Zero dimensional computable geometric logic

[JohnPhantom]

and how it relates to the elves...

Let me post this first, a youtube video of Terence McKenna describing what he thinks about schizophrenia:

I have schizophrenia, diagnosed soon after May 10th, 2001. I am diagnosed as bipolar with schizoaffective disorder, which is episodal schizophrenia. I went so deep the first time the doctors told my mother to prepare for me to be institutionalized for the rest of my life. Medication saved me. Because of this anti-psychotic medication, I can no longer take psychedelics, but I do medical MJ (on it for PTSD, I could also be on it for cirrhosis due to alcoholic hepatitis).

I have not done DMT, but I have done mushrooms twice before schizophrenia and twice after, and I have done LSD about half a dozen times in the 1990s before I became schizo. I had no problems with the LSD, quite happy trips. The first time I did shrooms it was about 1.5 grams, a friend and I split an eighth. It was mildly trippy and ok. Second time I did shrooms I got dosed with 17.5 grams. I ended up in the hospital. The two times I took mushrooms after having schizophrenia, and the one time I did 180 micrograms of LSD after having schizophrenia, I just got a headache and a bit of light headedness. BTW, on the 17.5 grams "God" talked to me, so I think I have had a breakthrough there too, besides my schizophrenia.

I plan to patent my work, I have a plan laid out and working models that need polishing and descriptions for the patent. It is just 15 words, and describes reality in a mechanically engineered way. I will fully share my work with you all if I am made a member, not that it really matters and I am sure I will get dead silence like I do from each and every other person/organization I have shown this to.

They do not say, "this won't work." A couple times I have gotten, "This is trickery!" to which I answer, "then why do the models work?" and get no answer in return.

It is too simple. It is too obvious. It's utter simplicity tests even me, who came up with it. Here is the DMT aspect: I hallucinated this engineering in reality in my deepest schizophrenic episode - reality seething with ever changing connections. My implementation requires constant intelligent input to operate - this is where the elves come in. Are the elves trying to show us what I will describe in detail, if you all allow me to?

 

[JohnPhantom]

I'd just like to add, you would all probably like what I dreamed in my deepest schizophrenic episode, my Philosophy of Nothing, or How To Build A Reality With My Theory Of Everything. It is only 20 lines long.

 

[Seeingisbelieving]

I'm not giving you the vote until you post your ideas. Mania is the best.

 

[JohnPhantom]

Logic Geometry: A computable logic that arises from how connections are made and/or broken over time. I don't think going into a full on description fits in this area of the site.

 

[unclebob]

I am sure that altered mental states can bring about deep insights that are otherwise hard to find. I would not be surprised to learn that many great discoveries and Nobel prizes came about with the help of mind altering substances. So, yes, maybe you have stumbled upon something that humanity has so far failed to see. The way to validate your ideas is to show them, write about them, publish them. There sure will be some open minded people out there who will take look, take their time to think about it, and maybe provide real, constructive feedback.

Love

 

[JohnPhantom]

So, yes, maybe you have stumbled upon something that humanity has so far failed to see. The way to validate your ideas is to show them, write about them, publish them. There sure will be some open minded people out there who will take look, take their time to think about it, and maybe provide real, constructive feedback.

Love

First off, thank you for taking the time to express yourself to me.

I am asking for you to let me tell you about this, here. I think the Theory of Everything belongs in the Science section and my Philosophy of Nothing belongs in the Philosophy section, do you agree?

 

[JohnPhantom]

BTW in my "adventures" with this over the past 20 years, due to a question I asked there was a new use for the ancient BC Chinese/Pascal's Triangle found, a simple mathematical construct, so simple it goes back to BC times. The explanation is simple, I took nothing into account as something that was real and had to be counted, and since they didn't have a representation for zero up until Arabic numerals, it was not thought of. I want to be clear that what I described in the messages above is not math. Everything logically computable we have is based on math, including our digital computers. If the 3 basic Boolean algebra logic gates operating on binary bits is the basis of our reality, then why don't these gates and bits show up in nature, ANYWHERE?

Think about it. How much of reality is based on connections, never mind the very atoms in your hand are connecting. It is the most fundamental thing you can come up with. I can perform math with this, it is like a highly automated abacus. I can also perform the permutations of the problem I presented that Pascal's Triangle can be used to solve.

I will present all of this, just give me permission.

 

[ephedra]

You should, first, define what you understand by "nature" in the context of your argumentation, could you define that?

 

[JohnPhantom]

You should, first, define what you understand by "nature" in the context of your argumentation, could you define that?

Everything we can perceive.

 

[Voidmatrix]

You should, first, define what you understand by "nature" in the context of your argumentation, could you define that?

Everything we can perceive.

There is, however, potentially more that we cannot perceive than of what we can...

Also, a great deal of what we perceive is limited by the perception to some degree.

One love

 

[JohnPhantom]

There is, however, potentially more that we cannot perceive than of what we can...

Also, a great deal of what we perceive is limited by the perception to some degree.

One love

Yes, even Einstein thought a 4th spatial dimension was possible, to explain gravity. Many scientists think there are more dimensions than we can perceive; the consensus seems to be 11 dimensions total. I think it is 10 spatial and 1 time, with many psychonauts thinking that the 12th dimension (to fit numerology) could be "God" or "The Higher Power" or "The Spirit" or whatever you call the possible overall encompassing entity that many think somehow exists.

Oh if your interested in numerology, my full birth name is the master number 11. You don't want to know what my Stanford-Binet Dr. tested IQ is, I literally have the mind of The Devil, if you believe that sort of thing.

 

[JohnPhantom]

Oh BTW my real name's meanings from GIS are "God is gracious" (obviously John) "conquering" (Vincent) "Trinity" (a variation on lily).

 

[Voidmatrix]

There is, however, potentially more that we cannot perceive than of what we can...

Also, a great deal of what we perceive is limited by the perception to some degree.

One love

Yes, even Einstein thought a 4th spatial dimension was possible, to explain gravity. Many scientists think there are more dimensions than we can perceive; the consensus seems to be 11 dimensions total. I think it is 10 spatial and 1 time, with many psychonauts thinking that the 12th dimension (to fit numerology) could be "God" or "The Higher Power" or "The Spirit" or whatever you call the possible overall encompassing entity that many think somehow exists.

Oh if your interested in numerology, my full birth name is the master number 11. You don't want to know what my Stanford-Binet Dr. tested IQ is, I literally have the mind of The Devil, if you believe that sort of thing.

Would you be so kind as to enlightening me as to why your IQ has been brought up? Seems like a non-sequitur.

I'm of a particular camp, that sees a certain class of statements made as less true by their being stated and more indicative of something outside said statement...

I also wouldn't entertain believing it or not because I don't really know you and find the attempt at objectifying something so abstract as laughable. I think there's some limited applicability, but is generally a farce with regard to how individuals try to utilize such "data." It's been far removed from its original intent.

That said, your concept should hold itself up and need not be bolstered by your claims on IQ. You've been requesting permission to share your idea. So, I would like you to share your idea with us.

One love

 

[JohnPhantom]

Would you be so kind as to enlightening me as to why your IQ has been brought up? Seems like a non-sequitur.

I'm of a particular camp, that sees a certain class of statements made as less true by their being stated and more indicative of something outside said statement...

I also wouldn't entertain believing it or not because I don't really know you and find the attempt at objectifying something so abstract as laughable. I think there's some limited applicability, but is generally a farce with regard to how individuals try to utilize such "data." It's been far removed from its original intent.

That said, your concept should hold itself up and need not be bolstered by your claims on IQ. You've been requesting permission to share your idea. So, I would like you to share your idea with us.

One love

What claim have I made on my IQ other than it being a 'demonic' number? You are projecting your beliefs.

It is not my attempt to objectify anything. I simply said what scientists believe. You have realize that science is real, and not everything is 'magic'.

I won't limit my thinking, you can if you want to.

 

[JohnPhantom]

You've been requesting permission to share your idea. So, I would like you to share your idea with us.

I've shared the full idea above. I call it "Logic Geometry". Like I have said here before, I don't think this is the place to describe and get into an in depth discussion about it.

 

[JohnPhantom]

It is too simple. It is too obvious. It's utter simplicity tests even me, who came up with it.

^^^ Like I said.

 

[Voidmatrix]

Would you be so kind as to enlightening me as to why your IQ has been brought up? Seems like a non-sequitur.

I'm of a particular camp, that sees a certain class of statements made as less true by their being stated and more indicative of something outside said statement...

I also wouldn't entertain believing it or not because I don't really know you and find the attempt at objectifying something so abstract as laughable. I think there's some limited applicability, but is generally a farce with regard to how individuals try to utilize such "data." It's been far removed from its original intent.

That said, your concept should hold itself up and need not be bolstered by your claims on IQ. You've been requesting permission to share your idea. So, I would like you to share your idea with us.

One love

What claim have I made on my IQ other than it being a 'demonic' number? You are projecting your beliefs.

It is not my attempt to objectify anything. I simply said what scientists believe. You have realize that science is real, and not everything is 'magic'.

I won't limit my thinking, you can if you want to.

I suppose an apology is in order as your prose and claim that I'm projecting and that I'm "limiting my thinking" shows you feeling attacked and insulted. Wasn't my intent.

It seems, and I could be wrong, that you're referring to the number of the beast. So, then, a claim that your IQ is 666 has been made...

IQ metric is an attempt to objectify intelligence... Also not all scientists believe the same things, which, among other things, is why paradigm shifts in scientific fields happen, to state it simply...

And apologies again. I thought there was going to be more to it than what was stated, which doesn't describe much imo. I was, erroneously, expecting and looking forward to more. I suppose I'll revisit if you decide to go into more depth, though you say it's not worth doing so here... so there may be no revisitation.

Apologies again. Be well.

One love

 

[JohnPhantom]

It seems, and I could be wrong, that you're referring to the number of the beast. So, then, a claim that your IQ is 666 has been made...

You are wrong. My IQ is a number.66666666~. If you ask me to explain, you will not like it and complain, like you are doing now.

I thought there was going to be more to it than what was stated, which doesn't describe much imo. I was, erroneously, expecting and looking forward to more. I suppose I'll revisit if you decide to go into more depth, though you say it's not worth doing so here... so there may be no revisitation.

Again:

It is too simple. It is too obvious. It's utter simplicity tests even me, who came up with it.

^^^ Like I said.

 

[Voidmatrix]

This will be my last post here. I don't see any complaining on my part. Sharing my observations and position, in an attempt to understand more.

Again, apologies. You feel attacked. I have an incisive side, which has clearly been a bit much to you.

Again, be well my friend. Keep developing ideas. They're welcome here.

One love

 

[JohnPhantom]

I should mention this theory of everything I have is a common symptom of schizophrenia. It is called, "Apophenia". Dictionary: the tendency to perceive a connection or meaningful pattern between unrelated or random things (such as objects or ideas). Look to the movie A Beautiful Mind to see it in action.

We all do this to some degree.