The Magic Bottle - A Fable

There was once a great land that time had forgot. It was ruled by a great king and queen and many loyal subjects. The land was vast and beautiful. It was known for its majestic gardens, sparkling rivers and marble fountains. In it lived many creatures both big and small. One day, the king told his son that the prince needed to urgently leave the kingdom to find his bride. A beautiful princess had been captured by an army of dwarfs and had been taken away to the edge of the world. The king warned his son that this was no easy task to rescue the princess and marry her and he also told his son that this strange land had no sense of time. If the princess stayed there she would naturally get old and die and there was little time to rescue her since everything in their kingdom would be destroyed until she was returned. That meant the prince would have to hurry and if he any chance to rescue the princess and the kingdom, he would have to think of a clever plan. The prince could see that he had little time as he himself was growing older, and everything around him was changing and aging. He quickly bid his father farewell and hastened to rescue the princess from her captors. When he finally arrived at the edge of the world where the princess was imprisoned, he noticed that he had now stopped aging but knew that he had little time to rescue the princess and return back to his home since time was still in this strange world. He quickly hurried to the castle where the dwarfs were keeping her and stealthily entered her room and explained that he was the prince that was meant to rescue her and marry her. Unless they could escape and leave this strange land, all would be lost for them back home. The princess was happy to see him and she wept with joy. As they were getting ready to leave, the army of little men entered the room and stopped them, holding up a small lock and key, and their commander, a little man wearing a red cap approached and warned them that if they took one more step he would turn the lock with the key and unleash all the evils in the world. The prince and the princess did not dare to go one step further. They looked at each other and anguished that they would never escape and return back to their kingdom. The prince quickly thought of a clever plan to distract his captors. He had brought with him a bottle of wine from the kingdom that had once been used to house a genie but the genie had been let out and it had become an ordinary bottle of wine. He presented the bottle to his captors and asked them to open and drink from the bottle since the world was now being lost and he wanted to celebrate these last moments with his bride. The captors agreed and the little men began drinking from the bottle until everyone was quite drunk and distorted. They thanked the prince for bringing them the wine and to show their hospitality, welcomed him to stay with the princess until the entire ordeal was over. The prince stopped them from leaving, insisting that the empty bottle of wine was magical and that a powerful genie had once been kept there and if someone so little entered the bottle, he could rub the bottle and make them all bigger. The little men were astonished that this could even be possible and they desperately wanted to become bigger since their entire kingdom was so big and they truly disliked being so small. But if they entered the bottle, they would have to leave the magic lock and key with the prince in case something went wrong. The little men could not refuse such an offer and they all agreed to enter the empty bottle one at a time. The prince and the princess crept down to the floor and watched the little men enter the bottle. Once all them were inside, the prince quickly turned the bottle over as cries of help whistled from the open mouth of the bottle and he closed the top with the cork pushing it tightly inside so it would never open again. At that instant, the edge of world was made whole again, and time resumed since all the little men were inside the bottle. Flowers began to grow, water began to flow and sunlight began to shine and the world was wonderful again. The princess was rescued and the prince returned with her to their home. She was so happy and she asked him what he would do with the bottle now that she was rescued. He said that he would return the bottle to his father, the king who had used it to capture an army of little men many years before. Indeed, it was the genie that had escaped the magic bottle all those years ago and created an army of little men to destroy their happy kingdom.

The Lost Boy

This is about a boy who thought he did not exist. After he was born, and was around five years old, he came to his mother and said, "I don't exist". She replied, "Of course, you exist, you're standing right here". He answered back, "No, no I don't exist because you are my mother and I cannot exist or share time with you." She sent him on his way saying, "Don't ever think like that, you exist, go make something of your life." Though he insisted he didn't exist because he could not conceive separating time from his mother who was his timekeeper, he agreed and left her and went on his way, although despondent about the truth of his existence. He met others who insisted that he existed and that he shouldn't fault his mother for sending him on his way. People hearkened around him and all insisted that he existed and this was a fact of life. He didn't feel quite right all the same but he went about his daily life, without giving it much reflection though it distressed him that people behaved so badly with him. Thus every second, every minute, every hour felt like a million years and each moment, he was saddened by his every increasing grief. His friends and the people he knew constantly made fun of him and joked about how he acted so oddly or out of place and out of time. His only reason for living was his mother's assurance and his only salvation was his denial that he truly existed. Thus, his life never seemed adequate and he felt sad and did not know how to adequately pass his time. He went on and married and had children of his own and always felt embarrassed because of his strong sense of separation and denial of his existence so why should his children exist. He became the butt of jokes at the office and almost everywhere he went because of his odd behaviour and his family also teased him about his preoccupation with not existing. Thus, his life went by in state of disbelief and he grew old and gray. When he finally went back to see his mother who was now aged and dying, he was truly remorseful. Though as she lay dying, he still posed the question, "if he existed". To relieve his distress, she finally admitted to him that she had lied all this time and that he did not exist so that he might after all, be at ease. And with those last words, she passed on, no longer existing and left him behind only to think why all this had taken place. He heard children laughing outside the bedroom window. He did not know why he did not exist.

Age

I just finished talking with my mother on the phone and I remembered that her birthday is coming up. I joked with her that she is getting getting while refuted my playful, jocund manner she also admitted that she her forgotten her own age. Maybe she is going senile but to me she is forever young. In her 50's or so, my mother has real beauty and charm that no other possesses. She is quite old now and I admitted to her that I've writing my book and thinking about the concept of time and how it might relate to her own age. Obviously she is a young 50 but she has four children, three in their thirties and my sister, who is in her late twenties and grandchildren who are also now part of the family. It almost seemed to me that if we added all our ages together my mother would be almost 200 years old or 200 hundred years young. Obviously, she doesn't feel like she's 200 hundred and her children are too young to feel any older, though each member of the family can add on additional, subjective time to her life. If she lived to be another 150 or less, and when and if she ever passed, which I have never imagined, because I love her dearly, her children will remain behind, though she shares our time with hers. Does that me we will die and be buried with her if she passes. An honorable son could only that was so, but alas, she will leave us one day and I have to cope with that fact. My time will continue and I will age as she did in her life and while I live and continue my life, by living as her shared time on earth, I believe that I will continue her life on earth, through my children and their children. Alas, she will be in heaven smiling down at a jealous forebear who will miss her dearly and can only wish he was also with her but will have to eek out a dignified existence nonetheless. My father died a long time ago and when we say we are survived by our children, that is exactly correct because we do survive and preserve the legacy of our fathers. I loved my father dearly and miss him dearly and while he may not be around, his time on earth has persisted. And his wife who is my mother has shared this time with him and thus kept time alive in us, by which she has provided a mutual respect in us for time by leaving us with a measurement. Time is immemorial since we all visit tombs or the Taj Mahal and places that have outlasted time and are visited by us to praise the time gone by and consider that as a appropriate use of our time because it is monument to love, the ultimate goal. I can only wish I can do my mother well by spending her time on earth well and preserving her legacy and remembering her as my time continues and flourishes. Thus, I will always be that grain of sand and my mother, by dying will no less be without me or me without her until the end of time, which is the day of reckoning. While my love for my mother and my father outweighs my desire to live, time has the ultimate word and my hope is that God or the universal architect will guide my time well on this planet that I share with my loved ones. I can only pray that their time is also well applied that is whoever is guiding me. My other hope is to share time with someone who is important to me, who I love and respect and that can fulfill these values.

Why Murder is Wrong?

Why does society consider murder a morally corrupt act? Consider the murder of a man with an appreciation for time and space. Consider that the whole world watched that murder at the same time, that of the act taking place. There are two men standing in a meadow. An argument ensues and one man picks up a rock and holds it over his head. The act of murder is imminent and the other man is seemingly helpless and thus, is in position to defend himself. He is caught off-gaurd and unawares. The entire world turns to this event and watches in incredulity and suspense. Time also plays a role and subjective time seems to be transfixed on this subjective event taking place, thus an illusion is created that seems to justify the action with respect to all time. Consider that everyone throughout the history of time watched such a murder taking place. But alas, we know that mere existence provides a measurement of time or a continuation of that measurement to justify all time which is still irrespective of nature. Thus, when the event takes place and the defenseless man is struck over the head by the rock and is killed, the entire world takes notice as if all time has stopped. But even if the world watched such an event taking place and life continued as it were, the act would be morally reprehensible for the following reasons: 1) The event took place in the first place due to an argument that was predetermined by all time or our sense of the measurement of time but since we know that we all are subject to all time, and even if the act was predetermined by all time, we would consider it wrong since it would not justify taking the other man's life such as a grain of sand falling out of the hourglass. The hourglass can always show time as a measurement but can never replace that measurement with something else. Thus, the grain of sand is theoretically, entombed in time as a measurement. Over time, the sands may rub together and even disintegrate but it would not matter much at all since time is encapsulated by the hourglass. So why should measurement exist in the first place. Thus, we would consider the murder of the man by the rock wrong since it is not justified by all time. It simply cannot come to pass due to our reasoning. Consider the grains of sand, they rub together indefinitely and immeasurably. If they disintegrated, they would disintegrate at exactly the same time so while the possibility exists of the man throwing the rock, it would not justify his own action or even his existence. The victim would die, theoretically, but he is also not dead due to the impossibility of such an event. The grain of sand will always remain despite the friction. 2) Why else is this action wrong and if it happens, why do we punish the murderer at all? The answer is self-evident. There is no punishment but that may be befitting such a social, cosmic event. Should the man be charged with death by hanging? A question that might be worth asking in a law school setting but there would not be any sufficient punishment as dictated by the mere fact of our existence; 3) Could all time dictate such an event taking place that the grain of sand magically disappear without a trace. Even if it did, it would obviously create a time difference in the hourglass itself or the measurement of time would be lessened by such an event due to the lack of the grain of sand. But this is merely a figment of our imagination or fallacious thinking. We are all trapped inside the hourglass with a specificity of time or specified measurement. Like letting the genie out of the bottle. It is simply a figment of our imagination; 4) No man is an island because every man is a grain of sand; 5) When a man is killed, is time in fact shortened by such an event. Not likely due to the impossibility of the event. It just simply never happened so while the possibility exists that it could happen, it is again a misapplication or mismanagement of our concept of time. The concept of time itself seems to impinge on our clarity as a measurement. We cannot be clear when we relate time back in hours, minutes, seconds. It's not a clear conception. We need a better measurement. I will look at this problem more closely when we return to this topic.

A Frame in Time

We observe things with a sense of time? All living creatures and life on earth has a sense of time. Time is thus a frame of living and thus is framed by living things. The tree knows when to shed its leaves when the seasons change and its almost time for winter. Photographs capture a moment in time much like a hourglass. The sand in the hourglass travels through funnel to ascertain the passage of time but as part of the hourglass, does it not also embody all time. The sand only changes places but the hourglass has encompassed the sand which is the measurement of the time it takes to change places. What is the significance? Is all life on earth framed in time such as the sand in the hourglass. When the sand reaches the bottom, we determine the amount of time that may have passed but once it reaches the bottom, the measurement, which is the sand has no real value and only objective time that of the hourglass or the frame, remains. So is a photograph much like an hourglass because of it captures a moment in time. As soon as the light flashes and the camera shoots a picture of an object or material entity, that material entity is thus reflected in the photograph, as a moment in time. The object itself becomes a measurement of all time and thus, when we look at the Polaroid, we smile when we see the moment when the image was produced. We have a sort of living memory of such a time when we were young or happy and with friends. But now the friends are old, some of them have died, our hair is gray, and we no longer smile for the camera but we have this living memory of a former time that we ourselves are a measurement. So overall time seems to overrule our undermine the sense of measurement such as hours, minutes and seconds that we use to measure time. Our sense of time while a productive measurement is still fallacious as it relates to overall time. It is only our apprehension of time gone by such as night turning into day. How can frame time better? We see frames in time everywhere. The man walks down the street, the dog barks, the mother nurses its young, all of these frames of time. Obviously, we are also a product of time since the mother needs to nurse its young, and the man needs to walk down the street to the Post Office and the dog barks when it sees an intruder. Time is thus framed by our measurement. What does this mean for us? We often complain when were are behind the time. Othello says we must obey the time. Time is the enemy, some people say. "I don't have time", says the passerby when he is confronted by a peddler. Neither does the peddler have the time to peddle. If one is true, then we must consider both to be true. These are time dialectics. Frame by frame, we are measured and are measuring our time on this planet, under the watchful eye of an ultimate timekeeper. I go to school, then it's time for lunch, then it's time for recess, then it's finally time to return home. Some people have all the time in the world, others do not. But on the whole, our individual sense of time is moot. During the marathon, the person who crosses the finish line first at a record time, has accomplished a great feat. The last person to cross the same finish line has also crossed but as a measurement of time, came in last place. Could it be that the person who came in first and the person who came in last crossed the finish line at the same time and were simply misframed. It seems that we to need to better frame our time. Even light is a measurement of time. As a non-material entity, it travels at some 180,000 miles per second. It is thus a measurement and is measured by the distance it travels. Is it also a fallacious mode of time. The observer and object problem persists. Should there be light and no timekeeper, thus no light at all or no observational deck. A wrinkle in time means a ripple in time where light might persist if the observational deck is lost for only a few moments until the glimmer of light has faded completely and is lost in nothingness. This may be fallacious thinking since time is only a gatekeeper and the cause of light is also a value of time. When time ceases then all light and living things should cease, theoretically. Thus, I need to make better use of my time by framing it in a more productive way. I need to respect nature and be one with time, nature and respective time that we all share. But alas, something that you might be doing might seem a waste of time to me such as the peddler or the runner. I don't see why I should watch this race since it makes no difference who wins. I'll hear about it later in the news or a friend might tell how exciting the race was. Thus, we are all interconnected by such a measurement of time. "I don't want to hear it", I tell my friend who looks at me askance. He might think it is appropriate use of his time and mine to share such a story. But the differences persist. We must be able to frame time better. Art, literature, poetry are dignified applications of human time. So is time spent on our health and well-being such as running a marathon, exercising or other sporting events. The criminal who has misapplied his time to commit a criminal act is thus punished not only because he has committed a crime or a moral wrongdoing, but that he has misapplied time relatively. So while he is absconding with other people's money after a bank robbery, he is captured by police who detain him for his criminal act and thus, the police and the criminal and all the people all involved have been subjected to a moral wrongdoing as well as a misapplication of time, that no one wants to measure or be measured by. We'll get back to this problem soon.

The Law of Place Continued

Let us consider some other factors that make law of place so important. I want to return to the example we discussed earlier. Consider the eagle and its place when it stalks its prey. If it was in any other place, it's perspective would change and thus, the angle of its attack. At every moment, like fast motion photography, the eagle will fly forward and thus occupy space at different time intervals. Finally, the place of its prey is also important. If the prey occupies any other place or changes places, it would naturally escape. If the eagle captures its prey, space is unified in a loose sense and the eagle has succeeded in its place manipulation. I had a friend that traveled to Texas. He was living in New York and traveled Texas and thus changed places. He was no longer in New York, where I may be able to communicate with him or say hello. He was now in Texas and thus had changed places and I could only reach him by phone. He traveled a great distance to reach his destination and as he changed places, he also changed my orientation to his place in time. I realized that he was no in Texas and would not be easily reachable and I also imagined what his new place might be like. Do we then think in terms of distance and place? I would've easily thought of him as being close by even though he was physically in Texas. If I thought he was close by would I be able to reach out and grab him by the hand. Obviously, no because place has determined him to be elsewhere and I would reaching for nothing. Consider a child when it is born. It occupies as small place due its size. As time passes, its body grows and it occupies more space depending on how tall or how short, how skinny or how fat. Time then determines place and space occupation such as the eagle outspreading its wings and thus fulfilling its rightful place. Does consciousness have a place? If consciousness was one and uniform, then place would be uniform. But consciousness is non-material reality. It may not require material to exist. Further, consciousness provides a place that is non-affected by physical mediation. We can resolve that place affects us greatly. A deer grazing on land consumes grass in a specified place and no other place, thus providing itself nourishment. I stand under the sun or in the shade and place will affect the outcome and whether or not I would be tanned or sunburned. If I traded places with you at this very moment, you would no longer exist, if I could occupy the same space inside the very place that you stand. The place that you occupy is your personal space that is owed to you by mere fact of your existence. What would happened if I pushed you out of place. You would be then, be occupying a different place and will feel out of place if you were pushed involuntarily. Considerable time will also have passed as a result of that event, you being moved from one place to another. Will you be angry with me for moving you out of your place or will I apologize and say it was an accident. Notwithstanding if we can resolve our differences, this event would create a considerable place displacement and we would resume taking up our respective places. I pushed the old lady out of the way of traffic so she wouldn't be hit by a car. If she stayed in her place, she would've been struck. Actors often have to stand on a mark in order to deliver a line in front of a camera. If they occupy any other place, it would affect the shot considerably and how the film looks. We also impact the place that we occupy. We walk on the beach, we leave footprints on the sand thus creating a place impression. The place is changed due to the distance we travel and the impact that's made. While this change is superfluous in an objective sense, the place has not changed and we have created a small, immeasurable impact on the former place that we traversed. The question persists. Why should there be a place in the first place for us to occupy such a place and conform to that place to survive? When a parent tells a child, "stay in your place" that has real significance since place is so determinant. If the child acts out of place, he will likely incur the anger and resentment of the parent who has instructed him to behave. Thus, we have a natural instinct for place. I know I am near the water's edge and should not go closer lest I fall in or that my hand is close to the fire and I should move it away lest it be burned. Each entity occupies a place and is interrelated. Standing close to the water's edge makes me vulnerable to falling in. If I do fall in and drown, I would've left the place of my safety and thus, became a victim of drowning in a place where I wasn't meant to be. Thus, instinct tells me to move away from the water and occupy a safer place. Obviously, someone who can swim would be able to safely leave the water. Can matter occupy the entire realm of place? Obviously not, since place greatly outweighs our ability to occupy it. There is matter everywhere that we see in nature and nature offers a place for matter to survive and time governs the place where matter exists but any other place for it to occupy that is not it's rightful place would negate its instinct for survival. It seems time is fixed as it relates to place. There is a fixed time for the tree grow or the fruit to blossom in a specific place. Nature exists in fixed or perfect time. I have a certain number of years to live or it takes me so much time to get to school and if I stayed in bed, I would be late for school and thus, my time would be wasted. Can I live longer than a hundred years? No, because I am a product of fixed time albeit time will go on, though I will no longer exist. Would that then mean that I have transcended time or simply that the ghost has passed. You are given a certain amount of time to take an exam. When time is up, you must drop your pencil and hand in your exam. This affects you, your place, your existence since time is objective and theoretically, you can have all the time in the world to complete your exam but alas, you are a product of fixed time because you won't outlive all time. If you believe you can transcend time, you won't exist in a place or at all and have no impact, in a physical sense, on the world and thus, would not have any statistical value (see Sartre). We often say when someone passes, that "he is now in a better place". Does that mean he was in a worse place prior to his passing or that he is truly in a better place where there is no suffering and he has entered heaven. It's hard to let a place go. Firstly, it requires physical strength and notwithstanding a lot more. Place memory often determines what we do, who we are and how we act. The squirrel remembers and sometimes forgets the place where it has buried its food. I remember a place where I was once happy or I was once sad and place often denotes an emotive quality. I may thrive in certain places such as a quiet room in a library where I can study without interruption. When I remove a plant out of its place in the sun, chances are it will destroyed by lack of sunlight unless it is a different kind of plant that can survive without sufficient light But then it is no longer the same plant occupying the same place. Place then becomes a contradiction in terms. We cannot share the same place without changing something in ourselves. This can be better defined by the laws of evolution. Let us consider the topic again at a later date.

The Law of Place

What is meant by the law of place? Matter exists and takes place in a specified place. Matter and place are unified by the law of place. Space exists all around us but space defines our material being. Consider the polar bear who lives in the north. The place defines the object or the material entity. Outside of such a place, the polar bear would not exist. This is meant the law of place. Place cannot be substituted by a material form that depends on that place for its life. The polar bear cant's simply to Brazil and eek out an existence. He will cease to exist if such an event took place. Birds fly south in the winter because the honor the law of place. When it becomes too cold to survive in the north, migratory birds will travel south until the winter is over. Why is this the case and how is time measured as a law of place. It takes the birds quite some time to travel south and thus quite some time to travel north. Perhaps, many birds also die during this extended migration. But it is necessary in order for these migratory birds to survive. If the stayed in the north, without traveling, they would likely die due to lack of food and the cold weather. Some plants only grow in certain places and it is quite obvious that many animals are subject to the law of place. It is what makes them such as the chameleon who becomes camouflaged when it sits on a tree. If it didn't have its place on the tree, it would not be camouflaged. Why is place important in the transmutation of species. If I am wounded or bleed and am occupying a specific place then, materially I am subject to the elements. Blood will congeal faster in hot weather or cold climate might exacerbate my wound. Thus place will determine my material decomposition. Fair skin people have to stay out of the sun because they will be sunburned or their skin might peel off. Thus, place or an objective space that is predefined with a material object in mind, becomes their ruler. Fish cannot live out of water. Mammals cannot live in water. Amphibians can live in water and on land. The Viking enjoys cold weather whereas an African might not be able to exist in Greenland without some difficulty. Thus, the African who is not meant for survival in such cold climates might be deleteriously affected by such an environment and can easily get pneumonia and die. The law of place is also critical for survival such as Nordic people whose diet might be quite different from someone living in the Philippines. Having lived in the U.S. for all my life, I will likely sick if I drank water in Argentina or Mexico. The law of place has significantly defined my material needs and fulfillment and thus being displaced, might cause a material disruption since I will no longer be occupying the place where I meant to be and that is essential to my livelihood. I am a material object that occupies a place that is pre-defined by a material condition that has dictated my physiological capacity. People that live at higher altitudes are often known to have stronger and more durable lungs, whereas someone who has not lived in such a place, might not be able to tolerate such a height. What is meant by the place and why is essential for us to study? The movie Titanic shows that someone drowning in cold water will suffer hypothermia and die instantly. Such a place will have a drastic impact on their material life. Cold, freezing water is no place for a warm human body. Though, whales and other creatures that are hot-blooded can survive in the coldest temperatures and occupy such a place freely and beneficially. Right now I am occupying a place at my desk, writing on the computer. If I left this place, I would no longer writing on this computer and would occupying a place where such an act or process or state would not be possible. Thus I have committed myself to this place and have become one with the place. Leaving this place will considerable change who I am and what I can become. Thus, place-changing can be adverse or positive or neutral. If I had the window open and it was cold out, I might have to move out of such a place lest I catch a cold or suffer a cough. I am a subject of place and never an object of place since place is objective and governs my subjective being. I cannot traverse the North Pole without proper gear or wear a jacket on the beach. The law of place will negate my futile attempts. We shall return to the subject on a later occasion.

My Life

I've lived my entire life wary not to make a single mistake but in the process left a path of destruction.

The Mind

I believe we all have thoughts, degraded thoughts, demonic thoughts, disturbed thoughts that we all wrestle with in the private recesses of our mind and in our private lives that we never show in public or let know to others because we trust that we are repenting.

How is Relative Time Measured . . .

How is relative time measured? Let us examine this problem. Let us observe the time it takes for an eagle to catch its prey. The eagle on its crag is an object of time as well as the prey that is hiding in the hedges below. The time it takes for the eagle to spot the prey can be measured as subjective, objectified time as well as objective, subjectified time. The earth and the winds of change will blow as the eagle will continue to observe its target, waiting for the right moment to attack. The target may be a small deer or a fox in the meadow, who is also an object and subject of time as it continues to graze unaware of its impending doom. It seems that form, that of the eagle and fox, is a capsule of time, measured by material change. Outside of form, there is subjective time that is also measured by material change but has a uniform and encompassing quality. The eagle is hunter and so it preys on the fox until a time that is appropriate for it attack. But objective time seems to negate this entire material function and leaves material change inert. Why? It seems that form is a determinate quality of objective time. Consider two foxes in the meadow or two eagles and the hunt taking place simultaneously. It seems that subjective time is also categorical or superfluous or denominated by objective time, or all time. How do we cope with this question? How is subjective time interrelated and why? The eagle sensing that the time has come to attack will fly off the crag in all its magnificence and swoop down to nab its prey. Considerable subjective time will have passed until the prey has succumbed to the eagle's prowess. Form and talent will determine the outcome of such an event - the eagle capturing its prey. But each actor is beholden to time and thus, a mutual victim. What happens when the fox is obliterated. It's subjective time ceases to be or it is subsumed as objective time so why then should such a form exist. Is it merely to feed the eagle's appetite for time and personal survival. Consider taking a flight to Hong Kong from New York. I will leave New York and reach Hong Kong in 16 hours or more. Considerable subjective time will be needed for my trip to take place and considerable objective time will have passed, such as night turning to day, or the shoreline receding or an iceberg melting. Is subjective time then a component of natural time and what is the difference. Is our time actionable and perceptible and why is it perceptible and actionable? We perceive the world through our own subjective time while objective time perceives us. Why should such a dialectic take place. It seems almost ignorant for such perceptible nihilism to be wanton. Time is a source of action on our part. Existence merely governs how that time is spent. We exist as a denomination of time. Time is passing, time is fleeting. Then how is relative time measured? Should it be a factor of subjective and objective time such as the age of the earth relative to all life on earth multiplied by the infinitude of space and the cosmos. It seems that we would never know true time until we knew the size of the cosmos and the duration of space and light. Even then we would subjectively measure time and have no explanation for the objective reality - that of existence. Are we all then subject to a frustrated existence where survival of the fittest is paramount. The more we see change, and change in ourselves, the more we are frustrated by the mortality of subjective time vis-a-vis objective time or overall time. The tree dies and decays but is raised again. The old wither and die and are born again, until all subjective time ceases and only consciousness remains. A supreme consciousness that has the power of creation for which no time is necessary. The athlete is a prisoner of time. As each hand whisks a tennis ball over the net during the course of a match, time is elapsed and competitive subjective time is measured. The ball traveling over the net relative to the power and force applied will determine the time it takes to reach the other side, each shot measured by an indefinite number of possibilities of force, speed and ricochet. Not only that but the players themselves will find themselves time-bound. Does the variance of each shot determine the subjective measurement of relative time. With each stroke, the player must wait for the ball to return and the variance will determine the length of time and thus, objective time will overrule subjective time and a time anomaly will ensue. Bodies will be subjected to a single time variance, no matter if that variance is ideal or if that action is time-justified. We must examine this problem more closely.

What Makes Right Good

Chatting with a friend, the question came up, is right always good, and if not, why not?

Friend 6:12 pm
right
Me 6:14 pm
heres a question - is right always good?
Friend 6:14 pm
no
Me 6:15 pm
why not?
Friend 6:16 pm
what are u talking about
Me 6:16 pm
is being right always good
Friend 6:16 pm
most of the time
Me 6:17 pm
any other time?
Friend 6:17 pm
what are u asking for Me 6:19 pm
can war be right but is it good
Friend 6:20 pm
war is never right....it's savage
Friend 6:21 pm
but, obviously u have to defend yourself if your caught in it
Me 6:22 pm
is capital punishment right and is it also good
Friend 6:23 pm
some people dont deserve to live but obviously having to kill someone is never good...what are these retarded questions about
Me 6:23 pm
so right is not always good then
Friend 6:24 pm
i said that obviously
Me 6:24 pm
then what makes it right
Friend 6:24 pm
most of the time right is good...who cares
Me 6:27 pm
i think that right is self-serving as opposed to good, which is more universal
Friend 6:29 pm
what u think is good and what i think is good could be different
Me 6:29 pm
if it's good everyone agrees - if it's right - i might not agree
Friend 6:29 pm
what the hell u talking about
Me 6:29 pm
good precedes right in many ways
Friend 6:31 pm
it's hot in my apartment...u might see that as good since like the heat but i don't see it as good as i like it cold so good? says who
Me 6:32 pm
its good not to commit violence, its right not to commit violence only because its good - good precedes right
always do good and you'll always be right i guess
Friend 6:33 pm
u make no sense right now
Me 6:33 pm
its right not to commit violence is just a formalism

Illness

There is no greater sickness than a sick heart.

My Life

Things have happened in my life, unexplainable things, unimaginable things, indefensible things and I can never be sure that such things may not happen again.

I Am, I am Not

All my life, I went around saying I am not. Today, I go around saying I am.

Creation

I want to create something. I want to create something with an object in mind.

Horse Racing

What makes a winning horse any different from any other horse on a racetrack. After all, they're all horses.

Metaphysics

Metaphysics can be described as the space between two musical notes when they are joined to form a harmonious sound.

Patha Nah Karaho

Patha nah karaho is zindaagi ka sach
Patha nah karaho is zindaagi ka sach
Yeh zindaagi bi kya ek haq ki muzaffat
Kay marnah or jeenah to hum saab hi karay
Likin is pyaar ki maanzil pay, yeh pyar ka musaffir
To sirif ek kadaam, ek kadaam hi chaddah.

My Father

I didn't know my father long, but the one thing he taught me that I never forgot was how to obey the line.

America

I've never felt more isolated and alone than when the sun sets a little earlier in North America.

What is Happiness?

What is happiness? Happiness is a medium by which we cope with our mortality. Those who are truly happy are those that are truly content in themselves.

Kya Karu, Kya Nahi Karu

Kya karu, kya nahi karu
Kya banu, kya nahi banu
Kah chalu, ka nahi chalu
Kya karu, kuch sochta rahu
Pyar to sirif tum say karu
Kyu is intizaar sai daruh
Kyu nahi tu milti rahai
Is pyar kay baagh mai mahi hoti rahai
Kya yeh sacha pyar nahi hai
Kaasa yeh intizaar bi hai
Kya karu, kya nahi karu
Kya mai tumse pyar nahi karu
Kya yeh zindaagi bi hai
Pyar kai bina kuchbi nahi hai
Kya kahu, kya nahi kahu
Pyar to mai dil sai hi karu
Kya mai insaan nahi hu
Kay terah pyar mai martah rahu
Kya likhu, kya nahi likhu
Kya parhu, yeh pyar ka junoon
Kya sonu, kya nahi sonu
Teri yaad mai beh janaa rahu
Kya karoo, kya nahi karoo
Is pyar ki qaid mai, kuch to bi mai kar na saku.

Is Mathay Pai Likha Hai

Is mathay pai likhi hai ek posheeda kahani
Jasay taj pay likha ho ek puraani dastaan
Kay bana hu terah, tu meri maharani
Dekha to is mathay pay likhi hai merah pyar ki shahnameh

America

It seems that America needs a grand priest, someone to set her straight in her ways, but it behooves me to ask, why she should need salvation at all, when salvation itself is self-contradictory.

Skepticism

The skeptic too believes in God, since all belief in God is likely skeptical.

God

Can we ever resent God by virtue of his existence?

God's View

I would not speculate on God's view of the world, but to Him, it may all just be accidental.

One and Many

Would you be alone and happy, or among many and sad?

Life

When you reflect back on life, you may be apt to accept that it was not all that bad.

Old Age

The more I age, the more I lose my sense of self.

Sense and Experience

Consider sense and experience. As material agents, we all experience life uniformly and distinctly. Take the following example. A student of music attends a concert of classical music with someone who has not necessarily studied classical music. Both individuals will enjoy the concert as a whole and experience the music for its overall goodness and enjoyment. However, the person with the trained ear will have a more fulsome experience since they will better appreciate specific aspects of the music and enjoy the concert as a whole. Whereas, the individual who is lacking a trained ear, may not experience the music in the same way. This does not necessarily mean that the mover is degraded or demoted in either case. Only the material senses seem to compete for a greater coherence of reality while the experience as a whole may be evident to anyone who hears music that is pleasant-sounding. Consider a gifted musician who can play the violin expertly to someone who might not possess the same gift. This does not mean that the potential is not present for either mover to possess such a gift or be magnified by such an experience. Matter and form seem to determine how we understand and interact with the universe, which is inherently experienced by the widespread egalitarian mover. Take the blood that flows inside all our veins. Some of us experience blood cots and die. This does not mean that we do not appreciate the life-giving value of blood in our veins and sense its vitality. It's only that matter with the allotment of time provide a means to individualize and interpret that experience in a distinct way. Trees breathe so do humans and sunlight and water give life to all the creatures on earth. But each experience is distinguished by a material prejudice, no matter if that experience can be objectively realized. Such as sunlight beading on a tree, that leads to photosynthesis, which is an objective reality. Thus, while the experience may be real as a dialectical truth, it can still be objectively deconstructed. Why? It seems a greater more glorious reality persists that is more logical and all-seeing. Why then should there be matter and form? What is the mover's purpose? Is it relegated to only form by which the trained ear contemplates music or the valiant soldier trounces the enemy. How is that accountable to an objectively known reality that may be predetermined. The mover is central to our question and matter provides some answers or a knowable set of talents that are also limited. I can visualize a demonic monster arising from the depths of the ocean to lay siege to a helpless city, but that does not make it materially true. Are these material apparitions limited in scope or are they hanging by the cusp of an infinite reality. The possibilities are endless. I think therefore I am but as I think am I not unthinking. It seems that the consideration of metaphysics often relegates us to the status of beasts. Let's hope otherwise.

Kajaal

Wo kajal ki lakirah kabi teri ghalo sey nahi millah,
Kaabi na dekhu yeh anko mei ansu say terah kajal bahai.

Hunger

If you want to empathize with world hunger, simply consider never having chicken again in your life.

Reason

If reason rules the world and man has the capacity for reason why should he exist and why should there be ignorance. Is man's capacity for reason a necessary evil. Is he deluded by his own existence and therefore, dependable on reason for salvation. Is that an acceptable means to an end when we consider the totality of the universe. It seems that man needs to internalize reason or to become reason for reason itself to be justifiable to his existence. If reason was man and man was reason, should they not cease to exist or by persistently co-existing, would man not improve his condition. Therefore, should we not all strive to be models of righteousness as Nietzsche suggested.

Meri Zindaagi

Meri zindaagi mei khaafi dukh aya
Meri zindaagi mei khaafi dukh aya
Kaabi nahi kiya hathyar sei dushmanno ka sayah
Ajnaabi yah wo ho apno say bi parayah
Jo is kalaam nei nahi karaho un dastano ka chayah

Life is Good

Life is good, but . . .

Life in America

Life in America often seems like a mean between averages.

The World

I believe this world is a testament to God's terrible grace and indiscernible majesty.

Natural Selection

No greater a friend to man in this world than the tolerable ass.

Power

Power begets misery.

Humanity

To know perfect beauty and perfect happiness is to accept a greater flaw in ourselves.

The Truth

In my search for truth, there have been many unintended consequences.

Har Pal

Apna har pal mere liya acha socha
Apna har pal mere liya acha socha
May nay har pal apko naraz kiya
Jab dil nahita tho jeehan ki kyaa baat
Jab emaan say bi tokarah gayah and kohi nahi ta awaan
Tho ragahi sirif ek andaari raat.

Forgiveness . . .

This life is an act of forgiveness for our shortcomings.

Return to God . . .

I believe our life needs to constantly revert to God. Consider the law of temptation. Did an apple ever taste the same for Adam whence he was expelled from heaven for tasting the condemned fruit.

Neend

Yeh neend be ha ek Allah ki rehmat,
Yeh neend be ha ek Allah ki rehmat,
Jab raat ko soyah hoo jassai ghuzaarti hai Qiyamat,
Aur kwaaboi mei dehka hai ek jannat ki rohanat,
To jaggnah ka nahi bohlo jab is neend ki hifazat

A Simple Rule . . .

If you can do, if you can't or shall not or won't, just don't.

Life . . .

Life is a lot like a game of chess . . . the most important thing is to decide when to move.

My Life . . .

I would describe my life as a sardonic surprise birthday party . . .

Capitalism and the United States

I believe that the extreme concentration of wealth in the United States due to a long-standing capitalist model will result in one of the fastest contracted economies in the world.

Human Frailty

How frail is man that his mere existence invokes sympathy . . .

Food and Religion

I believe food unites people of all faiths but faith sometimes neglects what it comports as food.

A Simple Formula for Love to Succeed . . .

1. Marriage
2. Decisions
3. Money

Love . . .

How come we feel most in love when we are most alone . . .

Jogging . . .

The saddest day of my life was when I gave up jogging . . .

Nuks . . . Urdu Poetry Continued

Aksar, may choti choti batto pay ladkara gya hoo
Aksar, may choti choti batto pay ladkara gya hoo
Asa na ho, key ek din mah koi baddi bath pay badkara ja hoo

Knowing . . .

I know who I am, do you?

What Is Lost . . .

What else is lost when we stop to smell the roses . . .

Urdu Poetry . . . Meri Bhool/Kabi Socha Ta

Kaabi shaadi ka socha ta to ghalib he nahi millah; jab ghalib he nahi millah tho jivani he ko gayah; jab jivani he ko gayah tho quoi kihani he nahi ti; jab kihani he nahi ti tho quoi abadi he nahi dehki; jab abadi he nahi dekhi tho quoi kurban hona ke liyeh nahi ta; jab quoi kurban hona ke liyeh nahi ta tho quoi gilaniyah he nahi ti; jab gilaniyah he nahi ti tho quoi shirvaniyah he chor gayah; jab shirvaniyah he chor gayah tho pir wo shirmanah he bhool gahi; jab shirmanah he bhool gahi tho zimanah he badal gayah; jab zamanah he badal gayah tho quoi piyah he nahi ta; jab piyah he nahi ta tho quoi lihnana ke liyah nahi millah; jab lihnana ke liyah nahi millah tho quoi pani he nahi baha; jab pani he nahi baha tho pyaas lagti hi gahi; jab pyaas lagti hi gahi tho umeed say chotkara hi sahi; jab chotkara hi bana to sano dil bi bichar gayah; jab dil bi bichar gayah tho quoi parvah he nahi rahi; jab parvah he nahi rahi tho puranah raviyah he palat gayah; jab raviyah he palat gayah tho quoi mastana he nahi raha; jab mastana he nahi raha tho quoi shirarat he nahi ti; jab shirarat he nahi ti tho quoi mujbooriyah hi nahi siyah; jab mujbooriyah bi nahi siyah tho sirif maharbaniyah hi ra gahai; jab maharbaniyah hi ra gahai tho pir thora kojah ta sa gayah.

Religion . . .

We all practice religion but we all believe selfishly in God.

Burping . . .

Burping is nature's way of saying eat more.

Looking . . .

When we look at the world through another's eyes, do we see what we want or do we see what we ought . . .

India . . .

I believe India has the most self-less people in the world . . .

Must love cars . . .

If you were struck by a car and died, would it matter to you if the car was expensive or would you regret that it was just any ordinary car.

Patience . . .

Does time have patience . . .

Human Consciousness . . .

What is human consciousness and when does it begin? Does it begin at birth when a baby is born? What is the purpose? How is consciousness related to the mover. It seems consciousness begins at birth when we are in the womb. Still life, that which is not moving, may still be conscious. I think we can all remember consciousness in the womb. The mover exists as a result of its human attributes. But consciousness seems to precede movement. Consider the lion that stalks its prey before moving in for the kill. It consciously stalks its prey. Is our consciousness connected to divine consciousness, that of all things. Our consciousness seems limited by our motor senses and other material attributes. Divine consciousness of all things supersedes lower forms of consciousness and encompasses all consciousness and time. That begs the question. Does consciousness cease when we die or does it reincarnate as divine consciousness. Why exist in the first place for human consumption? Animals also seem to be conscious? Is there consciousness also linked to the divine. I would define consciousness as memory and not necessarily movement. We remember things when we are conscious but the mere balance of our existence seems to cloud our judgment. We have been divorced from the divine consciousness and thus are grasping at the higher rungs of existence to keep from falling. The mover persists and is guided by our consciousness. Our consciousness will tell us when to move away from fire or to get out of harm's way. Even the gazelle is conscious when it is being hunted. How does world consciousness and interact and how does that interaction lead to final reckoning or greater clarity between the material and immaterial world. How do we cope with such a subject as consciousness? Are the dead conscious? Are they living amidst a divine consciousness and if so, can death be simply defined as a material expiration. Does the mover who can cheat time and space to exist concomitantly with the divine, join the super consciousness upon death. How are the two related, when we know consciousness and will are often conflicted. After all, consciousness may not denounce bravery. The mother always care for its young in spite of herself. Is that a part of human nature, grinding against the laws of a static consciousness. Is consciousness static or is it dynamic. Life and death and survival in the animal world may not be truly accountable to a divine consciousness, that expects all things, even miracles. What is the thinking man to do? How does the thinking man reconcile such differences? Consciousness, the mover, time, God, and space give us pause when we consider our brief material interlude. We come back to consider if movement precedes consciousness and our lives are simply grounded by a divine presence that has shaped all life on earth. How is that divine presence interpreted by mortal man? Or are we slaves to our consciousness and that of consciousness all around us, and moving only between two worlds that seems to exist only for divine pleasure. Consider the Buddha? If movement and consciousness are one, why should there be a need for a perfect balance? Are we capable of a perfect balance? These are the questions that perplex the mind along the long stretch of gravestones that mark our mortal lives.

Jewelry . . .

Ever wonder how a ring size is adjusted to fit a person's hand . . .

Life . . .

Here is your life, here is your wife, here are your children, here are your friends, here is your country, here is your hope, here is your knowledge, here is your love, here is your desire, here is your work, here is your death, here is your legacy, here you are laid to rest, and here you shall be resurrected, and here is your salvation . . .

True Love . . .

Does true love ever fade away or does it linger for a time or is it suppressed completely by the world's reverie until the day it is freed from its bonds if only to find itself unloved or loved again . . .

The Adage

From birth to death, regret birth defect . . .

Great Grief . . .

Sometimes great grief can last a thousand centuries . . . but its impression can last several thousand years longer if not more.

Provisions . . .

Not being able to provide for one's family is one of life's greatest disappointments . . .

Cross-eyed people . . .

Take heed of the cross-eyed person that walks the straight line . . .

The Formula

Walk, see, do . . .

True Love . . .

True love has no real language.

Love and Marriage . . .

Love and marriage are one of life's greatest blessings.

I was wondering . . .

How come baseballs have stitches?

Intelligence and Love

Intelligence and love are essential to all life on earth.

Hirings and Firings

Rick Sanchez call Rupert Murdoch.

Currency

Why do I sometimes feel like I would spend $60 rather than break a $50 bill?

Humanitarian Crisis in Pakistan

Julius Caesar

I had a chance to catch an old Hollywood remake of Julius Caesar on TV the other night with all the pomp and revelry of classic English cinema. The inimitable John Gielgud starred in the title role and Charlton Heston played the part of Antony. I have to say this film brings Shakespeare to life in a big way. What an epic. If you hate reading the bard in school, watch this film. It might ignite some passion for this classic genre in your soul. I'd have to go back and watch other film versions of the play (including Brando's version) but it may not surpass my ovation for this film. Be warned - the film is graphic and does not hide the brutal aspects of the murder regicide - the scene is quite dramatic and unbearable to watch. Richard Johnson as Cassius stands out most. He is also one of the last surviving actors of this precious film and should be rightfully praised while he is still living. I have to say he is one of the best and most powerful performances I've ever seen on stage and screen.

Letter to the Smithsonian National Zoo

Dear National Zoo:

I am a writer and educational blogger and am quite impressed by zoos and zoology as a whole. I wanted to find out by anyone at the zoo whether wildlife at the zoo, specifically lions and the Big Cats, can be returned to the wild after a period of captivity. Does such a plan of reintegration exist? I am intrigued by the process of reintegration to preserve exotic wildlife and endangered species.

Your Website was very informative and impressive. I hope to visit the National Zoo in the near future. My only experience of zoos has been largely limited to the Wildlife Conservation Society in New York City. The Bronx Zoo and the Queens Zoo are highly likable and educational but alas, they seem to be much smaller and limited in their scope, and programs and services. I have written to WCS regarding their reintegration policies since several of their animals (lions, tigers, polar bear) have been in captivity for a long time, and I am concerned that these species may yearn to return to the wild.

The Smithsonian National Zoo seems to embody a strong commitment to wildlife preservation and conservation, which I applaud. The Wildlife Cams that you have in place are also very enjoyable and your Website is clear and easy to navigate. I hope to become a member.

Thank you.

Chris Dodd for President!

The Supermover - Who Am I?

The more we analyze the phenomena of the mover, we invariably stumble on the question of nothingness. Why should mover and matter exist in the first place in a symbiotic way to perform a highly defined set of material obligations. If the existence of mover and matter are defined by time, then existence becomes even more illusory. Hence the question arises - who am I? Am I the person that is reflected in the mirror or am I the mover inside the image of the man or woman in the mirror. Who am I? Since matter is finite, the reflection in the mirror will change over time - our hair will gray, our skin will wither and we will become old, enervated and feeble. The mover however, seems to have an eternal charm and thus, we can never tell if the mover has become old or enervated. Just the opposite - the mover can be inspired, encouraged, hopeful and determined at any level of material progress. This can last up until the very end when our material being ceases to exist and the mover can return to an infinite material-less state. Animals are also movers and also grow old. Is the eagle defined by its claws and sharp vision or should it be defined by the inherent mover. Are all movers alike? We know from the previous blog, that a mover learns and can adapt to its material state and become unified with its material talents to accomplish its natural goals. An eagle learns to fly and knows how to fly and its material being is conducive to its life as a mover. But what is the eagle in the vast space of nothingness? What is an eagle prior to existing as an eagle? Is an eagle simply an incarnation of material and supernatural possibilities or does it exist as a representation of a larger super-reality. We cannot know for sure but it certainly does seem that if the eagle is defined by its timeliness and material state, then quite likely, it conceptually exists prior to natural life. The eagle and the mover need not exist as a material entity at all. But alas, an eagle exists. Why? And what or better yet, who is the eagle? Is it the creature that we observe flying with outstretched wings in the sky? Or is it simply an incarnation of a mover in animal form that has these material qualities. Why does the mover appear in such a state? Obviously, it appears to fulfill a specified, natural material obligation. When its life comes to an end, the mover is separated from its form such as that of an eagle and returns to infinite being. Thus, what is the mover? Is this mover, a small part of a supermover that ultimately foretells or commands the appearance of a unique mover such as an eagle or a lion, in the natural world as we know it. Since we owe our existence to our parents, and they would owe their existence to their parents and antecedents, then our existence as movers is highly compromising. Who are we? Who are you? Who am I? These questions linger in our minds. It seems more and more that as material beings, we should be in touch with our inherent mover. This can occur through common religious practices, such as churchgoing, prayer and meditation. Once we become connected to the mover, we can better ascertain its functions, role and true purpose. As movers that appear in bodily form through procreation, we must realize that our natural life is biological and ephemeral, and our souls are preordained by a supernatural, super-conscious reality. In fact, our own consciousness is illusory as individual movers or souls. We're simply a parcel that may travel from one distant location to another and owes its flight to a super-reality, until it arrives at its destination, at which point, the contents within can be revealed to unlock the mysteries of existence. But a superconsiounsess is always present and guides such a hypothetical, material obligation. The distance traveled and the time it takes for the parcel to be mailed is incidental or accidental and the reality that ensues or unravels is ultimately, the primary cause. We must bear this in mind as we continue to consider the mover's journey.

Knowledge, Matter and The Mover

What is knowledge and how does it relate to the matter and the mover? After all, The Knowing Cafe is a forum for knowledge, and was founded to promote the process of knowing. How does matter know? How does the mover utilize knowledge? Knowledge can be defined as a set of defined and undefined values that are learned by a material agent during the process of existing. In a metaphysical sense, knowledge is everywhere and infinite. In a material sense, knowledge is finite and subjective. A person learns through experiences and is also taught by books and communal living. We are edified and educated during our lifetimes. As a material agent, our knowledge is also specific to our material reality. A lion knows how to roar. An eagle might learn how to fly but it knows to fly. A fish can swim at birth. It knows by way of instinct. Thus, knowledge is instinctual. After all, a fish out of water would die and mammals prefer to live on land. Each knows its place in the ecosystem and what actions it needs to carry out in order to survive. Teach a man to fish and he will know how to fish. Is the mover knowledgeable? It seems that memory and instinct are essential for the process of knowing to take place but what purpose hath the mover during this osmosis. Does the mover learn and does it know? How is this knowledge pertinent to the mover. Let us turn to a basic example. The eagle may help its young to learn to fly or to know how to fly. During this process the young eaglets become knowledgeable of flying. Importantly, the appearance of such a material obligation implies the process of knowing immediately or temporally. The bird knows how to fly. It can also be argued that the mover exists materially with prior knowledge of its material function and capacities. Birds appear with wings and bears appear with claws. Certain instincts are easy to know such as hunger, pain and thirst or need to mate. Is it the mover that feels this pain, hunger and thirst or is it a material priority. Alas, both are acting in tandem, and one must accept that these perceptions are congenital. Again, religious provocations come to mind. We consider unique knowledge such as that of the prophets. They too are movers but is their movement and knowledge prophetic. Is their knowledge preordained by a higher power. Do others among the movers of the world possess superior or revelatory knowledge. Are these movers saints, prophets or angels. We can never know since this knowledge cannot be proven in a finite sense but we can observe and acknowledge acts of faith and miracles. We know and choose between right and wrong. We know that certain acts are good and certain acts are bad. This seems to be inherent knowledge, knowledge that is imbibed within us as movers. Why? Others possess knowledge too and share in that knowledge. All eagles know how to fly and all lions know how to hunt. When we consider the cowardly lion, even that seems to grind against our common view of lions in general. All lions are dangerous and deadly. This knowledge seems to be archetypal and shared by like-minded material groups of movers such as lions, eagles and tigers. All bears hibernate in the winter. It's the biological clock of knowing. If certain knowledge is shared by groups of movers, then how does knowledge coincide with other knowledge. Is knowledge possessed by the mover subjective or objective, or is subjectified by a material state of being. Four fingers and a thumb enable human beings to grasp objects although the knowledge of not knowing how to grasp an object is also objective to us. How are we accountable to such objective knowledge? In conclusion, knowledge seems to be the raspy wind in the willows of the super-consciousness that blows in so many different directions but offers only a small glimpse of a larger, more supernatural, phantasmogorical reality, one that births knowledge itself. The mover can know, and matter subjectifies that knowledge and sometimes, to the extent where it can indeed split atoms or glint like a sharp knife in the corner of our eye. Is the mover bound by subjective knowledge? How does that knowledge translate to material actions, those that we execute in order to promote our basic material needs and to what extent. Is knowledge time-bound? Knowing how to fly is only a vague impression that results in the flight of birds and that knowledge seems to hang by a tether to the overall concept of time. If knowledge and time were unified, then the material agent would cease to exist. The process of knowing seems to also implicate an action or inaction. We know good and we know evil. These are fundamental to other primeval knowledge such as flying or hunting. Knowledge as time, would be an aspect of a larger value since knowledge only appears in a limited, finite and material way. Knowledge may be more vast that we can ever imagine or conceive but time governs its execution and self-knowing. Knowledge for knowledge sake would be countervailing. Form, knowledge, matter and the mover seem to be working together as time-limited entities. Does matter identify with workable, functional knowledge to promote that knowledge for survival, its fundamental instinct. Is other knowledge betrayed in the process or is this knowledge fated to exist. We can never truly know the answer. What we can know is that matter and the mover share knowledge and utilize knowledge for progress. To this inquiring mind, it seems that an excruciating disconnect persists in the larger qualification of time, space and the mover. Something that connects all things metaphysical. Something that links matter to the mover, and the mover to time, and knowledge to matter. Each co-exist but exist with the slightest degree of separation like two stones rubbing together that light a spark if only after a few dull moments. How do we compensate for such a separation?

The Subconscious Mover

We have established that a mover is persistent in our larger conception of time, space, matter and movement. Let us better define the mover that operates within a material realm. It is better to define this mover as a subconscious mover, which exists in a transitory, finite state. If all matter is finite and a superseding movement is present, than the mover as part of matter would be a subconscious mover, which exists in a transitory state. This subconscious mover is restricted by its material capacities. Let us turn to the example of the eagle. The eagle can only see so far, fly so fast, or prey on specific animals. Its material talents or operational form is what largely defines its subconscious movement. The eagle does not roar which is reserved only for the lion. Nor does it prey on large animals. The subconscious mover is also part of the larger hypothetical material panoramic that exists within the supernatural universe. Thus, we deduce that the supernatural has many material faces or aspects but as the supernatural, it is a super-consciousness as opposed to a subconsciousness. Thus matter provides a vessel to execute hypothetical material obligations. But, why? Is the presence of the eagle a balancing force for the material universe that is governed by the supernatural? This theory is arguable since dinosaurs once existed and are now completely extinct. Thus, nature's preserve is extraordinary or limitless. Orcas or killer whales exist in the ocean and it need not be to sustain the ecosystem. Goldfish may still thrive in the water despite the presence of the Orca. A constant food chain seems to be present or overactive. Matter requires sustenance. All animals seem to prey on one sort of matter or another to persist. The mover subconsciously consumes and procreates to prolong its material life or progeny. If all movement is the same, why do we perceive distinction. It seems experience is central to distinguishing between movers and we can also postulate that the supernatural creates distinctive material movement on its own. Lions fight other lions in the wild for territory and breeding rights. What determines winners from losers? Might or movement? Perhaps, physicality. Physicality is awarded in nature. One who overcomes adversity will thrive, procreate and gain territory and respect. But the mover is lost in the material uproar. It seems matter is constantly forming and reforming itself and interacting turbulently within the supernatural paradigm to promote hyper-creation. The mover on the losing side is no less important. Opposition is critical for this process to take place. Two lions fighting. Why? Would not the superior lion be happier without a fight or a hunt? Nature and the supernatural seem to exist in a counter-intuitive way and are dissonant cognitively. Is this constant struggle the reason why matter seeks to prolong itself or is it simply an intrinsic trait, a bubbling to the top, so to speak. Fight may win territory or land for grazing but hunger is a basic natural instinct. The mother needs to feed its young at birth and hunger may be considered the first natural material inclination. Again, the material obligation provides the ultimate answer and clarity. A lion will roar and an eagle will fly only because its material obligation is indispensable to its survival. The subconscious mover becomes an agent of this material obligation, existing as divine right. This subconscious mover seems to survive in the most basic, and elementary way. It only knows its capacity for survival and how to carry out its material obligations. The camel does not want to grow wings but to live as a camel. How does it spend the rest of its time? Drinking water from a trough. Nor does the elephant seem to want to swing from trees like gorillas. The subconscious mover fulfilling its material obligations is arguably contentable. Why? Let us examine the human subconscious? It's more varied even if it is not highly potent or colossal. Are human beings invariably lazy. Probably not since human society is communal and works in concert with a supernatural, life-giving force. It's individual parts are motivated subconsciously. On a micro level, the variation of human consciousness leads us to believe in God and pursue other achievements - weapons of war, advances in science, art and physics, human technology and infrastructure serve us supernatural emblems that boast our material potential. Consider the wonders of the world and the great pyramids. Even an ant is motivated by its subconscious. The longing that we feel is attributed to the subconscious, perhaps best described as a magnet that clings to a larger force that pulls us towards a greater destiny. This magnetic attraction to the supernatural propels the subconscious mover in different ways and perhaps, shapes matter too to adapt and to overcome its environment, a sure sign of our role as material agents, to harness our material prowess and powers to achieve material good, which can sparsely attribute for the supernatural and gain its approval. Eating an orange is not a meaningless exchange or activity. It requires the presence of a mover, the one who eats, and the orange, the thing that's consumed. It is a highly satisfactory experience but presents a hypothetical reality or unreality. An orange is very real and attributable to nature. It tastes good and provides nourishment to the consumer. It is also pleasurable. The orange is also befitting to the mover and accommodates the mover well, since its edible and pleasing to the taste buds. Once consumed, the mover gains satisfaction and material promotion. Not one less orange exists in the world but an opportunity to grow more oranges or prolong material life that may require sustenance to persist and be productive. Once plucked from the orchard, the orange is consumed and its materialness no longer exists as an orange but as sustenance for the mover. It has a purpose. Matter has a purpose and seems to invite the mover to execute a material action, whether eating an orange or planting a tree. Movers that are inconsistent with the material want or longing may fall out of favor with the material urge or movers that do not conform to a material plan, may become unpalatable material agents for the material embodiment. Does the supernatural have a plan for us all. The supernatural can assist us and elevate us during our material journey, overcoming significant burdens or material challenges. A deep connection to the supernatural can transform matter over thousands of years, so that men might be able to fly in the air one day or possess other qualities that we sometimes, read in comics. But in its current form, the human being is limited to human ingenuity and human prowess. But the subconscious mover seems to know its finiteness and thus, struggles to overcome its material limitations. It longs for eternal life, through the gateway of the material universal to seek the supernatural paradise that indeed, delivers the fulfillment of its material wants and desires, whatever they may be in accordance with its subconscious and the supernatural. In the material journey, all then seems ephemeral, save for the mingling of the subconscious mover with the supernatural. The question plagues us once more. Suffering is inherent to the material realm since matter is finite. The material journey seems more and more a test for the subconscious mover fulfilling its material obligations to live by those natural means and somehow gain salvation. This temporary divorce or separation from God or the supernatural mover is unexplainable and can only be interpreted religiously, philosophically, metaphysically, stoically and ascetically. A temporary shroud for the subconscious mover becomes its only means for salvation or re-entry to the supernatural, its life once passed becomes a vague transition from formfulness to formlessness and thus, supernatural ecstasy. Obviously, only ecstasy can prevail in such a case, when the only condition of our suffering and pain in the material universe is the material provision itself, which has a finite value. The infinite value of the supernatural does not present the same finite quality. The return to the supernatural offers a transition or crossing that is not attributed to the material value of time and finiteness space but is only a mortal and divine interfacing.

Light, Time and Space

What is light and how does it correspond to matter? Let us ruminate on this phenomenon. Does light exist as a quantum of matter or does matter produce light as a counterbalancing force. It seems that matter is self-perpetuating by producing light to sustain itself. Light travels over millions of years from far-off galaxies to reach the planet and to touch our eyes. Why? We are also tanned by light and the sun is a light-giving and life-giving force. Light can save or it can destroy. It is also multi-faceted and can be reflected in multi-dimensional ways across a diverse spectrum. Why is light multi-dimensional and multi-colored? What are its components? Without light, we would not be able to see? The stars in the sky twinkle and exude light for our eyes to behold. It seems that matter is not only an organic element governed by an infinite number of material possibilities and dynamics, but also consumed by light and radiation. Light affects our pigment. Some animals tan, others do not. The skin that sheds on animals may be an outcome of thousands of years of evolution as light transforms their bodies. A chameleon can change the color of its skin and birds are often identified by their color. It doesn't seem that light can be captured in a bottle and is quite transparent. Which begs the question - is it matter or a concomitant mover. If the moon did not shine at night, the nights would be pitch black, thus hindering our ability to see. Plants and trees and leaves require a tremendous amount of light to exist and light is essential to photosynthesis. Thus, we consume light as a particle of food. How is the mover affected by light? Light can pierce our bodies or skin but how does it interact with the mover? If light did not exist, would the mover? But light is a quantum of time? It takes time for light to travel over great distances. The mover seems independent of time. Is the mover and light interrelated and how? Does the origin of light within a material universe a metaphysical oxymoron. Is light a precursor to matter, time and matter, itself and does it govern our material hypotheticals? Does our sun govern our material obligations in any way? Does light spin the wheels of the mover as it exists in a material realm? Does the mover exist in light? This recalls countless, biblical analogies that solemnize the value of night and day, light and dark. Thus, the mover as an indemnity of matter should recognize the existence and infinitude of light. One thing is certain - light is everywhere. Ergo, the process of illumination often governs our academic and civic way of lives. If we demote our livelihood to darkness, then we undermine the value of light and become hypocritical movers. Light cannot be denied and should be recognized as omnipresent. Is light intelligent? When a bulb lights up, we credit Thomas Edison as the inventor. The bulb does not capture light but only magnifies existing light that is not turned on, so to speak. The photons or electrons have not been charged or transmitted through a proper channel. We should consider light with a more colossal possibility. If we can place light in a bulb or jar, then why not consider a bigger jar that transmits a larger quotient of light. The spectrum expands, producing considerable more material possibilities. Matter once again seems finite. It can only go so far to advance the components of light. Is light form? As a quantum of matter, it can be advanced as form. When matter interacts with matter to procreate and light is transferable to produce a desired or determined result, can we also postulate, that light is conscionable or self-knowing. How does it know and what causes such knowledge? Consider a dirty glass window and a clean glass window. Light transmitted through a dirty glass window would be immensely distorted, obscured, or misfigured, whereas a clean glass window, will reflect that same light in a more clear, holistic and molecular way. But light also seems persistent and a dirty glass window would not retard light altogether but place a temporary block like blinds on office windows. The light is persistent. Whereas, a a dirty old man, or homeless person may seem uncouth and dull, the mover within who is independent of that physical state, may still embody light in a holistic way. Light is illusory or can produce illusions, delusions and dreamlike thinking. When the blinds are lifted, then the light that pierces through can vanquish darkness like vampires. We should focus on light when we consider the journey of the mover.

A Follow-up to my Email to the Wildlife Conservation Society

A Positive Follow-up:

Let me extend my appreciation to WCS for my recent wildlife experience at the Queens Zoo. I visited the Queens Zoo, after visiting the Bronx Zoo, and the experience was vastly different. The educational aspects, the overall conservation, and family friendly environment were impressive. Obviously the Queens Zoo is at the center of a transportation hub and there is pollution to contend with but here at the Queens Zoo, the wildlife seemed more healthy and peaceful. I especially liked the petting zoo, which could be expanded with the acquisition of additional open space where children may be allowed to ride ponies or horses for a more personalized experience. While I did not enter the aviary, it was a nice aspect, and the walking trail was a lot of fun. I enjoyed the pumas and the sea lions (this exhibit was inspirational), most of all. I still don't understand why the eagles don't take off (they don't seem to be confined) but I leave that to the good
judgment of the conservationists. Eagles are very majestic and as a theoretician, I often reflect on eagles in my writings and support their conservation but importantly, the reintegration to their natural habitat. Birds can often outlive other species and we should do everything we can to promote their well-being, freedom and procreation. Again, reintegration is very important and interchanging wildlife exhibits should be seriously considered. Wildlife thrives in the wild. I was displeased with the tiger enrichment at the Bronx Zoo, mainly because I thought that feeding the tigers by hurling cardboard boxes over the fence was very inappropriate and seemed crass. That really sends out the wrong message and shows that conservation is hands-off and primitive. I hope the Bronx will work hard to make improvements and WCS will continue to be a positive enterprise devoted to ongoing conservation.

Keep up the great work,


- AJ

PS: I'd like to add the Polar Bear to my list of discontented animals below. These creatures are truly displaced and deserve to be in their natural habitat which offers an ideal, natural environment for their perpetuation. This polar bear seemed very annoyed.

I am also disenchanted with the WCS Website. I think it's a bit degrading and uses too much negative language and imagery. This is not an attractive way to promote conservation. We should not frame wildlife with statements that harp negatively on their endangered or threatened status. A positive message should be sent to the public - positive words and photos should be used - that wildlife has a chance for success and conservation is making a strong impact. Indeed, animals are instinctual - and have a sense of their own state (free or captive), well-being and how they are being cared for. WCS should be mindful of how they interact with wildlife on every level and every aspect of our conservation effort should be cognizant of how wildlife is portrayed in the media or to our guests. We should not undermine the well-being of the wildlife or its natural integrity to meet funding needs or to kowtow to donors - funding needs are integral to positive
outcomes. I hope this is improved.

A Letter to the Bronx Zoo

To Whom It May Concern at the Bronx Zoo and Someone Who Might Listen:

I hope you're off to a great summer. My name is AJ Naseem. I am a professional blogger, writer, freelancer and educational filmmaker and musician. Formerly, I was a museum professional and development specialist for several non-profit organizations and am writing to you as a professional researcher and activist. I visited the Bronx Zoo recently and wanted to follow-up with some general and specific thoughts. Why? Because, I had very strong feelings concerning the wildlife at the Bronx Zoo that I wanted to share with someone who might listen and take appropriate action.

I also write a professional blog devoted to many things including spirituality and the coexistence of matter within overall space and often, use wildlife analogies to underline some of my metaphysical points. Thus, my trip to the zoo this year was largely driven by my work in this area and served as an anthropological field study. The main thrust of my work discusses the critical need to realize the temporal nature of matter and how it coexists within a three dimensional world, and thus carries out defined material obligations, when no material obligation need be defined as a factor of time, thus promulgating the importance of a mover or supernatural life force. Animals who are often restricted to their material obligations seem to embody a lesser will for abstinence from those material obligations and this is often cited in my work. Thus, my trip to the zoo was highly enlightening and sentimental.

I am concerned. I think zoological societies and conservation efforts are very important but they can often be excessive, exaggerated and mismanaged. As a meta-physician, I strongly believe that animals belong in the wild where they can live out their material obligations as defined by their supernatural material obligations that ultimately govern their worldly existence. An animal in a cage is indeed contradictory. However, birds and other creatures that live peaceably in mild containment can often thrive and seem happier. Wildlife in the wild are indeed happy if left alone to prosper. My concern is mainly with several animals at the zoo in particular.

1) The lion - my impression was that this king of the jungle seemed to me highly irritable in his captive state. Thus, I feel very strongly that this particular lion or pride should be relocated from the zoo immediately. They don't seem happy and I sensed a longing for the wild. Any animal or creature that is subject to intense, and prolonged commercial and public observation can grow irritable, confused and hostile. Seeing an animal in such hostile conditions is unacceptable and is anti-educational. This lion and his family should be removed from captivity and WCS should consider very strongly to interchange wildlife exhibits at the zoo to ensure that the wildlife are not abused or overly exposed. They deserve their freedom.

2) One of the tigers (the elder) also seemed tired and profoundly disenchanted with her surroundings. This tiger should be returned to the wild or plans should be made to ensure a proper transition to the wild. Conservationists at WCS should be engaged in wildlife replenishment as they do in wildlife enrichment. The animals should be allowed to roam in their natural habitats for extended periods of time or reintegrated into the wild once their conservational needs are met.

3) The gorillas seemed content. But these animals also must be interchanged and WCS should globalize its operations better (work with NGO's, African nations and other governments) to ensure the interchangeability of its wildlife exhibits.

I hope this is taking place. As a former museum professional, I have a deep understanding of curatorship and conservation. I have also been involved in conservation efforts and know its significance but strongly endorse replenishment and reintegration as part of wildlife conservation. Every effort should be made to ensure that this is taking place. Extinction should be redefined and a metaphysical perspective should be considered. When wildlife cannot fulfill material obligations as defined by their material makeup, then conservation can often be antithetical. We need to interchange and reintegrate wildlife at the Bronx Zoo to ensure a worthwhile experience for visitors, more content, safe, and protected wildlife and a more conservational and metaphysical-friendly environment. If this is overlooked, then conservation is falling severely short. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink holds true more than ever when material
obligations are considered. I encourage you to read some of my work in this area (knowingcafe.blogspot.com/2009/07/knowing-cafe.html) and perhaps redefine the conservation work taking place at the Bronx Zoo and its counterparts. An animal is nocturnal or a squirrel burrows and forages and can do nothing else but fulfill a highly defined set of material obligations that are inextricable to its being (what it is) and its willfulness to do otherwise is undermined whereas a human being, as part of a material coexistence can engage in right and wrong behaviors. When the element of time is removed, we realize that only the mover persists and matter seems to be a mere remnant of a material existence that is highly separable from a less palpable, transitory or temporal existence that inspires us to understand the supernatural better that may hold even more greater material and supernatural promises.

Shape and Form

Today's discussion will be on shape and form and how it correlates to time and space. Let's analyze shape and how it coexists within space as a quantum of matter. Shapeless matter does not exist so shape is absolutely necessary for matter to exist. Since matter and space are largely intertwined, shape serves as an emblem of the illusion to make it work. We define shapes as basic - squares, rectangles, circles and more complex, human beings, leaves, shapes of animals, rocks; and synthetic shapes such as ceramics, electronics, batteries, medicine and miscellaneous objects. Consider this - not all material shapes require the presence of a mover. Alas, inanimate shapes are stationary. They are either fashioned by nature or human beings who mold shapes to benefit their material lives or fulfill a material necessity. The existence of inanimate shapes leads to a highly thoughtful consideration. Proof of the existence of an objective mover, supermover or God. The mere appearance of inanimate objects and shapes within the material universe is undeniable proof of the existence of God. The objects do not take shape on their own and seem to be compelled by an outside, immaterial force that produces these quantifiable, shapely phenomenon. Then, so why are some forms and shapes instilled with life? While all shapes may be biological, differing only in the amount of time that is needed to deconstruct and decompose the shape, why is a human being or an animal, infused with a spirit? Why also are other objects stationary and cannot be infused with a spirit? A container cannot get up and walk out of the building. But the shape of a leaf as an extension of nature does undergo drastic, natural changes as does animal life during the course of its spiritual voyage. While the presence of a spiritual mover on earth is awe-inspiring, it does lead to the larger question of a higher and more powerful supernatural force that moves all things, animate and inanimate alike. If we dismiss time as a relativity of space, we conclude that only the mover exists and thus all material life presents a subjective illusion. Only God remains eternal. What is the importance of shape? It seems that shape is only a facility to perform material obligations such as a leaf on a tree branch or water in the ocean. While water takes on the shape of its container, in and of itself, in it's most basic molecular composition, it is still bound to a specific shape. Why does a tree have branches? It seems that matter has an intelligent, shape-giving conscience. The tree grows leaves that are consistent with its material needs and human beings give birth to other human beings that possess the shape of an eye, ear, lips, organs and extremities. The shape of the lion or tiger for example is also conducive to its predatory nature. The alligator's teeth are sharp for a reason. Thus, we conclude that matter as a proponent of shape and form, is intelligible (in a derogatory sense) based on the a priori rule. The a priori rule in this case, should be redefined as an all priori rule since time is demoted, thus proving the existence of an omnipotent God. Since matter is immaterial and form or shape is a relativity of matter, we must wonder what part of the divine buffet is eternal. Obviously, the mover fulfilling material obligations becomes a servant of God and as a result, gains everlasting life or paradise by performing material actions that it would otherwise not be bound. If matter is an illusion, is the shape or ephemeral outline of matter as it relates to this super conscience invisible and visible. If we dismiss matter altogether, does form or shape prevail within the eternal, grand design. That also seems unlikely since one is essential for the other but does offer a rationale for infinite, immaterial obligations fulfilled by the finite capacity of matter. Can form exist without matter? Can the mover exist without matter? We realize the mover can exist without matter since the mover is primary. Can the mover exist without form? Also true, since form is a relativity of a material want or need and seems to be visible and invisible. What is eternal life when the mover is free from matter and shape? It seems to enter a super conscience that governs all existence and exists for the sake of or not the sake of material, transitory life. Finally, the finiteness of matter and form, and the biological parting from material life through old age, sickness or decay is merely a corroboration of material facts that seem to say that "we are eternal and materially contradictory". Why? It seems more more that matter and shape are merely doors to an eternal universe, that time unlocks to reveal the glory that resides beyond the material threshold.

Movement . . .

Let's begin today by discussing movement. Movement can be defined as the mover's penetration through time and space as a material entity. Movement seems to exist only as a material matter of course. The mover's right to shift from one position to another only exists by way of its material state. There are several forces at play. For movement to exist, we must gauge the amount of time it might take for the material entity to act, the consumption of space as it moves in a desired direction, and finally the intent of the mover to proceed at will. Further, the mover will never act against its will unless a material anomaly exists such as a debilitating disease or duress. Even then the consciousness of the mover remains constant. Is the mover invincible? We conclude in the affirmative since the mover's will is ultimately affected by its material relationship to its environment. The human condition can be largely understood by the paradigm of movement. The movers will to seek peace, wage war, fight hunger and starvation, procreate and raise civilizations is dependable on movement like Carl Jung's collective unconsciousness. Is the mover ultimately good? We cannot say for certain but one thing is true, the mover as a material entity, is quite compromised by its material state. Why - mainly, because it is an everlasting, infinite thing. However, the mover and matter are complementary. The mover will never deliberately cause harm to its material state and its main goal is to prolong its material life by a matter of course. This is quite a testy state of being. Without the movers existence, matter is ultimately, disowned. The material need is transitory so why is movement important. We define movement as an aggregate fulfillment of material obligations that the mover performs as a result of its material existence or for matter, a singular, micro obligation. Think of parents, siblings, friends, colleagues and acquaintances. It is ultimately their movement that is important to us. What they do is more important that what they are? A movement can be highly desirable or deleterious to material livelihood. Thus, we differentiate between material actions and laws and ethics are invoked. Why must the mover act and what governs its movement? Obviously, the need to fulfill material obligations is foremost? The mother who does not care for her young may not want to see her offspring die and thus must act in a positive, sustainable way. Her movement and material relationship to her offspring and vice versa creates a symbolic, worldly action or good. This prism, while shaped by a material interaction is highly dependable on the everlasting mover. Otherwise, matter would be inert and lifeless. The material motion picture, so to speak, is also transitory and governed by the value of time and will ultimately fade like a material memory or vision. Can the mover remember or does matter remember? Is memory a neurological, physical impulse. We cannot know but we know that the two are highly complementary and will act in tandem. However, the mover must prevail since memory is only a material aphrodisiac. Thus, the mover seems more intelligible. The action or movement becomes the summum bonum and the mover's existence in the material universe is thereby, fulfilled. Why move in the first place? The movement that ensues has severe material repercussions. For example, the lion hunting the gazelle, will create a great deal of material duress like the oxygen we breathe. But alas, this is secondary for the lion as a material entity who must fulfill such a material obligation by way of its makeup. The impact that this movement causes is highly material. The mover only lifts the lever or pushes the button. Why? The mover acting in a material realm to fulfill material obligations, when time and space are not essential to its livelihood, is highly irrational. Thus, matter becomes illusory and the movement is primary. Does movement exist outside of matter or does it need to exist. The answer is plainly no since matter is essential for the movement to take place. Does the mover ultimately pass the material, transitory realm and gain infinite life that has no recourse to a three-dimensional world that as material agents, we are compelled to serve. That seems more like the case and we conclude that the mover is transcendental. So, are our material actions also transcendental? Perhaps not, since the movement is not categorical from a material standpoint. The consideration of movement gives us much pause.