Afraid of What - EH Hamilton

 

On the Odds - Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac

Heisenberg recollected a conversation among young participants at the 1927 Solvay Conference about Einstein and Planck's views on religion between Wolfgang Pauli, Heisenberg and Dirac. Dirac's contribution was a criticism of the political purpose of religion, which Bohr regarded as quite lucid when hearing it from Heisenberg later.^[47]:320 Among other things, Dirac said:

I cannot understand why we idle discussing religion. If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality. The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination. It is quite understandable why primitive people, who were so much more exposed to the overpowering forces of nature than we are today, should have personified these forces in fear and trembling. But nowadays, when we understand so many natural processes, we have no need for such solutions. I can't for the life of me see how the postulate of an Almighty God helps us in any way. What I do see is that this assumption leads to such unproductive questions as why God allows so much misery and injustice, the exploitation of the poor by the rich and all the other horrors He might have prevented. If religion is still being taught, it is by no means because its ideas still convince us, but simply because some of us want to keep the lower classes quiet. Quiet people are much easier to govern than clamorous and dissatisfied ones. They are also much easier to exploit. Religion is a kind of opium that allows a nation to lull itself into wishful dreams and so forget the injustices that are being perpetrated against the people. Hence the close alliance between those two great political forces, the State and the Church. Both need the illusion that a kindly God rewards—in heaven if not on earth—all those who have not risen up against injustice, who have done their duty quietly and uncomplainingly. That is precisely why the honest assertion that God is a mere product of the human imagination is branded as the worst of all mortal sins.^[48]

Heisenberg's view was tolerant. Pauli, raised as a Catholic, had kept silent after some initial remarks, but when finally he was asked for his opinion, said: "Well, our friend Dirac has got a religion and its guiding principle is 'There is no God, and Paul Dirac is His prophet.'" Everybody, including Dirac, burst into laughter.^[49][50]:138

Later in life, Dirac's views towards the idea of God were less acerbic. As an author of an article appearing in the May 1963 edition of Scientific American, Dirac wrote:

It seems to be one of the fundamental features of nature that fundamental physical laws are described in terms of a mathematical theory of great beauty and power, needing quite a high standard of mathematics for one to understand it. You may wonder: Why is nature constructed along these lines? One can only answer that our present knowledge seems to show that nature is so constructed. We simply have to accept it. One could perhaps describe the situation by saying that God is a mathematician of a very high order, and He used very advanced mathematics in constructing the universe. Our feeble attempts at mathematics enable us to understand a bit of the universe, and as we proceed to develop higher and higher mathematics we can hope to understand the universe better.^[51]

In 1971, at a conference meeting, Dirac expressed his views on the existence of God.^[52] Dirac explained that the existence of God could be justified only if an improbable event were to have taken place in the past:

It could be that it is extremely difficult to start life. It might be that it is so difficult to start life that it has happened only once among all the planets... Let us consider, just as a conjecture, that the chance life starting when we have got suitable physical conditions is 10⁻¹⁰⁰. I don't have any logical reason for proposing this figure, I just want you to consider it as a possibility. Under those conditions ... it is almost certain that life would not have started. And I feel that under those conditions it will be necessary to assume the existence of a god to start off life. I would like, therefore, to set up this connection between the existence of a god and the physical laws: if physical laws are such that to start off life involves an excessively small chance, so that it will not be reasonable to suppose that life would have started just by blind chance, then there must be a god, and such a god would probably be showing his influence in the quantum jumps which are taking place later on. On the other hand, if life can start very easily and does not need any divine influence, then I will say that there is no god.^[52] 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Dirac

Mania - Fermi about Teller

Fermi once said that Teller was the only "monomaniac he knew who had several manias."

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Teller

Simple Legalize Translated - Simple Bank

In case of errors or questions about your electronic transfers, contact us as soon as you can, if you think your statement or receipt is wrong or if you need more information about a transfer listed on the statement or receipt. We must hear from you no later than 60 days after we sent the FIRST statement on which the problem or error appeared.

(1) Tell us your name and account number (if any).

(2) Describe the error or the transfer you are unsure about, and explain as clearly as you can why you believe it is an error or why you need more information.

(3) Tell us the dollar amount of the suspected error.

If you tell us orally, we may require that you send us your complaint or question in writing within 10 business days. We will determine whether an error occurred within 10 business days after we hear from you and will correct any error promptly. If we need more time, however, we may take up to 45 days to investigate your complaint or question. If we decide to do this, we will credit your account within 10 business days for the amount you think is in error, so that you will have the use of the money during the time it takes us to complete our investigation. If we ask you to put your complaint or question in writing and we do not receive it within 10 business days, we may not credit your account.

For errors involving new accounts, point-of-sale, or foreign-initiated transactions, we may take up to 90 days to investigate your complaint or question. For new accounts, we may take up to 20 business days to credit your account for the amount you think is in error. We will tell you the results within three business days after completing our investigation. If we decide that there was no error, we will send you a written explanation. You may ask for copies of the documents that we used in our investigation.

Translated

If you suspect fraudulent activity, get in touch with us right away. We’ll figure out what happened, let you know the results of our investigation and fix it, if necessary.

 

Dilbert and Management Thinking

 

Progress is not... Herbert Spencer

Progress is not an accident But a necessity. Surely must evil and immorality disappear. Surely must man become perfect. 

Herbert Spencer

- Humanity, Evolution, Darwinism, Perfectionism, Humanism,

the Old Man - haitian Pastor

"If we leave the devil with even one small peg in our life, he will return to hang his rotting garbage on it." Haitian pastor

Quoted in

FINISHING STRONG - Steve Farrar

Die Daily - Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Ah, Darinka, to die would be a simple thing." He opened the curtains and the window. "But to die daily this is another thing."

Tell Me who? Bonhoeffer

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Aspirations - Kidnapped - Michael Kitchens

I think your a man who gets what he wants

That's because I never allow myself to want what I think I can not get

Kidnapped 1995

It is only with the heart that one can see rightly - The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint−Exupery

 So the little prince tamed the fox. And when the hour of his departure drew near−− "Ah," said the fox, "I shall cry." "It is your own fault," said the little prince. "I never wished you any sort of harm; but you wanted me to tame you..." "Yes, that is so," said the fox.

"But now you are going to cry!" said the little prince. "Yes, that is so," said the fox. "Then it has done you no good at all!" "It has done me good," said the fox, "because of the color of the wheat fields." And then he added: "Go and look again at the roses. You will understand now that yours is unique in all the world. Then come back to say goodbye to me, and I will make you a present of a secret." The little prince went away, to look again at the roses. 

"You are not at all like my rose," he said. "As yet you are nothing. No one has tamed you, and you have tamed no one. You are like my fox when I first knew him. He was only a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But I have made him my friend, and now he is unique in all the world." And the roses were very much embarrassed. 

"You are beautiful, but you are empty," he went on. 

"One could not die for you. To be sure, an ordinary passerby would think that my rose looked just like you−− the rose that belongs to me. 

But in herself alone she is more important than all the hundreds of you other roses: because it is she that I have watered; because it is she that I have put under the glass globe; because it is she that I have sheltered behind the screen; because it is for her that I have killed the caterpillars (except the two or three that we saved to become butterflies); because it is she that I have listened to, when she grumbled, or boasted, or even sometimes when she said nothing. 

Because she is my rose. And he went back to meet the fox. "Goodbye," he said. "Goodbye," said the fox. "And now here is my secret, a very simple secret: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye." 

"What is essential is invisible to the eye," the little prince repeated, so that he would be sure to remember. "It is the time you have wasted for your rose that makes your rose so important." 

I ought to have judged by deeds - The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint−Exupery

 "The fact is that I did not know how to understand anything! I ought to have judged by deeds and not by words. She cast her fragrance and her radiance over me. I ought never to have run away from her... I ought to have guessed all the affection that lay behind her poor little stratagems. Flowers are so inconsistent! But I was too young to know how to love her..."The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint−Exupery

I, too, am going back home today... - The little Prince

He made no answer to my question, but he added: "I, too, am going back home today..." Then, sadly−−

"It is much farther... it is much more difficult..." I realised clearly that something extraordinary was happening. I was holding him close in my arms as if he were a little child; and yet it seemed to me that he was rushing headlong toward an abyss from which I could do nothing to restrain him... His look was very serious, like some one lost far away. "I have your sheep. And I have the sheep's box. And I have the muzzle..." And he gave me a sad smile. I waited a long time. I could see that he was reviving little by little. "Dear little man," I said to him, "you are afraid..." He was afraid, there was no doubt about that. But he laughed lightly. "I shall be much more afraid this evening..." Once again I felt myself frozen by the sense of something irreparable. And I knew that I could not bear the thought of never hearing that laughter any more. For me, it was like a spring of fresh water in the desert. "Little man," I said, "I want to hear you laugh again." But he said to me: "Tonight, it will be a year... my star, the

And he laughed again. Then he quickly became serious: "Tonight−− you know... do not come," said the little prince. "I shall not leave you," I said. "I shall look as if I were suffering. I shall look a little as if I were dying. It is like that. Do not come to see that. It is not worth the trouble..." "I shall not leave you." But he was worried. "I tell you−− it is also because of the snake. He must not bite you. Snakes−− they are malicious creatures. This one might bite you just for fun..." "I shall not leave you." But a thought came to reassure him: "It is true that they have no more poison for a second bite."

That night I did not see him set out on his way. He got away from me without making a sound. When I succeeded in catching up with him he was walking along with a quick and resolute step. He said to me merely: "Ah! You are there..." And he took me by the hand. But he was still worrying. "It was wrong of you to come. You will suffer. I shall look as if I were dead; and that will not be true..." I said nothing. "You understand... it is too far. I cannot carry this body with me. It is too heavy." I said nothing. "But it will be like an old abandoned shell. There is nothing sad about old shells..." I said nothing. 

He was a little discouraged. But he made one more effort: "You know, it will be very nice. I, too, shall look at the stars. All the stars will be wells with a rusty pulley. All the stars will pour out fresh water for me to drink..." I said nothing. "That will be so amusing! You will have five hundred million little bells, and I shall have five hundred million springs of fresh water..." And he too said nothing more, because he was crying... "Here it is. Let me go on by myself."  

And he sat down, because he was afraid. Then he said, again: "You know−− my flower... I am responsible for her. And she is so weak! She is so naïve! She has four thorns, of no use at all, to protect herself against all the world..." I too sat down, because I was not able to stand up any longer. "There now−− that is all..." He still hesitated a little; then he got up. He took one step. I could not move. There was nothing but a flash of yellow close to his ankle. He remained motionless for an instant. He did not cry out. He fell as gently as a tree falls. There was not even any sound, because of the sand.

The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint−Exupery

Dedication to The Little Prince - Antoine de Saint−Exupery

 

To Leon Werth

I ask the indulgence of the children who may read this book for dedicating

it to a grown−up. I have a serious reason: he is the best friend I have in

the world. I have another reason: this grown−up understands everything,

even books about children. I have a third reason: he lives in France where

he is hungry and cold. He needs cheering up. If all these reasons are not

enough, I will dedicate the book to the child from whom this grown−up

grew. All grown−ups were once children−− although few of them

remember it. And so I correct my dedication:

To Leon Werth

when he was a little boy

The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint−Exupery