The meaning of meaning

[ArturoDekko]

overview of logics

There are 50 logics in 2 mirrored sets of 25. 
e.g.-The logic for existance, A=A, has an inverse for non-existance, A≠A.

There are 5 dimensional levels. 
e.g.-The mathematics of the movement of a point on a line is different from the math of the movement of a point on a plane.

There are 5 essences.
-The 5 essences and their antonyms, expressed on 5 dimensional levels create the 50 logics.

Levels- 0 dimensions- describes objects as a single point. All things exist. Includes formal logic as a subset plus extra logics which take you to-


 - 1 dimension- describes logics of linear (quantitative) change. All things change. Includes dialectic logic as a subset plus extra logics to describe the limits of change leading to-


 - 2 dimensions- describes planar (qualitative) change. Change within limits must cycle. As all things change, change itself must change within limits, resulting in cycles. Describes the interaction of cycles and leads to-


 - 3 dimensions- continual cycles create rhythm (simply visualised as a spiral in 3-space). Describes resonance and harmony. Rhythms interact with other rhythms to create pattern-


 - 4 dimensions- The collective rhythms of the cycles of change of an object identify it uniquely and completely.

The 5 essences are Singularity, Duality, Similarity, Difference and Unity.


Singularity describes the ability of objects to exist as individual, identifiable things. There must be existence.


Duality describes the 2-fold nature of reality. All existance is relatiive. All things must change.


Similarity describes the connection between 2 relative objects. The connections between objects creates structure within which change occurs. Integral calculus.


Difference describes the separation of objects accross their similarity. Difference creates the force of change. Differential calculus.


Unity describes the ability of 2 or more things to exist as a one thing.

The five essences, collectively, describe the minimum conditions for existence and their compounded expression through all dimensional levels is all that is necessary to generate the complexity we know as reality.

Examples- There is nothing wrong with formal and dialectic logic as long as we understand their limits within any particular context. Formal logic can only describe static, unchanging objects. Dialectic logic can only describe simple linear, constant change, hence Hegelian/Marxian dialectcs is a sham.



- We are normally only aware of change. We cease to notice things if they do not change. By careful study of that which doesn't change we find the five essences which manifest in all things. Remove the differences and only the similarities remain.



-The dimensionality of our everyday life is more complex than we are normally aware of. A film showing on a computer or television screen is made up of pixels which have colour that can be expressed as a point in 3-dimensional colour space.
Plus the dimension of time - 4D
Plus 2-dimensions for the pixels position on the planar screen - 6D 

Plus 3-dimensions of sound gives a 9 dimensional complexity.



-We recognise an oak tree by its pattern even though each tree is variation of that pattern.

-The protease enzyme recognises the pattern of a genetic marker to produce RNA



-Each planet responds to the pattern of the orbits of the other planets and collectively they form a meta-pattern



-In Plato's allegory of the cave, the hero turns to face the sun that is causing the shaddows on the cave that others think of as reality. For me, the sun, in this analogy, is the number One whose final expression of its total complexity within the limits of its logical reality produces the universe we see before us. There is simplicity in complexity and complexity in simplicity.



-The evolution of the human psyche both historically and individually is the intuitive sequential realisation of the logics 

1- we are born with an awareness that we exist 

2- we realise our separation from our mother 

3- we realise our similarities to others. We think that they think and know the same things as us 

4- we realise that others have a different perspective and may not think or know as we do 

5- we realise that others have a different perspective of ourselves and that we can influence that perspective 

+ 20 more

AD

[jobsaboba]

Aravat - nice quote. The Lazy Mans Guide?
If you put your claim of existence with your previous comment on existence, then you too are eternal.
There is more you can say with certainty:
I exist.
I exist relative to something. That is, something else exists as well otherwise you would not know you exist.
That relativity is also a thing.
There is a specific difference between you and the thing you are relative to, a fourth thing.
These four things form an inseparable whole which is a fifth thing.

These five thing form what could be called a nugget of existence which itself exist and so can be put back into the formula. Nugget + related other + relationship + difference + their unity = Bigger nugget. ad inf.

Here is the same argument a little more systematically:
Essentially, what I have done is defined the minimum unit of existence and then followed the undeniable consequences of that. This can be shown in many ways, here is just one.
Here goes: Start by imagining nothing and into that nothing put something. That something has no qualities as yet, no dimensions, it is a zero point. We call this point A. The first recognition here is that there can be no existence without something to exist relative to, so if A exists, there must be a B such that A ≠ B. Now you should have two points labelled A and B. Two points define a line and this line represents the dimension which relates A to B. This line is the third thing, C, in this definition. Now recognise that the two points are separate on the line by a distance. That difference is the fourth thing, D. Now recognise that these four things are inseparable, no thing can exist without these four components, that these four things are a unit and that unit is the fifth thing, E, such that A + B + C + D = E. The Absolute plus the Binary plus the Connection plus the Difference equals the Envelope.
Now we return to the beginning and recognise that A could never have been a dimensionless point and must always have been a unit as just described, composed of four things, and that it must be an infinitesimal point. Following through the same logics repeatedly will define an infinitesimal point of increasing complexity. Here we access the magic of the infinitesimal: Any summation of infinitesimals will always be an infinitesimal and any infinitesimal is always infinitely divisible. Do I need to explain the relevance of Godel here?
I will pause here to gauge your reaction. I am hoping you will recognise that what I have said is undeniable and must always be true. When I got to this point, I suddenly realised that is means this and this... and the complete logics unfolded before me over a period of time.
That is a partial view of the first line of logic regarding existence. There are four more lines; change, cyclicity, resonance and pattern.

jobsaboba -
Any understanding can be found within The Foundation but The Foundation cannot entirely be found within any other understanding. This is the trump card.

AD

And thus it begins.......


Jobs

[Phil: C]

Aravat - nice quote. The Lazy Mans Guide?
, no, Kahlil Gibran, from his book The Prophet.

I'm enjoying this, I only know one other person that I can have such exchanges with.
Phil.

[Phil: C]

AD, I'm still trying to grasp your meaning, but a couple of things strike me:

Start by imagining nothing and into that nothing put something. That something has no qualities as yet (presupposes the existence of time), no dimensions, it is a zero point (then it might as well not exist, it's the same as nothing!).

Pete wrote:

I know 'THE answer - want me to tell you...?'

Isaac Asimov (NWO shill?) wrote a short story in which the ultimate supercomputer was invented, which could answer all questions, and the first one put to it was "does God exist?"
The machine chugged and whirred away for a while and then answered, "I do now"!
Phil.

[jobsaboba]

close your eyes, and quietly try to imagine that you dont exsist........
that is the point........
all things come from that point.....
just imagine.......

jobs

[Phil: C]

close your eyes, and quietly try to imagine that you dont exsist........
that is the point........
all things come from that point.....
just imagine.......

jobs

But I will be aware of trying to imagine I don't exist, so unless I imagine myself out of existence I will never succeed! Or is it the trying that's important? Sorry, I'm very literal minded!
Phil.

[jobsaboba]

sorry phil my bad...

the point is you cannot imagine you dont exsist, fear causes the trembles (earthquake) and the mind races into exsistence.. (lightning) it is the source of all material exsistence.

The main reason for the troubles with our planet is because we have stopped believing in it.

and as we come from this planet, made of the same stuff and its all relative, it follows the same course.

of course once it is clearly understood, we can move on and allow the planet to pass to its next stage, as we do when we understand that the physical body is simply an idea we created from our imagination.

jobs

[Phil: C]

Ah, now I see! Thanks Jobs.

[ArturoDekko]

Cheers jobs. I did start out trying to prove I did not exist - proof by invalidation of the negative. I succeeded in proving that we cannot prove there is a past or a future or even anything "outside" of us. In other words we cannot prove we exist as physical beings. The only thing I could validate was that there is this moment and we experience it. Will expand more on this later.

Avarat

AD, I'm still trying to grasp your meaning, but a couple of things strike me:

Start by imagining nothing and into that nothing put something. That something has no qualities as yet (presupposes the existence of time), no dimensions, it is a zero point (then it might as well not exist, it's the same as nothing!).

Pete wrote:

I know 'THE answer - want me to tell you...?'

Isaac Asimov (NWO shill?) wrote a short story in which the ultimate supercomputer was invented, which could answer all questions, and the first one put to it was "does God exist?"
The machine chugged and whirred away for a while and then answered, "I do now"!
Phil.

Well spotted and and the assumption of time is one of the trickiest to avoid, also the assumption of space. As soon as we put a zero point in the void we naturally assume it is somewhere in space. For the purpose of contemplation, I allow the point to be there while I contemplate but its reality is only there for an infinitesimal moment. Yes, it almost does not exist which is why it is infinitesimal and not zero. 1/∞ ≠ 0 (one divided by infinity does not equal zero)
Also there can not be nothing. There is existence; existence is possible; if there were some place/time/other dimension where existence is not, it is still possible; that possibility is itself a form of existence; every possibility has a probability; possibility x probability = potential; existence is that potential manifest.

I remember that Asimov story. When things are explained more fully, I hope someone will understand that the sequence of logics can be interpreted as a computer program. I believe that such a program, given enough computing power, memory, data and allowed to interact with the "real world" could replicate sentience which relies on the degree of complexity. I will expand this later but Godel showed that no matter how simple a system is, as soon as it becomes self-referential paradox occurs. Our consciousness is such a paradox. Current computing practice does all it can to avoid self-referentiallity. The Foundation program would be deliberately self-referential, allowed to make mistakes and learn by itself just as we do.
Consciousness is merely a degree of complexity of self-referentiallity. Everything is self-referential other wise it would not exist. It is only the degree of fractal complexity of the soul that give us the edge over the rest of the manifest. I believe there are higher degrees of consciousness awaiting us.

AD

[ArturoDekko]

The main reason for the troubles with our planet is because we have stopped believing in it.

and as we come from this planet, made of the same stuff and its all relative, it follows the same course.

of course once it is clearly understood, we can move on and allow the planet to pass to its next stage, as we do when we understand that the physical body is simply an idea we created from our imagination.

jobs[/quote]

Well said sir.

AD