วีดีโอ

Video description = clicked

Iain states the insight from his heroic efforts rather innocently with "the way to think about this in the abstract," without delivering the reality-wise proviso, "but don't go falling in love with the feeling of the abstract being real," that creates humanity’s multilingual, consensus-reality versions of reality, and our species generational confusion about the nature of language and reality. They say that our vocation tends to shape our worldview and I wonder if there any of those 3am moments when Iain contemplates his career choice of literary critique & Kafka's much loved critique of the human condition, when Gregor thinks he sees the sun at 3am, before drawing a final breath? A very clever story that tends to remind me of the reality-wise sayings "wisdom is more excellent for those who see the sun," and the Buddhist perception puzzle, "don't mistake your finger for the moon." While a more concise statement about the insights that will inevitably flow from Iain's heroic efforts to slay the Dragon of Abstracted Reality is, "The delusion is extraordinary by which we exalt language above nature. Making language the expositor of nature, instead of making nature the expositor of language," Alexander B Johnson, A TREATISE ON LANGUAGE. Insight inference; the vast majority of humanity understands next to nothing about the 'unseen' nature of being human and through the auto-suggestion power of memory, comes to believe that their autobiographical memory sense-of-Self, actually IS their Reality, which neuroscience research continues to debunk. While Johnson's treatise includes the comment "no words can reveal to me what my eyes have not seen," which can be contemplated with the thought experiment of looking at any object your eyes can see right now, and asking yourself if using any other word you can possibly 'imagine' to name the object will alter the object's reality or what your innate sight is actually seeing? After reading Iain's Master - Emissary hypothesis and trying to develop a visceral 'level' understanding of its insights into the representational system we call language, and his brief mention of 'the primacy of affect' I was left frustrated by TMWT's failure to explore this subconscious domain of human motivation, yet have continued to believe that the work lays the 'intellectual' foundation for a global reevaluation of humanity’s communication biased consciousness. And as Carl Jung so aptly pointed out "until you make the subconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate." He was like an ancient prophet saying, "repent, the kingdom of Heaven is at hand," if you'd just stop perceiving it so abstractly, you poor dimwitted fools. While, as Albert Einstein so aptly pointed out, in the context of the 'future of humanity' conference in October of this abstracted sense-of-reality we name a year, "no problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."

There is a way that Friston's free energy principle of mind/brain is VERY complementary to McGilchrist's hemisphere hypothesis. It may be helpful for Iain and Karl to realise this, and Darius gives us an important clue... 1:43:22 Darius: "When we receive the data from the world, which is ultimately always divergent from our predictions, we either update our model of the world (strategy A) or we act to change the world so as to make that sense data more concordant with our generative model (strategy B). In principle, this is a updating of the Helmholtzian notion of perception as inference but it includes action. And I think that's the great part of it, which is that we, in many ways, enslave the World by changing it in accordance with our preferences (strategy B)." So beautifully said, Darius. And to help Iain grasp and feel the significance, it may help to consider that the right hemisphere may allow us strategy A - to update our model to better conform with(understand) the world as it is. On the other hand, forcing change on the World so that it better fits our model (strategy B) is clearly the product of left hemisphere capacity for "power and control". These are the two main strategies our bihemispheric brain/minds provide for minimising brain entropy (free energy or surpisal), though there are others which can be associated with pathology. A Schizophenic, for example, uses maladaptive defence mechanisms (denial, projection, etc...) to reduce surprisal. In this case either deformed perception (hallucinations) or a deformed model of reality (delusions) can minimize the mismatch between predicted and actual sensory input. Because the distorted perception or model of the world are entirely internal, with no increase in understanding or ability to force the world to do our bidding, these strategies reduce overall function (mental illness). Now, to extend this fusion of Friston and McGilchrist, in which our dual brain hemispheres offer these two contrasting strategies (A & B) for minimising free energy, this is my take. Our right hemisphere provides the ability to better understand (internally adapt) to the world as it is - in particular, our relationships with individual living beings and collectives as they are. Strategy A affords adaptive awareness of the syntropic potential to join with other living entities to form a greater harmony, complexity, intelligence and beauty. The need for freedom (choice) is of central importance to syntropy. Healthy, intelligent, living systems are autopetic (self-assembled, self-generated, self-regulated), and this essential internal directedness is the opposite of external control. The predictible generativity that results from such uncoerced, cooperative freedom means that the potentiality of strategy A is inherently uncertain and imprecise in some ways. There is paradox here that reminds me of Tolstoy's quip that every happy family is happy in the same way (syntropy and health embody a dynamic stability that is familiar, knowable and predicible, less surprisal), but every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way (entropy and illness are chaotic and unpredictible, more suprisal). Happy families and healthy sustems also embody greater potentiality than unhealthy ones. The left hemisphere provides the ability to apply power and control to coerce, break apart or consume other entities into being useful to our narrow, individual goals. Strategy B affords awareness of entropic potential, which allows the desired degradation of an unfamiliar entity to be predictibly precise (not free and unpredictible). This inevitably reduces the entity's potentiality and also creates unanticipated and unwanted entropic "externalities". Darius' "enslavement" well captures the limitations of strategy B. Taken together, Friston's biophysical and McGilchrist's anatomic/phenomenologic insights help us better appreciate the nature of brain/mind and the human condition - our contrasting awareness of, and capacity for, a syntropic flow of events versus an entropic flow of events. Such dual awareness could be anticipated for the brains of animals - organisms with capacity for growth and reproduction (syntropy) but who rely on catabolism for energy (entropy). This essential thermodynamic (infodynamic?) duality distinguishes us from the dominant syntropic flow of the plant kingdom. It may also be central to solving the metacrisis of industrial civilization, which McGilchrist suggests is due to modern man's hypertrophied left-brain obsession with power, control, consumption, hierarchy, language and technology. The huge challenge we face for transtioning our entropic civilization (aka "the beast"), and the wonderous opportunity presented to us for understanding and harmonising with the living world, may well involve the thoughtful restraint of our left brain capacity for power and control and the unleashing of our right-brain capacity for syntropic culture. Humans have done so in the past, with many examples from around the world. The abberation is our current culture and mindset, with excessive reliance on strategy B using money and technology. The metamorpnosis of a hungry caterpillar consumer to a butterfly pollinator provides a lovely metaphor for transition from entropic anthropocene to syntropic anthropocene. May it be so. Thank you both for sharing your thnought provoking dialogue!

Thank you so much for this! I wished Chris had been my physics teacher. I do not understand numbers, but I did get the concept! It helped me immensely with the understanding of our brain and organism.

Every comment gets a like. Oh and thanks for a fantastic discussion\sharing. Cheers from a retired digga down under.

What I am grateful to Iain about is not his enormous wealth of knowledge bringing about the publications of, "The Master and his Emissary and "A Matter of Things" but the enormity of this left brain enterprise guided and manifested by a delightful and playful Unknowing spirit, which somehow lives between the words, escapes the script and informs without intending to do so and thus brings about its Art through keys struck beyond the visible or apparent.

If you were looking for the next Oracle, Buddah, Elvis, Einstein wouldn't you want the search loop to be conscious of seeing such a person arrive and thrive in their learning? If they are gifted with messages for the human soul and heart, wouldn't the search loop want to keep a particular quality in mind? Or do we lose them again because humans are terrible for optimising an end of line perspective on all of humanity? (18:10) Wait. Consciousness is not the Devine but the Devine can travel through consciousness? There is either a home address problem here or it's an ethical problem. I think the winner for a theory of everything should be chosen today, for a recipient to collect, 250 years in the future. What the hell do they think we are? Complete imbeciles! (21:00) (Don't mind me, I just like the idea of writing outrageous things. How it speaks to the reader is not a test of the mind... )

Thank you for the brilliant conversation, one of the best ever on You Tube. I watched it at intervals because I found my awareness triggered into all new spaces in the awareness phenomenological state space that I then wanted to explore on my own for a while. I have one request for Darius and Dr. McGilchrist; could the two of you do a three way conversation with Thomas Metzinger; bringing your insights together with his work with meditative states in his new book, "The Elephant and the Blind"?

Anyone else autonomously developing a working example of Iain's 'elevator speech' from watching that many of his interviews in order somehow to proliferate all this? Asking for a friend.

The right hemisphere has the capacity to inhibit. This goes along with and is part and parcel of the parasympathetic ventral vagus which has the capacity depending upon Neuroception (exogenous) or Interoception ; (endogenous) really work in concert, bi laterally. registering, accessing, perceiving. The left brain sympathetically adrenally mobilizes for apprehension or execution for material object-acquisition or repetitive compartmentalized formula-making or ideation. When doing so the ventral brake is disinhibited and allows for metabolic increase and thus sympathetic adrenal action (ie, defensive fight/flight responses). When the ventral vagal brake (right brain) is if you will put back on (ie in parasympathetic rest and restoration, calm) then the left brain sympathetic nervous system is mobilized no longer for defensive fight/flight but for play and joy.

Excellent!

Thank you both. Be like water ☯🙏 Just to be clear, that's Bruce Lee no' me 😉

My schizophrenic artist friend who has shown his paintings and poetry in NY is jealous (without deliberately showing it) of other's success when they show success. He has no idea how his shows are in galleries. A true outsider artist. Yet the latest Venice Biennale is a piss-take on outsider artists. They (curators) use a post-postmodern argument (a return to sincerity, authenticity, and a re-engagement with grand narratives and universal truths) to make their post-colonial argument. Making the art of the Indigenous the outsider. As the spokesperson argued, 'it is whoever shouts the loudest', as they stood in a hypercolourised gallery space of their own ego. Whatever happened to the dirty colours that make pure colours shine? Today the pure colours drown out the mud in which lilies grow. From my point of view, neither the outsider nor contemporary Indigenous art, are beautiful. But they are recognised as art today. Flow states? The first day as a professional chef, 'you are a snob now drop everything you know and do as necessary in the present moment'.

The limit is not the eNd

There is no limit without determinability, no determinability without limit.

Yes consciousness can (100%) have Mathematical explanation, because Mathematics is a modeling system for transformations (consciousness is a system of transformations and equalibrium tracking). The mathematical explanation for consciousness might be large, but it fundamentally can be described by mathematics. Our universe really is a computation that obeys mathematical rules, math is king, queen, and scribe of the natural world.

Thank you so much. It’s an honor learning from such a knowledgeable person about hemispheric interactions. As I have performed many QEEG/brain maps, it seems that I can now better comprehend the findings in relation to brain wave hemispheric findings and actualized behavior. Which of course greatly helps with treatment. I feel I have a better vocabulary to explain what I intuitively perceived, but couldn’t explain. Bravisimo!

Neurological Gravitational Potential, analogous to gravitational potential's influence on physical objects, is represented by Intellidoscope as: N•X ( zP q(g )Z( G)Q zp ) Y•N. 1. 'XZY+Q' Coordinates 2. 'N' Neurological Network. 3. 'G' Gravity. 4. 'P' Potential. The Markov Blanket, represented by 'M' & 'B' serves as the boundary separating and connecting the Brain's internal states with the Minds external environment. Together @ T≈0, Symbolically, this relationship can be expressed as T²B²/M²≈0 •X( z qtb(m )Z( M)BTQ z )Y• The Markov Blanket is conceptualized as a function of the brain's and mind's squared elements at the foundational moment of cognitive processing. This highlights the potentiality and complexity inherent in the brain-mind interplay, illustrating their dynamic and reciprocal relationship. This framework transcends the classical limits of time and space, suggesting that the brain, with its 10¹² neurons, operates at a computational 'speed' that can be conceptualized as surpassing the speed of light. The brain-mind interface at T≈0 isn't merely processing information within its own scale but is 'sampling' from a vast, higher-dimensional space of possibilities. This 'sampling' transcends the speed of light because it's not limited by material transmission but by a kind of shifting focus and, in turn, attention. Space at an order of 10¹⁵ can be understood as a field of potential worlds that are continuously updating. The distortions of spacetime via gravitational waves may, in fact, be evidence of such updates. Just as each jewel in Indra's Web reflects the whole yet offers a unique perspective based on its position, our individual contexts determine how we perceive and interact with the myriad possibilities that surround us.

•X ( z q() Z ( 🐙)Q z ) Y•

Thanks for the update ❤

Uncle Carl's Certified Platinum-Grade Organic GMO-free Snake Oil. Side effects: Might actually cure what ails you. I've been trying to get my mind around FEP. Where I've arrived so far is that there's a Godel problem. I have too many choices! What should I do? Apply FEP. Oh, dear, there's more than one way to apply FEP. I have too many choices! What should I so? Apply FEP again. FEP seems to be a recurrent pattern when systems navigate certain kinds of choice architecture on a persistent, sustained basis. It seems to perhaps be an emergent pattern in the choice architecture solution space. But I'm guessing there are hideously sensitive dependencies on the precise boundary conditions of how FEP emerges. FEP trying to change its own parameters mid-flight is perhaps the ancient story of tying to upgrade an aircraft engine mid-flight. In software engineering, we call this technical debt. If it isn't broken, leave it alone. But gradually all the misbegotten cruft starts to weigh down the whole enterprise. FEP seems reluctant to perform surgery on itself. How would you accurately condition that? If FEP at one level ultimately becomes poisoned by technical debt, perhaps the organism reaches crisis, the crisis registers on a higher level FEP, the higher level FEP finally makes a big enough choice in a big enough context to walk away from a poisoned FEP at a lower level. Maybe this leaves a gap in the FEP hierarchy, a kind of blind spot for a while in your choice architecture delegation tower, until the missing link re-emerges again with less accumulated toxicity. I'm beginning to think that the reality of the organism is that there's a kernel of non-linearity with no easy solution. The FEP principle, emerging hierarchically, seems to be good at pushing those non-linearities to the sidelines, creating the illusion, at least, of a linear zone of behaviour in a central domain of behaviour. But life is variable, and some of those non-linearities will come back to haunt you. At this point your stability becomes part of the problem space, not part of the solution space. Maybe this is why we are social. From time to time, we need to make a Hail Mary from one zone of stability to another, and during this time, we depend on the environment to cooperate, or we die. If so, there would be a large incentive to organize an environment with the capacity to cooperate. So there's this very powerful, almost universal algorithm, to organize local perception/action gradients. This algorithm operates with loosely coordinated, hierarchical concurrency. What could possibly go wrong? The entire non-linear kernel of your existential embedding that's immune to local optimization. That's what.

A'tention Tensor •X ( z qt(A ) Z ( a)TQ z ) Y•

ID and Ego •Xe ( zi q( E) Z𝐈 (e )Q zi ) eY•

🐙

I, Me and Self. •X(s zi q(m ) Z𝐈 ( M)Q zi S)Y•

The External, internal and Outer. It's surprising to find that not all of what is external is part of the material Universe. •Xe ( zi q( Eo) Z𝐈 (Oe )Q zi ) eY•

Markov Blanket @ T≈0 •X( z qtb(m ) Z ( M)BTQ z )Y• Right, Up, Down, Left •X( z Rq(uδ l )Z( L ∆U)Qr z )Y•

3rd dimensionally mind bending ; )

I like that the title of this course, which I just started, is Physics AS Information Processing, not Physics IS Information Processing. Looking forward to this ride.

Self-Organising Identity S²I³ O² •X(s zi q( o) Z𝐈 (O )Q zi S)Y•

E.M.Path.Y

Continuous Time & Discrete Time. C³T² ∆² •X( zc qt(δ ) ZC ( ∆)TQ zc )Y•

Inside and Outside inverted from expectation. •X ( zi q( o) Z𝐈 (O )Q zi ) Y•

There is a great book called “symmetry, causality and mind” by Michael Leyton. If you want to talk about salience, you can check his book out. It talks about how we are always looking for visual symmetry in things, and if we find something that we do not recognize as symmetrical, it can cause one to consider it salient. I’m not an academic. I’m an industrial designer. I found this book useful because it actually helped me scientifically explain why “cool” things look “cool”. The idea that you can recognize a square is a square is completely dependent on your ability to visually scan all the lines of the shape, one at a time, to verify it’s a square… I would love to get better acquainted with your institute.

44:47 i like how the interviewer does not let himself get derailed away from the Hard problem. Solms has a lot of great ideas which i find fascinating but they don't quite penetrate into the Hard Problem imho. If I'm understanding Solms' stance correctly, he appears to treat subjectivity as an axiom? "Subjective feelings exist because they do. Things are dual, don't know why. Now let's talk about about how feelings are used." I don't think Solms is saying he has solved the Hard Problem, right? He just wants to talk about details and consequences AFTER the Miracle of subjectivity.

Chris, thank you for this great lesson. A profound idea that I took from you is that entropy only makes sense as a discrete concept. This reminds me of how entropy is calculated by carving up phase space with a discrete grid, which implies there is an observer imposing a specific coordinate system. Also, the relationship with symmetry, where there are different actions which may yield the same effects. I am studying physics with John Harland and this relates to our research. In particular, I am working out a combinatorial alternative to the wave function based on the combinatorics of orthogonal Sheffer polynomials, which yield what look like causal trees. I look forward to watching your subsequent videos and perhaps talking some day!

Interesting to think about sensors and models working together. I can model the sensors, can I sense the model?

•X h(s z qt(Ao)Z(Oa)TQ z s)H Y•

Space as a Constant: A Hypothesis on the Absence of Impermeable Substances in the Observable Universe By David MacArthur Domains Of Being Project 2023 Abstract: This paper serves as an introduction to the concept of Space as a Constant and the hypothesis on the Absence of Impermeable Substances in the Observable Universe. Through an exploration of various disciplinary perspectives, we will delve into the fundamental concepts and underlying thoughts that shape this proposal...

There is no limit without determinability, no determinability without limit, yet the limit is not the end. Beyond the limit of finitude is possibility. Now that last part has an interesting directionality, in that one could take it as a purely categorical proposition and would likely only take an inside out perspective. What is it really to recognise the manifestation of possibility?

59:33 - Entropy is pretty neat! ^.^

57:00 ❤

•e ( c b(δAE)C(ea∆)B c ) e•

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 HighRoad and LowRoad Order H² R² LO² •X h( z Rq( l o) Z (O L )Qr z )H Y•

Black Box •X( z⚫ qb() Z⚪ ()BQ z⚫ )Y•

At some point, that field of science and technology is going to have to accept that certain things can't be explained by science alone. If God sets parameters and by some stroke of luck you find them. Stick to them and don't let any bastard cross the damn line! That's the small lie you might be angling for when it comes to a markov for two. Suck it up, we are not interested in this work to make people more miserable. Neither will we let those experimenters keep digging for answers they themselves refuse to see. What your tests MUST NOT do is control predictions, otherwise it's money and hardwork down the toilet.

If E=MC² is Related to Energy directly associated with Mass Then what if we take into account Energy not directly associated with mass also?¿ E⁴ C³ M² •Xe ( zc q(mE) ZC (eM)Q zc ) eY•

Optimal Scale Resolution •X (s z Rq( o) Z (O )Qr z S) Y• 'Optimal Scale Resolution' is valuable when considering the loss of free energy in various systems. In thermodynamics, the term "free energy" refers to the portion of a system's energy that can perform work at a constant 'temperature, and it's subject to irreversible loss in the course of such work. This concept helps us understand how systems evolve and how efficient they can be in terms of energy usage. When we talk about the loss of free energy, we're often referring to the idea that when energy is transformed from one form to another, there is always some loss-energy becomes less ordered and more dispersed, typically as heat. Although energy is never lost containment may be. This is a fundamental principle known as the second law of thermodynamics, which states that the total entropy of an isolated system can never decrease over time. In the context of data models and simulations, 'Optimal Scale Resolution' can help minimize the metaphorical 'loss of free energy' by ensuring that the model is as efficient as possible. It means that the model uses just the right amount of detail to be accurate without wasting computational resources on unnecessary complexity. This is analogous to a physical system that's been optimized to minimize energy loss and maximize efficiency. For example, in a machine learning model, 'Optimal Scale Resolution' would involve choosing the right level of feature granularity so that the model is complex enough to capture the necessary patterns in the data but not so complex that it becomes computationally expensive or prone to overfitting. This balance helps to ensure that the model's 'energy'-in this case, its computational power-is used as effectively as possible. in data processing can be seen as a strategy to ensure that the 'free energy' of the model-its capacity to capture and utilize information-is not lost through unnecessary noise. It's about making sure that every bit of computational power contributes to the model's ability to perform its intended task efficiently. Balancing Complexity and Clarity in Simulations: Normalization, Smoothing, and Optimal Scale Resolution are key processes in the preparation and analysis of data for simulations. They serve to refine the raw input into a form that is both manageable and meaningful, allowing us to extract insights and make predictions. 'Normalization' is the first step, where we adjust the data to a common scale, ensuring that each variable contributes equally to the analysis. This is crucial in preventing any single feature from skewing the results due to its range or scale. 'Smoothing' follows, acting as a filter to reduce noise and highlight significant trends. It's a way of looking past the random fluctuations to see the underlying patterns more clearly. 'Optimal Scale Resolution' is the art of choosing the right level of detail. Too much detail, and we get lost in the noise; too little, and we miss the nuances that could be critical to understanding the system. Overcoming The tension between Optimal Reducibility and Computational irreducibility: The challenge of simplifying complex systems without oversimplifying them. Computational irreducibility reminds us that some systems require us to embrace their complexity fully, as any reduction would lead to a loss of essential information. In creating global-scale simulations, we strive to resolve this tension by: • Applying 'Normalization' to ensure fairness in feature representation. • Utilizing 'Smoothing' techniques to focus on the broader trends. • Determining the Optimal Scale Resolution to balance detail with abstraction. • Recognizing the limits of Optimal Reducibility and the necessity of 'Computational Irreducibility' in certain complex systems. Here we introduce the idea of inverting the demand of computational Energy by creating a model that meets the criteria for optimal reducibility yet is computationally irreducible. symbolic representation of this concept: We can conceptualize this as an Intellidoscope equation to illustrate the transition from computational irreducibility to optimal reducibility, and finally to the concept of optimal irreducibility. Here's how it might be represented: •( ic R( o) 𝐈C (O )r ic )• This equation symbolizes the transform of a system or model from a state where its complexity is inherent and must be computed 'Computational Irreducibility' through a process of inversion where we simplify the system to its most essential form without losing critical functionality 'Optimal Reducibility' to a final state where the system is as simple as it can be without further loss of necessary complexity 'Optimal Irreducibility'

Updating Beliefs through the Observations of an Intelligent Agent •X( zi qb(uAo ) Z𝐈 ( OUa)BQ zi )Y• Bayesian Query Process •X( zP qb() Z ()BQ zp )Y• Probability Map •X ( zP q(m ) Z ( M)Q zp ) Y• Functional Gravitas of an Agent •X( z Fq(gA )Z( aG)Qf z )Y• World Brain in sided relationship with the Universal Mind •X( z qwb(mu ) Z ( UM)BWQ z )Y• Note, interesting to see the Mind is Universal and the Brain as Cosmological. 🤔 I suppose I have a slightly inverted perspective on the relationship with brain and mind and seeing the brain as on a cosmological level containing a universal mind and that the brain is actually providing the functionality of intelligence to the mind. 🫢 Wow this is cool... I see that the Mind and the Brain share the same propositionality as a Markov Blanket. •X( z qb(m )Z( M)BQ z )Y• What does it mean to create a simulation, or what I refer to as a "Post-justified Reality"? I suppose these kinds of quantum computations of the brain already take place. Consider the refresh rate-the frequency at which the brain updates its model of the world. This concept aligns with the idea of retrospective sense-making, where reality is rationalized or explained after it has been experienced or observed. This term is consistent with the notion that understanding comes after the fact, and interpretations are constructed to justify what has already occurred. Similarly, a simulation might be updated to reflect new data. Then, when I think of my model of recursive learning, I'm inspired to engage with deepening my understanding of modes of being, but there's too much to say, anyway... In the context of earlier ideas, as we reevaluate data, the functionality of the brain is afforded relationally to the universal mind. This could be seen as a Post-justified reality in itself. The brain, with its cosmological expanse, could be constantly justifying and re-justifying the universal mind's image of the world. I'm not quite sure if "equivariance" is the right word, but there seems to be a kind of equivariance being maintained-a kind of homeostasis, an optimal path through possible worlds. Perhaps by examining the interplay, or even 'energy as evidence, we can better predict certain outcomes or more precisely 'the state of things,' which is surely, in fact, the modeling of a simulation for the purposes of prediction. Dimensionality and Difference: What I've found in creating my novel algebraic calculus 'Intellidoscope' ,is that I've had to add an extra symbol other than the alphabetical letters, that being the Delta symbol, to make a clear distinction between dimensionality and difference. d7•d6(d5(d1 d2)d5(d3 d4)d5)d6•d7 •((δ )( ∆))•

•e ( c b(δAE)C(ea∆)B c ) e•