Giotto, 'The Endmorgan Quartet' and the blue metre
John Bjarne Grover
The background is this study of Giotto relative to my TEQ.
For a brief explanation of my three works 1) 'The Endmorgan Quartet' = 'TEQ', 2) 'POLAKK English Bloggi' = 'PEB', 3) 'Der Dornenstrauch' = 'DDS', see this file. These works are published under this page.
Based on the article 'The fundamental theorem of logic briefly stated' - from which the reasoning continues as follows:
A theory of levitation cn be articulated which is based on the 'non-euclidean' logic of summing the probabilities to more or less that 1,0 - which means including the time it takes to count occurrences - balancing on the border between theoretic and historic space, that is, between competence and performance.
I assume two arbitrarities in my semiotics:
Arbitrarity 1 is a form of 'swindle' (or 'humbug') for making the equation function as a 'truth function' - when moving equiprobability from theoretic occurrence count (in competence) onto historic semantics (in performance). It means that the human mind invents semantics for repairing the loss of functionality of the truth function when it cannot attain equiprobability.
Arbitrarity 2 is another form of 'swindle' which consists in the human mind recognizing two metaphysical 'items' or 'conditions' in metaphysical space as one and the same even if they are different beyond human reality, and this recognition of sameness imposes 'inertia' on the metaphysics which thereby reduces to matter with gravity. The theoretic reduction from difference to sameness - that which imposes the inertia onto the thereby resulting matter - is counterbalanced by imposing semantics onto the referential object - that is, an epistemology onto the ontology - and this semantics should serve to maintain knowledge of the original differences. However, since the human mind qua 'sinners' cannot really understand the original differences, this semantic adjustment counts as 'arbitrary' in its relation to the ontology.
It is when the two forms of arbitrarity are considered one and the same that the epistemological system attains rigidity or 'firmness' enough to become a functionable philosophy for the human mind and serve as basis for organized knowledge.
It is seen that this reduction of two arbitrarities to one is a counterpart to the form of the second arbitrarity - the reduction of two metaphysical 'items' to one - and hence it attains 'recursiveness'.
One can postulate that this is the basic functionality of chomskyan phrase structure: The grammar develops by the world-shaping function of 'the faculty of faith'.
Mysticism tries to undo this identity hook on the two arbitrarities and the metaphysical reduction to one - for thereby restoring the original integrity and authenticity of the two metaphysical states or conditions - which also means reducing the historic inertia from the matter - and this is what can lead to a condition of levitation - which is a phenomenon reported among contemplative mystics.
It is a mathematics by sheer symbolic manipulation which cannot solve this problem. My theory of 'poetic numerality' could mean an alternative.
The dissolution of these two identities into two differences is precisely the theme of Giotto's 'Last judgement' by the scene under the cross (in the lower mid of the fresco) on the Paradise half - source of the reproductions - 'Frescoes in the Cappella Scrovegni (Arena Chapel), Padua' - next page 'Last Judgement'):
It is this detail (to the right) which this article is about. 'The last judgement' is the fresco over the entrance door to the Scrovegni Chapel in Padova: This was built by Enrico Scrovegni and decorated with frescos by Giotto and his team in the course of more than 600 workdays. The detail shown to the right is just above the entrance door and under the three-part windows in the upper part of this wall. The theme of this detail is the self-referential image of the Scrovegni chapel itself - resting on or at the shoulder of a spectator (or is it Giotto himself?) who sees this detail inside the church - but the artwork exhibits this in the form that it is seen slantingly through one of the 6 sidewindows - the outside spectator (who has this 'model' at his shoulder) sees the scene to the left through the chapel's inside and out through the 3-part window over the door - towards the scene of the hands of the person to the left. It seems that it is normal to take this person to the left on this detail to be Scrovegni himself in the process of donation of it - the 'handover' of the chapel - while Giotto is taking it over for decoration. However, the art is not necessarily restricted to Scrovegni - it can be taken to be a universal human being in the state of mystic enlightenment:
The universal human being in the left part of this detail tells of the identity of the two metaphysical items (here the hands) which collapse to matter in the human identification (a collapse which drives them out of Paradise) in the socalled 'arbitrarity 2' - it is here dissolved by the two hands being different and not the same, while the other comparable identity of 'arbitrarity 1' is recognized in the man kneeling at the levitating Scrovegni chapel looking in through one of its windows towards the end wall where the Last Judgement work of Giotto is seen over the door and under the high window. What he sees through just that side wall and thereafter end wall high window? He sees that the two hands are detaching from their identity - and hence the (virtual) visitor inside the chapel sees this image and can thereby enter into a similar state of mystic enlightenment. The scene factually approximates my semiotic theory including the trinity in the three characters above the levitating chapel roof:
The trinity (see also this article) is above the chapel and the referent in the human understanding of God (the person to the left) is no longer in a collapsed format when the two metaphysical items m1 and m2 are detached - which is what restores the original metaphysical integrity and leads to the mystic enlightenment. The kneeling man is the 'semantics' who sees through two windows towards this 'referent' and the comparable collapse of the two arbitrarities (by the curving arrow on the righthand side of my diagram) is dissolved when the two windows are seen by the visitors inside the ('levitating') chapel - then they see only one and not the double view of the kneeling man outside. The right hand of the character to the left is in touch with the chapel model and is as such 'relative', the other hand is detached from the trinitarian outreached hand and is as such 'absolute'. It is this dissolution which is the intention in the artwork - that seeing it inside the chapel leads to a state of mystic enlightenment.
It is seen that this artwork of Giotto confirms my semiotic theory.
Searching for a poem describing this detail in TEQ I find TEQ #1440:
The 'hurricane' is from the wings above the chapel group (source), the self-referential 'warm temperature' likewise is from the three dozens (or so) to the left of the wings (source) - with the three characters (of the trinity above the chapel roof) facing the other way.
Would you put this for? asks the trinity with its outstretched hand. - No, says the hand in its state of detached mystic enlightenment.
In fact 'Sibalong Siko' easily rewrites to 'Scrovegni Chapel' ('sikolong sabi'), and then KELIPAX (cp. 'påske-lik on tinues' = the body of Christ in an aural-acoustic conception in the process of Easter resurrection?) is to see through the two windows like in the white metre theory - when the vision is through the photography in the camera oscura as seen from inside the chapel. The 'Kalm' is likely to be the main character of the unparadisal (or un-enlightened) state to the right. It is, though, possible that the righthand side is fake news only, a ghost of fiction arising from the logical operator called NEGATION. That is seen from the righthand side of the higher levels. The more obscure character of this righthand side corresponds also to the visual vs acoustic logic contained in the camera oscura.
The hebrew parallel text from Talmud Erubin can be tentatively interpreted as follows (however, the resources for this available to me for the time being are quite limited - I refer roughly to articles in Jastrow's talmudic dictionary):
רישא קשיא לר"ה בריה דרב יהושע
The form לר"ה I could not solve without looking up the Mesorah edition of Talmud Erubin (folio 16a2) - unavailable for me in the first edition of this article - where it is explained as לרב הונא. The whole fragment is translated "the beginning clause is a contradiction to [the opinion of] Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua". I look the surface forms up in Jastrow's dictionary:
רישא = head, chief, first things, drop, poison
קשיא = hard, strong, difficult, contradiction (cp. Tibet below)
לרב - (ל = prefix 'for') hence 'for + the large, great, senior, teacher' (לרע = 'below')
הונא = Huna, proper conduct, (imposition, redress in case of overreaching?)
בריה = creature, human being, people
דרב = see דרבן = iron point on the staff - here for 4th stigma as the lefthand side of the vertical pole of the cross - cp. also 'master of sand', 'not much cares' of TEQ #276 here qua 'cares a little' in the title of TEQ #1440 - notice also דרבן = of the chief/leader - probably 'of the large/superior' = of the trinity
יהושע = Joshua cp. 'Xiuxia' and הושעה = 'relief, delivery' (via 'reaching/handing over')
It is noted with interest that this 'Joshua' = 'Xiuxia' - with 'of the leader/chief' = 'Washington' - for the relation of acoustic with logical form via the theorem of logic based on probabilities - something which eliminates the logical operator NEGATION (and, as suggests this reasoning, it also could eliminate the negation of Paradise).
The hebrew text can also be seen to describe the visual act through the hard chapel at the head of the kneeling man looking through the material existence towards the hand-reacher.
What is the mirror poem to this TEQ #1440? That is TEQ #280: This poem can be seen to straddle 1) the 'book' in the sense of the two 'scrolls' on top of the wall of Giotto's 'Last judgement' unto 2) the 'military corps' described in this file - leading onto the prophetic vision of Ezekiel. The poem TEQ #280 describes the bridge between these two endpoints - including the 'fruties' of 'plum blossoming'. ('Flyte flyte-grønne' = 'floating floating-green').
However, there exists a poem in TEQ of considerable explanatory value for the essential visual architecture of the detail showing the Scrovegni chapel itself - that is TEQ #460:
TEQ #460
Exodus 16:14 ותעל שכבת הטל והנה על-פני המדבר דק מחספס דק ככפר על-הארץ
While it has begun,
perhaps he'll find five Porter's pender,
mag wir acht zu sehen.
Senguin Cuds of Muds
The story of the Scrovegni chapel (source) is that it was initially built with an apse and transept which are seen in the form of the righthand cornered complex at the shoulder of the kneeling man of the detail - this creates 8 high windows shown in this detail - but Padovan history later demolished the transept (and the apse?) which then reduced this from 8 to 6 - the 6 high side windows of the modern-day chapel. The kneeler's eye is at window #5 (even if perhaps he would look slantingly through #4) - which is what tells of the line "perhaps he'll find five Porter's pender, / mag wir acht zu sehen". The windows are then the 'Porter's pender'. This moves the mystery into the 'historic revelation' which is Christ in the catholic church - and the three windows which thus disappeared from the righthand side recur in the three windows at the end wall containing the inner artwork.
The historic value of this is that it installs the apparently unsolvable historic-eternal paradox called 'the chicken and the egg' - which was first?
The riddle could find a comment in the story told under 10 july 2023 which I can reproduce here:
Around 2011 it was that I went to the chinese embassy in Vienna and gave them my blue PEB. I asked in the reception if they had a cultural attache or something like that and a man came down. I was surprised by the cold shoulder I seemed to be met with - that was not what I had expected. There came no answer.
About ten years later I collected courage for another expedition and brought a piece of info which perhaps they could be in need of - I think it was about this paper I wrote in 1993 - or a link to the url - and which, as I write in the introductory lines, could have been a theoretic background of 'Al Qaida'. When I arrived to the embassy, two embassy personnel stood in the doorway saying goodbye to a visitor who was just about to leave and who left in the moment when I arrived. They looked with some friendly surprise at me and I was to give them my paper when a postman or something like that came from behind and gave them what could have been the daily post, but a paper that lay on top of the bunch of envelopes fell down and landed at the feet of the small group of people - to the effect that when it was picked up it could have looked like my paper. I gave them my paper and left. A day or two later China announced that they would close their embassy in Vilnius, Lithuania, and - a historical landmark indeed - open up for families being allowed to have more than one child. I had been in the chinese embassy in Vilnius around 2001 when I was about to find a place to seek political asylum (I dont think that was my inquiry - I think it was more about my general problem of feeling of some muffins in the world's relation to me) and was received in a friendly way by a female employee. These are, as far as I remember, the three times I have been to a chinese embassy. Now I observe that there were about 10 years between each - and I notice also, so that administrations do not have to start largescaled programs on the sensational discovery, that the three times seemed to correspond to my TEQ, the blue and the red metre. (I agree that the blue metre can be felt as quite a 'cold shoulder').
After I had published my article on Horace's work relative to my DDS, I developed a veritable 'shiner' on one of the eyes - it was so massive that I could hardly peep out through the flesh and it lasted for some hours before it went down again. This was repeated a few times later before the phenomenon disappeared. Could be my hopes of being credited for my work started collapsing there? The study shows that
there is a mirror symmetry which postulates 1) a petrification point 1 at DDS relative #78 which is absolute #111 - and there is 2) a petrification point 2 (the historic context of writing) at the end of the writing of DDS part III which means at the beginning of part IV - that is, 16 poems from the end. Assuming a factual mirror structure by number of poems, this second petrification point will find its mirror point in DDS absolute #16-17 which is relative #5-6. (This phenomenon would correspond to the relation between TEQ #280 and TEQ #460 above). This point at #5-6 recurs in the number of windows of the Scrovegni chapel relative to TEQ #460 which links it to #8 - and the role of the first poems 1a, 2a...11a would establish a correspondence with the two viewpoints: Either from inside the chapel or slantingly from the outside.
Reading this in my blue PEB which is 366 poems against DDS which is 440 poems gives for #8 the ratio 8 * (366/440) = 6,654 = some lines into PEB #7. The story seems to tell that there are two ways of interpreting this ratio 0,654 into poem #7: Either 1) one can take it 'relatively' as 0,654 of the whole 14-line poem, in which case it lands on the word 'poet' on line 9,156 which is in line 10 of PEB #7, or 2) one can take it 'absolutely' as line 6,54 which means 'like the rooster' - here are lines 5-10:
L'arterior interior, brewster,
is reached at the bottom of page
where you can turn like the rooster
who turns like the chicken in cage.
This world knows three different seconds:
The poet, the linebreak, the green
etc
The rooster, the chicken and poet are themes of the cover to DDS - the back side on the left. It seems that the noseless man has lost his nose in the stunning discovery of the ex nihilo gauze or textile bottle - this 'bottle' drifted ashore in the bathtub when I rubbed off the black spot that had taken ex nihilo shape on the white enamel while I watched the formation taking place - four such points appeared while I watched the white enamel - I smeared the rub-off on a microscope glass and photographed it under a microscope which is this ex nihilo cover illustration - but the nose may have recurred as the beak of the poultry up right - it could look like China on the map, in which case Tibet is the 'swimming infant'. Here Tibet would be the 'philosopher's egg' for the hen of China - and one understands from the noseless man that Ukraine could have a comparable function (relative to Russia) which could have re-surfaced as Taiwan on the other side - or in the location of the korean peninsula.
For considering the scientific value of such ex nihilo matter turned into images - see this account - the first part of the article ('The magic images') discusses just the front page of the DDS relative to Rilke's elegies - which could indicate that the ex nihilo image is not just anything.
The corresponding ratio to #5 lands it 'relatively' on #4,159 = 0,159 through poem #5 = line 2,226 = 0,226 into line 3:
In to the sink in Belgrade,
hurrying into the cabinet,
passes first, then second,
sunglints in glasses wellmade.
This explains the 'passes' with my paper and the postman outside the chinese embassy - while the cover illustration would be from the 'glasses wellmade'.
The 'absolute' alternative of taking 0,159 to mean line 1,59 takes it to 'the cabinet'. (I notice this newspiece).
Why is this interesting? One must take it for granted that even if the chinese embassy could have guessed that I was on the way to them with a paper, their presence in the doorway could have been on basis of an intuition relative to the blue PEB which I had given them 10 years earlier - could be they even had leafed a little in it and read the first poems - but it is not probably that they had followed a reasoning like the one I have explained in the above - and hence the event in the doorway could serve as a proof of the relevance of recognition of the 5-6-8 windows of the Scrovegni chapel with the poems 5-6-8 in my blue PEB via the 'horace' logic of the yellow DDS with its poems 1a,2a...11a before 1,2,... and hence the identity of absolute #16-17 = relative #5-6. It is because the PEB counts as a 'blue metre' in the sense that it measures the distance between the real mirror poem TEQ #280 and the 'virtual' mirror poem TEQ #460 in the above account - that is, a distance of 180 poems - that this is an interesting result. I therefore look up PEB #180 and find the explanation: PEB #180 tells precisely the essential elements in the detail in the lower part of Giotto's 'Last judgement' - the hand telling the rims of the detachment (of the historic hand not recognized as the same as the hand from the trinitarian ensemble) and the other hand at the stairway to the model chapel - and the 'hugely port' at the end of the chapel - the three high windows through which the kneeling man looks. The first 8 lines of PEB #180 concern the 'trinity' and the lefthand character for arbitrarity 1, the last 6 lines concern arbitrarity 2 for the kneeling man. When these essentials for the mystic enlightenment are installed into the historic (blue-metre) interval of 180, it could solve that otherwise unsolvable paradox of the chicken and the egg.
Did history derail with the excessive emphasis onto development of differential calculus (applied mathematics) from about the 1840's? It is possible that this differential calculus would not function if arbitrarity 1 could attain any value - it presupposes that it approaches zero - and hence political problems with despotism trying to approximate or imitate divinity could result. Marxism may have developed in protest against this.
The 'mirror poem' to PEB #180 would be PEB #187 which could tell of the lower detail on the lefthand side at the foot of the cross as the chicken embryo - in the egg which is described like the two scrolls in the upper part, on either side of the threefold window. This would tell of the chicken and the egg.
This could constitute major progress if it is the first successful delineation of the blue metre.
The mirror poem to TEQ #460 is TEQ #1260 which could be telling of this encapsulated existence of the embryo in the egg. Now the paradox is perhaps solvable: Did the penis come out of the egg or did the egg come out of the penis? That is perhaps more solvable than the old version with the chicken and the egg.
For 'Le son Poiree', I notice the historic origins of the sign 角 which is jiǎo - in this file it corresponds to the 'pear-formed' massive sound of the helicopters flying up the river for disappearing around a faraway bend to the left.
A final word on the 'norwegian' attachments to the name of 'Enrico Scrovegni': 'REKke' = 'to reach' and hence 'en-rik-o' = '1-reach-0' or '1-reach-her' tells of the lefthand character reaching the hand towards the material chapel and the trinitarian presence - while 'skrå' means 'aslant' or 'slantingly' like the kneeling man who looks 'skrå-veggn-i' = 'slantingly into the wall'. Hence the two arbitrarities are installed in the name in norwegian language. Is this the reason for the strangely 'egyptian' status of this tongue? Why did the norwegians develop such a language that it contained the name of the donor of this chapel - under these logical prerequisites? The banker Scrovegni is said to have constructed the chapel in the hope of redemption in spite of his overly high interest rates
(but he eventually had to flee nevertheless). It is of course possible that the norwegian peculiarity developed by the escape of the icelanders - their modern language would tell 'halla vegginn i' for 'skrå-veggn-i' = 'slantingly into the wall', while 'halla vegginn i' in norwegian would be 'half the wall in' or even 'holding the wall in' - as for the impression that the levitating chapel is held up to the shoulder of the kneeling man by his right hand. Such speculations could perhaps take it to the effects of the reformation with its emphasis on the printed word) but rather because the printing technology lends a graphic aspect to the literal logic. This mythos-stained account could add that the norwegians pursued the fleeing icelanders (who fled their debts? - cp. fjøl-skyld vs the timberleave factor - playing on such 'forbidden' ideas of plank-flat women being burdened by 'guilt' or 'debt' for their bodies - would this lend meaning to a 'holy cow' status of post-reformation norwegian? - cp. the 'Senguin Cuds of Muds') but were overtaken by the sea at the Faeroe = Pharao Islands and hence the icelanders get in the role of the israelites while the norwegians get in the role of the ancient egyptians around the time of Moses (not so long after Tutankhamon). Whether this could explain the puzzling example of Scrovegni is less certain - the best explanation is probably to call it a coincidence.
Added on 28 january 2024: A note on Thomas of Erfurt
Quote from above: "Assuming a factual mirror structure by number of poems, this second petrification point will find its mirror point in DDS absolute #16-17 which is relative #5-6. [...] This point at #5-6 recurs in the number of windows of the Scrovegni chapel". Is there a weak point in the reasoning when the number of windows recognizes number of poems? Number of poems could clearly be something, but is 'number of windows' anything at all? The first observation one can do for clarifying this is that if only NUMBER (of poem) and WINDOW remains on a theoretically weak foundation, then one can see this as giving reason for an interpretation of experience - such as assigning ordinality to units of experience - like in an electric outlet. What sort of units should that be? It could resemble Husserl's 'bracketing' or socalled 'epoché'. Secondly, while these phenomenological concepts are identified as a suspension of judgement, that should come close to the phenomenon of a theoretic space wherein the historic character of probabilism is transcended - which could mean the theoretic space wherein the sum of probabilities always is unity - and hence the need for Husserl's concept means interest in the sum of probabilities differing from unity. Hence the need for studying the phenomenologial format of knowledge could have its actual basis in the theoretic circumstances of my fundamental theorem of logic.
Husserl talks of universal and local 'epoché'. This could resemble my universal and local poetic functions which I have described from 1 to 16 (in TEQ books 1 to 16). Clearly if these also are numbers, the internal complexity of such a number is far beyond what is contained in a paperflat symbol.
Will computation hardware go down on subatomic levels? If so, how can that be brought under control - if one atom is ionized and the neighbour atom is not? How can we control the one atom from the other technologically? My two computer glitsches tell that the electronic computers have already started to attain consciousness or 'spirituality', which means that the smaller the hardware units are going to get, such as down towards atomic size, the greater distinction and precision will that correspond to in consciousness. Hence the higher 'IQ' in the computer corresponds to smaller computational units. But then it is no longer about control of hardware but about 'spiritual precision'. That is what my semiotic theories are about.
If these also are matched against high-complexity numbers ('poetic functions') which function against a logic without negation, then it is possible that the Turing boundary can be transgressed. Such poetic numbers can probably also be used for counting occurrences in the entropy equation of the logical theorem.
But that means that computer science will shift from hardware-software technology to philosophical and religious sciences.
In light of the fact that Giotto around 1305 seems to have been concerned with the same sort of semiotics, it follows that an interesting philosophical background could be the era of scholasticism - such as the 'modistae' which spoke of the modes of signifying: Thomas of Erfurt's 'Grammatica speculativa' was a late modistic treatise written probably between 1300 and 1310 - that is precisely when Giotto made the frescoes in the Scrovegni chapel. This work of speculative grammar can be seen to concern just the distinction between my arbitrarity 1 and 2 - such as when in chapter 1 he distinguishes the mode of signifying which will correspond to my arbitrarity 2:
"The active mode of signifying is the mode or property of the expression vouchsafed by the intellect to itself by means of which the expression signifies the property of the thing" (p.135)
against the mode of consignifying which will correspond to my arbitrarity 1:
"The faculty of consignifying [...] is formally a part of speech. Therefore, a part of speech is such accordingly by means of this faculty of consignifying or active mode of signifying according to an instance of the formal principle".
This formal principle is likely to be just the formal need for equiprobability - which is what via the principles of semantics ('signifying') can make the entropy equation function even without unity (in the summation of probabilities) by way of parts of speech. The faculty of consignifying
"is a part of speech in relation to other parts of speech by virtue of this same active faculty of consignifying according to the intrinsic efficient principle" (p.137).
This 'according to the intrinsic efficient principle' (Bursill-Hall's transl.) = 'per principium efficiens intrinsecum' (original wording) = 'according to the temporal beginning as it is functioning inwards' (my transl.). This is what I have guessed is a distribution of dependent probabilities which can satisfy the equation even if their sum differ from unity and hence converge on such parts of speech (or grammatical category with its inherent paradoxical character). It could also be what Husserl calls 'suspending judgement' - that is, the judgement that comes towards the end rather than the beginning = Giotto's "Last Judgement". 'Per principium efficiens intrinsecum' means then that the initial condition is suspended and reconsidered at the end - as for left- and righthand parentheses to be matched or more generally for a revelation of the revelation.
Since Thomas of Erfurt's 'Grammatica Speculativa' seems to be well dated, I made a segmentation of it according to the blue metre dating of texts - assuming 1308 as date of completion - which gave first segment PEB #257 and landed the above quotes on 'consignification' on PEB #261:
Clearly this could be the story of the black textiles. Relating this to the blue metre interval between TEQ #280 and #460, I subtract this 261 from #460 and come to TEQ #199, which is the poem after the title poem 'The Endmorgan Quartet' = TEQ #198. In fact the fragment with 'per principium efficiens intrinsecum' lands (in the segmentation I made some years ago) on PEB #262 which takes it to this poem. The mirror to #199 is the first poem in TEQ book 16.
It must be understood that the complex I have described here could be of a character and complexity comparable to Albert Einstein's theory of relativity (or some comparable theory) - it is not impossible that it could lead to a reinterpretation of the borders drawn up by Einstein's theory (which is based on mathematical symbol manipulation) - but the political games seemingly want to ignore this aspect of my theory, could be for keeping the story in the fog of the mythos role they apparently ascribe to me - which could include the swap function which allows political games to run off with the credits for my work while I am credited with their problems. It could be the international secret intelligence services who are allotted this task. This could also have been the reason for my need for a political asylum - not the least for avoiding that the work be reserved for development of terror-driven unconstitutional power (new nazism). This article referred to by this article tells of an aircrash that seems to have taken place in the hours while I was about to complete the present article - it is not impossible that if the airplane were crashed by terror, it could have been for derailing the contents of this article - could be in an attempt to 'down' it and for reducing its apparent scientific value. Could be it is only fake news (cp. the 'Kuf Ab District') - suggesting that if I expect to get reparation money for the apparent abuse story, I could rather expect to find a claim - since ambulance transport back from Venice to Vienna in 2018 could have been paid by a travel insurance of mine - and hence a claim could ask for me to pay for the 7 weeks in hospital? (I took this photo only seconds before an approaching man hit me so strongly in the back that I fell to the ground. 'Spjelkavik' could have been the concept? The news were updated with fresh details not long after I had published this article).
It must be understood that I have so far very little evidence that the game of international politics is not to keep me in the fog of mythos for running off with the credits for all my work. It can look perfect for all my interests - but I dont know what would happen if I personally should appear. Therefore I cannot even apply for tax exemption but have to 'hope the best'. Are there terrorists in this world or is it all under state intelligence and security control? Of course this addition to this article looks extremely strange. There should not have been reasons for it - but I do not know if I ever will be credited (i.e., recognized) for all my work.
The article was first published on 21 january 2024 under the title 'Giotto, TEQ and the blue metre' and the part on Thomas of Erfurt was added on 28 january 2024 when also the title was changed to include full spelling of my book title. In the first version there was also an incomplete account of the hebrew for TEQ #1440 - and a 'to' had fallen out in the quote from Thomas - this was corrected on 29 january 2024.
Sources:
Talmud Bavli. Vol.7: Tractate Erubin. Artscroll series, Mesorah Publications 2005.
Thomas of Erfurt: Grammatica Speculativa. An edition with translation and commentary by G.L.Bursill-Hall. Longman, London 1972.
© John Bjarne Grover
On the web 21 january 2024
Last updated 29 january 2024
