Saturday, September 28, 2013

I posted

my design for an Ideal Webpage: http://www.nathancoppedge.com/Ideal_Webpage.html with characteristic creativity and symbolism.

Friday, September 27, 2013

Encyclopedia Developments

In the Dimensional Biologist's Toolkit (2015), a sense of how elaborate arguments for survival create equity fatui.

In the Dimensional Economist's Toolkit (2024), the introduction of a history model, in which:

The population difficulty in demand terms 
is the competing consumer information for 
peak population consumption when the peak 
of consumption including demand for 
populations based on information is information 
which is a product of consumption when it is 
still possible that the loss of consumption has 
information value.

In the Dimensional Physics Toolkit (2025), the aforementioned 78 Binary Laws of Physics.

In the Dimensional Time Travel Toolkit (~2027), 84 related methods of time-travel, consisting of 21 quadrae.

If I were the inventor of perpetual motion this would give me grounds to believe I had time traveled at some point, perhaps even by my own volition (theoretically).

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

A Work of Atheistic Theology

People who believe in God have a reason to avoid evil.

History, however insignificant, is written by those with a pure heart.

Those who consciously realize the accomplishments of good people are themselves significant, however insignificant their reward.

The puzzle of immortality is, from the mortal position, at least the discovery of good people by those who are insignificant, and is not necessarily the doing of evil things by significant people.


Uncertainty Principle in Psychology

From Appendix XVI of the Dimensional Psychologist's Toolkit (2014):

(1) Determined or undetermined, there is no rational reason to feel defended, because defense is an artificial emotion; (2) There is no certain defense of happiness, because happiness involves defense of emotion; (3) People who are happy are defended; (4) Authentic emotions are not a defense, because they require an authentic defense; But an authentic defense cannot be absolute (change, death, etc.); Authentic emotion raises authentic questions; Authentic people are gamblers; To ask questions, whether or not they are authentic, is required unless someone is omniscient, by virtue of the fact that life involves inquiry; The exception is utter folly; One can reject facts, or one can conclude that ignorance is god, or one must ask questions; To avoid authentic questions, one cannot be authentic; (5) Happiness, sadness, or doubt, the conclusion is that matter is the brain, and it has no defense, since defense is an artificial emotion; Evidently, consciousness is a free event on real estate where there is or is not a poison; Unless life is determinate, and if it were, it would be arbitrary::


(Nathan Coppedge, pre-release)

What Are the Dates of Nathan Coppedge's Unpatented Inventions and Inspirations?

(1999: Informs Israel of Downdraft Energy Tower Concept)

(2000:
Experiments with Cubism)

(2001 - 2002:
Lost sanity)

2003:
Coherent Philosophy Unity Diagram
Ornate Style of Hyper-Cubism

(2004:
Took hiatus from Hyper-Cubism,
wrote poetry)

2005:
Non-Ornate Hyper-Cubist Work
Grav-Buoy Device (at this point equivalent to Frank Tatay's design)
CatSpur Shoes
Compensation Clothing

2006:
Iteration 2 of Grav-Buoyancy
Curve-Rail
Motive Mass Machine
Repeat Lever
Tilt Motor
Continues Hyper-Cubism

2007:
Coquette
'50 Miscellaneous Devices' or 50-Devices-Reached (ambiguous)
Continues Hyper-Cubism, feels uninspired
Gains Job at Public Library

(2008:
Gives Knowledge Generation Bureau info about relative status as inventor)

(2009:
Moves to Howe St., Loses Job
Organizes philosophical thoughts, continues artwork)

(2010:
Meets Colleen Conlon, she moves away. Conflictive behavior ensues.
Uninspired about perpetual motion.
Circa 40 - 80 Ornate Works Lost at Cafe (in addition to the 440 or so given away)

2011:
(Moves to Orange St. in September)
Bezel-Weight
Complete Categorical Deduction Method, while writing Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit
Continues Hyper-Cubism, feels slightly more inspired

2012:
1st Magnet Concept
Inspired Hyper-Cubism
Begins Writing Secret Principles of Immortality at Ezinearticles.com
Begins to sell art at Etsy.com

2013:
Continues Digital Overlapping Hyper-Cubic Works
My first painting that Looks Like a Picasso
Coherent Categorical Deduction
The Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit published.
Successful Over-Unity Experiment 1 (popular video)

2014:
Extensive articles published.
Method for solving all paradoxes (paroxysm)
Several artworks sold online for the first time.
Granted a minor philosophy award.

2015:
The Metaphysical Art
How to Build a 21-Dimensional Universe
Lever can lift its fulcrum.
Expanded psychic methods around this time.

2016:
Famous Quotable on Poemhunter
Extensive Systems Theory page (100+ systems also published as a book)
First device that functions almost like a perpetual motion machine (Pendulum 1).
Ignore the Elephant, flawless Hyper-Cubism
Granted membership in PESWiki (free energy alliance).
How to Build a 100-Dimensional Universe
Brand-name design concept
Method of devising the souls of literature (Library of Alexandria concept)
Top Writer in Quora categories such as Perpetual Motion, Analytic Philosophy and Modernism




Perpetual Motion Holidays

I have delayed too long in communicating the secret holidays of perpetual motion.

Mischief Night, 2006: Invention of the Tilt Motor, 1st Day of Perpetual Motion

What I remember is that I time-traveled back to the eve of (day before) mischief night, after inventing the Tilt Motor around 11pm, Mischief Night, 2006.

4/16/2007: Day of 5 Devices, 2nd Day of Perpetual Motion

4/26/2007: Day of 50 Devices, 3rd Day of Perpetual Motion

A Volitional History: Philosophical Developments Related to Perpetual Motion

~1000 BC 'Prokriti'

~500 BC Cosmos
              Prophecy

~400 BC Theori

~1 AD 'Love'

~100 AD Sainthood

~300 AD Popular Physics Education

~1500 AD Mechanical Mind (Information)
                Empiricism (Natural Law)

~1700 Calculation (Decidability)
          Categorical Imperative (Decision-Making)

~1800 AD Philosophy of Process (Doing Something)
                Pragmatical Thought (Functionalism)

~1900 AD Nihilism (Denial Without God)
               Psychology (Academic Soul)
               Computer Programming (Virtual Mechanics)

~2000 AD Meaningful System (Coherent Categorical Deduction)

Precedents for Perpetual Motion

The Wheel (~4000 BC, and independently in the New World)

Failed Wheels (The Bhaskara Wheel, 1150)

Toilet (John Harrington's Flush Toilet, 1596)

Fuel-Based Motor (Michael Faraday,1821)

Bicycle (Starley's Modern Bicycle, 1885)

Energy Using Sprinklers and Differences in Air-Pressure 
(Philip Carson's Downdraft Energy Tower), 1975, introduced 2013

Sunday, September 22, 2013

Some Significances for Perpetual Motion

Relative Immortality (my aunt's name is Athena)

Math Advances, such as Recursive Values Complexiter

Ideas to Compliment Virtual Reality (e.g. tangible ideas)

A Work-Out for Depression

Fuel for the Imagination

A Reason to Have Big Ears

Dimensional Economics ("more money")

Free-Will Meets Fate (Volitional Mechanics)

A Reason to Time Travel (Historic Landmark of Economics)


Semiotic Things on the Horizon for Perpetual Motion

The Old Yes - The answer to neglected problems;

The Perfect Object - "Things" which are not nonsense;

The Gradual Quest - The road to greater things;

Liberated Machines - Machines not enslaved to humans;

Definite Work - Labor that is reliable to watch;

Real Mechanical Clocks - That don't need ratcheting;

Symbols of Immortality - Machines, thus, man, can be long-lived;

Profits for Heaven - Pain-free work;

The Work of the Mind - Genuine products of intelligence;

The New Horizon - A changeable industrial landscape;

Add to this: (A) New archetypes, such as mobile buildings
and full-scale toy cars, leisure jobs, free-food factories, thinking government;
(B) Another rags-to-riches story;
(C) The justice of the first machines;

Saturday, September 21, 2013

A Collection of Favorite or Desired Words

Episophy, Macrosophy, Microsophy, and Mesosophy

Ismics, Metempsychic, Prosthetic (said of arguments)

Mutible (a word for changeable)

Portrage (a serving of soup)

Travail (as a word for travel)

Mediocriticism (as a play on mediocrity)

Mereology - the study of how something is found, as of syntax or status quo

Phronesis - practical knowledge, sometimes interpreted as morals

Parametric - said of something like isometry

Corruvulated - rivuled, spinnioned

Ecstatic - very excited, riveted, fanatic

Expectorate - deliberate, analyze

Hypocritical - disingenuous

Involution - reversal

Latitude - willingness, compatibility

Melange - variety, miscellany

Paragon - emblematic idyll

Phrasis - high phrase, or language body

Proverse - verse elect, that is, a sanguine parser

Remand - subject to a contrary demand

Sui Generis - typical in general

Supplication - donations, homily

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Concomitant Theories

Less original theories which converge:

"Wisdom is knowledge, systems are practical"

"Happy is very happy" (I disagree with this one)

"Intelligence comes early and proof comes late"

"Architects are bald and gardeners tear their beards"

"Broad claims are those that witness facts"

"Fruit rots that is not eaten"

"Fortes are scintillations"

"Possibility is prose, theory is science"

"Capacity is an architect, visions are elisions"

"Products forget capacities and remember images"

"Nothing is quite identical to any one situation"

"Design betrays motivation, always"

"Fortune is the impossibility of dissatisfaction, however limited"

Systementologist Quotes by Nathan Coppedge

"Systems are applications"

"Quality is culture"

"Categories are really the standard of standardization"

"There is a context for every subject"

"The amelioration of jagged potencies is really the second center"

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Update on Soon-to-be-Published Books (2014)

Tractatus of Dualities will likely be sidelined for now, although it is complete.

I may or may not publish a book on writing aphorisms this coming year.

The plan for the Dimensional Psychologist's Toolkit is going forward.

Saturday, September 14, 2013

Distinguishing Between Analogy and Categorical Deduction

We will use the following terms:

'Good', 'Bad'
'Cat', 'Dog'

An analogy would say that:

Good : Bad :: Cat : Dog

The conclusion would be that dogs are bad, and cats are good.

Simple enough.

An analogy would not draw the comparison as follows:

Good : Dog :: Bad : Cat

Because, according to analogies we could only conclude that we are relating two distinct things, a bad cat and a good dog. Or, so goes the reasoning, we could equally compare a bad dog and a good cat.

Suffice to say, in conventional reasoning (that is, conventional analogy), this type of comparison is considered meaningless. It is considered to be relative, or ambiguous. It is a form of amphiboly.

Consider for stark comparison what happens when, instead of analogy, a categorical deduction is implied in the system.

First, we set up four quadrants, in which opposites are held in diagonal locations.

A. Good. B. Dog. C. Bad. D. Cat

The conclusion is that A. A good dog implies a bad cat, or B. A bad dog implies a good cat.

If cat and dog are indeed opposites, then this holds to be true.

And if they are not opposites, then it could only be a rough analogy. In this way it proves what an analogy cannot prove. Furthermore, it establishes complex conditions which an analogy could not establish.

Consider that 'bad' and 'good' (just like 'cat' and 'dog') are really some of the simplest opposites to choose. In other cases the comparisons are more meaningful. In fact, there is even room for imagination, so long as the oppositeness cannot be disproven.

So it may be that geniuses in the large part of recent history have conducted a major mistake, the Folly of Amphiboly, by assuming that nothing could be drawn from comparisons of opposites, except so-called one-to-one-correlations. In the last several months, I have detected people attempting to re-define the meaning of one-to-one. And I think the simple explanation is that there is a new device, with a new standard of definitions. And it's name is the categorical deduction.

Cite my blog. Or better, buy my book and read the source material, if the above material appeals to your intellect. I hope it's infectious.

Nathan Coppedge is the Inventor of the Categorical Deduction

Here are arguments and supporting evidence for a statement that I am promoting, e.g. that I am the inventor of the most important method of philosophical logic ever invented.

A. As of April 2013, the term 'categorical deduction' was rarely used as a set of connected words. Instances included references to Nathan Coppedge's book, published in January of that year.

B. As the term propogated over the internet over the course of the months since January 2013, I saw many instances of its being misused. For example, when I spoke about the term and related terms on Yahoo! Answers, people often mistakenly believed that it was identical first to a categorical imperative (Immanuel Kant's), and secondly to a categorical syllogism (Aristotle's). In fact, neither of these assumptions is correct. Categorical deduction is a diagrammatic or correspondent, non-causal method of inference.

C. Categorical deduction is a coherent theory method which applies to some degree to any type of information (defined as having a quality) that can be measured as relating to one of any two opposite terms. It is thus utterly different from the categorical imperative, which was specifically a moral claim based on general applied reasoning, rather than a general application which applies a neutral system to language statements.

D. Categorical deduction is not a causal method of inference in the normal sense of the word. It's conclusions often refer to genus categories in a highly absolute sense, but always providing an alternative. However, the alternative has different truth conditions. In this sense, it is highly original. A categorical deduction does not depend on premises in the same way as Aristotelian reasoning. Thus, the distinction between categorical syllogisms and categorical deduction is actually very broad.

Article Published

Secret Principles of Immortality, Edition 25

I'm the author of the previous 24 articles as well. See my Ezine Author page at: http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=Nathan_L_Coppedge


Friday, September 13, 2013

The Sacred Principles of Traditional Economics

We will have as much money as we have
We will not have what we do not have
We will desire what we do not have
We will owe if we do not own what we have
We will have possession if we own what others have
We will earn if we know what we do not have
We will project to determine what we will earn
We will invest so others earn for us
We will disinherit what does not serve our interest
We will stock what is held in demand
We will require our debts are paid to us
We will lend to those in our trust

Signs of the Perpetual Motion Gods

The date was the night of September 12th, 2013

Monday, September 9, 2013

Links To My Earlier Articles on Mathematics, as of September 2013

with some modification.

http://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2015/08/unconventional-arithmetic.html

http://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2013/09/on-incoherency-of-mathematics-primer-on.html

http://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2013/08/categorical-introduction-to-set-theory.html

http://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2013/06/disproof-of-cantors-diagonal-argument.html

http://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Emotional-Cognition-Replacing-Mathematical-Processing?&id=7465381

http://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2012/12/recovered-proof-by-euler-on-irrational.html

http://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2008/11/on-earlier-article-concerning-qualific.html

http://www.nathancoppedge.com/Perpetual_Motion_Theory_Essays_MetaPositivism.html

On the Incoherency of Mathematics, A Primer on Dimensional Mathematics

Part I.

I have acknowledged for some years a stipulation of my studies of philosophy, which is the following:

Systems must be dynamic or they involve work. There are two choices: mechanics or a labor-intensive project. This insight was first introduced by the late philosopher Alfred North Whitehead, who was the progenitor of process philosophy. However, he did not introduce a dynamic system in a coherent sense. That would involve the insight that Aristotle had no exclusive proofs, and that exclusive proofs required the Cartesian Coordinate system, which supposedly only came later.

Anyway, the theory that the choice is between mechanics and labor-intensiveness comes about by considering the alternatives. Those two are really just neutral categories. But, I think, only so many neutrals are possible in extant reasoning. For example, easiness or laziness is one alternate neutral category, and reduces to semantics. (Mechanical easiness is determinism, which reduces to semantics). The strong categories which are non-neutrals are absoluteness or pure energy, which when combined with labor is also a form of semantics, that is, relative effort, which must be concluded to be either labor or non-labor, but cannot be both. The other non-neutral category is passivity, which is not really a principle at all in most views. Combining passivity with mechanics yields dysfunction, rather than an alternative. In most views this is not open to interpretation. Another option for neutrals in the context of passivity and energy is magic, but that has been discarded in prior history. Some, anyway, would consider it to be a form of mechanics, or to involve labor. So the circuit of the diagram looks like this: [Energy] [Magic] Mechanics [Passivity] Labor [Laziness]. All the terms in brackets have been eliminated.

In conclusion, the two options remain mechanics or labor-intensiveness in any system. And labor-intensiveness has many forms, whereas mechanics is the efficiency of these forms, and it is always dynamic. Consider for instance Pascal's Numbers, or E = MC^2. They derive their value from dynamic operation, which is only possible when they involve dynamic organization. And that is not to say that they are prime examples of this phenomenon, in terms of pure theory. They may not be.

Part II.

Cartesianism, in dimensional terms, that is, "axiometric" terms, is a two-variable calculus (meaning calculus in a simple sense). It takes two operators, plus and minus, which express the single dimensional axis running diagonally. If it had four variables (as mathematicians evidently unconsciously assume), then multiplication and division would not be capable of being expressed in terms of addition and subtraction. But they are expressible in those terms. Indeed, a chart in which multiplication and division were a separate opposite comparison from addition and subtraction would be ridiculous, because it would be at least partially redundant. The only conclusion is that, in the simple terms of the original intentions of the Cartesian Coordinate System, it is a two variable calculus, that is, we can treat multiplication and division instead as simple functions acting on a single diagonal axis of comparison. See the following diagram for reference:


Part III.

What is the conclusion?

Math that does not state the problem of dynamics / labor-intensiveness in an obvious way runs a serious risk of being systemically incoherent. Accepting labor-intensiveness is not a good alternative. So the only option is to express systems at the functions level. When these systems are not coherent, the result is incoherence. According to this observation, much of math as we know it today has made a fatal error---very likely the types of errors which are now deemed to be mathematical knowledge, but which according to my system are no more than semantic references to the prior failure of mathematics. Math is possible. But it is really proto-math. Just like meta- (after) physics is the only study of reality.

Cite Nathan Coppedge if using this material, as a novelty or otherwise. I welcome inclusion of my ideas in student papers.

Sunday, September 8, 2013

I have hints of new physics principles

Cite Nathan Coppedge if you re-use any of these ideas. If you want a more official answer, you will have to wait for my controversial encyclopedia volume on physics, which won't be due out for perhaps ten years. Actually: REVISION, the 78 Binary Laws has been published as an Article HERE. See also a different related article, The Physics: 232 Laws.

I am printing this material with the knowledge that it is more difficult to buy a book than---for some prodigious individuals---to immediately and impromptu develop equations based on the merest hint.

So here is my greatest feat of physics genius so far, by conventional standards. The method is still further developed when a method of categorical deduction is applied, yielding (currently) seventy-eight 'binary laws'.

All statements refer to forms of matter or energy, as might be present in physics equations.

THE BASIS FOR THE BINARY LAWS OF PHYSICS

Interaction is relative and gradual
Size is quantum and neutral
Energy is rational and finite
Mass is always definite and infinite
Excess is exceptional and relative
Mergence is neutral and correlative
Newness is quantum and gradual
Projection is redundant and coherent
Surface is gradual and redundant
Source is quantum and coherent
Guidance is finite and definite
Association is infinite and rational


The 78 Binary Laws (not repeated here, but based on the above) were inspired by an article in the New York Times, raising questions about contemporary physics in the context of Einstein's Relativity and the growing uncertainty about the true nature of black holes, e.g. is there a firewall effect preventing us from knowing about other universes, is the universe genuinely matter-neutral, and what is the fate of quantum information, etc.

Saturday, September 7, 2013

Interesting Ideas Encountered in Philosophy History Class

Thales, the Greek philosopher known to have begun philosophy in the West by predicting an eclipse, had an interesting theory of how magnets had souls. He is also popular for the idea that in some way, everything is composed of water. Later commentaries attributed water to 'one of the five (logical) principles', suggesting they borrowed it from the five Chinese elements.

Anaximander, the second Greek philosopher, introduced a combination of two principles, Arkhe and Apeiron---the original and the unlimited. In some way, a sourceless substance was the beginning and end of all things. This is similar to the Chinese concept of Wu Wei (Wikipedia).

Anaximenes had a simpler concept that all was made of air or mist which becomes compacted into other elements. For him, air was an eternal and boundless substance (apeiron).

Collectively, the first three Greek philosophers are known as the Milesians.

I added a psychological tractatus to my Psychologist's Toolkit

for those interested in that type of thing.

The Dimensional Psychologist's Toolkit will eventually show up (next year) in my Amazon Profile at:

http://www.amazon.com/author/nathancoppedge

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Interface Euphoria 3.0

I have been making efforts to compile lists of qualities and language expressions which evoke psychological sublimity for virtual reality environments.

There was the much earlier article (Interface Euphoria 2.0) using the expression PlayDolphin and SecretCloud and some other recommendations.

Now I will add to the list:

* "I will sequester in sleep"

* "The priest made a pattern of preambulations"

* "The gamer ambited over the course of the green"

* "The puzzle de-machicolated"

* "Heaven opened like the application of the will"

* "The worried stones had finally developed a fear of their own, to migrate towards the river"

* "Music gathered like water in the math"

* "There was a certain fitness, which could impress anyone"

* "The monster sat under the wall like it was a tree, and counted his tokens carefully"

* "Fear brimmed over the wall"

* "Chemical lightning, falling in forks upon the brain"

* "Idioms lost to silence"

* "Foreign words merged with her mouth"

* "The enemy was evacuated"

* "The roses were green"


Sunday, September 1, 2013

I found a new psychological technique

although I have a hunch I borrowed some of it from my therapist.

Essentially, it involves using a set of specific definitions which interrelate in the same manner as a categorical-deductive typology. The end-result is the ability to differentiate multiple categories of personality and corresponding accurate prospective advice, based on only four category questions.

Another similar technique that I call psychic prediction involves an assessment of personal significance based on reference and negation.