The Orlando sacirifce in preparation for the BRexit vote

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: TerminalVelocity

You insist that we have to have language to have numbers.

You said that numbers are a language.

only if they're spoken or written. You can understand basic addition without writing or verbalisation.

How can you understand that language without oh I don't know.... words?

Recognition. If there are 4 fingers do you count them or just recognise them as being 4?

1 is a word. One.

1 stick on the ground is still one, yet we don't need to write or say it for it to be true.

How can I possibly understand the number 1 without the word 1?

Becauee 1 is what we use to describe the amount of whatevers.

They are intrinsic it is undeniable they go hand and hand. You cannot have one without the other.

Yes you can. 1 stick is still 1 stick wether or not it is stated.

The word itself is math it is a shape it is geometry, our mind works on geometry on words on math.

Facts.

The word isn't math. The word is a description that we have allocated (in many different languages) to describe what 1 is.

a reply to: TerryDon79

What is four?

You can't have experience without language(geometry).

It's literally the basis of the esoteric arts it's called sacred geometry and it's what ALL of the mystery schools practice even the masons.

Kabbalist knew this, or Jewish Mystics.

It's also why the bible refers to creation as the "word".

You better believe this idea does not start with me.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: TerryDon79

What is four?

An English description of how many things there are.

a reply to: onequestion

Math is a language into itself, and it's universal language as far as the universe is concerned.

1 is an expression. Not a word.

"One" is a word, in the english language, "Uno" in another language.

However, 1 is a expression and a constant, but is not a word. You do not need to understand the word, to understand the expression.

Language is a construct of humans and life.

Math is a construct of the universe, and came well before any language ever.

The speed of light in a vacuum has always been 186,000 miles per second. That expression and construct has existed since the universe began.

The words used to state that expression by us didn't come about until very recently.

Sorry but: math existed well before language ever did.

And math is not numerology.

a reply to: TerryDon79

4 = four.

a reply to: onequestion

And IV and IIII and quatro. All represent an integer value.
Hell in binary it's 100.

a reply to: onequestion

Yes, you can. There will be 4 no matter if there's an observer or not. There will also be 4 in whatever languages there are in the world.

Something I have noticed is that this "geometry" stuff only works with the American English. Use British English and it falls apart.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: TerryDon79

4 = four.

4=neljä

a reply to: TerminalVelocity

Math is a language into itself, and it's universal language as far as the universe is concerned.

1 is an expression. Not a word.

It's both an expression and a word you cannot experience an expression logically (in your mind) without a geometric conduit (word).

Every number has a form, when you count something your using words to count not numbers, numbers are words.

The word, in the bible, it comes from Jewish Mystics who were Kabbalist who create Hebrew with the understanding that everything is geometry(math) and that you cannot have numbers without form.

No form = no numbers.

Words(language) = geometry = math.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:1

a reply to: onequestion

Every number has a form, when you count something your using words to count not numbers, numbers are words.

No. There are words which represent numbers. Numbers can be represented by a variety of words (and numbers if you change the base, 4 = 100 in binary).

a reply to: Phage

You cannot have numbers without form.

It's impossible.

a reply to: onequestion
Prove it.
Oh, wait. Skunk works. Scratch that.

What form does the number "i" have? And yes, it is a number. It represents the square root of -1. There's some math for you.

a reply to: Phage

The form they have in english is....

i

and

-1

See this is where language came from.

They began as marks on a wall that morphed into much much much more.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Phage

You cannot have numbers without form.

It's impossible.

Let's say there are 7 planets. If there were no humans there would still be 7 planets, but no human to state that there were 7.

That means that the number of planets haven't changed, but haven't been given a word to describe how many there are. There would still be 7.

a reply to: onequestion

No. Not -1.
The square root of -1. Draw it for me.

a reply to: TerryDon79

This has nothing to do with the observer. That's an entirely separate thread.

a reply to: onequestion

If you're going to start quoting the bible to prove your point, instead of actual science and math......time for me to leave.

Just keep this in mind: numbers, constants and expressions existed well before any human.

And no....not everything has form. Gas and water do not. They form into whatever outside force shapes them. They have mass and density, atomic weights......but no form on their own.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: TerryDon79

This has nothing to do with the observer. That's an entirely separate thread.

You said that number need a form. They don't. My example proves they don't as they would still be there and there would still be 7 of them.

You also keep failing to address why "freemasonic" has 2 different numbers. If it was a "sacred geometry" there would be only 1 number.

a reply to: TerryDon79

How can seven planets exist if there isn't 7 planets?

There has to be a planet. A planet is a form, usually an orb or sphere.

a reply to: TerryDon79

If there's nothing to count then there are no numbers.

They require form.

Sorry this is getting childish and ridiculous.

This is your ego telling you that you need to prove me wrong more important than it is to intellectually recognize the truth.