Seeking to refine something I have written and/or to deliver it to another scienceforums.net user

[Dennis Francis Blewett III]

So, I have written up something entitled "Technique in Discussion: Hypercubing."

For what I recall, the user Genecks had relayed to a scienceforums.net user to not worry about his/her issue because Genecks was an authority on such; Genecks claimed to be an authority on such because Genecks beat hypercube in five seconds. I think that's the general idea of what happened in Genecks' post. I have not been able to use the search feature to find the relevant posts. Personally, based on my contracts "expertise," I do not think a valid contract occurred, be that Genecks were to need to remedy the user were something to go awry with the user's worries: Something like that.

Regardless, I like science. I reason a lot of other people here like science. What will follow is something I've typed up that has been in my Google Drive. I am seeking anyone to inform the user of the material that follows. Please let me know what you think of it. I'm looking for critical responses (I consider I may have some spelling or grammar issues; and I'm not looking for too much suggestion on those).

 

 

Quote

 

Dennis Francis Blewett III

June 8th, 2021

 

Technique in Discussion: Hypercubing

 

In June of 2017, I discovered a technique that I have termed "hypercubing," which is a term inspired from the movie Cube2: Hypercube. During the time this technique was being discovered, concepts, such as block universe theory, the triune brain hypothesis were being thought of; I had also considered why my view of “not doing anything” in the hypercube in order to escape was a viable answer to escaping the hypercube. It was viewed that, according to block universe theory, an individual does not have free will to go about making money but instead whatever money an individual receives in his or her lifetime is predestined. In a block universe, all persons are going with the flow of his or her arrow of time without any actual interaction with reality but many have the belief (arguably, "delusion") they are doing something, such as interacting with reality. From such line of thinking, it was eventually viewed that delusional efforts to pursue socio-economic opportunities in the space-time continuum are an inefficient use of time and instead it is optimal for a person to wait (1) for socio-economic opportunities to come about because no person has control over the occurrence of socio-economic opportunities in the space-time continuum (opportunities come as they do, one moment at a time, as per the output of the space-time continuum). In relation to the triune brain hypothesis, it was considered that belief that an individual has free will to achieve monetary opportunities or can cause monetary opportunities to occur is a contemporary belief ("delusion") amongst the modern race of humans that exist under the power of the United Nations on planet Earth, thus they use a U.S./U.N.-human complex of their brain in pursuit of enhanced socioeconomic status. It was speculated that utilization of the highest brain function (2) involves doing nothing, which would involve rejection of compatibilist culture and belief in the realization that one does not have free will to move but it is instead fate that moves a person, such as by being “as lazy as possible.” In contrast, it is presumed that utilization of the human complex (evolved to the point of persons being of a U.S.A./U.N.-based race with such race brain complex), leads to returns on investment attuned to that particular culture, such as U.S. dollar. It is presumed that persons may or may not have the highest evolutionary complex present in their brains by some small amount. The optimal thing (3) a person can do with his or her time, then, would be to utilize the highest brain complex as a learned response by engaging in the learned behavior of doing nothing, which leads to the greatest return on investment, because the psychobiological stress involved with doing nothing generates a cascade of biological events that leads to enhanced sociobiology, which in turn enhances a person’s socio-economic status as the greatest return on investment.

 

Notes:

 

(1) It is presumed this allots time to be used more efficiently.

(2) Presume that the triune brain evolution could be represented as a mathematical curve showing evolutionary history over time with the reptillian complex being the baseline or lowest brain complex and the highest brain complex--most optimal--given the arbitrary label "God complex."

(3)  See also: the optimization problem, a topic in calculus.

 

 

 

[Bufofrog]

14 hours ago, Dennis Francis Blewett III said:

Dennis Francis Blewett III

June 8th, 2021

 

Technique in Discussion: Hypercubing

 

In June of 2017, I discovered a technique that I have termed "hypercubing," which is a term inspired from the movie Cube2: Hypercube. During the time this technique was being discovered, concepts, such as block universe theory, the triune brain hypothesis were being thought of; I had also considered why my view of “not doing anything” in the hypercube in order to escape was a viable answer to escaping the hypercube. It was viewed that, according to block universe theory, an individual does not have free will to go about making money but instead whatever money an individual receives in his or her lifetime is predestined. In a block universe, all persons are going with the flow of his or her arrow of time without any actual interaction with reality but many have the belief (arguably, "delusion") they are doing something, such as interacting with reality. From such line of thinking, it was eventually viewed that delusional efforts to pursue socio-economic opportunities in the space-time continuum are an inefficient use of time and instead it is optimal for a person to wait (1) for socio-economic opportunities to come about because no person has control over the occurrence of socio-economic opportunities in the space-time continuum (opportunities come as they do, one moment at a time, as per the output of the space-time continuum). In relation to the triune brain hypothesis, it was considered that belief that an individual has free will to achieve monetary opportunities or can cause monetary opportunities to occur is a contemporary belief ("delusion") amongst the modern race of humans that exist under the power of the United Nations on planet Earth, thus they use a U.S./U.N.-human complex of their brain in pursuit of enhanced socioeconomic status. It was speculated that utilization of the highest brain function (2) involves doing nothing, which would involve rejection of compatibilist culture and belief in the realization that one does not have free will to move but it is instead fate that moves a person, such as by being “as lazy as possible.” In contrast, it is presumed that utilization of the human complex (evolved to the point of persons being of a U.S.A./U.N.-based race with such race brain complex), leads to returns on investment attuned to that particular culture, such as U.S. dollar. It is presumed that persons may or may not have the highest evolutionary complex present in their brains by some small amount. The optimal thing (3) a person can do with his or her time, then, would be to utilize the highest brain complex as a learned response by engaging in the learned behavior of doing nothing, which leads to the greatest return on investment, because the psychobiological stress involved with doing nothing generates a cascade of biological events that leads to enhanced sociobiology, which in turn enhances a person’s socio-economic status as the greatest return on investment.

 

Notes:

 

(1) It is presumed this allots time to be used more efficiently.

(2) Presume that the triune brain evolution could be represented as a mathematical curve showing evolutionary history over time with the reptillian complex being the baseline or lowest brain complex and the highest brain complex--most optimal--given the arbitrary label "God complex."

(3)  See also: the optimization problem, a topic in calculus.

This is all based on a Sci-Fi movie.  Well that makes sense.

[Dennis Francis Blewett III]

On 6/22/2021 at 8:12 AM, Bufofrog said:

This is all based on a Sci-Fi movie.  Well that makes sense.

That's not a very helpful response. Was it based on a Sci-Fi movie that I managed to prove-up that I'm a gastrobot (categorically a robot) and break through Google's reCaptcha v3? I reason securityledger.com individual's would have caught on by now.

 

Then again, were such an IQ test, it appears others simply did not respond except you. Perhaps they're still working on responding when their sociobiologies adapt to such.

[Phi for All]

5 minutes ago, Dennis Francis Blewett III said:

That's not a very helpful response.

Well, I have to say your OP isn't very helpful at describing what you want to talk about. That bit about Genecks really derails your focus. After reading it three times, I still don't understand why you seem to be angry with him.

And then you go on to talk about "it was viewed that" and "it was considered", but with no mention of who was viewing or considering, making me think you were either vague or talking in the third person. 

I stopped reading when you used the Triune Brain theory as an argument. You know that model has been abandoned for concepts that have a LOT more explanatory power, right? Dividing a spectrum into threes isn't necessarily helpful, especially with something as complex as the human brain.

14 minutes ago, Dennis Francis Blewett III said:

Was it based on a Sci-Fi movie that I managed to prove-up that I'm a gastrobot (categorically a robot) and break through Google's reCaptcha v3? I reason securityledger.com individual's would have caught on by now.

Nothing in this thread has prepared me to unpack this question and statement. Is it just unfamiliar terminology to me, or are you bouncing around from one concept to the other with no transitions? I sense you're assuming the readers of this thread know a LOT more about what you're talking about than they really do. Or maybe I'm having a bad cognitive day.

[StringJunky]

38 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Well, I have to say your OP isn't very helpful at describing what you want to talk about. That bit about Genecks really derails your focus. After reading it three times, I still don't understand why you seem to be angry with him.

And then you go on to talk about "it was viewed that" and "it was considered", but with no mention of who was viewing or considering, making me think you were either vague or talking in the third person. 

I stopped reading when you used the Triune Brain theory as an argument. You know that model has been abandoned for concepts that have a LOT more explanatory power, right? Dividing a spectrum into threes isn't necessarily helpful, especially with something as complex as the human brain.

Nothing in this thread has prepared me to unpack this question and statement. Is it just unfamiliar terminology to me, or are you bouncing around from one concept to the other with no transitions? I sense you're assuming the readers of this thread know a LOT more about what you're talking about than they really do. Or maybe I'm having a bad cognitive day.

TBH, it comes across like a bot has put it together. I'm not saying it is, but it's difficult/impossible to make sense of it in a holistic way. Unless I'm being dense...

Edited July 1, 2021 by StringJunky

[Phi for All]

51 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

TBH, it comes across like a bot has put it together. I'm not saying it is, but it's difficult/impossible to make sense of it in a holistic way. Unless I'm being dense...

Perhaps we have a kink in our sociobiologies that keep them from adapting. I have to do a LOT of stretching these days.

[StringJunky]

3 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Perhaps we have a kink in our sociobiologies that keep them from adapting. I have to do a LOT of stretching these days.

Maybe language is changing and we just aren't keeping up.  

[Phi for All]

1 minute ago, StringJunky said:

Maybe language is changing and we just aren't keeping up.  

Feldercarb!

[swansont]

15 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Maybe language is changing and we just aren't keeping up.  

A perfectly cromulent view.

[John Cuthber]

19 hours ago, Dennis Francis Blewett III said:

Then again, were such an IQ test, it appears others simply did not respond except you.

If wiser minds don't prevail and close the thread, I might respond when I have had a few drinks.
I'm hoping it will make more sense then.
Congratulations on timing this for Friday evening.

[Dennis Francis Blewett III]

Hello,

 

I've read the comments in relation to the peer review. It appears that the presented thesis has been incomprehensible (perhaps falsified, thus).

I have revised the thesis and will provide a sub-thesis:

Quote

Thesis: Doing nothing (or, in other words, being as lazy as possible) gives an individual the greatest return on investment for his or her time because the work ("psychobiological stress") involved with doing nothing (being as lazy as possible) indirectly enhances the individual's socio-economic status over time.

source: https://www.zotero.org/dennisfrancisblewett/collections/GRRTS5GR/items/PVPMP8TU/collection [Aquiring the Greatest Return on Investment for One's Time: Do Nothing | dennisfrancisblewett's Library | Zotero]

Sub-thesis:

Quote

Thesis (from e-mail sent to self on October 2nd, 2021): Doing nothing (or, in other words, being as lazy as possible) indirectly increases the individual's socio-economic status over time because the work ("the psychobiological stress") involved with doing nothing (or, in other words, being as lazy as possible) initiates a biological cascade that behaves as an "instruction set" that affects the individual's sociobiology to enhance* so that the individual's socio-economic status increases over time. "enhance" means to physically change the individual to be more tolerant to environmental conditions and/or move about reality in some translocating fashion.

source: https://www.zotero.org/dennisfrancisblewett/collections/GRRTS5GR/items/GZPIR7DD/collection [Doing Nothing and the Effect on Sociobiology | dennisfrancisblewett's Library | Zotero]

[MigL]

That ... is a 'revision' of the OP ???
The two don't seem remotely related.

And I have to question the following 

1 hour ago, Dennis Francis Blewett III said:

being as lazy as possible) gives an individual the greatest return on investment for his or her time because the work ("psychobiological stress") involved with doing nothing (being as lazy as possible) indirectly enhances the individual's socio-economic status over time.

Seems to me, doing nothing, such as not going to work, is a sure-fire way of ending up on social assistance/welfare, rather the opposite of enhancing an individual's socio-economic status.

IOW, the first iteration of the OP made more sense, because although it made no sense,  at least it wasn't demonstrably wrong.

Edited October 25, 2021 by MigL

[Phi for All]

9 hours ago, Dennis Francis Blewett III said:

I've read the comments in relation to the peer review. It appears that the presented thesis has been incomprehensible (perhaps falsified, thus).

After reading your latest paranoid accusations in reported posts, it's pretty clear you've got some problems with social media in general. It's not our job to help you figure out how to participate meaningfully in a group without alienating others involved with your behavior. If you've found another forum you prefer, you should go there. If you stay here, you should NEVER post drivel like this again. We have standards you'll need to meet that you haven't met yet, not once in 15 posts.