Who likes my shit?

and? :eek:

Be good. ;)

Christmas isn't for another 5 months. :p


EDIT: Are you saying God amounts to nothing? :confused:

Christmas isn't for another 5 months. :p


EDIT: Are you saying God amounts to nothing? :confused:


God is the unification of nothing and everything.

Infinity has no numerical value, it is simply something that has no boundary and as such cannot be the object of classical arithmetic manipulations.

The rest of your post is gobledigook.

God is the unification of nothing and everything.

What is nothing then? And what is something?

Gobledigook is a funny word.. :D

The number, or "non-identity" 0, is the complete union of two numbers that no human has ever counted. By the simple arithmetical operation of taking the difference or total of negative and positive infinity, we see that the two are limited by a number other than themselves, the other. If some algorithm can count infinity then it is possible for a mind to be omnipotent.

i have to say that that is one of the most interesting posts i have read here in a while!

references please for further reading.

welcome aboard!

The number, or "non-identity" 0, is the complete union of two numbers that no human has ever counted. By the simple arithmetical operation of taking the difference or total of negative and positive infinity, we see that the two are limited by a number other than themselves, the other. If some algorithm can count infinity then it is possible for a mind to be omnipotent.

Not quite accurate if my mathematics is correct. Don't you mean that as n-->inf, n + (-n) = 0. There is no natural number called infinity.

The human mind can only understand(and prove) relations which hold on infinite limits by using natural induction.(or using theorems proved using natural induction)

The human mind is capable of reaching the limits of unseen knowledge. If it is possible for a single mind to conceptualize an infinite quantity, then that mind becomes omnipotent.

The number, or "non-identity" 0, is the complete union of two numbers that no human has ever counted. By the simple arithmetical operation of taking the difference or total of negative and positive infinity, we see that the two are limited by a number other than themselves, the other. If some algorithm can count infinity then it is possible for a mind to be omnipotent.

I thought (-2)+2 = 0 ?

Does that mean my mind is somehow omnipotent? :confused:

I thought (-2)+2 = 0 ?

Does that mean my mind is somehow omnipotent? :confused:

i can prove mathematically 1+1=0, what would that make me? "whatevertheacronymforomni"potent?

Well, according to him:

The number, or "non-identity" 0, is the complete union of two numbers that no human has ever counted.

I suppose since we have come up with numbers that when joined become 0, we are superhuman?

Actually, infinity + (-infinity) = 17.3

Are you sure? I don't believe you are being very accurate - I make it 17.3275

At the top-most level of symmetry identity and non-identity are rendered indifferentiable, everything is nothing and vice versa.

Spit your game niggaaaa.

Language is the act of description, existence is a description, at an infinite level of description the two converge where existence is neither predicated by description nor is the predicate of it, but instead, both are predicated at once. The only logical answer to this is a "descriptor" of existence and description itself.

I'm a little confused on what you're describing here. Do you mean that given a langauge and a sentence within the language describing an object, the description becomes the object as the description becomes more precise? This seems open to discusion since there are no physical objects that have been described completely, and any complete description of an abstract object could "fill" in for the true abstract definition.

At the limit

Mind = Existence or

Mind = Reality


That's allll you gotta know!

Suck it.

If we take the sum total of every description in every human mind we would have only a set of descriptions of existence that are limited to human capacity. Without human capacity existence would have one less set of descriptions on it made by mind. If a total unlimited description exists, then existence and description converge. If one can prove mathematically that existence and description converge, then the universe is a mind.

It's been proved that we are incapable of observing an object's speed and position both at the same time. Although we do know that any object has a particular speed and particular position, we cannot measure both. Hence, complete existence of a physical object by us, or any other physical object, is an impossilbility. While we could speculate that, like abstract objects, existence comes to being by observation, that objects are defined by their behavior, this seems to be more a theological question of God observing our existence, bringing us into existence. At the same time, to say that existence exists apart from observation is just a intellectual leap as the above question.


Mind = Existence or Mind = Reality

This does not seem to be true, insofar as it concerns just the human mind. For many years the collective human mind did not know of the existence of the planet pluto. Hence, physical existence is not dependent upon our minds, even though what we call human existence is. It's interesting to note that this statement is based upon observation, that through the human existence that I know, I'm incapable of knowing everything.

Well, we can say that an abstract object can be given a perfect description, in logic at least. But even our logical descriptions of an object are not the object itself, but the behavior of an object. We know that 1 by it's behavior under multiplication and addition. But we don't know what 1 really is, in fact it could have different in a different field. These are really abstractions, everything that we physically see, mentally exists only as an abstraction. Nevertheless, we have other modes and other ways of seeing.

Shut the fuck up.

You're all a bunch of liars.

You've made so many statements in this thread that I've not been able to hold on to a single theme... so I'll answer in the same way.

Descriptions exist because (a) things that can be described AND (b) things that can describe both exist. Therefore, a description can never become the descriptor, or the descriptee, as all 3 are independent.... perhaps at their basest levels, they are one, but not on superficial levels.

Mathematics is a language (or construct?) used to describe what we can, in some way, observe. Has there ever been anything that is not observable that has been properly explained by mathematics?

Zero is the absence of something, right? If you have no 1's, or 2's... then you have... zero. If you were to combine a number and it's complementary negative by simple addition..... that's called negation....

If 2=0+2... then you have 2 more than zero of something... if -2=0-2, you have 2 less than zero of something.... in physical reality, aren't all negatives simply perspective based? Meaning that, if you're on an x-axis, and you move -n degress down it, you're still +1 degree in the opposite direction from -n - 1.

So, when you take infinity... as applied to a number... since there simply is no number infinity, but it's a concept (as pointed out) for unlimited numerical value, then by adding +infinity to -infinity... you still simply have nothing... which is just the opposite of infinity which is literally everything.

Wouldn't it make more sense to say that everything is and isn't simultaneously?

I'm sure quantum physics is really what I would need to describe that, but I'm extremely unschooled in it.

Also... doesn't the fact that you can't observe an object's position and speed at the same time kind of imply that physical existence != mathematical existence? (*!= is "not equal to")