Quote from: Machine Grind DreamIt's almost a month old...
What exactly?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: Machine Grind DreamIt's almost a month old...
Quote from: LMNOTLU, a word of caution: my brother is bi-polar, and for a while, he enjoyed his pendulum swings, as well.
Then he went into a black, black depression, and didn't leave his apartment for a year..
Then he went totally manic, and had a complete psychotic break, and had to be hospitalized.
Then he became a Scientologist.
So, all I can say is: watch out.
Quote from: The CommanderKeep in mind I am talking theory. There is no accounting for individual naivete or stupidity.
Again, you are assuming some supernatural element to the equation. You are correct in that the consequences of your actions cannot be known for certain, but that applies to everyone, not just yourself. No one can know the full effect of ones consequences. The examples of influence you give require the person attempting to influence someone to have or claim to have supernatural or spiritual knowledge of such things. I take that sort of thing out of the equation. Anyone who claims such knowledge is not to be trusted. Besides, the Buddha said "Be a lamp unto yourself". In other words, think for yourself!
An individual might not know the true extent of the consequences of their actions, but we can still try to take actions that we think will bring a positive effect on those around us, or if you are Discordian, a creatively chaotic effect on those around us, in the hopes that the ultimate result will be a positive one on us.
It seems utterly daft to me that anyone could deny that their actions have effects on those around them, for good or ill. It also seems equaly daft, although perhaps slightly more understandable, that people would make decisions that have negative effects.
Quote from: LMNOPhysics is a science, and therefore a self-correcting mechanism. The same cannot be said for most non-scientific systems.QuoteOf course not. I just don't like physics because it's much less fun than unscientific things.
You obviously haven't really understood physics, then. That shit is weirder (and more fun) than most.
And Goedel's proof obviously stems for the fact that numbers (and, by extension, math) is an abstract concept and is therefore open to manipulation and paradox.
Quote from: triple zeroyea and he did it from the most simple number theory thing, meaning you don't even need complicated obscure etheric math stuff like uncountable infinite sets or real numbers (which cause most of the other math paradoxes thanks to the axiom of choice), but just counting natural numbers
the book "Goedel Escher Bach" by Douglas Hofstadter explains Goedels incompleteness theorem in a way easily understood by anyone with a good brain for math and logic (but no prerequisite knowledge necessary) and also talks about a whole bunch of other interesting subjects .. the few chapters about the incompleteness theorem pretty much blew my mind, i really gotta read that book again sometime
QuoteThe axiom of choice states:
Let X be a set of non-empty sets. Then we can choose a single member from each set in X.
A choice function is a function on a collection of sets X such that for every set s in X, f(s) is an element of s. With this concept, the axiom can be stated:
For any set of non-empty sets, X, there exists a choice function f defined on X.
Or alternatively:
An arbitrary Cartesian product of non-empty sets is non-empty.
Or most compactly:
Every set of nonempty sets has a choice function.
Quote from: FelixTLU gains intellectual respeck from Felix.
I believe it's two words, and has the little horizontal colon over the O, like this: "Bitte sch??n".
I've experienced the beauty/truth trip myself. Remarkable, no? I haven't however seen "Waking Life". Would you say it's worth the trouble?
I like your perspective on bipolar, how it 'cycles'. It's a good model I suppose, as I'd imagine such psycho-chemical turnovers would (now that I think of it) induce far more insight than a stable neurochem' state.
Also, it's interesting to see how others retrospect.
that is all. The Immutable Cabal thanks you.
Quote from: triple zeroin short (i almost have to say here "warning plot spoiler" ), it's a bit about the ephimedes paradox, a version of which basically says "this sentence is false". your basic paradox.
what goedel does is, he builds up a formal math system according to very simple axioms and logical rules. he just lays down the very basics for number theory. has been done a long time before (goedel did his proof in 1931), been used first to prove simple things like "2+3=5" (would have been a nice thing for Winston to know in room 101 heh) or "there is no highest prime number", using a method called "proof by construction", meaning that the construction of a sentence/statement is also its proof. Goedel figured out a trick to have a formal statement say something about itself and constructed a statement that stated "this statement is not true", thereby pretty much kicking mathematics in the shins, blowing it up from its foundations, etc.
in the end, Goedels conclusion was something like, either a formal system is not 'strong' enough to be complete (meaning it's pretty useless), or if it is strong enough it will be possible to build a 'Goedel Sentence', meaning you can blow it up from the foundation and it's incomplete as well. that's why it's called "goedels incompleteness theorem". (i probably cut a few mathematic fundamentalistic corners here and there, don't shoot me)
oh there wikipedia sez this:
In 1931, G??del published his famous incompleteness theorems in "?úber formal unentscheidbare S?§tze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme." In that article, he proved that for any computable axiomatic system that is powerful enough to describe arithmetic on the natural numbers, then:
- The system cannot be both consistent and complete. (This is generally known as the incompleteness theorem.)
- The consistency of the axioms cannot be proved within the system.
and in the end Goedel died of starvation caused by paranoia.
also, he always wore black all the time.
ahaha i like this guy .. wikipedia sez: G??del had a most distinguished coach for his citizenship exam: Albert Einstein, who had earlier earned his own citizenship, but knowing of G??del's unpredictable behavior, was concerned that his friend might somehow behave erratically during the exam. Einstein accompanied G??del to the hearing. To everyone's consternation, G??del suddenly informed the presiding judge that he had discovered a way in which a dictatorship could be legally installed in the United States. ^_^
Quote from: The unimportant oneI just read on wikipedia that the fbi investigated discordians. 1.)is this real
2.) how and why? 3.) does this board float? 4.) if so are we still? 5.)wa-thu-fuk?
Quote from: triple zeroah ok didn't spot the mathematics mentioning .. though still imo fractal dimension isn't really something that hit anybody in the face, more like a new more general definition of dimension .. what really kicked math in the face previous century was goedels incompleteness theorem, imo.
truly, reading that one (in Goedel Escher Bach) was one of the biggest mindfucks i ever read - i can recommend it to anyone not afraid of a littlebit of abstract math, logic and proof stuff. at least, it blew my mind and changed my life in a number of ways
Quote from: triple zero1) "bitte schon", no umlaut
2) i think they call it the "long dark teatime of the soul" or something. or the abyss. the odd thing is that you actually seem to be enjoying it, while usually one reaps the actual benefits afterwards, after recovery (which you wouldn't call "recovery" of course) .. there's a lot of writings about how someone first needs to "cross the abyss" before reaching a new (higher) state in life, but i think others here can tell much more about this. it's a bit .. new agey? hippie? fluff-headed, but that never stopped me
Quote from: FelixRefreshing to be disagreed with, so thanks for that.
So what about being faced with extreme perspectives teach you about life?
Quote from: triple zerohow did fractal dimensions fly in the face of anything?
also, what do they have to do with physics?