Deeper than primes

[doronshadmi]

And are you saying you need to accelerate something to faster than the speed of light for quantum computing to work? If so, then you're talking about your own version of QC.

zooterkin, if you do not know what EPR is, you are not (yet) in a position to say any meaningful thing about QM, QC etc ...

 

[zooterkin]

zooterkin what is called Organic Number is both the Quantum Computer and the tool that enables to use it.

In Organic Mathematics there is no dichotomy between the calculated and the calculator, because both of them are simply two aspects of a one organism.

Bye bye Dichotomy.

Wellcome Organism.

Ok, show how you represent the organism 2 +3 in OM.

 

[MosheKlein]

Just to remind you what you said:




Now, please explain in what way that is an expression of support?

If you could accept/understand OM then it was very clear for you to see way it is a support letter.

 

[MosheKlein]

Ok, show how you represent the organism 2 +3 in OM.

2+3

 

[MosheKlein]

Of course they will be built using traditional mathematics and contemporary physics. They will be physical structures of metal and plastic, etc., like any other computer. They will operate using a mix of classical and QM principles, and run software (such as Shor's algorithm) that is a mix of classical and QM algorithms.

Do you have some example of an OM algorithm that might be useful for quantum computing?

Do you have any worked example of OM in use for anything at all ? By example, I mean written OM expressions that have some function and purpose.

Just try to write with a pen the 6 distinctions of 2
Then you may begin to understand from yourself ! what is QC

 

[doronshadmi]

Ok, show how you represent the organism 2 +3 in OM.

What is 2?

What is +?

What is 3?

You are using it, but do you also understand that it is some case under ON5 case (where ON5 is some case of the non-finite organism?).

 

[doronshadmi]

Just try to write with a pen the 6 distinctions of 2
Then you may begin to understand from yourself ! what is QC

Be careful Moshe, do not limit ON2 to its distinct-only state.

If you do that you misleading the posters here.

 

[dlorde]

The aim of guiding you to this video (which I do not agree with) is to show that even what is called electrical pulses along neurons are nothing but a serial view of Non-locality\Locality linkage.

The video showed nothing of the sort. It simply described the mechanisms and processes of visual perception (not entirely accurately). I am well aware of the physics, biology, neurophysiology, and psychology of the processes involved - I spent some years studying them in my Human Biology degree.

You are following only the story like any verbal-only-oriented system, and missing direct perception as the source of any verbal expression (abstract or not).

You have previously said that all observation is direct perception, and I am familiar with the pre-verbal aspects of perceptual processing, both conceptually and practically, so perhaps you can explain more clearly and exactly what you mean with regard to this framework of perception - try using alternative words, as while I understand both the conventional and QM meanings of locality and non-locality, your usage of them is opaque.

For example, in this video they interpret perception as idea, and fail exactly like anyone how gets perception as a verbal interpretation.

OM says exactly the opposite: direct perception is not an idea about direct perception exactly as the idea "silence" (even if it is only thinkable and not vocally expressible) is not silence.

So when you said the video was a good start for explaining your ideas, but substituting OM for the soul at the end, you were being substantially misleading?

 

[doronshadmi]

And then it appears an allusion to the Tao Te Ching is relevant after all.

Only by direct perception, where net-neti fulfills itself.

 

[doronshadmi]

So when you said the video was a good start for explaining your ideas, but substituting OM for the soul at the end, you were being substantially misleading?

No, it shows that you do not use Non-locality\Locality linkage at the basis of your notions.

For example you have failed to immediately understand that some neuron's path is the non-local aspect and the electric signal along it is the local aspect of the same complex system (also called Organism).

 

[MosheKlein]

Be careful Moshe, do not limit ON2 to its distinct-only state.

If you do that you misleading the posters here.

Ok thank you , I will do that.
QC should lead us to a new technology
which is the technology of the conciseness.

 

[doronshadmi]

You have previously said that all observation is direct perception,...

Do not read my leaps (exactly because what I am going to write is not on the verbal bla bla bla ... level):

Direct perceptopn is not an obsevation, Direct perception enables Obsevation.

 

[doronshadmi]

Ok thank you , I will do that.
QC should lead us to a new technology
which is the technology of the conciseness.

The technology of the conciseness is reduced to direct perception, where no subjective verbal-based expressions have a room.

On the basis of this reduction we get the real objective base ground that enables verbal-based expressions to be exactly what they are, accurate expressions of direct perception.

 

[MosheKlein]

The technology of the conciseness is reduced to direct perception, where no subjective verbal-based expressions have a room.

On the basis of this reduction we get the real objective base ground that enables verbal-based expressions to be exactly what they are, accurate expressions of direct perception.

thank you !
I think that the imaginary colure in Benaham wheel
present the power of the technology of the conciseness
and what is direct perception

http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/col_benham/

What do you think about this unexplained.. phenomena ?

Moshe

 

[jsfisher]

1. This isn't an application of OM.
2. It doesn't satisfy what you stated as the third rule.

which rule exactly @ not satisfied ?

Was I unclear in the post of mine you quoted?

Perhaps this will help:

x@y=y@x
x@(y@z)=(x@y)@z
x@(y*z)=(x@y)*(x*z)

 

[zooterkin]

Just try to write with a pen the 6 distinctions of 2
Then you may begin to understand from yourself ! what is QC

Be careful Moshe, do not limit ON2 to its distinct-only state.

If you do that you misleading the posters here.

Yes, guys, try to keep the story straight...

 

[dlorde]

For example you have failed to immediately understand that some neuron's path is the non-local aspect and the electric signal along it is the local aspect of the same complex system (also called Organism).

I may not use those terms, but I understand the relationship.

 

[zooterkin]

If you could accept/understand OM then it was very clear for you to see way it is a support letter.

Thank you for a clear example of self-delusion. Can you produce an equally clear example of OM?

 

[doronshadmi]

thank you !
I think that the imaginary colure in Benaham wheel
present the power of the technology of the conciseness
and what is direct perception

http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/col_benham/

What do you think about this unexplained.. phenomena ?

Moshe

Moshe,

Direct perception is not any particular visual observation.

Direct perception is the base ground that enables also visual observations.

As for Benaham, I do not know, it has to carefully be researched where the researcher's aspect must not be ignored (the researcher's aspect is ignored by the Newtonian Mechanics, which is fundamentally wrong).

 

[doronshadmi]

I may not use those terms, but I understand the relationship.

No, you don't , as long as you get the terms only on the level of verbal expression.