post

Xavier Cugat and Charo

As a fitting follow up to the Funniest Names in the NFL, here is my latest guest post on The Blog of Funny Names.

Mark Sackler's avatarThe Blog of Funny Names

How’s this for a couple: Francesc d’Asis Xavier Cugat Mingall de Bru i Deulofeu (1 January 1900 – 27 October 1990) and Maria Rosario Pilar Martinez Molina Baeza (born January 15, 1945)?

Honestly, you can’t make this stuff up.  As you might surmise, there is a story as to how they became a couple and how they came to be featured on this blog.

Let’s start with the latter (and shorter) story first.  In perusing the NFL draft’s funniest names, I noticed that not only were there two guys named Cornelius up for grabs, there were also two named Xavier.  As Xavier seemed to be nearly as good a candidate for funny names fodder as Cornelius, the search was on for a funny-named Xavier in other walks of life.    Seek and ye shall find.  Buried deep in the archives of my decaying neurons was a blurry vision from an Ed…

View original post 445 more words

post

Kaley Cuoco

My latest guest post on The Blog of Funny Names. She’s a funny lady but there is nothing funny about her career…

Mark Sackler's avatarThe Blog of Funny Names

(Hey, Dave – it doesn’t count as hijacking your blog if I’m just hitting “Publish” on someone else’s behalf, right? amb xo.)

(PS Mark – that clip just made my morning. Hilarious!)

“That’s a funny name….Smoot!”–Penny (Kaley Cuoco) on The Big Bang Theory.

How awesome is that?  A funny name quote delivered by a funny-named actress on one of the funniest shows ever on TV.

Kaley Christine Cuoco is a 27-year-old California-born actress who just happens to be one of the hottest things on television in the CBS sitcom The Big Bang Theory.   She portrays the street smart Penny who lives in a Pasadena, CA apartment across the hall from a pair of nerdy brainiacs from Cal Tech .  Along with Jim Parsons, who plays the scientifically brilliant but socially and culturally clueless Dr. Sheldon Cooper,  she makes the show what it is–the highest rated sitcom on US network…

View original post 223 more words

post

1001: A Blogging Odyssey

“Blogs are whatever we make them. Defining ‘blog’ is a fool’s errand.”–Michael Conniff

“Blogging is pure vanity.”–Unknown

1001 HITSLet’s not get all misty eyed here, but yesterday The Millennium Conjectures™ passed the 1,000 subscriber threshold.  This presents an opportunity to wax poetic on the nature of blogging itself.  Oh, wait, I forgot–you don’t care, and my poetry stinks.  I’ll spare you the agony;  if you are one of my followers it is probably because of the humor, satire or metaphysics.  Thanks for being here.  Thanks for liking my posts and commenting on them.   The onus is now on me to keep delivering–with a little help from my friends, of course. 😉

post

Conjecture #4: Quantum Consciousness

“You can’t always get what you want.  But if you try sometime, well you just might find, you get what you need.”–The Rolling Stones (Jagger/Richards)

“I’m-a get medieval on your ass.”–Marcellus Wallace (character, Pulp Fiction)

I conjecture:  In a quantum multiverse, one’s consciousness is a composite of the many worlds.

 

You’ve been warned folks: I’m-a get metaphysical on your asses.  What’s worse, it’s a personal, almost solipsistic metaphysics.  Hell, it’s my blog, why can’t I?  I might also add that the next couple of  conjectures will be the most controversial, and to some extent they might contradict each other.  Consider it an appropriate quantum superposition–both simultaneously half true.

Few subjects in the sciences are as controversial as the notion of quantum consciousness, as it meets at the junction of theoretical physics and cognitive psychology, and manages to merge the two phenomena that puzzle scientists the most.  Oh, we understand what quantum mechanics is in terms of what it does,  but have no freakin’ idea how and why it does it.   You can say pretty much the same for consciousness.

The concept of quantum consciousness is nothing all that new.  Without getting too technical–because hey, then I wouldn’t understand it either–the notion of a quantum mechanical basis for human consciousness was first directly proposed by Roger Penrose, in his 1989 book, The Emperor’s New Mind.  Built on his earlier work with Stuart Hammerhoff,  Penrose asserted that the human mind can perform functions that are not computable and could only arise from quantum superpositions occurring within the brain.    Max Tegmark,  an MIT cosmologist with no shortage of his own controversial ideas, became the most vocal opponent of this concept, for reasons I won’t go into here, as this is not exactly what I am advocating.     Or maybe it is.

What I am advocating, whether the mind is a quantum computer or not, is that our conscious experience represents a composite of all the universes, or potential universes suggested by quantum theory.  The distinction between potential and actual alternate universes implies the distinction between the Copenhagen and Many Worlds interpretations of quantum mechanics.  And the former seems to make more sense in concert with this conjecture, as it asserts that there simply is no objective reality on the sub-atomic level until we measure it; there are, effectively, only statistical probabilities.  From that it would be easy enough to make the philosophical assertion that our consciousness is essentially a composite of all the possibilities.

But it might not be.  As we only appear to be conscious in one reality at a time, it is certainly within the realm of feasibility to assert that consciousness is a composite in the Many Worlds scenario as well.   If the Many Worlds interpretation is willing to accept that these universes can interact with each other on the sub-atomic level to produce the wave interference pattern described in Quantum Weirdness 101,  why not accept that our consciousness does the same thing? Therefore, consciousness would be a composite across actual, physically real worlds.  David Deutsch, in his book The Fabric of Reality, makes the case that the quantum multiverse is the enabler of free will;  from this I would infer he means consciousness as well.  But the Many Worlds interpretation suggests something perhaps darker and more sinister,  even frightening.  I’m bound to get flamed to no end for even bringing it up–it will be the subject of Conjecture #5.  I call it quantum solipsism.

My bottom-line position on the composite consciousness conjecture: It’s a strong possibility.  I see evidence of it in my own life; but it would take a volume, let alone a blog post, to fully recount.  The best way to sum it up?  The Rolling Stones quote above.  It seems I rarely get exactly what I want, but often get what I need, and just in the nick of time.  What?  You say you don’t get what you need?  Well, read the next conjecture.  It seems that may not be my problem!

Below, Stuart Hammerhoff discusses the notion of quantum consciousness and related issues.

post

Guest Post Reblog #2

I’m back from the Iberian peninsula just in time to reblog my second monthly guest post on The Blog of Funny Names. Appropriately enough, it’s a place name and not a person.

In other news, my thanks to Sue of Dreamshadow59 for nominating me for the very inspiring blogger award. I do appreciate the nominations (this my 8th I think) but I don’t participate–meaning I don’t jump through the required hoops among which require nominating so many other bloggers, so that it spreads like a rhinovirus through the blogosphere.    http://dreamshadow59.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/very-inspiring-blogger-award/

Now, if I can find my office under all this snow, back to real life.

Mark Sackler's avatarThe Blog of Funny Names

Truth or Consequences, NM,is indeed one of the odd names in American Geography.  The story of the name’s origin is odder still.  I thought I had it nailed back in the early 70’s, long before the founders of this blog were even born.  I drove through Truth or Consequences on a cross country trip.  As I passed beyond the city limits heading north towards Albequerque, I saw a huge sign on the interstate proclaiming “NEXT SERVICES 100 MILES.”  Aha!  That has to be it, I thought, as I looked down at my dashboard. My gas gauge had better be telling me the truth, or I would pay the consequences!

Wrong.   Well, sort of right; my observation about being screwed if my gas gauge was inaccurate probably was true.  But  the true story of how the former Hot Springs, NM changed its name is more unlikely than that. It…

View original post 171 more words

post

Winter rerun: This is Not a Pipe

While I’m out photographing the Spanish countryside today, here’s an apropos rerun of one of my back posts.  What else can I say–other than “this is not a blog?”  

“I am two with nature.”–Woody Allen

This is not a pipe

The Treachery of Images, by Rene Magritte, 1928-29
Ceci n’est pas une pipe. This is not a pipe.

René Magritte’s message is rather unambiguous.  An image of a “thing” is not the thing itself.  But don’t worry, I’m not headed toward a heavy ontological discussion here.  I have a simple question which, believe it or not, my overly opinionated philosophical mind has virtually no idea how to answer.   Maybe one of you out there can help.

I love nature photography.  Flowers, birds, wildlife, oceans, lakes, clouds, mountains, landscapes–you name it, I like looking at these images and they are my favorite to photograph.  Good grief, I’ve even photographed mud puddles and insects.  And yet I am not, by any stretch of the imagination, what one would call a nature lover.  I hate gardening and yard work.  I won’t even mow my own lawn as I am allergic to grass pollen. I haven’t been camping in 30 years and only rarely go hiking.  I do spend a good bit of time outdoors, but this is almost entirely involved with playing or watching sports.  It seems that I prefer a well framed image of nature to the actual experience of nature itself.  And to add to the conundrum, this only applies to photographic images.  My preferences in other visual arts tends towards styles or schools–Surrealist (Miró), Social Realist (Hopper), Post-impressionist (Seurat, Rousseau, Van Gogh), Geometric Abstraction (Klee, Mondrian).  (Here is a link to my favorite contemporary artist, Yanick Lapuh.)

I have only just realized this–and really have no strong ideas about why this should be.  A preference for a well-composed image?  Remnants from a childhood anxiety of physical reality?  Or, like Woody, am I just at two with nature?   All you amateur psychologists please provide your opinions by email, snail mail, or pony express.  (Comments herein are OK, too)

Below, three of my personal favorite landscape photographs from my own travels, as well as a couple of representative pieces by Monsieur Lapuh.

(Click on images for full size)

Sideways tree

Sideways Tree. Looking out from the Great Wall of China. Copyright 2006, Mark Sackler

coastline

Costa Rica Coastline. Copyright 2008, Mark Sackler

Loch

A Scottish Loch. Copyright 2010 Mark Sackler

Objection Your Honer, Yanick Lapuh, 1993

Envisioned Solution, Yanick Lapuh, 2006

post

Time Out: End of the World Post(poned)

“In the beginning, the universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and was widely regarded as a bad move.”–Douglas Adams

end of the worldI’m kinda hoping this Mayan calendar thing is right as I haven’t paid my cable bill yet this month.  And I’d endure almost anything to make sure the Cowboys miss the playoffs.   On the other hand, I hate to think of all those unused frequent flyer miles I’d lose.  Either way, I’m holding off writing my next post until Saturday–just in case.

cookie

post

Cosmic Quote #12

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”–Arthur C. Clarke

No, not that Magic!

No, not that Magic!

To say that Arthur C. Clarke was a visionary is to put it lightly.  In 1947 he published an article advocating a global satellite communication network.  That was ten years before Sputnik, when many serious scientists were still calling space travel impossible.  Yet even he didn’t always get it right.  In the 1960’s he foresaw humanity’s 2001 future in outer space, but little progress was made in the following decades.  It turned out the human future in the new millennium was in cyber space.  My future, then and now, continues to be spaced out.  I’ll see you in my dreams…

post

Time Out: Remembering Dave Brubek

“I like to play  dangerously… where you’re going to take a chance on making mistakes in order to create something you haven’t created before.”–Dave Brubek

(Note:  The title of this post provides an apt, if inadvertent double entendre.  I have used the title preface “Time Out” for posts that don’t readily fit into my existing threads.  “Time Out” also just happens to be the title of The Dave Brubek Quartet’s signature album.  It was issued in 1959 and became the first million selling jazz album ever.  It is one of the greatest classics of the genre).

Brubek on the cover of Time, November 1954.  NO! I do not remember it, I was four years old.

Brubek on the cover of Time, November, 1954.

I never met the man, yet somehow I knew him.     In one of the choral groups I sang with in high school we performed a Brubek composition (yes he wrote choral music, too).   Our director actually tried to get Brubek, who lived in a neighboring town,  to make a guest appearance to conduct the piece at our concert.  He was unavailable.  I never gave it much thought then, though Brubek’s Greatest Hits was the first jazz album I owned–and in fact the only jazz in my collection until I was in my forties.  I did not see him perform live until I was in my 50’s and he in his 80’s.

Below are two videos, courtesy of the Litchfield Jazz Festival, where I saw Dave Brubek perform twice.  The first video is a promotional piece that begins with Brubek performing in the 2005 festival.   In the shot of the audience applause that follows the visual of Brubek you’ll see two audience members stand up near the back.  I’m pretty sure the partially obscured one farthest back is me.  In the second video, taped at the 2008 festival, NPR interviews Brubek and Paquito D’Rivera.  There was no seating in this tent.  I was standing in the front row, about fifteen feet from Brubek during the entire interview.  I witnessed history that day.

Dave Brubek was an icon, a living legend.  He was not just a great artist, he was one of the great ambassadors for the arts.  He died yesterday, one day short of his 92nd birthday, in the same hospital where my wife was born.  So near, and yet so far away.

post

Photo Op#2: Storm Damage

 “It is only in sorrow that bad weather masters us; in joy we face the storm and defy it.”–Amelia Barr

There will be no poetry; there will certainly be no wise-cracks.  I will even refrain from New Jersey jokes.

We had no power for six days, but on balance we were extremely lucky.  How is the following for an equation of everyday life?

325 +7 = 0. 

For my readers on the metric system I will put it this way.

100+11=0.

Translation? 325 feet (~100m) above sea level and 7 miles (~11km) inland equals no flooding damage.  But as the pictures herein demonstrate, we had plenty of tree damage and some fence damage to go with it.  Nothing came near the house. My thoughts and best wishes go out to those in NY and NJ who were not so spared (and there was plenty of damage here in CT, fortunately we did not get the worst of it).

These uprooted trees lean away from our driveway, but directly over the neighbor’s fence and storage shed.

Most of our downed trees were in the woods. This is the most impressive one.

Minor fence damage.

Equines present and accounted for. We now return you to our regularly scheduled program.