Monday, September 30, 2019

Specialized Heuristic Combinations


Formula for souls, title = Set 0,

Then Efficiency = Part 1 + Part 2, which means the noun of the first part of the title plus the opposite quality of the second part of the title. These phrases (part 1 and 2) would be preceded with 'If you / your'.

Then part 3 (the result of combining part 1 and 2) and part 4 (the opposite of part 1) are the difference.

We can surmise part 1 and 2 are only combinable if they are not zero sum, that is if they are not two double negatives or two opposites. Otherwise, part 3 might as well be blank or indicates no result, and it becomes possible that part 4 is blank as well (that is, if part 1 = everything, universe, etc), and if so the difference component = 0 in the TOE.

Thus, a TOE in which the difference between the total efficiency and Set 0 is 0 always involves a contrast between something highly important and its opposite, so that part 3 of the soul has no result and part 4 is meaningless, resulting in a difference of 0. The result then is that the title takes the form [Quality of Everything] [Opposite of insignificance], in other words, Universal Meaning.


It has long been found that there is direct compatibility between objective knowledge snd the formula for solving paradoxes.

Essentially, OK is modulo 4, and the Solution to Paradoxes takes any properly ordered half of a coherent diagram and treats it as a problem or solution depending on whether it comes first or second. If the solution is not desired, then the problem statememt is really a solution statement, or they are both neutral which in coherent language means semantic (meaningless or else merely useful with no inherent value).

Basically though solutions to problems are just halves of a coherent diagram of polar opposites opposed on the diagonal. The simpler notation of simply finding the opposite of every word in the problem in the same order makes the solution to problems capable of creating coherent solutions from highly incoherent cases. That is, it uses a coherent frame of reference even without considering both halves of the diagram simultaneously.


The parts of the soul formula analogous to coherent reference are that the first and fourth parts of the soul are opposed, and the second part of the title is roughly opposite to the second part of the soul.

However, the first part of the soul is not always opposite of the second part of the title, thus the second part of the soul is not always the opposite of the first part of the title.

Thus, the relation of the first part of the soul and second part of the title is analogous to a problem or solution statememt in the formula for solving paradoxes. If that is the case, the opposites are found in the second part of the soul (which is opposite of the second part of the title), and the fourth part of the soul, which is the opposite of the first part of the soul.

Thus, in the soul formula, [1st part of soul] [2nd part of title] [4th part of soul] [2nd part of soul] is analogous to objective knowledge. The only difficulty is that in the formula for souls the 1st part of the soul tends to be a noun, whereas in objective knowledge it would be a quality, and 2nd part of the soul tends ts to be a quality, whereas in objective knowledge it would usually be a noun.


Once again, title = Set 0.

Now, [First part of soul] [2nd part of title] = Total Efficiency.

[4th part of soul] [2nd part of soul] = Difference.

Set 0 = [noun of 1st part of Set 0] + [2nd part of Set 0] + [opposite of 1st part of Set 0] + [opposite quality of 2nd part of Set 0]. Or not universal.

Thus, because the 2nd part of title and first part of soul form the problem statement, therefore the first part of the soul if negated, since the 2nd part of the soul contrasts with the 2nd part of the title, produces a problem for the 2nd part of the title, which opposes the 2nd part of the soul, therefore since the first part of the soul is the primary part as it does not contrast with the first part of Set 0 which in the title of the formula for souls is the quality, so we can conclude that when we are looking for a quality which is not universal (which is a non-universal category, as quality and noun are equivalent) and we assume the efficiency is not 0 as consistent with the theory of everything, then the first part of the soul does not equal the 2nd part of the title, and so there is some difference, and so the first part of the soul is not opposite of the 2nd part of the soul which is opposed to the 2nd part of Set 0, thus categories which are not universal do not produce a complete opposition between the first and second part of the soul, and also produce a non-zero difference. So, although non-universal initially meant a quality about souls or categories that is incomplete and opposed, a de facto category in fact involves incomplete contrast between the 1st part of the efficiency and the 2nd part of the difference, which implies at least one degree of contrast between the 4th part of the soul and the 2nd part of the title, or the content is universal.

Thus since the 2nd part of the difference is the 2nd part of the soul, and the 2nd part of the soul contrasts with the 2nd part of Set 0, and the 1st part of the difference is the 4th part of the soul which contrasts with the first part of Set 0, so we know that the two parts of the difference contrast with the two corresponding parts of Set 0, but only when the difference is not 0.

Since when the difference is zero it means universal, and incomplete systems are made of parts which can be called nouns or qualities, incomplete categories can be associated with either high Set 0 or high difference. Therefore, incompleteness is also associated with high efficiency, which means an active subject,the only alternative is an efficiency of zero which is usually excluded.


Universal = Universal Meaning = Difference 0.

Standard (Set 0) = [noun of 1st part of Set 0] + [2nd part of Set 0] + [opposite of 1st part of Set 0] + [opposite quality of 2nd part of Set 0]. Or not universal.

Incompleteness =  high Set 0 or high difference or high efficiency.

Universe as a triangle!


Using formula:
Set 0 = [noun of 1st part of Set 0] + [2nd part of Set 0] + [opposite of 1st part of Set 0] + [opposite quality of 2nd part of Set 0]. Or not universal.


[For all infinites... Set 0 = Unique, Unlimited, Mainly, Subtle]

Set 0= Inf, Eff= -Inf, Diff= Impossible: Perfection or Determinism or Impossible Rarity (Intransducibility).

Set 0= Inf, Eff= -Fin, Diff= Inf: Insignificant event, reversibility, change, dynamics in an infinite system, chaos, luck, immortal education, temporality, gambling, the feeling of having been anticipated by a completely different strategy (gambits).

[Something with a particular character happens but it doesn't matter, an earlier more powerful element takes over and dominates. The observation of small significance within the universe].

Set 0= Inf, Eff= 0, Diff= Inf: Immortal time, eternal continuity, greatness, insignificance, absolute standards, powerful strategy, inexorability, overwhelming defeat, complete mastery, complete control, universal knowledge (Mastery).

[Input is infinite, something happens but it is not affected, the result is continued infinite output. The feeling that what is occurring is right and unavoidable or that one should give in to a greater power, that the infinite is playing a more important game. Reveling in the discovery of real strategy. Honorable defeat].

Set 0= Inf, Eff= Finite, Diff= Inf: Universal loops, time-crystals, wormholes, infinite record keeping, infinite events, remembering eternity, infinite significance (Loops).

[Something is infinite, it is recorded transcribed preserved, the record is finite but the event has infinite significance even if that significance is forgotten. The measurelessness of what must already have occurred].

Set 0= Inf, Eff= Inf, Diff= 0: Matching the infinite, perfection, invulnerability (Attr).

[Matching the infinite: Realizing the nature as one's own authority. Perfection: Feeling the consequence is sufficient regardless of outcome. Invulnerability: Maximize efficiency relative to difference to produce high invulnerability score in Set 0, absolute score is only reached with infinite Set 0 and infinite efficiency, with zero difference. This suggests properties like changelessness, self-immunity, self-sufficiency, and infinite potential. Overall, real powers (like cards) that can be carried forward with confidence].

[For all finites... Set 0 = Mainly, Subtle, Uniquely, Unlimited]

Set 0= Fin, Eff= -Inf, Diff= Impossible: Meaning or Imperfection (Unrealistic, Unconquerability, Unsatisfiability).

Set 0= Fin, Eff= -Fin, Diff = - (-Fin) + Fin: Telekinesis (Set 0 > Eff), Invisibility, Time-Travel, 'Neutral' (Lowattr).

[Time-Travel Back: Efficiency negative of difference. Time-Travel Forwards: Difference negative of efficiency. Telekinesis: Negative effect or different effect. Invisibility: No difference or overlapping or beginning semi-invisible: Set 0 = |Efficiency|].

Set 0= Fin, Eff= 0, Diff= Fin (Same): Emotion, Consideration, 1/4 of souls (Emotion).

[Consideration: Appreciate the gentle effect, it is just as it was, now it is the same, now we appreciate it some more, it is always the same. Emotion: If you should have emotion, how do you feel, and how do you want to feel? It's more than that].

Set 0= Fin, Eff= Fin, Diff= Avg 0, Fin1 - Fin2 no abs notat verified: Obj Knowledge, Destructive Magic, Invisibility, Teleportation, Perpetual Motion Machines, World Peace, 3/4 of souls (Core).

[Objective Knowledge: Efficiency is sq rt of Set 0. Teleportation: Large difference or large efficiency or small distance. Destructive magic: Set 0 is damages, say 5, efficiency is < Set 0, key is some difference, like a white butterfly, 'how boring'. Perpetual Motion Machines: New equation: heavier mass = (1/2 longer leverage, longer leverage) + unweighted diff. Older equation follows: Difference is 1/2 of primary mass plus difference in mass between primary and secondary mass (effective). World Peace: People should be passive or have a better solution. Ooze and similar: Efficiency = Set 0]

Set 0= Fin, Eff= Inf, Diff = Impossible: Polarity or Limitation or Hard Limits (Irreducibility).

[For all zeroes... Set 0 = Calculus, of Limits, Incalculable, Infinity].
Set 0= 0, Eff= -Inf, Diff= Inf: Power, populism (power).

[Power: One thought it was over, but the power was not the same as one thought, it is full of potency and wild, uncontrollable energy. Populism: The public is unstoppable but the power derived is immense, almost better].

Set 0= 0, Eff= -Fin, Diff= Fin: Consequences (Consequences).

[Consequences: Something happens, but one quickly responds because one learns there is a difference].

Set 0= 0, Eff= 0, Diff= 0: Learning of no consequence, Triviality, Neutral Semantics: Source of Negativity (Triviality).

[No consequence: One cannot grasp something, but it does not seem to matter, little comes of it. Triviality: Something meaningless happens, but it does not seem to have any useful outcome, one learns to ignore the possibility].

Set 0= 0, Eff= Finite, Diff= -Fin: Turtles, retracting tools, Humans (Retract).

[Turtles: Set 0 (0), Eff (7), Diff (-7), or Set 0 (1), Eff (7), Diff -6), turtles see each limb as being as important as their shell as they each offer advantages, extremely fertile turtles may have up to seven to fourteen living young, difference is number of appendages plus hard shell, efficiency represents retractability, tough ones lose an appendage or have soft shells because to have a higher survival rate they need to lose difference, tough turtles are more conservative. Humans: Set 0 = Output, Eff = Advantages, Diff = Females, Females are often helpers while men are exclusively advantage-seeking, sexuality focuses on breasts and involves unity and relationships, advantages like money and intelligence may result in involvements often with no consequence, in highly fertile humans the number of legitimate children frequently equals the number of sexual partners].

Set 0= 0, Eff= Inf, Diff= -Inf: Immortality (Immort).

[Immortality: Act conservatively, have a perfect reservation, have full appreciation. Die less without saying yes, meet requirement to be sufficiently perfectly evolved, easy effort, Easy difficulty. Rumor: Exactly like being a star athlete, except easier.].

[For all negative finites... Set 0 = Missing, Limits, Tracking, Disintegrals]

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= -Inf, Diff= Impossible: Analogy or Containment (Irreconcilability).

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= -Fin, Diff= - (|(Fin1)| - |(Fin2)|): Refrigerator type idea, cumulative damage, palliative measures. (Ongoing).

[Refrigerator effect: One notices a reduced effect, and when one creates a further effect of the same kind then it has a combined effect. Cumulative damages: one has already done some damage, then one increases one's effort and the result is more damage. Palliative effects: one notices applying a substance reduces the appearance of damage, then when one applies more of the substance the damage is reduced further].

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= 0, Diff= -Fin (Same): Assessing damage, consistency of reduction, spread of disease (Damage).

[Assessing damage: It looks bad, there is no further effect, then the badness continues if it was bad. Consistency of reduction, spread of disease: One looks for a X say a cure, but if there is no X the condition generally continues].

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= Fin, Diff= -(Fin2) + (-Fin1): Some effect, fishing, evolution, Normal , 'Neutral' (Effect).

[Some effect: If one has an efficiency one might get some result, if conditions are bad it is just as likely that there will be no good result, one should just accept the outcome or improve one's approach].

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= Inf, Diff= Impossible: Exclusivity or Weakness (Insuperbability).

[For all minus infinities... Set 0 = Missing, Unlimited, With, Limits]

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= -Inf, Diff= 0: Consistently bad, consistent effect (Consistency).

[Consistently bad: Something looks very bad, then conditions being equal it continues to be very bad conditions. Consistent effect: A strong effect is noticed, then conditions being equal there continues to be a strong effect].

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= -Fin, Diff= -Inf: Drop in the bucket, needless effort (Inconseq).

[Drop in the bucket, needless effort: Although an effect is desired, a powerful force is already creating the effect so one does not have to create the effect one desires, the result would be the same with or without trying].

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= 0, Diff= -Inf: Dominant neutrality (Nodom).

[Dominant neutrality: There is much effect from something, the one thing it does not affect is zero].
Set 0= -Inf, Eff= Fin, Diff= -Inf: Unsurprising outcome (Nully).

[Unsurprising outcome: One tries to have an effect, but it is not a big surprise, the outcome comes out in the favor of the dominant force].

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= Inf, Diff= Impossible: Complexity or Separation (Unspannableness).


Determinism, Imperfection, Limitation, Containment, Weakness, Separation.

Perfection, Meaning, Polarity, Analogy, Complexity.

4 INFINITES: Power, Loops, Mastery, Gambit.

4 NEGATIVE INFS: Nully, Nodom, Inconseq, Immort.

3 UNIVS: Consistency, Triviality, Attr.

3 NEG UNIVS: Effect, Damage, Ongoing.

2 FIN: Conseq, Emotion.

2 NEG FIN: Retractors, Lowattr.

1 POT INF: Core.

(Negative Univs are ambiguous negatives. Univs are zeroes).

--Chart of Solution for The Theory of Everything

Philosophical Statistics

Michael Coppedge Studies

Saturday, September 28, 2019

On the Philosophy of Instrumentalism

(The concept originated in 1906)

Pragmatism --> Instrumentalism --> Applicationism

Under pragmatism, there is a general theory that there is usefulness.

Instrumentalism sees specific disciplines of science as pragmatic.

Under the applicationist paradigm, first, categories of usefulness are useful as categories, and the material function returns a new pragmatic value. Secondly, specific objects embody paradigms by exhibiting principles and other properties, and maximizing a principle becomes a means to find 'practical objects'. Third, the properties and principles of objects serve a logical function in which the material and abstract properties are interchangeable, and in this way the material properties of specific objects become pragmatic identities through the analogy between valuable functions and general usefulness. Fourthly, objects which share in the abstract properties show a characteristic unification (ala Hegel or Leibniz).

In Science what is the opposite of Instrumentalism?

History of Philosophy

Sublime Analytic Notes

Aims to be ostensibly less dirty than The Red Book by Jung. Yet inspired by it also.


That blue properties might be the opposite of the property of blue (another example: sublime blue the opposite of blue sublime): categoric system the opposite of system category: 'broken' in the analytic.

Singular the index of vertical relation. Independent the index of alternate correlation.

This suggests, however, that we cannot see beyond our abstracted 'shoe-shapes'.

A possibility is that receptiveness is the opposite of realization: receptiveness being receptiveness to realization, and realization being the ultimate receptiveness.

This is a frustrating duality, but it seems to say the key to nothing is everything, and the key to everything nothing.

Yet, what is between them?

You see, a texture which is one part maximization extends itself through derivation. Needless to say, the texture which begins by derivation, extends itself through maximization. Thus we get everything and nothing, as textures.

It is a strange rule, which says that we must add something in proportion to the 'way it is explained'...

In this way, unity is achieved, like the shapes of the continents, a mixture of correlation and relation.


The aperture is the world, and what we find with it.

Just like the aperture is the 'thing' which we call whatever it is.

Out of the 'thing' comes the idea of the world, but out of the 'world' comes whatever.

The dualisma of whatever-it-is (like texture, or color) and the apertura of sensesation is the or a realization of the sensation of unity, or a gestalt.

Yet the concept gestalt is death, if we do not understand it, or if we do not know its exact 'ego'.

Out of the fuming darkness is the strangeness of this 'sense'.

An emptiness abides in the complex and the simple.

The obviousness of intelligence in all mindful things.

The sensesation of the pride with the business of the world.

We open our eyes to this pride, and it's permutations. We live with it's fiber.

In this we know our ego. An empty unity, a flavor of space. A passing of time. A magic vine.


We have questions which chip at the contour of the world. Timelessly, like a glass of water.

These questions may change us, equally we respond with a feeling of newness.

This is a threshold of nothingness, yet surrounding it is a territory of supreme imagination.

Outside the polished mirror lies texture and color. Inside the mirror is the newness.

This is the birth of something like the world or the imagination.

We can imagine thought, like a bird, floating somewhere in this mirror-sky.

Symbols are like symbols here, but terrible is not as terrible.

So, the average transformation takes place when we call it transformation.

The mystery is but a name, a name without mystery. There is mystery yet.

We usually find a tree which reflects our desire.

It is up to us to find it's meaning.

Over time, it may lose it's promise.

The world has many touchstones, which are much like the tree.

We may find meaning, or a barking dog.

The goal of life is forgiveness.

But anything we attain, we must keep traveling.

We gather pieces of the One Tree, but we rarely find it's meaning.

When we find it, we often lose it.

There are many Natures, but they are passing.

In this I do not profess wisdom.


So we know, but we do not Know (as that).

We must forgive the unforgivable.

We must eat what cannot be bitten.

The shape of things that come before and after.

We must cast our seeds through the nets of impossibility.

The dangerous song of 'a new sense'.

The treasured throne of the alchemist.


Emergence. The focal concept at any level.

The spitting dragon.

The loose stone, the diatonic sound.

Opening the ends.


Tractatus of Lifetimes

Friday, September 27, 2019

Hapt Symmetric Vertical Lever


Improved Vertical Lever Perpetual Motion Concept

  • Date of Invention: September 27, 2019.
  • < 150% conventional Over-Unity.
  • Leverage: 4:1 (looks like 8:1)
  • Counterweight Mass: > 3X to < 5X
  • Equation: Assuming ball = 1 with variable application, and long end has additional 1 constant application, and counterweight located on shorter end, and counterweight is designed to direct ball on opposite end up slight supporting incline before ball applies leverage, Unified Counterweight Mass Formula = Min Lvg + 1 > (Max Lvg / 2) + 1.
See also from the same day: Hapt Symmetric Vertical Lever

Advanced Troubleshooting Perpetual Motion

The most essential advice, but by no means the only necessary advice, is that perpetual motion requires both correct design AND correct construction.

These hurdles (design & construction) are both extremely difficult, but they are essentially equal. The goal of design is to make an idea that works well mathematically. The goal of a working model is to adopt a good design and work out the engineering such as to make the math succeed.

Other good advice includes but is not limited to the necessity of correct cheating, overcoming proportional difficulties, the use of an ultra-lightweight structure, and having a good understanding of leverage.

If lever is beyond 4X of the shorter length, weight problems will render it almost inherently impossible. However, superbly sturdy construction and genuinely expert design typically involving special materials and a close to wire-thin lever  can make 4X workable if the design is working and suited to the measurement. The concern is that the difference between the unweighted long end and short end should not exceed half the raw range of counterweight mass variation in proportional units of the marble mass. This means even a device that is legitimately approximating 150% OU will typically not have a raw long end lever mass above 1/2 of the marble's mass. This can be extremely difficult over long distances, as the lever is not allowed to bend.

For that reason, leverage of less than or equal to 3X the short end length is strongly recommended. There is not much alternative.

The same problem that occurs with 4X also occurs with 3X and 2X levers, with the norm of the raw long end lever mass being < 0.5 of the marble (mass) in almost every case. However, at 3X or less the problem I mentioned is less serious.

Elsewhere I have discussed the material problems of perpetual motion. Materials are often limited exclusively to aluminum, steel, and oak, and in the case of small devices, sometimes strong yet lightweight plastic. Further, oak will often not be an option at most scales as it tends to be excessively heavy for its level of tensile strength, so I do not recommend oak, however it may ultimately be usable I simply have never had an easy time with it.

Cases are numerous of excessive stickiness, wetness, or even low amounts of moisture, and odd amounts of torque, and other oddities, contributing to failed models.

Perpetual Motion Links

Chuang-Tzu Philosophy

(280 BC supposedly, but I question Western math)

A Westerner raises the concern of a 'Duang' as opposed to a 'Tao' but this is merely fingers clapping.

The real image is one of transformation between 'claps'. The claps may be ambiguous, such is transformation.

The memory of the clap is a butterfly, the recollection of the clap is a glorious sage, yet the two together form another clap.

How strong is this fleet-winged butterfly? How strong is the power to forget? How strong is the power to survive the clap? When we keep clapping, we produce more claps.


History of Philosophy

Quality-Quantity Theory of Energy

Mass Min = (Max Advantage / 2) + 1
Mass Max = (Min Advantage) + 1

Exhorbitant: Energy = Mass diff / Max Adv - range of Advantage.

Normally, exhorbitant energy is usable and generated. Sometimes, if the device is self-powered without fuel, the exhorbitant energy may be over-unity, although there are few examples of this so far.

Advanced Precepts

That mathematics lacks qualities.

What if people see it such that the alternative to bad may only be very well 'made up'.

That paranoid people are probably paranoid about paranoia.

That God's book of infinite life became the devil's book of complicated devils.

That magic is mystical.

That nirvana might explain all by explaining one. Yet, nirvana is one to all, I believe.

Thursday, September 26, 2019

Magic Mass Theory

I have recently conjectured (in The Leibniz Conjectures) that magic holds the key to technology. It is only natural then that magic also be extended to matter, as might be evident from examining the below article on neutrinos.

Essentially, magic might explain differences in mass that cannot be explained by any particle theory.

Magic mass theory might explain human psychosis as a desire for invisible power, or as control by hidden forces encoded in an unseen essence (magic). Magic would open society to a mental yet often irrational factorialization.

Irrational factorialization may explain phenomena in outer space, as already shown in astrophysical observatories.

The will to control by some psychological rule may explain disparities between phenomena. A mixture of several effects, or even a diversity, might be active:

1. Old grump / Young grump.
2. Butterfly effect / Mystery.
3. Processor / Psychological Virus.
4. Artist / Sorceror.

Note these effects would be mostly accountable in dark matter.

In the Leibniz Conjectures, the mechanism of impossibility was connected to higher technologies, but here it may be connected to dark matter. This may indicate magic.

Another interpretation is that dark matter is essential waste energy.

If this energy has a tendency to be disintegrated, this may indicate a segue to The Disintegral, which has been known to suggest a trinity of time-universe, wormholes, and consciousness. This may be the missing piece as far as Magic Mass Theory, suggesting magical interaction on a grand scale through phenomena such as those listed.

This may also lead to limited and unlimited probability theory.

Touches on:

Classic Magic.
Classic Gravity.
Classic Psychology.
Classic Trinity.


The Leibniz Conjectures

Real Virtuality Primer

Concept Tree.

Minding Things.

Eternal Roads.

Fast Paths / False Doors.

Great Songs / Encounters.

Miracle / Miscelles.

Troubt / Doubles.

Orderain / Plurre.

Difficelt / Terreste.

Mutain / Concester.

Fent / Willop-poer.

Trest / Schem.

Fam Alt.












Rood / Rope.


The Semantics of Madness

Avoiding madness seems to at least require opinions.

Any true opinion is rational enough to be above madness.

But there are some that are wrong about their most basic opinions. Let me give examples.

There is a dubious rule which guides some people to think the second-to-worst is actually the worst, or something moderately good is actually not moderately good, or the best is actually the second-to-best.

Philosophers at least value their opinions.

Which means they actually know that opinions aren't madness. (In this way, they aren't wrong, so they are rational beings).

You see, assuming opinions are rational can do the same service as having rational opinions, if the end result is someone who isn't wrong.

In semantics this is true even if it is only true semantically. So, in effect the philosopher is rational even if his opinions are not right, as long as they are not wrong.

So, in effect, all a philosopher needs is an opinion if he wishes to prove rationality, that and the ability for ethical correctness.

Ethics Links

Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Big Ideas Part 29


Different Stem:
Meta-system mentality.

* Obscure intellect, for example alien languages.
* Occult intellect.

Empirical Technology:

* Impossible Magic.
* Possible Magic.

Big Ideas

Demi-Logical Strategies

To live in a land of abundance.

To try one's luck.

Paths cleared for progress.

Clear communication.

To take advantage of commercial trade.

Good qualities and neutral properties.

Imposed order.

Meaningful regulations.

Military strategy.

Police tactics.

Libertarian rationale.

Protests and deregulation.

Special research.

New clever standards.

Meta-system mentality.

Obscure intellect, for example alien languages.

Occult intellect.

The Leibniz Conjectures

One should believe in a variety of mechanics, just as one believes in the possibility of implementing mechanics at all.

Mechanics cannot be perfect because atoms are messy. However, the ideal can be approximated, see Ideal Lever.

If one mechanic shows large possibility, one can expect more detailed possibilities from it, just as the consideration of many possibilities suggests occasionally clever possibilities. The more clever, the more likely possibilities follow from it.

Now if there is physical possibility, one might expect something very clever, as cleverness is correlated already with physical possibility. Now, we see a correlation between probability and technology.

Now, if you have the greatest technology, one or many, all technology may follow from it, just as the existence of any technology follows from probability.

Therefore, if you do not have the greatest technology, it follows there are many technologies undiscovered. And equally, if you know you have not discovered some basic minor technology, you know you do not have the greatest technology.

Now, if you have a possibility you can make it s technology if it has a physical description. Therefore technology begins with a physical description. Not only that, but one which expresses possibility.

However, if we do not know possibility, it may as well be expressed in terms of impossibility, yet, yet it is possible still. When it is expressed materially, impossibility becomes possible if the technology was greater (more clever) or a product of greater technology.

Now the obvious determination is that cleverness is the only term of technology, far and above probability, therefore some technologies may be like magic, and this must be true at least relatively.

Therefore, it is as fair to say that technology is clever as it is to say new technology is magic. After sll, it performs functions we didn't imagine, and really at this point if matter is no restriction, magic does not seem impossible.

But since we have already said the best technology is permitted a kind of impossibility, then the best technology must certainly be impossible magic. So, as far as empirical technology, we now have a formula: impossible magic. But as for un-empirical technology, it's formula must involve magical possibility.  Therefore, magic must be some kind of realization, likely either against matter, or against impossibility. So, it is defined as impossible matter or immaterial impossibility.

The Mirthy Semantics

Would it be certain if we were having fun? Were we having fun after all, and would we call it fun?

What would be a miracle? And would it all manifest?

Have we seen time travel at all? Have we been so blessed?

What is the ransom of the year? Who owns time?

What is the sublime? What is the name of a true number?

Mystics like these circle around, but can we wonder about their purpose or their intent?

The world's secrets are not completely 'open', things might not be as they appear, we do not always know the price of pleasure or the way the next day will begin.

We do not know the secret of good and bad luck.

And we don't know what we will find in our soup, or whether if we cheat we'll be a cooked duck, or how precisely our recipe is supposed to go, or whether we are supposed to have an ego.

Abstract, Independent Elements

Abstract Polyps

Alien Polytics

Alien Lessons

Afine Conjectures

Aesthetic Consciousness


Naturalistic Aphorisms

Tuesday, September 24, 2019

Why, Given Mathematical Evidence, Perpetual Motion Machines Are Real Even If They Aren't Built

Because, logically, it might not be built even if it works.

Monday, September 23, 2019

A Manifesto of Future Privileged Significance

(This was a response to the question of ‘are you a mass of clones?’ which explains the attitude…)

I feel like one being, a causal essence of historical value.

I have done some of the best things that could ever be done with information.

However, the world is trying to sell me into slavery to petty morals like physique and a foolish sort of ‘adding up later’, and the idea that I absolutely don’t think.

In fact, the world is forgetting that I had real potential and made use of it, not only that but I surpassed any mortal standard as far as the quality of my philosophy.
However, since I am miserable, I still lack privilege, and moving further may involve declaring some sort of superiority to the people around me.

The original intention of playing the other people was to make me look inferior. But at this point, it is merely a dubious attempt to prove human equality, utter folly and frankly a waste of resources to say that as far as my own evolution other people are not a waste of time or an expensive set of avoidable delusions.

The real program would advance my agenda, because it is the information age, and I offer information.

But somehow the great powers that be have once again forgot the morals of the past, and have not adapted to the real meaning of new information.
So, I feel stuck. I feel like I have to survive like an animal. One of my only major defenses is that I believe in metaphysical standards and the rarity of the human soul. I know it doesn’t look like a good argument to argue the way I argue if you are being very cruel, but when all is considered realistically piece-by-piece, I still offer one of the best programs like I imagine I have done many times in the past.

The excuse this time is that I’m poor and don’t know the difference between good and bad. But that is a trumped up argument and doesn’t even have sense.

I wish things were better. People don’t know how much this means to me and how heavily it should be weighed. I have suffered too much to believe in mere human equality. It would be folly to make everyone suffer more than me if they contained any ounce of what they assume is proven genius. In the end they would just end up having short meaningless lives, lacking purpose, or feeling that they had been deceived if they are even allowed to analyze.

My cards are good. I’m sorry people assumed I was gambling. It’s more like I was playing divine tarot, I was just not given the privileges that I deserved or the platform where strategy mattered.
Things may seem random. I may become a mere animal. But the fact remains that I am one of the greatest beings. Not in the way I feel, but in the strategies and subtle resources that I possess.
I find the world frightening and mad, but I am the one put in a corner. It’s sad. I should rationally expect better. The world has been presented as a troubling place full of red tape, but frankly I should be dispensed with this. I am on a higher plane. It is not a flying ego, it is someone who holds the key to various types of superhuman promise. People don’t know how important I am, or how much basic standards of living can make a difference. I know a lot of the semantics people would expect me to know, but I am not a flash performer in the social ways people anticipate. Yet again my worth to the world is being missed, because no one in control wants to learn new tricks. If there was sense to the great powers they would know how to at least make a list of ideas, or to read a list of ideas, or to consider if one or another idea on a list was something new. But since there is no ambition from anyone to assess whether I deserve any better in life, I merely pile up these cards which would surely be superhuman except that I am scraping along at the most subsistence level of genuine privileges. There is an obvious blindness to my intellectual good fortune. An unwillingness to reward significant heroism. An inability to see anything new or consider anything outside of what is assumed. In my slightly bitter perspective, it is hard to see why things don’t improve. The world is mad, evidently. They believe in neither genuine rarity nor genuine privilege. So, all I can really do is register a complaint and fit within some obscure notion of education which is exceptional enough to eventually make a big splash on people’s sensory system.

The world changes little enough. Maybe that is because no one feels good. But then they tell me I’m not trying to feel good, I’m just not understanding. But the reality is quite opposite of what they think is happening. I am in my 21st or so life, with a very complex strategy devoted to improving ideas and demonstrating exceptional greatness. But I am treated neither as great nor as an intellectual, simply because the system has some messy reasoning which says that the system is always ahead of my profound agenda. Believe it or not, I didn’t prove I was stupid. At least that should mean something. One would think even basic education would give me advantages at some point, if what they mean by stupidity is having a genius historical strategy. I think the overwhelming evidence is that it’s laughable how little credit they give me compared to what I am actually worth. They still want superficial actors and people who get beat up. Why don’t they try a little dose of authenticity, and reward someone who has real cards but doesn’t follow obscure jerrymandering to prove a point. The things other people do to merely LOOK like they have an advantage are utterly ridiculous. A lot of it looks like pure luck, and not because the people are charming or bright. Then they tell me I have all the flaws other people don’t have, but they’re not seeing the point that other people are just not geniuses. If the reward system made sense and I was evolving into other people by a meaningful process that would be one thing. But instead they’re conveying the message that I should die for their liberty with no possible advantage to myself ever in eternity. Obviously, something about the world’s or God’s sensibility now sucks. It’s obviously not my fault because if I could take advantage of having a fun, outwardly-agreeable life that would be an obvious route to take but it was far and away not an option for me like it was an option for nearly anyone else. I’m sensing a deep and abiding usory, and frankly a lack of meaningful common sense. I suspect I will keep saying negative things until some kind of thoughtless fortuity takes the place of the nonsense I have so far been presented. I’m not talking about what they think is my pitiful mind, I’m talking about the state of the real world.
Sometimes real things happen is hard to communicate when you’re the only one working on … knowledge, energy, the sublime, etc. The points I have proven are frankly over the top and I will be blown away if life does not improve greatly for everyone that finds significance palatable.
—-Nathan Coppedge


Saturday, September 21, 2019

The Story of the Real-World Death of Hitler

What, now! Stop it!

What would you like?

A billion dollars? What about a trillion?

Kill me? You can't do that!

There would be a riot on every street corner.

The world would go mad.

Then they killed him.

History Links

Friday, September 20, 2019

Deontology of Contemporaneous Past-Life Regression

Many return to the idea that Hitler was an artist.

They see Dizney Land is run by someone that looks similar.

Similar, a word reminding people of evolution.

Picasso, also thought to be The Artist, living at this time.

'Similar' reminding us of innocence.

Innocence associated with sin.

But the modern, a time of salvation from the primitive.

The conclusion, in an unframed format of mind, is that Hitler is a real person, otherwise we are led to believe we had no past life, or we were not saved by the modern.

If we were not saved by the modern, we could have been apes experimented on, which would lead to now, only without salvation.

If we had no past life, we are led to now, it is the same as what people believe.

Only all of this sounds like what Hitler thinks.

Thus, Hitler is The Artist.

You see, religion believes in authority. Science believes in Hitler. Hitler believes in mother and father.

History believes if I am after the modern and I am not an ape and I am savwd by the modern I may be like I am now.

Only, Hitler sees us as ghosts. Ghosts would survive in the modern landscape. An artist reading Heidegger.

Thus, one can survive interpreting The Artist.

Should one be a ghost forever?

Is it worse to try to exist?

Or should knowledge itself become a ghost?

The scary thing is even Hitler, The Modern Artist, may hold old pretensions.

It may be, although a contemporaneous strategy, knowledge should not die.

It may be that life is more terrible than death, yet this seems to say I am a ghost. Ghosts, did they die the death of the terrible or not? You see, many would think that ghosts are dead, but if ghosts are not dead, then who?

It seems to me, Hitler had me commit to a ghostly theory, so I am always in some way a ghost. But this suggests that I cannot exist, and I cannot have ghostly knowledge.

Hitler might say my knowledge is already a ghost, however a ghost is likely the realest thing I know.

Would it be clearer if I am merely terrified by Hitler, if I need emotional therapy or wish to survive in some form further from him? How much of history has to be Heidegger? How much of history has to be ghosts for that matter? There has been ample opportunity for verve and tenacity. I don't feel like a loser, I feel like a winner.

Why Hitler? Why ghostly Holocausts? Isn't modernism over? Do we have to suppose things get any worse? Is there such a thing as climbing a ladder? Am I the last man on spaceship earth?

I wish I had a better system. Then I felt like I found intriguing examples.

The world doesn't scream. It doesn't really say Hitler is an Artist. So, unless I am some kind of ghost, I may as well go with the theory that Hitler is terrifying.

See also:

The Story of the Real-World Death of Hitler


On the Philosophy of Manly Hall


Known primarily for the concept of 'recent initiation by a goddess', Hall is also known for the concept of 'taking care', 'taking care with secrets' and 'careful initiation'.

Although these concepts are important for fraternities (sometimes with a meaning similar to Mystery Schools), my conclusion is that Hall adds excessive mystique from any commonsense point of view.

Although fraternities might promise additional 'honors', the empirical meaning of such honors is heavily truncated by the duration of a life. The same could be said of wealth, psychic powers, or literary acclaim.

My further result is that what Hall offers, and what he was given, is not completely different than the accomplishments of a well-known, if prolific writer. I think if you looked for a long list of his biggest ideas you would be hard-pressed to find it.

Given that he was so obsessed with fame, it is ironic that he is known to be a member of a secret fraternity.

Other thinking:

Manly P. Hall --- Wikipedia

History of Philosophy

Analytic Immortality

Similar and different.

Yan's Theory: Similar and yet different.

Brian's Theory: Immortal but with a difference.

Scarpa's Theory: Similar, but somehow unchanged.

Ryan's Theory: Immortal, but not similar.

Bruno's Theory: Not the same, but made to be the same.

Michael's Theory: Similar, but with no meaningful difference.

Renee's Theory: Not the same, but with the correct difference.

Owen's Theory: Meaningfully the same, but actually different meaningfully.

Lyon's Theory: They look different, but they act the same.

Jeffrey's Theory: Theoretically different, but functionally the same.

Nathan's Theory: Strategically varying but functionally similar, but that does not solve the problem.


Strategy varies infinitely but the function remains similar: indicates timeless place.

The Dialectich of Intriqui

An exercise in semantics perhaps.

I think everyone is innocent --Paul.

Knowledge is the highest standard for mortals.

Only God is infinite.

If mortals are innocent and held to the highest standard, God may love them, so in that way God is innocent.

Since all are innocent, knowledge is held to an absolute standard.

Since knowledge is held to such a high standard, all are innocent.

It turns out the question of how to prove knowledge is rather ambitious. By this point we can conclude ambition is a similar term to knowledge. Some excess of apparent knowledge is necesssry to schieve ambition, which itself comes before actual knowledge. Thus, a vast appearance of knowledge precedes actual knowledge.

This explains how all are innocent, for God cannot have knowledge of innocence while having absolute knowledge, so mortals are said to premise, as God is not absolutely innocent to a mortal.

Now what is contained within ambition must be experience with appearances, and so ambition must be generated out of that or what came before. So, ambition is merely superficial desire of some extreme kind which we may call superficial wisdom.

Thus, out of superficial wisdom comes ambition, which is the means to adequate appearances which are a prerequisite for knowledge.

What makes superficial wisdom must be some kind of resemblance. Thus, a law of similarity is an underlying principle.

Thus, things arise out of similarity, they become superficially wise by situations which require wisdom, then led to excess they become ambitious, and if they are great in appearance they are called knowledgeable. Yet, above all this, only God is infinite.

Keys to the X, Y, and Z Axes

Key to the X: Exponential Efficiency.

Key to the Y: Modality.

Key to the Z: Inherency.

Mathematics Links

Evasion Theory

Coherent Creativity

Avoiding Bees: 20 Degrees off opposite direction.

Study of Dimensional Schizophrenia

(A) schizophrenic may begin to find an analogy for their space.

They may want to stamp 'worth it!' on the upper left middle wall to officially connect the two worlds.

Yet they may want to keep their thinking secret.

Sharing information may taint it with 'Syn' in other words, a false correspondence.

What the therapist says at this point will look painfully false.

Careful investigation will result in feelings of temporary, excessive intimacy regardless of the gender of the therapist.

In the case that intimacy contradicts the schizophrenic's sexuality, a prolonged negativity will be produced sometimes accompanied by a willingness to smile.


Thursday, September 19, 2019

The Difference Between Eastern and Western Views of Immortality

This view may be a little esoteric.

I am ignoring, as is my norm in cases like this, the most common norms, at least in the West, as it is given to believing rightly enough in the falsity of common opinions in the West.

As to the East, that is the usual source of myths of this sort. The myth of the Fountain of Youth might be traced to Dutch contact with the Japanese and their plant called Amatazuru, perhaps confused in some way with the sprouting appearance of French fountains in vogue at the time.

The Japanese plant, like so many other stories, for example the ones about the original Chinese gods who lived in a little house far from the city, originate with Kwang Kuo (known also as Zheng Guo), the son of a coinmaker, who after returning from exile in Japan, was instructed to find an herb in the mountains by the Tall One. Supposedly the knowledge of this herb, called now Jiaogulan, was previously unknown before him.

Much of what is known factually today about immortality is derived from this one source, such as the style of Qi Gong and the continuation of the thought of immortality in the West.

There was some truth it was thought in the Eastern idea, less so in the West. This was why the West came to be known as death, and the East the fountain of light.

The West still had an idea of it however, contained within objects such as the scabbard of the Sword Excalibur and the tricky perhaps divine medicine called Panacea. Excalibur's scabbard granted invulnerability yet only when it was worn. Panacea was a gift rarely granted to mortals. But the consensus is both notions are fables. Indeed, even the fountain of youth, which seemed like a real place, seemed more promising.

An armorer would probably not tell you every common scabbard was from Excalibur, and a doctor would be quick to tell you there is no perfect panacea. Thus, the Western myths were almost like corrupting symbols.

Only the myths derived from the East had any authenticity.

Chinese Philosophy

The Philosophy of Galen Strawson


Many avoid Strawson because they feel he is so serious.

You can just about remember all of Strawson without referring to notes.


1. Strawson thinks free will is impossible because if we determine ourselves we must determine from outside ourselves.

2. Strawson adopts panpsychism because we have evidence of the mental, which must also be irreducibly physical.


Under Double-Compatibilism determinism and free will are almost interchangeable, so an argument for determinism would never have the authority to refute free will. In this view, free will is maximized when the preferences are met, which can theoretically occur without causation.

Even if panpsychism is adopted, physicsl reality may commit mental events to certain properties which may have traditional physical boundaries. For example, if someone is a telepathic ear, they may just consider hearing telepathic. The telepathic events may just reduce to normal senses and chemical noise. If there is an exceptional case it may be exceptional chemical noise filtered through ordinary senses---a genius sensation.

Galen Strawson