Over 6.4 Million Views at Nathan Coppedge's Gallery 2 Now

...

For a brief time Hyper-Cubism was listed #53 in Individual Artists under bestsellers:

https://www.amazon.com/Nathan-Coppedges-Hyper-Cubism-Post-Cubist-Paintings/dp/1499231512/

Latest stats:

...

Anticipated New Releases in Analytic Philosophy August 2022: 2nd place, fallen from 1st:

https://www.amazon.com/History-Coherence-Nathan-Larkin-Coppedge/dp/B0B92NWYJB/

Amazon Ranked #35 in Philosophy Reference (Kindle store) I'm not sure why... but there I am... right after Routledge on Kant:

CLICK BELOW TO VISIT NATHAN'S MOST POPULAR GALLERY:

http://impossiblemachine.com/Gallery2/main.php

MAIN PROFILE: Nathan Coppedge Quora


HYPER-CUBISM, ETC

New milestones:

June 2021: Over 100000 views to my youtube channel now.

June 21, 2021 High like count for first time on facebook....

Crossed 11 Million total views to all content online.

Passed 7 Million overall views on Quora. (2021)

Passed 1,000 impressions / day for a month on Youtube for the first time. (Dec 2020)

I happened to tabulate, and my collective content online has now passed 10 million views (2021)

How far I've clomb!

I'm consistently a top writer on Coherence at Quora:

January 5, 2021: 1st day with 100 more unique viewers on youtube than the previous day (viewers not subscribers).

MARCH 2021 YOUTUBE: 

Unique Viewers went over 1000 / day for for the first time two days in a row.

March 2021... 1/20 of a million views over 1 year for the first time.

Then they fell to nothing for several weeks...

..

I learned that I have more subscribers on youtube than Ulrich de Balbian the philosopher who I believe wrote about me.

...

Indication that I'm earning 4 MILLION VIEWS / year on Quora now, as of October 2021:

Maybe the most honest earnings in perpetual motion:

Not 'Cerning' very much:

June 2022: It's possible I'm a major blogger now...

...

One website, probably a bit 'off' claims I earn $80 / year from my blog. I'm not sure you should believe them. Seems like I'm earning about $1 / year from my blog and maybe they haven't sent the money yet...

...

I don't know if anyone reads those things, but:

Soul Saves

Divine Inspiration of the Unified Synthesis

When I first wrote a document called the Unified Synthesis a few years before the TOE, I was told by a silent voice that it wasn't the real thing (yet).

Here I describe the beginning at least of what I take to be the real thing, which was an unformed inspiration for the Theory of Everything.
...

This may be somewhat hard to grasp even compared to the T.O.E., but it is one of the only ways to 'protologize' or more fundamentally, alternately analyze the T.O.E. without referring to very specific applications.

First, you develop an ability to objectively synthesize experience, which is to say, communicate the essence of experience objectively. We call this objective synthization.

Next, we have a more analytic 'unifying ability' which acts previously and separately. This is the ability to synthesize all relevant information content separately but in conjunction with experience, in this case as though with the Programmable Heuristics.

When we have the synthization and the unification together, with the synthization considered first but the unification 'written' first, then we reach the beginning of the true Unified Synthesis.

However, even at this point it must be acknowledged that it is only being considered analytically, and the true form of the ability must be rather rare, in a similar way to the way thinking about  enlightenment is far more common than actually achieving it in an unqualified fashion.

Inspiration for The Theory of Everything

The Magic Concept Pyramid

1. Exponential Efficiency

1. Coherentism (Knowledge, Unification), 2. Natural Momentum, Perpetual motion, Immortality (Time, Animation, Reproduction, Health, Perfection).

1. Absoluteness (Reality), 2. Over-Unity (Meta, Energy), 3. Universe, Greatness.

...

Theory of Mechanisms

Mechanical Mechanisms:

Overall Dimension = mechanisms + distances


Temporal Mechanisms:

Flux = energy + time


Computational Mechanisms:

Computation = results + time


Electrical Mechanisms

Electricity = variation in current


Deception Mechanisms:

Deception = information + distortion


Destructive Mechanisms:

Destruction = target + damage


Relevant Mechanisms:

Relevance = (Meta - Form) / Power


Cognitive Mechanisms:

Cognition = Disagreement + Imperfection + Smallness + Riddles


Reality Mechanisms

Reality = (Anything /= Stupid)

...

excluded from major editions:

Dimensions of intelligence:

(1) The Sphinx: Big perfect things die.

(2) Lack of Significance: There are big disagreements about big miserable problems.

(3) Ugliness: There is perfect disagreement about cute dilemmas.

(4) Internal Conflict: Everyone can agree when it comes to flaws, little things, and Sphinxian riddles.

Proof Method of Categorical Exclusion

In process, based on:

Formula for Answering All Questions

The formula for answering questions says:

"The answer is formulated by saying the opposite subject of what you are concerned with in the perfect question confirms the object of the question."

This is unhelpful, as it just refers to the question formula:

Coherent Questions

The question formula says:

“The opposite of you related to something different from both your opposite and you.”

Therefore in this case the exclusion would be:

1. The main subject (Cat A).

2. The true polar opposite of main subject or subjectively what the main subject dislikes (Cat C).

3. A guess about what the concern of (1,2) are (Cat B), and if correct:

4. The true polar opposite or thing disliked by (3) = (Cat D).

...

So, since those four when complete describe the proper ultimate subject and proper ultimate context, a few notes:

* Each may be seen as sufficient because we can elaborate on them individually.
* Else, if they cannot be elaborated, it is impossible to know about them, and since we are adopting no limits on how to acquire data, that means those things that cannot be elaborated cannot wxist, as there is no conceivable way in eternity to even think of information on them.

Thus, the logic of categorically complete meaning 'exclusive' categories is:

1. There is a subject (A).

2. The subject resists something (C)., even if it is nothing.

3. There is a proper context B-D.

4. That context also includes resistance, even if it is nothing.

Insight Into Dolphin Language

Dolphin language Part 2

See also: Dolphin language Part 1

An empirical language, which is to say it is figurative, interacting with the environment.

In this sense, rhetorical: inflective.

Also, in the sense of water, infinite.

Humble, mystical.

Also, aware of loud noises.

Brain size may be partly a response to pain.

Tool-minimal language, meaning certain tasks may be exaggerated and interesting, like humans have words for travel, dolphins may have sounds for familiar tactile sensations like eating fish or growing daring.

A single inflection may be a situator for other clicks, the louder the click the more 'situating'.

Situating is analogous to the experiences dolohins have.

A common experience may be the bones of a fish, thus structure based on bones and the water surface may develop.

Perhaps narrative or non-localized thinking.

This may implicate awateness of extended environments like the stars or global events.

Also, the traction of sound with the water, and water noises.

Another view is that dolphin language is radically sectarian and aggressive.

Viewing swimming as an aggressive thing can lend insight into their language.

Swimming --> Sectarian --> Regrouping --> Comprehending --> Situating --> Asking --> What is it --> Fish --> Water --> Impossible

It is possible dolphins see omniscience ss one simple click.

Why not? Their brains are big.

With a big enough brain references csn be more sparse.

It may be that dolphin language is a response to their brain.

The dolphin is able to interpret through understanding.

An important concept is the reference network, (which to be simple is like fish).

However, it could also be sounds.

The memory of sounds and fish understood as a reference structure, like eating fish, or thinking about dolphin behavior.

A Sid Meier version of Weird Politics

A small band of Barbarians is camped out in Virginia.

Then perpetual motion is invented in New Haven.

Then the majority of the science citizens turn to unhappy faces.

Then more barbarian groups spring up in Boston and Washington DC.

Then the US changes its form of government from Republic to despotism.

Then there is a Democratic coup and the US declares war on Russia.

Then all hell breaks loose...

Politics Links

Psycho Therapy for Depressed People

1

There is no 'added' thing.

But it might be a trick question, right?

But if you want a coffee or you don't, either one is a way to live, right?

Let's just say there is no 'added' thing making you uncomfortable.

2

You don't want to feel bad.

Then you want to focus on the feeling of nothing.

That is fine too, because it is not a bad feeling.

Sanity Resources

Bad Mandarin

If you know mandarin, it is just like knowing how to write.

Not easy, you think?

Well, if we know how to write what's ugly, like this:

ン

Then we write what's ugly.

It is just like speaking Hebrew.

If we know how to write mandarin we also know how to write.

Now, speaking mandarin requires some knowledge of phonetics.

It is not just understanding and writing, but speaking Mandarin.

Mandarin is an intelligent language.

Which means all the Europeans borrowed from it.

Which means you can learn some Mandarin by learning about the European languages.

The Characteristic Interface

IMPROVED VERSION:

Thought --> agent --> queue --> (reference).
Context --> relevance --> exclamation --> scrimmage.



L-->

(1) Symbolic (function / interpret)

--> Desc (Savgam)

1. Modify.
2. Wait.
3. Codify.

--> (Ref).

(2) Formatic (sense-dimensions) --> Semantic (medium, report, modify, repeat)

--> Primal Efficiency
…1. General, generic.
…4. Preferred methodology.
…8. Summarization.
…16. Iterativation.

(3) Genus --> Species

--> Evolve.

1. Prediction.
2. Gather research.
3. Apply prediction in light of research.

(4) Complete

Phase Logic

1. Fundamentals. (Example: Protomathematics, problem-checking).
2. Concept phase. (Example: Sophistry, Art, Organizational Diagrams, Rocket Science).
3. Function phase. (Example: Math Operators, Sine Wave, Coppedge's Categorical Deduction, Functional Prototype).
4. System phase. (Example: Coherentism, Calculus, Coherent Calculus, Orbital Satellite).
5. Problem phase. (Example: Generalitic and species knowledge, riddles, broad strokes and hairsplitting, evolution of concept).
6. Meta-Problem. (Examples: The idea of Paradox, semantic versions of a theory, irrationalism, chaos theory, advanced models).
7. Meta-System. (Examples: The Pyramids, Kantian Idealism, Quantum Mechanics, Space Race)
8. Meta-Function. (Example: occult magic, String Theory, infinity, state-of-the-art).
9. Meta-Concept. (Example: Neo-Platonism, mathematics, Mission to Mars).
10. Meta-Basic. (Example: Copernican Revolution, Socratic Method, the eye of the stranger, quadruple semantics, Mars colonization).

--> Alt (Proof Method of Categorical Exclusion).

1. There is a subject (A).
2. The subject resists something (C)., even if it is nothing.
3. There is a proper context B-D.
4. That context also includes resistance, even if it is nothing.

--> Shift (Advanced Pragmatism).

Chronology -->
Early-adopter case.
Conservatuve case.
Confirm conservative case unless confirm early-adopter case.
Repeat (Conservative case may now be like an early-adopter case).
…

[End / Repeat]




...

EARLIER VERSION:

This is like an idea card version of the characteristica.

• Subject / Soul.
• Vertical = index / elements.
• Horizontal = context / description.
• Diagonal: critique / added details.
• Profile section: links on topic.
• Systems: interpretation / formulas.
• Substance: archaeology / credentials.
• Abstracta: extract / paradigms.
• Organon: idea / insight.
• Devils: problems / aspects.

Based on:

• Characteristica Universalis

• Categories.
• Vertical = entity, value, principle, power.
• Horizontal = degree, standard, commonality, honor.
• Diagonal: judgment, energy, resources, substance.
• Organic lines: coherence, boundary, dimensions, limit.
• Systems: identities.
• Substance: quanta, bosons, spacetime, posits.
• Abstracta: complexity, efficiency, perfection, beauty
• Organon: Nature, Wisdom.
• Flags: Inflection, Incorporation, Notation, Tradition.

...

Overall, based on earlier: A Manual of Options

Efficient Adaptation

A Kind of Dialectic of Adaptation

Under unusually good circumstances, unique traits develop in response to things like (extremely) special information and (extremely) special thinking. In human societies this is a very recent phenonenon.

In a wealthy society, amenities can promote positive recessive trait advantages, which ordinarily would be eliminated due to common dangers or undesirability.

In an industrial society, roles are created for engineers and physicists, resulting in higher mean IQ. Similarly, in a Golden Age, linguists, inventors, and other thinkers are more likely to have influence.

In a society that is at war, military skills, some of them being technical, are at a premium, and leadership often values the survival of male children to military age. Such society may also create engineers.

In a survival environment, with sufficient resources humanoids will develop who are capable of motivating themselves with pleasure and similar things.

Philosophy of Zadie Smith

(2000)

White teeth.

Good, or bad actually.

Oh man?

What?

The soul of the book is bad boyz.

What else?

I think she does a lot with syntax.

Oh, syn-tax, what an original concept, maybe it's about bad boyz.

I think it's a tech matter.

Oh, that's original. Maybe the bad boyz made a big move.

It's like that, only smaller in scale.

Like it fits in her pocketbook.

I suppose it would Weill in there.

Silly cops.

What did it say?

Bad boyz.

She can play, that's what's on her mind.

Why did she say tech?

Goodie two shoes.

What?

The soul of the book is bad boyz.

She thought she wrote the bible.

What is this, an action movie?

Move over, Al Gore.

What's her principle?

Derissiveness.

You got that right.

How did she do that?

She's an African-American [woman] and she wrote a book.

She's got soul, somebody says.

That's her kind of treatment.

The pages are bleeding.

Where's her apartment, I didn't know this was a magic car?

When is she going to atone? Is she def?

What?

This is the bad boyz, we've just done something bad.

Why doesn't she say that?

Because she's the invisible narrator.

Invisible? Invincible more like it. What is her favorite brand of shampoo?

None of your business.

See what I mean?

Who are you?

Nobody.

Someone says.

Someone with soul.

...

CRITIQUE: People get a feeling like, maybe Zadie Smith is the greatest genius, but I don't know what her ideas are. Some philosophers are like, she’s pretty smart, she discovered something about men.

...


History of Philosophy

The Philosophy of the Everybody Dies Book

There was a debate about who originated the Theory of Everything.

Ken Tanaka's book used the letters E and D and appeared to refer to a Theory of Everything, but not everyone sees the connection as explicitly a reference to efficiency and difference.

However, Everybody Dies (tm) is from May 2014, only slightly later than Nathan's most basic objective knowledge formulas which came long before Nathan's Theory of Everything.

Therefore it could be seen that Nathan borrowed The Theory of Everything in part from the initials for Everybody Dies.

In fact, on several occasions, explicit references were made in Nathan's presence to how Everybody Dies should be translated as a Theory of Everything.

Making things more complicated, time-travelers may have inspired Nathan's T.O.E. on purpose already knowing the result.

After that realization it is clear Tanaka has precedent if he is a time-traveler who knows about Nathan's theory, otherwise he should make the reference explicit. If not, it could be seen as a lucky coincidence, but still a point of inspiration for the actual Theory.

Additional Theories:

People are bound together by their connection to the Matrix movie.

David Ury wanted to act in the Mattix and possibly invented a Theory of Everything.

Nathan Coppedge wanted to be inspired by the Matrix and thought it could be used as an idea-platform for perpetual motion machines.

Some people say 'nerded on Matrix' to refer to sex.

In this system if Nathan tends to think of men when he associates ideas, that might be needing help, which is like gay Matrix.

Straight Matrix would be more like directing.

Directors.

People who need a clue.

But if sex always looks like that it looks awfully reductive.

Besides, Nathan already seemed to have a Theory of Everything before thinking of any real-world connection to Ken Tanaka, so that doesn't seem so much like needing help as making use of diverse resources.

Inspiration for The Theory of Everything

Advanced Language Testing

Based on the concept of certified linguistics acquisition testing.

Then, the components are likely: retension (memory / range), liquid intelligence (forming variety of sentences), and formal concepts (grasping deeper parts of a specific language).
This would be tested for more than one language.

Questions to simplify are asking What languages you speak, and then assessing how challenging those languages tend to be.

In terms of English language, here is a ranking of how challenging languages are:

Least -->
Basic English.
Intermediate English.
Advanced Spanish Basics
Latin roots (some prefixes and suffixes)
Greek Alphabet
Very Basic French.
Some grasp of Polish humor
Some Latin
Intuitive Language
More Advanced French
Some German roots
Fake Italian
Basic Chinese (big step)
Some Hieroglyphs
Rosetta Stone type thinking
Beginner Reading Arabic
Intuitive Japanese
Essence of Korean
Universal Languages
Basics of Reading Ancient Mongolian.
Very Basic Italian
Some Turkish grammar
Super-Advanced English
Intuitive Hebrew

Ancient Hindi

Golden Secrets
Grasping Romanian
Russian
Integrated in French culture
Integrated in Chinese culture
< -- Most