|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Jun 8, 2021 20:03:23 GMT
We observe through patterns, patterns act as the filter for further knowledge with this further knowledge being a pattern which acts in turn much like a filter.
The human mind continually renews itself through the patterns recieved given those which make it through the filter in turn act as meta patterns, or patterns within a pattern. The pattern in absorbing new patterns becomes a more complex pattern as it incorporates that which it previously lacked.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jun 9, 2021 11:44:02 GMT
We observe through patterns, patterns act as the filter for further knowledge with this further knowledge being a pattern which acts in turn much like a filter. The human mind continually renews itself through the patterns recieved given those which make it through the filter in turn act as meta patterns, or patterns within a pattern. The pattern in absorbing new patterns becomes a more complex pattern as it incorporates that which it previously lacked.
and thus the basis of our knowledge must be :
GEOMETRY
(Descartes!)
because: a pattern is just gemoteric
and if you get geometry wrong, then you cannot think clearly...
like the quackology of Einstein and the academic mob!
Until you can categorically claim:
"Einstein's Relativity is absolutely wrong"
then
You do not know how to think clearly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 9, 2021 12:34:47 GMT
We observe through patterns, patterns act as the filter for further knowledge with this further knowledge being a pattern which acts in turn much like a filter. The human mind continually renews itself through the patterns recieved given those which make it through the filter in turn act as meta patterns, or patterns within a pattern. The pattern in absorbing new patterns becomes a more complex pattern as it incorporates that which it previously lacked. and thus the basis of our knowledge must be :
GEOMETRY
(Descartes!)
because: a pattern is just gemoteric
and if you get geometry wrong, then you cannot think clearly...
like the quackology of Einstein and the academic mob!
Until you can categorically claim:
"Einstein's Relativity is absolutely wrong"
then
You do not know how to think clearly.
I also think it's possible. Because even taking even and odd numbers, and an operation of addition we can derive something analytically, e.g.: a) sum of any paired odd and even numbers (odd, even) results in an even number iff the quantity of these numbers in general = n². b) any sum of even numbers results in an even number. c)... At the same time we might suppose that there's no need of using geometry, although we use direction operators. I presume any of such analytical derivations require shifts. A skeptic may claim there's no need for an extension for spatial speculations, and we can response on it saying the language itself is unavoidable for using configurations. A German philosopher, G. Frege firstly wanted to create strictly analytical system with no addressing to spatial&time definitions for the arithmetic's sake. And after Russell's discover of a contradiction in Frege's system, the German philosopher turned to Geometry as a basis. I don't no works of him about it, I know Frege has changed his mind though. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Jun 9, 2021 14:52:39 GMT
We observe through patterns, patterns act as the filter for further knowledge with this further knowledge being a pattern which acts in turn much like a filter. The human mind continually renews itself through the patterns recieved given those which make it through the filter in turn act as meta patterns, or patterns within a pattern. The pattern in absorbing new patterns becomes a more complex pattern as it incorporates that which it previously lacked.
and thus the basis of our knowledge must be :
GEOMETRY
(Descartes!)
because: a pattern is just gemoteric
and if you get geometry wrong, then you cannot think clearly...
like the quackology of Einstein and the academic mob!
Until you can categorically claim:
"Einstein's Relativity is absolutely wrong"
then
You do not know how to think clearly.
Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Jun 9, 2021 18:38:16 GMT
We observe through patterns, patterns act as the filter for further knowledge with this further knowledge being a pattern which acts in turn much like a filter. The human mind continually renews itself through the patterns recieved given those which make it through the filter in turn act as meta patterns, or patterns within a pattern. The pattern in absorbing new patterns becomes a more complex pattern as it incorporates that which it previously lacked.
and thus the basis of our knowledge must be :
GEOMETRY
(Descartes!)
because: a pattern is just gemoteric
and if you get geometry wrong, then you cannot think clearly...
like the quackology of Einstein and the academic mob!
Until you can categorically claim:
"Einstein's Relativity is absolutely wrong"
then
You do not know how to think clearly.
Where Thinking Goes Down a Wonderland Rabbit Hole
The dummies in academia invented the pronunciation "processeeze" for processes based on a defective and superficial knowledge of the pattern exemplified by crisis, parenthesis, etc. That pronunciation can only be used for the plural of the imaginary word "processis." But then again, everything thought in the sheltered echo chamber of academia is imaginary. |
|
