Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

4 Math is greater than 1 Math

Posts: 62
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2016 8:20:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
This is an extract from a theory I'm in the process of writing, and I would like to debate for the logic I've outlined.

Submission Theory
In this document, I, the author, have written 'the submission theory'; a conspiracy theory, but also a scientific and philosophical theory.

The document will be split into partitions with numerous chapters in each partition.

Humanity has been forced into submission by false academia and Governments, to varying degrees. Some aspects of ourselves are at liberty, but some other aspects are not.

The submission theory is an analysis of the submission of mankind to academia and Governments.

The Science of 'The Submission Theory'.
Humans have been educated an incorrect numeric system and therefore conduct false mathematics. The number 1 is symbolic of a single point; of which, are non-existent.

"I have one apple".

The 'one' apple that was claimed is not a single point, and therefore is not 'one' apple. The apple Is above 1.

A further analysis of the falsity of 'one apple', proof that the apple is not a single point...

The apple isn't void of other existence, there is always that which is external to it, otherwise the apple wouldn't exist.

The apple can be sensed from a number of angles dependant on the observer.

The apple had come from an apple tree, it has it's own lineage.

To conclude the 'one apple example'; proof that the apple is not a single point has been presented, and the apple is above 1.

The proper apple, is of the numeric value 4, void of the number 1, and following is an explanation...

A square has 4 corners, there is no 1 corner in a square " to claim 1 corner is to reduce a square to 1 corner of a square.

A square has a face, equal to it's corners. The face of a square equals 4.

The symbol of "4", in it's current state, is equal to 1. Therefore, we cannot understand 4, because we use false symbols. We were educated to work with the number 1, and this education does not allow us to understand a number 4 that's void of the number 1.

What you may refer to as 'one apple', is truthfully of the number 4. It may be difficult for most humans to understand, for they are influenced by the numeric value 1.

The apple of the numeric value 4, described in the square example, has four extremes; to perceive the apple's side completely requires four angles of perception. It requires four angles of perception to perceive the top and bottom, or 'polar', of the apple.

The apple's polar are two sets of four extremes. The side of the apple is extended to the polar.

The polar sets are perceived by two full tilts relative to a neutral side perception, or rotation around a semi-tilt through the neutral side set. A single, or hybrid set, can be perceived at a time.

At any given time a face set is perceived, composed of polar and side. In other words, an angle of perception is perception of a full set.

Face sets, side sets, polar sets and hybrid sets, all equate 4. Again, 4 that's void of 1.

The apple itself is cubic, a cube composed of a complex of the numeric value 4. The polar, side, face and hybrid sets together form a cube and not a square.

To be continued.
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 3:33:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2016 8:20:45 PM, M0nK3Y wrote:
Humans have been educated an incorrect numeric system and therefore conduct false mathematics.

Monkey, there is more than one counting system used in the world, and more than one kind of mathematics.

It can be most useful to see mathematics as a linguistic procedure with no intrinsic purpose. If you want to ascribe a purpose to it, you have to show it fit for that purpose first.

There are ways of showing certain math is fit for some purposes, and some math is fit for many purposes, but I haven't myself seen any claim stating that a particular math is fit for all purposes, and most mathematicians would disagree if they did.

You are free to construct other forms of math -- other languages and procedures -- and people have, many times. However, what attracts people to mathematical procedures varies. Among the criteria people consider are:
* Is it easy to use?
* Is it unambiguous?
* Does it predict matters of interest reliably?
* Do others understand it, and can they verify it?
* Does it reveal anything new and possibly useful?

You may wish to consider whether the math you're exploring meets all of these criteria, or even any of them.
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 12:20:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There is no logic in what you've written and has no basis in any form of mathematics, philosophy, or science.

Hope that helps!
Posts: 62
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 6:32:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"To conclude this chapter" - wit at it's finest.

You have enforced a sexual fantasy with word.

You have not disproven cubic logic, and your dismissal is based on prior knowledge that if you presented would easily be contradicted.

You don't present this knowledge? Then what you refer to with your post is yourself, your feelings and your, what is to be considered, fantasy. We are forced to submit to your fantasy argument for 1 mathematics - in time we will appear no different, making nonsensical comments like you, unless we resist.

People laughing, people insulting, people misbehaving; all of this is a product of the accepted perverse behaviour when considering the abstract.

You now, are no different from a criminal! And no, I do not like it.