• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Deeper than primes

Status
Not open for further replies.
doronshadmi said:
The animation is a direct result of your frame-by-frame local-reasoning, where Non-locality and Simultaneity are beyond understanding.
Click to expand...

No, it is not of my making at all. You are the one who insists Mathematics is process. And all it has gotten you, his odd world view you have, is contradiction and inconsistency. Poor choice on your part.

EDIT:

Jsfisher, what enables to compare between any arbitrary pair of notations in the quote above, even before there is some rule that gives it a meaning?

You are not aware of the fundamental level of our discussion.
Click to expand...

You still don't get it: "Enables to compare" is gibberish. It has no semantic valuation. Moreover, you have demonstrated no necessity for any comparison; you have run away from any questions about what difference it makes.
 
Last edited:
sympathic said:
are you joking? look around you, practically everything you see (including the computer you are using to post your gibberish on this forum) is a result of this research.
Click to expand...
It is reseachable because ~ is copmarable with P and ~P is comparable with P.

No comparison, no resrearch.
 
Let @ be a place holder for P or Q.

Let | be Isolator.

Let __ be Connector.

Only ___ (notated as @ @) does not enable to compare @ values.

Only | (notated as @|@) does not enable to compare @ values.

Unary means that we deal with an atom, where an atom is a total state, such that the atomic state of NOT is total isolation (notate as @|@).

Also the atomic state of YES is unary and total, such that YES is total connectivity (notate as @ @).

Unary state is not researchable, and only a linkage of (@|@) with (@ @) is researchable, where under this linkage NOT Is at least NOT CONNECTIVE (≠) where Connectivity is not total (comparison, notated as @_@, is possible), because of the Isolation aspect of Isolation\Connectivity linkage (notated as _|_ ).

Now under _|_ things are comparable by at least two types, which are Local Comparison and Non-local comparison.

Local comparison under _|_ is expressed as P ≠ Q , or P = Q as follows: P=P ≠ Q=Q

Non-local comparison under _|_ is expressed as P=P ≠ Q=Q, where P ≠ but comparable with Q,
because of ____ (the non-local comparison) of _|_ framework.

A shorter notation of P=P ≠ Q=Q is P__Q
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
Let @ be a place holder for P or Q.

Let | be Isolator.

Let __ be Connector.

Only ___ (notated as @ @) does not enable to compare @ values.

Only | (notated as @|@) does not enable to compare @ values.

Unary means that we deal with an atom, where an atom is a total state, such that the atomic state of NOT is total isolation (notate as @|@).

Also the atomic state of YES is unary and total, such that YES is total connectivity (notate as @ @).

Unary state is not researchable, and only a linkage of (@|@) with (@ @) is researchable, where under this linkage NOT Is at least NOT CONNECTIVE (≠) where Connectivity is not total (comparison, notated as @_@, is possible), because of the Isolation aspect of Isolation\Connectivity linkage (notated as _|_ ).

Now under _|_ things are comparable by at least two types, which are Local Comparison and Non-local comparison.

Local comparison under _|_ is expressed as P ≠ Q , or P = Q as follows: P=P ≠ Q=Q

Non-local comparison under _|_ is expressed as P=P ≠ Q=Q, where P ≠ but comparable with Q,
because of ____ (the non-local comparison) of _|_ framework.

A shorter notation of P=P ≠ Q=Q is P__Q
Click to expand...

Continue to illude yourself you are actually doing something useful. By the way I thought you hated notations. What happened to direct perception?
 
Last edited:
zooterkin said:
Give him a break, he's having enough trouble with 'not'.
Click to expand...

EDIT:

No, you have a trouble to get _|_.


Classical Logic gets only the local aspect of _|_ as follows: ≠ is | under _|_ and we get P_|_Q that is also notated as P≠Q,
where _| is P=P and |_ is Q=Q.

Classical Logic does not get the non-local aspect of _|_ , where ___ of _|_ enables the comparison of P with Q in order to conclude that P ≠ Q.

The ability to compare things (even if they are not equal) is non-local by nature, and this non-locality is used but not understood by Classical-Logic.

Even if P ≠ Q, then P and Q are comparable (notated as P__Q) where P__Q ≠ P=Q, so there is no contradiction here.

Following this notion [_]_ does not mean that (Belongs) = (Does-not belong) but it means that (Belongs) is comparable with (Does-not belong) (we are focused on the comparison).

Also local things are comparable but by Classical Logic we are focused only on the local aspect of the comparison, such that P=Q OR P≠Q.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom