luke viia Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Since they have so many females around them, their testosterone level must be low I'm not sure that it really works that way perhaps we could ask SCIENCE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 2.012 In logic nothing is accidental: if a thing can occur in an atomic fact the possibility of that atomic fact must already be prejudged in the thing what is happening to me is 2.0121 It would, so to speak, appear as an accident, when to a thing that could exist alone on its own account, subsequently a state of affairs could be made to fit. If things can occur in atomic facts, this possibility must already lie in them. (A logical entity cannot be merely possible. Logic treats of every possibility, and all possibilities are its facts.) Just as we cannot think of spatial objects at all apart from space, or temporal objects apart from time, so we cannot think of anyobject apart from the possibility of its connexion with other things. If I can think of an object in the context of an atomic fact, I cannot think of it apart from the possibility of this context. 2 0 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCM Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 this thread is now worse than the fucking baobab tree out of my head one. way to go babar - why didn't you just start your own thread?? anyways, I respectfully request this thread be locked as it is complete nonsense. mods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cryptowen Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Do those post have anything to do with CERN, neutrinos, or time travel? I try to read them & my brain initiates the Time Cube Sanity Shielding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCM Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 no - babar has royally fucked up this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Agreed, Babar should have started his own thread instead of filling this one with timecube-esque ramblings. Originally this thread was about SCIENCE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triachus Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 you've come to the conclusion that babar fucked this thread up just now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCM Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salvatorin Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spratters Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 in b4 lock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 no yeah you figured it out before I actually did it. That's what we call intuition, prejudice : this is a quantic phenomenon because it relies on a dynamic system : the brain. To you, i fucked this thread up with stuffs that are totally unrelated to physics quantics. You intuition has been, so far, confirmed the same way my 2012 thingy has been confirmed, at least in my opinion. Yesterday I designed the first neural auto-theory. And Two days ago I got a mathematical/geometrical result : today I learnt this result is mathematically impossible. Yet it is here, on the screen, on paper. This goes straight into breaking rsa (not really sure it doesn't need a quantum computer), the prime numbers, etc … life is strange that's all, and this thread should be locked, since, obviously, any 22yo ass with a 120 IQ who says he's on the path to breaking RSA, he's delusional. I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 lol babar, tell me more about this mathematical result of yours that is both true and impossible. I can help you. but anyway I actually wanted to tell you about a cool tool in case you're actually serious about all that shit and not just deluding yourself. http://books.google.com/ngrams/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 What is your opinion on the critique of the Babar stories being a justification for French colonialism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cazador Mod Unit Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 this is fun http://books.google....s=0&smoothing=3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 lol babar, tell me more about this mathematical result of yours that is both true and impossible. i'm fine with myself and the exclusive enjoyment of the money that is ahead. but to answer your question, I believe i'm in a situation anologuous to that of Mioara Mugur-Schächter is a French physicist of Romanian origin, a specialist in quantum physics and epistemology. Contents [hide] 1 Biography 2 See also 2.1 Internal links 2.2 External links [edit]Biography Of Romanian descent, she arrived in France in 1962 from Bucharest. Her PhD thesis - of which the whole content had been elaborated beforehand in Bucharest and sent to Louis de Broglie - contains the first and very elaborated invalidation of von Neumann's famous proof asserting the impossibility of hidden parameters compatible with the quantum mechanical formalism. This work was published in a volume prefaced by Louis de Broglie and published in the collection "Les grands problèmes des sciences", Gauthiers Villars, Paris, 1964. As a Professor of theoretical physics she founded in 1971, at the University of Reims, France, the Laboratory of Quantum Mechanics and Structures of Information, which she headed until 1997. Her research concerns the foundations of quantum mechanics, the theory of probabilities and the theory of information. and she has a method as well ! Since 1984 and up to now she kept developing the "Method of Relativized Conceptualisation", MRC (in French MCR) that stems from the study of the cognitive specificities that led to the formalism of fundamental quantum mechanics. MRC is a formalized and normative epistemology inside the framework of which there arises a deep unification (so far for me) between logic (wittgenstein, programming), probabilities, information (linguistics), and the study of complexities(strange attractors). by the way, i'm just spotting patterns here and there, like any delusional person would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 this is fun http://books.google....s=0&smoothing=3 beyond good and evil http://books.google....s=0&smoothing=2 true and false http://books.google....s=0&smoothing=6 wholes and elements http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=whole%2C+elements&year_start=1700&year_end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=6 but going beyond differences relies on one principle : well distinguishing solos, and duos • Beyond good and evil was published in 1886 • One important "french" era of europe is the one between ~1790(French Revolution) and ~1820(fall of Napoleon). duos and solos http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=duo%2C+solo&year_start=1700&year_end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baph Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 schizophrenia is awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 t t t beyond genius n' psychopathology Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 so knowing nothing about the subject until now i can tell that von Neumanns proof was conceptually wrong, i.e. his proof didn't prove what it claimed, but something more limited. so, it isn't the case that it is both true and impossible. So I doubt you grasp the concepts correctly, that's why I'm offering help, it's because i know this shit, not because i want to share your riches, even if your deluded mind think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 more like beyond reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baph Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 t t t beyond genius n' psychopathology also, that MF gif you posted is totally MF's cruising face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 what is beyond reason is the way we reason. ie. if you can't figure out how an atomic thing work, it's because it's only atomic to your mind. or 1. The world is all that is the case. 1.1 The world is the totality of facts, not of things. 1.2 The world divides into facts. [*]2. What is the case—a fact—is the existence of states of affairs. 2.1 We picture facts to ourselves. 2.2 A picture has logico-pictorial form in common with what it depicts. in other words, if you want to get a representation that your mind can hardly break, something atomic, etymologically something you can't cut, then you have to delegate the answering research process to another "brain" or cognitive apparel. This thing you conceive in order to conceive and translate into language(the end result) what cannot be conceived or translated by the mean of language(that biological capacity), is a dynamic system. In these system truth is gradually determined before being considered as emerged once a certain threshold is reached. Truth or Falsity doesn't matter to me. I'm interested in the way they emerge. That's why i'm so interested in all the schizophrenic patterns I see. Because they are very meaningful and I want to determine how they get so meaningful. Ideally i've always wished to things in the field of "technology of poetry". Be it video games or text generation. This is almost art, at least one of my main drives in life is. I know I have to model some kind of dynamic system in order to get some interesting chaos if I want to generate cool things. Otherwise it would be too mechanical and I wouldn't get the creative feeling i'm looking for when I dream of externalizing creation. Because it is the externalization of creation. It is IA. Artificial, vulnerable, intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cazador Mod Unit Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 good and evil http://books.google....s=0&smoothing=2 hahah that's awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essines Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 babar. ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaarg Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 I find Babar's meditations fascinating. Feels like he's really letting things loose up there, it's all very dynamic and in a wicked way plausible. It would probably be fair to create a brand new thread about babar's discoveries, but it would probably seriously lack traffic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.