Archive for March, 2014

Value of the Past

on March 31, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

The future, as far as natural selection is concerned, has no value. True, the future can be altered with every action done in the present: it is called niche change. Also true, anyone’s alterations or actions of niche change can alter the future—it does not need to be your changes.

In my estimation, future predictions of events are based upon past analysis of analogous and homologous experience. The future of your survival also relies upon your expert and precise knowledge of mathematical systems. Good thing only your subconscious brain needs to know these calculations right?

We need two terms if we are to understand this to be the case. Conscious past: the past you know and love, or are wise enough to hate, is the obvious one that everyone understands. The unconscious past, which is responsible for your survival, is less understood.

Unconscious past is based in innate instincts and fine-tuned with learning. By example, it is what teaches your nervous system to walk. It does not exclude representation of new data which is part of your conscious past, but it does keep the calculations out of your conscious mind or conscious brain.

To keep it simple for our understanding, the conscious brain does not need to know that 2x2x2 is the reason that your finger feels pain. The unconscious brain does need to know that 2x2x2 is why you cut your finger. We just need to understand that there are two different brains doing two different past event analysis.

The unconscious past is what makes the predictions about the time flow from present into future and automatically makes adjustments in your behavior. Your unconscious brain is where the knowledge of space/time relativity is stored and it is this that I refer to as brain relativity. It is considered past because you already know it. At the same time, it is present/future oriented. Confused?

©copyright 2011-2014


First Causes in Language

on March 22, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

“Sound trumps meaning in first language learning” ScienceDaily.

First, let me console my friends and followers. Sound does not trump meaning. Sound and meaning are one and the same in the brain. First sound meaning, trumps secondarily learned meaning, is the correct means of expression.

The article is very interesting and I take this quote:

“[Children] do not always rely on the most predictive information available when learning their first language. Instead, children disproportionally value the phonological information.”

The link to the article:–+ScienceDaily%29

Since I am writing and you are reading, I can’t deal in phones or phonemics: you can’t hear me. Calls and cries are first cause. I will use the word “food” as a cry. The “F” in food is phonological information. Being “first cause” the “F” allows for grouping. Grouping for food will become classed as both food and a type of food. Fudge will become secondarily grouped into the food classification without conflict of interest. It starts with the sound “F.”

The conflict of phone over meaning comes into play when nouns are used “wrongly” in accordance with the innate meanings. Foundation is not something to eat. It is something to build on.

True, you might say that apple does not start with the letter “F” and it is food. That is the whole point! Apple does not start with the letter “F” so it does not need to compete with the meaning of food and is accepted as the noun for that type of food without conflict. The brain sees food and hears apple: no conflict of calls or cries, thus words. Read into it the placing of nouns onto objects and not setting up different categories of things.

The link to the published study is:

©copyright 2011-2014




It is not often that I will get to critique scientific findings. A bone, called the Hyoid, which is used in speech, was discovered in Israel in 1989. Scientist x-rayed the Hyoid bone of this Neanderthal and found it to be similar to modern humans (our linage). Normally, I would be ecstatic about this finding.

The first thought I had was: this would change everything! Upon reflection, this is not the only part of anatomy that produces language. Similar, or exact in shape and function, ignores the other parts of anatomy.

Second, even if all of the other “voice” mechanisms were the same, it does not follow that language was the same in kind.

True, Neanderthal would be able to produce the same sound-wave vibrations, but articulation proper, does not necessarily ensue. We very well could have shared the exact same calls, cries, grunts, and other noises. Unique to humans is not the ability to communicate well. Unique to humans is our ability to communicate very well by means of articulation.

Even chimpanzees can sit and scream eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee all day long. You don’t hear too many chimps saying A E I O U in short rapid secession.

Just a thought!–+ScienceDaily%29

©copyright 2011-2014


Music Through Time

on March 15, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

It appears as though my theory of Brain Relativity controlling Language Relativity is true on the musical level as well. I would be hard to fathom any sound in nature, musical or otherwise, which are not produced one note after another. More to the point, one sound vibration after another.

True, you could have several sounds, from several sources, all happening at the same time. Every sound from every source would be in a time constructed order. I am working on a video to better describe this process and I will link to it on another post. Key here, is that the sounds themselves, matter very little if they have no structured order to them.

Imagine listening to Sweet Emotion (Aero Smith) without any order to the swift words of the song. Hard to do? What if the words were sang in Greek? What if you don’t understand Greek? When speaking, the brain tries to grasp the jest of what is being said by what is going on in the context of the situation. You might not be able to figure out what is being actually spoken, but your brain would understand that what was being spoken was ordered structure.

As soon as your brain makes the realization that it is music being played, meaning is wiped clean and the brain sees only this ordered structure. Any words added to the music, in any language, would now have the flow of music to carry the ordered structure. Ordered structure is nothing more than grammar or grammatical form, syntax or syntactic form.

I have included a link below for an interesting study done on music. The authors of the study conclude that: “Specifically, it’s syntactic and not semantic processing that is key”. Semantic is the term that refers to meaning.–+ScienceDaily%29

©copyright 2011-2014


“Features” of Sounds

on March 15, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

First let’s recap in simple terms. Words are produced from phonemes (phone), which are still produced of sound waves or vibrations. As I dealt with in my book Tilogos, if a species can produce a sound, it can also understand what the sound represents innately.

I must make this clear to all of my friends, readers and followers. Let’s set up a perfectly acceptable empirical experiment:

Do not make any noise at all. Sit in a room with other people around you. Listen to breathing only. You and the whole room can only do one thing, breathe. More, you can only breathe through your noise. When I experiment, I run a tight ship!

You all of a sudden hear a whistle noise from someone breathing in the room! You and every other person in that room will know exactly what this person is doing when she gets up and heads for the washroom.

Every vibration from a sound wave will be received as that same vibrational element in the same said species, and with the varying pitches and frequencies, concept wise, relative to the innate knowledge of what the sound holds holistically.

This is why we are taught to excuse ourselves from company and seek privacy when these noises occur. One should blow their noses in washrooms…, so they have access to tissue paper…

It is very good that science and scientist are making headway in the study of language deficiencies for the betterment of humans. Just don’t ridicule me for speaking in such simple terms when I renege to use the “proper” words!

The following link has a very good article in these “features” of sounds…–+ScienceDaily%29

©copyright 2011-2014


Only Knowledge Matters

on March 15, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

This article, with the link attached below, shares insight into how the brain processes language. However, it needs slight adjustments to become more accurate. Sight does have a sizable influence on language, but not because you see language. Knowledge, I believe, is the point that keeps getting missed.

Because of the way the brain works, there would naturally be sub-states of language. Sound recognizable concepts: lions roar, thunder, baby’s cry, and so many more sounds would rely on sound, and possibly sound only. These are innate! Articulate speech is not innate. Articulation is learned from calls, cries, and other natural sounds.

The two systems come into play as soon as you convert into articulation. Sound-knowledge gets diverted through a belief system. To make understanding easier, let’s call it belief-knowledge. Why? Because as soon as you learn to articulate language, you can learn to manipulate language to deceive. Boldly, you can lie! A natural mistrust within the brain would override hearing if it became questionable.

Sight on the other hand, would hold the truest sense we have to work with, everything being equal, because it does not rely on hearsay. Sight-knowledge would become a more selectable trait, than sound-knowledge. At least as far as articulation.

In the end we have three sub-systems: sound-knowledge, sight-knowledge, and articulation-knowledge. Articulation-knowledge can’t be trusted, so it converts to belief, faith, or trust. This gives rise to a filtering system, where sight, when available, overrides sound-articulation.–+ScienceDaily%29


©copyright 2011-2014


Evolution does have a purpose and that purpose was to evolve Walt Disney. Disney was famous for cartoons. His most famous character was Mickey Mouse. Mickey Mouse was an animal, rodent to be more specific. Can you even imagine a real mouse talking?

A short time ago, someone found my blog by entering the phrase “did Adam and Eve talk to animals” in a search engine. Indirectly, yes! If Adam or Eve heard a lion roar, then the squealing of a pig in pain, it would be “communicated” to them, that a pig became food for the lion. Understanding noises to contain content is not a huge problem.

Mirror Neurons, are brain cells that allows your brain to imitate other persons states of emotion, meanings of jesters, and they play a heavy part in language. Language did not select for these neurons in and of themselves. Other purposes selected for them and they worked perfect for language. Mirror neurons interact with all of the senses. If you hear the lion roar and pig squeal, then your brain mentally mirrors or envision what is happening. What’s happening?

A loin is chasing you and you make a sharp dive through a crevice and climb to the top of a huge bolder to safety. Forget language! What do you do now? Your eyes watch the lion and report to the brain where the lion is in conceptual form, not language. Your brain actually mirrors the lion and makes an informed image in the brain to manipulate. Your brain actually says: object moving that way, without language.

If the loin moved out of sight in that direction of motion you would look for a way that the lion could climb up. Once you see the path, your brain says, in subject/object form, the lion is coming up there. You jump down and run to safety or home. What’s happening?

Your brain is transposing the loin’s actions as object/subject narrative. Your mirror neurons are actually detecting the lion’s intentions. If that is the intention of the lion, then that must also be what the lion is thinking in subject/object form. No? Tomato, tomato!

Introduce language and what do we have? Tell the story! The lion tried to sneak around the rock to get me, but I knew what he was thinking and I escaped the other way. Now you add character to the lion. The lion was thinking! Take a guess at how many creation myths are told with the voice of animals. Including: and the serpent said unto the woman.

This would also be the beginnings of storytelling. The brains ability to track the intent of subjects and objects. All this with the great foresight of evolution to select for Walt Disney.

©copyright 2011-2014


Wild Cognitive Sex

on March 15, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

Some University of Kansas scientist set up experiments on masculine and feminine words using native speakers of the Spanish language. Words ending in “O” are mainly masculine. Words ending in “A” are mainly feminine.

Personally, it is no surprise to find that there is a cognitive lag in men, when women speak masculine phrases. Likewise, when men speak feminine phrases, the cognitive lag belongs to the ladies. In other words, having women speaking phrases that would typically be spoken by men, the men take pause to understand what was said. It seems that we expect men to speak male phrases and women to speak female phrases. When this does not happen, it confuses the brain. At least in languages which have high gender specific content.

There is a good reason why it comes as no surprise to me in finding this lag. Several experiments have been performed too show that this is also true of any and every situation. I will cover two of them in this posting. First it is important to understand what this lag means and why it is there. Lag means that more cognitive time was needed to deploy information to our conscious thinking. As to why it is there, let’s exaggerate and say it is better to waste one minute now, then to waste ten minutes later on.

One experiment I am going to mention is the famous name the word on the colored blocks. A red block might have the word green written on it and you must say the word green, not “red” the color of the block. The experiment is worked both ways and measured for response time. There is a lag in cognition!

Another experiment has different shapes with different words on them. The word square might be written on a triangle or circle and you either have to say the shape of the block or the word written on the block. Here too, we find that pesky cognitive lag. These lags are measured on the scale of hundreds or thousands of a second, but they are there in every case.

Psychologically speaking, the question should be: why are there voices in my head to begin with?

I usually try to explain the selective process before blogging out. I thought this time it might be fun to leave a cliff-hanger.

You are walking along a path in the woods, when all of a sudden you see a snake open its mouth and roar like a saber-tooth tiger.

©copyright 2011-2014


Smelling Words

on March 15, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

In my book, Tilogos: A Treatise on the Origins and Evolution of Language I dealt heavily in sounds representing concepts. I stopped there, but other qualities such as taste, smell, feel could produce sound concepts too.

You feel something slimy and make a shivering/disgust noise. That noise becomes the representation of that feel. This is no different than a yelp from pain becoming the sound, then name for pain.

You taste something bitter and you spit it out with a gaging sound. That sound becomes representative of bad food and evolves through my process into articulate speech. This is not so amazing!

Now there is evidence that smells can be accurately named if you speak the right language. I have a link below to the article. My point is, that any sense, accompanied with a sound can become articulated. What is the difference if you smell your enemy or see your enemy? The same call for “snake” will be induced into the brain with all your senses. The first sense to recognize the snake will produce the snake call.

Why would the smell of rotten food not evoke the same repugnant sound as tasting the rotten food? The same goes for every sense! This ought to be truest the closer one gets to the first language spoken. English, confused as it is, only has a fifty-percent correlation.–+Language+Acquisition%29

©copyright 2011-2014



on March 15, 2014 in Uncategorized Comments Off

Yes, Brain Relativity even works for Santa! It works like this. If you have been a good boy you end up at the top of Santa’s gift list. If you have been a good girl you end up at the top of Santa’s good list.

On the other hand, if you have been a bad girl or a bad boy, you end up at the very bottom of Santa’s list. The children that are only moderately behaved end up somewhere in the middle of Santa’s list.

Everyone knows that the better behaved you are the better the gifts you receive. That is a basic no-brainer! The farther down the list you are the worst gifts you get. Finally, at the very bottom of the list you get nothing at all. Brat!!!

Therefore, Santa’s brain must keep the list in relative order from the best to the worst children.

If this is the case, and it is, then it behaves like time relativity. Past being the worst behaved, all the way up to the future, being the best behaved. After all, Santa must pack the sleigh before delivering the toy’s in relative terms.

I wish everyone a very Merry Christmas and a well behaved New Year!

©copyright 2011-2014



Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.

Join other followers: