It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help me George. I'm trying to channel you.

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   
George was born in 1815 in England. His parents -- Mary and John were humble folk, but hard working. John was a shoemaker, however interested in applied mathematics and scientific instruments. George's parents had been married nine years before he was conceived. Perhaps it was not for lack of trying; we don't have a measure of that. What we do know is that George was a somewhat sickly child initially, however soon flourished into a well-mannered and inquisitive child.


Having learnt Latin from a tutor, George went on to teach himself Greek. By the age of 14 he had become so skilled in Greek that it provoked an argument. He translated a poem by the Greek poet Meleager which his father was so proud of that he had it published. However the talent was such that a local schoolmaster disputed that any 14 year old could have written with such depth. By this time George was attending Bainbridge's Commercial Academy in Lincoln which he had entered on 10 September 1828. This school did not provide the type of education he would have wished but it was all his parents could afford. However he was able to teach himself French and German studying for himself academic subjects that a commercial school did not cover.


After the age of 16, George became a tutor and enjoyed absorbing the works of Newton, namely the Principia, , as well as other important and esoteric mathematical works.

Being mostly self-taught and developing ideas in symbolic reasoning, in 1847 he published Mathematical Analysis of Logic.

George exemplified

the analogy between algebraic symbols and those that can represent logical forms and syllogisms, showing how the symbols of quantity can be separated from those of operation.
. In short, he fostered an analytical reasoning, created rules in applied mathematics that manipulated and governed probabilities, and most likely would have evolved his thinking into quantum mechanics, had he been exposed to such thinking. In 1854 his published works became the basis for what is now known as Boolean Logic. Boole

Please help me, George Boole.

At one time, in the way, way back, when the internet was in its infancy, there was a wonderous plethora of information, and to sift through the (then) megabytes of information, one used Boolean logic to create a search string that resulted in just a few answers to your query. Remember those times? We had AskJeeves, which later morphed into ask.com.. We used terms like "AND" and "NOT" AND "OR" to refine our searches, our vigilant venery for TRUTH. We would enclose key words in quotes, and know that ONLY sites with those terms would be returned in our Boolean searches. Further refining with AND or NOT could leave a person with only a dozen returns. Glory.

These days -- go ahead, try it -- put something in quotes and search it. ALL manner of things return, including those that only have segments of that which is in quotes!!! How are we to survive flushing out the grit from the yotta-bytes of information that now exists and cross-correlates???

It is said by some that all searches lead ultimately to porn. I have not found that to be the case, however, I find that almost all searches lead ultimately to a deluge and glut of a miasma of unrelated information. Oh sure, you can accurately glean the bust size of various bollywood actresses, or the exact words of various political pundits as they misspoke in their weak moments while massaging the crowds of the great unwashed.

Where is our exacting search? Does it no longer exist? Are we doomed to never be able to winnow down ideas and queries into valid and measurable data?

Well, I'm tired. I'm tired of trying to find the juice on the internet. Please help me George. There has to be a way.

Well, I feel better. Thank you.


Give yourself a cookie for making it this far.
edit on 16/3/16 by argentus because: spellin'




posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:42 PM
link   
I honestly had to read that twice as I thought my dear friend Argentus is looking for a long lost relative named George.
So I was going to suggest you use the Morman and the LDS ancestry site, they have recorded everyone so they know who gets into heaven


As for your exacting search question. I have this advice for you :

.




.



.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

LOL! I might have know the only person to actually read all that would be you, Zazzy.

I like to think that George liked to ROCK!!

ETA:

So I was going to suggest you use the Morman and the LDS ancestry site, they have recorded everyone so they know who gets into heaven
Surely a short list, by their measure. We could google that, if it worked.
edit on 16/3/16 by argentus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: argentus




posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

This whole thread is the fault of my Paul Harvey obsession. I hope this kind of discourse doesn't become a habit. I hope if it does, I confine it to the history forum.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: argentus

Paul Harvey was a conservative gentleman, pity the new breed of con-radio-host paid him no heed.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

True! Paul told a great story. I was trying to channel him while talking about trying to channel George Boole. Oh what a tangled web.

This all came about for me tonight trying to do a little research. No matter how I changed the variables, the Boolean connectors of AND. OR. NOT. did. not. make. a. single. bit. of. difference.

Guess I'm just old. I guess the rest of the world is happy with looking for Celebrity Plastic Surgery Fails and ending up at Zoomquilt (which, incidentally, there are probably less soothing places to land).

NEVERmind. The internet is broken for old farts. That's it.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: argentus

My favourite gag the internet pulls on me is when it tells me to use less specific search terms. It's literally telling me to search less efficiently.

*throws up hands, kicks Internet in the teeth, has a beer*



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 03:39 AM
link   
The worst thing is, they have set things up that way because they are trying to be "helpful".
"We know people type things in wrong, so we will help them by giving them as many things as possible remotely connected with what they typed. If they are looking for a company called Gemran, we will also give them lots of information, on Germans, just in case".
You can fight an outright enemy, but overcoming the well-meaning who wil give you what you haven't asked for is much more tricky.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:35 AM
link   
a reply to: argentus

Yum cookie.

I find what I look for by using anti logic. Gut feelings and such. Natural AI if that makes sense.

Maybe its quantifiable mathematically. I dont know.

The results pan out.

We just have to divine our own minds for the exact information we feel will lead to the string we know is out there.

Then unravel with no care.

Its like magic half the time.

I feel you holmes. Its true what you say.


edit on 3 17 2016 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: argentus

You'd be surprised who reads what on ATS....well, as a moderator*, I guess you wouldn't.

But yes, I also remember when an Internet Search actually found useful information. But then, rather suddenly in my opinion, the whole thing got scrubbed and neutered. Personally, I think this is the greatest conspiracy. What power, to decide what information the people have. It's like those days when only a few were allowed to know how to read. They managed to go full circle, so now only a few decide WHAT we will read. Isn't that worse? Mind control at the core.

Thanks for the introduction to Mr. Boole. That sounds like a biography to look into to.

Oh, and while they scrubbed quite a bit, I did find ATS! I still feel rather smug and thrilled about that! But sometimes I find myself trying to print to file a lot of what's here, wondering how long it will last. I hope there is some sort of back up plan for people to re-connect?

Anyway, thanks.

* Correction: super-moderator, whatever that means.
edit on 17-3-2016 by ClownFish because: added "correction"



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Yes, don't you love that? "Try removing the quotation marks". Might as well say, "wouldn't you rather have 29.6 million returns on your search than, say, 72 thousand?"



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI


You can fight an outright enemy, but overcoming the well-meaning who wil give you what you haven't asked for is much more tricky.
niiiice. I really like that. ... and agree.

It's particularly difficult if a person is searching for a specific name that shares part of the search string with a famous person.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

Anti-logic....... so you're left-handed also?



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: argentus

Grrr. Or when the search engine asks you (asks you!!!) did you mean 'celtic bronze board?. No. No I didn't. I wrote 'celtic bronze boar' for good reason and 'celtic bronze boar' is what I hope to find.

Get Jeeves back, I say.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ClownFish
a reply to: argentus

Personally, I think this is the greatest conspiracy. What power, to decide what information the people have. It's like those days when only a few were allowed to know how to read. They managed to go full circle, so now only a few decide WHAT we will read. Isn't that worse? Mind control at the core.





That...above quote...I couldn't agree more!!
It's getting to the point that people feel they have 3 sources for information...facebook, google and wiki. (And if they read it there, it HAS to be true!!)

I also miss dear Jeeves.


I've learned a couple of tricks in searching though.
If I use "in private browsing" I seem to get different search results (than just regular google).

Also, I will use different country's search engines (by first searching for "Australian search engines" or Canadian, etc.) and then perhaps search "news" instead of "web". It is tedious trying to track down certain information.

S&F
jacy



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ClownFish

Agree. It's informational control at the very least; an attempt to keep all us little data-pickers away from the good stuff and happy with the haven of social media.


Correction: super-moderator, whatever that means.


Just the same, except I have to wear a pink cape.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: argentus

Thanks. That's the second time this year that I laughed out loud. It's been so long since the first, that I've forgotten already what it was, so I am going to imprint this pick cape idea in my mind so that I can giggle at will.

(Thread drift: I once worked in a nursing home and there was an old mathematician, tied down to a bed, who would recite formulas day and night, but every once in a while she would exclaim, "I hate applesauce!"....Not to speak poorly of the elderly, especially since 'I now are one,' we do use the expression "I hate applesauce!" to express the inexpressible, if that helps to explain to you the inner thought that some day, I will probably be tied to a bed in a nursing home, silently wondering why I keep having images of pink capes...)

As you were...



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: beansidhe

At least Jeeves was cordial. ... and discreet.

Ask.com seems to be the search engine still which is most along the lines of the old stuff. Maybe it's tired too.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: jacygirl

Those are interesting tricks! I'll try that. Maybe I lost hope too soon. Thanks!







 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join