Archive for November, 2013

Biocentric Universe

Friday, November 15th, 2013

Great read:

I’m not sure if life creates the universe (see criticism of Lanza).  His book seems like a very insightful read. The only problem I have with Lanza is that he goes a little further than say that our perception affects our feel of the universe. He full-on proposes that we CREATE the universe. Interestingly, he can be both wrong and right at the same time, because we do create the universe that we perceive, but that doesn’t mean we are also creating the universe that simultaneously preexists (or might preexist) our conscience.

But I agree that our perception impacts our “feel” of the universe. Or I should call it multiverse–because:

There are an infinite number of universes and everything that could possibly be (and happen) is being and happening.  or example, if I can fathom that Obama and John McCain are gay lovers that live in a red house with blue sand and eight-legged giraffes, then that scenario exists somewhere.

Quantum mechanics is the answer to life (and “death”).

Note: I would simplify biocentrism to the idea that life in the universe is a reflection of the universe reflecting on itself. But I don’t think this necessarily warrants biocentrism as a reality, because, while we might be “creating” the universe as far as our purposes and perceptions are concerned, that doesn’t mean there is no universe without our created perception of it. Go back to the double-split test: the particle was still doing SOMETHING (it was behaving as a wave) even before the scientists watched it. Similarly, the universe can still exist (and not necessarily in the traditional sense of existence) prior to our subjective rendering of it.

Why did Twitter open at $45 today instead of the purported $26 IPO price?

Thursday, November 7th, 2013

Because the system is designed to fuck you, the retail investor–the poor bastard that doesn’t get to buy the stock until it is in the secondary market.

Meanwhile, the IPO takes place in the primary market: The banks “determine” the price of the stock (and charge Twitter a separate fee) for doing so. In reality, the banks set this price as low as they can get away with, so they can dump it in the secondary market (poor bastard individual investors who buy on excitement alone) for massive profit.

Essentially, initial public offerings (IPOs) are a means for Big Money into scamming you for more big money. Here, Twitter’s stock price doubled in the secondary market, which means Twitter got fucked out of $10 billion in investment money that it would have received in the secondary market, but which instead went into the pockets of the investment banking sector. Bravo, Wall Street.