Adinkra and Gnomon: The Necessary Bipartite Graph by Michael Jeub

double you tee eff?

Cheers LC

Good one Lawrence and well done Michael,

Your essay is obviously one of a highly technical nature that will take me weeks or even months to unravel, although I seemed to be having a feeling of deja vu with every sentence. I've had many days when every scientific paper had a similar read. Are you sure you didn't "borrow" any of this content?

Still, congratulations on a fine piece of work!

LMAO and ROTFL,

Dan

I agree -- like Finnegan's Wake and I Am The Walrus, people will be discussing this work for decades. Goo Goo Ga-Jeub!

How do you know all this stuff? I had google and wikipedia working overtime!

It will all become clear with "childish simplicity"in another dimension. Meanwhile let us wait to see the "eight magnificent sketches" - they are sure to explain something or other, or the other, perhaps even all the other ones too.

Or are we simply the victims of a hoax-cum-parody by a wanna-be Alan Sokal see this for example

Here's another paper from Michael Jeub, maybe it helps:

http://apps.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/scicache/753/scimakelatex.86556.Michael+Jeub.html

Dear Michael ,

I love your writing. It has a poetic flow to it and is full of gems. You said "The thought experiment continues to dominate every field of progress except that of education." So true that we are taught to assimilate and less often to think for ourselves.

You also said "What's inside your thick skull with two holes in it? What is on the outside being taken through those wondrous doors of perception. A dynamic chain of potentials..." This phrase mirrors my own personal journey of questioning and seeking answers about reality. It is such a profound question that I am surprised that it is not more commonly asked. It seems that most just accept without wonder the reconstruction somehow formed within the visual cortex but experienced as existing externally to the organism.

It is a complex piece of writing but delightful. I will take time to mine the treasure that I am able to comprehend within it. I am not a physics specialist so know little about M theory. I find "unpacking the whole" like an ode to M theory. Which means nothing to me on an emotional level as it is not a shared personal experience. Though it is curious to see another so enamored of what is for me, I believe, unfathomable.

I do hope that others take the time to read your writing. I shall certainly read it again, maybe many times. Best wishes Georgina.

Dear Michael ,

I would love to see the illustrations. I can not imagine them. Your essay makes me think of a magnificent Christmas pudding full of all sorts of ingredients thrown together for a potentiality satisfying but hugely indulgent and frivolous feast.

I am spending far too long looking for the unnoticed connections and riddles, and still coming across beautifully worded paragraphs in amongst others that I find incomprehensible. "Force is no longer equal to mass times acceleration, and pure energy is not so pure for it has somehow escaped like a prisoner into the darkness" referring to dark energy I imagine.

In the abstract it says a real philosophical blunder of immense proportions. M theory as an ultimate theory of everything is unleashed. I love "the predictive power of it will keep governments truthful and terrorists away,even if it is imprecise". The more I look the more I find. I must tear my self away, but I know I will not be able to resist the temptation to look some more.

Hi Michael, that anonymous was me again by the way. I forgot I was not signed in.

Best Regards. PS.The most thought provoking writing that I have read so far in this contest!

I should have said ...In the abstract it says "a real philosophical blunder of immense proportions." M theory as the unltimate theory of everything is unleashed...(My interpretation of the core of your essay)

It brings so many ideas together in a sometimes profound, sometimes poetic and sometimes numerous manner. Deliciously rich and creative. Well done.

Hi Michael,

I am curious about the title. By Adrinka do you refer to the geometric woven designs of African brocade cloth? Which communicate social thought,history philosophy and religion to those able to comprehend the language but being unfamiliar to most communicates nothing other than geometric pattern? Perhaps a metaphor for something both in plain sight but also obscured. As you are an artist I wonder if by Gnomon you refer to the Gnomon school of visual effects. "High end" computer graphics generation?

Michael,

As you can tell the fascination has not gone away. I notice that in the text you do actually refer Adrinka and Gnomon and have two references 5 and 6. I assume that if I dug out these texts they might shed some light on what exactly you are referring to.

Your reference to yourself as a human parser is nice. Considering your self as a processor of input information, breaking it down, digitizing it.

Are the fundamental purists laughing with your "childish simplicity" or a bit annoyed that you can make lighthearted fun of such serious business? I wonder.

Any art that captures the imagination or analytical mind and that compels the observer to spend time with it is good imo. Perhaps like other art it is the observer who in the end puts their own interpretation on to it and relates to it accordingly. It is easy to walk away from the mediocre or un extraordinary and not give it another thought on the other hand.

Hi Michael,

I have found your notes which make it a little more clear, here you again mention Adinkra but define Gnomon, a contraction apparently.I think you genuinely love this stuff.It is like musical composition or abstract visualization to you.

Is this your clavichord? harpsichordphoto/org/jeub A burton unfretted clavichord. Pretty. How many Michael Jeub's have constructed a clavichord? It sounds like a minority pass time to me. Do you play it? I have recently restored a piano. Individually restoring and replacing every hammer and dampener. It was unbelievably tedious and will not be done again!

Another thought if the alien kids are humanoid they might find the pioneer 10 diagrammatic representation more interesting.

Dear Michael,

It seems that you are leading us along a route that led to your own development as an M theorist, recalling introductions to mathematical and physics ideas. It is a somewhat historical but also autobiographical journey.I do not know if it is a non fiction or fabrication that makes an interesting collection of ideas brought together.

As the mathematics and physics referred to is largely obscure to the uninitiated it is bewildering unknown territory. Though the first half seems to be a developmental journey, the middle and end seems to be a celebration of M theory. Including outrageous optimism about its ability.Though if it keeps governments truthful and terrorists away how can we do without it!If as you say numerical topology is the only tool we have I am definitely without a paddle.

I can not agree when you say "I am a machine and so my reality is a machine." I do not think you refer to AI, since you mention the sympathetic and parasympathetic- which is the endocrine system, through which we have emotional responses. Though that may be your personal, subjective perspective. I think something mathematical may be rubbing off. I wrote numerous when I meant to say humorous in a previous post.It also occurs to me that if you are American you may mean foreign or outsider rather than extra terrestrial.

Whatever your intention, the diagrammatic representation of information does override the linguistic decoding requirement that can be a barrier to effective communication.The visual presentation of ideas does seem to be improving and multimedia presentaion is far more common than 30 years ago.Though I do not think we should shout our existence and ignorance to extraterrestrial intelligence I do remember seeing and admiring the diagramatic representaions sent into space, as a child.

Are you there watching us drown , like untrained rats in a water filled maze? Aware that we must keep swimming until the last note on the clavichord sounds, because there is no escape without a map. A diagrammatic representation to salvation from the icy glue ball. I might learn that maze as well as any rat that has gone before but expect to be drowned before I begin. Pushed down by the crowd or carried in the wrong direction.Are you a silent watcher? or just oblivious in creative bliss? in another part of the M theoretical multiverse entirely. Like an omnipresent but inaccessible God of this own Creation. Any body there? I want to see the sketches , please...

Georgina,

I'm afraid you've been duped. As a physics outsider, it is understandable. Mr. Jeub's essay is a work of art and not science. Taken as art it can be considered beautiful, with humor, with anger, or with a number of different emotions by those who view it. As art, in particular, as modern art often does, it represents the artist's commentary on the certain aspect of society, in this case, the physics community's continued academic and financial support of a field or fields that Mr. Jeub undoubtably considers dubious. He has a way with words, his vocabulary quite extensive, and his use of metaphor is thoroughly amazing, but his meaning, I can assure you, is one of ridicule rather than sincerity. I cannot doubt Mr. Jeub possesses a sincere distaste for the adoration that many in the physics community have endowed upon the String/M Theories, the multiverses, the time machines, the proclivity for mathematics over meaning; and perhaps academia in general, for it comes through with complete clarity to those of us who have read between the lines and looked past the vernacular and metaphor. I, for one, found his essay quite humorous, as much of his commentary, I was in agreement. For those who take serious the objects of Mr. Jeub's ridicule, they probably are in agreement with Lawrence's comment above, in the very least. Don't feel bad. It could have happened to anyone unfamiliar with the territory and it really is beautifully written. Mr. Jeub is unquestionably well educated to make all of the references he has made. Many of his comments are classic, such as:

"In an essay contest not unlike the present one, Euler describes monadists versus those who espouse divisibility in infinity. [1]"

or

"The thought experiment continues to dominate everyfield of progress except that of education. The philosophical attempts to elucidate theory are tortuous.[20]"

These are quite clever and completely hilarious when taken in Mr. Jeub's true tongue-in-cheek style of mockery and sarcasm. To those of us who got, and agreed with his humor, it really was hard to stop laughing.

Anonymous,

It is such as pity that you chose to be Anonymous here. Like most of the other respondents. Hedging your bets perhaps. I am guessing this is TH Ray since he not only replied to me but told me there was a reply here.

If you had actually read what I had written you would have seen that I was responding to MR Jeub's work as an artistic expression. I have commented on the poetry in the style of writing. Highlighted some of the more literary expressions that are unusual to find in a piece of science writing and the humour within it. Perhaps I did not see the same jokes as you but I still found parts amusing. I certainly was not laughing aloud and uncontrollably as you describe. As a work of art it is fascinating. As you seem to also agree. It also appeals to my analytical mind. It appears to be written in a language that I understand. It is English in a flowing poetic style. I am rather like a baby who has limited vocabulary but is "programmed" to learn and decode. Though it would take too long with dictionary and search engine to unravel it completely.

You are right It is not clear to me whether Mr Jeub is an M theorist or is fabricating a fiction full of obscure ideas. As someone with a background in science writing you have the advantage. I have said above "I do not know if it is a non fiction or fabrication that makes an interesting collection of ideas brought together."

Mr Jeub has unfortunately not responded so has not explained the intention of this work himself.I have tried to reach out to him using both direct conversation and poetry.I have tried to ascertain Michael Jeub's intention by questioning what he is. I have said "Are you watching us drown like untrained rats in a water filled maze"... Perhaps that slipped you by . Meaning are you cruelly torturing the uninitiated with something very complex that they will not decipher. I also said "an omnipresent but inaccessible God of his own creation"...Meaning an academic who is completely detached from non specialists and is not available for communication with them.

I do hope that Michael Jeub's work is more than an anti establishment satire. I hope it is trying to say something about communication of ideas. At university I was told of the necessity of using appropriate scientific language. It divides "us from them". One particular word is still an annoyance to me. That is heterosis. We were told repeatedly to use it in preference to hybrid vigour. To my mind hybrid vigour is the superior expression because it does explain a concept rather than just being a mere label. Other words such as diakinesis have to be just labels because, describing a particular phase of a continuous process, it is like a place name. If it looks like that, it has this name. To describe what it is would take too long so a short hand is required. Too often scientist deliberately put up barriers to effective communication rather than trying to explain their work as lucidly as possible. Of course some technical language is require to avoid overly long simple English descriptions.

I find Michael Jeub's work to be at the other end of the spectrum to Michael Christian's competition entry. Called "Reality". While Mr Jeubs is extremely complex both in what it discusses and its presentation , Mr Christian's very simple.I really like both. That is not to say that I think they should score highly in the competition. I do not think they were entered with that intention.

As I said to Ray Monroe I think modeling in physics is rather like "Eternity 2", a board full of linked pieces looks good- but so does the empty board. Einstein said "Everything should be made as simple as possible but not simpler" where science is concerned it is perhaps the empty board and the simple poem that is the better.As in Eternity2 just because the pieces fit does not mean it is the correct solution.

I do not know if it was only intended as a satire. It is a pity if it is that alone, because it has been done before and so is unoriginal. I am making a real effort to read and appreciate to the best of my ability what other contributor's are saying in their competition entries. The only thing I feel bad out is your Anonymous patronizing comments.

Anonymous,

That should have said --The only thing I feel bad about is your Anonymous patronizing comments.

Georgina,

This is not T H Ray and you misinterpret my intentions. I never meant to patronize you. I must admit that, with so many essays to read, I did not carefully read all of your responses to Mr. Jeub, only enough to believe that you took him seriously. Sadly, it is my belief that he had three intentions in writing this essay; to mock and ridicule those whom he despises, to display his cleverness to those who empathize with him, and to dupe the uninitiated. His refusal to comment in this forum, IMO means that his essay was all the commentary he needed. I chose to remain anonymous because it seemed a rather awkward and embarrassing situation. I have obviously offended you, so I apologize.

You wrote: "Too often scientist deliberately put up barriers to effective communication rather than trying to explain their work as lucidly as possible. Of course some technical language is require to avoid overly long simple English descriptions."

I couldn't agree more. I am not a professional, only somebody who aspires to be taken seriously. I believe I have unique and creative ideas and a passion to understand the world, yet find it difficult to communicate in general, particularly a field that chooses mathematics over meaning and a penchant for unnecessary formality. Unfortunately, these are the hurdles we must face to have our ideas seriously considered.

There are many things that I envy about Mr. Jeub. He is obviously a genius, has many talents, and is much more educated than I. I greatly appreciated his humor, because I also identified with his frustration. But I also pity him, for IMO he has given up on the system or the system has failed him. I do not know the journey which has lead him to produce a farce rather than an authentic essay, but it seems like a huge waste of talent. I, for one, have not given up.

Anonymous,

Thank you for that clarification, and letting T H Ray off the hook. Apology accepted. If the intention was, as you say, 3 fold that alone is remarkable. Even without considering the literary style or any other facet of the work. Most mere mortals would consider 2 birds with 1 stone a worthy accomplishment.