
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. 
21st November 2014, 11:02 AM  #161 
Master Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,585


__________________
"All is needed (and it is essential to my definitions) is to understand the actuality beyond the description, for example: Nothing is actually"  Doron Shadmi "But this means you actually have nothing."  Realpaladin  

21st November 2014, 12:01 PM  #162 
Species Traitor
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 3,614

Reminds me of my experience interviewing grad students with Masters Degrees in Computer Science, who can't write a loop from 1 to 10
Quote:
I'll be right back, I'm having an epiphany moment right now.  Kidding! He seems like a reasonably nice person. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't mind him as a coworker. He would not be anywhere near the oddest coworker either, not by a considerable margin.
Quote:
I'm reminded of an acquaintance who had a lifelong dream of being a writer. He made his dream come true when he selfpublished his first novella. But, he is a writer who can't stand literary criticism. He was endlessly frustrated through college in creative writing classes. No one liked his stories. They wanted him to change it. They had every manner of unhelpful critique and suggestions for "improvement". It made no sense. What needed to be improved? His stories were imaginative, full of lively characters, his plots contained multiple threads of interconnected story arcs, his stories are strung together in his unique brand of breezy prose. He could not comprehend that anything could improve upon his already perfect stories. See for yourself. In his own words, he is an exceptionally gifted writer, like a presentday Milton or Dante. He has 7 or 8 more novels and novellas, literally 1000s of pages, each as faultless as the others. His perception of his writing ability is a little biased. But, at the end of the day, this acquaintance writes and keeps writing because its fun and stimulating. Likewise for Doron. He genuinely seems to enjoy the stimulation of highly abstract thoughts and conversation. 
__________________
>^.^< 

21st November 2014, 12:19 PM  #163 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Dear Dessi,
Infinitely fast (where in this case, we do not measure fast in terms of time) does not provide the needed accurate information if we use only ∞ to describe Infinity. The accurate way to do that is as follows (if the term fast is considered (again, not in terms of time)): N fast < P(N) fast < P(P(N)) fast < P(P(P(N))) fast < P(P(P(P(N)))) fast < ... 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

21st November 2014, 12:32 PM  #164 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884


__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

21st November 2014, 12:36 PM  #165 
Master Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,585

I definitely see what you mean... garbled tenses, missing words but what would put me off is... well, the dashes... I can see no function for them...
Other than that, I'd read that story. I read about 3 books a week (I don't do anything 'smart' on my smartphone other than reading books and checking the upcoming weather). I wrote an article on the DK effect and it's implications in peerassessment for the purpose of recruiting. But here's the thing, if this is the case, then Doron is breaking his 'contract' with the forum. However, he might not realize it. So, in essence he adheres, within the boundaries of his abilities but with the fullest intentions, to the 'contract'. Let's see how far you get. I'll be quiet and become an E. for a while. 
__________________
"All is needed (and it is essential to my definitions) is to understand the actuality beyond the description, for example: Nothing is actually"  Doron Shadmi "But this means you actually have nothing."  Realpaladin  

21st November 2014, 12:42 PM  #166 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Originally Posted by Dessi
As for my goal, it is using neutral monist view of Consciousness in terms of mathematical reasoning, as can be seen, for example, in http://www.sciencechatforum.com/view...269245#p269245. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

21st November 2014, 01:15 PM  #167 
Species Traitor
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 3,614

Gorgeous diagrams, they remind me of minimalistic mathematical art.
Strictly out of curiosity, how did you generate this image. 
__________________
>^.^< 

21st November 2014, 03:25 PM  #168 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Thank you dear Dessi, and also thank you for the beautiful link.
I used AutoCad without any programing, in this case. But I know to write programs with AutoLisp. Please look at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3h...ew?usp=sharing. Thank you. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

21st November 2014, 05:25 PM  #169 
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,063

Yes, I know you were inviting Dessi to read that, but I decided to read it again after several years. I see you've cleaned it up a little, removed some tangents that obscure your intentions.
Ah, Friend vs Enemy, so simplistic. It doesn't allow for the complexity of Human cooperation, that you express with the colorful diagram. Friends and enemies get subsumed under larger umbrellas where they are allies in face of the next outsider threat. And if only we could come to an ecology of total inclusion, where there is one mega umbrella that we all live under and nobody outside that. How to mathematically express that Ultimate Inclusion, that's been your quest these many years. If there were just a Mathematics of Inclusive relationship, a language that entailed Right Relationship whenever it was spoken, then our Science and Engineering would have a conscience. That's what it's all about isn't it? I'm reminded of Nicholas De Cusa's circle of infinite radius. With it's circumference at infinity, it includes all. There is no exclusive center, but each and every one included is central. This is a mathematical analog, using mathematics as a parable. Another might be the Mobius Strip that has no sides. Or the Klein Bottle that has no inside vs outside. But Doron, do we really need an elaborate system to get the simple lesson? There's such a thing as regarding each other as persons in our own right. I see you as [i]you[i], you aren't primarily of any colorful umbrella. Youaren't included in anything. You aren't the subject of any distinction. You are who you are unconditionally. You may be friend, you may be enemy, you may be frienemy, but I regard you above all those distinctions. You aren't an object of my agendas. You aren't an object pinned on the spacetime continuum or assigned a place in Complexity. You are You. I accept your existence, affirm it as well, unconditionally, without need of an objective, even mathematical, justification. I do this without a special Ethical Logic. I regard you this way without a clue of your Organic Mathematics or the "Direct Perception" you speak of. Everyday there are people who love this way who will never understand your system of umbrellas. Most of them won't even understand the words I'm using now. But they see the You in others. They are empathetic and compassionate. I can see how an engineer wants an ethic that can be tinkered with, just as many find the esoteric system of a religion to appealing. But I prefer seeing you as You rather than an object or element of my ethical system. I want to hold you in my heart, not make you a number in my head. I stopped trying to communicate with you over three years ago just because I couldn't make any progress with your Organic Mathematics. In frustration I almost made a cruel post. So I bowed out. But I have no ill feelings about you. I accept that your Organic Mathematics is necessary to your own process. Please just consider that we humans have other ways of transcending our us vs thems, and will probably survive to send signals to other worlds though none of us are getting your program. 
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections." Justice William O. Douglas "Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures." Author Unknown 

22nd November 2014, 01:30 AM  #170 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Dear Apathia,
This transcending is exactly Unity Consciousness as addressed by neutral monist point of view in http://www.sciencechatforum.com/view...269245#p269245. With all the respect dear Apathia, I think that what you call you in others is not satisfied without both personal AND nonpersonal aspects of you. As for Mathematics, it is the main tool for our technological developments, and if its main stream is based on false\true excluded middle reasoning that also excludes the mathematicians as factors of the results, there is no wonder that our technological developments are fully fulfilled only if the mathematicians eliminating themselves in order to get the requested results, or more generally, human beings have to eliminate themselves in order to fully fulfill technological developments. This is exactly the point where Organic Mathematics gets on stage and its first step is to point out the danger of excluding (pure or applied) mathematicians as an essential factor of their works, which unfortunately has a very high probability of human beings' self destruction as a natural conclusions of the current mainstream reasoning. And the tragedy is that the work of few determine the destiny of the rest of human beings, where the rest of human beings as mathematical laymen have no clue what actually going on, until it is too late. So dear Apathia, your naive approach is too dangerous as a strategic\tactic needed actions. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

22nd November 2014, 09:44 AM  #171 
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,063

Doron,
Unity Consciousness is something I get and have a felt sense for. I don't attache the same same philosophy, politic, and supernatural expectations the TM people do, but I relish the Unity. I'm a neutral monist merely in the sense that I'm an empiricist who doesn't deal with metaphysical substances, be they "mind" or "matter." For me it's just the "Suchness," and the quality of acceptance and inclusion in relation to myself, others and my environment. That quality is my spirituality. It transcends any content about beliefs and languages. It isn't dependent upon a mental framework. It informs and transforms my heart first. From there it's a question of what we do with our tools. Yes technology without heart is crippling, and worse. But heart cannot be an engineered component. Religions and, perhaps, Organic Mathematics, give a language and structure people can use to speak of their spirituality. But empathy and compassion always transcend their systems, and sometimes must even break them. People are more important than religion, ethics and any attempted logic of ethics. But if the perpetuity of the Human Race is dependent upon your system of belief, then we are certainly toast. We don't understand it. It doesn't help. I hope it helps you have heart. I accept it as your process. But alas, the rest of us are as good as retarded. So perhaps it's natural that we will become extinct. You and I have some common ground: Unity Consciousness, natural empathy, and a conscience that wants a better world. You attach these values to your Organic Mathematics. I don't understand how they attach. I don't see how empathy and responsibility follow from .9999999.... does not equal 1. In my opinion things get dangerous when people attach the core values of Humanity to their exclusive religious or ethical system, and then exclude others who don't believe or understand it from being truly Human. You have yet to demonstrate to any of us how your Organic Mathematics actually enhances empathy, compassion, Inclusion, and acceptance. You have not presented it in any sort of way that speaks to the direct perception of our hearts, much less a cogent mental presentation. You need to show us how it works. Have you presented your work to an audience in the Transcendental Meditation Community? I would be interested in how they translate it into their perspective. It may be that someone of that tradition has a view on how it meshes with their philosophy. I don't know how to communicate with you about Organic Mathematics. Ordinary Mathematics is already a struggle for me. So I just have my naive things to speak of. 
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections." Justice William O. Douglas "Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures." Author Unknown 

22nd November 2014, 10:28 AM  #172 
Thinker
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 203

doron,
I know this 7year thread seems arcane to most, but to a set theorist is this stuff just {elementary}? :) 
__________________
RickM Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform  (or pause and reflect). Mark Twain Use what language you will, you can never say anything but what you are. Ralph Waldo Emerson 

22nd November 2014, 10:49 AM  #173 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Very simple, the mathematician's observations' abilities is an essential factor of the results.
Moreover, the linkage between head and heart can't be achieved without us as essential factors of the results or our developed technologies, where the technology of consciousness is exactly the art of the linkage among head and heart, that can't be fully fulfilled only at the multiple aspect of reality. Techniques like TM are simply the natural ability of Consciousness to become aware of itself as Unity, and by achieve this awareness, multiplicity naturally becomes an ever developed harmonious reality. No supernatural woo is involved here exactly because Unity is the foundation among multiplicity but not vise versa. Can we find problems within TM movement?, probably yes. Does it mean that things can't be improved?, probably no. In other words, I am still optimist about the success of techniques like TM, and I wish to use systematic scientific methods in order to improve them in such a way that they will not be depend on any particular movement. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

22nd November 2014, 10:59 AM  #174 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884


__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

22nd November 2014, 12:40 PM  #175 
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,063

In my view Mathematics is both creativity and discovery. It is an Art, a Human expression. It has been integral to changing cultural milieu.
I realize you have views about infinity that aren't in sync with contemporary Mathematics. And it appears you feel that a right view of infinity is essential for a healthy ethic. I haven't been able to understand your right view. You haven't been consistent on the topic. Except that Limits Infinitesimals are hogwash and .9999999.... can never equal one. It may be that in your system it doesn't. That's OK! Mathematics isn't a monolith. An exgirlfriend of seven or eight years ago agreed with you. She said it was very plain to her that you were right. "How can it possibly equal 1? The 9s don't stop!" I suppose she has the Direct Perception you speak of, but I'm afraid it didn't help her be a empathetic and compassionate person. That sad woman has some serious integrity issues. So we must all be able to manipulate this "Technology of Consciousness," or we can only be selfish bastards? Alas, I like the millions, am Organic Mathematics retarded. What helps for me is being aware of my thoughts and feelings and practicing Mindfulness Meditation. May I ask you a personal question? Specifically, with examples, how has Organic Mathematics helped you to be a more mindful, empathetic, compassionate, and accepting person? Show me the heart in it, please. 
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections." Justice William O. Douglas "Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures." Author Unknown 

22nd November 2014, 03:42 PM  #176 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

0.999... = 1 OR 0.999... < 1 according to the mathematician's observation of the realline, and this is exactly what I mean by say that the mathematician is an essential factor of mathematical results.
For more details please read very carefully http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=110. Thoughts and feelings are only the multiplicity aspect of Consciousness. It means that actual awareness of Unity is not systematically achieved, unless you also transcend multiplicity. TM is such technology that systematically and naturally enables direct awareness of Unity. Organic Mathematics is simply my head AND heart view of the need of mathematicians to be aware of themselves as essential factors of pure or applied mathematical results, in order to become naturally responsible human beings. As for me I am more simple and straightforward with my feelings about leaving creatures but only other persons have the right to say if I am empathetic, compassionate, and accepting them. In one thing I can be sure, I am not an enlightened person. I simply love my family and my friends and don't hate anyone. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

22nd November 2014, 06:04 PM  #177 
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,081


__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent."  Galbraith, 1975 

22nd November 2014, 06:23 PM  #178 
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,063

The "OR" Very interesting! I hadn't noticed your point about that till now. You're saying it it's relative to the mathematician's (or exgirlfriend's stance of observation. It may be that it doesn't equal 1 because the 9s don't stop, OR it may equal 1 because the 9s don't stop.
You are positing an ambiguity in Mathematics. I'm not a Mathematician. I suspect that most Mathematicians wouldn't necessarily accept such an ambiguity. But as a someone whose field of study was literature I appreciate ambiguity as a means to create thematic depth. I see how this openness relates to tolerance. Previously, I thought that you were trying to advance a dogmatic position that would not admit the value and utility of modern Mathematics. But I see now you are simply trying to show the inherent openness of Mathematics. Or at least I hope I'm getting you correctly now. I've been burned before.
Quote:
Quote:
"I'm not "Enlightened" either. I'm a fallible Human Being, and as such I have mercy on myself and others. Meditation has encouraged and broadened my mercy and empathy. I don't hate anyone either and want to let go of dogmatic ways of thinking and speaking that put down and exclude others. Thank you for giving your approach its personal and Human context. I'm glad I engaged you again. I don't think I'll ever get the way your Organic Mathematics is supposed to work in practice, but it helps to see the spirit and intent of it. 
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections." Justice William O. Douglas "Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures." Author Unknown 

22nd November 2014, 06:44 PM  #179 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,309


__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

22nd November 2014, 08:10 PM  #180 
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,063

I think he has a perspective with which he tries to stretch and twist mathematical terms to accommodate. The perspective itself is ambiguous and not formally logical.
It bears some similarity to the notions of Complexity expressed in Arthur Koestler's Janus, a summing Up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janus:_A_Summing_Up Doron attempts his own logic and mathematic based on these principles, but the framework doesn't seem robust enough to build the calculus necessary for the equations of physics. Is there ambiguity in Mathematics? Mathematical Logic is certainly no longer the bastion of certainty Bertrand Russell expected it to be. I think that Doron primarily uses the language of Mathematics analogically to express his philosophy. He's happy he can do that with his framework and so isn't concerned about applications beyond his "Technology of Consciousness. He hopes his Organic Mathematics could umbrella contemporary Mathematics as a perspective within it. He hasn't shown how that would work yet. It seemed to me back seven years ago that his position was that Euclid had led mathematics astray, so that now it is simply wrong. Now it looks like he's taking a more tolerant view. There's the old split over whether Mathematics is created or discovered. The Neutral Monist view is that it is both. Doron sees that as a place to assert Humanity into Science. He feels his framework leaves room for the humanities to wiggle. Yes, I've walked out onto the plank again. It's very possible that Doron will give me a shove in his next reply, and I'll be wrong for suggesting that his use of the word "OR" had any significance. But that's OK. It will simply show things as they are. 
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections." Justice William O. Douglas "Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures." Author Unknown 

22nd November 2014, 09:48 PM  #181 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Hey psionl0,
Please look at http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=163. 0.999... = 1 if N fast observation is used. 0.999... < 1 if more than N fast observation is used. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

22nd November 2014, 09:51 PM  #182 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

You are wrong dear Apathia, please look at http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=181.
My suggested view of the realline (and also the view beyond it) is more accurate than the traditional point of view that uses only ∞ to describe Infinity, in this discussed case. Moreover, I don't care if transfinite cardinality is discovered or invented. I do care about the mathematician's abilities to use it as a part of his\her mathematical work, in this discussed case. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

22nd November 2014, 10:29 PM  #183 
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,081


__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent."  Galbraith, 1975 

22nd November 2014, 11:04 PM  #184 
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,063

Yup! I was wrong about Ambiguity.
Organic Mathematics has out raced me again. I can't even keep up with the "fast observation." And since I realize that I'm not going to get what you mean by a "fast observation" as opposed to a "more than fast observation," I'm not going to speculate or attempt to understand. Grace and peace, Doron. I wish I could understand this topic which is so fine and important to you. I wish I could find a common place of understanding we could work with. But again, I'm not confident I understand any word you say. We don't share a common language. So please just accept a smile, as I leave you to whatever is going on here with the wish that it gives you happiness. 
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections." Justice William O. Douglas "Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures." Author Unknown 

23rd November 2014, 08:03 AM  #185 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,309


__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

23rd November 2014, 08:10 AM  #186 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,309

No, your "suggested view" abandons meaning. The notation 0.999... has a precise meaning, and that meaning gives it a precise value, and that value is 1. Make up as many excuses as you like about points and speed blended with an unending supply of strawmen, and the value remains unchanged.

__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

23rd November 2014, 01:01 PM  #187 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Please look at http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=158.

__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

23rd November 2014, 01:03 PM  #188 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Also please look at http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=158 (including the links).

__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

23rd November 2014, 01:06 PM  #189 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Wrong jsfisher, I simply communicate with Dessi, as seen in http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=158.

__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

23rd November 2014, 01:10 PM  #190 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

The meaning is given by observation, as done in http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=158.
Your observation is simply limited only to N. More details are given in http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=110 and http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7&postcount=73. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

23rd November 2014, 04:06 PM  #191 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,309


__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

23rd November 2014, 04:07 PM  #192 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,309


__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

23rd November 2014, 06:38 PM  #193 
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,081

Your diagram appears to depict the building of a set whose elements are the empty set and sets of sets containing the empty set. If you continue the building process indefinitely, you would have a "countably infinite" set.
I still don't see what any of that has to do with "fast observation" or "Infinitely fast". 
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent."  Galbraith, 1975 

24th November 2014, 09:22 AM  #194 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Again, what you call Mathematics is simply N observation of the realline.
Fortunately Mathematics is not restricted only to this particular observation, as seen in http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=110. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

24th November 2014, 09:40 AM  #195 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

Please read all of http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=158 including the links.
Thank you. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

26th November 2014, 02:19 AM  #196 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884


__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

26th November 2014, 06:52 AM  #197 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,309


__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

26th November 2014, 03:28 PM  #198 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=190.
The mathematical meaning of 0.999... is changed by observation, or in other words, the mathematician is an essential factor of the meaning of a given mathematical object. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

26th November 2014, 03:47 PM  #199 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,309

Pointing back to a previous post of yours doesn't suddenly make it do what it did not do before. You did not define anything in that prior post; you mostly pointed to yet other previous posts where you also failed to define anything.
Perhaps rather than reiterating empty statements by URL proxy, you could simply post, in one place, a definition for one of these madeup terms of yours.
Quote:

__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

26th November 2014, 09:22 PM  #200 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,884


__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

Bookmarks 
Thread Tools  

