Pebbles are tangible, is probability?

I am desperately trying to pull together my first packet of work for this semester and I think I just found my theme.  Sharing the beginning with you all:

“We don’t know one millionth of one percent about anything.”

 - Thomas Edison

At the residency this autumn, up at Goddard, I sat in on a talk my advisor gave about GeoGebra and the Mandelbrot set. What I took away from the talk and demonstration was that mathematics is an art, and a study. Math is as much a puzzle maker an answerer to puzzles.

 My understanding of it all is that the discovery of one plus one equaling two is a visual, universal observation as is subtraction, multiplication and division and the beginnings of Algebraic thought.  Drop a handful of pebbles on the ground and you can easily see the results of addition, subtraction and create sets, subsets and venn diagrams galore. It is clear and precise and you can categorize it. It is tangible, can be manipulated. 

 As you work with bigger numbers and bigger ideas than simple sets, you have to still understand and be able to visualize the base you got there from.  It isn’t about faith that a number you see is what you want it to be.  When the Mandelbrot set was demonstrated and then displayed in a computer graphic I was amazed. I understood that somehow the building blocks of mathematics had been stacked one on top of another to arrive at the formula that created it.  But I was also accepting on faith that the professor in the front of the room understood the math that created the formula the Mandelbrot graphic was built on. Because I had no clue and could not even begin to understand how it happened.  

 But I didn’t have to know it to see what I saw.  I had to have faith in the math without understanding that the math caused what I saw.

 Did it exist without the math to generate it?

Non Violent Communication at Sangha

I practiced non violent communication yesterday.  Well not really. I practiced it in my head and rethought through my reaction to a situation that had me steaming.  But I struggled a lot and I did not speak violently. 

 I have the whole back-story written out if anyone cares to know it, but I suddenly realized I may have been spouting off form my own benefit and just boring others. It is hard to know what people read for. But this is long enough without the backstory.

 But, the short version is the leader of a meditation sangha, I am part of, has told us he no longer has an interest or need for the Buddhism practice the group was founded around. He has been touting a new guru who guides people in a self inquiry method to get to the heart of pretty much the same base the Buddha taught, “no self” or being in “awareness.” I don’t care for it. 

 I have never converted to Buddhism, but I like the message of the Dzogchen lineage that I have been exposed to.  For me it is right–on-target and effective.  I “sit”/ meditate almost daily and it is a routine I carry with me.

 There is nothing wrong with the message this guru offers.  It is about looking behind the thoughts and the individual and recognizing another view and getting beyond the words.  It is not as rich and meaningful for me however.  And I am not comfortable with my sangha leader’s tone and demanding that he be understood.  And I just don’t want it.

 I found myself very angry and “fed up” with him yesterday and could not sit in the circle at one point and got up. And then of course I was disappointed with my reaction to him. After all, I was sitting in his sangha.  Not mine.  So I brought myself back to the circle out of respect and half listened to what he was saying to a participant and internally pieced out what I was going through so that if I opened my mouth, I would be constructive and not destructive. Because of course, my point in speaking would be to be heard and listened too and taken seriously.

 So I went through my thoughts.  I sorted out if I was actually angry and tried to lay out for myself what he was doing actually:

• Speaking a lot.
• Instructing a woman using words that I had no emotional connection with and disliked his using.
• Pushing his sangha member on something she had not really invited him to do. 
  • Although, to his credit, he did ask her, after starting in on her, if it was alright that he drilled her. She said “yes it is.”  Did she mean it, or was that a coerced because of the group setting? 

 Anyway, I broke it down to things he was doing vs. what I wanted from him as my sangha leader. Then I realized he was not going to give me those things anymore. Did that make him wrong?  Well I still have concern about his new adoration of his guru and his pressuring of us all that we should see what he sees. And then I asked myself, if something bothers me that much, often it means I should face it head on, does that mean I should investigate the guru or does that mean I should face the sangha leader? 

 I never opened my mouth to him during sangha.  I was still filled with anger and I new I could not say words that were non-violent and was concerned with shutting him down instead of getting him to listen and value what I said.  But I saw the value of the lessons.  I practiced silently for the future.

Non Violent Math and Communication

Routine has been difficult to establish. Sitting down to do work isn’t so hard except for that sense in the house that there is always something else that needs doing.  But I finally reclaimed my desk space.  So I have a better dedicated space with fewer distractions.

 

Math and Me and God and Ph.D.s and logic and oh my head hurts.

I was recently laid off or RIF’d (Reduced in force) or outsourced or some such by my employer of seven years. So among the other duties is thinking about and acting on replacing my paycheck with more than unemployment benefits.  But I also want to work in an industry I have respect for.  So I am being careful and choosey about whom I apply with.  Of course with the employment market being what it is that might be a poor strategy. But I really do not want to find myself taking a job that I dread going into everyday.  So I am attempting to be deliberate and measured in my search.  All this has little to do with school work except that it factors into my day’s organization and “stuff.”

 So last night I sat my butt down and got back to the Bayesian probability world.  I had decided to continue into the book even though I was not convinced I understood the logic behind the entire Bayesian theorem yet. I would just accept it for the moment.  Maybe it would get clearer as Unwin continued.  Maybe he would explain in a new way and maybe something would click.

 Not yet. And I started having more questions about the way he was handling the evidence. I have a feeling there is something about the way mathematicians work that I am missing.

  I mapped out on poster board all the pieces I am learning as I understand them and then came to a full stop at the first part that I don’t get.  If you happen to be reading the book it is on pages 50 and 51.  I am not sure I understand why.  But I gave in and moved on to play with the theorem and then followed on to Unwin’s logic in using the evidence he put forth.  That is in chapter seven. And I hit another wall.  Why is he building on one piece of evidence to determine the probability of God’s existence and then using that probability as a factor in determining the probability with a new piece of evidence and so on until he gets thru all the pieces. Why not figure them all individually and then average them out.  What am I missing? 

 So I stopped for a while and have sent a question or three on to my advisor.

 

Non Violent Communication

Another part of my weekend involved working on a curriculum for a theatre workshop I run through the recreation departments in my communities.  I have run this workshop in one form or other for about nine years and have finally started formalizing the curriculum for several reasons, but recently was asked if I could supply it to one of my fellow Goddard buddies…  As I was writing away on it last week I realized my reading on Non Violent Communication fits in completely with the workshop. That is wonderful I will have a practical way to use it from the start.  Here is my roughed out description of the goals of the class.

 Goals of a Theatre For Kids Workshop

1. To stage a play over the course of 8 weeks of classes meeting once a week.
2. Offer children an early experience with performance. 

This is just a jumping off place for a child who might want to go on from here.  Be prepared to refer parents to professional theatrical programs in your area if their kids want to take this further.

1. Provide opportunity for class participants to recognize and improve skills they use in performance as well in life.

• Awareness of their space and speech.
• Presentation
• Interacting with others

1. For kids to experience success in their endeavors and recognize that even a little work can be some fun. To paraphrase Cyndi Lauper, ~kids just want to have fun~, but they also want to please people and to see success from effort.  This curriculum is designed to provide something for each participant to reach for within their means.  While children will have stumbling blocks in the class and in their lives, there is something successful in getting from the beginning of a process to the end.  While not every child will be class president or get an “A” in math, they each should find some value in (they won’t be able to express it) the experience of not knowing what they will be doing on day one and finding a point of completion on day eight. It is doable, it is measurable and it is healthy. 

 

Not a bad weekend. Just a busy one.

Happy Monday All!

Relationships between Math and Communication

Running through yesterday’s experience in schoolwork.

 I spent a bit of yesterday reading and getting my head wrapped around the variables involved in Bayes’ theorem. I can follow the formula to the point that I can plug in numbers work them to get an mathematically correct result. But, I am not understanding the reason for the variables and their manipulation particularly well. And I think that is the point here.

 I ask at this point, (pages 51 thru 60 in the book) should I stop at this point and work thru understanding this?  Go to websites explaining the theorem?  Or should I read on accepting the math in hopes Stephen Unwin explains it further? This will be one of my conundrums today.

 My other main subject of study yesterday was NonViloent Communication as “preached” by Marshall B. Rosenberg, Ph.D. I just started delving into his book so I can’t speak to the entire thing, but it reminds me very much of lessons put forward by Harville Hendrix and Harriet Lerner in their books.  This does not lessen its importance. It only reminds me the idea is pervasive.  I have with less clear a concept tried over the years to practice this style of communication in business. It is difficult to practice one sided. But that does not make it wrong, does it?   I have been advised to look for a NVC support group and I can see the value in that as I begin to look at this more deliberately.

 I had an interesting twinge of recognition of a relationship between Bayes’ theorem and NVC yesterday and did not particularly pursue it. But I thought I would put it out there today.

 Per Stephen Unwin, the value of  P(G\E)increases as the value of P(E\G) increases. 

 (I don’t know how to show the mathematical symbol in Word yet, so I can’t show the formula)

 

Marshall Rosenberg wrote:

Furthermore, each time others associate us in their minds with any of those feelings, (fear, guilt or shame) the likelihood of their responding compassionately to our needs and values in the future decreases.

 I believe that statement is expressed for a positive also. But I have not seen that yet.  Regardless, it is about proportion of cause and effect – wait, isn’t that also a physics concept. Ugh!  It is EVERYWHERE.

 

Something tells me Goddard College folks would approve.

It is everywhere, just everywhere – God, math, music, health – oy!

I feel as if the world is following me and everything I am studying seems to be in the air.  Is music good if it isn’t spiritually inspired? This is sort of my theme for part of my packet work this semester.  Suddenly I feel like I am not that original.  Morning Edition on NPR is asking listeners for their input on the 50 greatest voices and what makes them great. But ultimately, this is great, it gives me a stepping off point. Something to use as a gauge.  Well that and a half dozen journal articles I found last night. I love journal articles. It is like being a kid in a candy shop when I log into EBSCO.  There is so much useful information as well as so much information to take you off in a whole other direction.  I don’t actually intend to focus on vocal music, but lyrics do play an awful big part. The instrumental part of piece may be beautiful and the words insufficient, or vice versa. OY. How will I measure this?  It is not today’s goal to figure out, but I can’t just let it drop.

Yesterday I was doing household stuff – I was goofing around on Facebook – with public radio on in the background (are we seeing a theme here?) and Leonard Lopate (local Public Radio show host)  announced he would be interviewing Karen Armstrong on how religion’s have changed over time.  She wrote a book a few years back on the history of religion and now has a book out called The Case For God.  This is not good. I have a lot of respect for Karen Armstrong and now I want the book. I don’t need yet another one… but I do.  Oh and Dr. Sanjay Gupta is on a press run about his new book Cheating Death.  From the interviews I have heard he addresses alternative therapy including meditation and prayer and how they improve quality and longevity of life.  This is also on the periphery of the Dementia and meditation thread I am looking at this semester. (sigh)  It’s everywhere.

But I need to settle.  Today or at least the next couple of hours is about MATH. I think I am actually getting into the math of the math and not just the philosophy behind the math of the math. Not sure if I am expecting to be exasperated or completely engrossed.  I will share what I learn and my frustration levels later.

 

Happy Wednesday!

Getting Organized in work and in thinking about God

It was Columbus Day and the public schools were closed.  The banks and government organizations. My daughter was home, there was no mail.  The day was just off and it was difficult to get organized.  But “things” got done. Some school work, some job hunting, some housework, shopping and cooking. 

 For me I think, it is particularly important to impose some routine on myself for this semester.  On top of the rest of life I am in the dubious position of needing to look for work. This leaves me a little extra time for school work, but it also leaves a big gap of space where my day used to have an imposed structure to it.  Some of that routine has to come from the rhythm of life.  I am currently able to wake up before the household, so using that quiet time is wonderful. An hour of reading and note taking is a nice way to start the day. And that is the beginning of my new routine.  Figuring out the rest as I go. 

 So in yesterday and today’s work I have been slowly working my way through The Probability of God.   Before I got too far into the chapter, I sat down and wrote out my thoughts on what God is, so that I had it documented before I tainted it with Stephen Unwin’s views and findings. I don’t believe in the white robed old man in the clouds. I don’t believe in an entity.  I believe more in a Star Wars like “force” and the interconnectedness of existence and not one central processing unit controlling it all. Does that make sense?

What I gather we will be determining the probability of is the more specific and clear cut individual all powerful and knowing and involved in life and death.

Question to myself:

I wonder if Unwin’s formula will consider the character of this God. I suspect only the probable existence of the individual being.

Implementing the study plan – God and Math begins

I was just so tired last night there was no writing. And the night before the same way. I had been driving the entire day and I found myself dozing off on the sofa at 9:30. I guess the momentum of the week got to me.

Today a good start. Started reading and making notes. Actually looking forward to getting into this book, The Probability of GOD and seeing where it takes me. Unwin (the author) did make a statement I take exception too though.

Like most of us, I was taught religion prior to the development of any intellectual defenses, and much of it stuck. 

I wonder, is it true that “most of us” were taught religion early in life? Did any of my readers? ( do I have any readers? ) I would be curious to know.

I am not sure that is going to have any serious involvement in his mathematics, but still, where did he come up with that consideration?

Goddard Residency – Day Five The work has really begun

Doing a short version post tonight, because I have been working on my study plan and have been fighting a slow computer or a slow network. I just am not sure which. The study plan is going well, but the computer issues are not helping my flow. I am thrilled that I have some goals for the semester that include some research of how religion impacts dementia patients, how religious organizations do good work and religion/.spirituality in music. The big deal to me this semester is getting my math requirement out of the way. And my advisor turned me on to a book about a mathematical proof that might or might not prove the existence of God. That is going to be fun to learn. And then of course I get to decide how I feel about the whole thing. The question is, can I get the math? I am going to “do” stuff this semester, I think. I have decided to join Toastmasters to learn good public speaking skills. Hopefully I will be able to mix my speaking with my packet work. That is the plan anyway. OK I am rambling and probably not making a whole lot of sense to anyone from outside the Goddard and Low Residency learning process. I will attempt to explain it later.

 

Day is done all, sleep well!

Goddard Residency Day Four

Ah. It seemed to be a successful day.  I had a nice “sit” with a small group of meditators this morning.  We were all anxious to get on to breakfast and then learn our advisor assignments. So, although I tried to remind the room, and myself, to carry the satisfaction with the present, along with them throughout the day, I cut the sit short by about ten minutes and off we went.  I am very hopeful with my advisor assignment and as a result feel free to get excited about the work ahead. 

 I met up with my advisor and co-advisees. That went well. I sat in on a potentially interesting Graduating Senior presentation about spirituality and was glad to have been there although I did not take away as much as I would have liked to from it. But I suspect that can be partially attributed to nerves. It started to take shape towards the end as he became more comfortable with the room, the equipment and he had warmed up. And of course, he had graduation looming a few hours away.

 I ran some errands and found a used book store in Plainfield that is one of those that I would love to get lost in and then have hours and hours to devour the books I had purchased. It was in a house and the rooms of stacks kept going on and on. What a fun place. It smelled like old books. How perfect.  I restrained myself, due to time constraints to get back, time to read and money.  I am temporarily unemployed after all.  I can’t be spending the way I really want to. I will be back in the fall, hopefully flush again.

 I sat in at graduation which really was nice to watch. I remembered it being rather laborious the last time I was here, but this was sweet and satisfying.

 Finally, I sat in on a workshop about Buddhism after Patriarchy.  My eyes were opened a bit about the lack of equality between the genders in Buddhism. I knew it existed of course. At the NJ Sangha we have discussed the fewer number of female lamas and Buddhist leaders.  We have also discussed the strength of those who are prevalent, Sharon Salzberg, Pema Chodron, Lama Willa. But I don’t think I had thought seriously about the lineage that had allowed it to be this way. I found myself rather frustrated with the focus of some of the participants in the workshop. Instead of trying to understand what this history was and how it has evolved, or not in many cases, some people were fixated on the problem. It seemed to me the lesson of the workshop was that the innate message of Buddhist practice has nothing to do with gender and that the widely known messenger screwed up in how to transmit his message to the wider audience. And this came  out of his own imperfectness and his own experience.  If it actually happened that way at all,  We have only oral history to base this off of and mankind is imperfect after all.

  OK day is done. There is still a thing or two needing to be done before I sleep.

Peace All!