I have transcended

[Ecmandu]

> If an algorithm is infinite, there is no output, and if it's
> completely random, there is no algorithm!
>
> This is actually a very deep mathematical law!
>
> I'll explain this better.: If there is eternity, the concept is
> unmade and unchanging - it never began and never ends, it is an
> eternal platonic form. With infinity there is motion (if you cunt it
> as a whole, motions occurs)… the act of
> counting an infinity from the ether, is motion itself. Infinity =
> motion.
>
>
> It's considered a mathematical proof ala Cantor from over 140 years
> ago that all of the real numbers cannot be counted...
>
> I use a techinique called 1 dimensional flooding to show that all of
> the reals cannot be counted in one list with one dimension, which is
> differnt than Cantors diagonalization argument.
>
> use the lists..
>
> 012345678910...
> 123456789101...
> 234567891011...
> 345678910111...
> 456789101112...
> 567891011121...
> 678910111213...
>
> etc...
>
> To do one dimensional flooding, you simply add an infinite list to
> each place in the previous infinite list… plus 1
>
> 024681012151...
> 036912151821...
> 048121620242...
> 051015202530...
>
> When the list converges at infinity, there is no way to begin counting...
>
> 12345678910...
> 13579111315...
> 14812162024...
>
> Because you never pass the zero's.
>
> This is the proof that we cannot determine the limit of how much we can
> count.
>
> Sorry forgot to add the disproof of Cantor's diagonalization argument...
>
> Once you do one dimensional flooding, you have to expand to another
> dimension to keep listing the sequences... diagonals can be subsumed
> by a third dimension, say list 1.1, or list 5.7 etc... or a 4th
> dimension 1..1, 5..7, etc...
>
> It's actually easy to absorb the diagonals by starting from the center
> and listing them from top to bottom in sequence using another
> dimension... what this means is that cantors proof that you cannot
> count all the reals is FALSE!!!. It also means that you cannot find
> the limit on what can be calculated!!!!!!!!! except that it cannot be
> everything!!!!!!!!! (I'll disprove this later!)
>
> what this means, is that there are no powers to infinity, each
> dimensional flooding is just as large as another dimensional flooding,
> but they are still "uncountable" because of dimensional flooding!!
>
> My technique for sequencing the rationals.... I call it the mirroring
> technique, because i realized that if you mirror all of the natural
> numbers you have all of the decimals.
>
> The way it works is that the first ten numbers are counted just as
> themselves and their negatives:
>
> 0,1, -1,2, -2,3, -3,4, -4,5, -5,6, -6,7, -7,8, -8,9, -9
>
> Then after that you count 10 and then the next number is the mirror of
> 10, which is 01 and then you move the decimal point in once to get the
> 12th number being 0.1, then the thirteenth number (not counting the
> negatives which are numbered every other) is 0.(1 repeating). These
> steps continue until you reach three digit numbers and higher. Once
> you count 100, you then count the next number as 0.01, then 0.0(1
> repeating) then 0.(01 repeating), then you count 101 and it's mirror.
> If you keep marching in the decimal point when the number that's about
> to be mirrored ends in zero it causes infinite overlap. The number 100
> ends in a zero, so after you mirror it you only march the decimal in
> for one place to the right, if you march it two places to the right,
> you end up with 00.1, which is the same mirror that you get when the
> number 10 is mirrored, and will occur an infinite number of times as
> the zeros expand and you keep marching in the decimal point (which
> will give you infinite overlap as the sequence expands).
>
> However, if the number doesn't end in a zero, you keep marching in the
> decimal point, say the number 102. The next number is mirroring it, so
> it's 2.01, then you do the repeating decimals by next counting 2.0(1
> repeating) and then 2.(01 repeating), then you march the decimal point
> in once more to get 20.1, and then you do the repeating decimals by
> having 20.(1 repeating). (If you march the decimal in one more time,
> you get 201, and have infinite overlap as well.) Then you count the
> number 103 and then mirror it and do this forever.
>
> I also disproved Chaitin's work on infinities.... it's actually very
> simple...
>
> Disproof of Chaitin: If an algorithm is infinite, there is no output.
> If the algorithm is completely random, it's no longer an algorithm.
> Therefor... every infinite number has a finite algorithm to it that's
> shorter than that number (when dealing with infinities).
>
> I'm going to top myself and give you a law and it's implications:
>
> The set of all sets is not a subset!!! (the set of all apples is not an
> apple)
>
> Watch this !!!
>
>
> It's so easy!! It's basic set theory!!!
>
> You either have 1 or 2 or 1 and 2...
>
> 1.) 1 cannot know 2 or 1 and 2
> 2.) 2 cannot know 1 or 1 and 2
> 3.) 1 and 2 cannot know 1 or 2
>
> These are all mutually exclusive and actual!!
>
> It's a concrete disproof!!
>
> It's the same argument in terms of presence and potence ...
>
> It's impossible for any being to have an omnistate!!! For a being to
> be omniscient, it must know what we don't know, and not know it, as well as what it
> knows (everything)
>
> 5.) The Real Numbers… (Moving irrationals in sequence) (using It's Champernowne's number) (ordered! sequential! transcendental! by definition) (all irrationals)
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ………………………………………….
> ………………………………………….
> ………………………………………….
> <...312111019876543 : 345678910111213…>
> <...121110198765432 : 234567891011121…>
> <...211101987654321 : 123456789101112…>
> <...111019876543210 : 012345678910111…>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> <...111019876543210 : 012345678910111…>
> <...211101987654321 : 123456789101112…>
> <...121110198765432 : 234567891011121…>
> <...312111019876543 : 345678910111213…>
> …………………………………………...
> ……………………………………………
> ……………………………………………
> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
>
> As my mirroring technique for counting the rational numbers expands,
> you interpolate it with this sequence for every digit (the grid
> above)…
>
> You slowly spiral out from the middle of this infinite sequence grid!
> (one axis is negatives and the perpendicular axis is decimal points)
>
> As you spiral out, you list 8 consecutive directionality's, up, down,
> right, left and all the diagonals… (these are added dimensions)
>
> This sequence will count the reals. 8 numbers added on top after each
> segment of the rational sequence.
>
> Whenever dimensional flooding occurs, you have to add a new operator
> to render it in a single list… I'm using 12 operators here to count
> the reals (that I'm not naming).
>
> You can use brute force to decrypt anything with the set of reals!!
>
> Also: View my videos by typing "Jason Teague Philosophy" on you tubes
> search engine
>
> Thank you

[Ecmandu]

I consider my best videos to be 1,2 and 9

9: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYeXYUyrxY

[URUZ]

5 3 13 1 14 4 21

Yeah not too bad.

The 1's are slicing through it, brutally.

531 31 144 21

5 31 31 144 3

(7)

Nice.

5+31+31+144+3 = 214

5x31x31x144x3 = 2075760

Hahahaha yeah.... digital love

Pretty funny actually.


2075760x214 = 444212640


44 432 444444


Uh oh.

[Ecmandu]

My tenth video (comments to my other 9 videos)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SDSbR0Ee0-Y

[Ecmandu]

My 11th Video!!

Challenge to men!!! Why men hate women!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8iklNX ... e=youtu.be

[MagsJ]

You haven't transcended, as you're still discussing the same topic that's got you in a loop.

Duplicate topics will be removed from public view..

[MagsJ]

My 11th Video!!

Challenge to men!!! Why men hate women!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8iklNX ... e=youtu.be

How is that a challenge, even? and you now want other men to hate women.. like you do, so that they too feel like you do about women?

[Ecmandu]

My 11th Video!!

Challenge to men!!! Why men hate women!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8iklNX ... e=youtu.be

How is that a challenge, even? and you now want other men to hate women.. like you do, so that they too feel like you do about women?

The challenge is to be a man who doesn't hate themselves for being with a woman sexually. If you want to play a game, at least play a good one, a challenging one.

[surreptitious75]

Why on Earth would a man hate himself simply for being with a woman sexually
You have a long way to go Ecmandu if you think avoiding that is transcendence
I am celibate but dont hate women so does that mean that I have transcended

[MagsJ]

The challenge is to be a man who doesn't hate themselves for being with a woman sexually.

Why would he? what criteria would permit him to? is it something in his past present or future that would determine that outcome?

If you want to play a game, at least play a good one, a challenging one.

..the end goal of this game being?

..what defines a challenging game? a challenging game to you?

[MagsJ]

Why on Earth would a man hate himself simply for being with a woman sexually
You have a long way to go Ecmandu if you think avoiding that is transcendence
I am celibate but dont hate women so does that mean that I have transcended

..that is you, but we are talking about Ecmandu here.. why does he see guilt here?

[Ecmandu]

Why on Earth would a man hate himself simply for being with a woman sexually
You have a long way to go Ecmandu if you think avoiding that is transcendence
I am celibate but dont hate women so does that mean that I have transcended

It's in my videos.

He either/and uses approach escalation, the proclivity to marry (slavery mentality) and/or sexual jealousy.

This makes him self hating.

[Ecmandu]

Why on Earth would a man hate himself simply for being with a woman sexually
You have a long way to go Ecmandu if you think avoiding that is transcendence
I am celibate but dont hate women so does that mean that I have transcended

It's in my videos.

He either/and uses approach escalation, the proclivity to marry (slavery mentality) and/or sexual jealousy.

This makes him self hating.

I'll add to this, we are already collectively hallucinating our reality. The necessity is to figure out how to be the only being in our own hallucinated reality. This solves every problem that can be conceived

The celibate have given up on the female problem, instead of working it for the benefit of all

[surreptitious75]

In order to be the only being in an hallunicated reality you simply hallunicate solipsism and convince yourself that everyone else is a mental construct of your own imagination. This presumes of course that reality is actually an hallunication and that you can hallunicate whatever you want to within it. Both of these premises I reject entirely however because there is precisely zero evidence for either of them

[Ecmandu]

In order to be the only being in an hallunicated reality you simply hallunicate solipsism and convince yourself that everyone else is a mental construct of your own imagination. This presumes of course that reality is actually an hallunication and that you can hallunicate whatever you want to within it. Both of these premises I reject entirely however because there is precisely zero evidence for either of them

We already hallucinate from platonic forms, it's not much of a stretch for each of us to hallucinate variations of platonic forms of each other in the universe - no solipsism required.

[surreptitious75]

Reality is mind independent though so any attempt at hallucinating it will have no actual effect upon
it because such attempts will only be true to the one actually doing the hallucinating and no one else

[Ecmandu]

Reality is mind independent though so any attempt at hallucinating it will have no actual effect upon
it because such attempts will only be true to the one actually doing the hallucinating and no one else

in ether we have more access to the platonic form of truth ... from which we can import our variations from the hallucinated reality of others. The problems only emerge when more than one person is in the same hallucinated reality, as it is currently. Reality is mind interdependent

[MagsJ]

in ether we have more access to the platonic form of truth ... from which we can import our variations from the hallucinated reality of others. The problems only emerge when more than one person is in the same hallucinated reality, as it is currently. Reality is mind interdependent

What if both those elements are needed to transcend.. blocking out humanity, then immersing yourself into the throng of humanity.. ad infinitum? a circulatory necessity to heal modern wounds and woes?

[Ecmandu]

in ether we have more access to the platonic form of truth ... from which we can import our variations from the hallucinated reality of others. The problems only emerge when more than one person is in the same hallucinated reality, as it is currently. Reality is mind interdependent

What if both those elements are needed to transcend.. blocking out humanity, then immersing yourself into the throng of humanity.. ad infinitum? a circulatory necessity to heal modern wounds and woes?

If you are hallucinating everyone from platonic forms, you can hallucinate perfect fidelity of all beings (no variations), and not hurt anyone but yourself (if you so desire)

[URUZ]

17117

[MagsJ]

If you are hallucinating everyone from platonic forms, you can hallucinate perfect fidelity of all beings (no variations), and not hurt anyone but yourself (if you so desire)

Hurt only myself? the stuff self-harm and bad-dreams are made of

What purpose would such a (mal)adaptive state serve.. beyond only hurting one's self?

[Ecmandu]

If you are hallucinating everyone from platonic forms, you can hallucinate perfect fidelity of all beings (no variations), and not hurt anyone but yourself (if you so desire)

Hurt only myself? the stuff self-harm and bad-dreams are made of

What purpose would such a (mal)adaptive state serve.. beyond only hurting one's self?

It's important that people be allowed to hurt themselves if they want without putting it upon others for the task. Say you've lived a. A zillion quadrillion years and you're curious what a stubbed toe is ... you go the the platonic form, stub your toe, and now you know.

[Ecmandu]

My newest video!! Summary of my first 12

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfD2iCJ ... e=youtu.be

[Ecmandu]

Yeah! A super-awesome video !! (By me)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DiUrry3GWq8

[wuliheron]

An infinity here, an infinity there, and pretty soon you're talking a real multiverse! The Umbral Moonshine Conjecture might interest you.