Casting Out Nines, Structure and Function of Real Numbers

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Alton,
My point about 'consistent' was that it is not. To me there is no point in getting hung up over this term or that definition as they are all plastic, relative, subjective etc etc. I prefer to think in the round rather than get bogged down in detial. The devil is in the detail and all that. I listen to others and convert their vocabulary into mine (that's the best way I can think of putting it). I do it automatically. This is how I can see connections/commonality in, say, an Indian religious text, Greek philosophy and Mayan mythology. I see the underlying 'thing', the essence or kernel.

Again, it does not matter at all what system any culture used as long as it was self (internally) consistent i.e. it does not contradict itself, violate identity, etc

Then why was your opinion of the Egyptian/Pythagorean system I posted, so derisory? It worked for the Egyptians for thousands of years. They achieved things we still cannot match today. (Standards of masonry etc).

Nietzsche is Nietzsche. He has been called an existentialist, a romantic, a proto-nazi (by left and right), a proto-communist (by left and right) and a whole host of other labels by various experts. Nietzsche loved the Greeks and specifically Heraclitus. It was Nietzsche who led me to Heraclitus originally. Nietzsche had several writing styles, two of his more commonly used were aphorisms, which he got from Heraclitus and hyperbole which he got from the Greeks (the presocratics).
I have not time for French existentialism as I find it too miserable. I read The Stranger last year as one of my daughters was reading it for A-level French (I read it in English ). I doubt that you have understood it if you feel it changed your life. And if such a slim, plotless, miserable, negative book is the best you have ever read then you should consider changing your reading habits.

You say that people on this forum "communicate well". Unfortunately they do not, and they are not much different than people on practically every physics forum.

Sorry we disappoint you. Why don't you go elsewhere then? Somewhere where the intellectual calibre is up to your standards?

You can perform a thought experiment. Imagine a 2-D entity, there it is. Now rotate it slowly.

I cannot do this as my head does not work that way. I can't do objects and shapes. I do thoughts and concepts. The nearest I get to viewing something in 3-D is when I contemplate on a topic/subject and I 'see' (nowhere near the correct word) how it is connected to the topics/subjects around it, the things that lead up to it and the things it will lead to. Like I said I 'see' things in the round. This is partly because I don't use my brain if I can avoid it. I certainly don't restrict myself to logic. This is what meditation and contemplation is about. It is why all great thinkers throughout recorded history have done it. McCoy, Spock, Kirk. You are Spock and I am Kirk. Why do you think old James T used to sit in his chair in the same pose as Rodin's 'The Thinker'?

[Grey Cloud]

Hi JL,
I've just stolen this from a post by Seasmith on another thread (I left him a note).

Thot’s major cult centre was in modern el-Ashmunein in Middle Egypt. Greek visitors called it Hermopolis after the god in their pantheon they associated with Thot. The Ancient Egyptians called this city Khemenu or "town of the eight", a name referring to four pairsof primaeval deities who were eclipsed in importance by the arrival of Thot, "lord of the city of the eight".

[Thot(h) = Hermes]

Hermes Perseus Athene

From right to left:
Athene = human mind. She crops up in almost every 'Hero' story. She aided Hercules, Perseus, Odysseus, etc.
Perseus = Warrior (Everyman). Will be Hero when he's completed the quest. (Alchemical of course).
Hermes = 'Messenger of the gods'. He is also god of boundaries and exchange. He is the mind of Zeus down here in the mortal realm. (He is an aspect of that mind (aren't we all dear)).
Not sure whether Perseus is gearing up to tackle the the Gorgon or rescue Andromeda from the sea-monster here but the meaning of the story is the same (will explain if anyone is interested). Virtually all Hero quest stories from the various mythologies are the same.
Neraly forgot. Look at the arms. Hermes has one up, one down, Perseus has both down and Athene has both up. Kevin understands.

[altonhare]

Hi Alton,
My point about 'consistent' was that it is not. To me there is no point in getting hung up over this term or that definition as they are all plastic, relative, subjective etc etc. I prefer to think in the round rather than get bogged down in detial. The devil is in the detail and all that. I listen to others and convert their vocabulary into mine (that's the best way I can think of putting it). I do it automatically. This is how I can see connections/commonality in, say, an Indian religious text, Greek philosophy and Mayan mythology. I see the underlying 'thing', the essence or kernel.

-GC

I understand what you're saying, however I must disagree with you that this or that term is relative/subjective. It is only subjective if we make it so i.e. if people use these terms inconsistently or in self-contradiction. Just as in the base-6 number system I conceptualized, if things are defined in a single way they can (and should) always be used that way. I know it's a bit painstaking to take this attention to detail, but as I've repeated its necessary to avoid self-contradiction, absurdity, and logical blunders. I think that, with some practice and some effort, it becomes second nature (just like learning any language).

The reason you "convert their vocabulary into yours" is because nobody is using a common system. This is exactly what I am trying to avoid. From person to person, post to post, the following words vary so widely in their meaning that they are meaning-less:

energy
time
motion
wave
exist
object

If you are necessarily translating these terms then there is non communication at best and miscommunication at worst. Nobody is learning anything because nobody knows what anyone else is actually talking about. You know what YOU would be talking about if YOU were saying what THEY are saying. The caps are for emphasis, not yelling. I'd like to also emphasize that my definitions are not everyone's definitions. You are free to define these in any way you want for the purpose of your post/talk/dissertation/etc. but you certainly must do so, and do so unambiguously. Then you must actually stick to those definitions or you will inevitably end up with duality, paradox, self contradiction, and violation of identity. I have tried my best (not always successfully in the beginning, but I think I've got it now) to make my method of communication clear so people can actually know what I'm thinking, not what they would be thinking if they were using my words. Does that make sense? That last sentence and the italicized sentence are saying similar things, and I think they are very important points.

Then why was your opinion of the Egyptian/Pythagorean system I posted, so derisory? It worked for the Egyptians for thousands of years. They achieved things we still cannot match today. (Standards of masonry etc).

-GC

I am sorry, but I do not object to the system you posted in particular. I have heretofore wrongly (both unfair to you and wrong on principle) grouped you with JL. Whether you and I can come to agreement or not is another matter.

What you posted sounds like "religious babble" to me but, objectively, it is simply nonsensical to me because, as always, many of the terms are not fundamentally defined. That doesn't make it invalid or wrong, just incomprehensible to me.

I object to JL's post because he basically deifies numbers (he has at least engaged in reification of numbers). He talks about the spin of numbers and their phase. As we've agreed on, numbers are shorthands for concepts, which themselves are a relationship among entities (I don't think you've explicitly agreed on this last part, but the former I believe so). JL assigns an action (spin) and a concept (phase) to a concept (number). But he claims that "spin" is not really an action but rather a "something". Then, because he can relate this self-created system to some observations such as the way our hands point or how our fingers are arranged he concludes it has some significance to existence. However you disregard my objections to his misuse/abuse of language, you cannot deny that, to go forward, he must define "existence". Otherwise what exactly has he concluded? What exactly is he doing? So far we have a conceptual framework but that is all. We have alpha numeric characters but no "IIII" that I used to illustrate my base-6 system. What he is doing is akin to me trying to create my base-6 system likes this:

1
2
3
4
5
6

1+1=2
1+2=3
1+3=4
1+4=5
1+5=6

And on. These are "disembodied symbols". All you can do is memorize the symbols and the rules. "If I have a 1 then a + then a 2 then a +, the last symbol must be a 3". You need the concretes. You should be good at removing bias towards the alpha numeric characters and realizing that simply laying down rules for which symbols go where under what circumstances results in a system without necessarily being relevant to existence. If there is any relevance it is not apparent to anyone except (maybe) the person who wrote them down.

Sorry we disappoint you. Why don't you go elsewhere then? Somewhere where the intellectual calibre is up to your standards?

-GC

I am not condescending to any of you when I talk about miscommunication. As I said it "happens on practically every physics forum". Even further, it happens practically constantly. I think you quoted someone as saying something along the lines of "The problem with communication is the illusion that it has actually taken place". I'm paraphrasing, I don't remember exactly. This is not a matter of intellectual calibre, plenty of you are obviously intelligent. The fact is we all take communication for granted. I came here because you all are more open-minded than mainstream physicists and thinkers so I expected greater productivity in my endeavor.

I cannot do this as my head does not work that way. I can't do objects and shapes. I do thoughts and concepts. The nearest I get to viewing something in 3-D is when I contemplate on a topic/subject and I 'see' (nowhere near the correct word) how it is connected to the topics/subjects around it, the things that lead up to it and the things it will lead to. Like I said I 'see' things in the round. This is partly because I don't use my brain if I can avoid it. I certainly don't restrict myself to logic. This is what meditation and contemplation is about. It is why all great thinkers throughout recorded history have done it. McCoy, Spock, Kirk. You are Spock and I am Kirk. Why do you think old James T used to sit in his chair in the same pose as Rodin's 'The Thinker'?

-GC

If you can't do objects/shapes that's fine. I will tell you outright that physics is essentially the study of objects (of course JL will prob disagree with me, in addition to almost every mainstream physicist) so I cannot consider you a physicist. Obviously this does not prohibit you from being a capable thinker. This also doesn't mean we can't communicate and I don't respect your ideas. There is one question I must get out of the way. Does anything 2-D exist? Feel free to define dimension, thing, and/or exist as you like for the purposes of your answer. I know your answer will not be framed in the way I would, but if you make an effort to communicate to make effectively, consistently, and unambiguously I will make every effort to comprehend your thinking. Communication is not a matter of left brain vs. right brain or conceptual thinking vs. object-oriented thinking. Without clear communication we are both forever confined to our own modes of thinking. We won't define our words/symbols and, instead, the other person will just take them to mean whatever HE would mean in that context. In the end we just stay in our own heads and waste a lot of time.

[junglelord]

Greycloud and the rest of us have no choice.
The definitions are not clear.
They are vague, contradictory, and self limiting both in thought and conversation.
This whole misty veil is woven by those who want to dumb us down.
APM and other attempts to make simple non contradictory definitions for words like Mass require a re-organization of how we view the units and therein lies the problem. The web site for electric definitions is another perfect example of the trashy way physics has created language for its science. This leaves everyone talking their own lingo.
The perfect way to cause confusion.
the tower of babble comes to mind.

The industrial military complex is much wiser.
Study the 12 points of leverage.
Notice something at level 6. Need to Know Classified Material.
Those who know and those who don't.
From this point on the leverage is all on their side.

They know exactly what is going on.
They also know exactly how to leave us in the dark.
Its time to wake up.
Thats only going to happen at a personal level.
Society as a whole and transformation,
they have that closely guarded and do not want us to know or change.
Thats the guise of National Security.
Warmachine, War Machine.

[junglelord]

What I have begun to describe above is really just the tip of a very large and fascinating iceberg. The name of the iceberg is Synergetics! As it turns out, the simple little triangle is really a doorway that opens worlds of understanding about everything ranging from the design of the universe, to solving problems like pollution and food shortages that we experience together living in the world. How can so much come from the humble triangle? The quick answer is that it provides a very basic foundation upon which much can unfold.

The preeminent individual who developed much of this work is R. Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)). Often affectionately called "Bucky" by his admirers, he is best known by many as the inventor of the geodesic dome, but his accomplishments range far beyond this invention alone. It is difficult to classify him, as his interests and accomplishments are so wide-ranging. He was an inventor, mathematician, engineer, architect, lecturer, writer, philosopher, poet, humanitarian, visionary, and explorer of uncharted realms of thought and planetary concerns. His "World Game" (or "World Peace Game") is an attempt to address the problems of meeting the needs of all peoples of the world in a balanced and sustainable way. Among his many writings are "Critical Path", and a two volume set "Synergetics, Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking".

Synergetics was his word for a comprehensive system within which the structure of the universe could be appreciated in the most natural and rational way. He demonstrated that using our usual cubic-based x, y, and z coordinate system to understand the universe gives rise to a very confused point of view, which actually obscures the underlying truth and simplicity of the natural organization and design of the universe. Going beyond simple mathematics however, Synergetics provides a framework within which any structure or system can be appreciated in a deeper and more comprehensive manner.

The term "Design Science" is often found in writings concerning Synergetics. Design Science refers to a coherent methodology for the design of structures, systems, or in fact almost anything. In this context however, it generally refers to the application of Synergetics to Design Science.

[lizzie]

JL said: As it turns out, the simple little triangle is really a doorway that opens worlds of understanding about everything ranging from the design of the universe, to solving problems like pollution and food shortages that we experience together living in the world.

Oh, the simple little triangle – it’s the magnetic angle; its center point marks Keely's Neutral Center of the Universal Vortex Transformer Doubling Circuit; if you understand how the Neutral Center works, then you understand the "secret of the Universal Vortex Transformer Doubling Circuit." It is a double transformer; once it starts oscillating, it is self perpetuating; you just need to know the frequency. It's a transformer; so you can transform the energy up or down the harmonic scale. It has a counter rotating circuit so it will null gravity and you can create a superconductor; and if you can suspend the magnetic fields, you manipulate matter big time. You can disassociate water just as Keely did; you can produce unlimited energy with water alone! You can make monoatomic metals like ORME. You can truly reanimate matter. Of course, I don't understand all this stuff nearly as well as you do, but it's a start. I wouldn't have made it this far without your help.

[junglelord]

I 2-D'd the Tetrahedron.
It seems baby steps are needed.

[lizzie]

Joshua sounded the trumpets at Jericho; Ed Leedskalnin sang to his stones; John Keely played his violin to operate his machines. Will Junglelord will play his drums?

The Secret of the Universal Vortex Transformer Doubling Circuit - the Infinite Ninth (the triple helix)
http://www.svpvril.com/DPANEtxt.html#Bloomfield-Moore

We can see that rotation is a natural phenomenon. The very existence of a longitudinal or transverse wave train gives rise in a natural form a third vibratory component that easily and effortlessly rotates about and with the longitudinal and transverse wave trains.

Should we be able to understand these three forms of vibration and their interrelations we would be in a better position to 1) de-emphasize the first two while 2) giving preponderance to the third mode which would result in pure rotary motion without the need for complex levers and expensive fuels.

The question then is: What is a vibration and how do we gain control over its three modes? This is the essence of SVP - understanding and controlling vibratory phenomena.

One of the prime areas of difficulty is in the definition of a vibration. Conventionally we count the oscillation back and forth as a single cycle or vibration. But using a clearer and more definite interpretation of natural phenomena we see, in actuality, two distinct yet opposite vibrations where orthodoxy sees but one. We see three distinct vibration modes or types of vibrations: 1) Longitudinal or straight-line; 2) Transverse, Shear or zigzag; 3) Lamb, Love, Surface, Raleigh or vortex waves. Each of these vibration forms are composed of the three polarizations of positive, negative and neutral phases or states of a vibration.

When a vibratory amplitude departs from the Neutral Line it is either proceeding into the positive or the negative zone. It will either become a positive quantity or a negative quantity. These two phases are mirror images of each other and are not mathematical positive and negative quantities. The negative phase is not a negative quantity but is a real thing possessing real power and has real effects on its environment. Likewise the Neutral is a real quantity – ZERO. The truth of the concept is this zero-point or neutral is actually a merging of the Positive and Negative quantities. If we use a negative number matched to a positive number possessing equal but reverse amplitude from zero we have a null quantity or zero. This is where zero-point comes from but the premises of its definition are in error and may lead our work and research into error.

The actual nature of the zero-point or the Neutral state is a merging (Sum or Difference) of the Positive and Negative as distinct and positive quantities. When the two phases are merged or summed they become complimentary and One with each other to form the third mode; i.e., scalar or neutral. Thus the characteristics of each become latent all the while retaining full individuality and potency. They each can be awakened or disturbed from this cozy arrangement by acoustic modulation with a pitch discordant to their chord of unition. These pitches and tones are all defined mathematically.

This neutral pole has within it pure (vibratory) energy in a potential state (neutralized, latent). This is a result of the perfect balancing of the two harmonic (= magnetic) and enharmonic (= electric) flows. These two then, perfectly balanced together - becoming One - is the Dominant, scalar or third point of the triangle. Further this may be further conditioned to augment its quiescent nature to allow access to and subsequent manifestation of literally unlimited energy. In other words mass and inertia are results of these forces and may subsequently be manipulated by using the aliquot of the these forces (chords of vibrations).

This modulation of the spin and triple axis is the key to liberation of immense quantities of so-called Free Energy. The manipulation of these properties is done by manipulating the aliquot parts of the vibratory signatures.

Quaternions describe mathematically the structure of Keely's triple streams or concordant flows as he called them when harmoniously balanced thus becoming his Full Harmonic Chord. This triple flow is then an undifferentiated flow as a scalar phenomenon.

By using a positive number system for each of the three states we manage to stay within the realms of dynamical forces. This numbering system must address all parameters within the state itself and must also cross-over or hook into the other two states.

[altonhare]

I still haven't gotten your diagram of "something" without shape JL. If you could just e mail it in any format you choose that would be great.

I hope you didn't misplace your picture of "something" without shape. Since you made fun of me so much for calling "something" without shape nothing, that would be quite embarrassing for you!

If you don't have a scanner you can just fax it on over, let me know in PM and I'll give you the fax #. If you don't have an image, but rather a statue, I will arrange to have it shipped at my own cost. Really, I'd hate to embarrass you by limiting your options, if you can show me "something" without shape please don't balk at logistic concerns. We'll work something out.

[junglelord]

I still haven't gotten your diagram of "threads/ropes" without material shape & structure. If you could just e mail it in any format you choose that would be great.

I hope you didn't misplace your picture of "threads/ropes" without shape or material structure. Since you made fun of me so much for calling "APM" without shape nothing, that would be quite embarrassing for you!

If you don't have a scanner you can just fax it on over, let me know in PM and I'll give you the fax #. If you don't have an image, but rather a statue, I will arrange to have it shipped at my own cost. Really, I'd hate to embarrass you by limiting your options, if you can show me "threads/ropes" without shape please don't balk at logistic concerns. We'll work something out.

[junglelord]

Poor old Dorthy.
I have one better.
Can you tell me why shape exist?
No?


Neither will I fax you the reason then.

[junglelord]

I feel bad leaving you out in the cold.
I do not adhere to Leverage Principle 6.

Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness.
That is my non material Structure.
Its Ordered Form is by PHI, Pi, e.
It creates Platonic Solids.
Whats your fax Number?
Hope you got a lot of paper.
The numbers are transcendental.
Just like my non material consciouness and its ordered structure.

[Plasmatic]

Can you tell me why shape exist?
No?

This is a PURELY religious question left only to those who dont consider it an invalid query.

[altonhare]

I still haven't gotten your diagram of "threads/ropes" without material shape & structure

-JL

Straw man. There is no thread or rope "without material shape and structure". Only YOU would propose something so laughable. Again you cover your "rear" with one hand and point the finger with your other hand. Here's a picture of what a taut thread looks like:

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

It is a simple elongated three dimensional object, here represented on your screen in cross-section (you can't see its width).

See? It has shape. You can see where it begins and ends. It can be distinguished from its background or from what it is not. This is called an object. The colored space (I'm partly color blind) around the object is NOT the object. If you close your eyes, the image on the screen STILL has shape. In fact, it always has shape! The elongated image on the screen is NEVER the colored space around it! This is a scientific definition of "object" because it can be used consistently. When we use terms however we feel like to win the discussion at hand the person is called a cheat, liar, phony, quack, or a rip-off.

Now, when you use the word "object", what are you referring to? Everyone knows exactly what I am referring to because I am not a cheat, phony, or quack. I am clear.

Can you tell me why shape exist?
No?


Neither will I fax you the reason then.

-JL

You lose. If something (or part of something) can be distinguished from what it is not, it has shape.

You are the one who thinks there is such a thing as "something" without shape. There's my diagram up there of something with shape, I've made my case. You can't show us your "something" without shape because there is no such thing. You lose JL.

[junglelord]

You know I have both of you on foe for a reason.
Your both excluded from my conversations.
I am not talking to either of you, therefore my posts are never for either of you.

I really dont see your post.
Yet, You both always reply, like I am talking to you.
Or like I read your posts.
Thats the biggest joke.
All the effort you both put into me.
Effort I never see.

Nothing ever to see.
Both Dorthy and Toto can follow me around like shadows if you like.
Trying to control the universe from your 2-D levels of thought.
Working like a team of shadow boxers. Giving me the old 1-2.
Shadow Boxers Indeed.
I am not seeing them anyway.


If you feel the need to talk to someone who ignores you,
all the more power to both Dorthy and Toto and your imaginary worlds.
I think we all see both the motivations and actions do speak louder then words.
You both are always running after me, shouting about what I say.
Must be funny the Knots I tie both of you up in.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

For the rest of my good friends, who KNOW and appriciate my posts.
The ones I write for....


I am getting my Zome Tools today.


I am getting the basic kit (Explorer kit) with a extra kit of infinite blue green struts and the green struts.
The new blue green struts make the combinations infinite.
2-3-5-Infinity.