Double K Posted June 7, 2010 Posted June 7, 2010 In some way he is onto 'something'. He has discovered a virtuous circle (positive feedback loop) however how he arrived at assigning 1 to everything still has me baffled. Clipper, why is a positive action 1 and a negative action still 1? It would seem to make more sense to be a binary system, 1 for a truth, 0 for a lie. Or even a +ve integer for a truth and -ve integer for a lie. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtuous_circle_and_vicious_circle A virtuous circle or a vicious circle is a complex of events that reinforces itself through a feedback loop. A virtuous circle has favorable results, and a vicious circle has detrimental results. A virtuous circle can transform into a vicious circle if eventual negative feedback is ignored. Both circles are complexes of events with no tendency towards equilibrium (at least in the short run). Both systems of events have feedback loops in which each iteration of the cycle reinforces the first (positive feedback). These cycles will continue in the direction of their momentum until an external factor intervenes and breaks the cycle. The prefix "hyper-" is sometimes used to describe these cycles. I know this isn't exactly directly applicable but I hope you can see the relevance.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback Positive feedback, sometimes referred to as "cumulative causation", refers to situations where some force is amplified, then summed to its input.
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 It's because everything is opposites, existing only as opposites. 1 - 1, are opposites of each other. Like one of you would say, 'disorder' between one and another - along a time line. ( 1 - 1 ). You could even think of it as a 2 sided windmill, spinning. For example: Magnets, they have exactly the same effect both sides, but are opposites of each other. (+ +) Nothing to something would appear as: (- -) - (+ +)
iNow Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 Shannon legaci Squar3one Clipper ... Whatever your current incarnation... If you truly believe this tripe you keep posting at science forums across the net, then I fear you may have dangerously lost touch with reality, and should seek help. I sincerely mean this, and in the spirit of kindness. The detachment you show from anything even remotely realistic is troubling. It's okay to dream. It's good to imagine. However, we need to keep the threads of those mental activities rooted a valid existential space. Don't lose your passion, but for the love of Thor... Give up the nonsense and numerology, will ya?
Double K Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 "For if there were any solid body in equipoise at the centre of the universe, there would be nothing to draw it to this extreme rather than to that, for they are all perfectly similar; and if a person were to go round the world in a circle, he would often, when standing at the antipodes of his former position, speak of the same point as above and below; for, as I was saying just now, to speak of the whole which is in the form of a globe as having one part above and another below is not like a sensible man." Plato Is this then the justification for assigning '1' to everything? As everything referred to is diametrically opposed. In some ways this would reinforce the buddhist principle of yin-yang. The christian principle of heaven-hell. & possibly many other religions which I am not familiar enough with to comment on.
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 Also, forgot to mention E = MC2 1. [God] [Heaven and Earth]2. [Face of the Deep - Face of the Waters] [Darkness- "Spirit of God"] 3. *lie* *truth* 4. good*truth* [Face of the Light] [Face of the Dark] 5. [Day (x2) - Night x2] [Evening - Morning] 6. *lie* 7. [firmanentA - firminateB] *truth* 8. [firmanentA2 firminantB2] - [Day4 Night4] E (1) = MC(Heaven Earth) 2 (God) Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedI'm being Symbolic, I'm not looking at the bible through a human perspective. I'm talking of the (1 - 1) second of the universe.
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 The mean the first 'things' that came to existence. Heaven and Earth represent, ExistingThing1 and ExistingThing2. The 1st whatever that began in the universe.
Double K Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 Yeah before we go too far down the path of expanding on the formula, lets assertain how the numbers were assigned. You need to convince us that the numbers have a meaning in context of a phrase or action. I'm still not clear on how you arrived at everything being '1'
swansont Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 Also, forgot to mention E = MC2 E (1) = MC(Heaven Earth) 2 (God) Why is God 2 in this case, but 1 in others?
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 God is the set, (1 - 1) - he is always 2 1.First, God created the Heaven and Earth2 the '1.' is essentially (nothing). 1 - God would be 1 - (1 - 1) Heaven Earth could be seen as E = 2MC Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedI didn't even write it correct; but I'm starting to believe the saying part IS lies.
mooeypoo Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 God is the set, (1 - 1) - he is always 2 You have to justify this, otherwise the rest makes no sense. Why is God (1 - 1) and not 0 or 10, or 100, or 5? BTW, (1 - 1) isn't a set. the '1.' is essentially (nothing). 1 is something by definition. It's one. Zero is said to be 'nothing'. 1 - Godwould be 1 - (1 - 1) Heaven Earth could be seen as E = 2MC This is wordsalad. The sentence makes no sense. I didn't even write it correct; but I'm starting to believe the saying part IS lies. Science isn't about belief, so either you show us a theory or you're spewing wordsalad here that you don't even think is right yourself. I don't think I understand what you mean. Worse, I don't think *you* know what you mean. ~moo p.s - it's E=MC^2, not E=2MC, which, I think, you mean.
Phi for All Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 I didn't even write it correct; but I'm starting to believe the saying part IS lies.The crazy got Clipper.
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 Well I understand what I'm thinking, I'm probably wrong, but it's nice working out happenings in the bible before it happens. I mean ' E = M C Squared ' Exactly the same as Energy, but swapping Speed of Light and Mass for Heaven and Earth.
mooeypoo Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 Well I understand what I'm thinking, I'm probably wrong, but it's nice working out happenings in the bible before it happens. Of course it works - you force the evidence in. It makes no sense, though.
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 Okay, maybe I just got carried away; I'm probably looking at it too simply.
iNow Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 Please read our rules. Thread closed.Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedFine, people seem to beg to waste their time with this. I will repeat the request, however, that Clipper avoid from *lecturing* to people and instead practice proper scientific discussion with evidence, reference and substantiation. Have fun. Any chance your original judgment can be recognized for it's appropriateness and reinstated?
mooeypoo Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 Any chance your original judgment can be recognized for it's appropriateness and reinstated? Ask ydoAps. I believe it was him who "pwned" me into reopening the thread.
iNow Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 While I've always thoroughly enjoyed reading the posts of the guy, I was unaware that ydoaps had any influence over staff decisions and actions here.
mooeypoo Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 While I've always thoroughly enjoyed reading the posts of the guy, I was unaware that ydoaps had any influence over staff decisions and actions here. Only when he pwns the queen of pwns. Seriously, though, this is in speculation for a reason. You can just ignore it. The staff is participating in this thread, and are aware of it. Not to worry, we'll close it when we think it needs closing. Until then, feel free to take it off your notify list, I don't think it would be that much of a loss for your thread queue.
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 What is the current 'Final Frontier' theory? Time met light, bang? (no sarcasm intended)
michel123456 Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 A good reading, small book from Dennis Guedj, Numbers: The Universal Language, transl. Lory Frankel. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc. Publishers (1997): available at the MOMA in the U.S. Ancient greeks believed number 1 was the equal of existence. I think Clipper is about saying the same (he is thus right but 2500 years too late). If he had posed 0-1 (as proposed by KK) instead of 1-1, he would have reached Leibnitz (350 years ago). If he wants to reach the present, he should realize that in his statement 1-1 there are 2 concepts: _a. There is the number 1, which is the existence (see the Greeks, or fermions in current science) _b. There is the connection sign - (see bosons in current science) IMO it is too elementary to see any god in those. If god(s) is (are) somewhere, it(they) cannot be in the elementary small, but in the infinite big (but that is for a religion forum).
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 Name one thing in existence that doesn't have an opposite.
Double K Posted June 8, 2010 Posted June 8, 2010 How about if we use a numerological set to break down god? G = 7 (th letter of the alphabet) O = 15 (th) 1+5=6 D = 4 (th) 7+6+4 = 17 = 1+7 = 8 GOD = 8 Q.E.D. Or... GOD =
Clipper Posted June 8, 2010 Author Posted June 8, 2010 (edited) You're doing it in a different way to me. He just sits, and watches the people in the boxes Everything he sees he absorbs and adopts it He mimics and he mocks it Really hates the box but he can't remember how to stop, it So he continues to watch it Hoping that it'll give him something that he can box with Or how the locksmith, see the box as, locked in the box Ain't got the combination to unlock, it That's why he watch-es, scared to look away Cause at that moment, it might show him What to take off the locks with So he chained himself to the box, took a lock and then he locked it Swallowed the combination and then forgot, it As the doctors jot it all down, with they pens and pencils The same ones that took away his voice And just left this instrumental, like that And he never lies And he never lies And he never lies Cause he never said anything at all He just sits, and listens to the people in the boxes Everything he hears he absorbs and adopts it Anything not coming out the box he blocks it See he loves to box and hope they never stop it Anything the box tell him to do, he does it Anything it tell him to get, he shops and he cops it He protects the box, locks it in a box when he goes to sleep, but he never sleeps Cause he stays up to watch it, scared to look away Cause at that moment, it might get stolen And that's the last of the boxes So he chained himself to the box, took a lock and then he locked it Swallowed the combination and then forgot, it As the doctors jot it all down, with they pens and pencils The same ones that took away his voice And just left this instrumental, like that He never lies And you can't tell me just who you are You buy new clothes just to hide those scars You built that roof just to hide those stars Now you can't take it back to the start And you can't tell me just who you are You buy new clothes just to hide those scars You built that roof just to hide those stars Now you can't take it back to the start and you can't tell me just who you are You buy new clothes just to hide those scars You built that roof just to hide those stars Now you can't take it back to the start And you can't tell me just who you are You buy new clothes just to hide those scars You built that roof just to hide those stars Now you can't take it back to the start Edited June 8, 2010 by Clipper
Recommended Posts