The Unavoidability of Belief within Reason

[nothing]

Static state is devoid of movement thus is grounded in 0 as an absence of movement.

Thank you for
defining the word:
" BELIEF "

Of the root of ones own, be it belief, and that belief be false,
truly satisfies the same condition, hence knowledge negates belief
in/as if propagating movement: progression. This progression is Φ.

Be it absence of, yet instead be there knowledge
satisfies the opposite condition, hence belief-based
ignorance is static, propagating not movement, progressing not,
thus your very favorite "LOOPS". This is captured/plotted by π².

Above all: conscience.
Knowledge begins and ends with
knowing only ones own bounds
by way of tilling ones own grounds
such to weed-out, seed-in and plant anew
saplings to bear tree yielding fruits
(or not). It is a matter of discretion.

The projection of a point, 0d dimensionality, is 1 as a line or circle (0 progresses to 0 as a line or circle). This projection of 0 is the beginning of movement as infinite movement considering the line and circle is composed of infinite lines and circles. Movements begins and ends with 1.

point, 0d, 0 progresses line or circle, projection of 0, infinite lines and circles...
waffle

[Eodnhoj7]

Static state is devoid of movement thus is grounded in 0 as an absence of movement.

Thank you for
defining the word:
" BELIEF "

All being stems from a single point, this single point negates itself to produce all forms beginning with the circle and line. The origins of the formless nature of thought begins with a point 0. Void is not knowledge, nor is it belief, but rather the beginning of said phenomena.

Of the root of ones own, be it belief, and that belief be false,
truly satisfies the same condition, hence knowledge negates belief
in/as if propagating movement: progression. This progression is Φ.

Be it absence of, yet instead be there knowledge
satisfies the opposite condition, hence belief-based
ignorance is static, propagating not movement, progressing not,
thus your very favorite "LOOPS". This is captured/plotted by π².

Above all: conscience.
Knowledge begins and ends with
knowing only ones own bounds
by way of tilling ones own grounds
such to weed-out, seed-in and plant anew
saplings to bear tree yielding fruits
(or not). It is a matter of discretion.

The projection of a point, 0d dimensionality, is 1 as a line or circle (0 progresses to 0 as a line or circle). This projection of 0 is the beginning of movement as infinite movement considering the line and circle is composed of infinite lines and circles. Movements begins and ends with 1.

point, 0d, 0 progresses line or circle, projection of 0, infinite lines and circles...
waffle

all begins with a point 0 which negates itself to all forms. Point 0 is the potentiality of all movements and is not subject to movement itself as it is beyond movement.

[nothing]

All being stems from a single point,

There is no such thing as a point in nature, though
it can be said all miserable being stems from a single point
of belief-based ignorance.

this single point negates itself to produce all forms beginning with the circle and line.

Imaginary.

The origins of the formless nature of thought begins with a point 0. Void is not knowledge, nor is it belief, but rather the beginning of said phenomena.

Thought has an impetus and arises because form. Void is not real.

all begins with a point...

Pointless.

[Eodnhoj7]

All being stems from a single point,

There is no such thing as a point in nature, though
it can be said all miserable being stems from a single point
of belief-based ignorance.

All phenomenon break down to point particles. Simultaneously an object at a relative distance results in a point. Upon closer inspection the object is composed of various relative points.

this single point negates itself to produce all forms beginning with the circle and line.

Imaginary.

[color=#FF0000]False, the distance between two points always results in a line.

All phenomenon as traceable result in a loop as the beginning portion of the tracing is the same as an end.

All phenomenon as replicating forms (ie legs, eyes, etc.)

/color]

The origins of the formless nature of thought begins with a point 0. Void is not knowledge, nor is it belief, but rather the beginning of said phenomena.

Thought has an impetus and arises because form. Void is not real.

Thought is form and what imprints the thought does so through a formlessness within the subconscious. This formlessness is void.

all begins with a point...

Pointless.

See above.

[nothing]

All phenomenon break down to point particles.

No they do not. There are no actual particles, only motion.
I've stated several times there are no "points" in nature
but you seem to make a point to ignore this fact.

False, the distance between two points always results in a line.

No it doesn't: it may also result in a curve, as in the case of time/space (energy)
the shortest distance between two points is not a line, but a curve.

All phenomenon as traceable result in a loop as the beginning portion of the tracing is the same as an end.

Now why can't you apply this to BELIEF?

People who believe something that is not true
are bound to go around in loops, hence time
is a measure of those loops, thus if not for loops,
time would have no efficacy on a body.

Thought is form and what imprints the thought does so through a formlessness within the subconscious. This formlessness is void.

Thought is formed, not form, and still void is not real.

[Eodnhoj7]

All phenomenon break down to point particles.

No they do not. There are no actual particles, only motion.
I've stated several times there are no "points" in nature
but you seem to make a point to ignore this fact.

Movement requires the change of one particle from one position to another. This movement is the replication of a given particle across a space. Movement requires particles as particles are the grounding of movement. All phenomenon, given the appropriate distance, are reduced to points at a distance and upon closer analysis are composed of points.

False, the distance between two points always results in a line.

No it doesn't: it may also result in a curve, as in the case of time/space (energy)
the shortest distance between two points is not a line, but a curve.

False the distance between two points is a straight line even when a curve results.

All phenomenon as traceable result in a loop as the beginning portion of the tracing is the same as an end.

Now why can't you apply this to BELIEF?

All knowledge is intrinsically empty in and of itself, the same applies for belief.
Knowledge and Belief are complimentary.

People who believe something that is not true
are bound to go around in loops, hence time
is a measure of those loops, thus if not for loops,
time would have no efficacy on a body.

Thought is form and what imprints the thought does so through a formlessness within the subconscious. This formlessness is void.

Thought is formed, not form, and still void is not real.

Void is voided in the presence of being, only being exists. Void can only be observed through a relationship of parts. This relationship necessitates particles. These particles relate to produce forms and these forms are empirical and abstract. As abstract all thoughts are forms as they are composed of different shapes.

[nothing]

Movement requires the change of one particle from one position to another. This movement is the replication of a given particle across a space. Movement requires particles as particles are the grounding of movement. All phenomenon, given the appropriate distance, are reduced to points at a distance and upon closer analysis are composed of points.

Particles do not (actually) exist in/of themselves: motion is their constituency expressed as a ratio s/t (and/or t/s).
√5 is the grounding of movement, and √5 is not a particle, it is a quantity/quality.
There are no "points".

False, the distance between two points always results in a line.

False the distance between two points is a straight line even when a curve results.

False, it may also result in a curve whose s/t "distance" is shorter
than that of the corresponding line. This is how counter-space works
given 1 = Φπ²/16 captures the relationship between linear constant Φ
and curvature constant π² (yang and yin respectively).

All phenomenon as traceable result in a loop as the beginning portion of the tracing is the same as an end.

Apply to any/all (false) " BELIEF ".

All knowledge is intrinsically empty in and of itself, the same applies for belief.
Knowledge and Belief are complimentary.

All knowledge implies intrinsic emptiness (absence) of (false) belief(s), thus
whereas (false) belief(s) are a (+) constituency defining the (dis)placement(s)
from unity, knowledge(s) are the corresponding absence (-) of such belief(s), hence
light is composed of the axes
{Α∞Ω} as a directional binary ± and
{BEG∞END} as a positional binary ± hence
the '4' in/of 4/√Φ is the "transcendental" number/nature of π
and not the (erroneously approximated) 3.14159...

Void is voided in the presence of being, only being exists. Void can only be observed through a relationship of parts. This relationship necessitates particles. These particles relate to produce forms and these forms are empirical and abstract. As abstract all thoughts are forms as they are composed of different shapes.

Relationship implies ratio: s/t. The nature of the relationship intrinsic to space and time themselves
are as being (multiplicative) reciprocal aspects of motion, thus any/all space/time phenomena
are immutably subject to (and of) reciprocity. This is how/why the "golden rule" is embedded
in the ("fabric" of) space and time (ie. existence; being) itself.

[Eodnhoj7]

Movement requires the change of one particle from one position to another. This movement is the replication of a given particle across a space. Movement requires particles as particles are the grounding of movement. All phenomenon, given the appropriate distance, are reduced to points at a distance and upon closer analysis are composed of points.

Particles do not (actually) exist in/of themselves: motion is their constituency expressed as a ratio s/t (and/or t/s).
√5 is the grounding of movement, and √5 is not a particle, it is a quantity/quality.
There are no "points".

Particles are that which is a part of something greater. From a distance an object appears as both a point and a part of a larger backdrop. Up close the object is composed of points, with each being a part of the object as composed of pieces of the object.

False, the distance between two points always results in a line.

False the distance between two points is a straight line even when a curve results.

False, it may also result in a curve whose s/t "distance" is shorter
than that of the corresponding line. This is how counter-space works
given 1 = Φπ²/16 captures the relationship between linear constant Φ
and curvature constant π² (yang and yin respectively).

Two points exist, a curve connects them. Even with the curve the points are a linear distance between eachother.

All phenomenon as traceable result in a loop as the beginning portion of the tracing is the same as an end.

Apply to any/all (false) " BELIEF ".

The loop is an objective form which exists through a variety of phenomenon.
As existing through these phenomenon it is knowable as a form. This form is assumed, ie imprinted upon the intellect. Existing as an imprint this form is knowledge as in knowable.

All knowledge is intrinsically empty in and of itself, the same applies for belief.
Knowledge and Belief are complimentary.

All knowledge implies intrinsic emptiness (absence) of (false) belief(s), thus
whereas (false) belief(s) are a (+) constituency defining the (dis)placement(s)
from unity, knowledge(s) are the corresponding absence (-) of such belief(s), hence
light is composed of the axes
{Α∞Ω} as a directional binary ± and
{BEG∞END} as a positional binary ± hence
the '4' in/of 4/√Φ is the "transcendental" number/nature of π
and not the (erroneously approximated) 3.14159...

Knowledge as acceptance of a phenomenon, through imprinting, is knowledge as belief.

Void is voided in the presence of being, only being exists. Void can only be observed through a relationship of parts. This relationship necessitates particles. These particles relate to produce forms and these forms are empirical and abstract. As abstract all thoughts are forms as they are composed of different shapes.

Relationship implies ratio: s/t. The nature of the relationship intrinsic to space and time themselves
are as being (multiplicative) reciprocal aspects of motion, thus any/all space/time phenomena
are immutably subject to (and of) reciprocity. This is how/why the "golden rule" is embedded
in the ("fabric" of) space and time (ie. existence; being) itself.

No real disagreement.

[nothing]

Particles are that which is a part of something greater. From a distance an object appears as both a point and a part of a larger backdrop. Up close the object is composed of points, with each being a part of the object as composed of pieces of the object.

That "greater" is unity s/t=1. There is no "backdrop" once a phenomena reaches the affine substrate: it becomes self-referential.

False, the distance between two points always results in a line.

False, the shortest distance between two points may also be a curve.

False the distance between two points is a straight line even when a curve results.

Again, false - there are conditions wherein only a curve may result (if/when finding the shortest distance).

Two points exist, a curve connects them. Even with the curve the points are a linear distance between eachother.

A/the linear relation does not necessarily imply/mandate the shortest distance.

All phenomenon as traceable result in a loop as the beginning portion of the tracing is the same as an end.

This beg/end axis is only present if/when s/t ≠ 1.
The beg/end axis is null and/or n/a if/when s/t = 1.

The loop is an objective form which exists through a variety of phenomenon.
As existing through these phenomenon it is knowable as a form. This form is assumed, ie imprinted upon the intellect. Existing as an imprint this form is knowledge as in knowable.

All "loops" are composed of a particular configuration of (unresolved) conjugates.
Indeed: it is possible to know who/what/where/why/when/how a displacement(s) exists/persists.
Not all "imprints" are composed of (as: a body of) knowledge - the same applies to belief-based ignorance (as: a body of).
This is how/why knowledge and belief can not be juxtaposed with "imprints".

All knowledge is intrinsically empty in and of itself, the same applies for belief.
Knowledge and Belief are complimentary.

Knowledge implies a negation(s) of belief-based ignorance(s):
who/what/where/why/when/how and/or if to/not to believe.

Knowledge as acceptance of a phenomenon, through imprinting, is knowledge as belief.

Acknowledgement of a phenomenon and acceptance of a phenomenon are not equivalent expressions.
No belief is knowledge, as belief implies absence of knowledge (by the presence of degrees of uncertainty).
One may know what one believes and why, however this has no bearing on the constituency of the belief itself.

Void is voided in the presence of being, only being exists. Void can only be observed through a relationship of parts. This relationship necessitates particles. These particles relate to produce forms and these forms are empirical and abstract. As abstract all thoughts are forms as they are composed of different shapes.

Here we go with the "void" nonsense again.
The closest that comes to "void" is √5: because it is irrational
and is √1 greater than the √4 (alpha/omega/beg/end) all
that has a constituency occupying the beg/end axis (s/t ≠ 1)
invariably and immutably passes through √5, hence:

√1 = I am (willing...)
√4 = to know all (thus) not to believe
√4 = to believe all (thus) not to know
________________________________
√(√1+2√4) = √5 hence the need to measure
the circle whose diameter is √5 such to find
the true/precise value of π and/or
the alpha/omega/beg/end as it applies to
a Φ-based pentagram.

[Eodnhoj7]

Particles are that which is a part of something greater. From a distance an object appears as both a point and a part of a larger backdrop. Up close the object is composed of points, with each being a part of the object as composed of pieces of the object.

That "greater" is unity s/t=1. There is no "backdrop" once a phenomena reaches the affine substrate: it becomes self-referential.

False, the distance between two points always results in a line.

False, the shortest distance between two points may also be a curve.

False, after reading this I will not respond to the rest considering if we cannot agree to this then we cannot agree to anything. The shortest distance between two points is a line. A curve has excess length. A Curve bending at a specific angle results in an infinite regress as the angle occurs as a distance between two points as a series of angles. In shorter terms the curve is composed of micro linear distances. A curve as the shortest distance between two points only occurs at higher dimensions, yet these higher dimensions are composed of lower dimensions. A shortest distance, being that of a curve, does not extend across lower dimensions yet these lower dimensions are what compose the base of the higher dimensions thus transcend them.

The shortest distance between two points, on a curved surface, requires the curved surface to be compose of micro angles, thus micro lines. The curve is only the shortest distance if one stays on the curve.

False the distance between two points is a straight line even when a curve results.

Again, false - there are conditions wherein only a curve may result (if/when finding the shortest distance).

Two points exist, a curve connects them. Even with the curve the points are a linear distance between eachother.

A/the linear relation does not necessarily imply/mandate the shortest distance.

All phenomenon as traceable result in a loop as the beginning portion of the tracing is the same as an end.

This beg/end axis is only present if/when s/t ≠ 1.
The beg/end axis is null and/or n/a if/when s/t = 1.

The loop is an objective form which exists through a variety of phenomenon.
As existing through these phenomenon it is knowable as a form. This form is assumed, ie imprinted upon the intellect. Existing as an imprint this form is knowledge as in knowable.

All "loops" are composed of a particular configuration of (unresolved) conjugates.
Indeed: it is possible to know who/what/where/why/when/how a displacement(s) exists/persists.
Not all "imprints" are composed of (as: a body of) knowledge - the same applies to belief-based ignorance (as: a body of).
This is how/why knowledge and belief can not be juxtaposed with "imprints".

All knowledge is intrinsically empty in and of itself, the same applies for belief.
Knowledge and Belief are complimentary.

Knowledge implies a negation(s) of belief-based ignorance(s):
who/what/where/why/when/how and/or if to/not to believe.

Knowledge as acceptance of a phenomenon, through imprinting, is knowledge as belief.

Acknowledgement of a phenomenon and acceptance of a phenomenon are not equivalent expressions.
No belief is knowledge, as belief implies absence of knowledge (by the presence of degrees of uncertainty).
One may know what one believes and why, however this has no bearing on the constituency of the belief itself.

Void is voided in the presence of being, only being exists. Void can only be observed through a relationship of parts. This relationship necessitates particles. These particles relate to produce forms and these forms are empirical and abstract. As abstract all thoughts are forms as they are composed of different shapes.

Here we go with the "void" nonsense again.
The closest that comes to "void" is √5: because it is irrational
and is √1 greater than the √4 (alpha/omega/beg/end) all
that has a constituency occupying the beg/end axis (s/t ≠ 1)
invariably and immutably passes through √5, hence:

√1 = I am (willing...)
√4 = to know all (thus) not to believe
√4 = to believe all (thus) not to know
________________________________
√(√1+2√4) = √5 hence the need to measure
the circle whose diameter is √5 such to find
the true/precise value of π and/or
the alpha/omega/beg/end as it applies to
a Φ-based pentagram.

[VVilliam]

[Eodnhoj7]

Agree to the post, where did you get the quote?

[VVilliam]

double post

[VVilliam]

Agree to the post, where did you get the quote?

I got the quote from one of the posts above, which [-I think-] was written by you.

[VVilliam]

Double Post