For those that don't know

I'm still in school (hopefully to be completed). I'm taking one class per semester, so at this rate I'll be done in about 12 and a half years, considering the requirements. Anyway, my current course is a course for my major called Pre-Socratics to Plotinus.

On the first day, the professor didn't show up. That means I've spent four bus tickets on this class---two to get the book yesterday, to be prepared for class, and two today for an untaught classroom.

Perhaps there is a detection problem, along the lines of "one of the students wrote a book of philosophy, so therefore the professorship is covered". I felt kind of like the philosopher of the day, although I admit it's exaggerated in my mind, because another student was saying as much as I was. I have a habit of exaggerating everyday conversations, although it's clear enough that it could be a short leap to interesting areas of interest.

By the time I finish at Southern, I'll have published nearly thirty books, at my current rate of production! And at two or three times that of works which I chose not to publish, or saved for a day when I had more capital.

Since I don't plan on earning a PhD., the only more prestigious thing I can think of doing after I graduate is to publish essays at peer-review quality journals on the internet. It's a pity my philosophy is going to waste in the meantime, but at least there's some significance to the idea that respectable journals require an education.

It will be interesting to see if there is a large difference between my final papers and my private work. They are becoming vastly divided, with the small exception of the composition class in which I was allowed to mention Gottlieb Frege.

I can feel the pressure to mention Mozart, and go down what appears to be an artificial lane of belated conceits and exaggerations, promising things that could only be achieved by a more humble-minded and acerbic approach.

Alas! How will I explain myself in twelve years? It is like the future is already gone, but much is being achieved without any evidence of reward! What a small world, with such bad ideas! There are some people who would mistakenly think the same thing of me.

I made my biggest ever bible commentary

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/The_Jews_believed_that_God_made_a_contract_with_them_called_a&altQ=The_Jews_believed_that_God_made_a_contract_with_them_called_an

The only comment from another user is the statement that Jews are a treasured people.

Am I being too abusive? Is it wrong to think Moses was an advanced philosopher?

I am writing with the future plan of publishing a book of poems titled "Poems by God", and a second book called "God's Tractatus" taking a quasi-polytheistic position. So it's obvious people would take offense and question what I'm talking about.

I Created Two Memes at QuickMeme.Com

Illuminati: http://www.quickmeme.com/ILLUMINATI/?upcoming

Update: Illuminati has been changed to 'Soulless Illuminati' to reflect my intentions for the meme:
http://www.quickmeme.com/Soulless-Illuminati/?upcoming

Impossible Machine: http://www.quickmeme.com/Impossible-Machine/?upcoming

I Had a Dream Which Revealed One of the Secrets of the Lord of the Rings

There are two doors which stand eternal:
The first one [Hell] leads to life eternal:
In the second one [Blank] no one dies:
The first man chooses life eternal:
Then he learns he burns infernal:
The second one chooses door the second:
Soon his death becomes a lesson:
The third man chooses to be a demon:
Ruling Hell to survive reason:
The fourth one chooses no selection:
And infinitely goes in no direction:
The fifth one is ruled by demons:
The sixth one knows the door to choose:
And stands beyond all time confused:

The critical lesson appears to be that the ring travels in two directions, as though one is hell-slaves, and the other yogis. Parts of the Lord of the Rings are references to the riddle, for example, the dwarf halls are a way of reasoning about Hell: perhaps Hell has priceless treasure (the conventional argument for God's Hell, e.g. the meaning of suffering), or perhaps Hell is merely work, in which case one might "still get burned", a way of reasoning that the value of life is incomprehensible. The immortal, in contrast, is compared to madness such as fortuity (the wild wizard) and telepathy: the message from the elf queen: suggesting things like long life is inhabited by dragons, producing the conventional duality of good and evil; In any case, it is interesting to note that this sort of riddle is the beginning of the end of the Roman Catholic belief in Hell. Assuming it is incorporated or decorporated.

Recent Twitter Posts

"Applicationism: Metaphorical Literalism"

"Language is a to-do list for relative obscurity"

"Evil people can aspire to be good, reason can aspire to madness, good people can aspire to be moral"

---Nathan Coppedge

New Cover

Here is the updated cover for the Dimensional Psychologist's Toolkit, which will be published next year:

I have posted

a number of interesting articles at academia.wikia.com.

Just search for "nathan coppedge".

Or guess which ones were posted by me anonymously, by searching the "recent additions".

Building Ideas

Consider the following approximations:

1. Subjective subjectivity

2. Relative absoluteness

3. Boolean analogy

4. Universal parable

5. Metaphorical metaphysics

?

If you can go beyond this, you might be more advanced than my encyclopedia.

Categorical Introduction to Set Theory

Let {} represent a set.

{} is boundless or represents a definition.

By Wittgenstein, definitions are atomical facts. Conceptually, a definition can have any volume, and any shape a definition takes is a formality which seeks justification.

The argument that {} represents more than a point in space is untenable unless a formality is adopted.

{However, a point in space may contain any form of representable information}

Now consider three variables, which are NOT necessarily mathematical:

'{}, info, formality'

[{}] is the form of [formality]

[info] is the contents of the [{}]

[{}] is the observable [formality]

[{}] is the formal definition

There are infinite points in a non-typological line.

If [{}] is finite, it does not take up space, unless that space is typological.

To be an observable formality, the [{}] must be infinite or typological, or both.

However, [info] necessarily has a definition, a necessary bound.

[info] without definition would be an unbounded unbounded [{}], an empty [{}].

[info] must be bounded, while the [{}] must be unbounded.

Essentially, the [{}] must formalize the [info], or the result is an empty [{}].

The obvious answer is that the formality of a [{}] consists of typological [info].

At this point, the missing variable is mathematics.

I commented at M-Phi (Mathematical Philosophy Blog)

http://m-phi.blogspot.com/2013/08/jacquettes-argument-for-inconsistency.html

http://m-phi.blogspot.com/2013/08/isomorphism-groupoid-in-gr.html

Dimensional Psychologist's Toolkit Approaching Completion

I had about 40 pages in January, and now I have the equivalent of over 180, or about 370 printed pages.

So far I have neglected to include Adler and a number of other psychologists and researchers, but I have succeeded to find a psychic technique and a method of psychological deduction, which are well described in my text.

For those interested, The Dimensional Psychologist's Toolkit, subtitled the So-Called Serious Joke Book: The Dimensional Encyclopedia, Second Volume, will be available at Amazon and Barnes & Noble early next year, from Amazon Publishing.

For Those That Don't Know

Andromeda Galaxy is colliding with the Milky Way in 3 - 5 billion years.

Here is the source link.

That doesn't mean that there is much probability of colliding with another star or planet though, supposedly.

Increased Popularity, But No Recent Purchases

My commercial art gallery at http://www.etsy.com/shop/HyperCubism has been included in over 160 favorites collections, but no purchases so far.

Also, there has been a small amount of feedback, some of it negative (but not very outspoken), on Amazon, in regards to my three published books: The 1-Page-Classics (2012), The Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit (2013), and Creeping Cadence and Cadence Continues (2013). That is, customers have not considered the current reviews very helpful. I had two sales on Amazon in May, but none since then.

I'm waiting for a review of the 1-Page-Classics by Jamie "Cat" Callan and Samantha Kusiak. Both have delayed considerably, for unknown reasons.

However, there are six "likes" for the Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit on Barnes & Noble, which feels like progress.