When doing a vanity search for my web page ,
I noticed that Google uses the first few words of the
Body as the title . It doesn't use the Title tag .

Also , Google picks up changes about once a month .

....
I've made a few small changes to my tiny web site
http://www.NCPlus.NET/~jeff-relf/ a copy of it follows :

Yesterday's spookiness often becomes today's science .

That's why theoretical physicists typically trust that :
Genuine randomness is never intrinsic to pure nature .

I trust that :
The future is as immutably fixed as the past .
There is no genuine free will .
Only Pseudo free will . A flawed perception .

This is called " Fatalism " ( Fate ) in metaphysics .

Fatalism may be thought of as " A Scientific Religion . "

( No , I'm not a science fiction fanatic . )

Before Newton , The toss of a coin seemed probabilistic .

Before Einstein , Gravity seemed non-local ... Spooky .

It's obvious to me that
when something Seems non-local or probabilistic
then our precision and our theories are lacking .

Entropy is wasted heat . _ Perceived _ disorder .
( Heat is a measure of a kinetic energy per volume . )

The second law of thermodynamics tells us that :
The entropy of the total system always goes up .

Or as David Byrne sang in 1986 :
" Things fall apart , it's scientific . Whoa Yoey . "

Like Randomness , entropy is always perceptual ...
Never " Real " ... Never intrinsic to pure nature .

Pseudo entropy means that time is Pseudo directional .

Genuine time is spatial :
Genuine time is yet another dimension of space .

So genuine nature is most likely to be a
static five-dimensional block of spacetime and energy .

Einstein's colleague Hermann Weyl said :
" The world doesn't happen , it simply is . "

Einstein said :
" The past , present , and future ,
are only illusions , however persistent . "

Hawking said : [ Three quotes ]
" In relativity , there is no real distinction between
the space and time coordinates , just as there is
no difference between two space coordinates .
...
Imaginary time is
indistinguishable from directions in space .
...
One could say :
' The boundary condition of the universe is that
it has no boundary . '
The universe would be completely self-contained
and not affected by anything outside itself .
It would neither be created nor destroyed .
It would just Be .
What place , then , for a creator ? "

See " Block Time " : at " Wiki Pedia. ORG "
http://www.WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time

Some interesting physical " Facts " :
- Gravity is negative energy , and is exactly equal to
relativistic mass which is positive .
- Massive objects can't go anywhere
near the speed of light . ( Not counting spin . )
- Only " Massless " objects
can reach the speed of light .
- Because quantum " orbits "
are Perceived to be probabilistic ,
Quantum velocity is meaningless to us .
[ Thus imaginary time , imaginary mass , etc. .
Thus the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle .
Thus the EPR experiment and the perceived
" Spooky action at a distance " . ]

I could be wrong, but I thought the tilda (~) stopped search engines. It
will find your meta tags on the main page but I believe those with the ~ are
hidden.

J.
===============
"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
...
When doing a vanity search for my web page ,
I noticed that Google uses the first few words of the
Body as the title . It doesn't use the Title tag .

Also , Google picks up changes about once a month .

....
I've made a few small changes to my tiny web site
http://www.NCPlus.NET/~jeff-relf/ a copy of it follows :

Yesterday's spookiness often becomes today's science .

That's why theoretical physicists typically trust that :
Genuine randomness is never intrinsic to pure nature .

I trust that :
The future is as immutably fixed as the past .
There is no genuine free will .
Only Pseudo free will . A flawed perception .

This is called " Fatalism " ( Fate ) in metaphysics .

Fatalism may be thought of as " A Scientific Religion . "

( No , I'm not a science fiction fanatic . )

Before Newton , The toss of a coin seemed probabilistic .

Before Einstein , Gravity seemed non-local ... Spooky .

It's obvious to me that
when something Seems non-local or probabilistic
then our precision and our theories are lacking .

Entropy is wasted heat . _ Perceived _ disorder .
( Heat is a measure of a kinetic energy per volume . )

The second law of thermodynamics tells us that :
The entropy of the total system always goes up .

Or as David Byrne sang in 1986 :
" Things fall apart , it's scientific . Whoa Yoey . "

Like Randomness , entropy is always perceptual ...
Never " Real " ... Never intrinsic to pure nature .

Pseudo entropy means that time is Pseudo directional .

Genuine time is spatial :
Genuine time is yet another dimension of space .

So genuine nature is most likely to be a
static five-dimensional block of spacetime and energy .

Einstein's colleague Hermann Weyl said :
" The world doesn't happen , it simply is . "

Einstein said :
" The past , present , and future ,
are only illusions , however persistent . "

Hawking said : [ Three quotes ]
" In relativity , there is no real distinction between
the space and time coordinates , just as there is
no difference between two space coordinates .
...
Imaginary time is
indistinguishable from directions in space .
...
One could say :
' The boundary condition of the universe is that
it has no boundary . '
The universe would be completely self-contained
and not affected by anything outside itself .
It would neither be created nor destroyed .
It would just Be .
What place , then , for a creator ? "

See " Block Time " : at " Wiki Pedia. ORG "
http://www.WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time

Some interesting physical " Facts " :
- Gravity is negative energy , and is exactly equal to
relativistic mass which is positive .
- Massive objects can't go anywhere
near the speed of light . ( Not counting spin . )
- Only " Massless " objects
can reach the speed of light .
- Because quantum " orbits "
are Perceived to be probabilistic ,
Quantum velocity is meaningless to us .
[ Thus imaginary time , imaginary mass , etc. .
Thus the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle .
Thus the EPR experiment and the perceived
" Spooky action at a distance " . ]

Hi J. , Speaking of Google you say :
" It will find your meta tags on the main page
but I believe those with the ~ are hidden . "


But none of my tags have tildes .
One tag is intentionally commented out .

"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
...
Hi J. , Speaking of Google you say :
" It will find your meta tags on the main page
but I believe those with the ~ are hidden . "


But none of my tags have tildes .
One tag is intentionally commented out .

Google doesn't display (and hardly uses) meta tags.... it uses content.

This is why its so good...

Hi Cable Speed Test , You say :
" Google doesn't display ( and hardly uses ) meta tags ...
it uses content . "


Before I added a Title tag my page was " Untitled " .

But after I added the tag Google didn't use it ,
instead it used the first line of the Body .

I wonder if the title has anything to do with
how the page is ranked .

"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
...

..

I wonder if the title has anything to do with
how the page is ranked .

Title, content, image names, and image "alt" text, but most of all, other
web sites that refer back to a particular site increase rankings...

BTW, most BOTs read and rank on commented code, so your strangely commented
style tag [ !--style body { font-size: .95em;}/style-- ] could be
affecting your results.

Hi Cable Speed Test , You say :
" but most of all ,
other web sites that refer back to a particular site
increase rankings ... "


Such links obviously outweigh everything else .

I was amazed to see that Google changed my listing today ,
apparently in response to a change that I made today .
Now no quote or cache is shown .
Google must react somehow to recently changed pages .

"Cable Speed Test" wrote in message ...
"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
...
Hi J. , Speaking of Google you say :
" It will find your meta tags on the main page
but I believe those with the ~ are hidden . "


But none of my tags have tildes .
One tag is intentionally commented out .

Google doesn't display (and hardly uses) meta tags.... it uses content.

This is why its so good...

Is that why some posts look absolutely blank?

(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)

"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
...
Hi J. , Speaking of Google you say :
" It will find your meta tags on the main page
but I believe those with the ~ are hidden . "


But none of my tags have tildes .
One tag is intentionally commented out .

=============

I actually meant the folder in which the tilde occurred -- you said the
folder was "/~jeff-relf. I think this folder is hidden from most search
engines.

J.

Hi 1Z , Speaking of Bohr , you say : " In Thee Reality ,
he as one of the architects of the Copenhagen interpretation
which * does * say that randomness is intrinsic :
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation "


The Copenhagen interpretation says no such thing .
You merely don't understand it .

( By the way , " Wiki Pedia. ORG " is a great reference . )

I went to your link . Here is a quote from it :
" What causes the particle to _ Appear _ to
switch between statistical and non-statistical behaviors ?
When the particle is moving through the slits ,
its behavior _ Appears _ to be described by
a non-localized wave function
which is traveling through both slits at the same time .
Yet when the particle is _ Observed _ it's never
a diffuse non-localized wave packet ,
but _ Appears _ to be a single point particle.

Notice the words " Appears " and " Observed " .

This is very consistent with what I've been saying :
There's difference between _ Perceived _ randomness
and the likelihood of actual randomness .

Further quoting from the same page :
" In classical physics , probabilities were used
to describe the outcome of rolling a die ,
even though the process was thought to be deterministic .
Probabilities were used
to substitute for complete knowledge .
By contrast , the Copenhagen interpretation holds that
in quantum mechanics , _ Measurement _ outcomes
are fundamentally indeterministic . "


Notice the word " Measurement " .
A measurement is always a perception ,
it's never the actual thing .

Neither Bohr nor Heisenberg nor the Copenhagen interpretation
would ever dare to say that the randomness was anything
but perceptual ... i.e. a _ Measurement _ .

J.S. Bell ( of " Bell's inequalities " fame )
wrote an entire book about how the word " Measurement "
should be banished from the vocabulary of QM .

J.S. Bell wrote :
When one forgets the role of the apparatus ,
as the word ' Measurement ' makes all too likely ,
one despairs of ordinary logic ... hence
[ one is relegated to the ' Quantum Logic ' slum ] .

When one remembers the role of the apparatus ,
ordinary logic is just fine.

In other contexts ,
physicists have been able to
take words from ordinary language
and use them as technical terms
with no great harm done .

Take for example the " strangeness " , " charm " ,
and " beauty " of elementary particle physics .

No one is taken in by this " baby talk " . ...

Would that it were so with " measurement " .

But in fact the word has had such a damaging effect
on the discussion , that I think
it should now be banned altogether
in quantum mechanics .


John S. Bell , " Against ' Measurement ' "
http://samvak.tripod.com/string02.html :
" It would seem that the theory [ quantum mechanics ]
is exclusively concerned about " results of measurement "
,
and has nothing to say about anything else .

What exactly qualifies some physical systems
to play the role of " measurer " ?

Was the wavefunction of the world waiting to jump
for thousands of millions of years until
a single-celled living creature appeared ?

Or did it have to wait a little longer ,
for some better qualified system ... with a Ph.D. ?

If the theory is to apply to anything but
highly idealized laboratory operations ,
are we not obliged to admit that
more or less " measurement-like " processes
are going on more or less all the time ,
more or less everywhere .

Do we not have jumping then all the time ?
The first charge against " measurement " ,
in the fundamental axioms of quantum mechanics ,
is that it anchors the shifty split of the world
into " system " and " apparatus " .

A second charge is that the word comes
loaded with meaning from everyday life , meaning which
is entirely inappropriate in the quantum context .

When it is said that something is " measured "
it is difficult not to think of the result as referring to
some preexisting property of the object in question .

This is to disregard Bohr's insistence that
in quantum phenomena the apparatus
as well as the system is essentially involved .

If it were not so , how could we understand , for example
,
that " measurement " of
a component of " angular momentum " ...
in an arbitrarily chosen direction ...
yields one of a discrete set of values ? "

John S. Bell ,
" Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics "
http://samvak.tripod.com/string02.html :
" ... conventional formulations of quantum theory ,
and of quantum field theory in particular ,
are unprofessionally vague and ambiguous .

Professional theoretical physicists
ought to be able to do better .
Bohm has shown us a way . "