Theo Verelst Diary Page

Tue Jan 15 2001, 0:40 AM

I've decided after good example to write some diary pages with toughts and events.

Oh, in case anybody fails to understand, I'd like to remind them that these pages are copyrighted, and that everything found here may not be redistributed in any other way then over this direct link without my prior consent. That includes family, christianity, and other cheats. The simple reason is that it may well be that some people have been ill informed because they've spread illegal 'copies' of my materials even with modifications. Apart from my moral judgement, that is illegal, and will be treated as such by me. Make as many references to these pages as you like, make hardcopies, but only of the whole page, including the html-references, and without changing a iota or tittel...

And if not? I won't hesitate to use legal means to correct wrong that may be done otherwise. And I am serious. I usually am. I'm not sure I could get 'attempt to grave emotional assault' out of it, but infrigement on copyright rules is serious enough. And Jesus called upon us to respect the authorities of state, so christians would of course never do such a thing. Lying, imagine that.

Previous Diary Entries | List of Diary Pages | Home Page

Tue Jan 15 2001, 0:40 AM

The smart ones amoung you, or of course those with a rudimentary serious physics course have noticed my little lets say error on the previous page, where a probability distribution has to be on Rpositive (larger or equal to zero), though energy values could be taken negative or even complex, though the energy is usually taken by the square of the wave function. More today, I think about the permutations idea, which leads to finding the probability of a certain particle distribution over orbits of increasing energy levels, based strictly on the number of possible particle permutations possible in that distribution compared to the total number of possibilities. Or maybe look at the idea of exclusion and grassman like logic to form fermion probability functions, and what the idea means in for instance the bose einstein condensate forming idea. Or simply make some more graphs and explain introductory fourier transorn ideas with maybe pictures, which as in good enough academics courses serves as a lead to be accurate about the theory and occupy oneself with materials to develop skils by being confronted with having to explain them well, and making relevant research work on the other hand. Einsteins pencil is probably not very important to understand how his thinking got to be so advanced or succesfull or known, maybe his 'Logik der Forschung' is.

Also it may be good to take on a nice example from my previously paid research, from just before the time I started to realize that positively sure I wasn't going to get seriously paid and advanced by parties (like professors and wannabees) who are paid to at least also do so, on the basis of serious performance and use for official project purposes, but simply because I'd make the probabilities of me myself buying my own ticket to auschwitsch and handing in my golden teeth myself just in time for my final trip acceptably balanced with the portions of me which of course should be treated like that in some new way fitting this age, or because I'd become good enough a whore keeper or whore to realy credible become a fittingly corrupted mindless and personless and sexless and most preferably standing opionless gear in some great international machine of who not even the real great ones know with how much human flesh it must be fed before it starts to rain dollars. I do my job well, so I get kicked out. No, that wasn't it, either. There is something so basic you've never understood that you must be unallowed ever again to make an appearance in anything near the circuits and subjects you've claimed without having yourself or letting others have sacrificed your authority in every way, especially where that matters the most. Well, anyway, you'll find some way in our wonderfull world that 'is', you know how it all works, and of course the constitution, human rights and every form of intellectualism that takes itself serious is a sign of madness. Ha, you'd never make it, every doctor understands you'd in the end be hurt so much trying that such crazyness must be stopped before it ever starts. We learned that from the countries with very interesting ideologies, and also that in the end we'll be better of just rewriting history, and then we're fine, and then never let openess exist, of course, the idea. Historically impossible. And the stuff I mentioned was very succesfull and made a few obscure and filthy rich people a lot happier, for sure. That realy worked.

Anyhow have that written of my chest, I near the end of my working time at university was thinking about writing a PhD suitable text, which would have to include, probably as one of the first during two graphics projects, most others were limited, theoretically uninteresting, or even in error or at least not very physically founded, a neat enough theoretical threaty of the radiosity and ray tracing computations and the integrals they are approximations from, and how those integrals are made.

And only after some reading and recapping I got to the point of getting the foundation for the well known enough radiosity matrix (or piecewise continuous functional, for the more advanced) together starting from the physical propagation properties of light. That radiosity equation is usually put forward as 'the' radiosity equation, which is fine, and in neat articles it is pointed out that it comes from 60's or so heat transfer equations adapted for the case of light transfer, but rarely it is derived in physical mathematical sense. Not that that is needed to put new meat in a contemporary hip enough thesis because I didn't invent the idea, it is just not so widely known a derivation, though in general the Neuman inversion that leads to the well known radiosity equation after somehow discretising the integral steady state light flow equation is advanced physics subject enough as functional integral approach to appear late in the orland/negele book, the same in fact holds for the in graphics not so in place monte carlo integration.

All this quite specialistic terminology gets to a pretty practical example. Suppose we have three areas of which one emits light, and the other two reflect it to eachother, and that we know how much light the light source emits. How 'light' will then that scene appear on a photograph, in other words, how much light will end up on the reflecting areas, and after they reflect light also amoung eachother, how much light in the end do they generate in a photocamera's lense? Trivial problem? No, though humanly speaking, it isn't extremely hard to understand roughly how that would go, and most painters would probably have a good guess at the answer, though not in accurate figures. Irrelevant? Ask Philips how they can make sure that some office is going to have light on the ceiling when not a single light is emiting light directly to it, for instance because there are tl tube armatures only strictly pointing down.

Anyhow this sweet little problem is good enough to sent advanced economicists back to class, they'd know about steady state equations and about iterations converging to eigenvalues, but the physical construction and the mathematical tackling of this seemingly quite simple problem is probably not their normal cup of tea. Know the answer in numbers already? Don't worry, it just isn't a simple enough problem to solve on a napkin for any normal person, I guess, though it's a nice idea to try.

Or maybe I should contemplate on my experience for instance from my work or presence in the salvation army bureles or maybe the latest sermon I sort of sat through doing quite different things then listening, except for 10 seconds to ascertain wether the person I never saw before and who was probably completely unknown would make clear his own or the Holy Spirit would show forth some wonderfull person, or wether a direct question as to 'what is your name' would return the ubiqutous and rather sucking answer 'antichrist'. I don't even wanna know which one. But it realy exists, and even speaks. Yeah, I know. F* that.

Probably the essence of a lot of the desire to reach at least some people with the non sense of so much logic and reverence to non-sense which takes so much place unrightfully is that I am convinced that someones' deepest and most leading religeous, ideological and practical life convictions do form the main basis for their motivations, and some I wish to be more aware and corrective of errors or strong dislikes I have in those areas because I care or because I don't wish them to live in correctable errors which cost their and my happyness and wellness more in my opinion than most are willing to ever assess. And the idea that we shouldn't strife for happyness or a nice enough life for 'the reasons' to me means that you're accepting some kind of sacrifice to the moloch or the mammon or assume that there is no other choice but to give up all authority to hercule, and that that is fine. People luckily wiser than that have founded peaceble and at least relatively pleasant societies of which the inhabitants usually don't envy any other, and the reason they succeeded and that we in the west can have relatively much freedom and real enough riches is that they did not bow for the temptation to give up on their convictions not to make the sacrifices the new babylon makes so easy to buy and belief in. And which not at all so hidden and quite illogical convictions so sneakingly slip into natural mans and worlds being to achieve damnation, misery, unfruitfull rejection of simple truth, up to social and life wise retardedness, death and unsuitability to achieve or even look at anything good or worthewhile or usefull. And the rich stand by and laugh at all those poor layman finding their little step unto the entry level circuit ladder that is going to keep them occupied until the day they die and may well still not arrive in the heaven, while in the meanwhile never realizing what wages and simple riches are kept from them, because they want to belief so firmly in the logic of their hidden religion which every natural person understands so much by nature, and which is so illogical and unsensible and good for nothing. Why must the order of those things be preserved? To make sure that the rich can at proper time erect incredible monuments for the sustained winning of the desire to have the right to abuse and wrape, and the ones willing to sacrifice children the the whatever it is that produces such a foolish and useless religion.

And religion is normally the highest and often one of the strongest motivations forms, I'm sure, so especially intelligent people I like should be aware of how much in life which isn't much worth it at all is the direct result of an unconscious or even a conscious religion or consideration, which is obviously in error and unfruitfull. To begin with and especially the conviction that everything worthwhile must somehow be sacrificed or otherwise the gods and the humans in their service will bring horrible revenge. Child abusers and wrapers will want to make sure secrecy games continue, the rich will want their money to make corruptable new, the powerfull ones will want their power, and the poor sods or death worth criminals in all kinds of bloody cults will want to maintain their unfuitfull idea that what their religion or rituals brings is realy worth it, somehow. Otherwise they'd be stupid, heh.

Another stretched subject first.

Is Holland damned?

For the answer to that from the highest instance, at least for those who belief there is one, we'd need to ask God. Maybe I should wish that some serious christians would be occupying themselves with what He has to tell them about such a subject. Maybe I should assume that he basically rejected the lot of them simply because they refuse to listen to much what He would probably want to make clear, even when they are faced with roots of damnation which are so bad and are going to render them so damned that every normal person would think twice or more times before continuing and not thinking about what He and some wise words of his actually are saying. Preferable people I like or would want to like, or who I wish well would think about what He has to say more than a little, starting with the pretty simple observation that much of life that is presented to them by certain parties, also in christian labeled sense, is simply and absolutely not acceptable to begin with even, and can never by any person or God be presented or said to be right or worth while, unless your god is maybe like some liar or angel of light, which prefers to slay and kill man and everything God may want for the better with fragile and naturally inclined to sin and evil mankind.

'Let us see who we will give her (Mary's or so) holy spirit today'. Meaning how are we going to make those stupids belief it is better to also accept the cup of deamons our greatly hated mother whore can give to those she feels the need to damn with it, so we can make some poor subdued ones dance to our shooting, and do the will of the deamon we don't even discern has only such desire. 'so so so' with lightly lowering tone, medium vivace. Meaning, well well what a wonderfully incredible mess and ordeal has been going on here, and how can I make the most horrible and double lifed use of it making and breaking trust as horrible as I can imagine, and have the wonderfull, 'I save everything' attitude to go with it.

In dutch to make a few points that may mean something to some.
'Eh, een blauw stalen, he dus, eh.' 'Heb u lege flessen bij u?' 'k ga d'r neerknallen, echt ik doe het' 'hoe bedoel u?' 'ik vlucht naar belgie, nee, frankrijk' 'ik heb nog een paar lootjes van vorig jaar..' 'Ik knalde d'r gewoon neer!' 'he jan, waar ga je nou met dat ding heen joh, doe effe ontzettend gezellig' 'nah, ...' (gitaar solo of zo, doe maar wat).

Al minstens 25 jaar niet te versmaden, Cornelis Vreeswijk:

De nozem en de non

177 De nozem en de non
Cornelis Vreeswijk

F                 Dm           Bb   Gm     C7
Niemand ter aarde weet hoe het eigenlijk begon
    F           Bb   Gm     C7          F
Het droevige verhaal van de nozem en de non
Dm     Bb Gm7 C7        F
Van de no     zem en de non

Vroeg in het voorjaar ontmoetten zij elkaar
Hij keek in haar ogen en toen was de liefde daar
Ja toen was de liefde daar

Sterk is de liefde, tijdelijk althans
De non vergat haar plichten en zelfs haar rozenkrans
Ze vergat haar rozenkrans

Met zijn zonnebril en z'n nauwe pantalon
Verwekte onze nozem de hartstocht van de non
Ja, de hartstocht van de non

't Is wel te begrijpen, 't gebeurt toch elke dag 
De nozem was verloren, toen hij in haar ogen zag
Toen hij in haar ogen zag

Ze liepen in het plantsoen in de prille lentezon
En kussen bij de vleet kreeg de nozem van de non
Kreeg de nozem van de non

Een zekere juffrouw Jansen sloeg hen gade door de ruit
Ze wist niet wat ze zag en haar ogen puilden uit
Ja, haar ogen puilden uit

Een zekere heer Pieterman keek neer van zijn balkon
Hij keek stomverbaasd naar de reacties van de non
De reacties van de non

Leve de liefde, zei Pieterman galant
Maar juffrouw Jansen, die belde naar de krant
Ja, die belde naar de krant

Maar daar dacht een ieder, dat ze het maar verzon
Dus ging ze naar de kapelaan en verklikte daar de non
En verklikte daar de non

Kijk, zei de kapelaan, da's nu echt weer des duivels werk
Zodra ik er niet bij ben, belazert hij de kerk
Dan belazert hij de kerk

Dankzij juffrouw Jansen en de kapelaan
Maakte de politie er een einde aan
Ja, er kwam een einde aan

Want ze liepen namelijk zo maar op het gras
En de politie zei dat dat verboden was
Dat 't gras verboden was

De non en de nozem die gingen op de bon
Een schop kreeg de nozem, de zenuwen de non
Ja, de zenuwen de non

Niet om het een of ander, maar omdat het niet kon
Eindigde de liefde van de nozem en de non
Van de nozem en de non

Volgens Aristoteles weegt een zoen niet zwaar
Letterlijk uitstekend, figuurlijk zelden waar
Vraag de non er maar's naar

(alternatief slot:
Volgens Aristoteles weegt een zoen niet zwaar
volgens de kapalaan is dat nou echt niet waar, 
volgens mij..
is't nogal raar)

I found a little piece of the song, rerecorded it, and squeezed it through an mpeg encoder, so those who don't know the appeal of the music can have a taste of it here.

I don't think it is going to work to start with damnation so that in the end grace and merci will be even more because God is forced to ackowledge how bad we've made it and do all the more incredible saving work. When we ask for it to be damned and work at it, we're going to get what we're bargaining for.

But of course it is better to give up everything worth while and make eachother suffer, and make it real hard to even get normal things of the ground and make it impossible to let even public life make clear what normal, untainted life can be like, because we'd better make sin increase so certain very uninteresting religions will consider us really great and special and the sons of bitches which think serving the worst master of em all who were stupid enough to be willing to serve that man damning thing who are good for nothing must get what that anchient angel of light wants, so we're sure they too will damn everything to the possible extend, but in the end at least we're certain of having not mastererd so much misery that Rome itself his going to think we're nice out of pity and give as the lion share of all its riches. Sure. When you're stupid. Luckily in spite of films like amsterdamned at least 'our' constitution, apart from being 'volontarily' but officially subdued to european law, is fine enough to live with, and should be good enough to warrant and safeguard an even nice enough western societies' roots.

And its older then most families can probably think back, even when they suck on every little prophecy that the real God gives to try to predict and plan the lives they want to preferably rule or keep away from exposing their powerlessness to make things work for real. So it must be seen as victorious over any criminal power scheme invented in whatever bad circuits. It has officially been there many centuries, and must therefore be taken as proven authority without having been officially succesfully threatened by any family, satanist clan, secret club, or whatever. Not that it is my logic, but such ideas of 'having' certain things probably like having options on possible bets about authority seem to catch on in not too elevated members of mankind.

It may well be that if evil and braindead people get too much power or place or even taken-serious airplay time, and all kind of plans appealing to rather dumbly accepted basic sentiments which are obviously wrong are accepted by too many votes not even the reasonable enough ones can save a whole country from centuries of serious damnation, especially if that has been the time of preparation of devious, treacherous and generally selling out of everything worthwhile in mankind plans at too high a level. 'Selling ones' soul to the devil' may be completel nonsense as it stands, considering everyone is already born naturally as sort of having that thing as father if one doesn't pay attention, but the idea of planning occult curses, occupying oneself with soothsayers, so called magicians, witchcraft (however boring), magical healers, mediums and other powers of the occult and giving that a major place in society without question does the same to it as It is more usefull to at least have some self awareness, I guess, instead of killing all normal humaness, to at least make clear what is right and what is not instead of simply letting secret new babylon take over and just let whatever it is slide in and do another body snatch for the great unholy doll in the sky, or become their dog forever.

I found this piece on a site I didn't further much read at all, I just stumbled on it, and I found it sort of hilariously self critical in a fluent american tongue which is worth it just for the love of it. Should be a rap song.

I also found some stuff that I'd rather forget...
I came across stuff that I had written when I was about 20 
and working for NewTek...holy shit. What an ass I was. 
I mean, I've read some arrogant, loud-mouthed, cocksure rantings 
before, but this crap really takes the cake. If I could travel back 
in time and find me, I'd smack me a good one, right in the mouth. 
I recently heard from someone who said that he'd met me when I was 
about 19 or 20, and I was a total dick. Well, dude, you were right on. 
I was a complete ass, and I need to make a public apology to anyone 
who dealt with me between the ages of about 15 and 21. Those were 6 
very angry, self-righteous, frustrated, confused years for me, and 
I wasn't exactly quiet about my feelings.
Well well.

So so so... Nope, not allowed.

In fact what cought my eye was the top of the page's maybe well known saying: 50,000 monkeys at 50,000 typewriters can't be wrong. As long as they're nice'n soft and not too gigantic, they may be ok enough to live with, but not wrong?