The Stream

A direct link to the above video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz2Lx4DLNUQ

Two days ago, I was awakened by a vivid dream. The content was unusual enough that I immediately sat down at my computer and published it as my last blog entry, which was called News From the Future.

If you read that entry, you will have noticed that I omitted the fact that this story had come to me in a dream. Why did I do that? Because I know that there are many out there who have been trained to reject dreams as nothing more than random bits of junk, just the brain sorting through its data. On the other hand, I know that there are regular readers of this blog who completely accept the idea that dream states are plugged into extra-dimensional patterns, alternate realities not part of our own, and in that sense are not that different from the visions a Shaman might witness while in an altered state of consciousness.

It's possible, too, that both might be equally true: that the brain, in the process of sorting through recently acquired memories, is plugging into memes that exist in the sense that Richard Dawkins meant when he originally coined the term: memes are information patterns, ideas, or beliefs, that exist outside the restrictions of linear time.

At the end of that previous entry, I listed some of the recent news articles I had read in New Scientist and Scientific American which seemed to connect to my dream, and I also listed some of my blog entries which have played with similar ideas in the past. Clearly, the idea that some unconscious/subconscious part of my mind was fitting all those ideas together is easy to see, regardless of whether you believe in ideas advanced in blog entries like Creativity and the Quantum Universe and Our Non-Local Universe which say that there is now scientific proof that our universe is connected together in ways that transcend the limitations of the fourth dimension. Could there really be a "stream" of connectedness that our minds are sharing, as Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor proposed in her marvelous My Stroke of Insight?

I've talked a few times before about twine.com, the brainchild of web 3.0 pioneer Nova Spivack. Here's a link to a recently published essay of his called Welcome to the Stream: The Next Phase of the Web. In it, he discusses the quandary I presented in News From the Future: as tools like twitter make the web increasingly fluid, how does an end user make sense of the deluge? How do we filter the sludge out from what we really need? Nova concludes his essay like this:

The emergence of the Stream is an interesting paradigm shift that may turn out to characterize the next evolution of the Web, this coming third-decade of the Web's development. Even though the underlying data model may be increasingly like a graph, or even a semantic graph, the user experience will be increasingly stream oriented.

Whether Twitter, or some other app, the Web is becoming increasingly streamlike. How will we filter this stream? How will we cope? Whoever can solve these problems first and best is probably going to get rich.

Dreams of wealth aside, what I find so fascinating about these ideas of convergence and increasingly instantaneous connection across minds is the possibility that technology really could give us some bootstraps to pull ourselves up into a new mode of connectedness. In that sense, what we are talking about could be related to Kurzweil's Singularity just as much as it could be related to Zen Buddhism. And with my own project, getting people to see their underlying connectedness has been a running theme from the beginning. Here are some past entries where I've explored those ideas further:
Tens, Google, and the Expanding Universe
I Know You, You Know Me
You are Me and We are All Together
Daily Parrying
Where are You?
Poll 34 - God? Or the Multiverse?
Poll 37 - Do Shamans See Other Dimensions?

Finally, I wanted to mention a new scientific study just published by researchers from UCLA, who used high-resolution MRIs to discover that people who meditate regularly had "significantly larger volumes" in certain key parts of their brains. Isn't that amazing?

Enjoy the journey,

Rob Bryanton

PS - Here's an article published yesterday by TechCrunch called "Jump Into the Stream".
Next: Evolution's Fast Lane

Our Non-Local Universe

A direct link to the above video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBPBc4iZtro

Entanglement-at-a-distance does physically exist, in the sense that it has physically verifiable (and verified) consequences. Which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that some of our most engrained notions about space and causality should be reconsidered.
- theoretical physicist Bernard d'Espagnat

(I've talked before about the underlying patterns of information that create our universe, and of ideas that connect us all together, and how much I like the term Richard Dawkins gave us for this concept: "memes". Memes, as ideas that instantaneously connect together "outside of spacetime" are a great example of thinking about our universe from a timeless perspective. I saw another great example of the kind of synchronicities that arise as people around the world think similar thoughts right after I finished writing today's blog entry. The above quote is from a blog entry posted just a few days ago by award-winning theoretical physicist Bernard d'Espagnat. Click here to read his blog entry in full, and you will see a great many parallels to the blog entry you're about to read.)

Principle of locality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In physics, the principle of locality states that an object is influenced directly only by its immediate surroundings. Quantum mechanics predicts through Bell's inequality the direct violation of this principle. Experiments have shown that quantum mechanically entangled particles violate this principle: they have been shown to influence each other when physically separated by 18 km, thus the principle of locality is false.

As the above wikipedia definition clearly states, our universe is non-local, despite what our intuition might tell us as we look around at our world. Understanding that our 4D spacetime is really just a shadow of patterns that exist outside of time, within the fifth dimension and above (see The Holographic Universe) gives us a way to visualize how entangled particles can be connected in ways that seem impossible, and this also gives us a way to see how the Shamanistic viewpoint regarding hidden forces which are outside our physical domain makes sense in this context: it's all part of our non-local universe.

The above picture comes from the National Human Genome Research Institute website.

The National Institute of Health published an article recently about ground-breaking new DNA analysis procedures that look at the helix not as a sequential ladder, but as a 3D shape. To quote from the article:

The sequence of the 3 billion DNA base pairs that make up the human genome holds the answers to many questions pertaining to human development, health and disease. Consequently, much research aimed at understanding the genome has focused on establishing the information encoded by the linear order of DNA bases. In the new study, however, researchers focused on how those bases chemically interact with each other to coil and fold the DNA molecule into a variety of shapes.

"We often think of DNA as a string of letters on a computer screen and forget that this string of letters is a three-dimensional molecule. But shape really matters," said Dr. Margulies, who is an investigator in NHGRI's Genomic Technology Branch. "Proteins that influence biological function by binding to DNA recognize more than just the sequence of bases. These binding proteins also see the surface of the DNA molecule and are looking for a shape that allows a lock-and-key fit."

I've talked many times about Richard Dawkins and his "River Out of Eden" concept, thinking about genes as being shapes that are connected across time (or as I like to say, the fourth spatial dimension, since for us "time" is just one of the two possible directions in that dimension). When we've already been encouraged to think of a genome as being a fourth dimensional shape (or as Bruce Sterling likes to say, a "spime"), I have to admit I assumed that 3D analysis of DNA was already in place!

This all relates to trying to think about our reality as existing outside of spacetime - if you think of reality as being only a linear sequence of events relentlessly moving forward on our "arrow of time", you are missing an important part of the picture.

Discover Magazine put up an amusing article on their website a couple of weeks ago, called Twenty Things You Didn't Know About Time. The last two entries in particular caught my eye:

19 Time has not been around forever. Most scientists believe it was created along with the rest of the universe in the Big Bang, 13.7 billion years ago.

20 There may be an end of time. Three Spanish scientists posit that the observed acceleration of the expanding cosmos is an illusion caused by the slowing of time. According to their math, time may eventually stop, at which point everything will come to a standstill.

With my project, I insist that those two ideas are related - both "before" and "after" the beginning and end of our universe are the same state: but to understand that idea requires a perspective which is "outside" of time as we know it. One of my personal favorite blog entries about this idea is "Local Realism Bites the Dust", which you might want to check out.

Quantum physics tells us that our reality is connected together in ways that seem impossible: instantaneous effects with widely separated but entangled particles make no sense within our sequential physical world... unless you can embrace the idea that our universe is non-local. An article in the March issue of Scientific American, written by David Z. Albert and Rivka Galchen, offers an explanation of Bell's Theorem which arrives at this important concluding paragraph:

Researchers carried out experiments using entangled photons instead of electrons (which alters the angles to use but makes the experiment technically much less difficult) and found results that conformed with quantum mechanics’s predictions. And so by Bell’s theorem there must not be any determinate values carried by those photons. And because that contradicts EPR’s conclusion, the assumption that nature is local is also wrong. And so the universe we live in cannot be local.

Our non-local universe allows for connections that transcend the "now" that we are in at this instant, and that is not some kind of mystical mumbo jumbo, that is an accepted scientific fact. Since that idea can be used to explain so many of the other mysteries we've been exploring with this project (most recently in entries like Creativity and the Quantum Universe, The Shaman, and The Musician) only adds weight to this conclusion, as non-intuitive as it may seem.

Embrace your non-locality! And enjoy the journey.

Rob Bryanton

Next: Imagining the Omniverse - Addendum

God 2.0

A direct link to the above video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-Y4xseftgQ


Last entry we talked about the "daily parrying" that would cause some people to look at a blog titled "God 2.0" and automatically assume that what is going to be talked about will be non-scientific meandering about the world of the spiritual and the metaphysical. If you're familiar with my blog or my book, you will already know that I am more interested in the middle ground - a place where philosophy and physics, spirituality and science can find ways to agree that they are really thinking about the same things.

The Skeptic
Michael Shermer is the well-known publisher of Skeptic Magazine, and Michael's goal has been to poke holes in the questionable claims of fringe science, the paranormal, and a wide range of other areas that he has targeted with his razor-sharp debunking skills. This is why I found it quite marvelous when I picked up the July issue of Scientific American, and found that Mr. Shermer's regular column this issue is entitled "Sacred Science: can emergence break the spell of reductionism and put spirituality back into nature?".

Reinventing the Sacred
Mr. Shermer's article is about a fellow who comes from my neighboring province of Alberta, Canada: Stuart Kauffman, founding director of the Institute for Biocomplexity and Informatics at the University of Calgary, who has written a book called "Reinventing the Sacred". To quote from Michael Shermer's article about the book:

Kauffman reverses the reductionist's causal arrow with a comprehensive theory of emergence and self-organization that he says 'breaks no laws of physics' and yet cannot be explained by them. God 'is our chosen name for the ceaseless creativity in the natural universe, biosphere and human cultures,' Kauffman declares.

I have spent time with Stu Kauffman... he is one of the most spiritual scientists I know, a man of inestimable warmth and ecumenical tolerance, and his God 2.0 is a deity worthy of worship. But I am skeptical that it will displace God 1.0, Yahweh, whose Bronze Age program has been running for 6,000 years on the software of our brains and culture.

Creativity and the "now"
I've talked many times here about the role of creativity in our universe, and how ideas from quantum physicist John Wheeler and professor of cognitive science Douglas Hofstadter can be tied together to show us how a self-excited loop can create not just a universe but life and consciousness as well. In my book I used physicist Richard Feynman's sum over paths idea to show how the past is just as probabilistic as we know the future to be. Now that Anton Zeilinger is publishing the results of experiments he and his team in Vienna have conducted that prove that we are operating in a probabilistic cloud where the only thing that is truly real for us is the constantly moving "now" of our observed reality, the ideas I proposed are being confirmed: and as John Wheeler suggested, this means that there are some indeterminate elements of the past that can be changed by our current observation. As I've been saying here, this means we can all select new trajectories from our current "now" at any time that launch us off on a new path, and accepting the indeterminate nature of the past is key to understanding how much power we are talking about here. As I discussed in Changing Your Genes, the scientific study that shows we are able to switch off and on various genes simply through changes in lifestyle and changes in attitude gives us a glimpse of how the past is not as carved in stone as we've been led to believe: because quantum physics is proving that our currently observed reality is derived from a multiverse of possible choices that exist in both the future and the past for our universe at any particular "now".

Enfolded Symmetry
Scientists like Sean Carroll, David Deutsch, and (of course) Richard Dawkins are atheists. I reference their work regularly with this project. I believe the Dawkins concept of genes as a "River Out of Eden" and memes as ideas that can be transmitted or shared without loss across time and space are both very useful and enlightened ways of imagining the underlying timelessness of our reality. My way of imagining how our reality is constructed agrees with Dr. Carroll's ideas about an equilibrium state which is "outside the system". My project also agrees with the Deutsch team's proof that the parallel worlds resulting from chance and choice are directly equivalent to the probabilistic results of quantum mechanics. Now, here's something new: the June 14 2008 issue of New Scientist Magazine has an article about the award-winning work of mathematicians John Thompson and Jacques Tits, who have offered some mind-expanding proofs about how our amazing universe is derived from symmetries in the higher dimensions. This idea is related to Garrett Lisi's eight-dimensional E8 symmetry group, which I've referred to a number of times in this blog, and which I believe ties back into my project as well: by the time you have imagined an Omniverse which expresses all possible patterns of mass and energy, there is an equilibrium state where all of those possible patterns enfold back into a balance, where everything fits together into a perfect symmetry, which is the natural underlying state. Our universe is defined by higher dimensional patterns which give it its unique laws of physics and its breathtaking intricacy, right from the quarks and neutrinos up to the universe as a whole and all of its possible "spacetime tree" of expressions. In that sense, our cosmos is just a temporary deviation which has been set in motion by the breaking of that symmetry, and our line of time is a return to that perfectly balanced zero which existed before our universe began and which we'll return to after our universe has run its course.

God 2.0
So, while some would object to calling Stuart Kauffman's patterns of emergence that feed back on themselves to create our beautiful and complex universe "God", perhaps "God 2.0" is a useful way to reset our thinking about all this: all we are really talking about here is how higher dimensional patterns could be responsible for the universe we find ourselves in to be selected from the multiverse of all other possible universes, which ultimately, are all part of the Omniverse, where information equals reality. And that is a beautiful thing, worthy of our praise and our wonder.

Here is a song about that very idea: "Thankful".


A direct link to this video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvROwf2KeOg

Enjoy the journey,

Rob Bryanton

Related Entries:
How to Make a Universe
Infinity and the Boltzmann Brains
The Omniverse
Is God in the Seventh Dimension?

Next: Wormholes

Song 24 of 26 - See No Future

The twenty-fourth of the 26 songs is called "See No Future". Scroll down below the following video for the lyrics and a brief discussion of how this song ties into the project. A blog post which lists all 26 songs, including 1 video for each song can be found by clicking here.



A direct link to the above video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69pUzwSONBc

I've proposed here that life can be defined as any process that becomes interested in "what happens next" - that would be true for the very first chemical processes on our planet that developed strategies for their own continuance and propagation, and could easily apply to other organized patterns of energy and matter elsewhere within the multiverse. With this project, we have also expanded that idea to include systems of memes that follow the sequential frames of a fourth-dimensional line being selected from a fifth-dimensional probability space: all that is required is a "chain of attention", a quantum observer in (as physicist John Wheeler liked to call it) a "self-excited circuit", observing one timeline or another out of Everett's Many Worlds. By allowing for this possibility, we have opened the door to there being voices of "god and conscience, ghosts and ancestors" which could also possibly be part of the nature of reality: and we have suggested that this fits nicely with the Julian Jaynes concept of an integrated state of mind being until relatively recently the normal mode of operation for humans, which may be the way in which those voices were once a part of the day-to-day human experience.

Thinking in terms of these really-big-picture ways of imagining reality, and the information that is our reality, shows us how within the timeless multiverse that our universe springs from there are shapes and patterns that reveal how our reality is constructed, and places within that multiverse of all possibilities where certain shapes and patterns start and end. There is a very large pattern representing our universe from its possible beginnings to its possible endings, but that pattern is still a tiny subset of the multiverse. There is a pattern that is a subset of our universe that represents the genes flowing from a "river out of Eden" that create all human beings, just as there is a connected web of ideas and ways of looking at the world that can be thought of as the memes that contribute to human consciousness.

And within that pattern there is another tiny subset, representing the set of genes and memes that make a particular person. Those patterns are connected together across time and geography, back to the first spark of life and out to the end of the human race. With ideas like Kurzweil's approaching Singularity, or the Mayan Calendar's predicted acceleration of time and consciousness, we can entertain the hope that the memes that make up a human being (or all human beings) may find a way to continue, and this idea relates very nicely to the discussions about the nature of consciousness and what carries on when a person dies that Douglas Hofstadter eloquently explores in "I Am a Strange Loop".

So even though the genes and memes that make a human being's body and consciousness are part of patterns that extend across eons and around the world, and the memes can be thought of as extending out to basic patterns for preferring one outcome over another that extend right out to the multiverse of possible universes, at the other end of the scale there is a particular human body, which is yet another even smaller subset of all these patterns and shapes in the information that is reality.

In the animation, I suggest we think of our bodies in the four-dimension as a long undulating snake, connecting our conceived self at one end to our deceased self at the other. In my book, I blend Marvin Minsky's idea of "Society of Mind" with the Richard Dawkins idea of memes to suggest that what we think of as a "soul" is a complex interaction of different memes that rise and fall over time, and in that sense your (or my) soul is not the same as it was twenty years ago, because we are always taking on new memes and discarding old ones.

But this is not to say that the body is unimportant: there is still something unique about the experiences and meme-set/gene-set of any one of us that are carried along in a physical body, and as an organized pattern within the timeless multiverse each of us really are a unique subset of all that could be. Unfortunately though, there can come a time in people's lives where, because of old age, depression, disease, bad choices, or bad circumstance, they give up. That's what this song is about: if life is about "what happens next", then death is what happens when we "see no future".


SEE NO FUTURE
music and lyrics (c) by Rob Bryanton (SOCAN)

You see no future on the road that you’ve been travelin
You see no reason to continue any more
Still you keep on keepin on
Cause it’s the way you’ve always gone
Won’t you tell me what the hell you do it for

Now if there’s one thing I can say – it’s you’re consistent
And you’re persistent to a fault, sure, some’d say
Are you stubborn or just dumb?
Why don’t you try to find someone
Who will help to turn you round the other way
When you see no future

No tomorrows
Just todays
Is that the way you wanna stay?
No wishes
No dreams
Can’t you find another way?

I wish some happiness could join you on your journey
I hope that fortune finally finds you on your way
But tell me how will you ever win
When that big wheel that you’re in
Has you runnin the same circle every day
You see no future

No tomorrows....

You see no future on the road that you’ve been travelin
You see no reason to continue any more
Still you keep on keepin on
Cause it’s the way you’ve always gone
Won’t you tell me what the hell you do it for
When you see no future
When you see no future
When you see no future
When you see no

EDIT - here are those lyrics written out again with chords
SEE NO FUTURE
music and lyrics (c) by Rob Bryanton (SOCAN)

B (open, no third)
B (open)
You see no
E (add 9)
future on the road that you’ve been
B/D#
travelin --- You see no
E (add 9)
reason to continue any
F#sus F#
more --- Still you
B -- B/D# -- E
keep on keepin on Cause it’s the
B -- B/D# -- E
way you’ve always gone Won’t you
B -- B/D# -- E
tell me what the hell you do it
F#sus F#
for ---- Now if there’s

A (add 9)
one thing I can say – it’s you’re con
E/G#
sistent --- And you’re per
A (add 9)
sistent to a fault, sure, some’d
Bsus B
say --- Are you
E -- E/G# -- A
stubborn or just dumb? Why don’t you
E -- A/G# -- A
try to find someone --- Who will
E -- E/G# -- A
help to turn you round the other
Bsus B
way --- When you see no
A (open 9)
future


A (open 9)
--- No tomorrows
G
--- Just todays
G/F
--- Is that the way you wanna
C#m7
stay?
A(open 9)
--- No wishes
G
--- No dreams
F/G
---- Can’t you find another
Asus A
way? --- I wish some

E
happiness could join you on your
B/D#
journey --- I hope that
E
fortune finally finds you on your
F#sus F#
way --- But tell me
B -- B/D# -- E
how will you ever win --- When that
B -- B/D# -- E
big wheel that you’re in --- Has you
B -- B/D# -- E
runnin the same circle every
F#sus F#
day --- You see no
B
future

No tomorrows....

You see no future...


....When you see no
A
future --- When you see no
E
future --- When you see no
A
future --- When you see no

(silent pause, then: B)

Next song: 25 of 26 - What I Feel For You

Google, Memes and Randomness

A link to this video can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EXNWfX8sz8

Can you remember what life was like before Google? That's what this week's poll question is about:

2008 is the Tenth Anniversary of Google, our world's premium meme-tracker. How would you say Google has changed the way you interact with the information that is our reality?
- Better, more immersive
- Worse, more superficial
- No change from 10 years ago

As you can see, I am using language related to this project to ask a question whose answer might seem obvious to some, but the question is an important one: by the time information becomes so much easier to access, are we in danger of becoming a world of skimmers, flitting along the top peaks but rarely immersing ourselves in the deep valleys of that information?

Google helps us to settle questions that ten years ago might have been the source of endless debate, and surely debate can be a healthy exercise in the exploration of ideas. But the conversation-stopping moments that used to happen ("When was Paul McCartney born?" "Hmm, I used to know that, guess that brain cell's no longer kickin' in. No wait, was it... umm..." "Oh well, never mind...") have been replaced with a few deftly chosen keywords into the Google Search window and the answer is there for our perusal in 0.14 seconds.

But we're talking about much more than rock star trivia here. In fact, we're talking about all aspects of human knowledge, being revved up and churned through and exchanged at rates that would have been unfathomable a decade ago. In "Tens, Google, and the Expanding Universe" we played with ideas surrounding the expanding sea of information that Google gives us access to, and the interesting coincidence that 2008 is the tenth anniversary of both Google and the discovery that our universe's expansion is accelerating.

Order from Randomness
Starting from the quantum mechanics idea of Information Equals Reality, I have been talking about a random set of patterns encoded into the underlying quantum fabric of our reality, and how that randomness works as a satisfactory starting point for imagining the complexity of the universe we're in right now. Randomness is really not the interesting part of the story, though: what is interesting is that true randomness has to have pockets of order, parts where one state is preferred over another, and those pockets of order will have places where they begin and places where they end. Flipping a coin one hundred times will not give you endlessly repeating heads/tails/heads/tails outcomes, nor will it give you 50 heads outcomes followed by 50 tails outcomes, even though statistically speaking that is what we would expect our overall totals to be very near for such an exercise. Likewise, if the unobserved whole of quantum indeterminacy that our universe came from is truly random, then there must be pockets of grouping within that randomness. Calling those pockets the "big-picture memes" that caused our universe to be the one selected out of a multiverse of other universes is an idea I've been promoting... for more about the patterns that begin and end being what creates our probabilistic reality, please refer to my blog entries called "Everything" and "You Can't Get There From Here".

This leads us back to Google, and the thing that Google is so good at: keeping track of the memes of all shapes, sizes and durations that are part of the Information that is our Reality: memes are patterns in the information, and memes tend to rise and fall over time. In my last blog entry I talked about the Search Bar here at the top of my browser: if I type a single letter in I am immediately presented with 10 or so Suggestions, which tells me these are some of the memes that are most active at this moment for our culture. If I were to make note of the Suggestions that came up today, then perform the same check a week from now, a month from now, a year from now, and so on, what would I see? There would be some Suggestions that continue to be the same, and there would be some that were short-lived. Keeping a record of these lists would be like a mini time-capsule, and of course there are a number of efforts under way around the net to capture records like these so that we will be able to analyze and compare the changes that have happened in our Googleverse of information from years past and over the years to come as the web continues to develop.

I'm a Spime (and so are you)
Something as simple as writing down the 26 top Suggestions corresponding to the 26 letters of the alphabet gives us a rudimentary way to track some of the memes that rise and fall, and the shapes that would be created by the duration for a certain Suggestion over months or years is conceptually similar to the "long undulating snake" or Long Body we are imagining as ourselves across the fourth dimension, with our embryonic self at one and and our deceased self at the other. This also relates to the concept of Spimes that Bruce Sterling has been using to refer to physical objects that have been tracked so that they now have a defined and recallable shape across space and time.

How can we tell if a meme or a spime is the result of randomness, or deliberate manipulation? Whether or not you believe the patterns that created our universe are the result of randomness or the deliberate manipulation by a higher power, they are patterns nonetheless. The patterns of information that sustain across a period of time continue to be operated upon by other patterns in the future, and this concept is very connected to what Richard Dawkins is talking about with his description of the randomness that creates life and evolution: once something is no longer being acted upon by these processes, it ceases to have any further change.

Tracking the Changes
Which leads, finally, to one of my favorite phrases for this project: "that which ceases to change ceases to exist". Whether you are talking about the formation of our universe, the beginning of life, or the memes that rise and fall and Google helps us to track, that concept applies. Genes, memes, and spimes: each is a shape or a pattern across space and time. Those that cease to exist cannot be operated upon by patterns in the information that is our reality from that moment forward. Those that continue to exist can be combined together or modified, sometimes in ways that are improvements that allow them to continue in time still further for even more editing and manipulation, and sometimes in ways that will soon cause them to cease to exist: which is how a sea of information becomes a universe, how a primitive chemical reaction becomes a human being, and how a simple idea can become known throughout the world.

Enjoy the journey,

Rob Bryanton

PS: June 18 1942. But you probably already googled that if you were interested, didn't you? To finish this entry, a new video for one of the 26 songs from this project. This is about the dancing patterns of information that create our reality: "From the Corner of My Eye".


A link to this video can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyP5jxFe5Po