LATEST ADDITIONS

For now, at least. First, a nice summation from <A HREF="http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/music/features/article2316883.ece"><… Independent</I></A>. Then, follow the external link to Denis Dutton's conclusion that Barrington-Coupe's "I did it for love" defense just doesn't wash. His conclusion: "Based of a reading of her letters to critics and her radio interviews, it is my considered opinion that Joyce Hatto, in addition of being a lively, chirpy, witty, bright and positive person, was also a pathological liar."

Bagheera calculates a trajectory.

Huckleberry just looks calculating.

"if arm falls off, reattach and play much slower."

I always knew that (and on the heart, too). What I refuse to believe is that anyone who has actually <I>read</I> Shakespeare could write like this:
<BR>
"This interdisciplinary work is good for brain science because it offers permanent scripts of the human mind working moment-to-moment. It is good for literature as it illustrates primary human thinking. Through the two disciplines, we may discover new insights into the very motions of the mind."

Gerald Edelman tries to explain consciousness. But doesn't G&#246;del's Law tell us that we can't use consciousness to define it?

<b>A $279 Speaker</b>