Prize.

I guess I'm not "intellectual" enough to see how that is worthy of any prizes. It seems pretty dumb to me because it looks about the same as some physicists deciding to drop the second law of thermodynamics in order to make their calculations add up. Incidentally, there actually are some physicists who try to do this and even try to say that we can reverse the arrow of time. Will this be the next big idea in Economics?*

Okay, back to the fractional-reserve. Somehow someone decided that it was a good idea for banks to lend out 10 times as much as their capital. I suspect that they are using similar methods and calculations as the previously mentioned Nobelist, and honestly, I just don't think it takes a genius to see that extending an order of magnitude of credit will result is some serious, exponential problems down the line. It would be much more realistic and less problematic to select a much lower amount than "times 10."

I mean, Lord have mercy, what kind of retarded idiot is going to believe that the Universe is going to magically unfold so that he suffers no losses from being completely unrealistic? Who was the dumbass who said that it was a good idea for banks to lend so much more than they have? I really want to know. He needs to be spanked very hard and possibly even imprisoned for being so stupid and causing this global meltdown. It does not take a genius to figure out that if you lend $10 for every $1 you actually possess it won't take long for it all to catch up with you, even if you're charging interest. (Unless you are in a mafia which breaks the legs of people who don't pay back their loans.) ;-)

Again, I want to say that the problem is not with banks and capitalism, per se. It is with the bad ideas and bad policies and bad practices that they've operated under. Somebody decided that these things would make the economies grow and make everyone rich and happy, or at least themselves rich and happy. But you know what? It was all an illusion and alchemy based on some dummies deciding that they have the power to overcome the very Laws of Nature.

Surely it must be apparent enough to everyone in the world who is witnessing our global banking failures to see and agree that ignoring the law of diminishing returns is just begging for disaster. Come on. It just doesn't take a genius to see how that works out.


*Okay, so here's my Nobel-worthy Economics idea. ;-) Let's just say "hocus-pocus" and turn back the arrow of time and erase all debt. Then we can just start all over again. But next time let's not drop the assumption of diminishing returns and let's not lend (or borrow) 10 times more than what we can afford. :-)

Dear Paris Hilton,

Actually, I kind of like your reply to McCain because it is pretty funny:

See more Paris Hilton videos at Funny or Die

But I feel I must inform you of a couple of things. First, you're not old enough to be President. The Constitution (you should Google it) states that one must be at least 35 years old to be President, so you and your choice of VP don't quite make it. Second, and please don't hate me for saying this, you really aren't that hot. You're really kind of ugly, in the face anyway. If you weren't super-rich with all kinds of people fixing your hair and makeup and all that, then you'd be a basic girl with no great beauty. In other words, your beauty is totally artificial. Which actually is a lot like most politicians. ;-)

Okay, so maybe saying that doesn't endear me to you, but if you are going into politics you'll have to develop a very tough skin. However, I have an offer for you. If you back me, financially and socially, as a Presidential candidate (at 40 I am definitely old enough) then I will make you the official White House decorator/interior designer because I actually do like the idea of painting the White House pink. :-) Plus, you do seem to have a decent sense of humor and that goes a long way towards overcoming your faults and conceits.

Please think about this offer. I have some very good, practical ideas about how to straighten out most of the problems in our country, but I just need some money help getting those ideas put into action.

Sincerely,

Rae Ann aka Vicious Momma

Phallic Clams

While checking my statcounter this morning I found that my Unusual Fossil post was linked in this forum. The following photos from that forum are quite impressive. I didn't know about these phallic "Geoduck" clams:

Sizzlin' Nuggets

Blue Q makes the cutest things. I got a pack of this "Boss Lady" gum the last time I visited my friend in North Carolina. Here are pictures of the entire package.



If I were a dominatrix, the cowgirl get-up might be my thing. Chew'em up and spit'em out. With a little help from Snappy. ;-)



I love the attention to detail in this printed reverse side of the packaging. Isn't this Boss Lady Country a fun little map? The tied up bundles of men and the running guys are so cute. ;-)




I also got this "Next to the Last Supper" gum. Well, maybe it's a sin, but the Bonus Shroud (printed inside) really cracks me up:



If you've ever seen a guy with a huge wad of chewing tobacco in his cheek like that you might find it even funnier. It's part of the baseball symbolism of the "trading card" theme, because baseball players have been known for their chewing tobacco.

Good Old Days

Area Senior Remembers A Simpler Time When His Anus Didn't Leak

CARSON CITY, NV—Once, movies were a quarter, soda pop only cost a nickel, and Hank Fletcher's sphincter was strong enough to expand and contract when he intended.

Jib Jab's 2007 Review

glumbert - In 2007

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

Please accept my apologies. I'm afraid that the recent heat wave of record-breaking proportions (by one or two degrees in reality) is entirely my fault. No, it's not because I drive an SUV approximately 32 miles a day. ;-) The real reason is because I am absolutely burning up inside and all that heat has to go somewhere or it might literally cook my insides. This is probably some pre-menopausal red giant phase which will eventually end in collapse into a smaller, cooler white dwarf phase. So just bear with me as we all suffer through it. It won't last forever. I'm not sure if there is any way of "stopping" it or reducing its intensity. Perhaps we should set a challenge, in the tradition of fairy tale heroes, to find a solution to redirect or absorb this heat? Please feel free to offer suggestions, except to kill me because that wouldn't work anyway since that would cause me to blow up into a supernova and destroy everything. ;-)

Thanks for your understanding. And really, I am terribly sorry for all this discomfort and am wishing for some real relief soon.

Sincerely,

Rae Ann aka Vicious Momma

What the World Needs Now

"... is love, sweet love..." Uh, nope. That's not really what I was going to say. I was going to say, "What the world needs now is a conservative female dictator."

That's right. ;-)

Today I've been told that fascism is an inherently leftist philosophy. When did they change that definition? I hate this postmodern crap. My pre-postmodern education which ended 21 years ago told me that fascism isn't necessarily "left" or "right". It can be either. But apparently because recent fascists have been socialists of some variety it has been decided that fascism is necessarily "leftist." Whoda thunk it?

Well, let's play that postmodern game for a minute. Let's give them some new evidence so they can change their definition again, back to its orginal, non-"handed" meaning.

I would be a perfect conservative, "rightist," fascist dictator. Give me that power and I'll prove it. ;-) I could easily crush that notion that fascism is inherently "leftist" or socialist. And actually, I think that is exactly what the world needs about right now. A conservative female fascist. A Vicious Momma to rule the world. ;-) I could whip, scold, scorn, reprimand, and time-out (imprison) everyone into better behavior. There are too many people running around these days who have never known real punishment. That's what's wrong with the world. I could change that. Yes, I do think that is what the world needs now.



"Ironman" by Black Sabbath as played on the game Guitar Hero. My eleven year old has this game and has played this song for me, but this isn't his video.

The other day AOL had a poll asking what Hillary's campaign theme song should be. I didn't look or think about it because I didn't have time and then got sick. Maybe she should use this song. It's pretty catchy. ;-)

A Love Child?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad born 10-28-1956

Donald Rumsfeld born 7-9-1932

Does anyone know if Rumsfeld visited Iran in early 1956? I've always been intrigued by their similar faces and expressions. Both are beady-eyed, and my mom always said that you couldn't trust beady-eyed men.

Falling Down (or live and let die 2)

"Is it me, or has Snow White developed an attitude lately?"


See, even Show White is fed up. :-) Comic orginally published in June 2002 Better Homes and Gardens magazine. Sorry for the "bleed through" of the opposite page.

Remember the 1993 movie Falling Down? It was about a guy who flipped out because of all the stupidity around him. Kind of like deciding to Live and Let Die.

Well, welcome to the bitchfest. Protective gear is recommended, and I can't be held responsible for "collateral damage." ;-)


Political Correctness Disclaimer: You must feel sorry for me and indulge my digression from rationality and niceness as I am a victim - a poor downtrodden minority who has suffered much abuse. That, and I've got a "mental condition" and might even be "autistic." But don't worry, I've got respect for SUVs. ;-)

Pork Roast

Allow me to apologize for the delay in getting this Pork Roast done. It takes an awful long time to roast a whole hog, and this is my first time doing that so, of course, it took even longer than average to get it done. Actually, it was first started way back last September but was left to "cure" for all these months. So sorry, too, if it's a little tough or otherwise unpalatable. ;-)

However, the timing is now even better since we can also take this as an opportunity to celebrate the Chinese Year of the Fire Pig (burn, baby, burn! lol).

And on top of that we could make this a kind of dinner theater in conjunction with CIP's fun story, The Easterner.

Oh, and one last note. Since pork isn't Kosher then consume at your own risk. ;-)

The 7 Commandments are abridged for the last time, simply reading, "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others."

George Orwell, Animal Farm

CapitalistImperialistPig did a post last year "Self Evident Truths" that pretty well sums up his porcine flavor.

His concoction doesn't agree with me so allow me to serve up my own alternative recipe. To start here is the first part of the Declaration of Independence:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

First off, cip skipped that first paragraph. The following is a very important omission in his case:

...to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...

That's a big set-up for the "self evident truths" and "inalienable rights". The Forefathers are establishing that there are indeed "separate and equal" positions that are determined by Nature and God. What that means is that all people are equal no matter who they are, what characteristics they have, or whatever things separate them. The plumber's value is the same as the doctor's value even though they have been endowed with different skills, interests, etc. that put them in different "stations" in life.

Unlike the aristocracy of England they did not accept that being born into a particular family made someone in any way superior or inferior. Also the Forefathers did not believe or assert that they were in some way superior, or even more equal ;-), to the aristocrats. They said they were separate and equal. You can also think of that as meaning 'different and equal'. They meant it as individuals as well as collectively. (and please, let's not get in a tizzy over the slavery issue because it was a sociological error and has been mostly resolved, and this is my feast and that subject isn't welcome, thank you)

CIP goes into something about 'ordinary truths' and 'great truths' and how these "self evident truths" are 'great truths', but I'm not sure I understand the rhetorical difference between them. He said:

Ordinary truths, said Bohr, are statements whose opposites are false, whereas great truths, are distinguished by the circumstance that their opposites are also great truths.

Maybe I'm just dumb or lack some imagination at the moment, but that just doesn't make sense to me. Anyway, I think the "self evident truths" are not determined by myself or himself but by themselves. They are the truths that are determined by "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God." I need a good example of a law of nature that qualifies as one of Bohr's "great truths" that is true and opposite at the same time. Or is that Bohr's odd way of saying that it is very Natural that there are "separate and equal" things?

Okay, I just looked it up found that the basis of Bohr's idea is his "principle of complementarity: that items could be separately analyzed as having several contradictory properties. For example, physicists currently conclude that light is both a wave and a stream of particles — two apparently mutually exclusive properties — on the basis of this principle." (wikipedia) That sounds pretty close to "separate/different and equal" to me. ;-)

But, CIP, I also found that Bohr said that the opposite of a great or profound truth might be another great or profound truth. That "might" and the other differences in wording do make a difference, just as different ingredients can't always be substituted in a recipe. And I'm glad I looked that up for some clarification because it sure didn't sound like something that Bohr would say the way that CIP presented it.

Let's move on to the great truths:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Those "great and self evident truths" are that

1) all men are created equal (by virtue of the Laws of Nature and Nature's God, and 'equal' can be 'different' and 'separate'),

2) they are endowed by their Creator (or Nature) with certain unalienable Rights including Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Unalienable Rights are not only Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness but include those, but I don't think there is any way to interpret that as saying that unalienable rights are negotiable.

If you apply Bohr's idea, as CIP tells it, to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness what happens? You get what CIP did. He degenerated into a rant about some aristocratic elite in control of the country and other mostly indecipherable things. Just like when a recipe goes wrong. Why is it his application of Bohr's idea failed in this case? Because he took a wrong turn in his calculations or he flubbed up his recipe:

Great truths are subject to the "Tinker Bell" effect. Their power can endure only as long as people believe in them.

Actually, that is probably a good summary of the Liberal Outlook on Life (L.O.L., lol). They would like to believe that the Laws of Nature, or the real "great truths" and therefore "self evident truths" can somehow become untruths or opposites or 'separate but not equal' just by refusing to accept them. Well, that's about as satisfying as a Tofurkey on Thanksgiving Day instead of a nice baked ham.

Remember I what I said a little ways up? 'Anyway, I think the "self evident truths" are not determined by myself or himself but by themselves. They are the truths that are determined by "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God."' If they are really "great truths" they will be true and powerful regardless of people's belief or non-belief in them.

Why is it so hard for Liberals to accept these Laws of Nature? 'Equality' does not mean even more equal. 'Separate' does not mean even more equal. 'Different' does not mean even more equal.

(please note the dangerous weapon carried by the pig: a pitchfork, no less!)

Well, now back to Animal Farm. Let's recall that the pigs led the Animal Farm after the Great Animal Revolt, and it didn't take long for them to start changing the Seven Commandments to suit their needs. Hmmm, doesn't that sound just like:

... the "Tinker Bell" effect. Their power can endure only as long as people believe in them

So here we are with the piggish thinking. They had no "great truths." They only applied the rules to everyone else and not themselves. Sounds just like a pig sty, doesn't it?



The Pigs became the new elite aristocracy because they didn't truly believe in equality for all. They only believed in themselves. The lived by the "Tinker Bell" philosophy of changeable truths. Not "self evident truths" or "great truths." They didn't respect the differences in the animals that separated them. They saw these differences as reasons to oppress and mistreat the others. They clearly had no understanding of the "separate but equal" aspects of Nature.

And it's quite apparent that CapitalistImperialistPig is not any different from any other Pigs. Except that now he has been roasted! ;-)

By the way, I must assure all that I wasn't the one who put the Big Pig on the spit, a job much too demanding of my stature. I asked some of my scary hillbilly buddies to take care of that for me. ;-) Funny thing, while they were working at it I did hear the tune Duelling Banjos playing. And I think I even heard one of them saying something about making pigs squeal.... Weeeeeee! Weeeeee! ;-)

Warning: Only those with very strong stomachs should click that last link. Trust me.


Side note: Apparently, the smell of roasted pork in the air has some pigs in Washington on the warpath. ;-)

Chimerical Mail Time

Dear Rae Ann,

Don't you think you're being hypocritical to accuse William Oefelein of playing a "wicked game" when you are guilty of flirting with men online?

Officially,
The Flirtation Police

Dear Flirtation Police,

Well, that's alltogether different because I don't know any of them in "real life". And I have it from a reliable source that the "e-world" is most definitely not the same as the "real world." Besides, Oefelein seemed to be involved in a simple, ordinary Euclidean love triangle, but I have no desire for such a thing as that. Oh, no. I would require something more like a very complex and multidimensional love Calabi-Yau manifold. ;-)

Sincerely,
Rae Ann


Hi Rae Ann,

How in the world did you get all mixed up with a bunch of scientists, especially physicists?

Curious but not Britney Spears

Hi Curious but not Britney Spears,

I hope you are wearing underwear. ;-) To be totally honest, and I promise I'm not saying this just because everyone involved in the Scooter Libby trial is saying it, I don't remember. Really, I don't. What I do recall is that at some point in 2005 I stumbled upon CapitalistImperialistPig's blog. I can't remember if I got there by clicking "next blog" while browsing, or if his blog was listed on the Blogger Dashboard as "recently updated", or if I got there in some other way. But I'm not completely certain that was the true introduction into the physics blogosphere because it seems I had somehow stumbled upon Lubos Motl's Reference Frame prior to finding CIP. But, again, I really can't recall exactly. Sorry. I wish I could remember exactly.

Thanks for asking anyway,
Rae Ann


Dear Vicious Momma,

I've heard that your views on Hillary have "softened". What's up with that? Are you becoming a lilly-ass liberal?

Say it ain't so,
A Concerned Conservative

Dear Concerned Conservative,

It ain't so... I'm most definitely not becoming a lilly-ass liberal. Maybe I'm just getting older and a little less vicious? Hillary is still much too socialist for me, but I have to admit that I do admire her strength and confidence. Her joke about "bad, evil men" was hilarious and I never assumed she was referring (only) to her husband. That's what makes a great joke, when it can have many levels of meaning. But don't make the mistake of thinking that because she can tell a funny joke is why my view has "softened." Her remaining relatively strong in her support for the military is a point in her favor, but if she starts that John Edwards style waffling (he must have learned well from his time with Kerry) she will lose all credibility with me. If she wants to appeal to the more conservative voters she must be consistent. I don't think it would be a disaster if she became President, at least not as much of a disaster as with any of the other Democratic candidates. My biggest concern with her as President would be her husband being in the White House again. I think it would be wise for her to keep him out of the White House as much as possible, especially away from the interns. Really, if you boil it down, Bill Clinton is Hillary's biggest detriment and liability, and not just because of his wayward tendencies.

Hope that helps,
A Kinder, Gentler Momma ;-)

Sedentary Living and Global Warming

I just got a laugh from this article about a new, serious disease that is even recognized by the World Health Organization:

Get Moving!

(by Carol Krucoff)

Professor Frank Booth, Ph.D, was out for his daily run one spring morning in 2000, pondering one of the toughest problems facing public health officials these days: how to get the nearly 70 percent of Americans who don't regularly exercise to start moving.

"Everyone knows exercise is good for them, but many don't realize it's a matter of life and death," says Dr. Booth, who teaches biomedical science at the University of Missouri-Columbia. "My father was in advertising, so I know how important a short, catchy name is to grab people's attention and change the way they think and behave. Running always helps my creativity, and the name Sedentary Death Syndrome just popped into my head."

Sedentary Death Syndrome (SeDS) may be a little too scientific to be catchy. But it needs to catch on. Because what it means, says Dr. Booth, is that "inactivity kills."

Dead Man Sitting
In fact, sitting kills more than 300,000 Americans annually. If it were a real disease, that would make SeDS the third leading cause of death in the United States, right after heart disease and cancer. But SeDS is more than one disease. Being sedentary is linked to a wide range of debilitating ailments -- from diabetes and depression to osteoporosis, certain cancers, and even sexual dysfunction. It affects nearly three out of four adults and a growing number of children and is projected to cost the United States $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years.

Though it's not yet a household word, the SeDS concept has caught on with a growing number of exercise scientists. Dr. Booth used his own money to start "Researchers against Inactivity-Related Disorders," or RID, an organization advocating governmental support for research into the disorders associated with sedentary living. A founding group of 40 RID members unveiled the concept of SeDS on Capitol Hill in 2001. Today, the group has more than 400 members in 19 countries.

(Just sitting around is apparently a worldwide phenomenon. Last year, the World Health Organization announced that about 2 million deaths annually worldwide are attributed to sedentary lifestyles and chose physical activity as the theme for World Health Day.)

Uh, yeah, I think the most revealing phrase in the entire article is "RID, an organization advocating governmental support for research into the disorders associated with sedentary living." We all know what "advocating governmental support for research" means: we want money, money, money! Oh, boy, someone has discovered a new source of pork-spending. They've created a new lobbying group disguised as doctors and researchers concerned for the health of all the people sitting on their asses (writing blogs and reading blogs and stuff, ;-) ). But the real truth of it is that this is just like the global warming scare that some people have created and perpetuated for their own job security and wealth. This new "SeDS" group is taking a page right out of the global warming playbook and working to create a huge public health scare.

I mean, this could be a scary statement for some people: "sitting kills more than 300,000 Americans annually." Wow! Just from sitting. ;-) If this isn't some kind of alarmist scare tactic like Gore saying that we have about ten years until the Earth is uninhabitable unless we all immediately go back to living like in the Dark Ages (well, except for him and all the other "important" people, just like when the Communist leaders lived in luxury while the "people" lived in poverty). And then get this, "[sedentary living] is projected to cost the United States $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years." Trillion. They really have set their sights pretty high, haven't they? These are some high maintenance "researchers" who must have some big mortgage payments to think about. ;-)

Unfortunately, there is some grain of truth to this "SeDS" in that our lifestyles have changed and some people apparently aren't adapting too well to those changes. But this grain of truth gets turned into a mountain just like the way a warm winter gets turned into climate change. Is this really something that can be fixed? I'm kind of thinking that on the larger societal scale, no, it's not something that can be eliminated like small pox, unless someone invents a perfect health pill and/or instates the Health Police. (actually, the Health Police are already trying that with the no smoking laws and now the no transfat laws some cities are passing)


The Health Police were too late for this fella.
Photo found on this hilarious site: Pushin Daisies: a mortuary novelty shop, though it looks like this particular item is no longer available, oddly enough.

Besides, I really question some of their "facts" about what really makes people unhealthy and kills them. I keep hearing about all these famous athletes getting cancer and bad arthritis and all the same things that regular people get. Yeah, all that healthy eating and exercise didn't keep them from getting sick, did it?

Just look at the commercials on TV. There's another key to this story: poor health is big business. We are constantly being told that we are depressed, full of mucus, impotent, too fat, allergic to everything, sleepless, asthmatic, hypertensive, full of cholestrol, and have acid reflux, ADHD and enlarged prostates (men) and leaky bladders (women). But all we have to do to get better is take these expensive pills. Now seriously, are we supposed to believe that this "RID" group really wants to kill their cash cow? I see right through their ruse.

Another big money maker for doctors is colon cancer screening.* I remember the day when it was only the unethical and seedy doctors who advertised their services (but never on tv because tv ads are expensive), but now all the big practices have their pseudo public service ads telling us we all must go pay them (or if you're lucky your insurance will pay them) to stick a camera up our butts or we will die of colon cancer. Scare tactics, again.

And there is a part of me that asks why we should be trying to keep all these people alive longer anyway, especially if the world is becoming overpopulated with couch/computer potatoes who drive their gas-guzzling SUVs to the Dunkin Donuts for a 60 pack of donut holes and a dozen jelly-filled. ;-) Well, of course, the answer is that we must do as much as possible to keep filling up the doctors' and researchers' and lawyers' pockets.

I have to wonder if this isn't a matter that will take care of itself. Just like the climate.



*Hold onto your stones. There's no need to throw them. I know the seriousness of colon cancer and that screening can save lives. Thank you.

TMI Tuesday Sermonette

warning: for those who are very sensitive, please know that this post contains potentially blasphemous and shocking statements

Yes, this is Wednesday, but I started this last night so the title stands.

The other night I was thinking about why this time of year is so difficult and this thought occurred to me. God-centered religion has really harmed women a lot over the ages and it becomes most apparent at this time of year.

Christmas is the celebration of Christ's birth. We celebrate the arrival of the baby. But somehow it is ignored that birth also involves a woman. Well, you can't give birth to anyone without a mother. The Protestants, especially Fundamentalists, completely ignore that messiness of birth in their celebrations. Well, I've got news for them:

Jesus came out of Mary's VAGINA!

(I was wallowing in my misery, and by God, I think I found a little bit of my missing humor. Sometimes you have to get real cozy and familiar with your misery so you'll learn something from it. Hell, just dive into it and swim. You might find some of those things that sank to the bottom and were lost. Sometimes I dream that I can breathe under water. It's weird, but cool.)

Okay, so Christmas is as much a mother's holiday as anything else, whether you like to admit it or not. And we all know that in most families it is the mother who assures that Christmas happens at all. We do most of the shopping, decorating, and all that. It's a lot of work that goes mostly unnoticed and unappreciated, unless there is some disaster and someone doesn't get what they asked for. Well, then, it's all Mom's fault for not finding it, and never mind all the other crap she did get you. This is what happens when you take the mother out of birth and just celebrate the child. The children get spoiled! And the mothers become downtrodden.

People say, "Jesus is the Reason for the Season." Well, sure, but he wouldn't have gotten here without his mother. Someone should invent a new slogan for the holiday that celebrates Motherhood and the pains that mothers go through to bring their children into the world and also the pains that mothers go through to make their children happy. Sorry, I'm not feeling especially inventive right now. If it were up to me the new slogan would be "Jesus came from Mary's vagina." But I really don't think that will catch on too well.

Now, before any self-righteous nincompoop gets their panties or boxers or briefs or whatever in a wad, just consider this: Ten years ago my mother was dying - wasting away with cancer during that holiday season. The tenth anniversary of her death is just a few days after Christmas. So allow me a little expression of mourning and if that expression takes the form of blasphemy I think God will forgive me whether anyone else will or not. And that's the point of Jesus coming out of Mary's vagina in the first place, right?

So I miss my mother and it's very sad to me that two of my children never met her and will only know her from pictures and stories. It really kind of SUCKS. And the holiday season which is as much a reminder of motherhood as you can invent is pretty painful for me. I don't expect anyone else to really understand because you can't until you've lost your own mother, but maybe if anyone actually reads this they'll see the holiday with a new perspective and appreciation for the women who keep the holidays coming every year.

And you know what, we all came out of our mothers' vaginas. Well, except for those who were born via c-section, like my children. But still they came out of my body. Maybe that new slogan could be something like "Jesus came from Mary's belly." Yeah, that's not so bad.

And that is this week's sermonette. Hey, many churches have Wednesday night services, so there you go.

Physics Anonymous

Hi, I'm Rae Ann, and I'm addicted. And it's a problem.

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

It's time for a twelve-step recovery program:

1. Admit I am powerless over my addiction - that my life with it has become unmanageable.

Done. I'm powerless and my life is unmanageable.

2. Believe that a Power greater than myself could restore me to sanity

Done.

3. Decide to turn my will and my life over to the care of God as I understand God

From now on I surrender my life to the God of Cute Kittens.



4. Make a searching and fearless moral inventory of myself

Done. I've spoken of things I know nothing about. I've sinned against science and nature.

5. Admit to God, to myself and to another human being the exact nature of my wrongs

Done. The exact nature of my wrongs is that I've asked silly questions and made stupid comments and wasted the valuable time of serious scientists, possibly interfering with the advancement of their work.

6. Be entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character

Done. I'm ready. Entirely.

7. Humbly asked God to remove my shortcomings

Done. Please, God, take this compulsion away, make me know my limits, and make me a better kitten lover so that my natural sweetness can shine through.

8. Make a list of all persons I have harmed, and be willing to make amends to them all

Done. Lubos, Bee, Kea, Mahndisa, Louise, Nigel, Matti Pitkanen, Lee Smolin, and yes, even Peter Woit. If I've left anyone out, please tell me.

Too all: I'm offering to make amends for wasting your time, etc. I'm not sure what kind of amends would work, so you'll have to let me know.

9. Make direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others

Until I'm told otherwise, the only amends I know is to only think of cute kittens and keep my mouth shut.

10. Continue to take personal inventory and when wrong promptly admit it

Will do.

11. Seek through prayer and meditation to improve my conscious contact with God as I understand God, praying only for knowledge of God's will for me and the power to carry that out

Will do.

12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, try to carry this message to other addicts, and to practice these principles in all my affairs

Here, you have it.


I guess completing nine steps in 30 minutes is a good start. ;-) What cute kittens! I wish you could see them...

Because I'm Worth It

(I used to work for L'Oreal, by the way, in my pre-vicious momma life.)

There is a price for availability. Nothing is free. I've said this before, I think. As you might have noticed in the last post, Vicious Momma has a new rule. "No free rides- ass, grass, or gas." (that order is negotiable ;-) ) I've realized that I do an awful lot of things for "free" that many people get paid, often large sums, to do. So, I'm taking some advice from someone and raising my price. If there is a long line (and there is actually) then the price is too low. That is the principle upon which this advice was given. Well, hell, let's try it out and see if it works.

Anyway, I've been moping around lately needing some motherly nurturing. I need to go see my "hired mom" (counselor). I pay her $80 (thereabouts) to be motherly for 50 minutes. She gives support and good advice, just like my mom used to do. For whatever reasons (actually, the cost was one consideration because almost a thousand bucks a year is a lot of money) I haven't been maintaining my monthly appointments with her for probably most of this year, and I'm suffering for that.

She frequently has told me that I am worth more than I expect and she has wondered why I don't value myself more. Well, there's neither the time nor space to explain all of that right now. ;-) One day I surprised her. Our session was much more intense than usual because I finally lifted a different part of my mask and showed her a new mess underneath. She had no idea I hid such a chaotic wreckage of guilt and conflict. I hide it well sometimes, even when I'm supposed to be showing it. See, the fear is that even someone paid to look would be so annoyed, disturbed, horrified, bored, uninterested or whatever that they "quit" me. Actually, I think the fear of abandonment is the primary root of all insecurities and problems. Not sure who said that first. Maybe I'll look it up later.

In thinking about what today's sermonette would cover I decided to consult the great oracle box: the TV. Since I like to think that I'm 'attuned' to the underlying currents I thought I'd check and see what the TV preachers were talking about today. Well, wouldn't you know it? The first sermon I found was about value and self worth and all of that. Coincidence, you say? Heh, whatever.

I'm in a bit of a hurry today so I didn't listen too long to the sermon because I got the confirmation that I needed pretty quickly. And don't we all love when that happens? I sure do!

Anyway, this preacher was talking about how if we don't value ourselves then we are not valuing God. By hating or rejecting ourselves we are hating and rejecting God and all the things He has done for us. I missed the scriptures he used to back up his statements, but I've listened to this guy before and he's pretty good so I trust that he's not just blowing smoke. His basic point was that if God didn't value us then we wouldn't have all of this (life, the world, and so), and so in order to please God we should value ourselves, each other, and the world.

That jealous God of the Old Testament just wanted to be appreciated and recognized. Much like anyone else who does so much for "free." In trying to get man's attention he did many things, most notably, sending his Son to die for man's salvation. "For God so loved the world..." (John 3:16) In God's efforts to show us how much he values us he also realized that we humans tend not to value those things that are free. So he set one condition, or price, for our salvation. No more free rides, He said. You see, even God doesn't give free rides, so why should I? Indeed, there is a price for all of life. And if we don't value ourselves, no one else will.

I think I have an appointment to make soon... And that's today's Sunday Sermonette.


Afterthought: Like Stephen Hawking, I know the mind of God. And let me tell you, it's very interesting but only in finite portions. ;-)