Some more explanation why not

Have been someone whose life has been defined by faith, as was brought up in a puritanical religion which is Christian fundamentalist--which I do NOT name any more as figure that's just free advertising for them--but ESCAPED to college where got a degree in physics, and after enlisted in the US Army, as switched really to alternate authority.

While in the US Army started playing with my own math ideas, looking at old math problems presumably could not solve, which have discussed before. Oh, hadn't mentioned was still in military? Um, yeah. That wasn't to last though.

Left the US Army with an honorable discharge, which is what's important, and set about living a life, while working hard for some reason on math problems I didn't reasonably see any reason to think I could solve. Part of me wanted to think maybe could but also saw it as fun fantasy better than alternative. Thankfully also got work, which just thought of as the 'day job' and also found web, where could talk out my hobby. And God help me, eventually DID end up with what I thought were decent ideas and went to accepted math authority, of course. Turned out though most of those ideas? Were just wrong.

I've been brought up on authority. I was taught to live by faith. I dropped belief in a religion and switched to science, and my country's military, and the Establishment, so of course if I think I have good ideas that's where I'd go.

That didn't work out so well though.

Lots and lots of bogus ideas, which is really embarrassing by the way. Until I had more and more solid ones. Until had cleared out all the wrong ones. And finally had nothing but solid.

Now so many years later as really over two decades, actually have more faith in my country I think, and less in other areas. Have abandoned talking to current establishment math authority, but quit working on hard math problems anyway. Oh, but found that ideas I'd figured out along the way grab global attention.

That's cool. I like it, a lot.

However, I have tried to be careful, as do not wish to lead others astray. But finally started wondering if maybe was going too far. I say, focus on the ideas, and not the person who found them.

So here is where things stand now. Anything I have across my blogs with regard to ideas, is in my mind, firmly established. Which is great to be able to say, as quit doing original research and am now focused on developing what I have, or just appreciating it.

There are no results which have been debunked by established authority, nor by anyone else with validity. There were some attempts with some of my math things but all collapsed under scrutiny. Some might disagree, but it's like with NASA and those who don't think went to the Moon.

The ideas drive the attention where I get glance off, which is ok.

It's still overwhelming often.


James Harris

Useful matters

Having things public is thrilling but understandably I think one wants that to go ok, and in the past talked more about my open source Class Viewer, which is an app for Java software developers, as if frustrated with lack of direct feedback. But I think people could read between the lines was also maybe a bit relieved actually? So there are two sides to it, as really want feedback and also can be wary of it.

Which to me is ok as there is a range of human behaviors that can be ok. And not everyone should fit into some specific type of behavior and not saying people push that but have maybe thought that myself. Now am like, lots of ways.

And now am glad the project is still being downloaded, as feel then like it is useful to people which is what is important, and I like to use it. And that perspective also helps me discuss it, as focus less on my feelings like being uncomfortable with even idea of a lot of attention, and think more about how it can best be useful.

More posting on Class Viewer by me has now moved to its blog on SourceForge, which is a natural place and actually that helped boost downloads quite a bit. Which made sense to me, versus talking about it here.


James Harris

Thoughts on Pinterest

So I link to this blog on my Pinterest account, and other accounts, while my other blogs have their own, but most social media links back to here for some reason. And I really like my Pinterest account for collecting things visually but also admit that it is nice to have an audience, and more I learn about that audience the more I find myself considering it as I pin things.

And, um, talked it more on my G+ account in a Collection where I muse on social media.

On my blogs I feel free to link to any social media that makes a point, and it's also about seeing what happens. Just curious.

Oh yeah, so at times I think hey, should talk Pinterest a bit for people who might wander over here, from there, as I link to this blog there.


James Harris

Art reality and 50 years of Star Trek

Questions about art fascinate me to some extent but also frustrate me, as people can focus on populism or elitism with no clue that longevity rules. So for instance classical music which is revered today was the pop music of its times.

And can do a quick post now as pushed forward my thinking on art and entertainment already, as consider growing evidence that Star Trek is art.

For those who don't know, show originally aired 50 years ago today.

However, with my own definition of art, find myself pondering why would it be art.

The gist of it is that I think that Gene Roddenberry, a warrior who as a soldier in World War II flew 89 combat missions, was sick and tired of human on human conflict so he imagined a time when it was rare.

And look at SO much fiction and you see--human on human conflict. Relentlessly.

The idea that people might eventually for the most part get along is a rare one I think in fiction. And for most is a religious notion maybe, while the most cynical maybe think human beings will always be the worst enemies of human beings along maybe with some other monsters tossed in as well.

Star Trek dared to go where primarily religion has gone before, expressing a vision of humanity as one species united, in peace with itself.

— James Harris (@jstevh) September 8, 2016

So if you wonder why Star Trek can be so popular, I suggest to you, you may be a cynic, convinced that some human will always be a horror on other humans, while others dream of better.

That better to me is a concept which resonates with the human soul as an abstract entity which permeates our existence as human beings and operates as a timeless concept, making it art.

But time will tell.


James Harris

Thinking on art and entertainment

To me science is a functional reality, where it gives us greater control in life, where the light switch is my favorite example as so easy to just notice as used daily by so many. Yet the ability to have light on demand was one of the greatest of human achievements, delivered through science and technology. Before humans were at the mercy of the dark, now can command light itself to the point it is not even thought of much by many any more.

And found myself considering the science of entertainment, where to me with a functional view of science, it isn't that hard to conceive of the possibility, and then found a simple enough base with the notion that entertainment is just a safe way to control mood. But what about art?

Well there am lucky in that the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art posed the question on Twitter, which I guess such institutions do routinely enough, but for me was life changing as with the challenge I found myself coming up with an answer to fit in a tweet which I've posted about and will copy answer to here:

I think art is the purest expression of our core humanity. Is sharing in a way that resonates with the human soul. Time irrelevant.

If I'd had more room, might have given a longer answer, but now find myself using that as my basis for what art is. And to me the timeless quality of art is of great use, as science is a lot about time. In science usually one figures out what MUST happen if you DO certain things. But in art, time is irrelevant.

Put it all together and can see that art is not in and of itself entertainment. But art can be entertaining if it safely gives a desired mood.

So art can be a tool of mood, but to art that is meaningless. And one way to ask, how do we know is art? Wait.

If you look in American cinematic history few knew that one of the greatest movies of all time was being produced along with so many others back in 1942. Yet is now well established the greatness of the film Casablanca which we know today is art.

Art doesn't care about the times, though can reflect the times, but only in a way that is timeless. So yeah, you can produce popular entertainment which is locked into its times. That pop song that resonates with millions for a bit, taking its moment in time, which by my definition above, is probably not art.

Which is how art can escape our attempts to hold it down or ascribe it, as the reality for any of us, with anything produced in our time? We may not see it. It may escape the limitations of our knowledge of our own core humanity, and resonate with our species over time, emerging in time to its proper place.

And regardless art will not care. Actual art can be imagined to have a disdain for the limitations of the humans who produce and consider it. Because we cannot truly consume that which is immutable to us. Art will last long after we are gone. And some art will always escape us, to be finally noticed, in time, by humans yet to be born.


James Harris