Reality - Version 0.1

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Reality - Version 0.1

Postby encode_decode » Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:59 am

    We must proceed with the prototype so you are correct. There was no interaction - my current interactions are a little messed up - I will fix them. The rules of engagement are the most important things that we are about to discuss. Yes you are correct the prototype needs basic rules of engagement so as to reveal more detail of what might be required by more finished emulators.

    So we are on the same wavelength - I am just excited as I have been for months - to put this baby to the test.

    Thank you for sharing your work with me James - I will send you links to it.

    =D>
    - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

    But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
    User avatar
    encode_decode
    Thinker
     
    Posts: 915
    Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
    Location: Metaspace

    Re: Reality - Version 0.1

    Postby James S Saint » Thu Sep 28, 2017 3:38 am

    The first thing that you will prove and demonstrate with merely the prototype is exactly how and why subatomic particles form. With a larger system, the monoparticle affectance density equation ("particle energy density") can be demonstrated and proven, along with its dependence upon ambient affectance density.

    $$Ad = \frac{1-Ab }{1 + 4\pi((x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2 + (z-c)^2))}$$

    Such will prove to Science the make of subatomic mass particles and that they will alter their mass energy content in accord with how close they are to large masses, such as Earth.

    The next thing to prove and demonstrate will be the cause and make of mass gravitation. To the disappointment of Quantum Physics, you will prove that there is no "graviton" in the physical universe (the proposed force-of-gravity carrier). The only particle associated with gravity is the mass particle itself. Along with this proof, it will become obvious that gravitational migration is not due to a magical force emanating from mass particles, but rather due to the gradient affectance field between masses.

    And inherently you will be proving that extreme outer space is different than space between the planets and thus gravitational effects should be expected to be a little different. This is a part of the confusion related to cause and make of "dark matter".

    That much is with merely the first stage prototype. Charged particles get a little more sophisticated and interesting. Molecular structure and static magnetism demonstrations might require a larger system.
    Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
    Else
    From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

    The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

    You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
    The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
    It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
    As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

    Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
    Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

    The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
    .
    James S Saint
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 25428
    Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

    Re: Reality - Version 0.1

    Postby encode_decode » Thu Sep 28, 2017 10:02 pm

      James

      I want to break my questions up a little so I will start from the top by quoting the folowing.

      James S Saint wrote:The first thing that you will prove and demonstrate with merely the prototype is exactly how and why subatomic particles form. With a larger system, the monoparticle affectance density equation ("particle energy density") can be demonstrated and proven, along with its dependence upon ambient affectance density.

      I do believe the prototype is capable of of proving and demonstrating these things you mention. The how has to do with your gradients you have mentioned I am guessing. I am trying to visualize this as I write but it is kind of difficult and I think that is what your equation is attempting to do. How much error is allowed for in the equation?

      My question is justified as soon as I read:

      James S Saint wrote:Such will prove to Science the make of subatomic mass particles and that they will alter their mass energy content in accord with how close they are to large masses, such as Earth.

      Now whether or not I am asking the right question here is another story but are we not regarding some uncertainty when the altering of mass must happen so quickly?

      :-k
      - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

      But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
      User avatar
      encode_decode
      Thinker
       
      Posts: 915
      Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
      Location: Metaspace

      Re: Reality - Version 0.1

      Postby encode_decode » Thu Sep 28, 2017 10:14 pm

        Secondarily

        I for some reason was imagining gravity to be some sort of congestion but I will go with this and also read back over all of my notes.

        James S Saint wrote:The next thing to prove and demonstrate will be the cause and make of mass gravitation. To the disappointment of Quantum Physics, you will prove that there is no "graviton" in the physical universe (the proposed force-of-gravity carrier). The only particle associated with gravity is the mass particle itself. Along with this proof, it will become obvious that gravitational migration is not due to a magical force emanating from mass particles, but rather due to the gradient affectance field between masses.

        I do not believe there is a graviton, such is still dealing with discretized matter and that should only be a matter of convenience in such cases. Mass makes a lot more sense but again I need to read over some of my notes because there seems to be a little ambiguity in what you are saying here and what you have said before - I am sure it is nothing as usual - it usually helps if I bring related information together to make more sense of it.

        James S Saint wrote:And inherently you will be proving that extreme outer space is different than space between the planets and thus gravitational effects should be expected to be a little different. This is a part of the confusion related to cause and make of "dark matter".

        Now this is something that is interesting.

        We are working with dark matter or not? We have not really touched on that much you and I.

        James S Saint wrote:That much is with merely the first stage prototype. Charged particles get a little more sophisticated and interesting. Molecular structure and static magnetism demonstrations might require a larger system.

        I agree and we should discuss this further and at length a little later on.

        :-k
        - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

        But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
        User avatar
        encode_decode
        Thinker
         
        Posts: 915
        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
        Location: Metaspace

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby James S Saint » Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:54 am

        encode_decode wrote:How much error is allowed for in the equation?

        I guess that would depend upon who you are trying to prove it to. The more random afflates there are, the more accurately physical reality will be represented.

        encode_decode wrote:are we not regarding some uncertainty when the altering of mass must happen so quickly?
        :-k

        "so quickly"?? :confusion-scratchheadyellow:
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25428
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby encode_decode » Fri Sep 29, 2017 1:37 pm

        James S Saint wrote:
        encode_decode wrote:How much error is allowed for in the equation?

        I guess that would depend upon who you are trying to prove it to. The more random afflates there are, the more accurately physical reality will be represented.

        encode_decode wrote:are we not regarding some uncertainty when the altering of mass must happen so quickly?
        :-k

        "so quickly"?? :confusion-scratchheadyellow:

        Ah, never mind, I thought I would throw it out there. We will see how it all goes as we go.

        :D
        - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

        But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
        User avatar
        encode_decode
        Thinker
         
        Posts: 915
        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
        Location: Metaspace

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby encode_decode » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:06 pm

        I like the idea of doing this before anything else:

        It might be interesting to display a point by point averaged affectance density so as to get a better feel for the actual field rather than watching racing afflates.

        Like you said the field will appear smoother than afflates rustling about.

        I think it also gives me a clue about the following:

        The first thing that you will prove and demonstrate with merely the prototype is exactly how and why subatomic particles form. With a larger system, the monoparticle affectance density equation ("particle energy density") can be demonstrated and proven, along with its dependence upon ambient affectance density.

        The averaged affectance density must be similar to the ambient affectance density. For an experiment they could be treated as the same or a useful tool.
        Last edited by encode_decode on Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
        - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

        But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
        User avatar
        encode_decode
        Thinker
         
        Posts: 915
        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
        Location: Metaspace

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby Arcturus Descending » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:09 pm

        encode_decode wrote:I like the idea of doing this before anything else:

        It might be interesting to display a point by point averaged affectance density so as to get a better feel for the actual field rather than watching racing afflates.

        Like you said the field will appear smoother than afflates rustling about.


        What are afflates? Leaves? OK
        :evilfun:
        SAPERE AUDE!


        If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


        What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

        Thomas Nagel


        I learn as I write!
        User avatar
        Arcturus Descending
        Consciousness Seeker
         
        Posts: 14852
        Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
        Location: Ecstasy on Earth.

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby encode_decode » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:13 pm

        Arcturus Descending wrote:
        encode_decode wrote:I like the idea of doing this before anything else:

        It might be interesting to display a point by point averaged affectance density so as to get a better feel for the actual field rather than watching racing afflates.

        Like you said the field will appear smoother than afflates rustling about.


        What are afflates? Leaves? OK
        :evilfun:

        I guess you could say they are leaves - leaves are made of the the same stuff we are studying - just that god has them pre-packaged for us already. Leaves decay to become part of the universe that we imagine they come from. In fact they never became separate from the universe - it is just an illusion.
        - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

        But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
        User avatar
        encode_decode
        Thinker
         
        Posts: 915
        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
        Location: Metaspace

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby encode_decode » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:17 pm

        James wrote: The field, although still rustling about, will be smoother, more like a shifting cloud.

        Again, this is a time when you have some freedom to pick and choose which way you would like to setup the field. You have specific afflate characteristics defined as if they were marbles (not yet "fuzzy"), yet the field has no such hard objects within.

        I still do not quite understand what you are saying here.

        So if asked what the field density is as some point, {d,e,f}, precisely how are you going to use the local afflates to determine (to declare) the precise density ... at any point chosen?

        I am going to average between afflates surrounding the point chosen for study.

        :-k
        - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

        But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
        User avatar
        encode_decode
        Thinker
         
        Posts: 915
        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
        Location: Metaspace

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby encode_decode » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:24 pm

        You could, just for example, have a linear decrease in afflate characteristic with distance from surrounding afflates. Or it could be exponential, giving a more choppy effect. I would recommend a very limited local distance for the range of evaluation so as to not consume too much processor time. I had to think for a while to figure a way to quickly evaluate each afflate's (or location point's) immediate surrounding. Of course, you are free to choose your own method.

        The decrease could be determined through interpolating next points from two previous points and two previously averaged points.

        4.25 - 4.24 will lead to 4.23

        4.21 - 4.18 will lead to via the following

        4.24 - 4.23 - 4.21 - 4.18 to 4.14 because the drop has been decreasing one at a time.

        Then the same could be done from another point in the field that is approaching the point that we just studied.

        We would need at least 6 points in 3 dimensions from guessing.

        The method could be fixed around the vector of the afflate's travel.
        - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

        But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
        User avatar
        encode_decode
        Thinker
         
        Posts: 915
        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
        Location: Metaspace

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby James S Saint » Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:02 pm

        Arcturus Descending wrote:What are afflates?

        In case you were serious, an afflate is an "affectance oblate" representing a minuscule portion of space-stuff, "affectance". With millions of random afflates zipping about, the effects of actual physical space, energy, and mass can be emulated.

        encode_decode wrote:
        You could, just for example, have a linear decrease in afflate characteristic with distance from surrounding afflates. Or it could be exponential, giving a more choppy effect. I would recommend a very limited local distance for the range of evaluation so as to not consume too much processor time. I had to think for a while to figure a way to quickly evaluate each afflate's (or location point's) immediate surrounding. Of course, you are free to choose your own method.

        The decrease could be determined through interpolating next points from two previous points and two previously averaged points.

        4.25 - 4.24 will lead to 4.23

        4.21 - 4.18 will lead to via the following

        4.24 - 4.23 - 4.21 - 4.18 to 4.14 because the drop has been decreasing one at a time.

        Then the same could be done from another point in the field that is approaching the point that we just studied.

        We would need at least 6 points in 3 dimensions from guessing.

        The method could be fixed around the vector of the afflate's travel.

        I'm not sure that I am following you, so let me try to explain one way of doing this, from which you can deviate as you wish.

        1. Always the first thing to do is to form a list of nearby afflates to the point-of-interest,
          afNearList.n, where n has a value from 0 to 10000. At the center of a particle, n gets huge even though in free space, n might be merely 2 or 3.

        2. Calculate the distance between the point of interest, Poi, and each afflate center in the afNearList as explained before;
        James S Saint wrote:$$dx = afNearList.n.x - Poi.x$$ $$dy = afNearList.n.y - Poi.y$$ $$dz = afNearList.n.z - Poi.z$$
        $$afNearList.n.d = \sqrt{dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2}$$


        3. Use the assigned radius of each afflate to allow for afflate size to affect afflate nearness;
          afNearList.n.d -= afNearList.n.r

        4. Fill in the effective afflate density values for each afNeaList.n assuming a linear gradient . This is the "fuzzy" part of each afflate. In more developed versions, this gradient should be assigned a random value for each afflate;
          If afNearList.n.d =< 0;
            afNearList.n.e = afNeaList.n.density
          If afNearList.n.d > 0;
            afNearList.n.e = afNearList.n.density - afNearList.n.d
          If afNearList.n.e =< 0;
            afNearList.n.e = 0, having no affect upon the point of interest.

        5. SUM the effective density values into the point-of-interest ambient total. As density has an upper limit of 1, a simple sum will not due. We are adding noise to noise;
        $$Poi.density = \frac{Poi.density + afNearList.n.density}{1 + Poi.density * afNearList.n.density}, for\;all\;n$$


        6. Display all points of interest densities (the ambient field).

        7. Increment each afflate in accord with its velocity (at the moment, always = 1);
        $$af.n.x\quad += af.n.vx$$$$af.n.y\quad += af.n.vy$$$$af.n.z\quad += af.n.vz$$$$for\;each\;af.n$$



        8. Repeat 1-8


        After that is working properly, we allow the ambient density to affect the velocity, size, and density of each afflate. At that point, if the average random density is set too high, clumps will begin to form as traffic jams emerge. But there are still other engagement rules required in order to have true particle formation.
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25428
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Reality - Version 0.1

        Postby encode_decode » Sat Sep 30, 2017 9:03 am

          James

          So that looks like a proximity calculation to me for each afflate within range of the point of interest - I can see why you were not following me.

          I was talking about splitting the calculation up by interpolating points around the point of interest - effectively performing a compression of sorts.

          1. Get every second point around the point of interest.
          2. Interpolate every other point around the point of interest.
          3. Calculate for density with interpolation.

          Don't be too concerned about what I am saying because I am following the mathematics you presented in your last post - I am only trying to save on cycle time so that we can study larger fields. You did recommend that we study smaller fields so I am going to stick with what you are saying for the time being.
          - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

          But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
          User avatar
          encode_decode
          Thinker
           
          Posts: 915
          Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
          Location: Metaspace

          Re: Reality - Version 0.1

          Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:43 am

          encode_decode wrote:So that looks like a proximity calculation to me for each afflate within range of the point of interest

          Yes, "proximity" is the right word. The afflates have no association with each other except where they overlap. There should be no implied interpolation between them. They are each headed in their own direction. They each have their own affect upon what they run across. There is nothing between afflates other than more afflates each headed in its own direction. Ideally there are an infinity of singly directed, independent afflates at every point in space. Other than additive interference, they have nothing to do with each other.
          Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
          Else
          From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

          The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

          You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
          The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
          It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
          As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

          Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
          Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

          The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
          .
          James S Saint
          ILP Legend
           
          Posts: 25428
          Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

          Re: Reality - Version 0.1

          Postby encode_decode » Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:30 am

          James S Saint wrote:
          encode_decode wrote:So that looks like a proximity calculation to me for each afflate within range of the point of interest

          Yes, "proximity" is the right word. The afflates have no association with each other except where they overlap. There should be no implied interpolation between them. They are each headed in their own direction. They each have their own affect upon what they run across. There is nothing between afflates other than more afflates each headed in its own direction. Ideally there are an infinity of singly directed, independent afflates at every point in space. Other than additive interference, they have nothing to do with each other.

          The interpolation that I speak of is different to how you are perceiving what I am saying - we are getting side tracked here, however we can double the resolution for the same cost. Such proximity and density calculations are not entirely unknown to me James and some are very expensive to run in code, not that I am worried or in the least concerned about this. Let us remain on topic though. We want a field.
          - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

          But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
          User avatar
          encode_decode
          Thinker
           
          Posts: 915
          Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
          Location: Metaspace

          Re: Reality - Version 0.1

          Postby encode_decode » Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:34 am

          There is nothing between afflates other than more afflates each headed in its own direction. Ideally there are an infinity of singly directed, independent afflates at every point in space. Other than additive interference, they have nothing to do with each other.

          This way is a better way to put it that additive interference is what we are looking at - I knew a long time ago that this part of the project could be brought down to additions and subtractions - the beauty of simple mathematics - this is what reality is doing - simple mathematics - we are the ones who convolute the situation.

          Affect upon affect . . . elegant!
          - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

          But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
          User avatar
          encode_decode
          Thinker
           
          Posts: 915
          Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
          Location: Metaspace

          Re: Reality - Version 0.1

          Postby encode_decode » Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:01 am

            James

            It feels like there are a few first things to do now - for me the first thing to do is get organized as quickly as possible.

            The first thing that you will prove and demonstrate with merely the prototype is exactly how and why subatomic particles form. With a larger system, the monoparticle affectance density equation ("particle energy density") can be demonstrated and proven, along with its dependence upon ambient affectance density.

            So if this is our primary target then in a nutshell I would say subatomic particles form through a gradient.

            It is a lack of organization that is slowing us down - nothing else - aside from I have been busy.

            Our documentation is at times sporadic - something I have been trying to solve - I believe I now have a sufficient solution.
            - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

            But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
            User avatar
            encode_decode
            Thinker
             
            Posts: 915
            Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
            Location: Metaspace

            Re: Reality - Version 0.1

            Postby James S Saint » Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:25 am

            encode_decode wrote:
              James

              It feels like there are a few first things to do now - for me the first thing to do is get organized as quickly as possible.

              The first thing that you will prove and demonstrate with merely the prototype is exactly how and why subatomic particles form. With a larger system, the monoparticle affectance density equation ("particle energy density") can be demonstrated and proven, along with its dependence upon ambient affectance density.

              So if this is our primary target then in a nutshell I would say subatomic particles form through a gradient.

              The proof for that comes without trying or intention.

              encode_decode wrote:It is a lack of organization that is slowing us down

              All you need to do next is create a routine to fill in afNearList.n for each cubic region Poi or you can skip that and just go ahead and use each afflate as the Poi between each tic.
              Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
              Else
              From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

              The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

              You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
              The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
              It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
              As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

              Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
              Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

              The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
              .
              James S Saint
              ILP Legend
               
              Posts: 25428
              Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

              Re: Reality - Version 0.1

              Postby encode_decode » Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:12 am

              The proof for that comes without trying or intention.

              Actually I think the proof for all of this follows the same line as in the quote.

              All you need to do next is create a routine to fill in afNearList.n for each cubic region Poi

              Too simple - it is similar to what I have.

              or you can skip that and just go ahead and use each afflate as the Poi between each tic.

              Actually, we could do both. And that way targeting could be switched around with ease too.
              - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

              But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
              User avatar
              encode_decode
              Thinker
               
              Posts: 915
              Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
              Location: Metaspace

              Previous

              Return to Philosophy



              Who is online

              Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]