I started..... For dis dis-course and found I has no words.....and....

An Invitation at the rationing had broken my aim to speak this fort night

Rationing in respect for economy, efficiency and a simple matter of effort for my incentives and wishfullness in this respect, I have come prepared with a new and irrefutable analogy I called and named a theory, as this is my discussion- theory. Theory is different from analogy, as black is different from dark-white different from causasian- bright reflection different from a street lamp. The Aurie Borialis not different from light or reflection, but in so remote a place, is lesser in conparison to a street lamp, that discussion of its' intelligence cannot be derived from the brightness of a street lamp or established as applicable. A stupid light from outerspace, and to share a complete brightness with you, guides your intellect. If one seeks bright company, and if he is not rich to construct a spaceship to test and feel the Auria Borialis, he'd remain only a little lesser alone to own a street lamp as a practical utility.
As theory is of analogy, analogy not of theory, but a building block of of the abstract. A filament of a light bulb, a building block of its' illuminations, I can compare, without regards to the practicalities of material objectness, mental objectiveness, simple facts of life and living uncommon to those who are simple, more than common to those whose paths illuminate more than their own progressions , and unknown to those established in dependancy on those alien lights reflected freely from the external. This is not theoretical, it is analogical to the bright, and theoretical to the dull.
Of a very fine distinction in this regards are surfaces. A theoretical surface is of mathematical components, and an analogous surface is a material object that looks like some other material object. And, thus, approaching my discussion from these two directions, there is an arising dilema: is my theory solid or is any theoretical solid object anaologus to it. And thus my thoughts lead to a new realm in cognition and assembly of the idea:
Does it have tangibility?

Does what? My theory, A solid object, an abstraction.
What does brightness have to do with tangeability? A street lamp is both bright and tangeable. the Aurie Borealis, in its' absense distant in space demands no tangability but some assumed brightness. If all things then arise from light, one might infer that any intelligence is always of questionable tangeability and brightness, and is always distal to the tangeable utilities that shed light on ourlives.
With respect to brightness what is the product of tangibility. An army has mobility, a man tranquility. The making of a movie, feasibility. It has .....according to most, either the property material or immaterial. Of no importance- the food of an adventurer is important to him, that of a gormet cook -not with respect to its volume or amount. What is the product tangeable intelligence? Is of little amount, that its' distance cannot be discerned, nor its' utility quantifable or perceived of those emmisions reflected upon us by what ever manner or intented focus. All else is not known from the trees.

Thus again all interpetation is relative to the proximal perspective of one, of that named witness, in that, I am third witness in this description, all is abstraction as sure as the other witnessess are self conceived as tangible entities proximal to eachother, distal to mine unquantifiable self, in this singular case focused and aware by intention, that my thought are obscured in the same woods and trees as proximal illuminations of direct tangable utility. As I am not a street lamp, a rack for your hats, or a reading light to illuminate, for ones' own pleasures, the pornographic engagements in the measureable darkened approximate of the nearby unexplored wooded lanes, that in order to prevent and provide a reasonable means of honenst focus to that which is honestly but unknowably distant, it is obvious that the routine communication means of evolutionary processes, the longitudinal modulations of wind, are of poor utility in the proper orientation of men with respect to the earth and the distant stars.

With this distinction, considered as an abstraction, I will continue into a new notion with discusion and an intended reform in theory to the consequences of language, to define from a new perspective- the alternate medium of color:seek to compare color with the mathematical, the philosophical,and to ultimately say that we can say more with color, (with color pictures than with black and white pictures) than of the blander and lesser diverse properties afforded the modulation of the winds of speach..
... medium color is as I sais it is, as self speaking and predictive of not only itself in theoretical requirment, as much as either a subtle or medium heat can cause light verses heavy frequency changes from heated colors depending or not depending on if heat has alternate routes to state itself, either honestly or dishonestly, in temporate or non temporate climates in a manner that is independant of color, as color might accomplish with regards to heat. A well positioned medium postion in the absense of intensity, hue, saturation cannot assume your profits and losses, or shift between interpretations of proximity from red shift in distant heats seen in the red and black( as black has no definition with respect to color-it is its' absense:and if we are communicating without words and colors, and we are seeking only words or colors,to include black or heat as a potential subset of the red, shift the absent dark or complete light, we would have described the immaculately conceived as ordinary in assuming its use in ordinary communications-thus we must seek to avoid the unended, as it is always beyond ordinary perception wherein all and any colors, of which exists an enormous variety with a limit to the infinite and the immaculate black as origin-and end-beyond, what ever is not included: avoiding in definition roots and branches -direction :as who knows real forwards, from real reverse, but can recall the colored features of events from their histories. ... and with white as an entire domain.
This is a much neater package than an open set of combinations of shaped symbols, what is not known,cannot be known, can and does never (or need) arise to question. To be continued....(but do not hold your breath ..breathe and perceive....if there is something to say remember that you are not a flashlight so save your batteries and energy-unless it is vital.

continued...

In the event of the existance neater less falable(in the sense that it does not refer to the immaculately conceived and the unanswerable) means of communication a curious thought can arise in the minds of the more complex...as we already do not communicate with color as the medium and have no immediate sense to do so, and have no means to do so with our simple tool of breath... why or how (if an ever deeper propensity for question exists)does nature insist on sound as the means of exchange. If one considers the stock exchange, it is obviously money, its' color that speaks for itself as it has no other needs than its' own medium allows. This also implies, as the stock exchange is the major entity of economics, economics the basis of all needs, that it follows that there is no need for language, ...that as again, colored pictures can fill the minimum requirements of language, why does a permissive(in terms of the existance of life as its' controlling element) nature permit as a mens of communication that which only allows specific referal, logical conclusion from the addition of logically arived at elements, with a perpetual referal inherent in its'(language) own means of existance(i.e logic and comparison) to endless dogma, non aesthetic illusions, a linguisitic self fulfilling prophacy, purgatory, derived from linear logic that is contrary to the ways of the world...which proceeds by stage, in steps, has a direction and one direction, without a path to the preceeding..in that any other truthfull prophacy that fails to be just this-refers to this, can not exist.
Yet world wide all communication is with sets of colorless symbols, and unique colored symbolics(money) representing direct needs-e.g. food, drink, clothing, housing etc. How can these things again be referd to (as is money) as a root of evil. In being exactly level, what is the root of all evil?, ... the troublesome dichotomies introduced from the meaning in language, or pictures that appeal to need, want, refer to comfort. Why is there a means to modulate and vocalize the air from our breath as an appearing innate mechanism, if not nature itself has with its its own meaning the same purgatory as, though neither an end nor a beginning-(life and death which it cannot exceed in definition),in motion- but a perpetual dilema,the same dilema that can be envisioned if one considers color only as a means of language in motion; a phenomenom existing of the single isolated act of seeking balance-survival. Black is its'(light and and color) absence, i.e death, white life, and all but that that includes black, of life. Following that nature also does include an analogy of black, but in between the reds and yellows and blues, and not at the extreme where it has no fundamental meaning but the "absense of", it is not surprising that the colors and pictorials of money(as the blues, yellows, and greens analogous to life)and a logical multi-component symbolic language, represent together all that is possible of life and communications-yellows, reds, greens, blue interspersed with the black (a null gain in seeking). Is not then "in the green" a better word than in the black, in the black a better and more natural word than "in the red" of which a multitude of confusions are potentially possible.
Consider a painting with an object or human figure pictured in a red area of the picture. The figure is "in the red". Does this mean he is in debt or failed? Can it be easily taught to others or large masses to mean this? If so are ther implication to what follows from this language assignment, in terms of learning and perception, an understanding of nature from the flood of visual signals imposed on an individual-and cannot this situation grow worse with over population and mass communications that limit diversity in language usage.
A smaller world is a less diverse one, must it also breed the unnatural?..i.e. a world wherein the transient seekings that create "economic pictures", involve black as red, become the means of established science which always of the mental integrations from perception. Could not a disease involving heat(red) world temperature troubles, in this affect emotions involving the monetary, to cause a false scientific assesment-false theory from the perpetual and world present subliminations of the symbols we employ. Science is naturally of and about people, but what people i.e . those who "felt" to symbolize finance in red and black. We not always know the record from the record player?, if we have a falsehood in our language and communication with respect to the natural, are the given meanings of reds and blacks in economic language, a record or a record player, the record or the record player.?

I does already know before hand, in all this regard, of mine own inspections, that role are changing-changed, with regards to science, biological medical applications, the physical sciences and warfare, a society in the green is not in the dark(black) or shrouded with the reds of aggression and warfare.