P =/= P

[Eodnhoj7]

So pretty much only you understand the truth...I am not seeing lines rush up to your defense.

It doesn't follow.

Well...you understand CKIIT, but I am not seeing a long line of people who do...as a matter of fact barring a few who agree with the simple premise of the "harm of beleif", I am not seeing anyone.


Apparently you are ignorant of this and believe in your system too much...as to the rest I read half a sentence total.

Do you actually believe that is the right question to ask?

No - I know it is, because you evaded it - answering in the negative would have proved my point, which is invariably true.

P=P is a loop, and that identity property is required for you belief system to work.

P=P is belief-based ignorance. Time is a loop, P is variable whose identity relies on its being in time.

So you know what will happen tomorrow with 100 percent certainty and how you will react to it?

...it doesn't follow.

So you dream of me, how sweet...sorry to break the bubble...no cult or followers.
Have a few people who agree and disagree with me everyonce in a while...that is it.

"void voids void... void voids void..."

You mean like the religions you are blaming?

I don't suffer others and/or blame others for my suffering. Believers do that.

And the woman blamed it on the "snake" (see the phallic symbolism behind that).

Islam is phallic worship - patriarchal swinery viz. Allah is Muhammad's "thing".

Dont forget communist atheists and capitalist frat parties as well.

Neither compare.

And all models are definitive in nature. Take for example the model of a theme park before it is constructed. It defines what will be constructed. To construct something ie to take a form and inverted it into another form....ie define one form through another, such as clay defined into a pot.

The definition is limited to its own construct.

I see, then you must feel alot of guilt for failing the messenger...

Lol what would I feel guilty for? I have no guilt to try to scapegoat onto others.

There you go projecting again. All I am saying, and the silence of the forum speaks volumes, is that CKIIT is just word salad.

The silence of the forums allows you to believe what you want to be true - enmity is like a parasite that needs feeding.

[nothing]

Well...you understand CKIIT, but I am not seeing a long line of people who do...as a matter of fact barring a few who agree with the simple premise of the "harm of beleif", I am not seeing anyone.


Apparently you are ignorant of this and believe in your system too much...as to the rest I read half a sentence total.

I do not pathologically fixate on a need to gauge work based on reception (or lack thereof) of/by others, especially given it is not even in my interest: the theorem is being formalized privately and will have its own platform(s) when done.

If you are trying to make me feel bad or inadequate, your attempts are having the opposite effect - predictions that come out true are never bad.

[Eodnhoj7]

Well...you understand CKIIT, but I am not seeing a long line of people who do...as a matter of fact barring a few who agree with the simple premise of the "harm of beleif", I am not seeing anyone.


Apparently you are ignorant of this and believe in your system too much...as to the rest I read half a sentence total.

I do not pathologically fixate on a need to gauge work based on reception (or lack thereof) of/by others, especially given it is not even in my interest: the theorem is being formalized privately and will have its own platform(s) when done.

If you are trying to make me feel bad or inadequate, your attempts are having the opposite effect - predictions that come out true are never bad.

I never claimed you where adequate or inadequate, I am just not seeing anyone who cares. I mean look at how great "kant" is...and the majority do not care.

Greatness is just a cycle of perceptions. People call eachother great all the time for no reason, it is a mirroring process.

[nothing]

I never claimed you where adequate or inadequate, I am just not seeing anyone who cares.

Okay, but you are doing so perchance ignorant of the fact that I myself do not care who does or does not understand and/or care about CKIIT on these forums. I came here with a specific intention which has already been fulfilled: I will be migrating to a different forum soon to deal with more technical aspects of CKIIT which relies on electrical engineering esp. as it relates to rotating magnetic fields.

Greatness is just a cycle of perceptions. People call eachother great all the time for no reason, it is a mirroring process.

Almost as though knowing one is nothing eliminates any/all relative comparison(s). This problem of comparison is a very big problem esp. as it relates to "believer vs. unbeliever" which is the conflict(s) CKIIT attempts to collapse.

I recently discovered that the pentagram:

...0...
2.....3
.1..4.

wherein (0-1-2-3-4):
0 = I am (willing to...)
1 = KNOW (approaches all-knowing)
2 = ALL (alpha)
3 = NOT TO (omega)
4 = BELIEVE (approaches all-belief-based ignorance(s))
= unfolded circle which expands indefinitely

and 0-4-2-3-1:
0 = I am (willing to...)
4 = BELIEVE
2 = ALL (alpha)
3 = NOT TO (omega)
1 = KNOW
= folded circle which contracts indefinitely

Therefor each belief-based ignorance(s) is a fold, whereas its knowledgeable counterpart is a return to a full circle. Eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil is essentially a collapsed circle: the space can not "contain" it.

Therefor a circle-and-dot is -A (knowledge) and +A (belief-based ignorance) respectively wherein any subject need only move *away* from the middle (+A) in any direction it wants (-A). This is a geometric representation of god granting freedom to eat from any tree: one can approach any degree of the circle, so long as they do not approach the middle tree which is suffering/death.

If only the "believers" knew.

[Arising_uk]

Wow! Were you two separated at birth or something?

[Eodnhoj7]

Wow! Were you two separated at birth or something?

Kids swing machetes at eachother yet?

[Arising_uk]

Still waiting for that link from you of a physicist saying atoms are 99.99% empty or is it as imaginary as your machete statistics?

[Eodnhoj7]

Still waiting for that link from you of a physicist saying atoms are 99.99% empty or is it as imaginary as your machete statistics?

Honestly UK, if you can't just Google it in 15 seconds then you are less interested in pursuing truth and more interested in pushing your biased viewpoint. I mean is this all philosophy has become, pretty games?

[Arising_uk]

Er! No, I posted up a link from a website setup by a professor of Physics to correct the misunderstandings such as yours as to what Physics is now saying. You then poo-pooed it as a non-academic site so the onus is on you to post up a link to support your erroneous claim.

[Skepdick]

Er! No, I posted up a link from a website setup by a professor of Physics to correct the misunderstandings such as yours as to what Physics is now saying. You then poo-pooed it as a non-academic site so the onus is on you to post up a link to support your erroneous claim.

If you are in pursuit of whacky Physics ideas - how's this one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

[Eodnhoj7]

Er! No, I posted up a link from a website setup by a professor of Physics to correct the misunderstandings such as yours as to what Physics is now saying. You then poo-pooed it as a non-academic site so the onus is on you to post up a link to support your erroneous claim.

I also "poo-pooed" for being outdated, while other sites where from approximately 2017 and up, yours was around 2013.

[Eodnhoj7]

Er! No, I posted up a link from a website setup by a professor of Physics to correct the misunderstandings such as yours as to what Physics is now saying. You then poo-pooed it as a non-academic site so the onus is on you to post up a link to support your erroneous claim.

If you are in pursuit of whacky Physics ideas - how's this one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

Never heard of that one, seems like a very loose version of monism.

[Arising_uk]

I also "poo-pooed" for being outdated, while other sites where from approximately 2017 and up, yours was around 2013.

So post them up then. As the model of an atom being 99.99% empty is from the 50's.

[Arising_uk]

If you are in pursuit of whacky Physics ideas - how's this one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

No pursuit here as whilst always interesting I find the physicists philosophising less interesting than I once did.

[Eodnhoj7]

I also "poo-pooed" for being outdated, while other sites where from approximately 2017 and up, yours was around 2013.

So post them up then. As the model of an atom being 99.99% empty is from the 50's.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=are+atoms+ ... =QBLH&sp=1

https://www.elephantjournal.com/2012/05 ... the-world/
https://www.sciencealert.com/99-9999999 ... mpty-space
https://www.iflscience.com/physics/the- ... ugh-walls/
https://education.jlab.org/qa/atomicstructure_10.html
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/w ... pty.74297/

"In the end, if everything in the world is fundamentally composed of point particles, then everything is really entirely "empty" -- the notion of size is then just defined by the distance between such points. This may, in fact, be completely true."