Deeper than primes

[doronshadmi]

Let us return to http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5858531&postcount=9626 .

By Standard Math an irrational number is defined as the limit of all rational numbers that are < or > from this irrational number.

In this case the rational numbers are not a complete metric space because their limit (an irrational number) does not belong to their metric space.

In this case we can ask: What enables the linkage between two metric spaces, such that an element of a given metric space is the limit of another metric space?

No one of the members of the given spaces is the linkage between the spaces, so there must be another mathematical property that is fundamentally different than the members of the given spaces.

Carful study of this case leads us to understand that the linked members of two different spaces are local elements of their spaces, such that each member belongs to a given space.

So the linkage between elements that belong to a given space, is exactly an element that does not exclusively belong to a given space, such that it belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or in other words, it is non-local w.r.t any given space.

Furthermore, if only a one given space is considered and more than one element of that space is considered, still the common property of a given space is non-local w.r.t to the given id of any member of that space.

No local element belongs AND does not belong to a given space, and no local element is the common proprty of a given space w.r.t to the ids that belong to this space..

A non-local element belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or a non-local element is the common property of a given space w.r.t to the ids that belong to this space.

Now, in the case of http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5858531&postcount=9626 constant X>0 is a non-local element, where the limit point is a local element = 0 (notated as Y).

Since X=Y is false, then it does not matter how many projections of bended versions of constant X>0 are projected on the non-bended version of constant X>0, S=(2a+2b+2c+2d+..) < X (by 0.000...3/4, which is the invariant proportion between the bended projected versions of constant X>0) exactly because X=Y is false (Non-local AND Local is false).

Classical analysis can't deal with the anomaly that is exposed by

because Non-locality is not understood by Classical analysis.

 

[Apathia]

Sorry for my late response to meditation and the "first stage of Yogic flying."

Briefly I meditate as an aid in learning to let go of identification with my fleeting thoughts and feelings. Also as wasy to encourage a compassionate mind.

As far as I'm concerened attempts to use meditation to develop psychic powers of as a way to meet metaphysical beings or realities is a bogus distraction.

What's important is that an awake and aware mind does see others as more than objects of a class to be acted upon for the purposes of the selfish ego.
(Though I admit that there are many gurus and meditation teachers who say this but exhibit all kinds of disgusting behavior toward their disciples.
Call it the "Fool on The Hill" effect.)

 

[doronshadmi]

As far as I'm concerened attempts to use meditation to develop psychic powers of as a way to meet metaphysical beings or realities is a bogus distraction.

The flying sutra is just one of the sutras that at practiced during the TM-Sidhis program.

Other sutras are used to develop Love, Compassion, Friendship, Senses refinement, and more properties that are essential to cooperated and yet unique and creative life.

TM works basically in two training steps:

1) Step one: The mind learns to be aware of more and more finer levels of its activity, until it is opened to the least state of mental activity, which is actually the silent source of all levels of mental activities.

The ability to move between different levels of mantel activities is a natural process in both directions. Most of our lives we are aware of the more stimulating levels of our mental process, so practicing mental techniques that trains the mind to be opened to finer and calmer levels of the mental activity (up to the origin of any mental activity) without loosing awareness, simply develop the balance between stimulating levels and calm levels of our mind, exactly as balanced training of muscles is done by optimal linkage between rest and action.

2) Step two: By using the developed abilities to be aware of finer levels of mental activity, we actually develop our abilities to act from deeper and deeper levels of our mental space. The Yoga sutra of Patanjali ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_Sutras ) is an example of a very profound mental technique that actually enables our mind to activate some thought right from the calm state of unbounded awareness, which is the source of any mantel activity.

If our complexity is tuned w.r.t the source of any mental activity, and since this source is actually the source of any possible phenomena, we get an activated result, which is tuned with the source of any possible phenomena.

In other words, our request is fulfilled right from the source of all phenomena.

We can't ask harmful requests to be fulfilled right from the source of all phenomena, because harmful requests are exactly those states of mind that are not directly aware of the common source of any possible phenomena.

If each one of us will be directly opened to the unified field of all possible phenomena, our complex realm will be developed in a coherent and consistent way, such that no complexity will block the development of any other complexity.

I think that our spices makes its first steps to be directly opened to the unified field of all possible complexities, which gives us the chance to be developed beyond our current and sometimes harmful interactions.

 

[doronshadmi]

Some correction of http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5876457&postcount=9681:

Instead of:

So the linkage between elements that belong to a given space, is exactly an element that does not exclusively belong to a given space, such that it belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or in other words, it is non-local w.r.t any given space.

It has to be:

So the linkage between elements that belong to different spaces, is exactly an element that does not exclusively belong to any of these spaces, such that it belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or in other words, it is non-local w.r.t any given space.

As shown in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5876457&postcount=9681 , it does not matter if the linkage (the non-local property) is defined between two different spaces or between two different elements of the same space.

So non-locality is defined between a given limit and some collection, whether the limit belongs or does not belong to that collection, where the irreducibility of non-locality (the linkage) to locality (the limit) prevents the sum of the convergent absolute added values of that collocation.

 

[doronshadmi]

As can be seen Neuroquantology http://www.neuroquantology.com/repository/index.php?option=com_sobi2&catid=2&Itemid=66 has a lot of research activity, and some of this activity is marked as a WOO "hands waving" science by people that uses the mechanic paradigm as the basis of Complexity understanding.

The mechanic paradigm that is based on a clear cut dichotomy between the observed and the observer does not have the appropriate tools to deal with real Complexity, and one of these inappropriate tools is the concept of Limit, as understood by Standard Math.


About non-locality please see http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v454/n7206/full/nature07121.html (its pre-print version http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0808/0808.3316v1.pdf )

 

[doronshadmi]

Let us summarize the last posts by using the notion of the unified field as understood by Quantum Spiritually view (http://www.neuroquantology.com/journal/index.php/nq/article/viewFile/377/426):

Fogs (non-local numbers) are defined along the real-line, but their exact location does not exist along the real-line, where the real-line itself if not a collection by OM, but it is the non-local aspect of the atomic self-state (the unified field http://www.invincibility.org/popups/uf2.html), exactly as a point is the local aspect of the atomic self-state (the unified field).

Fogs are the result of the irreducibility of the non-local to the local and the non-increaseability of the local to the non-local. The non-local\local mutual independencyenables the unified field (the atomic self-state) to express its unlimited infinite complexity.

This unlimited infinite complexity is undefined by the current paradigm, which claims , for example, that fog 0.999…[base 10] = finite value 1.

By the current mathematical paradigm (which is based on the Limit concept, by using only the local aspect of the unified field (the atomic self-state)) 0.999…[base 10] is a numeral that represents number 1.

Since OM uses also the non-local aspect of the unified field (the atomic self-state) it enables to define 0.999…[base 10] not as a representation of number 1, but as a number of its own, known as a fog (or non-local number).

Fogs are new kinds of numbers that can be used in order to deal with Uncertainty and Redundancy without forcing on them numbers that are derived only from the local aspect of the unified filed (the atomic self-state).

By Standard Math an irrational number (which is a local number) is defined as the limit of all rational numbers (which are also local numbers) that are < or > from this irrational number.

In this case the rational numbers are not a complete metric space because their limit (an irrational number) does not belong to their metric space.

In this case we can ask: What enables the linkage between two metric spaces, such that an element of a given metric space is the limit of another metric space?

No one of the members of the given spaces is the linkage between the spaces, so there must be another mathematical property that is fundamentally different than the members of the given spaces.

Carful study of this case leads us to understand that the linked members of two different spaces are local elements of their spaces, such that each member belongs to a given space.

So the linkage between elements that belong to different spaces, is exactly an element that does not exclusively belong to any of these spaces, such that it belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or in other words, it is non-local w.r.t any given space.

Actually, it does not matter if the linkage (the non-local property) is defined between two different spaces or between two different elements of the same space.

So non-locality is defined between a given limit and some collection, whether the limit belongs or does not belong to that collection, where the irreducibility of non-locality (the linkage) to locality (the limit) prevents the accurate value of the convergent absolute added values of that collocation.

No local element belongs AND does not belong to a given space, and no local element is the common property of a given space w.r.t to the ids that belong to this space..

A non-local element belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or a non-local element is the common property of a given space w.r.t to the ids that belong to this space.

Now, constant X>0 (the size of each orange element in the diagram of Koch's fractal below) is a non-local element, where the limit point (at the bottom of that diagram) is a local element = 0 (notated as Y).

Since X=Y is false, then it does not matter how many projections of bended versions of constant X>0 are projected on the non-bended version of constant X>0, S=(2a+2b+2c+2d+..) < X (by 0.000...3/4, which is the invariant proportion between the bended projected versions of constant X>0) exactly because X=Y is false (Non-local AND Local is false).

Classical analysis can't deal with the anomaly that is exposed by

because Non-locality is not understood by Classical analysis.

 

[doronshadmi]

David Lynch explains his understanding about consciousness, creativity and the brain. He says that Transcendental Meditation played crucial role in developing his consciousness and boosting his creativity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2UHLMVr4vg&feature=related

 

[The Man]

Stress reduction is a comprehensive physical measured phenomenon, which is derived from the mental practicing of TM technique, in this case.

In other words, restful alertness that was measured in brain’s activity during the TM practice [1] , plays a main role that enables Stress reduction all over the body.

The current physical measurement tools can’t measure directly the expansion of awareness during the practice, so you can’t find anything about “unbounded awareness” or that the subjects “get things from more profound levels of” their “mental activity” in these research papers.

There is no indirect way here The Man, you simply have to actually practicing TM, in order to get by yourself “unbounded awareness” or that you “get things from more profound levels of” your “mental activity”.

So your “unbounded awareness” and belief “you “get things from more profound levels of” your “mental activity”” or just your own interpretation and subjective feeling when you engage in TM. Guess what Doron, we already surmised that.

In other words The Man, indirect perception of a considered subject is a partial method of understanding it.

[1] For more details, please see:

Patterns of EEG coherence, power, and
contingent negative variation characterize the
integration of transcendental and waking states:
http://www.totalbrain.ch/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/brain-integration-progress-report.pdf

The group differences are empirically strong, but we cannot conclude what caused
those group differences. Since a cross-sectional design was used, we do not know the
pre-TM EEG patterns of subjects in the Occas-TE and Cont-TE groups.

Oops, guess they should have thought of that before.

Psychological and physiological characteristics
of a proposed object-referral/self-referral continuum
of self-awareness:
http://www.totalbrain.ch/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/eeg-of-enlightenment.pdf

1.2. Purpose of the current study
The current study extends these earlier brainwave findings by exploring the details of the inner
subjective experience of these subjects through two approaches—an unstructured interview and a
battery of standard psychological tests.

Still not addressing the problem of those “earlier brainwave findings”.

http://www.totalbrain.ch/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/EEG of Transcending.pdf

Oh look, stress reduction (or “decreasing anxiety” as it is referred to in this paper) again.

http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/IsTMMetaphysical/APersonalView/index.cfm

Not a research paper.

 

[The Man]

A meta-analysis of 597 studies of meditation practices was published in The American Journal of Health Promotion (May/June 1998). This study found TM to be significantly superior to other forms of meditation and relaxation in a wide range of criteria related to mental and physical health.

Resulting from… (its ok, you can say it) …stress reduction.

See also:

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/112457231/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

http://www.psrast.org/tmunique.htm

http://healthpromotionjournal.com/m...de=AJHP&Product_Code=JV14I5284&Category_Code=

None of those links are research papers.

Psychophysiological Effects of Yoga:

http://www.iayt.org/site_Vx2/publications/psychophysiology.pdf

A bibliography not a research paper.

A Doron, do you actually read any of these links and papers let alone understand what they are about?

 

[The Man]

Let us return to http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5858531&postcount=9626 .

By Standard Math an irrational number is defined as the limit of all rational numbers that are < or > from this irrational number.

No an irrational number is defined as a real number that can not be expressed as a fraction of two integers.

In this case the rational numbers are not a complete metric space because their limit (an irrational number) does not belong to their metric space.

Simple nonsense. Are you simply or deliberately confusing “complete” with “continuous”?

In this case we can ask: What enables the linkage between two metric spaces, such that an element of a given metric space is the limit of another metric space?

That would be just, well, limits.

No one of the members of the given spaces is the linkage between the spaces, so there must be another mathematical property that is fundamentally different than the members of the given spaces.

If you are still talking about rational and irrational numbers, their “linkage” (or more specifically union) is the set of all real numbers (which would be a continuous space).

Carful study of this case leads us to understand that the linked members of two different spaces are local elements of their spaces, such that each member belongs to a given space.

It is simply trivial that an element of some space is local to that space. Hardly “Carful study”.

So the linkage between elements that belong to a given space, is exactly an element that does not exclusively belong to a given space, such that it belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or in other words, it is non-local w.r.t any given space.

This is where you continue to fail Doron ‘belonging’ to some “space” (like say the irrational numbers) does not preclude belonging to some other “space” like the real numbers (of which the irrational numbers are a proper subset) but belonging to some space like the rational numbers (also a proper subset of the reels) is excluded as an irrational number is specifically not rational. So not all “spaces” are mutually exclusive, but some are. “belongs AND does not belong to any given space” is again simply self contradictory while ‘belongs to some “space” AND belongs to some other “space”” is not.

Furthermore, if only a one given space is considered and more than one element of that space is considered, still the common property of a given space is non-local w.r.t to the given id of any member of that space.

No local element belongs AND does not belong to a given space, and no local element is the common proprty of a given space w.r.t to the ids that belong to this space..

A non-local element belongs AND does not belong to any given space, or a non-local element is the common property of a given space w.r.t to the ids that belong to this space.

Now, in the case of http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5858531&postcount=9626 constant X>0 is a non-local element, where the limit point is a local element = 0 (notated as Y).

Since X=Y is false, then it does not matter how many projections of bended versions of constant X>0 are projected on the non-bended version of constant X>0, S=(2a+2b+2c+2d+..) < X (by 0.000...3/4, which is the invariant proportion between the bended projected versions of constant X>0) exactly because X=Y is false (Non-local AND Local is false).

Classical analysis can't deal with the anomaly that is exposed by [qimg]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4015/4430320710_daf5b36c0f_o.jpg[/qimg]
because Non-locality is not understood by Classical analysis.

Again the only anomaly “that is exposed” is the one in your head which insists upon the self contradictory ascription of “belongs AND does not belong to any given space”.

 

[The Man]

We can't ask harmful requests to be fulfilled right from the source of all phenomena, because harmful requests are exactly those states of mind that are not directly aware of the common source of any possible phenomena.

Well I guess your “common source of any possible phenomena” must be getting those “requests” demonstrably wrong as “harmful” “phenomena” do happen. Doron this is just your own particular brand of “The Secret”.

 

[The Man]

Let us summarize the last posts by using the notion of the unified field as understood by Quantum Spiritually view (http://www.neuroquantology.com/journal/index.php/nq/article/viewFile/377/426):

“Quantum Spiritually”, who would have guessed.

 

[Skeptic]

For those who want to know more, there's this book.

 

[doronshadmi]

Guess what Doron, we already surmised that.

Indeed surmised is your best in this case, because you never practiced TM and got the foundation of any thought within yourself.

You are like a blind man that argues about colors.

A bibliography not a research paper.

The Man research is not only by indirect methods that a measured by mechanical instruments that measure things by local-only methods, especially if the researched is the awareness itself.

Again, without a direct perception of awareness as the foundation of any mental activity, you actually have not enough knowledge in order to conclude any meaningful thing about awareness.

Still you are like a blind man that argues about colors.

 

[doronshadmi]

Guess what Doron, we already surmised that.

Indeed surmised is your best in this case, because you never practiced TM and got the foundation of any thought within yourself.

You are like a blind man that argues about colors.

A bibliography not a research paper.

The Man research is not only by indirect methods that a measured by mechanical instruments that measure things by local-only methods, especially if the researched is the awareness itself.

Again, without a direct perception of awareness as the foundation of any mental activity, you actually have not enough knowledge in order to conclude any meaningful thing about awareness.

Still you are like a blind man that argues about colors.

No an irrational number is defined as a real number that can not be expressed as a fraction of two integers.

Or as Dedekind's cuts, which the limits of L R sets of rational numbers, which is the relevant definition in this case.

If you are still talking about rational and irrational numbers, their “linkage” (or more specifically union) is the set of all real numbers (which would be a continuous space).

It does not matter, in this case the common property of being a real number is the linkage (the non-local property) between ids (localities).

Still you are unable to get your own words.

It is simply trivial that an element of some space is local to that space. Hardly “Carful study”.

And by the same reasoning, it is trivial that the common property of a given space is non-local w.r.t any given id (distinguished element) of that space.

Still you are unable to get your own words.

“belongs AND does not belong to any given space” is again simply self contradictory while ‘belongs to some “space” AND belongs to some other “space”” is not.

“belongs AND does not belong to any given space” simply means that the defined element does not exclusively belong to any particular space (or any particular id of the same space), or in other words: this element ‘belongs to some “space” (or id of some space) AND belongs to some other “space” (or another id of the same space) (where the AND gives it the simultaneity that no local element has).

Still you are unable to get your own words.


Also local-only thinker like you ignores http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5888652&postcount=9685 , isn't it?

 

[doronshadmi]

“Quantum Spiritually”, who would have guessed.

Yes I know, guessing is your best in this fine subject.


Most o the researchers in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5888652&postcount=9685 are idiots, isn't it The Man?

 

[doronshadmi]

For those who want to know more, there's this book.

Most of the researchers in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5888652&postcount=9685 are cranks by Dudley's book, so?

 

[Nonpareil]

This is the thread that does not end
It just goes on and on, my friend
Some people starting writing it, not knowing what it was
They'll go on writing it forever, just because
This is the thread that does not end...

 

[Apathia]

This is the thread that does not end
It just goes on and on, my friend
Some people starting writing it, not knowing what it was
They'll go on writing it forever, just because
This is the thread that does not end...

I was really tempted to stop posting in this thread, but this little ditty encourages me to help push it on to oblivion and beyond.

Because, because, because, because, Because!
We're off
to see the Wizard!

Help! Mr. Wizard!

 

[Apathia]

David Lynch explains his understanding about consciousness, creativity and the brain. He says that Transcendental Meditation played crucial role in developing his consciousness and boosting his creativity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2UHLMVr4vg&feature=related

Here's my favorite David Lynch youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XliMny3AvnE
He shows how to cook quinoa.

I've heard him speak about TM before.
Look, At least it's better than what a lot of other Hollywood people got into (Scierntology).
Thanks for the link.