Re: virus: Action Potential

Eric Boyd (
Tue, 12 Aug 1997 00:36:54 -0500

Brett Lane Robertson wrote:

> There are tricks to "parallel multitasking". Try using a paradox as your
> central point of departure/arrival. (Train yourself to say "that's it" for
> example, meaning both "that's it" and "that's not it". When the multitasks
> converge, say "that's it"--sends them shooting off in opposite directions
> again; or, start with the concept that ALL things are arrive
> at a point that seems to be the same; but you have already set up that they
> will be different.) I use a different method...I assume that ALL things are

An interesting idea... shall try!

> exactly the same. Every time I get a thought (which implies association
> between two different things), that must be a multitask: Things which

interesting! Exactly how does thinking imply this, however? I admit
that *novility* involves the association of two different things, but I
think it's possible to have thoughts without associating different


Looking at it again, I'm not even sure what that would mean. What does
it mean? Thoughts as associations between different things. I'm going
to have to think about this some more...

> appear unrelated MUST be related, my thought and the comment on TV. You
> can also set up two distinct personalities which cannot communicate with
> each other (an idea I've been working on). If one personality forms a

One of the biggest pitfalls I've found is the communication between
different "sparks"... it also seems that one of them wishes to remain in
control; that is, oversee both of them. That, of course, destroys the
entire idea...

> *Two* sparks of life! Really beyond my intellectual ability to comprehend
> why you would want to do this (but I only believe in a life instinct and not
> a death instinct...a tree, but no "not-tree", no hell). You are in
> good company with this endevor, however. There are those who seem to think
> that the world would be a boring place if it were totally cooperative...they
> need a double prime cause to explain how we can continue NOT to get along.
> You may have given me a clue to your motivation when you said that there was
> something missing in the circular systematic view (to which I agree). I
> think one takes this circle into ones being and THEN continues to grow in a
> linear develop ( I also think that this circular "entity" is
> the meme and that our continued development is the "irrigation project").
> Still, try--if you can--to explain to me why the system which adds to 1 (or
> one whole, The All, etc.) is inferior to a system which adds to two--as we
> can always take on different roles within this singular grand drama. You
> may can tell from this post that I am certainly interested in what you have
> to say.

OK. The entire endevor rises out of my attempt to "find more time": you
see, if I could "double-task", (or more), that would give me a lot more
time in a day to think. So while two still only adds to two, just as
one adds to one, two is greater than one!

> A couple of other points: In my studies, multitasking is related to
> addiction--feeling the highs and then the lows and jonesing for the highs
> again (first the one then the other mind). A house divided against itself
> falls (and it is not good to watch you destroy yourself). Cautions against
> practicing this "game" (forewarned is forearmed).

It is a dangerous game, I'll give you that. See, if I suceed, I'll
actually have a split personality!

But really, I think your "zero-sum" games are leading you astray, here.

I like to use an image of a blackboard.

Imagine a big circular black board, and a large hand holding a peice of

Now, the black board is your "short term memory", or what I like to call
"virtual desktop area". And the hand with chalk is the "spark of life":
the "thinker", if you will.

So... what I was doing with the serial multitask was "enlarging" the
virtual desktop area. That is, making it so that I could *remember*
data from several diverse areas, and switch between them at will.

I was also practising using the hand in different areas of the black

Now, with "parallel" multitasking, there are *two* hands with chalk, and
they work "side by side" as it were, on different areas of the black

So I see several requirements: 1) the black board has to be big enough
to support 1) enough data, 2) *two* hands with chalk. 3) Some kind of
agreement has to be set up between the hands, so that they don't
interfer *destructively* with each other. Whether this would be an
imaginary "line" down the black board, or an actual *physical* split
(like left brain right brain split) is a good research question.... 4) A
second spark, to control the second hand, is required. Either that or
the one spark has to do some real fancy tricks...

Now, comming out of the analogy, I see several interesting applications
and exercises and "tests" which could be done.

First, I think the division bewteen left and right brain is a really
cool thing to play off, as is the fact we have *two* hands.

Rub your tummy, pat your head. :-)

So what I've been doing is this: using the *wrong* hand[1] quite often,
in an attempt to get my spark used to working in *different* places on
the black board. Becuase there is no doubt that at least one of the
sparks is going to have to work "off center", as it were.

That, and I've been trying to "expand" my black board area. Just mental
exercises, you know. Visualizing as big and as complicated an object as
possible, for as long as possible. (I like a car, with as much detail
as I can manage). Multitasking in Netscape, so that I'm forced to
extend my black boards "shelf life"... the chalk doesn't vanish as

The real hard thing, though, is the extra "hand". I've been trying,
with my car image, to "animate" the picture. You know, spin the wheels
and run the engine, do the windsheild wipers. But it's very hard to do
more than one at once...

> Also, did you look at Drakir's meme page? My "time chain" is at
> and the first meme
> is defined by that circular system you referred to "create/destroy" (as you
> may or may not be aware of).

I'll have to go take a better look...


[1] I'm left handed, so this actually isn't that hard... I've been doing
it all my life!