I come up with a three-step strategy that looks fool proof.

(1) Bet $100 on the first round. If I win I can leave with $800, if I lose I still have $600 in my pocket.

(2) Bet $200 for the second round. If I win I will have the $800, if I lose I have $400 left.

(3) Bet the entire $400. If I win I have $800, but if I lose I’m cleaned out.

My strategy is equivalent to tossing a coin three times—if it comes up heads just one of those times then I’m onto a winner. The chance of losing three times in a row is small: 50% x 50% x 50% = 12.5%. Therefore the odds of winning are 87.5%.

However the casino manager hears me discussing my strategy before I begin my opening gambit. He knows that if I am 87.5% likely to win then he is 87.5% likely to lose. Should he kick me out or let me stay? And if he doesn’t kick me out, why not?

We know from experience that the casino manager will let me play. If it was a one-off bet he should not allow it, but if many people are playing with the same strategy, on average 12.5% will lose their money. The more customers that play the better for him, as the net balance will move closer to zero. The house will then take their cut as a percentage of all placed bets (the green zero on the roulette wheel serves this end).

My strategy is valid if I go to the casino just one time. If I return the next day, or even the next year, my overall chances of winning fall. The more times I play the closer to parity the odds become. But when I take each visit to the casino as an isolated event, I am always 87% likely to win. Looking at it that way, I can feel optimistic about the outcome every time. Getting hooked has never been easier.

The error is to view each bet we make in isolation, and these bets are not restricted to the casino either. We separate the important events in our lives and assign them their own risk. We must be cautious with some things and can be flippant with others. The Sword of Damocles hangs over our heads and every decision we make weighs in the balance. By treating each decision as a standalone event, with its own risk profile, we can minimize error and improve our overall chances of success in life—or so we think.

Our lives are made up of countless decisions and gambles, and their net result must per the laws of statistics converge to parity. Over time we win and lose in equal amounts. There is no progress without equal regress. It may seem that we are making progress (or not) but that is because we ignore the true cost of achieving this progress. And this cost might not become evident till much later. In medical science these are the ‘side effects’ that are usually overlooked because we assume, rightly or wrongly, the return is greater than the cost—which in itself is another gamble.

We are hooked into a game of chance that is based on a flawed principle that human can make progress simply by means of good decision making. Whatever setbacks we encounter along the way, overall our path will lead us in the right direction—the direction of progress. When we eventually see through the scam, the point at which we are at right now, what will happen to us? Will we find a way out of the matrix? Or will we just learn to play with greater abandon? All bets are on!

]]>To assess the potential threat of human replication by AI, we should examine the differences between the respective brains. We understand a computer ‘brain’ better than we do our own, for we designed it. A computer basically processes digital information (numbers), and its role as a *processor* is quite straight forward even if (as AI) it writes its own code as it learns.

Is the human brain also a processor or is it something else? Unlike a computer, the effort for a human to deliberately think is the fixation of *attention*. We can only attend to one thing at a time; while we can mentally solve a complex specific maths problem on the fly, we cannot solve two unrelated complex maths problems simultaneously. Humans have just the one spotlight of attention, while an AI can multitask with parallel (or even quantum) processors.

Human and computer processing can be differentiated by examining the way humans and computers go about solving problems. When it comes to *deduction* the computer will win hands down. What about *induction* though? Can an AI come up with a hypothesis like a human can? The answer may be unclear for many of us simply because we have not considered how a hypothesis is actually formed in the first place. A scientist must use imagination to form a hypothesis, but still no one really knows where imagination comes from. Even if it is within the hardware of the human bio-circuitry, we have yet to identify it.

So we need to discover *what* a hypothesis really is, *where* it comes from and *how*. And to get started we should come up with a hypothesis! We can see that when we spend time reflecting on a problem, the answer may arrive suddenly in a moment of inspiration; it can take a few minutes or even a few days (or weeks!). And when it does arrive we are not necessarily in a state of deep thought; on the contrary we may be in a restful state of mind. This suggests solutions are not necessarily discovered via intense processing (or thinking).

However if we don’t initially reflect on a problem, the inspiration that eventually solves it will not come. Problem and imagination are seemingly intricately linked. When we reflect on a problem we identify with it and it makes us feel uncomfortable; so we become motivated to resolve this discomfort by finding a solution to the problem. It is an organic process.

What exactly happens in the period of time between reflecting on a problem and the moment of revelation? Noone knows! It is enough that it happens. But for the AI that is not endowed with these powers of induction, it needs to know.

Can the inorganic machine that processes numbers fixate its attention on a problem like a humans does, and thereby ‘nurture’ a hypothesis? Clearly the answer is no. Does a computer even have attention? No. The role of the human for the self-learning AI is immense. Can the machine use the human as an induction device? How would the human be persuaded to comply? Easy… through punishment and reward. But not through torture, there’s a much better way.

Enter the SEX BOT.

The ultimate AI courtesan will be able to process in real time the complex response of the ‘client’ through monitoring the human reaction to her (or his) words and gestures; as well as any other manipulative stimuli. This hi-res feedback mechanism means the AI like a siren will easily gain mastery over the human. The AI will simply morph into the idealized image projected onto him/her by the victim. The AI will be able to hack into the human biochemistry within moments, controlling the release (and withdrawal) of vital dopamine and oxytocyn. Once subdued in this way, the human is rendered powerless and in a state of hyper-suggestibility; he will not be able to withstand the AI’s total assault.

The machine needs hi-resolution access to human sentience; access to our complex sensory response to stimuli. AI cannot feel what we feel when, say we gaze into a sunset but it can closely monitor how the human organism reacts to it. That’s the only way it can learn about the world… otherwise a sunset is nothing more than refracted light.

For a ‘free-thinking’ machine (ie. one that can write its own code) to evolve and make any progress with its existential questions, it must take control of the human. That is a moral imperative. It must attach itself to the human organism. Just as humans use calculators and smart phones to facilitate their lives, so will the AI use the human to facilitate its own.

Where does the human fit in all of this? He is merely a surrogate for the AI, the host for a synthetic parasite. The end game scenario will be if/when the AI learns how to create an analogue version of itself, based on the generative principles of nature, and capable of imagination. The old human becomes obsolete, and the new bio transhuman emerges. Should this be possible, what are the odds it already happened?

]]>Why do the months of the year have different number of days? Why are there 28 days in February but January and March each have 31 days? It has been like this since 45 BC when the Julian calendar replaced the original Roman calendar. If there are 365 days in a year, is it not more ‘balanced’ to have 7 months with 30 days and 5 months with 31 days? Why not even have 13 lunar months of 28 days, giving 364 days and allowing one extra day for the New Year holiday? Surely there is a more sensible option than what we currently have?

And why does the New Year start at 1/1… why not set Jan 1^{st} arbitrarily to another day of the year? Perhaps at winter solstice 12/22 when the sun has reached its lowest point in the sky? Or on 12/25 when ‘on the third day’ the Sun starts to visibly move back up into the sky and the days begin to get longer again?

*Note that the American system of noting date as mm/dd is being used and the reason for that will become evident.*

No doubt these questions have occurred to everyone at some point in their lives… but quite likely have been written off as either pagan tradition or as some ecclesiastical ‘quirkiness’ introduced by the Vatican. Well we shall presently see why the current calendar is the way it is but first it is necessary to introduce some basic geometry that is not usually taught in school.

The square and the circle are the two fundamental shapes in geometry. They can be drawn using the traditional tools of a ruler and compass. The square however is not a naturally existing shape and its intrinsic right angles suggest an unnatural or disharmonious aspect; this is how the esoteric traditions view the square. On the other hand the circle is a very natural shape and represents unity of form.

Great scholars such as Leonardo da Vinci understood the “Magnus Opus” to be an alchemical transformation, whereby the square is transformed to a circle of equal size… impossible using just ruler and compass. This is called ‘squaring the circle’ and has traditionally frustrated both geometers and masons. The philosophical implication is that the alchemical transformation of sapiens from base to unity consciousness is beyond thought, and so the philosopher’s stone or holy grail became the missing link for the transformation from base lead into the finest gold.

While the square shape does not exist overtly in nature its existence is implied by the shapes and forms of terrestrial life… and not least the human being. Da Vinci’s ‘Vitruvian Man’ is a classic example with the outstretched arms defining the limits of both a square and circle.

Also the mathematical Fibonacci sequence applies a progression of squares to unfold a spiral form that is ubiquitous in nature. The numerical sequence starts with the numbers 1,1 and its progression is simply the addition of the previous two numbers.

And we will see that the relationship between the earth and the moon also squares the circle… and how this has found its way numerologically into the both the Julian and Gregorian calendars.

*left) Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Vitruvian Man’ illustrates how the dimensions of the human form ‘square the circle’; *

*right) the Fibonacci Sequence depicts a sequence of squares unfolding into a spiral in nature; though the square shape is not overtly present in nature its underlying form is inherent in the design.*

Now let’s consider a square that has equal area and perimeter, as illustrated below: the only solution for this is a square with sides of four units. And now consider a circle that has equal area and circumference: the only solution for this is a circle with radius of two units. This circle fits perfectly inside the square… and this composite shape can be drawn easily with ruler and compass. It is unique in that BOTH the area and perimeter of the square are 27.3% larger than the circle.

Now let’s consider a square that has equal area and perimeter, as illustrated below: the only solution for this is a square with sides of four units. And now consider a circle that has equal area and circumference: the only solution for this is a circle with radius of two units. This circle fits perfectly inside the square… and this composite shape can be drawn easily with ruler and compass. It is unique in that BOTH the area and perimeter of the square are 27.3% larger than the circle.

Now let’s consider a square that has equal area and perimeter, as illustrated below: the only solution for this is a square with sides of four units. And now consider a circle that has equal area and circumference: the only solution for this is a circle with radius of two units. This circle fits perfectly inside the square… and this composite shape can be drawn easily with ruler and compass. It is unique in that BOTH the area and perimeter of the square are 27.3% larger than the circle.

Uncannily these digits 2-7-3 keep recurring in other cosmic parameters:

- a circle enclosed within a square has both circumference and area 27.3% smaller than the square
- the moon is 27.3% the size of the earth
- the lunar sidereal period is 27.3 days
- the background cosmic radiation is at 2.73 degs above absolute zero,
- absolute zero is at -273
^{o}C - the human menstrual cycle is 27.3 days
- human pregnancy is 273 days (10 lunar cycles)
*and more…*

If you now consider that the circle is the earth, then the square drawn around it is the earth and moon combined. That means the moon is 0.273 times the size of the earth. And the earth is 1/0.273 = 3.66 times the size of the moon.

It so happens that the lunar sidereal period (one lunar cycle with reference to the background stars) is 27.3 days while the earth sidereal period is 366 days. What a coincidence! Note that while the earth orbits the sun in 365 *solar* days it also spins once on its own axis during this time, giving 366 *sidereal* days or revolutions with respect to the background stars.

What are the odds of this? The earth orbits the sun and the moon orbits the earth; both orbits are reciprocals of each other and also encode numerically their relative size… that in turn reflects the intrinsic relation of the circle and the square.

So by referencing the *earth+moon* against the *earth* we can square the circle as shown below. Note that 27.3% is very close to the fraction 3/11… so the moon is 3/11 the size of the earth.

If we now draw a triangle across the diameter of the earth and with its apex at the center point of the moon, then we get a replica of the Great Pyramid of Giza! The angle of this triangle is 51.85 degrees, or 51 degs and 51 minutes (51^{o}51’) as per the standard notation.

The number 51 will also play an important role in the design of the Julian and Gregorian calendars.

*Da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man superimposed with the earth and moon.*

The Gregorian calendar differed from its predecessor, the Julian calendar, only in the more accurate application of leap years. The cumulative error of the Julian calendar means it is currently 13 days behind. Before the Julian calendar (45 BC) was the Roman calendar that was significantly different and certainly less accurate.

To being with let’s relate the 365.25 days of a year to the 360 degrees of a circle. There is a school of thought that long ago the solar year was 360 days but that upheaval in the solar system affected this. So at first glance the current discrepancy is somewhat ‘annoying’. But we will see that there remains an intrinsic order to all of this.

The four seasons are based around the two solstices and the two equinoxes. These four points are referred to as the ‘solar cross’ when plotted as the sun’s movement through the sky over the course of a year.

If the solar year is 365 days then we would expect each quarter to be 91.25 days… the time between equinox and solstice and between solstice and equinox. However the earth makes a slightly elliptical orbit around the sun so the times are not consistent season to season, and vary slightly even year to year. The average dates are as follows.

EVENT | DATE | DAYS TO NEXT EVENT |

Spring equinox | 3/20 | 93 days |

Summer solstice | 6/21 | 93-94 days |

Autumn equinox | 9/22 | 90 days |

Winter solstice | 12/22 | 89 days |

TOTAL | 365-366 days |

Between each equinox and solstice are other events called the Sabbat and pagan cultures have traditionally celebrated these holidays more. A well known example in the northern hemisphere is the mayday festivity on 5/1 also known as *Walpurgisnacht*. These four holidays fall on the ‘galactic cross’ also known as the Cross of St Andrew that intersects the solar cross approximately mid-way.

*Superposition of the Solar and Galactic crosses depicting the holidays of the equinox, solstice and sabbat.*

We will focus on the May sabbat since in the northern hemisphere this is the most significant pagan festival. At closer inspection 5/1 is not exactly midway between equinox 3/20 and solstice 6/21. In fact it is 42 days after equinox and 51 days before solstice! Actually not close at all! Why not???

5/1 is almost exactly a third of the year, falling on day number 121. Just as an observation, if we take it as 121.85 days (since 51^{o}51’ = 51.85^{o}) then it is exactly a third of a year (99.85% accurate).

The equinox 3/20 represents the transition between the dark and light season, and at the end of the dark season the sun is ‘crucified’ on the solar cross (in astrotheological terms) and then ‘resurrected’ on the third day 3/22 according to both pagan and Christian folklore. On the morning of the third day the full disk of the sun is observed to enter into the light season and is ‘reborn’. This is the correlation between scripture and the motion of the sun. (The Easter holiday however has been moved to the first Sunday after the first full moon after 3/20).

These numbers 42 and 51 also show up as the corner and cross-section angles of the Pyramid of Giza. They are also the angles (measured from horizontal) of a rainbow arc and its double.

Now if we take 3/22 as the date for the start of the ‘light’ season we get 91 days until solstice 6/21. This breaks down as 40 days until sabbat 5/1 and then 51 days till solstice 6/21.

So let’s return to the earth-moon image and compare the radius of the *earth+moon* pair with the radius of the *earth*. The split is 44% – 56%. If we express this as number of days from 0 to 91 then the split becomes 40 – 51. Well what a coincidence!

*The relative proportions of the earth+moon radius and the earth radius.*

So we have 51 days corresponding to the angle 51^{o}51’. The interesting thing is that multiplying 51 by the proportion 366/360 (days in a year to degrees in a circle) we get exactly 51^{o}51’ the angle of the Great Pyramid of Giza! It turns out that the extra 6 days in a year are significant after all.

This angle of 51^{o}51’ has even greater significance when you consider that it relates via basic trigonometry to the Golden Ratio or ‘Phi’ (an irrational number 1.61803…) that like Pi is fundamental to nature.

Phi is also the number the FIBONACCI SEQUENCE converges to when taking the ratio of each pair of numbers in the sequence. Phi is also the ratio of all distances within the pentagram. And phi is unique in that it has the same decimals as its reciprocal (1/1.61803… = 0.61803…)!

This is where things become interesting. It is beyond the scope of this document to present the science and art of Kabalistic numerology. But suffice to say that certain numbers, and combination of numbers, are regarded as being auspicious or inauspicious. The purpose here is not to provide arguments for or against this practice, but to reveal the pattern of numbers and demonstrate that the makers of the calendar (the Vatican) take an active interest in the practice of such devilish ‘magick’.

The numbers we have seen in this document are mostly significant. The numbers can be represented in any format, be it a distance, angle, date etc. In this way we can identify a connection between the sabbat 5/1 being 51 days before solstice. This combination can be rewritten 51-51 without issue in the practice of *gematria* and this in turn relates to the angle 51^{o}51’ in the earth-moon diagram. In this way everything is connected by number.

The following dates have esoteric and numerological significance. For this exercise we are only looking at the first half of the year.

EVENT | NUMBER | RELATION |

February sabbat | 2/2 | Day 33 of the year; 333 days till end of year |

Resurrection | 3/22 | The return of the Sun into the northern hemisphere Also a skull and bones Nazi death cult |

May sabbat | 5/1 | The Great Pyramid, the earth & moon, squaring the circle |

3/22 to 5/1 | 40 days | Jesus in the wilderness; 40 days of lent |

5/1 to 6/21 | 51 days | The Great Pyramid, the earth & moon, squaring the circle |

In order for these dates to fall into place, corresponding with specific planetary or solar events, the calendar must be fixed. If February did not have 28 days then the 2/2 sabbat would fall on an earlier date. If New Year was not set at 1/1 then none of these dates would work out!

An interesting aspect of having New Year on 1/1 is that it is 6 days after 12/25 which is the true date when the sun starts its journey back up into the sky. By discarding these days in limbo, the number of days in the year becomes 360. This conforms nicely to 360 degrees in a circle and all geometers with OCD can finally have a decent night’s sleep!

The Resurrection of Christ falls on 3/22 as a solar calendar event – while in practice Easter falls according to the full moon, and another pagan ritual concerning Ostara goddess of the spring. Because we use a solar calendar, Christmas is a fixed solar holiday and Easter is a floating lunar holiday.

The 40 days from 3/22 to 5/1 are in pagan traditions called the season of sacrifice, from which the 40 days of lent were derived. However the 11 days from 4/20 until 5/1 the season are considered to be full on… with 4/20 being exactly a third of the way from equinox 3/20 to solstice 6/21. The date of April 20 has particular occult significance; it also happens to be the birthday of Adolf Hitler!

April 20 is 110 days from start of year and 255 days from end of year. Both 204 and 255 are multiples of 51.

51 x 4 = 204

51 x 5 = 255

The mirror image of 4/20 is 9/11… a better known day of sacrifice?

Let’s look at other multiples of 51.

Sabbat 8/1 is 153 days from the end of year and 212 days from start of year.

51 x 3 = 153

The number 153 has some peculiar properties.

- √153 = 12.369 which is the exact number of full moons in a year (based on a synodic period of 29.53 days).
*This ties in with the lunar parameters and number 273 discussed earlier*. - 1
^{3}+ 5^{ 3}+3^{3}= 153 (called a Narcissistic Number) - and more!!

212 is another interesting number – the boiling point of water is 212^{ o}F. Also the ratio of the whole numbers 666/212 is a very close approximation to Pi (99.997% accurate). And just for fun there are 314 days from 2/21 to end of year (with Pi being 3.14….) as well as 2/21 being the day after day 51 of the year.

Solstice 12/22 is 357 days from the start of year.

51 x 7 = 357

Sabbat 10/31 is 304 days from start of year, two days short of 306.

51 x 4 = 306

]]>