PART II~~~ IXXIVVIC
Why has there never been a consideration for parallels for every system that thought can construct. After a lot of reading on psychological modules, I've realized most processing can be explained by the pictorial, the numerical, and the betabetical. Lets start with the pictorial, since most of my logical ability comes from analyzing visual relationships between objects and patterns, for indices, indeed! If there is a line, it is a dot with two points that are distinct, so the dot is the absolute base.
The dot in a matrix of both Euclidean AND non-Elucidean (conversions of specified axioms apply)space represents the binary 1, where the area that is not inhabited constitutes binary 0, and anything that cannot be represented in this n-dimensional matrix (layer by layer), is null. the >, the 1, and the 0, like a TRIAD! Now, lets move on to the shapes.
A shape with two sides has no uniform representation, and could be considered an "extrapolation". But add one more "side" (a boundary confined by two dots, so a side is formed by a mass of 0s in the pathways between two 1s, and when using optimal pathing of least distance from node A to B [symbolic representations such as numerical or betabetical of physical and/or quantum nodes is only to be processed in the conscious, and not to be taken as a real object in a dualistic set of physical and metaphysical]) this is intended to create isometrics/symmetry.
So there we have the TRIANGLE, the lucky number 3, the first object that can have both an inside and an outside (mathfags that are pretentious like Lanny and Captain falcon, to you have a better invented word to quantify this with?). This first object with both an inside and an outside becomes an essential factor to every n sided object after the number 3.
For example, a square can be separated into simplified divisions of triangles i.e. triads, but it would be impossible to account for the whole object using only points or lines, if you use a line, it disregards area encapsulated by the sides, which by lines could only be translated into a full square through an infinitude of line segments, as well as the fact that when considering something like a square holistically, the boundaries are created by the binary1 nodes pathing as a system, which could only be represented by a line, but this DUALISTICALLY (good word, because it implies there is an analogy of all reality in which these are two equal yet opposing forces that attempt to keep a system in equilibrium.) creates a square in the perimeter which could only be represented with binary0 and cognitive systems. As in, the binary1 implies the binary0, only if the area that is encapsulated by a node network is accepted to contain "empty" space. So pentagons, rectangles, irregular objects, etc.
All have triangular subdivisions, whether equilateral or anomalous. Now lets take this to the next step of n-matrux (NU-MATRIX is my published IQ test btw, I don't mean to boast but I clearly do mean to boast that I've scored 160 1/31,000 twice), the triangle escalates to a tetrahedron.
Although triangles viewed through multiple positions in binary0 space could photograph every aspect of the tetrahedron, it is not holistic, and as triangles are the first objects that take up space, tetrahedrons are the first objects that have an inside and outside, and nodes can transfer or travel to alternate areas of the tet, since it has a total of 6 sides.
A variable could be carried like a conveyor belt, while a variable along another plane replaces it. In this sense, the tetrahedron is not only 3-D, but also 4-D, in that it can represent permutations, which is very important to assessing whether the world is "uncertain" or "certain". If this could be then blown up in proportion as >root, to higher dimensions, with the maximum number of dimensions that actually exist (String theory says one number, M-theory says another, maybe they're both wrong), and each of these would provide an additional variable inherent in only >root.
This is sort of like making an analogy between reality and simulated reality, i.e., a computer program, which is a false dichotomy, because simulations are real, and real is a simulation based on neural nets, and I think it is highly likely that this universe, multiverse...omniverse is a rabbit hole,a fractal of modulating hyper-systems that form a ring around null itself, allowing null to be accounted for and ultimately essential...just like how good is this world could not exist without evil, to everyone's dismay.
Things transfer from omniverse ring to null all the time, as it is pinnacle equilibrium. And if our universe has been called by Richard Feynman, an elaborate net of a single electron traveling at hyper-speed through every boundary. Then it would complete the fractal theory, where pure micro-cosmos... the smallest element... binary, geometrical space, a quark, an atom... would be in a closed loop with 1>0 of omniversal ring, null, and the disparities within the ring (0) that can cause asymmetrical and fractal-twisting alignment, the basic geometry of a circle as a point, which could then manifest a line, etc... a multiverse as a quark, and the omniverse as the quark system operating within hyper-primitive logical parameters equivalent to an atom.
This way the loop is truly infinite, as the smallest elements could be seen as the foundation of the largest, and the largest could be seen as the foundation of the smallest, likely with the constructed absolute laws of mathematics forming the string to hold the multiverse beads on the ring, and situational laws that govern the properties of the specific bead and allow it to be discriminated from the other beads, so the whole light/color spectra that is emitted isn't reflexive or simply transformable, but instead crucially intertwined. Either that or laws truly are situational, and laws abide (lol) metaphysics, a physics system in which an accounting system between axioms is permuted, which would clearly be beyond the grasp of current neural systematization.
For example, if the universe spontaneously froze for 4trillion years, nobody would be aware of it. So now lets go with the number line...yes, it's a line, an infinite line, and a number is a point, and the value of the point distinguishes the number in location on binary1 from any diversion on the y-axis which would result in deviation from a coherent mathematical foundation. And the only limits are null. Now, it may seem intuitive that the number line is the only right explanation, but if viewed through the n-matrix, you can realize the number line follows a hierarchy, which is consistent and likely recursive.
The logic of primes could be considered structures that emerge through n-dimensional constructions on the number line. Complex numbers and Imaginary numbers can be derived by applying functions to simple numbers, but it could also be topologically located in the n-matrix outside the single, infinite number line. If numbers are seen as nodes with specific requirements, as in, the fundamental point of binary1 is not repeatedly as only "a single electron", but instead an infinite set of packets with distinct prerequisites and "personalities" or "flavors" as the quarkies like to say.
So then if a number is viewed as a node that is circumstantially allowed to join a pathing to another number by a Venn diagram of similarities that reach or exceed minimum "laws of linkage", the numbers form trees and pathways..geometrical and topological objects, structures that at different locations are recursive, algorithmic, and spectacular fractacular, this forms a numerical space that is synonymous and maybe even the same as the visual/spatial/pictorial n-matrix, except the nodes have UPGRADED! they are still binary 1s and 0s but carry values that influence their occurrence and association with out nodes. Similar to how quarks can be distinguished mostly by particular aspects of their behavior.
Basically, the equivalence so far between the n-matrix, the numerical, and quantum physics are all simply the n-matrix computation creations with different aspects and perspectives being pursued in study. If anyone's wondering how there could be infinite number lines with distinct values, they can have deviations in shape, base (if not merely a psychological construct, more on this soon) integer, errors or essential differences in hierarchies. Etc.
It's safer to assume every number line is equivalent in merit, but the one that seems most applicable is the most stable, as in -infinity to +infinity with integer 1 base 10, and perhaps other unique states, in which case our number line may actually be prone to error. Just like how a scientist conducts experiments, perceptions create experiments autonomously. What this has suggested so far is that specialization in academics, or monomaths, are missing the big picture of ALL, and unaware that only one vantage is being properly systematized, rather than radial integration from all disciplines.
As I have discussed with someone, this n-matrix also translates to societal structures, where every particular niche in society forms an equilibrium, and a geniocracy of maximum general ability force is a central radial for the tetrahedron to have 4-d shifting, as it is the most integrated, nuclear essential structure for the stability of inside and outside the physical <king> t<u>t.
Through this structure that encompasses the world as noospheric with meritocratic strata, the illusion of scarcity in world resource would be damned by pure harvestable energy from the omnipresent, omniscient blips and blops of alchemizable energy into a hyper-acceleration of the tetrahedron of human era to n-dimensional intelligence and awareness, hyper-sentience, loss of ego boundary, and metamorphosis eventually leading to pure integration of metaphysical and physical as the energy beings of sentience being in total coherence with non-sentient physicality through accounting systems that leave no conversion remainder to be recycled into base.
Now, the cognitive aspect is explored through this n-matrix. If consciousness is simply ALL coming to total self-actualization, and thus, perhaps a mold-ability beyond the structure that is supposedly "essential", then our neurons are more like simple nodes, but like the numbers, and in over-expressed regions of neural density, the consciousness has an "increased identity", awareness, intelligence, transformaive ability...whatever you want to call it. An area of the brain with computational packets eventually becomes coherent enough to produce self referential thoughts, which lets humans think of numbers as concrete entities, as derived from an abstraction of their own numerical, neural nodes.
Even if most people are not the most mathematically inclined, there will always be self-referential symbolism, and this symbolism can be anything representative for communication between sentences. So although only a pin-drop of the true computational complexity becomes aware, there is typical complexity which is achievable by any two adjacent nodes, forming a synapse. Instead of n-matrix visuals and numerals, we are now moving to betabetics, and in cases of auditory symbolism: phonemes.
Instead of an absolute truth that becomes confirmed through a structurally perfect neural net, common associations following less strict associations are commonplace enough, and since our senses distinguish the properties such as light, texture, etc, it is easy enough to form a metaphysical packet that simplifies the manipulation of physical objects.
For example, someone could write a very convoluted proof on why you can't divide a number by 0, and this requires a certain perception that follows nonlinear and complex logics, above and beyond basic numerical logics....but for an apple, an infant will be able to form a vernacular glyph from as little as 3 inputs: Red spectra, being radial, taking up little space by comparing size at close view and far view, organic (a bit more hard to define, but as in, not blatantly structural, following geometrical patterning, made out of a uniform density and tactile.), etc.
So that relatively rudimentary perceptual set over time becomes reinforced through familiarity, to the point where these few ill defined rules at both high and low resolutions can bring up the vernacular "A P P L E" in betabetical or "ah-pul" in phonetics.
Assuming a simple lexical tier of complexity, where the base interactions between sense activate in similar patterns, there are then metas upon metas after significant pattern recognition reinforcement for biological machines, as we've already discussed, the word "apple" is different in different languages, and it can also be derived from any combination of letters and sounds that seem acceptable to a mind that is socially disconnected.
If a persons macro for "apple" is actually "zutorou", the reinforced pattern is then removed from natural selection for what, for perhaps essential perceptual reasons, is readily understandable by significant portions of the noosphere. So "zutorou" will be extinguished out of the evolution of novel symbolism due to competition, reinforcement from sentiences, efficiency, and perhaps "objective cohesion of symbolism to electrical/perceptual patterns.
And more widespread use of the term "apple" basically dominates as beta male over less efficient representations. So on and so forth. And as the n-matrix can represent the number line, it can represent the betabetical and phonetic lines, because languages are not simply words, but letters and sounds that are binary1 root nodes with characteristics and interactions that form structure and hierarchy to create a fluent communicable language.
Once again, as the ultimate complexity is the same as the simplest complexity through the sploo theorem of closed loops, the root nodes create complex structures, as there are different languages with systems that are not fully equivalent, the ultimate hierarchy is the root of all language, the n-matrix which allows symbolism already creates universal visual and numeric clues, and since this system is literally always applicable to any possible (and imagined, which is possibility in bloom) phenomena, it would also allow a universally understood language, following glyphs as betabetic and phonemes systematized in a way parallel to the learning processes and consistency of the other figurative derivations of ALL.
In line with polymathic, non-specialized nucleus I've discussed, the learning process of the qualitative would then be ideally axiomatically parallel to the quantitative, and the purely visual, subconscious learning processes. So far we have been producing minds that compartmentalize, greatly reducing electrical efficiency. A mind primed to follow inherent and recapture it for all forms of expression would require much less cognitive resources, and would be the first phase for the next step of evolution-- it is now only a game of intelligence.
A mind that learns at first axioms underlying systems will have more capacity and awareness than a mind that wastes energy accessing various learned skills assumed to have nothing in common, and not not have a common underlying factor. Enhanced neural connectivity is enhanced computation for ALL's total sentience, and the easiest way to harness this by non-exogenous means is by using an axiomatic teaching method that would likely create extremely dense and representative brains.
One last thing, as a universe/multiverse is a closed system, every potential energy that is not completely transmutable and alchemizable will create excretions of jumbled waves, requiring equilibrium processes to be functional once more. So having falsely compartmentalized systems means the ultimate sequence of everything that is intended by "God" is delayed, one fractional moment at a time. Be wary of residue! It's like a logic germ!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
