Abstract: Mankind’s development is based upon a syncretic conflict of intellectual and 1

physical phenomena. These phenomena include emergence, evolution and

imagination. Imagination is the ability to conceive of realities that exist in the

noumena, well beyond the sense realms of historical and contemporary 2

perception. Science is, and has for many centuries, been plagued by

hubris, as natural result of human need for cognitive harmony (internal

consistency), as opposed to cognitive dissonance . 3

We need to believe that we are logically correct, that our senses are reliable, and our

inferences are based upon sound evidence or justified true belief (JTB). This is hubris

in that, actual knowledge is not a point in space or time, knowledge is a perspective on

a continuum. Science has developed many rigorous techniques to move towards

correctness (predictive integrity), such as the scientific method, hypothesis testing and

experimentation. Yet we are aware that our senses are far from infallible, and the lens

of history is extremely cloudy. In this article my task is to place knowledge beyond self

deception, confirmation bias, and error. By forcing the reader to examine the continuum

of knowledge that I describe as (Ku3).

1 "syncretism ­ definition of syncretism in English from the Oxford dictionary." 2013. 18 Jun. 2016 <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/syncretism> 2 "Experience and Reality ­ Philosophy Pages." 18 Jun. 2016 <http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5g.htm> 3 McLeod, S. "Cognitive Dissonance Theory | Simply Psychology." 2011. <http://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive­dissonance.html>

(Ku3) is shorthand for the infinite continuum of knowledge which ranges from, the known (predictable) to the

unimaginable (those elements of the Noumenon, that that can not be observed due to the limitation of our

senses, natural or augmented with devices)). Until recently mankind had little visible evidence, other than

conjectures based upon history, of the existence of DNA or plate tectonics.

It was only when sufficient nomenclature had been developed based upon newly discovered evidence that 4

these important phenomena were understandable. Yet if we accept WUN (What we Understand Now), as

terminal, then we make the same mistakes that have characterized our ascent. We must move as if the sky

was falling, every step of the way. Failure to do so can lead to years of unnecessary suffering caused by

stovepipes, strong leaders, and easy evidence, just as it led to the most fundamental mistake of

mankind...mono­culture agriculture ][ . 5 6

When the Polynesian trickster God Maui gave mankind the ability to see birds, birds that had 7

always been heard but never seen, reality remained consistent.

4 <http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_­CO4VFPFZbU/SMwF­pPM4DI/AAAAAAAAAAQ/CpJfqVb0v1c/S240/25300.jpg> 5 "Biodiversity and Agriculture | The Center for Health and the Global ..." 2014. 22 Jun. 2016 <http://www.chgeharvard.org/topic/biodiversity­and­agriculture> 6 "How the Growth of Monoculture Crops Is Destroying our Planet and ..." 2014. 22 Jun. 2016 <http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/monoculture­crops­environment/> 7 "Maui ­ Myth Encyclopedia ­ mythology, god, hero, people, culture, fire." 2006. 28 May. 2016 <http://www.mythencyclopedia.com/Le­Me/Maui.html>

This is an excerpt of the book entitled The science of imagination, published by INDRA Institute press. To order the full text please visit our publications purchase page at; http://www.alacrityinc.com/GSE/gse_publication_sales.html INDRA Institute Press Alexandria, VA 22314 Also if you have comments on the contents of this work please share than with us. Send your comments to; IE­comments@INDRA­institute.org

(Ku3) The science of imagination

Truths are statements that carry there own weight. All human endeavors are based upon imagination. It can be argued that the only slender thread that humans cling to, other than our belief in our specialness above all other life, is our ability to imagine the unseen, the un­sensed, the un­observed. Even this slight advantage will eventually fall, when ants learn to speak, or better yet when we learn to understand what they are already saying. What is knowledge ? Is instinct knowledge? Is 8 9

intuition knowledge? 10

Knowledge can loosely be defined as a form of ordering, an arrangement.. An arrangement of observations around an amorphous complex structure which enables fixed responses 11

mitigated, or exacerbated, by the environment. Knowledge is the existence of a state created by the collisions of states.

While this definition is sufficiently vague that the fall of a rock down a cliffside can be construed as knowledge. The observations of the rock are windswept encounters, the amorphous complex structure is the physical structure of the rock, and fixed response is a predictable path during its fall while interacting with the environmental forces such as magnetism, gravity, thermals. Although this seems like a stretch to say the least, it has many of the aspects of knowledge in that it results in both predictivity, and repeatability which are the essential tests of

the validity of knowledge separating it from speculation. Knowledge is also an awareness and recognition of key symmetries. A deer jumps high when it sees a snake, a bit more to the left or right depending the position of the snake, its experience

8 "Knowledge | Definition of Knowledge by Merriam­Webster." 2005. 26 Apr. 2016 <http://www.merriam­webster.com/dictionary/knowledge> 9 "Instinct | Definition of Instinct by Merriam­Webster." 2005. 26 Apr. 2016 <http://www.merriam­webster.com/dictionary/instinct> 10 "Intuition | Psychology Today." 2009. 26 Apr. 2016 <https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/intuition> 11 "Amorphous | Define Amorphous at Dictionary.com." 2009. 26 Apr. 2016 <http://www.dictionary.com/browse/amorphous>

with snakes, its energy levels, etc.. That same deer will freeze for other more complex phenomena from the noumenon , such as an unimaginable automobile, or run from a sound. 12

This in itself defines instincts as a form of knowledge. That's to say that instincts generate predictable reaction to a given stimuli. While instincts are a deformation from an ideal, they are a consequence of complex multi­dimensional systems such as computers or brains, ability to recognize symmetry, sense stimuli and control or initiate complex responses. Cortex based knowledge takes this form as well as becoming more than physical features but also as active deflection points. These deflection points act like magnets which attract similar observations and repelling dis­similar observations.

This is the basis for learning, as well as bias, belief and certainty. Yet any view of knowledge base upon perception must also embrace the concept of the noumenon, or that region of knowledge with can not be perceived by the sense organs of the observer, which exists nevertheless, and may be perceivable by some other observer with different or superior sense organs. However, what we call knowledge is not dependent upon sense organs, but is instead limited to relevant malleability, which, in argumedo is, the nature of all perception and the fundamental role and method of operation of sense organs. The eye provides changes in light field to the optic cortex, while the ears deliver changes in the sound field to the auditory cortex.

As these perceived changes migrate to the appropriate cortex, for assembly as experience, other brain processes, including many pre­cortex processes, (i.e limbic, etc.), interpret these changes through the field of experience and imagination. Various feedback loops, as well as emergence, ultimately process the perceive phenomena as experience. Yet the malleability of the rock allows it to provide a predictable response to phenomena, just as the malleability (response to change) of the sense fields allows them to invoke predictable reactions as well. For a current day implementation of the dents in the rock representing, or more precisely supporting such an abstraction, the idea that the shape of a stone can constitute knowledge, you need look no further than a camshaft, or intricately designed extruder. Using this abstraction of knowledge, it is clear that instinct is knowledge. Instinct, which engenders complex responses to a continuum of stimuli levels ranging from simple to highly

12 "noumenon | philosophy | Britannica.com." 2015. 6 Aug. 2016 <https://www.britannica.com/topic/noumenon>

nuanced complexity. Current theory of instinct involves pre­determined paths that have been drawn through the ideal, or default, states of a medium, in this case the brain. Instinct can be viewed as a deformation, just like a dent in a rock, of the media, that generate predictable response to stimuli. While this “knowledge” is evaluated anthropomorphically, with measures such as truth or effectiveness, all judgements are circular, since they too are measures of the observer, as much as the observed. For example, it has been reported that birds, when given false que’s, will perform complex responses, such as egg retrieval from instinct. To therefore refuse to call instinct a form of knowledge based upon the range of effectiveness of the instinct is to refuse to acknowledge that this instinctive behavior may have values beyond those which are obvious to the human observer. For example cooking is exercise, group cohesion, as well as food preparation. The observer, has been forced to limit the fundamental hypothesis, by knowledge, range of observation, limits on the tools of observation, and the noumenon. Since the fundamental hypothesis acts like a microscope, in that it limits the field of vision to concentrate on a small section of possible reality, then the existence of a hypothesis is a limit on focus. And just as with a microscope, even a small deviation in the field of focus, often translates into unjustified conclusions. These are all limitations on a fundamental perspective on knowledge, justified true belief, wherein knowledge is valid, only when the holder of that knowledge is aware of phenomena which has been tested as based upon justified true belief. My view of knowledge minimizes JTB criteria as simple anthropomorphic crutches. Knowledge is existence of a deformation, (or difference from the ideal base), which produces predictable responses to a limited range of stimuli. Adaptation, or speed of adaptation, which is the essential element of cortex based knowledge, is quite irrelevant to the predictive value of knowledge in its most abstracted form.

Known:

From a human perspective knowledge or knowing implies a previously existing awareness, and possible understanding in phenomena.

From a more abstract perspective knowledge is form and circumstance. We classify knowledge from the basis of what could possibly be known as opposed to a particular instance of knowledge. For example my dog knows

me, but he does not seem to know my cousin who is visiting from out of town.

To say this presumes that my dogs sensory pre­awareness of my cousin does not rise to the level of familiarity. Yet, we may discover that the sensory capabilities of my dog go far beyond

the sensory abilities of the human observer, and he may be reacting in a way that we assume indicates a lack of familiarity, but is instead some molecular or quantum ][ level 13 14

of dislike.

It is an increasingly common belief that dogs react more to the smell of other dogs, that you may be associated with, than to anything about you personally. As a result we may find that your dog likes you because you smell like him, and not because he is familiar with any other aspect of you.

Knowledge, or knowing, also implies some path dependence. For example, most common 15

knowledge is presumed to result from pre­exposure to phenomena, in either the physical or abstract domains.

13 "Quantum Knowledge ­ You+*­Tube." 2008. 25 Jun. 2016 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGFbqmUqP0E> 14 "Quantum knowledge cools computers: New understanding of entropy." 2012. 25 Jun. 2016 <http://phys.org/news/2011­06­quantum­knowledge­cools­entropy.html> 15 <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Olympic_Curling,_Vancouver_2010_crop_sweeping.jpg>

Instinct as a form of knowledge, presumes some pre­existing structure or form, such as a brain pathway. Yet, I want to avoid the mistake of existing knowledge theorists, which invalidates such paths as epiphany, or faith. Our lack of current understanding of these phenomena in no way definitely invalidates these paths. Just as if a rock falls on another rock and deforms, this deformation is a form of knowledge which will provide a predictable stimulus response. A common example of this are games such as pool, or curling, where surfaces and objects regularly demonstrate predictable

responses to stimuli.* However the concept of known must also embrace the fallibilities of human knowledge. Knowledge in the abstract sense, such as quantum phenomena or other scientific theories is generally evaluated by the flawed but inescapable concept of logic, and predictive value. Much of the esoterica of human knowledge is highly dependent upon axioms which are themselves subject to scrutiny. For example, as we branch out into space many of those fundamental axioms that are the basis of our knowledge, will become increasingly unreliable as predictors. “What goes up must come down”, is only true in an environment where the nature of the atmosphere is less dense that the gravitational field which the planet provides. This new view of truth will

radically affect not only projectiles but also knowledge as diverse as chemical reactions, which in most cases effectively ignore the impacts of gravity in their resolution. Another challenge to the known, is the critical path in the form of axioms, which human logic 16

relies upon to arrive at the known. Math teachers for years have forced students to focus on methods as opposed to results. This is due to the fact that in many cases a correct answer can be derived from a faulty process within simple domains such as natural numbers. Consequently emergent concepts such as category theory , which applies functions to abstract 17

and manifold spaces, when applied to even simple axiomatic concepts such as addition or multiplication, reveals the frailty of the methods.

16 <http://www.johndcook.com/category_concepts.png> 17 "Category Theory (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)." 11 Aug. 2016 <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/category­theory/>

Know to Wiun: Due to the frailties of human knowledge, I have for decades been incensed by scientists who go on television and state what they know. While my family and friend have often be annoyed by my unrelenting skepticism of even the most strongly held beliefs in the political, religious or scientific communities, I remain unapologetic. What troubles me is that first we can never really know anything for sure. It is axiomatic that we are severely limited by our senses, our intellectual capacity, our experience, and our history. This is true about both simple and complex phenomena. How many people languish in prisons, or have been executed by the hubris of knowledge. Dependence on later disproven science, eyewitness testimony, and subconscious bias have all proven the fallibility of human knowledge, and resulted in the tyranny of the so called experts at many levels. I propose that the word know be replaced by the word wiun, which is an acronym for What I Understand Now. This is not a radical change and could be employed in many languages both natural and artificial.

In natural language such as english the phrase so often heard “I know that” would be replaced by “I wiun that”.

English Ku3 Lqea: lo que entiendo ahora. : spanish saber = lqea conocible = lqeaible conocedor = lqeaedor conocedores = lqeaedores conocimiento = lqeaimiento sabiendas = lqeaendas conocimiento = lqeaimiento con conocimiento de causa conocimientos = lqeaimientos conocido = lqeaido datos conocidos

know wiun

knowable wiunable

knower wiuner

knowers wiuners

knowing wiuning

knowinger wiuninger

knowingest wiuningest

knowingly wiuningly

knowingness wiuningnesses

knowings wiunings

knowledge wiunledge qjcm ce que je comprends maintenant. ­ French knowledgeabilities wiunledgeabilities

knowledgeability wiunledgeability connaître = qjcmitre connaissable = qjcmssable connaisseur ­ qjcmsseur connaissants ­ qjcmssants connaissance ­ qjcmssance connaissance ­ qjcmssance connaissances ­ qjcmssances connu ­ qjcm

knowledgeable wiunledgeable

knowledgeableness wiunledgeableness

knowledgeablenesses wiunledgeablenesses

knowledgeably wiunledgeably

knowledges wiunledges

known wiunn

knowns wiunns

knows wiuns

UnKnown: To be unknown is not as easy as to be known. In fact as we move down the ku3 ladder, we will find that each level presents specific challenges. To be unknown, an intellectual entity, must be imaginable and imagined. That is to say there many intellectual entities, (intellectual entities include anything that can identified as being distinct, by sensory or cognitive methods, from other entities, although it may be related or derivative, ranging from atoms to ideas), which are as yet undiscovered, or

un­imagined which can not be classified as unknown. To be unknown an entity must exist in the intellectual domain of the knower. In math the classic un­known is a conjecture. A conjecture is idea, hypothesis, or conclusion based upon incomplete, but not zero information. While there are many classic mathematical conjectures, (Agoh–Giuga conjecture, Andrews–Curtis conjecture, Andrica's conjecture, Artin conjecture (L­functions), Artin's conjecture on primitive roots, Bateman–Horn conjecture, Baum–Connes conjecture, Beal's conjecture...ad infinitum), they all represent the unknown as roots of knowledge. What is known is also based upon some fundamental mathematical presumptions. For example the infinite nature of the modulo of 18

the quantitative analysis/description/prediction [ADP] of any pheno mena. 19

18 "Arduino ­ Modulo." 2015. 3 Aug. 2016 <https://www.arduino.cc/en/Reference/modulo> 19 <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Divmod.svg/250px­Divmod.svg.png>

The modulo is therefore key to the current understanding of that phenomena. For example an abstract phenomena, such as time, as described by a clock, is dependent upon the numeric base that is applied. While a single base is assumed, it can be argued that a base exists which will due to inherent symmetries generate results which are equally useful, or potentially superior, from the ADP perspective. This problem of an infinite universe is controlled in modern science by the self limiting nature of such as Noether’s theorem which implies that invariance in a single observed characteristic of 20

a phenomena, is indicative of its universality,as expressed in a law of conservation (i.e. conservations of energy, conservation of angular momentum, etc.). However, such limits, while useful from the perspective of non­infinite ADP, fall woefully short when we embrace the possible existence of unresolved forces. I once again use the existence of gravity as an indicator of this phenomena. In that prior to its resolution, and concomitant ADP solutions set, gravity was nevertheless active and had tremendous influences on the perspectives that could be drawn from any observation.

These limitations are based upon WUN perspective generated by both our physical environment and the existence of methods for analysis and description. In short it may one day be determined that in another “place” or dimension, that fundamental properties of our reality, such as height or angular momentum , 21

are dependent upon some as yet to be resolved force. 22

The non­mathematical realm is also filled with mostly unstructured conjectures in fields ranging from effective poetry to quantum physics. Where due to brevity on the intellectual stage, incomplete nomenclature, undeveloped measurement scales, or poor supporting hypothesis, the known is yet to be teased from

the unknown. It could also be argued, that history proves that, much of the known today will devolve into the unknown as time progresses. Scientific theories such as phlogiston, Newtonian mechanics and pre­particle physics, which for decades stood up under the quantitative scrutiny of the age, yet were later proven to be wrongheaded or at least not universal in their application.

20 "Noether's Theorem in a Nutshell ­ UC Riverside (Math)." 2002. 3 Aug. 2016 <http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/noether.html> 21 "Angular Momentum ­ HyperPhysics." 6 Aug. 2016 <http://hyperphysics.phy­astr.gsu.edu/hbase/amom.html> 22 <http://hyperphysics.phy­astr.gsu.edu/hbase/imgmec/amp1.gif>

Unimagined: I had a discussion about the nature of thought where the popular cliche “you can only achieve what you can imagine” was offered. I immediately reject such a notion because it implies that, for example, if you can imagine a different history that you could achieve it. I suggest that a more accurate statement is “your imagination limits your achievements”, but this does not have the kind of poetry that makes it a potential bumper­sticker.

The fact is that the unimagined can be achieved, if we remove the requirement that an achievement necessitates direction. This is of course the realm that we loosely call discovery. Yet, discovery is an anthropomorphic term that forces the suppression of the chance operational or intellectual linking of two or more phenomena, such as fire and heat. Pre­cortex animals only need to associate the phenomena to be modified by it. This is believed to be the basis of the relationship between humans and dogs. However, the unimagined can be teased out of both the known and unknown by employing various theories and theorems, such as symmetries as embodied in gage theory. As discussed above, Noether’s theorem , which is limited by the WUN perspective, is used to determined the 23

existence of a rooted invariance, which can be describe as a natural law, in this case a law of conservation. The natural laws can then be applied to data to determined the intellectual veracity of a concept, such as perpetual motion. However, as I have demonstrated aptly in my book “Meta­energetics” the theory of perpetual motion is a flawed crutch, which simply demonstrates the hubris of science. In short because perpetual motion theory presumes God like complete knowledge of existing forces. Yet the acceptance of these natural laws, when combined with theorems such as gage , can 24

shine a light on a part of natural phenomena, which may assist the discovery of even the unimagined. For example, this is the method behind the discovery of many fundamental quantum particles such as the photon, as well as its properties such as characteristic mass. Two points that I would like to make here are, first that the use of the term laws is just as flawed in physical science as it is in political science. Laws are written to achieve and end or to establish a truth. Yet in most cases, political laws, are written to express the desires of the

23 "Noether's Theorem: Its Explanation and Proof." 2008. 3 Aug. 2016 <http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/noetherth.htm> 24 "gauge theory | physics | Britannica.com." 2015. 3 Aug. 2016 <https://www.britannica.com/science/gauge­theory>

law­makers which are all too often based upon extremely unrepresentative cases, as opposed to the general case which defines reality. As a concrete example, I live in a large condominium complex in Old town of Alexandria Virginia in the US. To leave the complex you must turn either right or left onto the main roadway, Washington street. Over the decades that I have lived here the rules have evolved as it relates to turning right. In Virginia the law permits right turns against the red light, after reasonable precautions such as a full stop, and a complete scan for pedestrians. I should point out that this particular intersection intersects with a popular pedestrian path that during the day is busy with walkers and bike riders. One day a sign was put up which specifically prohibits right turns against the red light, the agents and rationale for the changing being unknown to me. I imagine that there were a few incidents, and the outcry of those with too much time on their hands. However, I am a displaced Manhattanite, displaced by the 9/11 terror attack which injured me and ruined my business, and as a result I am active at night. I know all of the 24 hour establishments within 20 miles of my home, and visit them frequently. Consequently this new Law, while it does implement the will of the lawmakers, it does not represent reality, and instead distorts reality in some very inconvenient ways, and as a result I and most of the other residents ignore the law regularly. When I was stopped by a local police officer for violating this law, at 2am on a totally deserted Tuesday night, the officer agreed that the law was stupid, but nevertheless the law is the law. I would also like to make the point that I used the term shine with purpose. Just as the biblical story of Job, illuminates modern western culture, where the question of why invariably always terminates at personal responsibility, or sin. The aprophical story of the lost keys illuminates the rational and ultimate limits of scientific inquiry. The story is that a man is searching for his lost keys, and several passersby stop to help. After a long and fruitless search, someone asks the man, are you sure you lost your keys over here? The man replies, “no I lost them over there”. “The questioner then ask, then why are we searching over here”? The key loser replies because the light is better over here. This answer seems quite ridiculous, yet it assumes that we know where the keys were lost, and that where they were lost is relevant to finding them. Yet as we all know well, we most often don’t know where the keys were lost, and that our expectations are all too often a flawed guide to finding them. So we labor under the light. This speaks to the limits of sensory examination, for if we used touch we could eventually by expanding the area of our search find the lost keys. This supports the current hypothesis, that to study infinitesimal phenomena we must use high energy methods, comparable to the energy required to find the keys by sight as opposed to

finding than by touch or vacuum. Yet, in the case of the unimaginable, we don’t even know that the keys are lost. This then presents the cargo cult phenomena, of assigning value to 25

phenomena which is not well understood.

25 "The Cargo Cults of the South Pacific ­ San Jose State University." 2003. 3 Aug. 2016 <http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/cargocult.htm>

Unimaginable: Is anything unimaginable? It is of course axiomatic that the unimaginable is related to time in the sense that time moves us along on the road of what is imagined. Yet, we can see the unimaginable as a distant point on a long road on a spherical planet. Even if you use a telescope you can only see what lies along the visual plane, and those ideas that are over the horizon are not visible. Yet, the unimaginable is far beyond the horizon, in that the analogy is only suited by a planet of infinite scale. Recently, I was sitting in my car writing, and appreciating the

heavy rainfall on the roof of my car, at a local mall. Of course watching people go about the day, (a favorite sub­urban pastime). A middle­aged couple had just come from the grocery with a cart overflowing with bottled water and cereal. They appeared to be recent immigrants, and I imagined that they had most likely had quite the experience, which is embodied in an American supermarket. The man had gone ahead to bring the car to the curb, while the woman pushed the cart to a convenient position. When the car arrived, the backdoor of the late modeled SUV opened automatically. Yet, when she tried to push up close to the car, the cart began to resist. She presumed that the wheel of the cart was malfunctioning. So both she and her husband were both on their knees trying to address the problem. As a veteran shopper, I knew that the cart was being controlled by an invisible fence, which is a common method employed by stores to keep people from walking off with an expensive cart, which generally list for about $250 each. These people where in the un­imaginable zone. The cart appeared as normal, although there was one red wheel. This is one of the unimaginable fields which indicates that the “closed system”, which is so popular in science, is purely dependent on knowledge. As modern thinkers we must embrace the un­imaginable. The realm of the the un­imaginable includes;

Any scientific law: Scientific laws, such as Newton’s laws are just like other human developed laws, such as traffic or even violence. These laws are a reflection of the empirical, conceptual, value and cultural limits of the writers. For example, Newton, was a firm believer in the Christian god, and the early magical chemistry of alchemy. These biases are a box, of limited scope, that the law writers use as resource. The predictive value of such laws may be quite impressive, but trust the reality of a shelf life for all.

Any solution based upon problem universal constant(s). To go to the extreme for an example, I would bet one day in the not too distant future, it will be discovered that their are multiple ways to find the area of a circle without using Pi. The new discoveries will most likely provide a better answer than simple 2 dimensional space, perhaps the new method will provide the area of more than idealized perfect circles, and be applicable to all closed spaces, or perhaps it will provide an answer that represents 3, 4 or 5 dimensions.

Amor fati: All ideas based upon fate, heuristics, or inevitable phenomena. Fate is a weak anthropomorphic concept, which is actually a method for describing history, and to make predictions based upon the cloudy lens of history, and consequently is therefore ill suited for informed prediction of future phenomena, and reliances on fate are sure to fail to recognize important, potentially high reward phenomena. Heuristics, or trial and error, axiomatically implies trial, and error realization, consequently heuristics can only lead down already established paths. I’m reminded of my ill fated trip to Montreal from my native Indiana, in the pre GPS age. My companion and I found ourselves wandering, seeking various markers on a paper roadmap. After much argument between us, we chose a route based almost entirely on instinct or intuition. It was a cloudy day and we could not determined north from south. We were eventually stopped by a policeman after making a series of highway U­turns. He suspiciously asked where we were headed, where he quickly determined that we were headed in the wrong direction, and with growing suspicion of this young couple of color, inquired how we came on upon this route. My only reply, luckily he had a sense of humor, was that this way looked friendlier. Despite the roundness of the globe, travel in the wrong direction will never lead to a correct solution.

Any device that requires complex component assembly. We can see this trend now in electronics, where millions of discrete devices are reduced to a simple pattern. We also find that the number of components of quotidian devices, such as vacuum cleans, clocks, and automobiles, where complexity is reduced to patterns that might be printed on a large piece of paper. I would imagine that in the not too distant future, the automobile, or private transit vehicle, while be reduced to a platform, wherein 90% of its design is to comfort the passenger. All you need to do is visit a wealthy suburb to watch kids whipping around on hoverboards, or police on 2 wheeled vehicles.

By Gare Henderson, Ph.D. AD, PM gare.henderson@indra­institute.org

Keywords: Epistemology, theory of knowledge, unimaginable, unknown, imagination, IQ based fees, IQ based expectations, justified true belief, noumena, stovepipes, easy evidence, strong leaders, knowledge continuum.

Background of the author:

Gare Henderson, Ph.D. AD, PM

Academic posts: Adjunct professor/lecturer: New York University, CUNY graduate center, New School for social research,

Hunter College, Baruch College, etc. Various NASA committees,

Publications: Various technical publications: environmental engineering, renewable energy sources, and philosophy of energy.

Books: Meta­Energetics 2002, Why it doesn’t rain in Saudi Arabia 2014, The water cycle revisited, the bio­recharge rEvolution begins

2016

Papers Presented:

CTE: Cooling Tower. ECC, Energy conversion conference ­China, IDA, International desalination association­Italy, IDTECHEX, EUEC,

Government consulting clients:

US Army, US Air Force, US Marines, Government of Ghana, NASA, Nuclear commission of India, US Navy

Significant events:

Implemented early form of email 1979. Chairman ECC convention China 2009. Youngest member of Ivy league university computer

science faculty.

Literary mentions: Popular Science, New Scientist, NASA tech briefs, Crain's, New York times, Wired Magazine, Alternative

Energy Magazine, etc.

Professional posts: Director of Research Gravitational Systems Engineering, Director of Research INDRA Institute, Director on

research INDRA project, CEO Electronic mail corporation, President Computer Help network, President Print A Part 3d, Engineering

supervisor United Technologies

Education, teaching & research:

Indiana University : Quantitative analysis, 1972 ­ 1978

New York University : Artificial Intelligence, 1984 ­ 1994

Graduate School of Political Mgt : Culture and the environment, 1987 ­ 1992 Ph.D.

Hunter College : Machine Languages, 1986 ­ 1989

Trinity College & University : Structural dynamics, 1979 ­ 1984 Ph.D.

King's College Briarcliff Manor : Geo­engineering concepts, 1987 ­ 1993 Ph.D.

New school of social research : Philosophy of machines, 1987 ­ 1992

CUNY graduate center : Database theory, 1989 ­ 1993

Bernard Baruch College : Computer interface engineering, 1986 ­ 1988