Cont: Deeper than primes - Continuation 2

doronshadmi · Jul 2, 2016

Little 10 Toes said:
You do circular definitions, make up words and then can't define them.

How exactly you are able to conclude that I do circular definitions, if (by your own words) they are based on undefined words?

Also please reply in details to http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11364407&postcount=1960.

doronshadmi · Jul 8, 2016

Take for example T.

It is not a free variable, yet T has at least two options, which are T,~T.

Any binary logical connective between the two options, is addressed by at least four rows as follows:

Code:

 T    ~T
--------
~T    ~T  
~T     T  
 T    ~T 
 T     T

T is notated by 1

~T is notated by 0

p and q are two propositions as follows:

p = 0 0 1 1

q = 0 1 0 1

By not using free variables, we get the 16 logical results as seen by the 16 branches of the following binary tree:

Code:

         p = 0    0  1 1

         q = 0    1  0 1
         ---------------


                      /0  Contradiction
                    /0
                   /  \1  p AND q
                 /0
                /  \  /0  p not implies q
               /    \1
              /       \1  p
            /0
           /  \       /0  q not implies p
          /    \    /0
         /      \  /  \1  q
        /        \1
       /           \  /0  p XOR q
      /             \1
     /                \1  p OR q
Unity
     \                /0  p NOR q
      \             /0
       \           /  \1  p NXOR q
        \        /0
         \      /  \  /0  NOT q
          \    /    \1
           \  /       \1  q implies p
            \1
              \       /0  NOT p
               \    /0
                \  /  \1  p implies q
                 \1
                   \  /0  p NAND q
                    \1
                      \1  Tautology

The complements of a given binary tree with 16 branches are:

Code:

         p = 0    0  1 1

         q = 0    1  0 1
         ---------------


                      /0  Contradiction -----------*
                    /0                             |
                   /  \1  p AND q ---------------* |
                 /0                              | |
                /  \  /0  p not implies q -----* | |
               /    \1                         | | |
              /       \1  p -----------------* | | |
            /0                               | | | |
           /  \       /0  q not implies p -* | | | |
          /    \    /0                     | | | | |
         /      \  /  \1  q -------------* | | | | |
        /        \1                      | | | | | |
       /           \  /0  p XOR q -----* | | | | | |
      /             \1                 | | | | | | |
     /                \1  p OR q ----* | | | | | | |
Unity                                | | | | | | | |
     \                /0  p NOR q ---* | | | | | | |
      \             /0                 | | | | | | |
       \           /  \1  p NXOR q ----* | | | | | |
        \        /0                      | | | | | |
         \      /  \  /0  NOT q ---------* | | | | |
          \    /    \1                     | | | | |
           \  /       \1  q implies p -----* | | | |
            \1                               | | | |
              \       /0  NOT p -------------* | | |
               \    /0                         | | |
                \  /  \1  p implies q ---------* | |
                 \1                              | |
                   \  /0  p NAND q --------------* |
                    \1                             |
                      \1  Tautology ---------------*

A more comprehensive view of a binary tree, and its implications on set theory, is given in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11342271&postcount=1804.

Further details are given in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11363027&postcount=1948 or http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11363119&postcount=1953.

Again, no free variables are involved.

doronshadmi · Jul 8, 2016

Let's briefly touch 3-valued logic, without using free variables.

T has 3 options which are: T, mT, ~T (m = middle, ~ = not).

T is notated by 2.

mT is notated by 1.

~T is notated by 0.

p, m and q are 3 propositions as follows:

Code:

p = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 

m = 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2

q = 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2

A tree of 3-valued logic of these propositions has 3²⁷ = 7,625,597,484,987 branches.

In this case contradiction is branch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,
where tautology is branch 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2.

Again, no free variables are involved.

doronshadmi · Jul 11, 2016

I use 2-valued logic tree in order to address integers and fractions as follows:

Code:

Unity
|\
| \
|  \
|   \
|    \
|     \
|      \
|       \
|        \
|         \
|          \
|           \
|            \
|             \
|              \
[B]0[/B]---------------[B]1[/B]---------------Integers
|[B]\[/B]              [B]|[/B]\
| [B]\[/B]             [B]|[/B] \
|  [B]\[/B]            [B]|[/B]  \
|   [B]\[/B]           [B]|[/B]   \
|    [B]\[/B]          [B]|[/B]    \
|     [B]\[/B]         [B]|[/B]     \         Fractions
|      [B]\[/B]        [B]|[/B]      \
0       [B]1[/B]       [B]0[/B]       1
|\      |[B]\[/B]      [B]|[/B]\      |\
| \     | [B]\[/B]     [B]|[/B] \     | \
|  \    |  [B]\[/B]    [B]|[/B]  \    |  \
0   1   0   [B]1[/B]   [B]0[/B]   1   0   1
|\  |\  |\  |[B]\[/B]  [B]|[/B]\  |\  |\  |\
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 [B]1[/B] [B]0[/B] 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

              ...

It is logically addressed that no bounded or unbounded branch of that tree is identical to any branch of that tree, but itself (this logical fact is actually expanded to any n-valued logic tree, where n > 2).

Actually we logically prove that 0.111...₂ ≠ 1.000...₂

Furthermore, in the particular case of 2-valued logic tree 0.111... and 1.000... are logically complements of each other (which in not true in case of n-valued logic, where n > 2. Yet it does not change the logical fact that any branch that is not 1.000..., is not logically identical to 1.000..., and so is the case of every fraction that is logically addressed by any n-valued logic tree, where n > 2).

-----------------------------

jsfisher · Jul 11, 2016

doronshadmi said:
I use 2-valued logic tree in order to address integers and fractions as follows...

Oh, my! You are making progress. By convoluted process you've discovered that all dyadic boolean functions can be enumerated. So can the triadic tri-state functions. Great stuff!

And now, you are about to discover the binary system.

All this is only fitting. After all, the starting point for the Deeper than Primes thread was your discovery that multiplication was repeated addition.

...
Actually we logically prove that 0.111...₂ ≠ 1.000...₂

No, that would be a bare assertion, the same assertion you have made multiple times, always without proof.

doronshadmi · Jul 11, 2016

jsfisher said:
Oh, my! You are making progress. By convoluted process you've discovered that all dyadic boolean functions can be enumerated. So can the triadic tri-state functions. Great stuff!

And now, you are about to discover the binary system.

All this is only fitting. After all, the starting point for the Deeper than Primes thread was your discovery that multiplication was repeated addition.

Jsfisher, since no infinite collection of members is complete, enumerated OR non-enumerated is no more than your fantasy together with your limit concept.

Moreover, your current used reasoning can't comprehend Fuzzy Logic as addressed in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11363119&postcount=1953.

In other words, you have no argument about the issue at hand.

jsfisher said:
No, that would be a bare assertion, the same assertion you have made multiple times, always without proof.

It is logically directly proven by simply using logical unbounded trees.

Since your framework is involved with too many words, variables etc., you are simply blind to proofs that are based directly on logical trees.

jsfisher · Jul 11, 2016

doronshadmi said:
Jsfisher, since no infinite collection of members is complete...

Proof by assertion continues.

doronshadmi · Jul 11, 2016

jsfisher said:
Proof by assertion continues.

Reasoning without entirely logically addressed continues.

No wonder that such reasoning can't handle with http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11364407&postcount=1960 that do not use free variables, exactly because they are directly and entirely based on logic, and so is http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11380724&postcount=1964, it is directly and entirely based on logic.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11374991&postcount=1962 and http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11375190&postcount=1963 are two examples of finite logical trees, which clearly expose the weakness of any mathematical framework that is based on finitely many logical connectives.

doronshadmi · Jul 11, 2016

jsfisher said:
After all, the starting point for the Deeper than Primes thread was your discovery that multiplication was repeated addition.

In this case your current used reasoning can't distinguish between, for example 2*1 as an operation between two redundant things, and between 1+1 as an operation between two non-redundant things.

Nonpareil · Jul 13, 2016

doronshadmi said:
Jsfisher, since no infinite collection of members is complete

Months away from this forum, and we're exactly where I left off.

I don't know whether I should be disappointed or impressed.

doronshadmi · Jul 14, 2016

As a replay to http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11377745&postcount=1813, let's address it by using 2-valued logic as the minimal expression of multiplicity\diversity phenomenon.

Here is a binary tree that its growth is unbounded vertically, yet horizontally it is bounded by contradiction (always false) OR tautology (always true).

Code:

                    Unbounded multiplicity/diversity                         
                                  ...                                 
                                                                       
    0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1   
    \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ /   
     0   1   0   1   0   1   0   1   0   1   0   1   0   1   0   1     
     \   /   \   /   \   /   \   /   \   /   \   /   \   /   \   /     
      \ /     \ /     \ /     \ /     \ /     \ /     \ /     \ /     
       0       1       0       1       0       1       0       1       
       \       /       \       /       \       /       \       /       
        \     /         \     /         \     /         \     /       
         \   /           \   /           \   /           \   /         
          \ /             \ /             \ /             \ /         
           0               1               0               1           
           \               /               \               /           
            \             /                 \             /           
             \           /                   \           /             
              \         /                     \         /             
               \       /                       \       /               
                \     /                         \     /               
     bounded     \   /                           \   /     bounded     
                  \ /                             \ /                 
        by         0                               1         by       
                    \                             /                   
   contradiction     \                           /        tautology   
                      \                         /                     
                       \                       /                       
                        \                     /                       
                         \                   /                         
                          \                 /                         
                           \               /                           
                            \             /                           
                             \           /                             
                              \         /                             
                               \       /                               
                                \     /                               
                                 \   /                                 
       _   _   _   _   _   _   _  \ /  _   _   _   _   _   _   _       
...  _/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_ ...
                                                                       
                             Unbounded Unity

The growth power is supplied by being rooted in Unbounded Unity, which is not bounded by (it is not the sum of) any form that may be developed as multiple\diverse phenomena (where a binary tree is an example (a particular case) of such phenomenon).

What is called God according to this diagram is actually Unbounded Unity, which is not bounded by its multiple\diverse phenomena.

Reasoning, thoughts, words, emotions, senses, objects, subjects, things and their complements etc. , are parts of multiplicity\diversity ever changed (ever developed) phenomena, so in order to directly be aware of God, one's awareness has to directly know (by actually transcend multiplicity\diversity ever changed (ever developed) phenomena) Unbounded Unity.

Without this direct awareness, any attempt to know God's purpose, is doomed to fail.

One's awareness that tries to know God's purpose by know only God's multiplicity\diversity ever changed (ever developed) phenomena, can't know God's purpose.

Navigator · Jul 14, 2016

doronshadmi said:
As a replay to http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11377745&postcount=1813, let's address it by using 2-valued logic as the minimal expression of multiplicity\diversity.

Here is a binary tree that its growth is unbounded vertically, yet horizontally it is bounded by contradiction (always false) OR tautology (always true).

Code:

Unbounded multiplicity ... 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / 0 1 0 1 \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / bounded \ / \ / bounded \ / \ / by 0 1 by \ / contradiction \ / tautology \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / _ _ _ _ _ _ _ \ / _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ... _/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_ ... Unbounded Unity

The growth power is supplied by being rooted in Unbounded Unity, which is not bounded by (it is not the sum of) any form that may be developed as multiple\diverse phenomena (where a binary tree is an example of such phenomenon).

What is called God according to this diagram is actually Unbounded Unity, which is not bounded by its multiple\diverse phenomena.

Reasoning, thoughts, words, emotions, senses, objects, subjects, things and their complements, are parts of multiplicity\diversity ever changed (ever developed) phenomena, so in order to directly be aware of God, one's awareness has to directly know (by actually transcend multiplicity\diversity ever changed (ever developed) phenomena) Unbounded Unity.

Without this direct awareness, any attempt to know God's purpose, is doomed to fail.

One's awareness that tries to know God's purpose by know only God's multiplicity\diversity ever changed (ever developed) phenomena, can't know God's purpose.

Hi doronshadmi

I think the thread was directed more toward the abrahamic idea of god, but in relation to your post 'we cannot know God's purpose in relation to the unbounded because we are restricted' implies that in the restriction any conceived purpose there might be is subject to the same restrictions as that which conceives them...therefore we can only know our part in relation to the purpose and in relation to our restricted position - we cannot know the whole purpose.

To be sure, we do not need to know the whole purpose of God [the unbounded] - and I understand the thread question was directed toward the abrahamic idea of god (itself a part of the restriction we are involved within) and even that being the case, that idea of god is just one of many, and from what I have come across in my own studies, there are far vaster ideas of god than those presented through the abrahamic organised religions.

My understanding is that if there is any 'purpose of god' in relation to consciousness and this universe, the options are rather limited as to what can be achieved in said universe, although time-wise...there seem to be any amount of that in order to do the achieving...

Looking at your diagram it appears that the 'unbounded' has purpose in relation to the path(s) from one point (unbounded unity) to another
( Unbounded multiplicity ) ...

doronshadmi · Jul 14, 2016

Navigator said:
Hi doronshadmi

I think the thread was directed more toward the abrahamic idea of god

God (Unbounded Unity) is not restricted to awareness about it, where any awareness that is based only on belief, is restricted only to awareness about God, which is not direct awareness of God.

Navigator said:
Looking at your diagram it appears that the 'unbounded' has purpose in relation to the path(s) from one point (unbounded unity) to another
( Unbounded multiplicity ) ...

Unbounded Unity can't be described in terms of its expressions, where 'point' is a form of an expression.

By directly being aware of God, and by not losing it during God's ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena, one actually knows God's purpose(s).

Navigator · Jul 14, 2016

doronshadmi said:
God (Unbounded Unity) is not restricted to awareness about it, where any awareness that is based only on belief, is restricted only to awareness about God, which is not direct awareness of God.

Unbounded Unity can't be described in terms of its expressions, where 'point' is a form of an expression.

By directly being aware of God, and by not losing it during God's ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena, one actually knows God's purpose(s).

Well that is interesting. Do you know anyone who thus actually knows God's purpose...particularly in relation to this particular universe?

Do you?

doronshadmi · Jul 14, 2016

Navigator said:
Well that is interesting. Do you know anyone who thus actually knows God's purpose...particularly in relation to this particular universe?

Do you?

Harmony among all its ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena, which is actually God's Art to more and more gently express its unbounded power through bounded phenomena.

This is actually The Art Of Love through living (ever changing ever developed multiple\diverse) phenomena, that eventually enables free will for living things (by directly being aware of God and not losing it during God's ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena).

Thor 2 · Jul 14, 2016

doronshadmi said:
Harmony among all its ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena.

You seem to be coming at this half way however. If this God happened along after all had been created then maybe it would make a bit of sense. But God, supposedly, created the mess in the first place, (bit of a shoddy job), so how does it make any sense given that?

doronshadmi · Jul 14, 2016

Thor 2 said:
You seem to be coming at this half way however. If this God happened along after all had been created then maybe it would make a bit of sense. But God, supposedly, created the mess in the first place, (bit of a shoddy job), so how does it make any sense given that?

Mess is simply the restriction of God's power. Through mess God's power is expressed as harmonious ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena.

Without God's power restriction there is only Unbounded Unity (simply God).

doronshadmi · Jul 14, 2016

Science is the best framework to actually know God and God's purpose(s).

Any framework that is based only on belief fails to actually know God and God's purpose(s).

Navigator · Jul 14, 2016

doronshadmi said:
Harmony among all its ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena, which is actually God's Art to more and more gently express its unbounded power through bounded phenomena.

This is actually The Art Of Love through living (ever changing ever developed multiple\diverse) phenomena, that eventually enables free will for living things (by directly being aware of God and not losing it during God's ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena).

It appears that you are basically saying that eventually things will sort themselves out.

Navigator · Jul 14, 2016

Thor 2 said:
You seem to be coming at this half way however. If this God happened along after all had been created then maybe it would make a bit of sense. But God, supposedly, created the mess in the first place, (bit of a shoddy job), so how does it make any sense given that?

doronshadmi said:
Mess is simply the restriction of God's power. Through mess God's power is expressed as harmonious ever developed multiplicity\diversity phenomena.

Without God's power restriction there is only Unbounded Unity (simply God).

All in the eye of the beholder...the 'mess' isn't a mess really - it just appears that way...especially when inside it near the beginning of it...even contributing to it. Obviously then the multiplicity/diversity appears to be a 'mess' and the appearance contributes to the manner in which consciousness chooses to react to it based upon the individuals understanding of it.

The idea here is pretty much in line with the 'we are GOD' idea I have been talking about here...

Obviously not the same as the abrahamic idea of god...it isn't about worshiping anything real or imagined...it isn't about worship at all...an idea of 'god' which does't require or otherwise demand unquestioning vainglorious worship...

Cont: Deeper than primes - Continuation 2

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

ETcorngods survivor

Penultimate Amazing

ETcorngods survivor

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

The Terrible Trivium

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Philosopher