The Mathematics of Pleasure

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

I believe that pleasure an energy ball the center being offset and below from your internal visual field. The center of pleasure is an energy ball. Particles gravitate into this energy ball. The energy ball is in a quantum state of fluctuation. If the energy ball is offset from the center, it is not aligned and not as pleasurable. It feels best when perfectly centered and symmetrical.

Pain I would say is particles moving OUT OF the energy ball, outwards.

Disharmony, which is similar to chaos and pain, is particles with random trajectories, someone of which orbit each other independent of the nucleus.


I searched the web for GIFs to explain this to you but couldn't find any. It is similar to a generic videogame charge beam chargeup effect. I would appreciate if someone could upload GIFs, I want to make sure we are both on the same page, and that everyone understands clearly what's going on.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

What's a GIF?

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

peanut butter

[Bill Wiltrack]

.










.......................................................








.

[Blaggard]

I think I wonder and no offense mate if you really understand maths?

Quantum mechanics, or quantum well that is the least of your problems with the OP.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

I think I wonder and no offense mate if you really understand maths?

Quantum mechanics, or quantum well that is the least of your problems with the OP.

Are you talking to me? The OP has no complex maths in order to which you could debate. Perhaps you don't understand what I meant by the symmetry of quantum fluctuations. Quantum particles are in a set of 2 states at once, a kind of vibration. When they become centered, the distance between the binary states approaches zero, the waveform width approaches zero, and they appear to become aligned unified and whole. Light has an average width of 400 nm but what if light ceased to be a wave and became a line. It would cease to be quantum and become a unified whole. However the thing I was talking about, the energy ball, is more like a star or a nucleus. In molecular physics an atom has a high vibration when hot, and a low vibration when cold. Cold would be symetrical, unified. High vibration would appear to vibrate so fast it would become quantum at a high enough state, energy becoming so energic when it approaches the speed of light.

However, I find cold itself to be most unpleasant. Perhaps the relationship is in inverse, external cold causes internal heat.

[Blaggard]

The OP has no sense at all, maths at all, or logic. Why you picked up on complex maths is perhaps most apposite though.

I think I wonder and no offense mate if you really understand maths?

Quantum mechanics, or quantum well that is the least of your problems with the OP.

Are you talking to me? The OP has no complex maths in order to which you could debate. Perhaps you don't understand what I meant by the symmetry of quantum fluctuations. Quantum particles are in a set of 2 states at once, a kind of vibration. When they become centered, the distance between the binary states approaches zero, the waveform width approaches zero, and they appear to become aligned unified and whole. Light has an average width of 400 nm but what if light ceased to be a wave and became a line. It would cease to be quantum and become a unified whole. However the thing I was talking about, the energy ball, is more like a star or a nucleus. In molecular physics an atom has a high vibration when hot, and a low vibration when cold. Cold would be symetrical, unified. High vibration would appear to vibrate so fast it would become quantum at a high enough state, energy becoming so energic when it approaches the speed of light.

However, I find cold itself to be most unpleasant. Perhaps the relationship is in inverse, external cold causes internal heat.

I study physics, which is not a pro po of anything, except maybe: don't fucking waste my time.

You clearly have no idea about either wave mechanics, physics or anything else, and I presume are just parroting what you heard on some cuntwit conspiracy site, or whatever shitety wich you frequent on the net. I hence iterate the former answer I gave again, for your interest if not edification.

Everything you said is gibberish though. It has nothing to do with physics, which is ok, this is a philosophy board not science 101. The only problem I have is it has nothing to do with philosophy either, and on a philosophy forum that is perhaps a little troubling.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

The OP has no sense at all, maths at all, or logic. Why you picked up on complex maths is perhaps most apposite though.

I think I wonder and no offense mate if you really understand maths?

Quantum mechanics, or quantum well that is the least of your problems with the OP.

Are you talking to me? The OP has no complex maths in order to which you could debate. Perhaps you don't understand what I meant by the symmetry of quantum fluctuations. Quantum particles are in a set of 2 states at once, a kind of vibration. When they become centered, the distance between the binary states approaches zero, the waveform width approaches zero, and they appear to become aligned unified and whole. Light has an average width of 400 nm but what if light ceased to be a wave and became a line. It would cease to be quantum and become a unified whole. However the thing I was talking about, the energy ball, is more like a star or a nucleus. In molecular physics an atom has a high vibration when hot, and a low vibration when cold. Cold would be symetrical, unified. High vibration would appear to vibrate so fast it would become quantum at a high enough state, energy becoming so energic when it approaches the speed of light.

However, I find cold itself to be most unpleasant. Perhaps the relationship is in inverse, external cold causes internal heat.

I study physics, which is not a pro po of anything, except maybe: don't fucking waste my time.

You clearly have no idea about either wave mechanics, physics or anything else, and I presume are just parroting what you heard on some cuntwit conspiracy site, or whatever shitety wich you frequent on the net. I hence iterate the former answer I gave again, for your interest if not edification.

Everything you said is gibberish though. It has nothing to do with physics, which is ok, this is a philosophy board not science 101. The only problem I have is it has nothing to do with philosophy either, and on a philosophy forum that is perhaps a little troubling.

It's clearly beyond your comprehension, though I don't know why, there's no advanced or heavy maths involved. I guess in this day and age one must put forth a compelling argument to explain to the average internet academic why ice is in a state of low vibration, and hot molasses is in a state of higher vibration. Try explaining anything else, and you might as well be some kind of heretic. I guess understanding 5th grade level concepts is a "waste of time" in internet philosophy culture.