Deeper than primes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are doronshadmi's posts available in English or do I need to wait for a the paperback ?
:confused:
 
doronshadmi said:
You did not read pages 27-29 of http://www.scribd.com/doc/16542245/OMPT.
Click to expand...

Nice way you skipped over the other two questions and the statement.

And you never answered my main post here.

How about you answer my post then I'll answer yours?

Let me also list the other questions that you didn't answer in my last post too:

Also, if you keep mentioning 0-dimensional elements and 1-dimensional elements and their locations, how does location matter to Logics [sic]?

Can you stop editing your posts after people reply?
 
Marduk said:
Are doronshadmi's posts available in English or do I need to wait for a the paperback ?
:confused:
Click to expand...

You need to wait for the movie rights to be negotiated. It will be non-local at a theater near XOR not near you.
 
Last edited:
The Man said:
Since a line segment is "actually finite" your assertions are simply naïve nonsensical gibberish.
Click to expand...
No, only a point is actually finite w.r.t a line segment, where a line segment is an intermediate result that is less than edgeless line and more than a point.

If a point is represented by 0 and an edgeless line is represented by 1 then a segment is represented as x, such that 0 < x < 1

The naïve nonsensical gibberish is entirely yours.
 
laca said:
You have no right whatsoever to talk about someone else's inability. You are the physical manifestation of the concept of inability. The hypocrisy flowing from your posts is reaching new heights with each post.
Click to expand...

Why? Just because you can't get a point as the minimal form of actually finite and an edgeless line as the minimal form of actual infinity?
 
dafydd said:
What about non-actual infinity?
Click to expand...
It is exactly infinite interpolation, where no segment is a point, and infinite extrapolation, where no segment is an edgeless line, and there is a symmetry between infinite interpolation and infinite extrapolation (for any given segment of infinite interpolation that is not a point, there is a segemnt of infinite extrapolation that is not an edgeless line, and vice versa).

Please see http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5243168&postcount=6308.

Simple as that.
 
Last edited:
dafydd said:
Ah,that Zen koan,the edgeless edge.
Click to expand...
No, edgeless edge is a contradiction.

Being both at AND not at with respect to some given domian Z, is Non-locality (let us notate it as X).

Being at XOR not at with respect to some given domian Z, is Locality (let us notate it as Y).

"X is at XOR not at Z" is a contradiction.

"Y is at AND not at Z" is a contradiction.
 
Last edited:
Little 10 Toes said:
And you never answered my main post here.
Click to expand...
Little 10 Toes said:
Why can a line not be located? If a line is made up of points,...
Click to expand...
A line is not made of points, exactly as a plane is not made of lines, etc... ad infinitum.

Little 10 Toes said:
I can see when someone is getting sleepy. How can "sleepy" exist?
Click to expand...
As an abstract concept in your mind.
Little 10 Toes said:
how does location matter to Logics [sic]?
Click to expand...
Location has a logical foundation, based on NXOR\XOR Logic ( http://www.geocities.com/complementarytheory/NXOR-XOR.pdf ).
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
An edgeless line exists even if there is no a single point along it.
Click to expand...

I think you mean 'endless', rather than 'edgeless'.

In which case, that line summarises this thread; endless and pointless.


What on earth do you mean, what is a line without a single point on it?
 
doronshadmi said:
No, edgeless edge is a contradiction.

Being both at AND not at with respect to some given domian Z, is Non-locality (let us notate it as X).

Being at XOR not at with respect to some given domian Z, is Locality (let us notate it as Y).

"X is at XOR not at Z" is a contradiction.

"Y is at AND not at Z" is a contradiction.
Click to expand...

You have not taken non-contrary contradictions into account.Let us take X not/and/or non-local in a universal set.Any given domain will therefore be locally non-local with regard to locally local non-specific elements in the null set pertaining to an infinitely non-finite line segment.If it takes an infinite amount of time to change the sheets in all the rooms in Hilbert's Hotel,how long would it have taken Einstein to sandpaper an elephant down to the size of a mouse? Do not attempt to write on both sides of the paper at the same time.
 
dafydd said:
You have not taken non-contrary contradictions into account.Let us take X not/and/or non-local in a universal set.Any given domain will therefore be locally non-local with regard to locally local non-specific elements in the null set pertaining to an infinitely non-finite line segment.If it takes an infinite amount of time to change the sheets in all the rooms in Hilbert's Hotel,how long would it have taken Einstein to sandpaper an elephant down to the size of a mouse? Do not attempt to write on both sides of the paper at the same time.
Click to expand...
What a Zen koan. Did you do it by yourself?

After such a Zen koan, we all know that you have no problem to get http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5243216&postcount=6310 .
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom