On February 15, 2013 Chelyabinsk Russia was hit with a 1/2 Megaton explosion caused by an unexpected meteor.
This along with all manner of human catastophes in recent news makes it appear that from every angle
The Earth is DOOMED!!!
But Seriously... even this single event should be enough for you to join me in Getting off this Rock!
100% Safe Interplanetary Transportation!
For you, your family, the pets, the garden, or even the whole farm!
Affordably priced and doable with mostly existing technologies.
UPDATE: Page 57 of "The Phenomenon of Man" by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin: 'Now, if the co-operation of some thousands of millions of cells in our brain can [actually do] produce our consciousness,
the idea becomes vastly more plausible that the co-operation of humanity, or some sections of it, [actually all interacting biology,]
may determine [constitutes] what Comte calls a Great Being.' (Essay on Science and Ethics in "The Inequality of Man", Chatto, 1932, p 113.)
So now I have to go find Comte's "Great Being" and "The Inequality of Man" by Chatto
'Now, if the co-operation of some thousands of millions of cells in our brain can [actually do] produce our consciousness,
Recently I appear to have been paralleling the work of Pierre de Chardin at least in so far as the concept of a Planetary Mind Although I propose it is more akin to a multi-versal mind, the planetary scale is a good place to start.
Here is my old resume - call me for an link.
Ever ask yourself What the #$*! Do We (K)now!?
The Whiz Bang Universe - simplified.
Thanks to some time for more study and with some help from some answers to my original questions, I've begun a new theory working from the quantum view of things.
The key questions still remain:
Ignoring the "Impossibility" of a spacecraft reaching the speed of light:
If a spacecraft were to travel at the speed of light (v==c) passed the earth while continually transmitting a UV laser signal behind it, how or what would the photons from the laser be experienced as if they were detected on earth?
Following the formulas if v==c then the frequency of the photon would be zero and thus its EM energy also zero. What does one get when a wavicle does not exhibit any waviness? Is it experienced as a particle? A virtual particle? A string? A quark? Would it have mass? If so how much?
The photon's existence as a particle (or at least as a non-wavicle) is on such a mathematical "razors edge" that a change in the receiver's velocity of a mere 1 cm/s would cause the photons to be experienced as a right-shifted RF signal. A detector on the surface of the earth is tracing a wobbling, corkscrew path through space relative to the center of the milkyway so if the spacecraft is flying straight across the galaxy, the delta v between the craft and the detector would constantly change from c to slightly less then c. Wouldn't the "non-wavicles" (whatever they are) thus appear to briefly pop in and out of existence?
Welcome to your Whiz Bang Universe.
Do you happen to be interested in Astrophysics, Quantum physics, and/or Cosmology?
Have you�ve watched "Cosmos" so many times you can't say 'billions' without rolling the l's?
Then why don't try your hand at answering my recently completed "Questions for an Astrophysicist"
Gotta write a screenplay if you want to get any kind of work in L.A.
Do you happen to be involved in Film or Television production?
Are you looking for a family friendly teen adventure screenplay with heart and low L.A. local production costs?
Then I'd like to present For Your Consideration: "A Treasure Unseen"
I've been playing around with a design idea for a t-shirt, hat, or bumper sticker. I even thought of putting it on a magnetic sign on top of my car to entertain all the news choppers in town. So far it looks something like this.
On Nov 1, 2003 My car was totaled by a 19 year-old drunk driver while I was in Las Vegas. As such I had to purchase a new or at least newer car and found the 2003 Pontiac Vibe shown below:
Okay, so this is a stock picture of the Vibe from the GM web site that doesn't have the two tone side panels but you get the idea and at least it has my plate on it : )
This car absolutely rocks! It has been up in the mountains, through the deserts, across the country and all over L.A. As of this writing (7/04) I've put 40,000 miles on it with more then half being in Los Angeles county. I've driven the entire length of every federal and state highway throughout the county and at this point feel like L.A. (all 4,084 square miles of it) is a small town. After all I can get from Manhattan Beach (on the Ocean) to my home in Arcadia (east of Pasadena) in only three turns using three streets. Every place in L.A. feels like it is just down the street from me. Granted it may take an hour or two to get there but still it's an easy drive.
Yes, I too have fallen prey to the hype and have created my own narcissistic web site. Not to be outdone by others that merely have a "home page", I have a whole domain dedicate entirely to my life, times, work, and philosophies.
One of the more puzzling aspects to having ones own domain is what to do about e-mail addresses. This entire site is designed, developed, and by the way, copyrighted by me. All e-mail sent to this domain goes to me so it doesn't really make sense to have an Emil@EmilDeVries.com or EDeVries@EmilDeVries.com. Therefore, I have decided to have only role and descriptive e-mail addresses. If you like my site and have something positive to say then send e-mail to LoveIt@EmilDeVries.com. If you don't have something positive to say, then say nothing at all. If you can't help but be a whiner then you can send e-mail to Whaaa@EmilDeVries.com. This will allow me to quickly and easily identify what e-mail to ignore. As far as the e-mail address that I will use in response the huge amount of positive mail, well that will be simply be Me@EmilDeVries.com.
While this site is primarily a way for me to globally express myself and have some fun, it does also offer a good forum for me to display my talent as a software developer. To this end I have included a copy of my resume in both MS Word and PDF formats for anyone who is interested.
Things to keep in mind if you are an employer looking for someone with real programming talent:
You can put 1000 monkeys in front of 1000 typewriters and, although they all know how to type, you will never get Shakespeare. Similarly, you can put a 1000 half-ass coders in front of 1000 computers and, although they all know how to write software, you will only get 1000 half-ass programs. You will then have to hire a person with true software engineering talent to come in and re-write these programs done by the code monkeys. Simply put, there a hundreds of violin makers but there is only one Stradivarius. Who do you want working for your company?
To do something professionally does not equate to doing something for pay. Those who have true talent do their work for the love of it, not strictly for $$. Van Gogh never received a dime for any of his paintings...... what an amateur.
The skills and talents of a true software artisan are in a state of constant evolution and are shaped and honed by each of his experiences. His talent can therefore NOT be measured simply by "years of experience" and "last used" of individual aspects (such as a given programming language) of the art. His talent is, quite simply, greater then the some of his experiences. It is impossible to discount the value of his experience with one particular aspect of the art simply because that aspect has not been directly used recently. To do so is tantamount to ignoring the value of all recognitions, certifications and degrees once the ink has dried.
If, as I claim, it is impossible to define a person's software engineering talent by the age and length of use of the individual aspects of the job, how then can a company decide who is right for the job?
First, let me state that there is a learning curve to EVERY job. If not in the use of different aspects of software engineering, then in the industry that the company is utilizing that engineering for. If not in the industry that the company is utilizing the engineering for, then in the company's specific niche in that industry. No two jobs at different companies are identical. What companies need to do is to hire engineers that have a heightened ability to get "ramped-up" at an exponential rate. Companies should look for software engineers that have a erector set mentality. Don't waste time asking trivial pursuit questions like "What is the correct syntax of 'select case' statement?" or "What is the effect of the forth parameter in the 'recordset save()' method." These questions can always be quickly answered by pressing F1. No one is capable of remembering every detail about every aspect of a given programming language, industry standard, or application. A fact that is only accentuated by more and more years of experience with a wide range of technologies. Those who are wise, buy big book shelves and save the space in their memory for the bigger picture. After all no one expects a novelist not to have a dictionary and thesaurus within arms reach.
The first question that a company should ask a perspective software engineer is "What did you take apart when you were five years old, and what did you build with the pieces?" If they respond with an enthusiastic, "Perpetual motion/Time machine/Space craft" and then they launch into a half hour discussion of its theory of operation, even though it may have never worked as imagined, then you are dealing with a person who has the necessary erector set mentality. The ability to build complex machines from a limited set of simple parts. Most programming languages have only a few dozen statements and built-in functions, the rest must either but built or bought. In fact software engineering itself contains no more than a few hundred distinct concepts. Every computer based application, specification, and pseudo-standard, however well hyped, is nothing but the creative, repetitive, combination of these concepts. There are only 26 letters in the English alphabet, yet the combinations of these give rise to more words then can ever be spoken. Learning the use and application of the letters is much more powerful then only learning the meaning just of a few words.
In the words of Sun Tzu, author of The Art of War, The oldest military treatise in the world:
"There are not more than five musical notes, yet the combinations of these five give rise to more melodies than can ever be heard.
There are not more than five primary colors (blue, yellow, red, white, and black), yet in combination they produce more hues than can ever been seen.
There are not more than five cardinal tastes (sour, acrid, salt, sweet, bitter), yet combinations of them yield more flavors than can ever be tasted.
In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack--the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers."
When presented with a "new" computer based application or standard (i.e. VXML) a good software engineer will immediately respond with "Interesting. How would I have built that." Within short order, the engineer will have broken it down to its base components and will have, at least mentally, re-created and improved on it. Similarly, when presented with a new problem to be solved, the good software engineer, will immediately begin to mentally construct the solution and often have it built before the conversation is over. This drive to create solutions to complex problems utilizing the simple pieces at hand is a direct reflection of the five year old building a "jet pack" out of a garden hose, alarm clock, drill, and fire extinguisher.
Just my opinion... but then again, it is my site :)
One more, just food for thought: "Society is more easily swayed by the gentle tick-tock of the pendulum clock then by any wrecking ball of man."