It would be impossible for this SELF to explain anything about reality or its representations without what you call the machine processor, as you call it. The SELF would know 0 about it.
Note, this response to you is based on you saying you agree with what he said to me. Well, if you look at the exchange, he seems to think we can know and learn things about reality without first hand experience.
The SELF interprets Sounds,Visions and Sensations created from binary data derived from vibrating matter.The SELF does not interpret 0 and 1’s.
Big if true!
Could you be wrong about that?
Come on pseudoai!!! it’s established science, you watch a tv don’t you…
It’s True.
Is it, truly? Do you say that all you wrote is the consensus of a group of people, and moreover, something is true because is the consensus of a group of people?
Could you be wrong about that?
Truth is Truth pseudoai…what has consensus got to do with it…lol!!!
True? What has the number two have to do with it, for example, in ‘binary’ have to do with it? Tell us
But, could you be wrong?
I’m not wrong…pseudoai
+/-=+/- is a philosophical certainty.
You don’t interpret binary…you interpret the sounds,visions and sensations created from it because you are separate from binary.
So you cannot be wrong about that? What if you cannot notice that you are wrong? Is that impossible?
With binary you can be:
Unaware that you are Unaware (Not a good state to be in)
Aware that you are Unaware
Unaware that you are Aware
Aware that you are Aware
Amazing!… but could you be wrong about what I first asked about?
I don’t know if this is a response to my post, but my question was essentially do you think the SELF can think itself to knowledge without the input from the machine processor. IOW we have SELF and no machine processor…can this SELF as realun seems to believe gain knowledge about the outside world? and if it can gain knowledge about anything else, what would that be?
So, you’ve never seen, heard, felt, tasted or smelled anything. You have none of that first person experience of the world. What would your a priori analytics lead you to conclusions about. Hell, you wouldn’t even have language.
No…because +/-=+/- is a philosophical certainty. If you have two unknowns…+ and - then the only way you can be certain that the formula balances is by the formula +/-=+/-
Of course you need to find the science that concurs with this formula.
The only science that does concur is binary science N/S (S) N/S…which results in the vibration of the cosmos and all matter contained within it and the emission of varying frequency electromagnetic binary energy waves (S) emitted at the CENTRE!!! of two interacting particles
As I have explained in other posts.it’s the spin speed of the particles which regulates the frequency of the balanced electromagnetic forces interactions N/S=N/S which in turn determines the characteristics of the energy wave emitted from a particular matter type.
The SELF does receive information from the biological machine in the form of sounds;visions and sensations and also information completely independent from it from the metaphysical.
For example? and does this information have anything to do with the outside world?
Binary data generated from vibration in the outside world is transmitted to the biological machine body antenna senses in the form of varying frequency electromagnetic energy waves.The biological machine then converts these analogue waves of energy into digital electrical binary signals and then sounds,visions and sensations which the metaphysical SELF interprets.
Is that an example? How would SELF know there was an outside world without the experience of it? And how would it come to such a wordy conclusion without growing up among language using others? But perhaps it wasn’t an example of what I asked for but just a repetition.
Listen…there has to be a sensible science that explains reality and I assure you it isn’t mainstream science which is complete and utter deluded BS.
Fine, I just have no idea how that relates to what I said.