Saturday, August 31, 2019
Lessons of Perpetual Motion
If something works, it works, regardless of what people think.
If people don't know how something works (when it does), they must be considered ignorant in that area.
Woe be to those that underrate a new philosophy, for often enough it holds the key to the future, like Aristotle's logic.
What we consider genius is often artificially constructed on an idealized past. But geniuses are human beings, and new technology is part of the un-ideal present and future more than the ideal past.
Not absolutely everything is democracy when it comes to genius, some geniuses are better than others, and the right opinion can be rather 'expensive'.
Sometimes people, meaning usually non-experts and those who accept traditional approaches, can be very slow on the uptake.
Correct investment in cheap tools can make an enormous difference in various hairs of degree that totally change outcome.
There's no way of knowing at first how 'legendary' perpetual motion is, because currently there is too much skepticism in spite of the obscure nature of getting it right.
There are absurd requirements for how 'right' the inventor needs to be, a few of which don't need to be met, that is one of the reasons scientists happen to be wrong about it.
It took a long time to reach anything close to standardized perpetual motion equations. Now humans have a numbness to the existence of real results. That numbness will be one of the hardest things humanity has ever overcome.
Humanity still has some stupidity left. For example, perpetual motion could be great in outer space, but virtually no one has thought about this in a foundational way.
The inventor is a genius or extremely lucky, but we shouln't have to prove personality to accept that an invention works.
We shouldn't always assume the news is accurate about everything.
In coming times, we may take much greater avail of the concept of possibility.
Perpetual Motion Links
Friday, August 30, 2019
Select Projects
'Specialty Studies' Some projects through 2018.
Please visit instead: https://www.quora.com/profile/Nathan-Coppedge
Gold and Silver Potions
Yesterday. Aug 29, 2019.
...
Keep two potions, one silver and the other Gold.
When you are suffering, drink clear water and spit it carefully in the silver-capped bottle.
When you find a new substance with a healthy property, put it in the gold bottle and immediately drink half more or less.
Save the rest for later.
When you are feeling in need of wisdom, drink from the silver-capped potion.
Keep these as your personal potions.
Rinse the bottles when they are empty.
...
Keep two potions, one silver and the other Gold.
When you are suffering, drink clear water and spit it carefully in the silver-capped bottle.
When you find a new substance with a healthy property, put it in the gold bottle and immediately drink half more or less.
Save the rest for later.
When you are feeling in need of wisdom, drink from the silver-capped potion.
Keep these as your personal potions.
Rinse the bottles when they are empty.
Inhumbrous Logic
...
Vocab:
INHUMBROSITY: The art of achieving any type of nearly impossible invention.
LUMINOSITY: Relying too much on magic to achieve the nearly impossible.
IMPOSSIBLE MAGIC: Something too expensive to imagine.
INHUMILITY: Overwhelming arrogance achieved through great achievements.
INSOPRIETY: Impressive secondary achievements, almost like magic.
IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBILITY: Theory of magic.
There's the level of practicing it. And there's the level of actually reaching it.
https://www.quora.com/Is-anything-ever-original-or-have-all-the-ideas-been-used-up/answer/Nathan-Coppedge
Vocab:
INHUMBROSITY: The art of achieving any type of nearly impossible invention.
LUMINOSITY: Relying too much on magic to achieve the nearly impossible.
IMPOSSIBLE MAGIC: Something too expensive to imagine.
INHUMILITY: Overwhelming arrogance achieved through great achievements.
INSOPRIETY: Impressive secondary achievements, almost like magic.
IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBILITY: Theory of magic.
There's the level of practicing it. And there's the level of actually reaching it.
https://www.quora.com/Is-anything-ever-original-or-have-all-the-ideas-been-used-up/answer/Nathan-Coppedge
Wednesday, August 28, 2019
Possible Solution to the Riemann Hypothesis
New:
Possible notation: Applications of The Unified Language Formula
Big Update:
If 1/2 is True, all values lie at 1/2 + it where t is a real number.
There are only 2 ways to get 0.5...
(WORKING)
2 / D > results / verbs = 1 / |+t| = 0.5
2 / D > results / verbs = 1 / |-t| = 0.5
As in this problem
1 / |t| = 0.5
This gives a situation where the most objective number is +/- 2 modified by 1 / the absolute value.
4 / 2^3
8 / 2 root of modulo 4.
0.25t^2 * 8
Note: This solution may require some modification.
Alternatives to the given expression which solve 0.5 may be solutions to the Riemann Hypothesis:
Link: Objective: Knowledge
0.70711
...
(Results / Verbs) / .70711 = Modifier * 0.3535
...
NEWER:
(1/0.75)(d -1)(d / d ^2)
Where d is dimensions, produces progression:
1, 1.16666, 1.25
...
EARLIER CHART OF KNOWLEDGE ONLY MILDLY RELATED
2D 1 result / 2 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 2 results / 4 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 4 results / 8 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 6 results / 12 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 8 results 16 verbs ... etc
4 D 1 result / 2 verbs ...
8 D 6 results / 8 verbs... * 0.707110 = 0.5303325
... 6 / 8 * .3535
8 D 12 results 16 verbs... etc.
8 D 15 results 20 verbs... etc.
16 D 5 results 8 verbs etc.
16 D 10 results 16 verbs
16 D 15 results / 24 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.44194375
...
Solutions to Unsolved Problems in Mathematics
https://www.quora.com/q/zafbpkdeutysfheb/The-Miraculous-Value-1-5
Possible notation: Applications of The Unified Language Formula
Big Update:
In my recent attempts:
(1/0.75)(d -1)(d / d ^2)
Where d is dimensions, produces progression:
(4-d =) 1, (8-d =) 1.16666, (16-d=) 1.25.
These are multipliers of some type related to sq root of 0.5
This emerged from my earlier work on tthe theory of everything and is ongoing.
Another formula:
(d*3.333) - |(+2 / d) + 0.5|
Another formula:
(d*3.333) - |(+2 / d) + 0.5|
PREVIOUS WORK, NOT NECESSARILY IN A COMPLETE STATE:
If 1/2 is True, all values lie at 1/2 + it where t is a real number.
There are only 2 ways to get 0.5...
(WORKING)
2 / D > results / verbs = 1 / |+t| = 0.5
2 / D > results / verbs = 1 / |-t| = 0.5
As in this problem
1 / |t| = 0.5
This gives a situation where the most objective number is +/- 2 modified by 1 / the absolute value.
4 / 2^3
8 / 2 root of modulo 4.
0.25t^2 * 8
Note: This solution may require some modification.
Alternatives to the given expression which solve 0.5 may be solutions to the Riemann Hypothesis:
Link: Objective: Knowledge
0.70711
...
(Results / Verbs) / .70711 = Modifier * 0.3535
...
NEWER:
(1/0.75)(d -1)(d / d ^2)
Where d is dimensions, produces progression:
1, 1.16666, 1.25
...
EARLIER CHART OF KNOWLEDGE ONLY MILDLY RELATED
2D 1 result / 2 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 2 results / 4 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 4 results / 8 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 6 results / 12 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.3535...
2D 8 results 16 verbs ... etc
4 D 1 result / 2 verbs ...
8 D 6 results / 8 verbs... * 0.707110 = 0.5303325
... 6 / 8 * .3535
8 D 12 results 16 verbs... etc.
8 D 15 results 20 verbs... etc.
16 D 5 results 8 verbs etc.
16 D 10 results 16 verbs
16 D 15 results / 24 verbs * 0.70711 = 0.44194375
...
Solutions to Unsolved Problems in Mathematics
Objective: Knowledge
Objective Knowledge
Generally...
NEW VERSION OF EQUATION:
(2 / D) - (results / (OU + ((D^ Results) - ((Diff + 5) - 1)))
For computers, difference = 0 unless perpetual motion or abstract computer.
Assume 3-d.
Revised formula:
(2 / 3) - ((Eff + zero diff) / (OU + ((3^ Results) - ((0 + 5) - 1)))
1 / result = Ontology of Everything Rating (possibly most important logical number)
FORMERLY:
|2 / D > results / verbs| = Possibility equation.
1 / (ratio of numbers from equation) = new number.
Now with knowledge...
2 results 4 verbs, 2 dimensions.
2 / 2 > 2 / 4 = 0.5 difference.
1 / 0.5 = 2 Ontology of Everything rating for categorical deduction.
New:
2/ 8 > 6/8, diff = 4/8
8 dimensions, 6 results, 8 verbs
8 D 15 results 20 verbs [Really 2.5 results? Dimensional Language / analogy]
16 D 5 results 8 verbs [Really 0.5 results? Answers to Everything, echoes, 'Everything Echoes', the perfect chamber, the chamber of opposites]
16 D 10 results 16 verbs [Really 1 result? Philosophical game]
16 D 15 results 24 verbs [Really 1.5 results? Possibility from Impossibility]
Ontology of Everything
Different rating system:
Souls per answers = 2 (coherence)
---Over-Unity Formula for TOEs
1 / (ratio of numbers from equation) = new number.
Now with knowledge...
2 results 4 verbs, 2 dimensions.
2 / 2 > 2 / 4 = 0.5 difference.
1 / 0.5 = 2 Ontology of Everything rating for categorical deduction.
New:
2/ 8 > 6/8, diff = 4/8
8 dimensions, 6 results, 8 verbs
...
[This is thought to be a somewhat complete list of classic objective logics, most of which don’t exist yet as a formula as of Oct 2021]:
New interpretation 10/24/2021 is that results represents reversals. Reversals - 1 is real reversals.
…
CHART OF KNOWLEDGE
2D 1 result 2 verbs [<-----Likely Paroxysm, 2 opposites, one reversal]
2D 2 results 4 verbs [<-----Categorical Deduction for Quadra: 2 deductions from 4 categories]
2D 4 results 8 verbs [<-----Possibly synergistic deduction, e.g. diagonals count in 3-d]
2D 6 results 12 verbs [<---------- Triangle, e.g. a combination of triangular elements is unified]
2D 8 results 16 verbs [possibly bowtie dimension construction]
4 D 1 result 2 verbs, etc. [Problematics, really 0.5 Results?]
8 D 6 results 8 verbs [Immortality really 1 result?]
8 D 12 results 16 verbs [Really 2 results? Existencion]8 D 15 results 20 verbs [Really 2.5 results? Dimensional Language / analogy]
16 D 5 results 8 verbs [Really 0.5 results? Answers to Everything, echoes, 'Everything Echoes', the perfect chamber, the chamber of opposites]
16 D 10 results 16 verbs [Really 1 result? Philosophical game]
16 D 15 results 24 verbs [Really 1.5 results? Possibility from Impossibility]
(With abstractions, Results appears to usually equal Verbs / D)
Ontology of Everything
Souls per answers = 2 (coherence)
---Over-Unity Formula for TOEs
...
NEW PRESUPOSIS
Method 2:
- If you eat all fruit you may find you are missing calories.
- If you are seeking dimensions, you may want to seek negative dimensions.
Methods --> 4-Methods
…
NATURE --> CATEGORIES --> EXP EFF --> COHERENCE, T.O.E.
Objective: Wizard Logic
Wizard Logic
Generally...
|2 / D > results / verbs| = Possibility equation.
1 / (ratio of numbers from equation) = new number.
Now with magic...
Standard category formula for 10 =
1 / Math (0.1) per 1 = 10
(Version 1)
1 result, 2 verbs, 5 dimensions
2 / 5 > 1/2 = 4/10 > 5/10 = |-1/10|
1 / (1/10) = 10 (values were for the original Wizard Logic)
...
How to get other wizard logics?
Keep results half of verbs...
Dimensions has to be 5...
Only other option is changing results and verbs in relation to different dimension...
Restraint is placed because verbs cannot be less than results.
Another option is a 4/20 relation between results and verbs in 5D or a 2/5 relation between results and verbs in 4D, snd other rrlations exist in higher dimensions.
...
(ANOTHER VERSION)
1 result, 10 verbs, 2 dimensions =
2 / 2 D > 1 / 10 = 1/10
1 / |1/10| = 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
2 results 4 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > 2/4 ... 8/20 > 10/20...
1 / |-2/20| = 1 / |-1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
3 results 6 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > 3/6... 12 / 30 > 15 / 30...
1 / |-3 / 30| = 1 / |-1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
9 results 10 verbs, 2 D
2 / 2 = 1
1 > (9 /10) = 1/10
1 / |1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
3 results 10 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > (3 /10) = 4/10 > 3/10 = |1/10|
1 / |1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
6 results 20 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > (6 /20) = 8/20 > 6/20 = |2/20|
1 / |2/20|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
2 results 5 verbs, 4 D
2/4 > (2 /5) = 10/20 > 8/20 = |-2/20|
1 / |-2/20|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
WIZARD LOGIC CHART
D, Results, Verbs, Rating
2 D = 9 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
2 D = 1 result 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
4D = 2 results 5 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
4D = 4 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 1 result 2 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 2 results 4 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 3 results 6 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5D = 3 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 4 results 8 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 5 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 6 results 20 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
Notes: When a value = 2 it is suggested classic wizardry or categorical deduction are involved somehow, when a value = 4 or 5 it is suggested it means 4 or 5 dimensions or categories are separately involved somehow.
Ontology of Everything
Different rating system:
Wizard Primary: 4 (5^1 > 2 - 1)
---Over-Unity Formula for TOEs
1 / Math (0.1) per 1 = 10
(Version 1)
1 result, 2 verbs, 5 dimensions
2 / 5 > 1/2 = 4/10 > 5/10 = |-1/10|
1 / (1/10) = 10 (values were for the original Wizard Logic)
...
How to get other wizard logics?
Keep results half of verbs...
Dimensions has to be 5...
Only other option is changing results and verbs in relation to different dimension...
Restraint is placed because verbs cannot be less than results.
Another option is a 4/20 relation between results and verbs in 5D or a 2/5 relation between results and verbs in 4D, snd other rrlations exist in higher dimensions.
...
(ANOTHER VERSION)
1 result, 10 verbs, 2 dimensions =
2 / 2 D > 1 / 10 = 1/10
1 / |1/10| = 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
2 results 4 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > 2/4 ... 8/20 > 10/20...
1 / |-2/20| = 1 / |-1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
3 results 6 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > 3/6... 12 / 30 > 15 / 30...
1 / |-3 / 30| = 1 / |-1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
9 results 10 verbs, 2 D
2 / 2 = 1
1 > (9 /10) = 1/10
1 / |1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
3 results 10 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > (3 /10) = 4/10 > 3/10 = |1/10|
1 / |1/10|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
6 results 20 verbs, 5 D
2/5 > (6 /20) = 8/20 > 6/20 = |2/20|
1 / |2/20|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
ANOTHER VERSION
2 results 5 verbs, 4 D
2/4 > (2 /5) = 10/20 > 8/20 = |-2/20|
1 / |-2/20|
= 10 (Wizard Logic)
...
D, Results, Verbs, Rating
2 D = 9 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
2 D = 1 result 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
4D = 2 results 5 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
4D = 4 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 1 result 2 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 2 results 4 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 3 results 6 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5D = 3 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 4 results 8 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 5 results 10 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
5 D = 6 results 20 verbs = 10 (Wizard Logic)
Notes: When a value = 2 it is suggested classic wizardry or categorical deduction are involved somehow, when a value = 4 or 5 it is suggested it means 4 or 5 dimensions or categories are separately involved somehow.
Ontology of Everything
Wizard Primary: 4 (5^1 > 2 - 1)
---Over-Unity Formula for TOEs
Tuesday, August 27, 2019
Ontology of Everything
Originally Aug 25, 2019.
A Typology of Coherent Theories Related to the Theory of Everything.
...
|2 / D > results / verbs| = Possibility equation.
1 / (ratio of numbers from equation) = new number.
...
.... hence (a lot of work implied here):
1 per math = 0.1.
God's convenience = 0.15
Opinion = 0.1515...
1 per souls = 0.16667
1 per magic = 0.3
1.1 per magic = 0.3030.... (magic energy?)
1 per answers = 0.3333...
Answers per souls = 0.5
Souls per math = 0.6
0.5 per answers = 0.6666...
1 per meaning = 27/32 (0.84375) (many meaningful systems fit here, usually not fully-realized).
Answers per magic = 0.9
1 per 1 = 1
Magic per answers (math per souls per answers per coherence) = 1.111...
Meaning per 1 = 32/27 (1.185185)
Answers per 0.5 = 1.5
Math per souls = 1.666...
Souls per answers = 2 (coherence)
Answers per 1 = 3
Magic per 1 = 3.333....
Magic per 1.1 = 3.666...
Magic per 1.111 = 3.703703...
[5.33 New Constant for ideas]
Souls per 1 = 6 (Formula for Souls)
The TOE = 6.6
Convening of the Gods (Souls know the Answer) = 6.666...
Math per 1 = 10 (Wizard Logic)
[33.5 inherent ideas number.]
...
Selective Perpetual Motion Applications
Ontology Links
A Typology of Coherent Theories Related to the Theory of Everything.
...
|2 / D > results / verbs| = Possibility equation.
1 / (ratio of numbers from equation) = new number.
...
.... hence (a lot of work implied here):
1 per math = 0.1.
God's convenience = 0.15
Opinion = 0.1515...
1 per souls = 0.16667
1 per magic = 0.3
1.1 per magic = 0.3030.... (magic energy?)
1 per answers = 0.3333...
Answers per souls = 0.5
Souls per math = 0.6
0.5 per answers = 0.6666...
1 per meaning = 27/32 (0.84375) (many meaningful systems fit here, usually not fully-realized).
Answers per magic = 0.9
1 per 1 = 1
Magic per answers (math per souls per answers per coherence) = 1.111...
Meaning per 1 = 32/27 (1.185185)
Answers per 0.5 = 1.5
Math per souls = 1.666...
Souls per answers = 2 (coherence)
Answers per 1 = 3
Magic per 1 = 3.333....
Magic per 1.1 = 3.666...
Magic per 1.111 = 3.703703...
[5.33 New Constant for ideas]
Souls per 1 = 6 (Formula for Souls)
The TOE = 6.6
Convening of the Gods (Souls know the Answer) = 6.666...
Math per 1 = 10 (Wizard Logic)
[33.5 inherent ideas number.]
...
Selective Perpetual Motion Applications
Ontology Links
Opposite Color Identity
As a resolution of the problem created in objective knowledge when colors are conflated with polar opposites, I propose the theory of opposite color identity.
Opposite color identity is a theory that clarifies:
1. Color opposites mean opposite colors, not opposite races.
2. Differences may or may not arise associated with opposite colors.
3. However, this has more to do with colors than opposites.
4. The usual philosophical conundrums apply: mistakes may arise because color may be partly subjective, interpreted using bias, and used or abused as a false designator or false logical symbol.
5. It may seem tempting to place more focus on color contrasts (a mere visual difference) than other types of differences like gender and personal interests, but there is nothing inherently more opposite about this type of contrast than any other apparent set of differences.
6. There is absolutely no philosophical reason to single-out color above other differences, and and as far as color specifically that is less a matter of contrast, and more a matter of color identity.
7. Further, there is absolutely no philosophical reason to imply an inherent difference between color identity differences and color identity similarities. Categorical knowledge makes no such distinction as both color differences and color similarities in that case fall under color identity.
8. It would be easy at this point to associate colors more closely with identity differences, e.g. non-valued and impartial observation, rather than with some type of supposedly objective truth scheme.
Opposite color identity is a theory that clarifies:
1. Color opposites mean opposite colors, not opposite races.
2. Differences may or may not arise associated with opposite colors.
3. However, this has more to do with colors than opposites.
4. The usual philosophical conundrums apply: mistakes may arise because color may be partly subjective, interpreted using bias, and used or abused as a false designator or false logical symbol.
5. It may seem tempting to place more focus on color contrasts (a mere visual difference) than other types of differences like gender and personal interests, but there is nothing inherently more opposite about this type of contrast than any other apparent set of differences.
6. There is absolutely no philosophical reason to single-out color above other differences, and and as far as color specifically that is less a matter of contrast, and more a matter of color identity.
7. Further, there is absolutely no philosophical reason to imply an inherent difference between color identity differences and color identity similarities. Categorical knowledge makes no such distinction as both color differences and color similarities in that case fall under color identity.
8. It would be easy at this point to associate colors more closely with identity differences, e.g. non-valued and impartial observation, rather than with some type of supposedly objective truth scheme.
Proof of the Existence of Polar Opposites
Sept 24, 2017.
PART 1:
Programmable Heuristics
Coherent Proof Theory
Objective Knowledge
The Sophists
PERFECT AXIOMS OF PHILOSOPHY:
{Note: Included models: Perfect Modal Logic 1 - 15, Assumptions of Categorical Deduction 16 - 29, Proof of Paroxysm 30 - 37, Universal Proof of Natural Deduction 38 - 47, Infinite Philosophy 48 - 56}…
—Perfect Axiomatic Reasoning Model
- Everything that is, is.
- Everything that is not, is not.
- What is is not what is not.
- What isn’t not is more like is than is not.
- What is not false is sometimes true.
- What is not true is sometimes false.
- What is always sometimes true is at least a little bit true.
- What is always sometimes false is at least a little bit false.
- What is always false can only be true by contradiction.
- What is always true can only be false by contradiction.
- To contradict a contradiction is what is meant by what is true.
- To contradict what is true is what is meant by what is false.
- What is false always contradicts its opposite.
- What is true always contradicts its opposite.
- True and false are opposites when it is not a contradiction.
- And so on just as above for other opposites.
- True opposites have oppositeness.
PART 2:
From two-section proof regarding commutation, final result was:
"Universal := Substance := Universal Substance"
If necessary conditional is empty, by formal implication, any number of categories will always consist formally in ‘v’ with one half using ‘~’. Otherwise formal implication is incorrect. This suggests that formally everything in logic is opposites, whether we properly measure them or not. A further exception to this is some type of Monism. --https://emporium.quora.com/The-Dimensional-Reduction
...
Programmable Heuristics
Coherent Proof Theory
Objective Knowledge
The Sophists
Master Riemann
(1859)
Later possibility: https://www.quora.com/q/zafbpkdeutysfheb/The-Miraculous-Value-1-5
From a certain perspective the Riemann Hypothesis is just an endless labyrinth.
Thoughts on the Riemann Conjecture after deep analysis of the TOE:
Hilbert-Smith Conjecture
SOLUTION: Unless the graph is symmetric, any formal symmetry will produce an asymmetric response to the formalism. Equivalently, if the Riemann structure is not formally coherent it will be formally asymmetric or coherence has been disregarded even if the map, etc is symmetric in any way. These views could also conceivably be interpreted mathematically in terms of completeness, as if to say a Riemann structure must be completely incomplete to qualify as mathematics, or the formal asymmetry is expressible mathematically.
...
Possible Solution to Riemann Hypothesis
---Solutions to Unsolved Problems in Mathematics
From a certain perspective the Riemann Hypothesis is just an endless labyrinth.
Thoughts on the Riemann Conjecture after deep analysis of the TOE:
"Half of consequences cannot be retracted. Half of damages are trivial emotions."
...Hilbert-Smith Conjecture
SOLUTION: Unless the graph is symmetric, any formal symmetry will produce an asymmetric response to the formalism. Equivalently, if the Riemann structure is not formally coherent it will be formally asymmetric or coherence has been disregarded even if the map, etc is symmetric in any way. These views could also conceivably be interpreted mathematically in terms of completeness, as if to say a Riemann structure must be completely incomplete to qualify as mathematics, or the formal asymmetry is expressible mathematically.
...
Possible Solution to Riemann Hypothesis
---Solutions to Unsolved Problems in Mathematics
Aesthetic Games
Primarily linked HERE now: Aesthetic Games - Sublimism - Quora
...
Cat's Cradle --> Solution to problems.
Soul on a Stick --> Formula for souls.
Self-Beating Drum --> Perpetual motion machines.
Xes and O's --> Categorical knowledge.
Q & A --> Answers to all questions.
Suggestion Box --> Psychic powers.
Dice --> Incoherent deduction.
Passwords --> Theory of Everything.
Rollerblading feels a lot like getting sued. Skateboarders are actually sued.
...
MANTRA: (Now it's about the values of the aesthetics of metaphysics).
Games
How To Think Like Brian
Philosophical Statistics
Truth Web Links
MANTRA: (Now it's about the values of the aesthetics of metaphysics).
...
This is a theory that occasional bears on applications of the Theory of Everything.
Examples of correct application are rare.
For example, a 28-category typology could be seen as a Chinese Box if the middle categories are seen as ‘triumverates’ made of three constituent parts, without a label. The overall category can be seen as having a label, because it is at the highest-possible level. The result is 28 categories instead of 31, which incidentally represents black swans.
The formula in this case is 3^(Levels) + 1.
Games
How To Think Like Brian
Philosophical Statistics
Truth Web Links
Special Problems
NEW 2023
Problem: For lack of brain damage they think I'm a primodona.
Repercussion 1: If I touch my head I am a primodona.
Repercussion 2: If I have to receive brain damage, I have to touch my head.
Source of Problem: Someone is causing brain damage in the top of my head.
Solution: Everyone who lacks brain damage looks like a primodona.
Set 0
- Possibility.
- Sense Perception.
- Graphic Symbols.
- Concrete objects.
- Flagics. (A large number of meaningful symbols from axes and boundaries).
- The Mystery of Asymmetry. (Rare symbolic extensions).
Set 1
- How To Find A Larger Philosophy (A philosophy made of all the meaningful symbols).
- Pragmatic Metaphysics. (Now it's sbout the aesthetics of metaphysics).
- Symbolic Value. (Now it involves special values).
- Aesthetic Games: Cat's Cradle, Soul on a Stick, Self-Beating Drum, Xes and O's, Q & A, Suggestion Box, Dice, Passwords (Now it's about the values of the aesthetics of metaphysics).
- Soul Alchemy. (Now let's say something magic happens).
- Meta-Theory. (Now let's say all of that is semantics).
Set 2
- Meaningful Objects. (Now let's say some objects are meaningful).
- Modal Architecture. (Now let's say that life is composed for meaningful experiences).
- Transcendent Functions. (Now let's say there are especially valuable objects like perpetual motion and magic).
- Archetypal Categories. (Now, let's say symbolic values are a system).
- Meaningful Semantics. (Now, let's say everything is meaningful).
- The Dimensional System (Now, let's find a special example).
Set 3
- Metaphysical Semantics. (Now let's say everything is meaningful like that).
- Elidian Leap (let's reduce it to the most genius thing).
- Eridian Curves (now let's apply it to physics).
- The Theory of Everything (now let's generalize it).
- Abstract Polyps (now let's say it is semantic math).
- Unified Science. (Now let's use principles related to intelligence only).
Note: Relation to TOE OU numbers.
Note: functional curves.
Note: 24, 32, 11.
Note: Principia.
1. Loading stuff.
2. Set principles.
3. Dimensional composition.
4. Advanced can be intelligent stuff.
...
Open Problems
Deconstruction of Hegelian Postmodernism
Dust is something people understand.
Let alone the logic of dust.
Now that we have ideas, let's try systems.
Done reading Hegel?
(Brush dust from fingers...)
Now history is over (?!?!)
Any REAL reader of Hegel and History would realize the foolishness of this.
Exactly how they X out perpetual motion: thinking they've read Hegel when they haven't completely read him.
G.W.F. Hegel
Let alone the logic of dust.
Now that we have ideas, let's try systems.
Done reading Hegel?
(Brush dust from fingers...)
Now history is over (?!?!)
Any REAL reader of Hegel and History would realize the foolishness of this.
Exactly how they X out perpetual motion: thinking they've read Hegel when they haven't completely read him.
G.W.F. Hegel
Study of the Evolution of the Technology of History
The soul is opposed.
Now there is power.
Now there is abstraction.
Now there are basic things to do.
Now there are ten numbers.
Now there are trump cards.
Now religion is a trump card.
Now there are intellectuals.
Now there are ideas.
Now that we have ideas, let's try systems.
Now history is over.
Now that history is over, let's try having history end many times...
Now that history has ended many times, let's try some processing...
Now that something big happened, let's react to it properly...
Now that there's a big idea, time for another big idea...
Now that there's a big idea, time for another big idea...
Now that there's a big idea, time for another big idea...
Now that there's a big idea, time for two big ideas...
...
See also the work it is based on:
[Reproduced here as it is a historical account by the same author]:
Historical Ideas
Now there is power.
Now there is abstraction.
Now there are basic things to do.
Now there are ten numbers.
Now there are trump cards.
Now religion is a trump card.
Now there are intellectuals.
Now there are ideas.
Now that we have ideas, let's try systems.
Now history is over.
Now that history is over, let's try having history end many times...
Now that history has ended many times, let's try some processing...
Now that something big happened, let's react to it properly...
Now that there's a big idea, time for another big idea...
Now that there's a big idea, time for another big idea...
Now that there's a big idea, time for another big idea...
Now that there's a big idea, time for two big ideas...
...
See also the work it is based on:
[Reproduced here as it is a historical account by the same author]:
Technologically, educationally:
- A goddess decided in 100,000 BC that the soul was a bad idea.
- Gods existed in China in 9000 BC but they had mortal bodies. The emperor was very jealous and hateful.
- In 0 AD inventing abstraction meant destroying the occult.
- In 200 AD it was original to invent book-binding.
- By 1000 AD it was usually original to think about ten digits.
- In 1515 it was original to fall in love or play with cards.
- In 1530 religion had never really been called good.
- By 1719 intellectualism was a fairly new idea rarely seen.
- By 1771 complexity and psychology were completely new ideas which meant the devil to nearly everyone.
- By 1880 systems were rarely known outside the works of Kant and Hegel. Knowing philosophy was rarely possible within the English language alone.
- By 1907 mathematics was viewed as a universal trump card for reforming humanity.
- By 1939 history was thought to be over.
- By 1999 computers dominated people's lives.
- In 2000 the first self-operating machine was suggested.
- In 2012 everyone thought about the end of the world.
- In 2013 true knowledge may have existed for the first time.
- In 2014 a solution to abstract problems was proposed and immortal matter was noticed.
- In 2016 a formula for souls was found.
- In 2018 there was evidence of perpetual motion and a way of answering all questions.
- In 2019 universal graphics and a theory of everything were invented.
Historical Ideas
Monday, August 26, 2019
Clues About Perpetual Motion Inventor DNA
To study 'inventor DNA' unfortunately you may be limited to studying Nathan Larkin Coppedge's DNA, and those who came after him.
Part of it is education, for example, education in use of levers. Romao of Wlber Cross High School had knowledge of this type, and was able to lecture for perhaps 5 hours on levers alone.
The unique properties of Nathan Coppedge are some of the following:
* Engineers in the family (both grandfathers were physicists / engineers), one uncle was an engineer, and one uncle was an architect. His brother was a computer prodigy who designed games from age 7 or younger. Yet Nathan's childhood was basically uneventful, aside from some homework and traveling and interest in designing weapons and castles and costumes.
* Visual-Symbolic-Spatial intelligence: Nathan developed 3-d and 4-d relationships on a 2-d surface very consistently during 2002 - 2009 in a manner that was purely abstract, yet highly varied and creative, within the most efficient medium: pen-and-ink.
* Related to smart genes. Nathan's Dad was a Yale PhD and his mother was a State College Valedictorian and member of Daughters of the American Revolution.
* Cultured aesthetic sensibilities. Preferred to go to an arts-focused middle school. Mild interest in abstract art in high school. Artworks may have sold for $1 million.
* Preference for things that are mentally dependent constructs even when the substance is said to be cheap. What Nathan calls expensive tastes. A bit of an intellectual snob, placing lower value on things that do not contain philosophy. Yet hr viewed this semantically.
* Tendency towards wisdom. Family friends used to call Nathan 'wise'. He pursued philosophy for his degree rather than visual arts, seeing arts as being too physical.
* Extra intelligent factors. Nathan once wrote 36 poems in one morning. When he gave himself the task of solving a list of unsolved problems in words, he often did so in less than 24 hours. Nathan once wrote a love letter to someone who became a post-graduate researcher at Yale.
Another approach:
A Perfect Storm for Perpetual Motion
Part of it is education, for example, education in use of levers. Romao of Wlber Cross High School had knowledge of this type, and was able to lecture for perhaps 5 hours on levers alone.
The unique properties of Nathan Coppedge are some of the following:
* Engineers in the family (both grandfathers were physicists / engineers), one uncle was an engineer, and one uncle was an architect. His brother was a computer prodigy who designed games from age 7 or younger. Yet Nathan's childhood was basically uneventful, aside from some homework and traveling and interest in designing weapons and castles and costumes.
* Visual-Symbolic-Spatial intelligence: Nathan developed 3-d and 4-d relationships on a 2-d surface very consistently during 2002 - 2009 in a manner that was purely abstract, yet highly varied and creative, within the most efficient medium: pen-and-ink.
* Related to smart genes. Nathan's Dad was a Yale PhD and his mother was a State College Valedictorian and member of Daughters of the American Revolution.
* Cultured aesthetic sensibilities. Preferred to go to an arts-focused middle school. Mild interest in abstract art in high school. Artworks may have sold for $1 million.
* Preference for things that are mentally dependent constructs even when the substance is said to be cheap. What Nathan calls expensive tastes. A bit of an intellectual snob, placing lower value on things that do not contain philosophy. Yet hr viewed this semantically.
* Tendency towards wisdom. Family friends used to call Nathan 'wise'. He pursued philosophy for his degree rather than visual arts, seeing arts as being too physical.
* Extra intelligent factors. Nathan once wrote 36 poems in one morning. When he gave himself the task of solving a list of unsolved problems in words, he often did so in less than 24 hours. Nathan once wrote a love letter to someone who became a post-graduate researcher at Yale.
Another approach:
A Perfect Storm for Perpetual Motion
Sunday, August 25, 2019
Truth Web Links
Now, maintained here also: Truth Web Links - Miscellaneous Drib-Drab - Quora
Absolute Dimensions: Find the Number Relevant to You
Selective Perpetual Motion Links with Considerable Unification
Over-Unity Formula for TOEs
Meta-Soul Formula
Theory of Everything Sensitivity Formula
...
MISC:
Selective Perpetual Motion Applications
"LATER NOTE: Therefore, we could surmise that the quality is 0.5, the ratio is 1, the quantity is 2, and the quantified ratio is 1.5. —Logic of 3000 AD"---Overlaps between Perpetual Motion and Category Theory
"The /2 appears to appear alone in cases where the ball's mass is larger. This may mean in effect that some perpetual motion machines (although not the majority) are expressing a complete set."
---The Coherence and Set Impossibility Equation
"It can be observed that the 1/2 mass * distance rule is used to good effect in perpetual motion... A similar rule is found with the ... Coppedge Curve, e.g. how to maximize the intelligence of a half-wit. The parallel is that a half-wit's intelligence is normally maximized between > 1 and < 2X normal intelligence... Now, what if we imagine the half-wit has more ambition, more leverage so to speak? Then the half-wit might be maximized at a much higher level."
1X Ambition-->... > 1.5 < 2
2X Ambition --> ... > 2 < 3
3X Ambition --> ... > 2.5 < 4
4X Ambition --> ... > 3 < 5
5X Ambition --> ... > 3.5 < 6
---Application of Perpetual Motion with Half-Wits
Standard Max OU =
Mass Difference / Lvg ratio + 1 * 100.
Maximized when the average of the mass difference / leverage ratio is 1 or higher, with the mass difference being larger.
....
Finding over-unity of knowledge:
D ^ results > verbs - 1 ---OU Formula for TOEs
...
In 2 dimensions results should be > 0.75 to achieve verbs of 0.5 and difference between sides of > 1 (over-unity rating).
In practice, in 3 dimensions results should be > = one to achieve more verbs ( > = 2) and difference between sides of > 1 (over-unity rating).
Knowledge is easily over-unity if D > verbs, and results > = 1. Remember verbs must already be > = results and an ordinal number, and results should also be an ordinal number.
Finding over-unity of knowledge:
(D ^ results) - (verbs - 1) >= 1
...
(Qualification) of (negative possibility) if not (positive possibility) (slightly opposite qualification).
---Wizard Logic
(Results < Verbs - 1) < D, or Math or Magic.
Negative result: very un-mathematical.
0.1, 1, or 10: Very mathematical.
Other positive numbers: Magical, with positive being better.
0: Immune to judgment.
4 +/- 1= > 3 < 5
...
Alternate:
|2 / D > results / verbs| = Possibility equation.
Negative numbers = Good magic (such as answers to questions = 0.3333 and formula for souls = 0.16667).
0.5 = Perfect coherence.
0.84375 (27 / 32) = Meaning.
Science is best when D = -2 and verbs = infinitesimal.
Results (2) = Perfect generally.
1 / (answers (0.3333) / souls (0.16667) = 0.5 (coherence).
1 / (ratio of numbers from equation) = new number.
.... hence (a lot of work implied here):
1 per math = 0.1.
God's convenience = 0.15
Opinion = 0.1515...
1 per souls = 0.16667
1 per magic = 0.3
1.1 per magic = 0.3030.... (magic energy?)
1 per answers = 0.3333...
Answers per souls = 0.5
Souls per math = 0.6
0.5 per answers = 0.6666...
1 per meaning = 27/32 (many meaningful systems fit here, usually not fully-realized).
Answers per magic = 0.9
1 per 1 = 1
Magic per answers (math per souls per answers per coherence) = 1.111...
Meaning per 1 = 32/27
Answers per 0.5 = 1.5
Math per souls = 1.666...
Souls per answers = 2 (coherence)
Answers per 1 = 3
Magic per 1.1 = 3.3
Magic per 1 = 3.333....
Souls per 1 = 6 (Formula for Souls)
The TOE = 6.6
Convening of the Gods (Souls know the Answer) = 6.666...
Math per 1 = 10 (Wizard Logic)
UPDATED VERSION: Ontology of Everything
...
Notes for application to Absolute Dimensions:
By same form of division with 1 / first...
[Answers per magic / magic per answers = 1.23456]
[1 per meaning / meaning per 1 = 1.4046]
[Coherence per answers / answers per coherence = 2.5]
[Souls per math / math per souls = 2.777...]
[Answers per souls / souls per answers = 4]
[1 per answers / answers per 1 = 9]
[1.1 per magic / magic per 1.1 = 10.89]
[1 per magic / magic per 1 = 11.111...]
[1 per souls / souls per 1 = 36]
[Opinion / TOE = 43.56]
[God's conv / Conven of gods = 44.444...]
[1 per math / math per 1 = 100]
FOR REFERENCE:
Here is a large sample of earlier data. D is the first number after the first parenthesis. Verbs is the value after the greater than sign.
Premier science: 0 (n ^ 1 / 10 > n + 1 - 1 / 10)
Incoherent deduction: 0 (n ^ 0 > n + 1 - 1)
Formula for questions: 0 (3 ^ 0 > 2 - 1 = 1 > 1 = difference of 0)
Prophecy of the Coherent History of Mathematics: 0.1 (129^1 / 10 > 129 - 1 / 10)
Infinite Philosophy: Ideally 1 (2^5 > 32 - 1)
Complete Theory of Human Knowledge: Ideally 1 (2^5 > 32 - 1)
The Big Equation: Ideally 1 (2^5 > 32 - 1)
How Do We Know?: Ideally 1 (2^5 > 32 - 1)
Coherent Deduction: 1 (2^2 > 4 - 1)
Solution to All Problems: 1 (2^2 > 4 - 1)
Formula for Answering All Questions: 3 (3^1 > 1 - 1)
Wizard Logic: 4 (5^1 > 2 - 1)
Theory of Everything: 9 (11 ^ 1 > 3 - 1)
Formula for Souls of Literature: 11 (4 ^ 4 > 6 - 1)
Convening of the Gods: 18 (5 ^ 2 > 8 - 1)
Extensions: Specialized Heuristic Combinations
Application of Perpetual Motion with Half-Wits
It can be observed that the 1/2 mass * distance rule is used to good effect in perpetual motion.
A similar rule is found with the Nathan Coppedge Curve, e.g. how to maximize the intelligence of a half-wit. I mean this seriously.
The parallel is that a half-wit's intelligence is normally maximized between > 1 and < 2X normal intelligence.
Now, what if we imagine the half-wit has more ambition, more leverage so to speak? Then the half-wit might be maximized at a much higher level.
For example, if we take the number 4 as symbolic of ambition, then the output would actually be > 3 to < 5X normal intelligence, according to the perpetual motion equations.
1X Ambition-->... > 1.5 < 2
2X Ambition --> ... > 2 < 3
3X Ambition --> ... > 2.5 < 4
4X Ambition --> ... > 3 < 5
5X Ambition --> ... > 3.5 < 6
In fact, if intelligence places someone below the competition, we can surmise from this if their ambition is knowledge or something more esoteric, there is automatically something missing from the picture of their intelligence.
A similar rule is found with the Nathan Coppedge Curve, e.g. how to maximize the intelligence of a half-wit. I mean this seriously.
The parallel is that a half-wit's intelligence is normally maximized between > 1 and < 2X normal intelligence.
Now, what if we imagine the half-wit has more ambition, more leverage so to speak? Then the half-wit might be maximized at a much higher level.
For example, if we take the number 4 as symbolic of ambition, then the output would actually be > 3 to < 5X normal intelligence, according to the perpetual motion equations.
1X Ambition-->... > 1.5 < 2
2X Ambition --> ... > 2 < 3
3X Ambition --> ... > 2.5 < 4
4X Ambition --> ... > 3 < 5
5X Ambition --> ... > 3.5 < 6
In fact, if intelligence places someone below the competition, we can surmise from this if their ambition is knowledge or something more esoteric, there is automatically something missing from the picture of their intelligence.
Meta-Soul Formula
Soul > 2.5
Alternate Translations:
1. May mean 2.5 absolute sensitivity levels, in which case the only option is to be The Artist or more than one person.
2. May mean 2.5 non-absolute sensitivity levels, in which case the goal is to have an efficiency above 0.333...
2. May mean universal parts of the soul, in which case it is a matter of being a good example of that soul.
...
See also: Formula for Riddles
Alternate Translations:
1. May mean 2.5 absolute sensitivity levels, in which case the only option is to be The Artist or more than one person.
2. May mean 2.5 non-absolute sensitivity levels, in which case the goal is to have an efficiency above 0.333...
2. May mean universal parts of the soul, in which case it is a matter of being a good example of that soul.
...
See also: Formula for Riddles
TOE Sensitivity Formula
See also:
2.16333 / (invent number minus 100 inverse)
...
The Artist 100 = Infinity.
110 = 2.16333.
101 = Sometimes 2.16333.
120 = 0.9245
102 = Sometimes 0.9245
130 = 0.721111
103 = Sometimes 0.721111
140 = 0.5408333
104 = Sometimes 0.5408333
150 = 0.4326666
105 = Sometimes 0.4326666
160 = 0.3605555
106 = Sometimes 0.3605555
170 = 0.3090476
107 = Sometimes 0.3090476
180 = 0.270416666
108 = Sometimes 0.270416666
190 = 0.24037037037
109 = Sometimes 0.24037037037
101 lower = 0.2163333
102 lower = 0.10816666
103 lower = 0.07211111
104 lower = 0.054083333
105 lower = 0.04326666
106 lower = 0.03605555
107 lower = 0.03090476
108 lower= 0.0270416666
177 = 0.0280952 (The Experience Machine).
168 = 0.025155 (Perpetual motion machines).
109 lower = 0.024037037
254 = 0.004796747 (Nirvana)
255 = 0.003926 (winnebago illusion)
[-0.02998: lost energy].
Accounting 2 = 0.024307- (negative)
Impossibility 1 = 0.02185185
...
2.16333 / (invent number minus 100 inverse)
...
The Artist 100 = Infinity.
110 = 2.16333.
101 = Sometimes 2.16333.
120 = 0.9245
102 = Sometimes 0.9245
130 = 0.721111
103 = Sometimes 0.721111
140 = 0.5408333
104 = Sometimes 0.5408333
150 = 0.4326666
105 = Sometimes 0.4326666
160 = 0.3605555
106 = Sometimes 0.3605555
170 = 0.3090476
107 = Sometimes 0.3090476
180 = 0.270416666
108 = Sometimes 0.270416666
190 = 0.24037037037
109 = Sometimes 0.24037037037
101 lower = 0.2163333
102 lower = 0.10816666
103 lower = 0.07211111
104 lower = 0.054083333
105 lower = 0.04326666
106 lower = 0.03605555
107 lower = 0.03090476
108 lower= 0.0270416666
177 = 0.0280952 (The Experience Machine).
168 = 0.025155 (Perpetual motion machines).
109 lower = 0.024037037
254 = 0.004796747 (Nirvana)
255 = 0.003926 (winnebago illusion)
[-0.02998: lost energy].
Accounting 2 = 0.024307- (negative)
Impossibility 1 = 0.02185185