.jpg?width=300)
American scientist (born 1933)
Missing: 4, 6, 8. Present digits repeat to show how many times they occur.
Eleven is a master number in Western practice: reduced it is 2, but the tradition holds it unreduced because a doubled 1 is read as intensified rather than merely summed. It is associated with sudden insight, unusual perception, and a nervous system that runs hot. The reading is consistent that master numbers are a burden before they are a gift — the perception arrives whether or not there is anywhere to put it.
A complete line in the grid.
The 1-5-9 diagonal complete. Read as determination that survives the middle of a project, when the initial energy has gone and the result is not yet visible.
The 3-5-7 diagonal complete. Read as emotional and intuitive range — the line practitioners associate with artists and with people who register what is unsaid.
Concentrated self-direction. Read as conviction that does not need external agreement — and does not always seek it.
Read as impatience with structure and maintenance. Associated with starting well and leaving the scaffolding to someone else.
Read as a complicated relationship with obligation — either avoiding it or over-shouldering it, rarely a settled middle.
Read as discomfort with power and money — not incapacity, but an unwillingness to claim authority openly.
Moolank 6 comes from the day of the month alone; Bhagyank 2 from the whole date. They differ, which is the ordinary case — the two numbers answer different questions.
Venus. Art, pleasure, relationship. Read as attraction and aesthetic sense.
Bhagyank uses the same arithmetic as the Western life path, so the two will always agree. That is not two traditions confirming each other — it is one calculation under two names.
I'm still somewhat in shock
You have to build up from the bottom.
I don't think there's another physicist in the town of Selborne, so that things slowly leak out over the news. But there's no marching in the street here.
That's right. I, my motivation was really coming from seeing that something does work, the brain, and understanding more about how the brain works would be necessary to understand thought consciousness or what have you.
And that it somehow was related to collective phenomena in networks. And I slowly wove my way from an interest in how the brain functioned to a question of how could hardware or software, or whatever you want to call it, wetware, produce such a thing.
And the centre of gravity of my knowledge and understanding moved slowly from much more physics oriented to the neurobiological one. And somewhere along the line, this connection between AI, networks, neural networks and physics developed.
Sourced from Wikiquote, restricted to the subject’s own sourced sections.