🚀 go-pugleaf

An analogy to understand entropy in a telepathic brain is that of a
language learnt but not practiced. While a second language is learnt
vocabulay and syntactic abilities develop. Feedback is important to
distinguish communicative phrases from more or less random chains of
words or even noises in that language. If it is well formed, the
phrase communicates, otherwise feedback makes it evident it is
malformed and some correction given. In a total immersion environment
the first language may even be forgotten (though not quite). Lack of
practice will reverse abilities in that language. With time vocabulary
is forgotten. A different context would render learnt vocabulay
insufficient to communicate. the first language or a different
language would be preferred, even a mix of languages and words used.
In this mechanic some practices such as creating a fantasy, silence
vows, not establishing a dialogue or not corroborating transmissions
in this channel may be justified as the newly speaking telepath would
not deepen skills in the channel or would forget it altogether. When
learning a language initial successes are important, otherwise
negative conditioning may block its learning. Since telepathy as a
conscious means of communication means access to brain areas not
normally used, its initial corroboration and practice may be difficult
if the particular area (ability) is not activated consciously. Some
schizophrenias would have their origin in the interaction between a
particularly tuned brain and the telepathic but not telepathically
conscious brain of a non schizohrenic. These would be characterized by
a seemingly random chain of words and phrases and other transmissions
making little sense as they would be randomly extracted from a
meaningful but partially transmitted thought chain...

In political terms the Sterens algorithm has a particular significance
for successful politicians: their sons will be in the borderline,
where they can follow the same successful career as independent
politicians, not directly attached to their successful (or famous)
parent, or be forgotten and discarded as Sterens children, not
belonging to the same family. In a democractic environment there is
little incentive for dynasties,  this relationship can be exploited by
their managers in double games, taking advantage of the disimilariy to
promote a seemingly independent political career (hiding socially an
overt family relationship) or by turning the dissimilar son into a
political liabiliy to be discarded and not promoted. The sons of very
successful politicians do have pressure to become astounding (very
successful) and play ruthless; being sterens they can be controlled by
discrediting them for not belonging to the **real** family of the
politician father, to the point where family ties are denied and
support taken away. This strategy can be conscious, purposefully
turned into mafia while at the same time genetic sons are promoted in
politics, directly related to the famous father or not. Geographic
distance and differences in last names for BOTH types of sons can aso
be played skillfully by the manager...

Fabrizio J Bonsignore now Danilo J Bonsignore