Deeper than primes - Continuation
- Thread starter doronshadmi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- deeper than primes
- Status
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
Well, this is a concrete example of the mind of verbal_symbolic-only context-dependent-only skill(er) works ("you have your context-dependent-only framework, and I have mine context-dependent-only framework").
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
Verbal_symbolic_only context-dependent_only skill(ers) can't comprehend that http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7721309&postcount=64 is an argument that explicitly adds Cross-contexts in addition to Context-dependent, such that it does not agree with the Context-dependent_only reasoning.
The problem with verbal_symbolic-only skill(ers) is derived from the attempt to know X in terms of some special (context-dependent) expression of it.
For example: "A non-empty set with null non-emptiness" is nonsense exactly as "X with null X (namely a curve with null curvature)" is nonsense.
This nonsense is expressed, for example, by wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curve ), as follows:
Let's correct this nonsense, for example:
While all poodles or terriers are dogs (where being a dog is a cross-contexts state), no terrier is a poodle (and vice versa) (where being a terrier or a poodle is a context-dependent state).
While all curved lines or straight lines are lines (where being a line is a cross-contexts state), no curved line is a straight line (and vice versa)(where being curved or straight is a context-dependent state).
The problem with verbal_symbolic-only skill(ers) is derived from the attempt to know X in terms of some special (context-dependent) expression of it.
For example: "A non-empty set with null non-emptiness" is nonsense exactly as "X with null X (namely a curve with null curvature)" is nonsense.
This nonsense is expressed, for example, by wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curve ), as follows:
Let's correct this nonsense, for example:
While all poodles or terriers are dogs (where being a dog is a cross-contexts state), no terrier is a poodle (and vice versa) (where being a terrier or a poodle is a context-dependent state).
While all curved lines or straight lines are lines (where being a line is a cross-contexts state), no curved line is a straight line (and vice versa)(where being curved or straight is a context-dependent state).
Last edited:
Well, go on then, correct it.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
These are correct examples, in case that you have missed it.
Last edited:
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
As you're the only one who asserts " verbal_symbolic-only skill" that problem remains entirely yours. As usual you are simply confused no one but you are attempting to " know X in terms of some special (context-dependent) expression of it" we are classifying X by some defined aspect of it.
Here we see a concrete example of your problem and confusion as well as some irony. A set can be classified as empty or non-empty you are deliberately trying to classify it as both then try to blame your own nonsense on others. This is not just your own nonsense by your "A non-empty set with null non-emptiness" claim but primarily due to your previous "belongs to AND does not belong to" assertions. Hence the irony, you claim the assertion above as nonsense but your previous assertion you take as a fundamental basis of your own notions. That you can perceive the nonsense in the assertion you simply want to attribute to others but not in that one you want to depend upon yourself indicates that your ignorance of your own nonsense is simply deliberate until you simply want to ascribe that nonsense to others.
I'm sure all unemployed people will be surprised to find that classifying them by employment is nonsense under Doronics as they currently have no employment. Just as I'm sure it will not surprise them that such claims of nonsense in that classification won't change their classification of lacking employment.
If you have a problem with how that article is worded I suggest you bring it up with them.
Doron " poodles", "terriers", "dogs", "lines", "curved", "straight" and even "state" are all words and thus have meanings that are dependent upon the context they are used within.
Amazing, you have found that lines can be classified as curved or straight just as dogs can be classified as say "poodles or terriers". The truly bizarre and ridiculous part is that you somehow think this is something new, unknown or not understood by others that you tend to refer to as "visual_spatial skills" or "cross-contexts attitude" that you simply like to claim that others lack. As always Doron when your assertions aren't directly self contradictory they are simply trivial.
punshhh
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2010
- Messages
- 5,295
Are you surfing in to rescue The Man from descending into the the plug hole, or just to spectate?
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Why not? A straight line is simply a curve with curvature = 0 at every point.
Doron cannot get that, of course, because Doron is so wrapped up in trying to disprove definitions rather than understand them.
But according to the First Law of Doronetics, a line cannot be fully covered by points. It follows that there exist pointless sub-segments of a line segment and therefore the curvature in these pointless regions cannot be determined - unless a person masters and applies the visual_spatial_only skills to see "if it's bended" or not.
punshhh
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2010
- Messages
- 5,295
Is it curved?
It appears that its you other guys who are attempting to wrap Doron up in definitions rather than consider what he's saying.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
Context-dependent-only skill(ers) can't get a Cross-context state like "belongs to AND does not belong to".
Context-dependent-only skill(ers) can't get that being a line is a Cross-contexts state among being curved or straight line, where being curved or straight is a context-dependent state of being a line.
Once again it is demonstrated that Context-dependent-only skill(ers) can't get X, unless it is classified by special (context-dependent) case of it.
Organic Mathematics is not less than Cross-contexts AND Context-dependent framework, which is inaccessible to Context-dependent-only skill(ers) that get everything in terms of a collection of classified closed boxes.
The irony is the attempt of Context-dependent-only skill(ers) to fit Cross-contexts AND Context-dependent framework to some classified Context-dependent box.
Thank you punshhh for get it and clearly express it.
I would add that there is nothing wrong about definitions, if they are not limited only to verbal_symbolic or context-dependent frameworks.
This is exactly the novelty of Organic Mathematics, it is not less than Cross-contexts AND Context-dependent framework, and this long thread is a concrete example of the inability of Context-dependent-only skill(ers) to get it.
I'm sure all people will be surprised to find that classifying them as unemployed or employment people, actually define them as people.
Context-dependent-only skill(ers) are doing exactly this, they define people only by some classification (context-dependent state) of them.
Another example:
"poodles", "terriers", "dogs", "lines", "curved", "straight" and even "state" are all nothing but words for verbal_symbolic-only skill(ers) and thus have meanings that are dependent only upon the context they are used within the verbal_symbolic-only classified boxes.
Last edited:
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
Not only that but some parts of a line can have non-zero curvature while other parts do not.
Doron insists upon considering a line as an indivisible whole, which gives him considerable problems.
We are considering what Doron is saying but what he is saying specifically and intentionally lacks definition merely so he doesn't wrap himself up in any definitions least of all his own.
Would that be a curved or un-curved plug hole?
I don't think The Man or jsfisher need rescuing by me. I haven't been here from beginning, but nor have I only just arrived. I hope you have done your homework by reading the first thread for this topic.
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
We have been over this before Doron your "belongs to AND does not belong to" is either simply self-contradictory or simply self-inconsistent. So which is it, are you being deliberately self-contradictory or just deliberately being self-inconsistent? Since you seem to attribute it to what you like to call a "Cross-context state" indicates the latter.
Really, then please tell us what different contexts you are using the word "line" within? Both a "curved or straight line" appear to be referring to a geometrical line within the context of curvature. Now a "straight line" in terms of comedy (a line of dialogue used to set up a joke) that would be a different context indeed. It seems, as usual, that there is simply nothing that crosses contexts in your assertion of, well, " Cross-contexts".
Doron there is absolutely nothing novel about simply being self-inconsistent, we see it all the time on this forum.
Evidently no one would be surprised but you that the definition of people is what classifies them as, well, people.
Wrong again Doron, just to give you a hint: "people" is a classification as well that is based upon some definition.
Ah so your "Cross-contexts state" "words" like "poodles", "terriers", "dogs", "lines", "curved", "straight" and even "state" have no meanings. Glad to see you have finally realized that.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
Context-dependent-only skill(ers) are unable to get X, unless it is classified by one (or more) of its possible partial expressions (only the method of verbal_symbolic classified boxes is used).
For example, they are ague that: "some parts of a line can have non-zero curvature while other parts do not."
This argument is a perfect example of how Context-dependent-only skill(ers) can't get Line, unless it is classified by one (or more) of its possible partial expressions ( only the method of verbal_symbolic classified boxes is used, so there is no wonder why they can't comprehend, for example, http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7617572&postcount=16472 ).
By being limited only to the method of verbal_symbolic classified boxes, there is no wonder why they can't get X (Line, for example) as "that belongs AND does not belong" to a given domain.
By using verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial skills, one easily know that, for example, a line is Cross-contexts ("belongs AND does not belong" to a given domain) AND Context-dependent (it is classified by one (or more) of its possible partial expressions).
For the past 9 years of Cross-contexts AND Context-dependent framework development over the internet, I am aware more and more of the inability verbal_symbolic_only context-dependent_only skill(ers) to comprehend it.
punshhh becomes aware of this inability, and he does not hesitate to argue about it.
For example, they are ague that: "some parts of a line can have non-zero curvature while other parts do not."
This argument is a perfect example of how Context-dependent-only skill(ers) can't get Line, unless it is classified by one (or more) of its possible partial expressions ( only the method of verbal_symbolic classified boxes is used, so there is no wonder why they can't comprehend, for example, http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7617572&postcount=16472 ).
By being limited only to the method of verbal_symbolic classified boxes, there is no wonder why they can't get X (Line, for example) as "that belongs AND does not belong" to a given domain.
By using verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial skills, one easily know that, for example, a line is Cross-contexts ("belongs AND does not belong" to a given domain) AND Context-dependent (it is classified by one (or more) of its possible partial expressions).
For the past 9 years of Cross-contexts AND Context-dependent framework development over the internet, I am aware more and more of the inability verbal_symbolic_only context-dependent_only skill(ers) to comprehend it.
punshhh becomes aware of this inability, and he does not hesitate to argue about it.
Last edited:
In that case the line is defined by a piecewise function.
(There is no single function that can draw a curve as well as a straight line - but only when we look at it w.r.t. cross_context_dependent_only_non-local viewing.)
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
The equation of a circle is X2 + Y2 = R2, where X,Y is the circle's center coordinate and R is the size of the circle's radius.
pi's existence is an essential property of a form that is considered as a circle.
This is a verbal_symbolic-only expression that ignores the visual-spatial fact of the existence of pi , as follows:
X2 + Y2 = 0 is actually a point, but by the verbal_symbolic-only expression it is still considered as a circle, even if pi does not exist.
X2 + Y2 = ∞ is actually a straight line, but by the verbal_symbolic-only expression it is still considered as a circle, even if pi does not exist.
Not only that this verbal_symbolic-only expression ignores pi, but in also ignores the difference between a point and a line (whether the line is curved or not).
We actually realize that X,Y,R,+,=,2 verbal_symbolic-only expressions can't express visual_spatial expressions.
So we actually need verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial expressions, in order to get the complexity of a given realm, where verbal_symbolic or visual_spatial are some special expressions of it (no one of them alone is the Unity of that realm).
By unify verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial expressions http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7617572&postcount=16472 is known.
pi's existence is an essential property of a form that is considered as a circle.
This is a verbal_symbolic-only expression that ignores the visual-spatial fact of the existence of pi , as follows:
X2 + Y2 = 0 is actually a point, but by the verbal_symbolic-only expression it is still considered as a circle, even if pi does not exist.
X2 + Y2 = ∞ is actually a straight line, but by the verbal_symbolic-only expression it is still considered as a circle, even if pi does not exist.
Not only that this verbal_symbolic-only expression ignores pi, but in also ignores the difference between a point and a line (whether the line is curved or not).
We actually realize that X,Y,R,+,=,2 verbal_symbolic-only expressions can't express visual_spatial expressions.
So we actually need verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial expressions, in order to get the complexity of a given realm, where verbal_symbolic or visual_spatial are some special expressions of it (no one of them alone is the Unity of that realm).
By unify verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial expressions http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7617572&postcount=16472 is known.
Last edited:
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Yes, at least in the mathematical sense.
Welcome to the thread. Doron ignores definitions, and therefore he ignores meaning. He also makes up his own terminology, but he won't define anything (nor is he even consistent in his own usage). So, say what you like, but it would be nice if Doron would at least adopt the conventional vocabulary and attempt to communicate rationally instead of obfuscate then hide behind his "you can't get it" shield.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
punshhh, please pay attention of the ignorance of verbal_symbolic-only skill(ers) to the following:
Definitions for them are known only in terms of verbal_symbolic-only skills that are closed in classified context-dependent boxes (no cross-contexts\visual_spatial methods are also considered in addition to context-dependent\verbal_symbolic methods).
punshhh, please pay attention of the ignorance of verbal_symbolic-only skill(ers) to the novelty of the unified framework of cross-contexts\visual_spatial AND context-dependent\verbal_symbolic methods:
doronshadmi said:
Definitions for them are known only in terms of verbal_symbolic-only skills that are closed in classified context-dependent boxes (no cross-contexts\visual_spatial methods are also considered in addition to context-dependent\verbal_symbolic methods).
punshhh, please pay attention of the ignorance of verbal_symbolic-only skill(ers) to the novelty of the unified framework of cross-contexts\visual_spatial AND context-dependent\verbal_symbolic methods:
jsfisher said:
Last edited:
- Status