Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
A line is 1 dimensional. Are you saying 2 dimensional objects do not exist?
"Lines" do not exist. Neither do "points". These are mathematical constructs, not real phenomena of nature.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
A circumferance unfurled is 1 dimensional
An angular velocity is not the same as a linear one:
they are different geometries entirely. Angular momentum
requires 2 dimensions and can not be arbitrarily reduced to 1
without loss of information (reduced to a simple vibration).
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Photon is a relative point of measurement, any variable as fixed or unmoving can be applied through relativity.
Photons are not relative, they have an absolute/discrete datum of '1' in/of v=s/t=1.
This is why Φ is a spatial constant whereas π² is a temporal constant.
1 = Φπ²/16 is the equation of light/photon, hence "Equation of Delight".
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
No, any potentiality is a lack of actuality.
As in any/all beliefs not actually known, hence potentially true/false.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Approaching knowledge necessitates potential knowledge thus an absence of knowledge.
Belief-based ignorance implies an absence of knowledge.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
No, good and evil observes a dualism between the one good and many goods (as a deficiency is good hence evil) thus results in a state of defintion as a relation of parts. This state of definition is knowledge.
Believing in (ie. to know) good and evil creates the displacement(s) experienced as a relative dualism.
Duality only applies to a displaced body which concerns duality (ie. us vs. them) rather than unity.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Any clarity in one respect is ambiguity in another. Magnifying a star is an example, as one star is magnified so a decrease in the other observable stars occurs.
The ambiguity would be local to the one perceiving, not empirical.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Belief based ignorance does not
proceed an absence of truth as in one respect it is an absence of truth. In another respect ignorance is an absence of knowledge not always relegated to belief. A blind man may simply be ignorant of color and have neither beliefs nor disbelief about it.
This doesn't even make sense: do you mean *precede?
In any case, all belief-based ignorance implies an absence of truth.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Categorization results in false knowledge, Pluto as a planet then not as a planet is an immediate example.
No discernment/discretion results in no knowledge.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
One phenomenon moving to another is a relative pulling.
Relative description, not an explanation. Actual science must be able to explain, not merely describe.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
If photons contain the binaries then by default binaries, due to your axis, are roots for binaries.
They are "messengers" of binaries, all of which concerns a definite {IS+/-NOT} which transcends even the photon.
All binaries implicitly/explicitly concerns the {IS+/-NOT} binary. If allowing '1' to be 'UNITY',
+1=Unity, -1=NOT, hence {+ALL UNITY / -NOT UNITY} is equivalent to {IS+/-NOT} as 'UNITY' cancels / is shared.
Operators: {ALL+/-NOT} concerned by all {Α∞Ω}
Roots: {to KNOW-/+to BELIEVE} concerned by all {BEG∞END}
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End"
is thus 'TRUE' from the level of the photon (ie. light) onward.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Thus pain cannot be proven as it can be falsified.
Negated, not "falsified": the root can be falsified as 'irrational', hence
irrational beliefs leading to irrational fears/actions (impetus) are negated.
Φ = 1.618... irrational
Φ² = (Φ + 1)... irrational
+ rational
Φ³ = (√5 + 2)... irrational +
duality
Φ = concerns universal progression/expansion (corollary: conscious knowledge)
Φ² = in-between (inference)
Φ³ = concerns universal gravitation/collapse (corollary: of ignorance)
Hence:
Conscious Knowledge of Ignorance Inference Theorem (CKIIT)
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
The root of pain as belief can be falsified in light of pain (physical) not being subject to belief, second pain cannot be measured through objective testing thus as untreatable is falsifiable. You cannot prove pain therefore pain is falsifiable. Emotional pain can only be reduced to belief.
Not all pain is belief-based ignorance, but all belief-based ignorance is pain
as endured/suffered over/as a function of time according to the gravity of.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
No it doesn't, that measurement is applied through a made up chart.
I didn't "make up" (1+√5)/2 as this is what the universe relies on to function.
±1=Unity (and Not) viz. progression-/+gravitation
Binary: UNITY={Is/Not}
If: Unity=Is,
then:
must-be-photon.
If: Unity=Not,
then:
not-a-photon.
(ie. ALL particular displacements from unity) viz. physical cosmos.
viz.
{IS/NOT} can be expanded with {ALL}
{ALL that IS/ALL (that is) NOT} reduces into
{ALL+/-NOT} viz. the birotation of the photon
reflected in/as the {Α∞Ω} axis.
{BEG∞END}=False=Photon (NOT displaced from unity)
{BEG∞END}=True=All Else (ALL displaced from unity)
etc.
The universe employs a logic that is infallible.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Actually your "light of the world" comment necessitates a degree of belief in scripture as well as the metaphorical usage of the tree of good and evil.
I don't see it from the perspective of
(because it is in the Bible, it is true) but rather
(because it is true, it is in the Bible) hence
whatever tends to be true tends to stand
the test of time according to truth value alone,
rather than any belief-based authority.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
False, everyone suffers due to entropy. Death manifests suffering and everyone dies.
Other way around: suffering manifests death.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
strawman, the book is "inspired" by a Creator according to many stances. As such it is open to human expression without contradiction.
It's not, is the problem. It would take a "believer" to believe it is, is the problem.
The solution is knowing what it actually is "inspired" by (ie. its real roots).
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Actually if the man is saved and reached salvation, according to the beliefs of that stance, the man is still alive. Second to bear a true witness of a dead man is to respect his memory as an act of witnessing, thus it is possible to bear true witness of a dead man.
Wow@all
"according to the beliefs..." there's the problem again.
"to respect his memory" the constituency of which is entirely imagined, thus belief-based.
Exodus 20:4 (KJV)
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth
heaven above = psychology (thoughts)
earth beneath = emotions (feelings)
water under = motor-instinct (rituals)
You may as well renounce your humanity if you're going to believe/argue
it is possible to bear a true witness of a
dead man. It's actually called
'IDOL WORSHIP'
and enmity/hatred is a predominant form of it. That is why Muhammadans kill
over ridicule of their idol: they worship his image/likeness according to their own.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
100 million in 100 years, under communist atheism, is a much higher rate.
The believer rate is much lower at 192,857.142857 per hundred years.
Pointing fingers elsewhere is exactly what Adam did to get kicked out of Eden.
Everything reduces into the same pathology: point fingers at others and is
precisely what the Muhammadan ideology is rooted in: blame the Jews,
the Christians, the atheists, unbelievers, infidels, the West, the Zionists etc.
Atheists believe something they do not know to be true, thus are not
indifferent from "believers". You might as well add them to the count.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:01 am
Your premise is false, thus you hold incorrect beliefs, the accuser is accused.
lol
what?
What premise, and what accusation? Are you salty over my finding
that you to have satisfied this condition in the past (and here) ?
It just follows naturally: those who can not face what is in themselves
blame/accuse/scapegoat onto others of the very same.