Prev: two limits to speed: speed of light and upper limit of slow speed #596 Correcting Math
Next: I am groovy
From: John Stafford on 13 Apr 2010 21:04
In article
<71b45b8e-ef82-419a-a5ce-73f961890c9d(a)e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
ta <tapadlr(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 13, 8:53�pm, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
> > In article
> > <a3b72a1c-3b67-4795-ad44-d03ed4c5c...(a)u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > �ta <tapa...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Apr 13, 7:43�pm, John Jones <jonescard...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
> >
> > (If the attributes are wrong, then please forgive)
> >
> > > > Can harmless imagination find nonsense in the studied utterances of
> > > > humankind?
> >
> > > It depends on how much acid you're on.
> >
> > Ya! But after 55 or-so-years of the experiences of that THANG it all
> > settles out into our dream of <insert PERSONAL_THANG_here>.
>
> All I know is 3 is the magic number:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxmKRyLdBho

That works for me. Thank you.
From: bigfletch8 on 13 Apr 2010 23:36
On Apr 14, 7:43 am, John Jones <jonescard...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
> Like the operating range of notes that can be played on particular
> musical instruments, numbers, too, have an operating range. Here are
> some ways in which that range is limited.
>
> 1. The number nine has a greater range than the number one. 9 goes
> further than 1 because it expresses larger numbers for the same number
> of signs. For example, 9999 uses four signs, whereas 10000 (which is one
> larger than 9999) uses five signs.
>
> 2. For the mathematician, the operating range of all the numbers goes no
> further than infinity. It would be a mistake for them to deny this as it
> would mean that one goes no further than zero.
>
> 3. One can go no further than zero of course, - we must expand the
> definition of numbers if we want to count monad or solitary objects.
> Such objects are not countable. Thus, an expansion of the definition of
> number to include all worldly objects places limits on Peano's successor
> axiom.
>
> It is because of this that numbers are antecedent to the Peano axioms,
> or at least antecedent to the axiom of succession which states that one
> number follows another. Clearly, in the case of the monad object, no
> number follows zero, which makes the Peano axioms arbitarily restrictive
> in their description of physical possibility. Amen.
>
> Can harmless imagination find nonsense in the studied utterances of
> humankind?

You would appreciate a visit to the Pythagorean mystery school.

People 'are' music. All vibrating at different freqencies, either
harmoniously or inharmoniously. They are each a walking orchestra,
each one conducting either knowingly or unknowingly.

Group consciousness,by the above definition, involve mutual
conducting. "I'll dictate to you, but you must dictate to me". The
dance of musical karma.

And the beat "ALWAYS' goes on...

BOfL
From: bigfletch8 on 13 Apr 2010 23:37
On Apr 14, 7:48 am, Sir Frederick <mmcne...(a)fuzzysys.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:43:17 +0100, John Jones <jonescard...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >Can harmless imagination find nonsense in the studied utterances of
> >humankind?
>
> How about this "utterance" :
> "The fact of existence is utter nonsense."

How about the existence of fact...and are you about to express
one ?;-)

BOfL
From: bigfletch8 on 13 Apr 2010 23:38
On Apr 14, 8:57 am, ta <tapa...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 13, 8:53 pm, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <a3b72a1c-3b67-4795-ad44-d03ed4c5c...(a)u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >  ta <tapa...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Apr 13, 7:43 pm, John Jones <jonescard...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > (If the attributes are wrong, then please forgive)
>
> > > > Can harmless imagination find nonsense in the studied utterances of
> > > > humankind?
>
> > > It depends on how much acid you're on.
>
> > Ya! But after 55 or-so-years of the experiences of that THANG it all
> > settles out into our dream of <insert PERSONAL_THANG_here>.
>
> All I know is 3 is the magic number:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxmKRyLdBho

Particularly three of them.

BOfL
From: Zerkon on 14 Apr 2010 05:26
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:43:17 +0100, John Jones wrote:

> 9 goes further
> range ..goes no further
> one goes no further than zero
> One can go no further than zero

Hey, what about 'come'?

2. For the mathematician, the operating range of all the numbers comes no
further than infinity. It would be a mistake for them to deny this as it
would mean that one comes no further than zero

Dance?

2. For the mathematician, the operating range of all the numbers dances
no further than infinity. It would be a mistake for them to deny this as
it would mean that one dances no further than zero


What else? "Like the operating range of notes that can be played.."

"Played notes" interestingly opening up the aspect of harmonics and
overtones. Number harmonic occurring by a relationship with zero.

Numbers go/come/dance/play through medium of zero?

> Can harmless imagination find nonsense in the studied utterances of
> humankind?

I believe this question now has been answered.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: two limits to speed: speed of light and upper limit of slow speed #596 Correcting Math
Next: I am groovy