My work in Physics

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Fri Jan 3 04:15:42 EST 2003


Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
|[...]
"If I'd not reached-out to Love, in the ensuing interval, the
new-new stuff wouldn't've gained sway [I'd've 'fought' to 'hold
the line', and I'd've 'succeeded', 'cause I'm fierce in thet way."
|[...]


"fierce"

like I said, I have to "gear-down".

I don't want to 'frighten' folks.

a more-easily-comprehended word is "stubborn".

When I 'go-for-it', doing so requires a putting-aside of
everything else, until the problem is resolved.

It's a deliberately 'merciless' condition in which to exist
[that's also explained in AoK] in which I focus TD E/I with
respect to the problem I'm working on [don't try it unless you
understand NDT well], and the magnitude of 'will' that arises
within is commensurate with all the "needs" that're being
'put-aside' in order to leave nothing other than the problem's
resolution. It gets 'intense', but if folks look back to =long=
former msgs, they'll see that the first requirement of
'going-for-it' is to spare others the 'intensity'... so,
outwardly, all anyone sees is 'stubbornness' [except, as folks've
witnessed, when I'm 'attacked' in the misdt of so 'giving-all'
:-]

Try to understand - it's for the Children, and nothing is "too
much" for them - so I don't hold anything 'in-reserve'. I Give
even what Life depends upon, in order to align TD E/I against the
problem's stuff. It's 'intense', as it has to be, 'cause the
problems are not, at least at the outset, trivial/ So I put on
'solitude'. As I've discussed in long-former msgs, early-on, the
'intensity' caught me unprepared. All I could see, back then, was
how much I wanted this or that for the Children [for everyone,
and, yes, for myself], so the problem had to be solved. Bbut, back
then, the 'solitude' was externally-imposed, because, when I'd be
working on a problem, that'd reflect in my behavior in a way that
others interpreted as 'aloofness', and they'd 'take offense' and,
react, often in 'cruel' ways - and before I got it all sorted out,
I'd reciprocate by 'takeing offense' at being subjected to such
treatment, because, there I was giving myself over to working to
do something good, and the 'cruel' reactions seemed overly unjust.
But, in 'time', I came to understand that folks didn't understand,
and that their reactions were 'blindly'-automated. Then, the
'solitude' became deliberate, internally-imposed stuff - Loving
folks in the only way I could, by 'sparing' them the experience of
my problem-solving 'aloofness' with which they 'took-offense'.

Anyway, I'd like folks to understand, but don't want to 'frighten'
folks.

Other, to me, correlated, matter:

"Director Quits Los Alamos Under Fire", By KENNETH CHANG

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/03/national/03ALAM.html

[all the "L" to the end of the URL - my newsreader routinely
'truncates' it]

[© 2003 by The New York Times.]

I'm impoverished for wanting to do-Science on behalf of the
Children, yet there's all this waste?

Why does a guy like me have to 'worry' about eating?

Doesn't compute, does it?

Nope.

ken





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list