Ovatko ilmeet osa

E.g Below should find soon from www.jannehuttunen.com
of a section:Research Samples/Researches/Organic/Human/Behaviour


if my webmanager suddenly quits like he has so far surprised me then also from http://ascientificbreakthrough.blogspot.com/

   Gesture, Outlook, Appearance



The research methods will be published
with the theory and book later.   

To have enough materiel to study
people alive means a lot of money.

The sequantial theory raises the
photography and movie to not
only to cost-effective mean
but a valid source. Many
people may have an idea such
a materiel is a ”secondary
experience” meaning ”quasi”,
when science is practiced.
However the theory of sequences
to be validated itself it does
not need the “real thing” while such
an idea is loose as everything is
real things.

Let us take example of even
You would be interested of
to study of the size of the breast.
Would You care if they are
natural, silicons, womans, or the
doll breasts? Personally I would
care they are woman´s and rather
the natural. However from the
research perspective. Studying the
size of the breasts, You would be in
all cases studying the size of the
breasts, right?
This keeps also the link open to
linguistic realm. To present
things here I will not
open the box of linguistics
now. It’s a messy box. Quite
finely depicting the chaos
we live in.

These pages will keep
up the spirit of making science
access to everybody. Under the
construction phase of the website
people may get lost of the meaning
the theory and researches themselves.

In here I would like to say
the issue is so vast it would need, what I have
referred in “Producers and Publishers”-
section, which You will find from the
“Business Support”-section.

II


What is clear to all it is highly
subjective to study difficulty
categorized phenomenon like
gestures, outlook and appearances
unless with a definition and framework.
It is always about chaos and order.
Order can be find when chaos
can be structured. Natural logic says
the frameworks works then like
chaos itself.

Linguistic depicts wonderfully the
chaos. The oversupply of cultures
and variations are protected and
understood very well in linguistic.
Who knows all the worlds languages?
But to ask, who knows all the colors
and pictures of the world, the hands
raise more often.

An example is found from the headline.
“Outlook” is a verbal which on my
mind walks in both categories of
this web section. The anatomy and
behavior. It is a bridge which links
worlds and ideas and ties them
together with new ways. However
outlook represent the “chaos”.
Unless defined with multiple
words.

Still regarding “outlook” a framework
can be built. “Appearance” and “gestures”
are more difficult to count and measure.
For me they represent something like
perhaps ”aura” is meant. This means
we start from the art before we practice
science.

We have personal visions
before skill and typologies.
Loose typologies intensifies
and gets secured when the numbers
of observations accumulates.
Then we are on the brink of
knowledge we master at the level
of practical skill and a science.

What is a science?
A question which there can
be find many answers from these
web pages. Gathering woods to
be burnt from forest may grow
to an science and it did in
the morning of our history.
That is all what life needs
to be advanced in it is my
view.

Getting back to linguistics
offers an realm where You must decide
what You mean by our definitions
or words borrowed. The trustworthiness
of the words e.g. is Your decision.
If You have definitions in Your world
it becomes more solid. The tools
bear no meaning.

Words are cultural and individual
contexted. They can be used for
anything. Words can rule the
world from tyranny to a
thin ice love affair. For me outlook
changes more often and faster than anatomy.
It can be determined and separated
from anatomy if need to.

You probably understand?
Even this text is unsegmented?

IIb

“Outlook and Gestures” frameworked

In outlook everything is unemotional
, stilled and calculable. You are near to
“order” and get close to “chaos” when
approach Gestures. Within chaos You
do not need authority, while there
cannot be patterns and experience.

The same idea the terrorists are
said to use is common for an artist.
You create and when step to the
new land, odd and unknown as an
artist You will start to use words
and expressions which by their own
may create a world of their own.
This world may laid a seed where
the new frameworks and compounds
will raise. When totally unknown and
naked You are better to grab parts
which You can call an innovation
instead of an imitation.

Already known the steps go safely
or may go from art to a science.
Usually people stop when the new field
on a scenery starts to look too much
of a repetition =science. To climb there
seems to be nerve-reckening, while
what is it is WORK. Few people needs
really a work too much to survive in our
societies. More than work, the smile
and that famous brown tongue will open
the already invented doors than scratch
the match in the dark. That is however
a task of an politician in a society.

As a reader we probably does not have to
go for work. I try to be merciful to You
and for myself. To say, the best part
of learning, the fast learning of a new
will stop when brains are not more “loving it”.
We love puzzles, quiz and pets and we talk
a few minute to our neighbour, but when
the romance is over our brains starts to
give warning signals of the forthcoming
marriage.

To marry a thing or a person needs probably
all of Your life. Your brains are hence
working well. When continuing to a science
field or with our lovers to the altar our brains
starts to create structures in our lives,
helpful or not. We have some amount of
“sequences” in our lives to spend. The bypassing
essence is hardly enough and when things gets
solid they show an interest in our lives to ourselves or
perhaps then not.

Braking up from marriage, regrouping the quarks
and the compounds to melt again is a similar
process when writing. I have my keyboard.
I do not love it. But I hope it is a marriage.
Still I am unfaithful to the old. My files are ready
on somewhere but I am de-magnetic to them.
I usually starts from the new page and forget
the old, even digging them up might be a better idea.
Everything I have written e.g. from the first September
this year is written on the spot. Some of them revealing
awfully, how the brains does not function when they
does not get the oxygen nor rest. Practically my brains
today is pretty much worthless. But someday they may wake
up again. So I keep an continue to write as You keep on continue
to enhance Your marriages e.g.

My life about ten years have been like walking
towards the new and painfully knowing the worthwhile
parts are dropping all of the time. Like nothing
would left to myself. I see a person who goes toward
and have only droppings of a big line after me.
However the pain between the missed tranquility, independence
and stability and the chaos which exists too much,
might turn one to not only dig the chaos but learn to start
always from a scratch. It is not a reasonable to experience the new
but one maybe forced to learn to write even decently because
It is what You are forced to do about that 8 hours in Your day.



III

To depict what I do in practice
to capture the terms of the headline;
is I let videotape roll freely
for a few moment and I record the UTC
(or look the watch). Then I use the
the knowledge of time and selected
items to ”timemap”
what I just saw from of the
selected sequence.

If I look for example ”hair colour”
I naturally ignore
other data.

It can be said. A man in a celibacy
hardly miss the redhair or brunette
during 3 minutes session.

Then I simply count how many
tupee´s I detected and how
long their appearance lasted.


With the spectrometer and with
better videotapes one could
make really quality finding.
Perhaps something like looking 65
inches Telly instead of 35 but
that is not really a needed. From
the point of view of validating
the “Theory of Sequences”

IV

I have dealt sometimes before
that exact science is impossible.

From such a strict point of
view science does not
exist at all.

Here is example.

Let us wish to fill the
need of exact science demand.
You would like to
measure a chin bones
from the perspective
of length, width, depth.

What would you do?

As in these pages
we had an example of a
failure of exactness
and superiority of the
poor “Nazi”-characters.
So let us borrow them
for a minute and see if
Arbeit Macht Frei?

How we compare the
the chin bones?

Well, naturally we dig up our
nazi-millimeter measure
sticks exactly calibrated.
Our stick fit and pass the
controlling eye of our
great professor.
However where do
put our poor models?
How do we positionate them in
a relationship to our sticks is the
dilemma to the exact science.

But arbeiting a lot we find the
solution. We nail the chair
in the wall and the floor so
we do not have to nail every model
on the wall but it is enough
we tie him or her head and chin
to be in a right position to our
sticks. We nail or glue our
stick and stereogrammetry as well
safely on the ceiling. The position
is exact during measurement.
Just to penetrate with thousand
of a model and we have
done exact science?

Guess, congratulations depends
on how worldly-wise our professor
is. If he is stupid he will not pass
the test. Why?

The test equipment, the measurement
all was calibrated to the needs of
an exact science?

Why to fail?

The answer of “The Theory of Sequence”
is made for poor and pitiful. The one
who wants to know the truth, which is
always extremely stupid. We are here to
enjoy, not to helping future generations
a child should even know.

But if our professor is stupid enough
he says something like: “Not accepted”.
“The sample will not do”
“Boys, Your sample will variate too much”
“You say You are measuring the chin bones
of 21 years of women, but You are lying”
The professor is right. Arbeit did not made frei.
The ladies are not 21 year of old
they are 21-22 years of old. Is that an exact science?

How much the chin bones changes in one year?

Actually there is not a single person
who could say, while never detected.

The Theory Of Sequences, while a time
theory emphasizes the exactness of
time. To be right You should make sure
the models are brought under the measurement
just when they are exact of an age. Exact of a seconds or a minutes would then
define the confidence intervals and the worthiness of the science.


VI

So what is science?
I think it is up to You.
The way You survive from this world
does not come from ancient German
Science is a matter just
to gather the information.
To gather more and with a disciplined
manner is not a news in our history.
Our ladies did it in ancient.
Now however there is such a “chaos”
one can only reason out why it is
like this. Me the very masculine
and fairly handsome male. I am just gathering
the pieces of apart and selling You the
the thing which is a women´s right and have
been for ages to gather unworthy parts from
the floor.

VII

Comparing the “chaos”?

If I want to compare
the result from
one human (“chaos”) to another (“chaos”)
I already lay on loose ground.

Without the exactness of a sequences
in all other cases I would not make
the TRUTH nor right to an individual.
Still rather often we read studies which
forgets to mention the essential which
should be included to studies as a
standardize. Study reports should
guide us with the honesty and open
their ugly hearts to say how much
they tolerate our capacity to
separate the lie from the truth.
How much the each study lies
or can lie is hardly ever mention.

In here, in these pages or in my
production I try to give an example
how it feels to read something
which is rather somewhat true.

What I could do with the
“outlook studies”.
I could not calculate e.g.
the volume/square meter
how much the redhaired took
with her tupe of
the space of the telly.

So I can only account
how many redhaired I saw
and think perhaps
Why I did saw more blondes
now as just a half of an hour
ago the redhairs conquered
the Telly.

When professionalism increases
an analyst will remember the
work by heart. An art has gone the
cycle to science and the to a gut instinct.
About there is perhaps when brains
are doing the natural thing of
evolvement and get back to
“chaos” to regroup.
To avoid this I try to
at times as much to forget the work I have done.
That one must know.

VII

Can we validate “The Theory of a Sequences”
by the process of depicted above?

I guess You should judge it.

You are a thinker, right?

At least this is boring enough to be
a trustworthy? When knowledge
turn to practical? When to science?
Who decides it? Who You let to decide it?
Why?

What science is? What it should be?
What is should produce? Are the questions
You can only answer Yourself.


Mr. Janne Huttunen 20th October 2005
Re-edited on 3rd November 2005