It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

page: 8
9
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 09:54 PM

Originally posted by Chamberf=6

That's where yew go astray! Source speaks Math! Ribbit

Well then it's easy.

So speak to us in the language of the "source".

(that's "math" in case you forgot)

Bring it. (bring it "source")

btw:

surprised you didn't say "ashtray" since I went to have a smoke..

I've been dew'n that butt yew ridicule the math as well, because closed mYnds C only what they want 2C.

Ribbit

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 09:57 PM

Well...

When you say 2 + 3 = 23

Of course I question.

It is obviously 5.

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:00 PM

you can't define nothing without defining something, and you can't define infinity without breaking 'it' into non-infinities. I like your take on the rule of threes.

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:02 PM

He just said he spoke in the language of the "source" ie. mathematics.

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:06 PM

Originally posted by smyleegrl

However, I have one point to make. Your assuming that the law of matter is correct. I know that recent work in quantum physics has unconvered that certain "fundamental" laws of physics are now in question. I just read an article (I think on discovery.com but I'm not positive) that stated Einstein's speed of light, assumed to be a constant, in fact may be fluctuating.

Any way to break down your overall post into language for dummies? What do you mean when you mention space-time for numbers?

Sure the speed of light is fluctuating nothing is truly constant, and nothing is truly eternal.

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:18 PM
*sigh* I was hoping this wouldn't come to heavy math to explain -_-

basically the hypothesis is that numbers -are- space-time, skipping the definition of the latter else i'll be here for days..

numbers define everything we experience, shape, intensity, physical laws (V=IR ?) the universe itself.

so why does 3 and 1 and 1 equal 23? because you just removed the commonly accepted laws of math, laws which have paradoxes, laws which infact are theory that has been fluked ever so well for a long time. decimal for example can be used to define scale, though most think of it as repeating tens, forgetting that your actually defining a bunch of ones.

obviously in normal math the proper marking for two and three is 2 + 3, not 23, but a programmer might see 23 as a string rather than a number.

I hope this hints at what im getting at, if not try to make sense of this en.wikipedia.org... , and re-read my previous posts, im not trying to confuse you but there are such things as 1 = 0 in regular math aswell..

ed: im trying to not have to explain how positive zero negative combination varients literally are how logic function works but if I must I shall return. srsly, it kills my brain to graph it all...>_>
edit on 3/2/2012 by whatsinaname because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:20 PM

Originally posted by Chamberf=6

Well...

When you say 2 + 3 = 23

Of course I question.

It is obviously 5.

whY use mY hand when eYe can use Spock's instead:

Let's see. TWO on the Left and THREE on the Right = 23

"kNot even God can win the argument against Stoopidity, when Stoopid is judging the Contest." - Old Toad Proverb

"U can't teach sum1 sumthing they already know." - Old Toad Proverb

Ribbit

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:23 PM

"kNot even God can win the argument against Stoopidity, when Stoopid is judging the Contest." - Old Toad Proverb "U can't teach sum1 sumthing they already know." - Old Toad Proverb Ribbit

Are you really trying to be serious, or just trying to have a laugh??

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:26 PM

Originally posted by andersensrm

Originally posted by smyleegrl

However, I have one point to make. Your assuming that the law of matter is correct. I know that recent work in quantum physics has unconvered that certain "fundamental" laws of physics are now in question. I just read an article (I think on discovery.com but I'm not positive) that stated Einstein's speed of light, assumed to be a constant, in fact may be fluctuating.

Any way to break down your overall post into language for dummies? What do you mean when you mention space-time for numbers?

Sure the speed of light is fluctuating nothing is truly constant, and nothing is truly eternal.

Time IS the Absolute Constant by which All is defined!

But remember, your measurement of Time, is kNot Time, it is only the measurement of IT.

You know kNot Time because you've had One of the Three connections to IT blocked.

2 of 3 = 66.6% = 666

EveryOne bears the Mark, but you can't see it, because IT is within you!

Ribbit

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:28 PM

Originally posted by andersensrm

Originally posted by smyleegrl

However, I have one point to make. Your assuming that the law of matter is correct. I know that recent work in quantum physics has unconvered that certain "fundamental" laws of physics are now in question. I just read an article (I think on discovery.com but I'm not positive) that stated Einstein's speed of light, assumed to be a constant, in fact may be fluctuating.

Any way to break down your overall post into language for dummies? What do you mean when you mention space-time for numbers?

Sure the speed of light is fluctuating nothing is truly constant, and nothing is truly eternal.

Time IS the Absolute Constant by which All is defined!

But remember, your measurement of Time, is kNot Time, it is only the measurement of IT.

You know kNot Time because you've had One of the Three connections to IT blocked.

2 of 3 = 66.6% = 666

EveryOne bears the Mark, but you can't see it, because IT is within you!

Ribbit

...And yet you have been saying 2+3 =23.

How does that connect to 666??

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:29 PM

Originally posted by Chamberf=6

"kNot even God can win the argument against Stoopidity, when Stoopid is judging the Contest." - Old Toad Proverb "U can't teach sum1 sumthing they already know." - Old Toad Proverb Ribbit

Are you really trying to be serious, or just trying to have a laugh??

Ever hear of Shakespeare? A Tragic Comedy?

Yew are a Contradiction but refuse to C IT.

Ribbit

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:30 PM

Originally posted by Chamberf=6

Well...

When you say 2 + 3 = 23

There was a special ed kid in school that did that.

Of course I question.

It is obviously 5.

If the "+" operator is overloaded and used as a string concatenator, it's definitely "23".

Oh dear!

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:33 PM

two thirds is 66.6%

pure math, abstraction, goog*strikethrough* search engine these terms.

ed: I get the feeling no one is infact following either the links or reserarching the things of which I speak so I guess i'll just wait til someone other than toad man and I get it.
edit on 3/2/2012 by whatsinaname because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:33 PM

Originally posted by Chamberf=6

Originally posted by andersensrm

Originally posted by smyleegrl

However, I have one point to make. Your assuming that the law of matter is correct. I know that recent work in quantum physics has unconvered that certain "fundamental" laws of physics are now in question. I just read an article (I think on discovery.com but I'm not positive) that stated Einstein's speed of light, assumed to be a constant, in fact may be fluctuating.

Any way to break down your overall post into language for dummies? What do you mean when you mention space-time for numbers?

Sure the speed of light is fluctuating nothing is truly constant, and nothing is truly eternal.

Time IS the Absolute Constant by which All is defined!

But remember, your measurement of Time, is kNot Time, it is only the measurement of IT.

You know kNot Time because you've had One of the Three connections to IT blocked.

2 of 3 = 66.6% = 666

EveryOne bears the Mark, but you can't see it, because IT is within you!

Ribbit

...And yet you have been saying 2+3 =23.

How does that connect to 666??

2 of 3 = 66.6% = 666
2 of 3 = 23

Sew yew just realized EVERYTHING ties INTO the Number 23.

Yew must be taking yew'r smart pills now.

Ribbit

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:35 PM

Originally posted by The1Prettiest1One

Originally posted by Chamberf=6

Oh dear!

eYe's think Cham's don't want eYe to Replicate!

Ribbit

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:38 PM

2 of 3

Is much different (even you must concede) than the 2+3 you originally gave.

(in your? language ...ribbit?)

Sew yew just realized EVERYTHING ties INTO the Number 23.

When you change the rule every step, I guess whatever you want to be... is whatever you want.
edit on 2/3/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:38 PM
It's not the law of 23, it's the law of fives:

The Law of Fives states simply that: ALL THINGS HAPPEN IN FIVES, OR ARE DIVISIBLE BY OR ARE MULTIPLES OF FIVE, OR ARE SOMEHOW DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY APPROPRIATE TO 5.

The Law of Fives is never wrong(also, never cabbage).

Source

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:42 PM

never cabbage).

Much of the world would disagree.

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:45 PM

Originally posted by The1Prettiest1One
It's not the law of 23, it's the law of fives:

The Law of Fives states simply that: ALL THINGS HAPPEN IN FIVES, OR ARE DIVISIBLE BY OR ARE MULTIPLES OF FIVE, OR ARE SOMEHOW DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY APPROPRIATE TO 5.

The Law of Fives is never wrong(also, never cabbage).

Source

You could say the same thing about any number, Im not sure where all of you are trying to get at.

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:45 PM

Originally posted by Chamberf=6

never cabbage).

Much of the world would disagree.

Take it up with another pope! I always was a dissenter on that point.

9