|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
Patrick Differ Inner circle 1540 Posts |
"In fact, I've heard that the same word means wonder and fear in Greek, and possibly Hebrew."
Which word? Posted: Sep 18, 2005 9:21pm -------------------------------------------- Notes on the snapper...while we're at it... Working in a shop, I had the opportunity to meet an experienced magician and a pure novice at the same time. I met the magician first, and then walked in the novice. The magician was wildly looking for something fun that would find him. The novice was just looking for something that might be wild and fun. The magician was wary of every direction I took him. The novice was fearless. The magician wanted something that would speak riddles to all. The novice wanted something with which he could speak a simple possibility. I showed the novice the Snapper. The magician watched me, and cued me "No!" as I demonstrated the snapper to the novice. I cued the magician, "Watch, and learn." I sold 24 snappers to that man that day. That's probably a world record. The novice was ready to work them and demonstrated the "fundamental desire TO DO." (Got it?) The magician was SPEECHLESS. The novice had no fear of the snapper because he was in love. The magician had fear of the snapper because he had forgotten the love. The novice walked out of the shop with a pocketfull of snappers and with the world waiting for him. The magician walked out of the shop scratching his head, as something had found him that he didn't quite expect. The magician probably went home and practiced his snapper...just like I showed him. Not a bad day's work. It's always fear. It's always the desire to know. It's always the want to understand. It's always the want to be understood. Magic is about human nature at its most base level. Who are you? Where are you from? Where are you going? What makes you so sure?
Will you walk into my parlour? said the Spider to the Fly,
Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy; The way into my parlour is up a winding stair, And I've a many curious things to show when you are there. Oh no, no, said the little Fly, to ask me is in vain, For who goes up your winding stair -can ne'er come down again. |
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
Dear Jim Snack
Sorry to be picky here. Quantum Mechanics was created by Max Planck. Einstein used one of Max Planck's concepts, that of energy being quantisized in a hot body. Max's name is therefore on the amount of energy in a quantum being called Planck's Constant. It is not Einstein's Constant. Einstein applied that concept to indicate that light is quanizied also in his fameous Nobel prize winning door opener experiment called the photoelectric effect. I call it a door opener experiment because it deals with that beam of light that used to be in front of doors enabling your presence to open the door. You may find it interesting that Max was a very serious person that did not bow down to puffy people that spoke with fancy words full of ambiguities. As a result he did not get much respect. (Much like magic.) His discovery of Quantum Mechanics was brushed aside by those in power. However, the concept that he discovered lives on and is to this day not understood. We shall hear much more of Max's idea in the future. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
For those who like to read:
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~hist......ins.html Frederick Kantor has some work in an information based (bits) interpretation and model system for physics in his book Information Mechanics. I would not be surprised if Al had explored this topic thoroughly and might have some insights into this topic to share as well.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
I read the web site.
Even though Planck won a Nobel prize for developing Quantum Mechaincs, it was essentialy ignored. This is similiar to Einstein winning the Nobel prize in 1911 for Special Relativity. It was ignored also. In fact it was ignored for 11 years before anyone studied it. I personally suspect there was some big guy that had his own theory and suppressed Einstein's ideas. That guy probably died at the end of that 11 years which allowed Special Relativity to be examined. On the other hand, as Quantum Mechanics matured, Einstein railed at the path it was taking. He would be known to go into a rage toward his contemporaries screaming, "God does not play chance!" The path of Quantum Mechanics suggests that all of sub space (whatever that is) consists of probability. It doesn't make sense until some specific event is measured several times. If you measure a single particle, you get varying measurements. If you measure it billions of times, as when we catch a ball, it makes sense. The point is that Einstein was revolutionary. Then, as he moved into power, he opposed new concepts. There are many parallels in magic and in life. I ahve observed this so much I have a personal rule of life. "Those in power will allow the truth to fall to the wayside if it comprimises their power." It is very difficult to be a human being. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Jim Snack Inner circle 1338 Posts |
Al,
Thanks for point out the inaccuracy. I stand corrected. That doesn't change the substance of my original point. My point was that whenever a person manipulates symbols to create wonder, he or she had created magic. Einstein certainly qualifies. Jim |
|||||||||
Partizan Inner circle London UK 1682 Posts |
I would sport more with creases then wrinkles. A crease is a more durable impression on reality and resists smoothing out although the crease would be more profound in comparison to a wrinkle, the wrinkle has the property of resuming normality and thus avoiding questioning quite well.
-------- Quote:
Jim Snack: This is not only ambiguous but false. [will qualify with provocation].
"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus."
- Mark Twain |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Darn, you got me thinking about how magic can leave a sort of footprint, a pleat in one's subjective narrative of events that covers things they did not see, notice, or consider.
Do thoughts exist in one's private symbol system or in the public systems we use to communicate? My feeling is we have a true communications theory issue here.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts |
Whatever do you mean, Partizan?
|
|||||||||
JTW Special user Florida 670 Posts |
Partizan consider yourself provoked!
|
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
Yes Partizan, consider yourself provoked.
However, as I think about it I am provoked. Excuse me if I use the realm of physics for I am more familiar with it. It does have one advantage of over magic in that there is more of a possibility for it to be real. I believe Einstein's goal was to express reality. I do not think he created a bunch of new symbols to express reality. In fact I percieve that significant achievements in science were expressed in very simple terms that did not require new symbols. For example, in Special Relativity, the primary postulate of his theory was that the speed of light is constant. I do not think that there is any new words there that were not there before Einstein was born. The second part of his earth shaking discovery is the formula t sub 1 = t sub 0 (square root(1-v^2/c^2)) Again this is an expression most high school algebra students could understand. I do not see any new symbols. The forgoing is the essence of Special Relativity. I don't get the new symbolizim. However, I do see writers, artists, film producers going kaka over the meaning of time shift, somebodys grandfather in a space ship and so on. It seems to me that any and all that do not understand it get some deep meaning from it. I remember in college my english teacher always using science to disprove the existance of God. When I went to physics class the next hour, that subject never came up. I find the same true in magic. When someone does not understand something, they give it a word. Essentially they create a new symbol that they use to express something. Unfortunately, the symbol is not based on anything but some feeling. In fact, a lot of the words spoken in this thread do not make sense to me. I am a college graduate. I have studied a lot about human behavior. I have studied a lot about many religions and philosophies. But, man, I don't have a clue about what you are saying. Do you worship God or the finger that points at him? Perhaps I am missing something. I provoke you to explain (in English). Please do not think this has nothing to do with magic. I invest tremendous effort at making what I do clear to the audience. I invest tremendous effort at making a routine flow with logic so it produces the desired effect. The questions I raise here I raise with myself in all I do. It is very important to be clear with all of this to get the heart of what we are doing. I am very, very hard on myself. Unfortunately, this aimed at someone else now. I do not take this thinking approach lightly. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Jim Snack Inner circle 1338 Posts |
The new symbolism that Einstein utilized as he formulated his theory of relativity was not in the words or mathematical symbols, but rather in the process he formulated, that had it's basis in his thought experiments from childhood.
Einstein wrote," The words of language, as they are written or spoken, do not seem to play any role in my mechanism of thought. The physical entities which seem to serve as elements in thought are certain signs and more or less clear images which can be 'voluntarily' reproduced and combined...From a pyschological viewpoint this combinatory play seems to be an essential feature in productive thought...The... elements are, in my case, of visual and some muscular type. Conventional words or other signs have to be sought for laboriously only in a secondary stage, when the mentioned associative play is sufficiently established and can be reproduced at will." Furthermore, Einstein also emphasized the important role played by fantasy and imagination: "When I examine myself and my methods of thought I come to the conclusion that the gift of fantasy has meant more to me than my talent for absorbing positive knowledge." In Howard Gardiner's words, "Indeed, Einstein's innovation sprung out of his capacity to integrate spatial imagery, mathematical formalisms, empirical phenomena, and basic philosophical issues." Einstein was an original scientific thinker and therein can be found his magic. The same was true for Martha Graham, who, with original thinking, gave the world modern dance. Gardiner argued that conventional symbol systems no longer sufficed, and that the creator must begin to work out a new, more adequate form of symbolic expression, one equal to the problem or product in all it's complexity. But we digress. Getting back to our world of magic, I would argue that in the 1970's, Doug Henning found the traditional symbols of the magician inadequate to express his artistic vision. He shed many of those traditional symbols, incorporated many new ones into his show and opened up a new line of expression for other magicians. In the 1980's Jeff McBride did the same, incorporating symbols from mythology, Kabuki theater and martial arts with his magic. More recently, David Blaine took symbols from urban culture, MTV and shamanism and combined them the create his "urban shaman" character. It's in the skillful manipulation of these new and different symbols that I find the magic. Jim |
|||||||||
Partizan Inner circle London UK 1682 Posts |
Quote:
All meaning is communicated through symbol systems. When someone has mastered communicating using a particular symbol system, it gives them freedom to begin the true process of creation. Firstly, All meaning is not communicated through symbol systems. To say it is is a vain fantasy of the human ego and its pride in its own tools. To assume that meaning does not exsist without humans is foolish. creative processes do not require meaning or symbols to explain them or humans to validate them. This universe has been in operation long before our appearance yet still operated in a creative mannor without symbolic system communication. Indeed the meaning and communication of the universe are simple truths that do not require conversion into arguments.
"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus."
- Mark Twain |
|||||||||
Jim Snack Inner circle 1338 Posts |
Partizan argues that "creative processes do not require meaning or symbols to explain them or humans to validate them." That was not my point.
I never said that meaning does not exist without humans, I said that it is communicated through symbol systems. If not through symbols, how is it communicated between humans? Jim |
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
Dear Jim Snack:
I am impressed with your knowledge and sophistication. Can you do a double lift? Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
When I find a hole in my understanding, it makes some sense to label that place or gap or hole in my inner model of the world, with a word. Then, I can explore the shape of the gap, that terra incognito and inspect the nearest known neighbors and see where the hole overlaps, connects or insulates itself from what I do know. When I look for assistance as regards filling in that gap, it makes sense to offer directions for how to get to that place on the map.
I would not have called Einstein a child as he sat pondering Maxwell's equations in university. At the time one did not learn of the mysteries of electromagnetism and pseudo-vectors till in university. Be it in Mach's elevator or an imaginary flight along side a beam of light, or later in an extension of Mach's elevator, we have good reason to look at an almost physical intuition about the world. The social side... oh... there we get to a tough nut most folks don't want to crack. If the universe is such that there are no privileged frames of reference, where causality is invariant between frames of reference and where the very expression of the laws of the universe are covariant, what then of the laws of man and how we treat each other? Surely we all live within our own frame of reference. One might be sorely tempted to believe that if one can formulate physics in terms of covariant expression, one might be just as well served to express social truths and laws in the same form. A sort of golden rule writ in vector form that many still wish to ignore. So be it, for now. Symbols and meaning are subjective and can only be communicated by shared experience of context. Markers on the map as it were. Meaning itself is not a blue shovel about to dig into the sand at the beach. More simply, the notion of a good dinner means different things to different people at different times and places.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Jim Snack Inner circle 1338 Posts |
Jonathan, nicely put. In "Creating Minds" Gardiner titled his chapter on Einstein, "Albert Einstein: The Perennial Child" to highlight the childlike sense of wonder that permeated Einstein's approach. He points out that Einstein was aware of the parallels between his thought patterns and those commonly associated with children. He once asked:
"How did it come to pass that I was the one to develop the theory of relativity? The reason, I think, is that a normal adult never stops to think about problems of tiem and space. These are things which he has thought of as a child. But my intellectual development was retarded, as a result of which I began to wonder about space and time only when I had grown up. Naturally I could go deeper into the problem than a child with normal abilities." Einstein stood out among natural scientists in his abiding curiosity about children's minds. Al, I'll put my double lift and Ambitious Card routine up against anyone's in magic; I just wish I could still look at it through the eyes of a child. Jim |
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
Mr. Snack:
I am pleased you recognize the value of actually doing what you talk about. Many talk about it but do not do. I am sure you understand. In discussing Einstein's thought process you mention that he goes through some internal thought process to arrive at his conclusions. However, the final level of the process is to reduce it to that (little confused on how to express this) level which can be communicated to others. In your discussions you are refering to symbols that are used to communicate. His internal thought processes were not communicated. His thinking was reduced to that which those in the physics community were already accustomed to communicating with. Part of my problem with all of this is that what Einstein says about Special Relativity makes no sense at all. Essentially, there is no symbol to represent it. Bear in mind that this is stated in very basic physics books. There is no logic to it. There is no understanding. The statement is made that the logic is in the math. That is it. In my junior year in physics my professor stood before a class of about 50 students and said the following. "Most of you are accustomed to thinking in pictures of pulleys and lines of force. From this day forward you cannot do that. You must think in mathamatics alone. Those that cannot make this switch will fail." The point is that Special Relativity has no symbol, picture or image to represent what is going on. It simply doesn't. It is simply a mathamatical fact. The press, media and those that need to give lectures come up with symbols to explain all of this. The math I provided earlier is the symbology that represents the facts. Your response paints a pictrue of how Einstein may have thought about it. But he did not use those images to communicate it. Perhaps you wish to know why I am so strong about this. I am a worker bee. I have worked in industry for about 30 years. I have been subjected to theories of management, communication, motivation and on and on during that time. I have been the guy many times that works many nights to 3:00 AM to get the product into a box and nailed shut so the company can send an invoice the customer. I can tell you the president of the company appreciates this a great deal. The management concepts, communication, motivation stuff did not get the job done. It is essentially valueless. I am a contract programmer. Generally when I am hired all of these fancy things have been tried and failed. I get hired often with the comment, "We have no other choice." These people do not want to hire me. I am often their last resort. As to your comments about Doug Henning, Jeff McBride and David Blaine; these are your opinion. I think you confuse commercial interests and a desire for big business to make a buck with creative vision. But then this is an opinion. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
An invitation to play and discuss: http://www.ams.org/featurecolumn/archive/syntax1.html
I am looking for a citation to a paper linking Thom's cusp surface and one or more of: foreground/background figure reversal pattern recognition affect/emotional shift * This with an eye toward modeling the experience of a magic trick as cognitively catastrophic experience, i.e. a map of the moment when the cloth is whipped from the floating lady to reveal nothing, or when the card that was just seen nestled into the center of the deck is shown to be on top of the deck... again. * resources required: spherical or cylindrical coordinates expression of cusp surface with cusp at origin and parametrized curve for what looks from phi=pi/2 (overview) to be a circular path centered at the cusp. Hint, the trip around this path counterclockwise does not get you to the same place ON THE SURFACE as the trip clockwise. And there is the catastrophe. If this model has not been explored in published journals... then I claim it. (9/21/05 - jt)
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Frank Tougas Inner circle Minneapolis, MN 1712 Posts |
I am moved to comment on a saying I learned in college - undergrad, way back. That education is often the process of trying to find meaning in things that have none. Wow Eienstein, Henning, & McBride? That better be a law firm guys because it is certainly not a discussion of magic.
I remember a thread not long ago where I posited that there is NO psychology in magic. Being a trained psychologist I felt I had a solid base from which to make my case. I was pummelled by people who with no training in the field told me not only was I wrong but I had never meant to say it in the first place. Mr. Schneider is a very intelligent man, well known in magic and a prolific writer/inventor of things magical and otherwise. I see the same thing is happening to him. People armed with a bit of knowledge and a lot of double speak trying to catapult magic into the upper eschelon of science and creation. It may be time to redo the class in magic 101 because we are so off the beaten path here I am questioning not if we are on the same page but are we on the same planet? I remember when Food for Thought was about relevant things, now it seems it has been coopted by a small group of intellectual exercisers who goad each other into responding to small but sweeping questions upon which no sane person would expect consensus. It feels more like, it's not magic but... I can not be a lone voice in my inability to track these heady conversations, I feel too many of the "ordinary magicians" out there (a group I am proud to be part of) has been intimidated by the pseudo scientific babblespeak and are afraid to say "we don't get what the heck you guys are saying nor do we see a point." It is my hope that they will decide to enter what has been an exclusive club and help bring it back to reality. Frank (I have a headache) Tougas
Frank Tougas The Twin Cities Most "Kid Experienced" Children's Performer :"Creating Positive Memories...One Smile at a Time"
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Advil and the anvil.
Distinctions are a way of defining a thing, especially useful when looking to make a map of where a thing can be found, or directions for how to get to it. From the AUDIENCE'S PERSPECTIVE, what distinguishes a magic trick from: a practical joke? a con game? a random act of nature? thinking about a cultural belief? viewing a painting or sculpture? attending a play where "magical" things happen? I happen to disagree with Frank about there being some psychology that permits us to experience magic. Consider a dog sitting with its master during a performance in magic show. Provided the magician does not make any sudden loud noises or produce a cat onstage, the dog is not likely to respond to most of what happens. When watching the zig-zag lady illusion, the dog is not going to react to the middle move, and given freedom to roam, may sniff at the fingers sticking out of the middle box and perhaps the foot sticking out the bottom. No reaction to what we call magic. Now consider a deaf person attending a performance of an expert cold-reader pulling the letters and digits from the mind of a volunteer as they gaze at their driver's license or the serial number on a dollar bill. They see what they see, yet there might not be any recognition of the effect. I argue that there is something beyond observing actions that causes what we call magic. There is an early childhood cognitive experiment involving a small stage, some toy cars on sticks and a partition. The experimenter moves the cars so that it looks like one car goes behind the partition from one side and comes out the other side an appropriate time later. The partition is replaced with one which has a large gap, an empty space. The experimenter repeats the procedure. If the child is mature enough to have the notion of "flow of action" there is a reaction of surprise evident when the car seems to make its impossible transit. The flow of action is congruent to the procedure with the solid partition, yet there is a gap where the child can see that no car passes by. The two principles of object permanence and flow of action are set against each other. There is a fairly primitive yet effective magic trick in the making. Replace the gap with a solid wall and you can claim the car is magic and went through the wall. That is an example of what I'm arguing for as a psychology of magic. Recognizing the things we expect to be true and recognizing when one or more of those things is evidently not true. I argue that we need to add the component of "will or first cause" and from that we have something close to a model for magic. Of course that's just my opinion. I've stated my opinion in terms that are open to experimentation and also open to refinement. And of course my opinion is open to change as better models or refutations are offered.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Magic is? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |