Debate :maths:

reply to post by iwishicould


Look let me say this... One I do not insult anyone.. well unless im drunk.

2nd Im not a genius Or pretend to be one.. Im not a time travleing wizznut..

Im showing you what i have FOUND.. nothing els.. This does not make me more special or anything Why should it????

Im pointing something out that other MAYHAVE over looked..

Do you think i would just come on ats and start randomly chatting boolhool about maths for the fun of it???

Oh wait aliens have landed Oh now wait yellowstong is going to pop!

Its just My intrest im showing others is that so bad ????

DENY IGNORANCE.. well blow me the F over..

Ok i im adding this here for a reason

maths

en.wikipedia.org...

A number (i.e., integer) expressed in the decimal numeral system is even or odd according to whether its last digit is even or odd. That is, if the last digit is 1, 3, 5, 7, or 9, then it's odd; otherwise it's even. The same idea will work using any even base. In particular, a number expressed in the binary numeral system is odd if its last digit is 1 and even if its last digit is 0. In an odd base, the number is even according to the sum of its digits - it is even if and only if the sum of its digits is even.

looping

en.wikipedia.org...

Pi is an irrational number, which means that it cannot be expressed as a fraction m/n, where m and n are integers. Consequently its decimal representation never ends or repeats. It is furthermore a transcendental number, which means that no finite sequence of algebraic operations on integers (powers, roots, sums, etc.) could ever produce it. Throughout the history of mathematics, much effort has been made to determine p more accurately and understand its nature; fascination with the number has even carried over into culture at large


bioligy

en.wikipedia.org...

An embryo (from Greek: ?µß????, plural ?µß??a, lit. "that which grows," from en- "in" + bryein "to swell, be full") is a multicellular diploid eukaryote in its earliest stage of development, from the time of first cell division until birth, hatching, or germination. In humans, it is called an embryo from the moment of implantation until the end of the 8th week, whereafter it is instead called a fetus.



DNA

en.wikipedia.org...

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a nucleic acid that contains the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all known living organisms and some viruses. The main role of DNA molecules is the long-term storage of information. DNA is often compared to a set of blueprints or a recipe, or a code, since it contains the instructions needed to construct other components of cells, such as proteins and RNA molecules


elements

en.wikipedia.org...

The term is also used to refer to a pure chemical substance composed of atoms with the same number of protons.[1] Common examples of elements are iron, copper, silver, gold, hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen. In total, 117 elements have been observed as of 2008,

symmetry

en.wikipedia.org...(biology)

Symmetry in biology is the balanced distribution of duplicate body parts or shapes. The body plans of most multicellular organisms exhibit some form of symmetry, either radial symmetry or bilateral symmetry or glide symmetry. A small minority exhibit no symmetry (are asymmetric).

In nature and biology, symmetry is approximate. For example, plant leaves, while considered symmetric, will rarely match up exactly when folded in half.

part 2

en.wikipedia.org...

Molecular symmetry is a fundamental concept in chemistry, as it can predict or explain many of a molecule's chemical properties, such as its dipole moment and its allowed spectroscopic transitions (based on selection rules such as the Laporte rule). Virtually every university level textbook on physical chemistry, quantum chemistry, and inorganic chemistry devotes a chapter to symmetry

part 3

en.wikipedia.org...

A symmetry of a physical system is a physical or mathematical feature of the system (observed or intrinsic) that is "preserved" under some change.

The transformations may be continuous (such as rotation of a circle) or discrete (e.g., reflection of a bilaterally symmetric figure, or rotation of a regular polygon). Continuous and discrete transformations give rise to corresponding types of symmetries. Continuous symmetries can be described by Lie groups while discrete symmetries are described by finite groups (see Symmetry group). Symmetries are frequently amenable to mathematical formulation and can be exploited to simplify many problems.



enjoy..

and this post was becouse i was called a hoax.. Questions?

Is that the proof you need?

I'm sorry Buddy. I've read 3 of your forums including this last post which seemed to throw in DNA and String Theory for good measure, and I've yet to understand what you are trying to relay to the rest of us. My comprehension is not lacking so I'm pretty sure I'm reading what everyone else is and coming up with the same wrinkled brow. I just can't seem to connect the dots. This whole thing seems like a one sided conversation that you've been having with yourself inside your head. Obviously It is important to you and if you could get those thoughts that you're so passionate about into a cohesive paragraph or two, then maybe the rest of us could engage and either say "I think you are wrong , here's why" or "I agree with you, here's why". But right now its akin to this (Bad analogy) You letting us watch the first two and last two minutes of a 2 hour movie that you made and then getting upset with us because we can't tell you the plot.

reply to post by EyesWideShut


its not easy for me...

My theory is clear We are in something alive... is that hard??

My tool is mathmatics..

My reason? Life / being alive.. to question it..

I posted the DOTS for you to connect try reading it again...

reply to post by theresult


You are not making any sense. If you want people to engage in a rational discussion with you, you must first set the stage for rationality - something that you are certainly not doing.

You seem to be "dropping names" of various theories for naught. You are not communicating any ideas, at least none that anyone here can see - yet, you believe that the name dropping provides more detail?

I'm not sure what you mean by "calculate god" or "calculate existence" because it's just about as meaning less as "calculate teeth" or "calculate bigfoot." The Unified Field Theory is the closest you will get to "calculating existence" (And the workings of god, if you wish)

If you're theory is that we are in something that is alive, can you reconcile the unified field theory as a proposed mathematical formulation that attempts to describe the workings and laws of what we live in?

If we are able to mathematically convey the physical laws of our existence (which we can convey a good portion), isn't that getting close to "calculating existence?"

If you are looking for a "reason why" then you will not find it in math nor science. Those are, insofar, personal questions that have personal answers. Remember when you were little and asked "why, why, why" all the way down?

Perhaps you never did. Perhaps you haven't learned to differentiate rationality from irrationality and the physical from the metaphysical.

.. and perhaps you never will since you've already arrived at an internal conclusion.

Originally posted by logician magician
You are not making any sense. If you want people to engage in a rational discussion with you, you must first set the stage for rationality - something that you are certainly not doing.

What he's saying makes sense to me, but his language is very suggestive and metaphorical. That doesn't invalidate his message, only makes it harder to decipher, and I'm not sure he's going to be eager to offer a whole lot of the kind of detail you would like to see.

Why is it so hard to decipher? Because what I think he's talking about requires an understanding that comes before the tools we use, similar to what the people who first invented these tools would have had to consider, and all the people along the way who had the clarity to evolve the systems in a meaningful ways. There is no easy way to render it after the fact, except to show a product of it, and then people will just look at the product and still will not understand.

And that very difficulty is why I very seriously doubt things will get much clearer unless you keep trying to change the angle of your head to meet his. Right and wrong are completely arbitrary. All there is to talk about are forms and relationships.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by bsbray11]

reply to post by bsbray11


Turst me i am trying i dont want to come across the way it seems i do and its very frustrateing becouse im not hoaxing im not out to make money.. or even say HEY im totaly right.. that would make me god ect.. or being a smart arse call it what you wish..

But i am trying to say calculating god.. no im not im calculating just life.. not god!! god is a big big thing just becouse he was ment to have made life is it wrong for me to ask how he did it what tools did god use? to create what i am living in.. its not maths.. granted i got to this part using maths.. but becouse maths fails to answer the basic question OF LIFE that means its the wrong tool!

But maths does POINT to something els.. i dont know wtf that is the only thing its point too for me "in my mind" is some kinda of DNA.. yep that sounds nutts it did to me.. but thats what LOGICAL mathmatics was showing me in life.. i posted that big long thing so people can see what im trying to show.. All the connecting words "terms" Read every single quote.. and you will see the same words over and over.. and i put maths at the top for a reason.. becouse everything under it came via mathmatical understanding of the interger "number"....

You see a number IS a word .. just becouse we Read it does not mean its not a number

kinda like x+y = whatever..

words are the same.. "in mathmatics" and in "logic" thats why we use words...

The cell theory just shows via maths there is something ALIVE and we are INSIDE IT and something MADE US AND MATHS and that was DNA

much like the cells in your body that are RANDOM but have RULES and that is DNA it

How many cells make up differnt things in your body? but are all based on your DNA?

how long did that take to map? now you get the jist of what IM after...

the universes DNA strand..

If i still done make sens im totaly just hopeless at trying to convay it....

feel free to flame at this point becouse i give up

Originally posted by theresult
Turst me i am trying

i dont want to come across the way it seems i do and its very frustrateing becouse im not hoaxing im not out to make money.. or even say HEY im totaly right..

I got you, and I deal with the same thing. It IS frustrating, and it's why some people in the East, for example, have cultivated this type of knowledge for thousands of years but there are few who appreciate it even when exposed to it.

But maths does POINT to something els.. i dont know wtf that is the only thing its point too for me "in my mind" is some kinda of DNA.. yep that sounds nutts it did to me.. but thats what LOGICAL mathmatics was showing me in life..

Math, geometry, chemistry, all about the same thing. What's really the difference between 1 + 1 and two atoms of the same element bonding?

You see a number IS a word .. just becouse we Read it does not mean its not a number

kinda like x+y = whatever..

words are the same.. "in mathmatics" and in "logic" thats why we use words...

Exactly. Words and numbers are all commonly united in the fact that they are just symbols, that only represent ideas and concepts in our heads that we all use to relate to one another.

Like I can sit here and talk about "five" of this, or "five" of that, but "five" is just a collection of four funny-looking symbols that, when read and "processed," amount to the concept of the quantity I allude to here:



Something very different from the symbol "five." Trivial now maybe, but not so much when you build number upon number, and start seeing patterns, forming axioms, theorems, systems of analysis and calculation, and eventually these are taught at schools (from the end product level, not with the full understanding that went into these systems!) and suddenly people begin attributing properties to these systems that never existed.

For example, all of the hard materialist mathematicians and engineers who were shocked to learn in the 1930's that calculus and all equally powerful systems are either incomplete or inconsistent, and can be made to contradict themselves. Bertrand Russell had just spent years of his life trying to carefully prove that 1 + 1 really is 2, through a system of very careful rules and definitions that would be completely immune (in his vision) from any devilish loopholes or sleights. But even he couldn't avoid having to eventually simply point to That Which Is, and say, "here, you just have to see the logic for yourself." Mathematics on its most basic premises is still completely unfounded, because there is no way to really prove that 1 + 1 is 2 unless someone can actually see for themselves what is being alluded to. And this is extremely important and should apply to all mathematical concepts.


No one can convey It properly, it's entirely too immense, but we can keep coming here and trying. Like you said on the last page:

Think of it this way.. you was ment to ask a stupid question.. to get the real answer..

Math can help one to better understand the universe, to a point, after which it concludes the mind.

look, let me say THIS

apparently after all of your threads on ATS, cant you see people dont understand. Why cant you just simply explain, and what you posted directed towards me, didnt make one bit of sense at all, how can you not see it? explain yourself, its getting old just reading your babble, why cant you state things clear? You are a 27 year old man, an english man, you speak english, type exactly how you speak, thats it is all.

its getting extremely old.

reply to post by iwishicould


If you dont like reading it then dont read it?

Very simple.. some get it some dont.. That is not my problem.

But i respect your view

have a nice day sir

reply to post by theresult


Universe Human
DNA DNA
MATHS MATHS

If you do not get this.. I realy think you need to understand what it is we are in..

Now what els shall you have me do, Or put it in a way that makes Sens to you ??

Theory: We are in something alive...

now tell me how i must prove it using maths or how do i connect the dots...

in a way you understand.

thankyou.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by theresult]

reply to post by bsbray11


Its hard to tell someone that MATH.. is and understanding of something that is alive.. but it will not alow us to create life.. becouse LIFE was created by another way.. and its not mathmatical..

When god created life.. he did so without using our mathmatical understading.. or we would be able to create life also...

something is ABOVE Maths.. think of it like a wedding cake lol


Math is at the bottom of this cake.. Something is on the next level on this cake...

crap analogy i guess lol



[edit on 7-1-2009 by theresult]

Epic fail!

Pathetic post. Semi-intellectual bs mixed with new age crap. The worst thing is that the OP talks about maths like he knows anything about it - which he clearly doesn't.

"Helloo Im gounna be controvarsal andd add miself in 1+1 cuz no1 haz dune it befoure. im so smat!!"

To the OP: Please, stop acting like you know anything at all about ANYTHING.

Edit:
Note to myself: Never ever post in threads like this again. It's not worth getting upset because of the ignorance and stupidity of people.

[edit on 11-1-2009 by Kos!!]

reply to post by Kos!!


You sound like you just came away from talking crap to all your buddies on a Counter Strike server or something. Spend a lot of time in your basement? Just kidding of course.

If the OP was bad, then your post just made this thread that much worse for the new dimension of immaturity that you've now brought to the table.

And the OP still has one over most all of you in my book.

Originally posted by Kos!!
Epic fail!

Pathetic post. Semi-intellectual bs mixed with new age crap. The worst thing is that the OP talks about maths like he knows anything about it - which he clearly doesn't.

"Helloo Im gounna be controvarsal andd add miself in 1+1 cuz no1 haz dune it befoure. im so smat!!"

To the OP: Please, stop acting like you know anything at all about ANYTHING.

Edit:
Note to myself: Never ever post in threads like this again. It's not worth getting upset because of the ignorance and stupidity of people.

[edit on 11-1-2009 by Kos!!]

lol and what is it you know sir?

Or are you going to debate not flame with total nonsensical tripe

Did you prove me wrong? did you make me think anymore than i have?

No you didnt.. You are in your loop STAY THERE

i like being me.. do you like being you??

I think outside the box.. while ur happy to build sand castles inside it..

have a nice day

reply to post by bsbray11


well looking at ur avatar i would say you understand more what im about than many..

And thats rare.. becouse of the way i word things and what im trying to show..

as your avatar does ; ) i use math to prove it.. not my fault people are blind..

doublepost

not

A

online..

[edit on 11-1-2009 by theresult]