Deeper than primes - Continuation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Little 10 Toes said:
And why are you trying to combine math and meditation?
Click to expand...
Because both of them are derived form the same source, known as Unity, where meditation enables one to directly be aware of Unity as the source of thoughts, where logical reasoning is some aspect of this source at the level of thoughts.

Furthermore, by being directly aware of the source of thoughts it is possible to define a one framework for Ethics (in therms of evolutionary scale) and logical reasoning, where also Ethics (in therms of evolutionary scale) is some aspect of this source at the level of thoughts.

The actual ability to establish a unified framework for Ethics and logical reasoning, enables our civilization to develop technologies, which are naturally free of inconsistency among Ethics and logical reasoning, because through Unity awareness Ethics and logical reasoning are like two organs of the same body, which naturally reinforce each others further non-trivial (profound) development.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
Because both of them are derived form the same source, known as Unity, where meditation enables one to directly be aware of Unity as the source of thoughts, where logical reasoning is some aspect of this source at the level of thoughts.

Furthermore, by being directly aware of the source of thoughts is is possible to define a one framework for Ethics (in therms of evolutionary scale) and logical reasoning, where also Ethics (in therms of evolutionary scale) is some aspect of this source at the level of thoughts.

The actual ability to establish a unified framework for Ethics and logical reasoning, enables our civilization to develop technologies, which are naturally free of inconsistency among Ethics and logical reasoning, because through Unity awareness Ethics and logical reasoning are like two organs of the same body, which naturally reinforce each others further non-trivial (profound) development.
Click to expand...

When are you planning to start on establishing this framework?
 
zooterkin said:
When are you planning to start on establishing this framework?
Click to expand...
Good morning zooterkin, you are one of the participators of OM's establishment, in case that you have missed it.

All you need is to grasp at least http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8175510&postcount=1236.

If you actually are able to grasp it, you immediately aware of Ethics and logical reasoning as organs of the same framework.

As long as Ethics and logical reasoning are understood only in terms of context-dependent frameworks, they can't be used as organs of the same framework that actually reinforce each others development.

Verbal_symbolic_context_dependent-only reasoning is too weak in order to translate OM into its limited framework, and evidences of this limited framework are shown all along this thread.
 
Last edited:
Little 10 Toes said:
Doron, just because you say something doesn't mean it's true. I mean, look at this thread.
Click to expand...
No one gets truth as a second-hand notion, so?

Look at this thread in order to see how second-hand notions are arbitrary\temporal, and therefore can't be known as truth.

This is exactly the current state of Traditional Mathematics, it is based on arbitrary definitions at the level of thoughts, which are naturally changeable (temporal), but they are forced as invariant truths by a community of people that develop this science only at the temporal level of thoughts.

You, for example, reject Unity as truth exactly because your awareness gets things only at the second-hand level of thoughts, by not being aware of Unity as the source of polychtomy (where thoughts are some aspect at the level of polychtomy).

Little 10 Toes, just because you think something doesn't mean it's true, because truth is actually known only at the level of the source of thoughts, which is not less than Unity awareness.

EDIT: Furthermore, mass-destruction weapon can be developed and used without any problem by the current level of awareness of the mathematical science, exactly because the foundations of this science are found only at the level of thoughts, which is some aspect of polychotomy (at the level of polychotomy Ethics and logical reasoning are not organs of a one framework that reinforce each others development).
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
No one gets truth as a second-hand notion, so?

Look at this thread in order to see how second-hand notions are arbitrary\temporal, and therefore can't be known as truth.

This is exactly the current state of Traditional Mathematics, it is based on arbitrary definitions at the level of thoughts, which are naturally changeable (temporal), but they are forced as invariant truths by a community of people that develop this science only at the temporal level of thoughts.

You, for example, reject Unity as truth exactly because your awareness gets things only at the second-hand level of thoughts, by not being aware of Unity as the source of polychtomy (where thoughts are some aspect at the level of polychtomy).

Little 10 Toes, just because you think something doesn't mean it's true, because truth is actually known only at the level of the source of thoughts, which is not less than Unity awareness.

EDIT: Furthermore, mass-destruction weapon can be developed and used without any problem by the current level of awareness of the mathematical science, exactly because the foundations of this science are found only at the level of thoughts, which is some aspect of polychotomy (at the level of polychotomy Ethics and logical reasoning are not organs of a one framework that reinforce each others development).
Click to expand...

Translation: you don't get it.
 
doronshadmi said:
EDIT: Furthermore, mass-destruction weapon can be developed and used without any problem by the current level of awareness of the mathematical science, exactly because the foundations of this science are found only at the level of thoughts, which is some aspect of polychotomy (at the level of polychotomy Ethics and logical reasoning are not organs of a one framework that reinforce each others development).
Click to expand...


Translation: Had we shunned real Mathematics in favor of the impotent Doronetics, scientific achievement would have been strictly impossible, thereby reducing any ethical liability from advancement to nil.
 
If Ethics and logical reasoning are used as organs of a one framework, then the ability to develop even anti-matter bombs is not prevented, it simply used in order to protect our plant from asteroids that have the potential to eliminate complex creatures like us.
 
doronshadmi said:
If Ethics and logical reasoning are used as organs of a one framework, then the ability to develop even anti-matter bombs is not prevented, it simply used in order to protect our plant from asteroids that have the potential to eliminate complex creatures like us.
Click to expand...

Sounds fascinating. When are you going to produce this framework?
 
zooterkin said:
Sounds fascinating. When are you going to produce this framework?
Click to expand...
When you are going to do the needed practice in order to be aware of the source of your thoughts, which is the natural linkage among Ethics and logical reasoning?
 
Last edited:
zooterkin said:
I'm not the one making grandiose claims, you are. Put up or shut up.
Click to expand...
This is the beauty in this case, in order to put up you at least have to practice how to shut up (be directly aware of the source of your thoughts).

This is exactly the opposite of grandiose claims, and as long you do not actually put up (the non-subjective aspect of your awareness) by shut up (the subjective aspect of your awareness) you have no choice but to get what I claim as grandiose.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
This is the beauty in this case, in order to put up you at least have to practice how to shut up (be directly aware of the source of your thoughts).

This is exactly the opposite of grandiose claims, and as long you do not actually put up (the non-subjective aspect of your awareness) by shut up (the subjective aspect of your awareness) you have no choice but to get what I claim as grandiose.
Click to expand...

Concentrate, Doron. The framework, where is it?
 
The ability to manipulate environments is in direct proportionality with the complexity of the manipulator (where Complexity is not a synonym for Complected, exactly as Simplicity is not a synonym for Triviality) . But in order to not break apart, Complexity must be rooted in simplicity, such that the balance of the considered manipulator is kept during manipulations.

Complex creatures like us actually must be aware of the simplicity that enable us to tune the needed balance in order to survive as non-trivial phenomena.

If creatures like us have the power to build today atomic and hydrogen bombs, and tomorrow anti-matter bombs, they must to develop the tuning between simplicity and complexity in order to survive these powers.

This simplicity is the non-subjective aspect of one's awareness, which enables the subjective aspect at the level of thoughts to be consistent with the subjective aspect of other creatures like us.

This consistency is expressed by the ability to use Ethics and logical reasoning as organs of a one balanced framework, and during the practical interaction among the the subjective and the non-subjective, Unity awareness becomes concrete in daily life.

The following diagram is an analogy of Unity awareness in terms of 1-dimensional space, such that being curved (represents the subjective and complex aspects of a given realm) or straight (represents the objective and simple aspect of that realm) is not known in terms of dichotomy (where dichotomy is a particular case of polychotomy):

5721561558_c5b78c3152_b.jpg


Only by Unity awareness a given realm is actually consistent and the mathematical science really fulfilled.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
At Unity awareness, which is naturally accessible exactly as thoughts are naturally happen in your mind without any effort.

EDIT: For more details please read http://www.tsmforlife.com/BubbleDiagram2pger.pdf .
Click to expand...

Totally irrelevant. To remind you what you said:

doronshadmi said:
Because both of them are derived form the same source, known as Unity, where meditation enables one to directly be aware of Unity as the source of thoughts, where logical reasoning is some aspect of this source at the level of thoughts.

Furthermore, by being directly aware of the source of thoughts it is possible to define a one framework for Ethics (in therms of evolutionary scale) and logical reasoning, where also Ethics (in therms of evolutionary scale) is some aspect of this source at the level of thoughts.

The actual ability to establish a unified framework for Ethics and logical reasoning, enables our civilization to develop technologies, which are naturally free of inconsistency among Ethics and logical reasoning, because through Unity awareness Ethics and logical reasoning are like two organs of the same body, which naturally reinforce each others further non-trivial (profound) development.
Click to expand...

Where is this framework? Have you developed it? If not you, who has?
 
doronshadmi said:
The ability to manipulate environments is in direct proportionality with the complexity of the manipulator (where Complexity is not a synonym for Complected, exactly as Simplicity is not a synonym for Triviality) . But in order to not break apart, Complexity must be rooted in simplicity, such that the balance of the considered manipulator is kept during manipulations.

Complex creatures like us actually must be aware of the simplicity that enable us to tune the needed balance in order to survive as non-trivial phenomena.

If creatures like us have the power to build today atomic and hydrogen bombs, and tomorrow anti-matter bombs, they must to develop the tuning between simplicity and complexity in order to survive these powers.

This simplicity is the non-subjective aspect of one's awareness, which enables the subjective aspect at the level of thoughts to be consistent with the subjective aspect of other creatures like us.

This consistency is expressed by the ability to use Ethics and logical reasoning as organs of a one balanced framework, and during the practical interaction among the the subjective and the non-subjective, Unity awareness becomes concrete in daily life.

The following diagram is an analogy of Unity awareness in terms of 1-dimensional space, such that being curved (represents the subjective and complex aspects of a given realm) or straight (represents the objective and simple aspect of that realm) is not known in terms of dichotomy (where dichotomy is a particular case of polychotomy): [qimg]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/5721561558_c5b78c3152_b.jpg[/qimg]

Only by Unity awareness a given realm is actually consistent and the mathematical science really fulfilled.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. It's a pretty drawing.
 
doronshadmi said:
This is the beauty in this case, in order to put up you at least have to practice how to shut up (be directly aware of the source of your thoughts).

This is exactly the opposite of grandiose claims, and as long you do not actually put up (the non-subjective aspect of your awareness) by shut up (the subjective aspect of your awareness) you have no choice but to get what I claim as grandiose.
Click to expand...

Anyone notice the irony?
 
dafydd said:
No it isn't. It's a pretty drawing.
Click to expand...
This pretty drawing is no more than an analogy at the subjective level (the level of thoughts) so?

Also mathematical definitions that are represented by pretty symbols are no more than verbal_symbolic analogies at the subjective level (the level of thoughts), so what exactly is your point?
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
This pretty drawing is no more than an analogy at the subjective level (the level of thoughts) so?

Also mathematical definitions that are represented by pretty symbols are no more than verbal_symbolic analogies at the subjective level (the level of thoughts), so what exactly is your point?
Click to expand...

I think he tried to explain that the pretty picture that you provided (which you say is no more than an analogy and hence not a substantial argument) does not answer anyone's question.

Maybe you should try again?
 
zooterkin said:
Totally irrelevant.

Where is this framework? Have you developed it? If not you, who has?
Click to expand...
It is relevant, since it actually direct you to be aware of this framework within your mind, and if your mind is developed during the practice, you actually aware of this framework within AND without you, in terms of Unity.

So first learn how to shut up your mind, in order to actually develop (put up) Unity awareness.

Once again, you are an active participator of this framework, all what I do in this thread is to give some directions that actually achieved by your active participation.

The days of the passive pure observer are irrelevant anymore, and as long as you continue to ask me about its development it will not be actually developed by you.

OM is self development framework during actual participation.

Little 10 Toes and dafydd still try to get OM in terms of passive pure observers.

http://www.tsmforlife.com/BubbleDiagram2pger.pdf is irrelevant as long as one only reads about it but not actually doing it.

For example, are you able to develop your muscles by only reading books about muscles' development techniques?
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
This pretty drawing is no more than an analogy at the subjective level (the level of thoughts) so?

Also mathematical definitions that are represented by pretty symbols are no more than verbal_symbolic analogies at the subjective level (the level of thoughts), so what exactly is your point?
Click to expand...

This pretty drawing is no more than a pretty drawing so?
 
sympathic said:
Are you able to learn math only by reading pages related to math on the internet?
Click to expand...
Are you able to develop mathematical understanding by not developing your awareness?

For example, you still get mathematical understanding only by using partial ability of your awareness (only your verbal_symbolic mind's skills).
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
Are you able to develop mathematical understanding by not developing your awareness?

For example, you still get mathematical understanding only by using partial ability of your awareness (only your verbal_symbolic mind's skills).
Click to expand...

I am able to develop mathematical understanding by actually learning mathematics. As you always say there is a difference between talking about learning mathematics and actually learning mathematics.

You refuse to understand fundamental mathematical concepts as sets and limits and continue waste your time.
 
Last edited:
sympathic said:
I am able to develop mathematical understanding by actually learning mathematics. As you always say there is a difference between talking about learning mathematics and actually learning mathematics.

You refuse to understand fundamental mathematical concepts as sets and limits and continue waste your time.
Click to expand...
You insist to understand fundamental mathematical concepts as sets and limits only in terms of verbal_symbolic mind's skills.
 
doronshadmi said:
You insist to understand fundamental mathematical concepts as sets and limits only in terms of verbal_symbolic mind's skills.
Click to expand...

I don't insist on anything. You are the one wasting your time and insist others will waste their time as well.
 
sympathic said:
I don't insist on anything.
Click to expand...

You are insisting to understand mathematics only in terms of verbal_symbolic mind's skills, as clearly demonstrated in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8170624&postcount=1179.

According to your partial use of brain's skills, mathematical explanation is valid only in terms of verbal_symbolic mind's skills.

EDIT: Unlike you, I am not "someone who favors drawings" because I use verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial brain's skills.

Furthermore, according to your reply, one can conclude that your teachers ignore, for example, http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8186618&postcount=1300.

You know what? even by ignoring my Unity awareness argument, your verbal_symbolic-only limitation actually prevent your ability to understand fundamental mathematical concepts as sets and limits.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
OM is self development framework during actual participation.
Click to expand...


Given that Doronetics has a following of exactly one, and that one is unable to express anything intelligent regarding said framework, that would render Doronetics a complete failure.

Thirty-five years of effort, and only sewage for result.
 
doronshadmi said:
You know what? even by ignoring my Unity awareness argument, your verbal_symbolic-only limitation actually prevent your ability to understand fundamental mathematical concepts as sets and limits.
Click to expand...

No. I understand sets and limits just fine thank you. My degree in maths indicates that. Got anything like that?
 
jsfisher said:
Given that Doronetics has a following of exactly one, and that one is unable to express anything intelligent regarding said framework, that would render Doronetics a complete failure.

Thirty-five years of effort, and only sewage for result.
Click to expand...

Don't be so harsh. The man still knows how to draw colorful drawings.
 
sympathic said:
No. I understand sets and limits just fine thank you. My degree in maths indicates that. Got anything like that?
Click to expand...

Your degree in maths was given by a community of people who understand Math only if it expressed by verbal_symbolic brain's skills.

EDIT:

For example, your teachers can't comprehend the following:

Let me share with you some fundamental notions of OM, which are based on symbols and diagrams, and in this case OM uses a cross-section of Riemann sphere through its 0 and ∞ poles.

The concept of Set is closed under the polychotomy of YESthing and NOthing.

The cause of polychotomy is thing (known also as Unity), as follows:

[qimg]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7043/6840987626_c9c426828a_z.jpg[/qimg]

NOthing is weaker than any tool that is used to measure it.

YESthing is stronger than any tool that is used to measure it.

Unity (thing) is the source of NO,SOME,EVERY,YES ploychotomy.

-----------------------------

By following the notions above the outer "{" "}" represent YESthing, no symbols between the outer "{" "}" represent NOthing, and between these extremes we have SOMEthing and EVERYthing.

According to these notions the universe of elements is between YESthing and NOthing, where NOthing and YESthing are not one of the elements.

(An example: The considered universe in the case of 2 and {2} is {2,{2}}, where the bold outer "{" "}" is beyond collections).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom