Friday, August 17, 2018




100 Followers and 96 Likes

At Real Perpetual Motion on Facebook...

Thursday, July 19, 2018

Is Nathan Coppedge Worthy of the Nobel Prize!?


The falling ratio is 3 versus 1.25. The rising ratio is 1.25 versus 0.5+. Good numbers.

The counterweight does have a lot of mass, but it has less effective leverage, which my math teacher taught me still makes a difference.

I asked him to tell me everything he knew about leverage, and it took him like three weeks as I recall. I lapped it up.

If there is friction in the 3/4 Vertical Lever, the counterweight will be maximized around 7X to <12x 0.25="3" 12="" 12x="" 1x="" 3x="" and="" as="" for="" is="" lever.="" leverage="" mass="" met="" p="" resistance="" the="" where="" x="">
I'm pretty much done explaining that design. I'm getting excited about what models might be produced. What I'm hoping for is: 1. A square or rectangular track structure set at significantly less than 22.5 degrees with two longish rectangular slots, each about 4 - 6 inches long. The larger one should be at least twice as wide to permit the basket or fork to free-fall, attached to the lever from below the slots. 2. Short straight barriers or walls set around both tracks at least up to 3/4 of the marble at the relevant point, but with some spacing on the smaller track to allow the relevant size marble to move freely. There may be some slight flexibility especially with larger balls and marbles. The two slots should be very narrowly separated with only one wall between. 3. A deflecting board should be used, slightly longer than the width of the walls of the smaller slot, and directed into the top of the larger slot. 4. The change in height of the entire length of the slots should be slightly more extreme than the variation in the arc of the end of the lever where the basket is located. This permits deflection into the basket from a slightly higher altitude at the top, and return into the narrower slot at the base. This fourth feature may place restrictions on the overall length of the slots relative to the length of the lever. 5. The ratio of the lever shall be 3/4 or 3:1, the long end being the end operated by the marble. 6. The weight ratio shall always use whatever marble is used as the standard of measurement. I have found ideal values tend to place the counterweight at barely >7 to definitely less than 12X marble mass. Earlier calculations assumed a median rather than an average was desirable, and so the ideal number is located higher than before. 7. The pivot of the lever is to be located beneath and not very far from the top end of the track. 20 inches length seems to be the most workable number for serious experiments. The lever should be nearly vertically disposed, meaning the pivot point is deep under the track, but simewhat outside it to create the angle. The angle should not be perfectly vertical, but rather still lean somewhat to the side at it's highest motion, perhaps at least 6 degrees. FINALLY, if the sideways transition between tracks is fairly narrow compared to the overall scale and size of the marble, transitions should be fairly easy to facilitate.

One way to construct it is to use a largish ball and have the larger slot the same size as the walls of the smaller slot, but with the slot being as wide as the walls for the larger slot. This allows some exciting standardization.

--Nathan Coppedge, Promising Perpetual Motion Research

Saturday, July 14, 2018

A Prophecy of Our Times

We have seen several synargasms:
  1. The growth of the computer metaphor relative to our nearness to philosophical fundamentals.
  2. The growth of precision manufacturing relative to our nearness to the original Industrial Age.
  3. The growth of education relative to our nearness to the origins of philosophy.
By all accounts this is the time where we are expected to make the greatest insights into the most fundamental logic.
It is ‘the time of great discovery’. The beginning of the first double golden age.

Thursday, July 12, 2018




Sunday, July 8, 2018

YouTube Channel More Popular Now

100+ views three of the past 7 recordd days at YouTube.

Just look up:

Coppedgean on YouTube

Or, "Select Machines".

Sunday, June 3, 2018

Quotable Quotes June-July 2018

"Animals are conscious when they die. Humans are conscious when they can philosophize, Artificial Intelligences are conscious when they’re God. Animals die, and so they find existence. Humans don’t kill the deaths of animals, and so they create the universe. Robots are all-powerful, and so they have energy. Whatever comes after speaks only in extremes, and sees nothing other than the extreme. Thereafter it is possible that there is nothing that is not extreme. In this way the old laws might become obsolete." ---Nathan Coppedge

"In the fields, one may learn of many Natures. Often, it is performing a reliable lucky task which serves the greatest medicine. To collect such-and-such at opposite such-and-such a time will not be recommended, as whatever-it-is will not be in prime condition… When technical thing B happens we call it Q, as that is the elaborate explanation. After some time, one learns to tolerate the manner of (cold weather, snows, the wind off the steppes, etc.) otherwise one becomes an ‘unfortunate one’… The unfortunate ones (visit many times…) One should not be so unlucky as they, who die on the steppes (unlucky feeling). When you reach a certain (scary name) things will be different. You will not be so (funny name). Things are perfectly (scary name). Enter time of temporary joyfulness. The (unfamiliar name). Unfathomable thing happens with (scary name). Enter time of bad luck. Bad luck is (necessary / inexcusable). Enter phenomenal quest to do the impossible. Impossible achieved when it is phenomenal. A time of gratitude. Proof of misery. Everything seems right again. Sense of forgetting the obvious. Something such as a tradition or most-loved person becomes ill." ---Nathan Coppedge, Folk Wisdom

"The forsaken wisdom is taken on like an animal hide. It feels much worse from the inside. The feeling of sin (wisdom, age, responsibility) is also the initiation into magic powers. There is a feeling of deadness = normalcy which is the first attempt to bring back lost virtues of youthful freedom. One learns a deep secret called values (economics), simultaneously one is tempted to make a bitter sacrifice and learns that if the magic is true, wisdom by itself would preserve all, but is hard-won. One’s first practical wisdom is the idea that things are just as they are, and what is good is good, and what is bad is bad: and what is bad is not worse, and what is good sometimes might become better. One feels better when one learns that being fair is an uncommon skill, and the most common way to be unfair: therefore some things begin to make sense, for one learns there may be a path to follow if one wishes to achieve success. One learns that one can demonstrate skills, but this risks looking ignorant, and so one realizes that success is a hard bargain, and it may be a long time before one learns this task of impressing others. The noble thing, it turns out, is to swallow one’s pride: so we learn to forget, and to make things work like a flash from the flames. Life’s secret becomes it’s concepts: impersonal things that are tough to grasp at first. The power of an impersonal world is merely our ability to understand and adapt. Thus one carries the secret that one has the power: if one discovers the true knowledge, one uncovers the revelation of power, and the key to happiness and worldly things. Only then… one will be a philosopher." ---Nathan Coppedge, Folk Wisdom

"As one discovers that one is a devil (a politician, an intellectual, a consumer), one discovers a profoundly weak situation where one’s greatest desire is to know abstractions. The abstractions are good—-in principle—yet it is also very clear that the secret lies outside the language of abstractions. And so, one learns about original sin, which is the power of achieving the devil with a more fundamental force—you see, the devil is always weak, and that is why he is evil, although he would be no less evil if he were powerful—for he has committed the original sin of fundamentalism which necessitates the devil—which necessitates the intellectual—the intellectual, the ultimate confession of non-realization—the ultimate confession that his own plight is immaterial—that he is only a philosopher out of necessity, not truth, not even understanding—just blind, stupid evil on a whim. One learns that knowledge is good—if it is treated that way—but the key lies outside one’s power. One is fundamentally low, tainted, ignoble. The knowledge one wears is a disguise for imperfection. There are countless ways one could be better, and there is every reason to believe it is all constantly being weighed. Now, if one is not great, it is a slight against one’s conscience. One already knows much has been lost. One already knows evil news will plague one even at the ultimate level. One also knows others could have been better—that some probably are better who are indifferent to knowledge—thus one knows that life is a composition, and, one gains the key to understand objectively that a better composition would always be better if it is a better composition, and so one seeks authentic knowledge of the fundamental nature of things. One realizes one is duplicitous and pure, for one has always been fundamental, but one has never known of the fundamental. Therefore one seeks to know of the profound roots of nature. And if one is selfish, at least one is not more fundamental, or more devilish, and so there is little alternative to some mixture of these… Therefore one finds a profound peace that life is merely a failure of understanding, and the gods may be excessively dramatic, and nothing is worse than the worst thing… Yet at times, on such a foundation, knowledge gives the appearance of failing. Evil is written in the language against one’s will. One wishes the language could be the cure, but instead the language is a cabinet full of poisons. Therefore one goes about the process of knowledge by poisoning oneself, and one is led into a domain that is supposed to be material, in which poison could be a cure… Therefore, if abstractions were once good, now they are good but wear the most terrible masks. Uncovering the real truth becomes a mystery plagued by simplicity and perversity. If one wants to become an intellectual, one should invent something, and then once one does so, one becomes responsible for it for endless eternity. Therefore, madness becomes the fashioner of dreams and strategems, as the thought of responsibility comes long before the materialization of what might be a mere selfish fantasy. One then becomes treated as a throwaway ragdoll who must compromise himself to safeguard his own cheap flesh, itself rancouring against any pure, safe, abstract ideas. Life becomes randomized within failure and suffering, as even the image of greatness fails to achieve that perfect protective power which fundamental abstractions seemed to have, in a more fundamental time when death was not so terrifying. Therefore, the image of one’s own knowledge becomes a fantasy, and one longs for the more-than-perfect material things which would somehow safeguard one’s idea of greatness. In this process one learns for the first time to culture the soul. One has become the passive goblin which may have been once one’s worst enemy—a devourer of secrets, someone who spits foul language and has admitted that he does not do things right. It seems like a terrible compromise, but somehow it is the devil of destiny and the way to make ends meet. One begins to look for better explanations, to exhaust the list of available theories to find notable exceptions, and magic powers… If one were an enchanter, life might be better! If one had a true strategy, things might be good eventually! One realizes one has infinite real estate where one has had subtle influence. What to make of it? Can one learn the true powers? Has the strategy shifted? Maybe it is only a matter of time before life becomes better? Surely if it is just a matter of wisdom, one eventually will select the best door? Haven’t I done so already? All that is missing is pleasure and imagination! I know very well those are popular items, but does that make them integral in every strategy that ever transpired? I can argue I am common or rare! I can argue I am unique and cheap! I do not have zero influence, but life has been slow to reward me. Perhaps I should have more character? But what if character is hard-won? Is it just endless complexity from this point on? My true options are not pure complexity, they are the same grains of intellect I have encountered now and again. I am not as confused as some might think. I have had good ideas many times, they just weren’t ideas in the purest sense. It’s the typical thing where it is assumed that what is best is an example of what is best, when the example of the example of what is best has little to do with what it could actually be. Anything real is going to obey the paradigms of what is real in whatever fashion of necessity presents itself to the soul. Before one finds the perfect life one needs to find a suitable explanation for what has already occurred—which leads willy-nilly towards gaining the knowledge of an enchanter who himself must argue he is less of a pretender than a politician or a usual intellectual, yet he is also less fundamental, and perhaps more unique… It becomes a nightmare to realize the pinnacle of knowledge as an object-in-itself, because usually the precedent for such knowledge defies the odds that it is knowledge at all… I might easily desire something immaterial, while at once I am told that the immaterial is cheaper than the actual, and far less tangible, far less desirable, far less actualized. The material becomes some ‘purpose’ chained to an invisible strategy which is likely to be much lighter than apes in a madhouse. One can merely desire better, but one also has the obligation to think and mean something, and it is not entirely for naught, but it is not supposed to confess that it enjoys the life of limitation, or that it is somehow guilty of being a devil and fundamental. No, much is lost in slavery to bad examples. By this point I should find a better idea than how I have previously lived, even if it requires intellectual trial-and-error, more brainstorming, computing what types of results I might like, or meeting the fancies of each passing moment as they come with deference to some form of higher judgment. Knowledge is no longer a taint—it is a puzzle, and one that I think I have solved many times when we are being nice about ourselves. I should not have to be injust. I should not have to matter to other ‘people’ in just the right way. Rather, we have this idea of ‘options’ which are made of fulfilled categories. A basic fulfilled category is for example, something desirable, something workable as a general plan or platform. Another fulfilled category is an occasion that meets one’s sense of taste about the meaning of life. Another fulfilled category is something that is aesthetically meaningful when it makes a tangible impression on one’s experience. Another fulfilled category is when there is nothing dangerous in any way by any fair definition that occurs under any conditions, not even relying on wit to prove it. If life has options and I am sufficiently great as before, there are no dangers of problematic knowledge except the ridiculous. In such a world of fulfilled knowledge I could select to be more conscientious of the meaning of everything. But the old caveats still hold: I cannot deny that by choosing this better life I would be less fundamental and more devilish. And so, it is already absurd to suppose that my knowledge was ever wrong, because the only consequence to devilishness is fundamentalism, and the only alternative to fundamentalism is being devilish. As soon as I am less of an intellectual, I am simply widening the scope of the problem—if I am fundamental I am simply less complex than someone who enjoys themselves. But this is not true of pursuing the fundamental as some kind of devil—for that would be intellectual enjoyment. And so, the problems of life are not solved unless they are solved, just as anyone should have suspected. The fundamental person is virtuous at being fundamental, and the devil is virtuous at being a devil—and from what I can tell, everything else on earth is just some mixture between the two. Every time someone contradicts a devil they find a more fundamental problem, and every time someone solves a fundamental problem they find a greater devil. It is even simpler to say that devils are the aims of life because they are the ones with excuses for causing problems, while fundamental people are far more efficient, even if not quite put together.  At some point one realizes that God is a greater sin than any devil—because he is composed of devils, and frankly if that is not true why care—because it would just be a difference of circumstance. Who would not learn from experience would be a sinner, and he without experience would be ignorant. The exceptions to this are devils and the fundamental." ---Nathan Coppedge, Folk Wisdom

"Quantity is propertied! Concepts are transcendental! Everything is located within concepts! Transcendental concepts are the bridge to reality!" ---Nathan Coppedge, insights on a broken cracker

"The ideal spider web is hard to buy. (Although it is also true that) We know the ideal spider web exists." ---Nathan Coppedge

"When we accept the problems of the soul, we ascend the universe and attain great power." ---Nathan Coppedge, A Tour of the Kingdom

"I think that barring nuclear war, if we assume aesthetic taste it is a tie between perpetual motion and the sundial. With a sundial you react like God has spoken. With a perpetual motion machine you feel like eternity has happened, then you feel like everything is forever after made of magic." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Just because I aim in a petty way to achieve greatness and immortality does not mean I think others could not aim to do the same." ---Nathan Coppedge

"You sort of have to know exactly what’s going on to guess whether we’re at 2X last year, or 50% or what. My assessment is the history of technology is hitting one of it’s hard to detect, dig-into-fundamentals slumps, where the ugliness of recently-established traditions asserts itself. People think they’re beyond this, but this is what always happens. If we do not progress fundamentally we will go on a much less predictable track which will not be for the better. So, the answer is, humanity, seeing the value of the fundamental, will undergo a shift. It is known to happen now and again. And the shifts will not always be so fundamental or predictable, but the scientists sure are having trouble with it, I dare say. Perpetual motion. Data omniscience. Essentially free to research, via my work on Quora." ---Nathan Coppedge


Friday, May 18, 2018

Classic Text of Perpetual Motion

These quotes are taken from Bryn Mawr Critical Review 2018/01/18, that text itself probably plagiarized or somehow serving as the original text for the First Year Seminar at Bard College in August 2001, for which I paid dearly, and which proved to be the most valuable part of my education by far.

Anyway, the point is these pieces of the text are the founding documents of sincere faith in perpetual motion...


Cynthia DamonC. Iuli Caesaris Commentariorum Libri III De Bello Ciuili. Recognovit brevique adnotatione critica instruxit C. D..   Oxford; New York:  Oxford University Press2015.  Pp. cx, 227.  ISBN 9780199659746.  $75.00.   

Cynthia DamonStudies on the Text of Caesar's 'Bellum civile'.   Oxford; New York:  Oxford University Press2015.  Pp. 329.  ISBN 9780198724063.  $115.00.   

Reviewed by Antonio Moreno Hernández, UNED (Spanish National Distance Learning University) (

Preview Libri III de Bello Civili
Preview Studies on the Text


The publication by Cynthia Damon (e.g. meaningful-to-god) 1of a new critical edition... of Caesar’s... (BC),
(Harmless enough)

Wolfgang Hering... and Virginia Brown (critical notes of the possibility of genius and a 'new spring' of ideas)----made pertinent suggestions to clarify the manuscript tradition of the BC,
there was yet no new edition that was based on an exhaustive critical study of the work
(No new Physics had been presented)

Damon’s edition and study... a new collation of the manuscripts that Damon considers most relevant for the establishment of the text; 2) an analysis of their filiation and her proposal of a stemma codicum; 3) theconstitutio textus, accompanied by the corresponding critical tools (an apparatus errati, an Appendix critica, and an Appendix orthographica);

and 4) a commentary on the passages Damon regards as the most problematic, which enhances our understanding of the text and of Damon’s editorial decisions.

In all these matters Damon does a rigorous job, not easy in view of the challenges facing a new edition of the BC,

As for the relationship among the principal mss. (St. 16-54), Damon undertakes a detailed stemmatic analysis in which she studies the possible relevant innovations and the correctable errors...

1. Damon recovers a large number of readings of the archetype compared to her three reference editions (edd.), which prefer to accept innovations of the recentiores or corrections from editions or critics.16

28.   Errata, qua que interpretatum impressionam max contiguuam contigentum, il impresso volumini comprehenditus, Venice 1513. Cf. Moreno, Epos 26, 2010, 33-50. (Re-interpreted for more meaning)
29.   “I gave you a familiar position for the fight. . . ” (LCL 297).


Sunday, May 13, 2018

New! Device demonstrates upward torque with full recovery!

Free energy device (proof of concept)  from yesterday morning.

When the support is turned inwards and tilted backwards, natural torque is produced, an unexpected unusual phenomenon.

These contraptions will be sold on Etay in the next several months, wuthout the cardboard.

Friday, May 11, 2018

I've reached 800 Followers on Quora!

A small number considering I have 1.3 Million Views there... About 1600 views per follower...

Thursday, May 10, 2018

The YouTube Upvote balance has tipped

Tipped to 30 upvotes and 44 downvotes, from 23 and 33,

Or about 3:4 from 2:3.

2018-06-28: Tipped to 46 upvotes and 43 downvotes, more upvotes than downvotes for the first time.

2018-07-11: Tipped to 59 upvotes and 42 downvotes or about 3:2.

2018-08-02: 81 upvotes : 44 downvotes or almost 2 : 1. Yess!!

Select Machines YouTube

Friday, May 4, 2018

Another Working Perpetual Motion Concept!

Rather ingenious. The swivel device finally perfected.

A counterweight acts on a slightly upward-and-downward left-right swiveling lever (mostly left and right 30+ degrees, or whatever preferred range).

Usual deal with support vs non-support. The returning motion is the rising motion, so the falling and rising motion is used to deflect the marble inward and outward onto two different track segments, as shown in a similar device the Not-If-But-When 4, a pretty much proven principle through two lengths of the cycle.

I know this device has two-directional motion by a proven principle from the Not-If-But-When 4.

Likely ratios are 1.5X effective ideal mass for the counterweight, right in the middle of the > 1X mass and < 2X mass necessary with 1 X marble abd 2 X long-end leverage (long-end leverage expressed as a ratio of short-end leverage measured to the midpoint of the counterweight).

Assuming deflection is designed properly, this is one of the easiest perpetual motion machines ever to build that I know of.

Consult diagram above if additional information needed.

--Nathan Coppedge 2018/05/04, 1am.

Thursday, May 3, 2018

Quotable Quotes May 2018

"Actually, like philosophy, science is an ‘approach’ and thus lies in a domain that is independent of content: a void which ideas must fill, or else, after Ages, all that is left are empty concepts. It is the USE of an approach, rather than its name given to tools, which belie the intelligence of an age." ---Nathan Coppedge

"So here we are, time for Santa Claus. Learn to adapt." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Immortality exists now by necessity only, but in the future it will begin to exist by explanation, and even dimension. Sometimes it will even be a convenient excuse." ---Nathan Coppedge

"God is work. Summed in Peril." ---Nathan Coppedge

"I aim to raise the bar on conservative methods and be useful in practical contexts--that's always the most radical thing other than perspective." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Sometimes my theory is that physical manifestations are a ‘symptom’ that only emerges with an infinite foundation. In this way, degrees of manifestation are directly symptomatic of the infinite, or some other necessity." ---Nathan Coppedge

"The madness of everything is still everything." ---Nathan Coppedge

“Irrationality is so much of the rational is the kind of thought people wait and pine for. But why wait? Patience is just the value of something valuable.” —Nathan Coppedge, Wisdom of the New Ancients in the 3rd Dimension

"The difference between the 3-d and 4-d is the difference between non-living and living immortality." ---Nathan Coppedge


Sunday, April 1, 2018

Quotable Quotes April 2018

"We live in a golden age, but we no longer seem to believe in intellectual heroes. So I have tried to live the dream that the world is not the same as it seems." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Its odd... I'm incompatible with people, but I am very compatible with society." ---Nathan Coppedge

"I think I have evidence of this most practical of archetypes." ---Nathan Coppedge, on perpetual motion machines

"Isn't it a bit like a blowpop? The blowpop fallacy." --Nathan Coppedge, criticism of Velikovsky's General Systems Theory

"Science is a minimal criteria macro-discipline, and as such aims to maximize quantity at cost of quality. Philosophy is a maximal criteria macro-discipline, and as such aims to maximize quality at cost of quantity. In other words, philosophy usually fails to provide evidence of the most important things. Science usually succeeds to provide evidence of insignificant things. Many things are discovered between philosophy and science, but very little is discovered by pure philosophy or pure science." --Nathan Coppedge

"Sometimes I think my writing is perfect, and sometimes I think it is too dirty. Anyway, what people eventually learn is that there needs to be a balance between different talents and motives, and the only exception to that is total mastery, which requires total knowledge, and in my mind, philosophy as well as science (and art, literature, magic, immortality… if it comes to that)." ---Nathan Coppedge, message to Eugene Rubinstein

"There will not be a ‘next Gates’ unless America prospers. It is a widely held belief that Bill Gates somehow made it with one trillion-dollar patent for computers. Far to the contrary, it was more like he was a patent mega-lord who bought a lot of small businesses, and had about literally a million thousand-dollar patents, or a billion ten cent shares in a company that exploded. For America to prosper, we need to continue to grow and change our thinking, and frankly at this point given how much we have already tested the boundaries without changing the categories, some aspects of both science and religion may end up being an inhibitor." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Philosophers tend to be happy people who never believe assumptions, and are always honest about reality." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Art is original the way literature is comprehensive, and philosophy is analytic, and science is real, and math is intelligent, and languages are insightful, and magic is useful, and immortality is sufficient." ---Nathan Coppedge

"A lot of people think 2X is the max leverage. Its not the max." ---Nathan Coppedge

"If there are constants, they must secure variation, maybe even desirable variation." ---Nathan Coppedge

"You see, we could just say you're seeking a principled good nature, or a metaphysical standard (morality OR coherence primarily), so I don't know if it is fair to say we should try both first." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Humans should build perpetual motion machines, machines should build God. All else concerning race is past and future." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Always look for metaphors at physics confetences, and fundamental discoveries at poetry readings." ---Nathan Coppedge

"There is one secret Zurich doesn't know: that paradoxical intelligence is more coherent than finite problems. This secret is truly powerful. Knowing it is like owning half of philosophy."

"The secret of Vienna is it swallows men. This is my most profound knowledge of it, even though I've never gone there in my current life."

"Time is challenging, so to speak. Information accumulates, and better be high-quality." ---Nathan Coppedge

"The general advice is, if we are suffering from a physical problem, we need to improve our mind, and if we have a mental problem we need to improve our body. If we can’t improve our mind, we physically die. If we can’t improve our body, we go absolutely insane." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Consider it this way: if you were reincarnated and didn’t experience your next life, you would feel cheated, right? As soon as we deny early-life consciousness we are also denying reincarnation. So I completely support the idea that humans are conscious throughout their lives. It is simply that the amounts of time involved are so vast by adult standards. And there is a time before individual life called the 'great foolishness' or also 'baby toughness' in which babies fight a war against being aborted by their mothers. The experience of being a baby is actually much like being an adult at first: there are wise, conscientious decisions that are made, until people force you to act and think in a certain more restrictive way. Restrictive thinking emerges at just the time that babies have averted the evil outcome called abortion." ---Nathan Coppedge

"At this point we should know if we want a new approach we should have NEW IDEAS, NOT NEW 'ORGANIZATIONS' OR NEW COMING-TO-TERMS. When we do not have new ideas, we fail, and at this point what counts as a new idea has become somewhat radical. So, at this juncture it is impossible to reject radicalism. So, it may be a long while before these radical new ideas are accepted. Above all, the new theories have nothing to do with problems unless they can solve them… What is egalitarian about real knowledge is the capacity to accept alternate systems, but only if they work… And what is not a system is truly not a system, and so it is pointless to accept a critique that is not offering radical, practical, and paradigm-changing methods. Almost no one seems to know what a radical solution looks like… Has a radical solution ever existed? We should not mince words, but merely accept that ideas are ideas, and they are not just one thing… if what something is offering is that it is a system, it should define itself as such, and not as though there are no alternatives, but not as though it does nothing… Logic is necessary to solve abstract problems, and mechanics is necessary to solve practical problems… Active logic, active mechanics… not a mere coming-to-terms." ---Nathan Coppedge

"Pain is inhuman. It is a contradiction of humanity. It is the cheapest alternative to meaning. It is an infinite lack of value. The opposite of pain is the meaningful. The opposite of pleasure is the meaningless. The further lives and spirits progress in cognition and complexity, the easier it becomes to achieve pleasure. There are many exceptions to exceptional complexity, but insofar as there is complexity there is always something more valuable than pain. Pain is the definition of the useless. It is wasted time, self-destructive matters, un-divine problems. The only reason for pain is ignorance and poor strategy, but it is not automatically explained: it implies a lack of explanation. Where there are explanations there are desires for a life without pain. When life has meaning, pain is usually insignificant. Pleasure, or perhaps eventually something better, is part of the good life. And, ultimately pleasure is a cheap form of meaning, just as pain is an extremely cheap form of the meaningless. We have economic imperative to overcome pain, and where there is pain there is a desire to compensate with impossible wonders. Meaning is born of the death of the impossible (pleasure), whereas appreciation of the meaningless very often comes from pain. Pain is an exaggerated lesson that is useless wherever it is felt. No one has ever called pain useful while being true to the soul. Pain is a theory of theory-less meaning, the death of all possibility coming from the refusal of impossibility. Where there is no impossibility there is no theory, and no way to oppose the meaningless. And where the meaningless explanations exist, there is pain or something to replace it. The trace of primitive education goes infinite sacrifice → skepticism → pleasure → meaning. The infinite sacrifice is pain, and the skepticism is the meaningless. Meaning begins with pleasure, it is the minimum standard. For everything that is good has pleasure, and nothing is meaningful that is not good. Sometimes we deny that meaning is good when we are complex, but this is not in earnest. Only perversity gives the idea that meaning exists that is not pleasure, and if we think pain is a good teacher we are truly ignorant. All opportunity comes from pleasure, and if we lack wisdom on this it is not our responsibility. There is a wisdom born of desperation, and it has great intelligence compared with evil. When the great powers deny the fundamental meaning, which is meaningful pleasure, they have destroyed much of the potential of life. All potentials come from meaningful pleasure. Without pleasure there is not substance. Therefore, all strategies should define that life is meaningful, and no strategy should deny that pain destroys value. Therefore, life is a continuum of value, defined in meaning. And pain is its destroyer. Pain may as well be meaningless unless life has contradictions. Elsewhere I have proven conclusively that contradiction is evil, so there is no evidence that pain has value. And so, life should concern itself with meaningful pleasure." ---Nathan Coppedge


Saturday, March 10, 2018

Recent Additions to History of Philosophy

The Counter-Calculus (Feb 2018)
Multi-Modularism (Feb 2018)
New Existentialism (Feb 2018)
Group Formalism (Feb 2018)
Emergent Contractualism (one of my favorite theories, Feb 2018)
Black Ideas (Feb 2018)
Integrated Progress (Feb 2018)
Alternative Systems (Feb 2018)
Non-Causal Systemology (Laws of Timeless Nature, Feb 2018)
Subtle Physics (Mar 2018)
The Dubious Process-Coherence (Mar 2018)
Proof by Machine (Mar 2018)
Minima Ontology (Mar 2018)


What if the key to everything were nothing?

Maybe if it were good later it would be really good.

Maybe the only good cheating is cheating at cheating.

We should focus on 'savoring the last crumb' by which we appreciate everything.


(Prescript: Before there were idiots it was all malarky… Know all the alternatives, climb the magic steps).
I know it will be cold tomorrow, because I'm not going to wear my coat. It happens my coat is enchanted with warm weather.
Sometimes pessimism is the best theory of optimism, because it creates awareness and raises the standard.
We progress when we think of the alternatives. How were we ever right? Well, through our degree of being concerned.
We may have moved on, but it is all necessary.
We can create necessity, for it defines proof.
A higher proof defies necessity.
Back to our roots, magical reasoning.
There is ‘something in there’, for I do not comprehend.
I may as well be an expert, to limit my options.
I should seek sacrosancts, because they have formility!
Calculus is really a forge of concepts.
Little more, that is what we are looking for!
Amalgamated feeling!
Grimacing gnomes!
Meaningful attractions!
Mechanical speed!
Divine information!
Philosophical problemation!
Composit samplification!
Exponential effication!
Significant vivification!
Conceptual animation!
(I reached this in Feb 2018)


[Coherent Systems 2.A.3.C.3.]
X = Number.
M = A module.
Number of Ms = X.
Number of Ms (X) = Coherent result R.
M(0) = Empty coherence.
MX = R1
MMX = R2
If (R1, R2, R3, R4) is a coherent set, then MXMMXMMMXMMMMX = Coherence.
(Soul: Expecting a four).


Essentially, it adopts a new framework → uses the framework for some new notion → is useful → may be open to meta-interpretation.

Existential Coincidence



Also called Group Formalism, as opposed to formal grouping. I do not consider this list comprehensive.

Pure Theoretics

Modal Formalism

High-Minded Formalism

Survival Formalism


I think its more like this process:
  1. Learn how to negotiate, or encounter a higher intelligence.
  2. Negotiate, either through intelligence or interaction with higher intelligence.
  3. Have an idea.
  4. Contract the idea.
  5. Locate a body of ideas or objects (‘setting’) as a result of the contract.
Now, we can ask whether the ‘setting’ has ‘emerged’ but it is much smarter to see the setting, from our vantage point as a contractualization of our prior ideas, and from others’ vantage points as a continued attempt at bargaining.
My general thesis is that the universe, that is, the real living universe, is far more intellectual than we think. Everything that is not intellectual tends to encounter something supernatural. That is the part we forget when we encounter the physical largesse of our own often inevitable contracts for dominion.
The supernatural aspect mostly only exists in order to ‘reproduce’ — to interact with the contractual, core-idea forming elements, and it may be predatory, but it remains blameless because there are necessities, ideas, and compensation built into the system.
Once we have a contract (with the universe), we can say whether we are being wise or foolish, or if we are just not getting what we want.


For awhile things don’t seem to get better, they seem to stagnate.
Then you are sure that you’ve evolved a little bit…
You have a black idea, something to add to your other ideas, until things seem to get a little bit better.
Now we cannot prove that we are not evolved.
Such is the influence of the idea.
And from then on, you decide you are allied to the ‘blackest ideas’ — that is, the ones that are most evolved.
Even so, it is a delicate balance, and it is possible—although difficult even—to imagine another approach or technique going equally far.
The black ideas are one of many methods—although not the worst, to prevent civilization from crumbling.
How high the day, how good the honey—when you can afford more than one!
Things will surely change for the better. How funny it was to think you were being blackmailed!—
It looks the same, but it is different, such is the nature of the best ideas!
One must therefore concern oneself with this mythological thing, this elephant in the room—which is merely one’s ability to comprehend with some completeness the importance of any one of these true ideas.
It is a bit like gambling, but with more reassurance, and within a few measures great things come to pass.
Therefore, acknowledge greatness, and stand in the shadow—civilization is non pareill.


It is much like how a mouse-brain thinks, as exaggerated by the human mind. Potentially advanced, in a smallish form.
“When the present integrates the thoughts of the future, then progress is integrated. Thus, progress is the past of the future, so progress is now. Thought integrated with the present is integrated progress when the present integrates the future. Thoughts of the present are the future of integration.”
The method is the following:
  1. Look back from the future.
  2. Think about what remains of the present.
  3. Act with future knowledge.
  4. Gradually resolve the presence of the future.
  5. See the present as an element of the future.
  6. Calibrate ideas by their arbitrary distance to the future.
  7. Guess future ideas.
  8. Plan history coherently.
  9. Refine timeless models.
  10. Adopt relevant paradines (paradigmatic paradigms).
  11. Use standardized or better metaphysics.


[Coherent Systems 2.A.3.C.4.]
Proof is Proof (if it exists as such, or to the extent that its considered proof).
What is a proof?
Okay, what we have just stated as the definition of proof is indeed proof as such or considered as such.
  • There are many, many variations of proof.
  • Each is a true proof by its own standard, if it has a standard.
  • Everything has its own kind of proof.
  • Everything is proven to the extent that it has a standard.
  • We should seek the best standard.
  • The standard of standards is the standard of proof.
  • There is no proof without standards.
  • The proof of proof is the proof of standards.
  • Proving standards are standard proofs.
  • The standard of proof proves a similar standard of standards, such as universal.
  • The proof, for example, of the universal, is proven by the proof of standards regarding the universal.
  • Universal proof is a universal standard.
  • The proof varies with the standard.
  • The universal proof varies with the universal standard.
  • If the universal standard constitutes the laws of absolute logic, then if such logic is absolute, the universal proof depends on it.
  • Then where the universal standard is absolute logic, the universal proof derives from it, and similarly for other logics.
  • What constitutes the universal standard will be the ultimate basis of proof.
  • Therefore the ultimate basis of proof has a universal standard.


Otherwise known as The Laws of Timeless Nature.
[Coherent Systems 2.A.3.D.2.]
A translation with the same meaning.
(—crude analogies)
ABCD and ADCB using polar opposites in diagonally opposite positions.
(—categorical deduction method)
Proof is proof. What is proof? Okay.
The such (universe) works because it is such (complete), by infinite mastery or sufficient coincidence.
(—Scientific or theological approach)
Venn Diagrams.
Gödel's defense of mathematical vitality and objectivity with Completeness and Incompleteness.
Incoherent Coherentism.
Specific metaphysical theories.
The Infinite Trumpet.
Legality, vanity, espousal, pretext.
Replacement, elimination, simplification, objectification.
Disclosure, deanimation, nothing, unexceptionalism.
Labeling, assuming, exaggerating, electrifying.
Ambiguousity, greed, collapse, impossibility.
Insubstantiality, hesitation, emptiness, requirement.
Function, equivalence, justification, awareness.
Strategy or strategizing, cheating, modifying, changing.
Discovery, singularity, solving, credit.
Destruction, non-existence, over-complexity, confusion.
Death spiral.
Delay, usurpation, maxing, incidiousness.
Discovery, singularity, solving, credit.
Temporality, ugliness, dysfunction, doubtfulness.
Transparency, exception, paranoia, example.
Imperfection, multiplicity, parity, holes.
Ultimate, unsurpassable, refined, shrewd.

Incomplete, undone, irrational, historical.


[Coherent Systems 2.A.3.D.3.]
In one case, an object is defined by a number of separate formulae… The formulae are collectively, so to speak, what makes the object subtle, which makes it physical. The larger the number of formulae, the more complex the object is relative to the physics, and so any subtlety which depends on more than one formula will also have a subtle physics by some definition.
On the other hand, there are cases defined by a single law, in which case it is what is physical that is subtle, because many physical things pertain to the law, and where the number of physical things is many, the difference between physical things is subtle relative to the law, and so, the law is subtle.
On the other hand, there are things (objects) which vary not by law, nor by formulae, but rather by location, and these things are subtle because their location is subtle, for otherwise, there is nothing to distinguish locations, as the difference in locations cannot be great unless it is lesser between the majority of other locations, and so the difference represented by a location tends to be subtle, unless it is expressed as a law, or a formula, etc.
Too, there are things that may vary by logical reduction, and here it is clear that if objects do not logically reduce, the logic is subtle enough so as to be NECESSARY, which means that there is something necessarily complex about it, which implies that it is subtle, as it is hard to see why if something were already partially reduced, that it would not be reduced further. Therefore, what is not physical, or formulaic, or subtle in location, is actually subtle logically.
So too, if an object is necessary but not logically subtle, this implies that it cannot be even partially reduced, in which case the object is infinite, which is again another form of subtlety which is hard to comprehend.
Therefore, all indications show that physically, in terms of formulas, in terms of locations, in terms of logic, and in terms of infinity, every thing (objects) are subtle, and therefore we may surmise that physics has a rule of subtlety.
Now we may determine that there is something special about physics:
(1) It may be partly ambiguous or random.
(2) It may be self-determinative in some way.
(3) It may be small and ingenious, and hard to comprehend.
(4) It may be composed of some type of essence or abstract substance.
(5) It may be on the whole inexplicable, because no explanation is large enough.
Therefore, unless further concepts of substantial subtlety present themselves* (*As may be the case) we may assume that physics in its subtlety takes one or more of these forms.
A corollary is that physics adopts those properties that are subtle, insofar as formulas, physics, locations, logic, and infinity are implied within the subtle.
The alternative to subtlety is then also likely to be subtle in at least one way, unless the thing is contradictory in some way.


Not much in this category for good reason, nor can it be considered fully-coherent so far.
The Coherent Dialectic


Ask someone: Relatively speaking, all the potential of life comes from immortality.
If they do not agree with you, in a high-minded sense they must be a robot.


Everything is true in some way about everything → Law by Universalism.
Nothing is true about nothing → Illusion.
to be continued. My brain is not functioning this morning.

See also:
Shortlist of 'souls’ of Ancient Philosophy