I remember an interview where Andrew Basiago said he met Martians and they had a different way of doing math. Like 1+1=3
Anyone have information on this or other planets way of doing math?

>>40670762 (OP)
i think richard hoagland said martians had different math too

>>40671536
based

>>40670762 (OP)
>>40671536
interesting topic im surprised its not brought up more

>>40670762 (OP)
>1+1=3
Martians are communist?

1. **Set-Based Math with Overlap (The "1+1=3" System):**
* **Core Idea:** Objects are counted based on their *boundaries* or *connection points*, not as distinct, isolated units. When two objects connect, the connection point itself is counted as an additional entity.
* **How 1+1=3 Works:**
* Imagine two separate pebbles (Martian "1"s). Each is a distinct set: {Pebble1}, {Pebble2}.
* Now, bring them together until they touch. A new entity emerges: the *connection point* or *boundary* between them.
* The combined system isn't just Pebble1 + Pebble2. It's Pebble1 + Connection + Pebble2. Hence, 1 + 1 = 3.
* **Addition:** Combining sets creates new entities at the interfaces. 2 + 2 (two pairs touching) might equal 6 (4 objects + 2 connection points).
* **Geometry:** Area/volume calculations would be wildly different. The "size" of two overlapping circles wouldn't be Area1 + Area2 - Overlap (like us), but Area1 + Area2 + PerimeterOfOverlap (or something similar), valuing the boundary created.
* **Equality (`=`):** Might represent a state of stable connection or equilibrium rather than strict numerical identity. "1 + 1 = 3" means combining two units *results in* a stable system of three components.

>>40670762 (OP)
can I please go to the timeline where this guy became president in 2016

>>40670762 (OP)
>1+1=3
So these martians are just as retarded as the grifter making it up?

>>40674469
Do you glowfucks even think before you write the dumbest shit . I’m not surprised you think every planet is exactly like your backwards ass settlements. Stop stealing Palestinians land

>>40674265
so how would you represent the number 2? seems like a pretty fundamental and useful concept

>>40674590
The numbers 2 is still just the number 2 but they value different things than our simpler method. 2 pebbles connecting form a third value. How come you guys can’t understand this? It’s not that complicated when explained by AI

>>40670762 (OP)
So Martians suck at math?

>>40674677
apparently they can do our math easi r than we can do there’s so most species would say they’re better. I love how you guys can’t understand stuff but still call it dumb. Why would aliens not want people like you to teach them stuff? Fucking brilliant

So if there are two Martians, and they each want one donut, do they ask for three? Or five, since it's two martians plus two donuts? Is the 1 + 1 = 3 thing only for more advanced concepts, not the day to day of morning pastries?

Is multiplication 2 x 2 = 7 (2 x 2 = 4 plus 3 connections) or is it 2 x 2 = 10 (3 x 3 = 9 plus 1 connection) or is it 2 x 2 = 9 (3 x 3 = 9 x 1 = 9)?

>>40674788
Just two unless they dip it in coffee, then the coffee stained donut interaction becomes the third object

>>40674788
The question is whether Martian culture prioritizes counting isolated objects or relationship networks.

>>40674652
> It’s not that complicated when explained by AI
chatGPT, explain martian arithmetic to me
what's a useful computation that you can do with this?

This thread is offensive.
I think you guys should stop making fun of people you know nothing about.

>>40674956
Don’t be so sensitive mars boy and help us figure this shit out

>>40674924
Yes, that was my question.

>>40674950
Start with 1 plus 1 equals 3. Then use richard Hoaglands work for more complex equations

>>40674788
> All math is a tool shaped by culture.

Humans optimize for objects (donuts as countable units).
Martians optimize for connections (donuts as relationship nodes).
Neither is "correct"—both solve different problems.
Here’s AI take

>>40670762 (OP)
The bare principle will be the same, although they may have a different base when it comes to how count. E.g. with 8 fingers they will likely have a base-8 number system.

Study number theory / numerolgy and discrete mathematics. No this is not some skizo shit, this is a branch of mathematics which asserts that discrete methods of counting are universal by necessity and that other forms of math such as 1 + 1 = 3 are not possible.

>>40675093
I wasn't talking about which one is correct. I was asking how to do Martian math correctly, which you haven't answered. It's about relationships, not objects. Check, we've established that many times over. So if Martian A goes to get the donuts while Martian B gases up the saucer, does Martian A ask for one, two, three, or four donuts? And what does Martian B owe him?

>>40675133
Just popped in the thread stop acting like a schizo. I was only trying to help you because you lack the ability to understand this stuff.

>>40675133
Dude people already answered you, 2 donuts plus 1 interaction N. It’s not hard to understand retard

stop picking on the dumb anon
it’s not his fault he is like this, they were just raised this way

>>40674265
This is just node graphs and their edges lol, we already have and use this everywhere

>>40675252
That makes sense that the e would have a similar system. You’re missing a lot of details by acting like us having a system that approximates their math but it isn’t our main way of seeing the world.

>>40670762 (OP)
ITT
Right handed people struggle to understand a holistic approach to mathematics
This way intuitively makes sense to me as a lefty

>>40675298
It's the same system. It's basically pure logic like >>40675102 notes. Most people don't learn anything about it because education systems worldwide are massively underfunded and geared towards producing lowest common denominator worker drones to fuel the capitalist hegemony.

The Ummo letters describe a system that uses vectors instead of integers. I neither understand nor remember the details.

>>40675318
>not quite but I understand why you would think that if you can’t see the whole picture. Which makes sense from your use of “lol”
I agree with the blame on public schools but your parents also let you guys down.

>>40675318
other anons are right
your example is flawed
edges are secondary to nodes but in the Martian example relationships are equal to objects

For any of you
on a paranormal message board
trying to prove "math" is prefect and doesn't have a single flaw some alien on another planet could figure out even if your silly little earth brain was simply incapable of pretending to imagine even as a "daydream"

>go fuck yourself asshole

for the rest of you
I'm not some educated "expert" in the field
I'm some common every day shit poster on 4chan

who doesn't let
the powers that be
tell me how "math" works

and I came up with this on my own
see pic related
which as the file names states is "made up bullshit"

and I can tell
because it's my bullshit
I'm the one who made it up

so if a common every day
shit poster
on 4chan

can make something like that up
even if it is
bullshit

what could someone
way smarter then me
come up with

if they also
don't let the powers that be
tell them how math works

>things that make me go hmm...

A system of math based on bonds over objects would probably have far reaching effects on society. It’s hard for people who are constantly thinking in terms of objects owned. Imagine a tax system based on something like this? Where more bonds (frens, family, coworkers means you pay less. Being isolated would mean paying more. Just as an example

>>40675530
that's a base-9 number system. you're not gonna get infinite decimal points when you divide an integer by a factor of the base. same rules as what we normally use, just with the numbers written differently

>>40675634
no
it's made up bullshit
you are confusing with a base-9 number system

someone
way smarter then me
probably came up with

likely even
before
I was born

>there is a difference which has to do with my version being the "fake" one and educated folks having figured out more then I have

>>40675319
>alien math system based on 12 base numbers and energy flow vectors
interesting. I’m going to dive into this one. Thank you

>>40670762 (OP)
>other planets way of doing math?

CCRU/Nick Land's Zygonomous Numeracy

https://s3.amazonaws.com/arena-attachments/87219/29b7c329ccc9cd085365d8b871743657.pdf?1363272401

https://mvupress.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/One_Two_Many_On_Nick_Lands_Numbering_Practices.pdf

>>40670762 (OP)
>and they had a different way of doing math. Like 1+1=3
oh shit, this that Terrence Howard math!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdxpwOEC4fk

>>40675750
>alien math that uses base 12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqGyUvZP0Zg

>>40675865
Howard was 1 x 1 =2 which is closer to ummo letters

>>40675102
This based on faulty assumptions
If alien life exists, it’s likely diverse with some species valuing the same things as us and others being on the opposite end of the spectrum

>>40670762 (OP)
Consequences of not beating the shit outta kids for wrong answers in schools.
If there are 2 random stars we see from here, what objective "connection point" would there be between them if someone on earth observes them as 1+1 star?

>>40676418
>no aliens have to use object focused math
>they can’t value connections and flow as equal to objects

>>40674495
>Everyone who disagrees with me is a government agent
How about you shut the fuck up and take your meds? You're clearly incapable of logic or reason and will cling to whatever grifter bullshit that aligns with your insecurities. You're not special, just some schizo retard looking for validation from other schizo retards. You're stupid enough to believe some grifting fraud I bet you also believed Trump when he said he'd disclose aliens too, fucking dumbass lol.

>>40676463
to be fair if you’re shitting up this thread you are definitely a glowie. this is a new thread idea I’ve never seen mentioned anywhere else. we should be bumping and encouraging but op has been attacked left and right for just considering what alien math might be like. It’s an interesting thought experiment that only makes you smarter. why would anyone get offended at this thread? it’s probably never getting posted again after it dies. you glow bright as fuck or your just miserable that we don’t have more nobody generals?
let op cook, faggot

>>40670762 (OP)
>1+1=3
Yes. I did, and posted about it a lot on /sci/. Its not Arithmetic, its more of a Geometric Physics equation, but rooted in Number Theory, which I base in Physics Metrology.

Each one of those fields have to be connected and cited for the Math to pan out, also, I did it again but made it =? because it is infinite and unknowable, but rooted in Arithmetic, by redefining the number 1 as a proportional appoximation of Pi. This was done when I calculated the entirety of Pi as part of Euler's Identity and correlated it to brain Cognition with Pure Mathematics.

The reason the "techonology" isnt released is because the ones controlling it would invalidate their power structure in doing so...that is the "social, economic, or techically disruptive nature".

>>40675465
>>40675477
The only difference is categorisation of types. It's the same number of "things" in total. It's quite literally a semantic difference.
lol

>>40676583
No it’s more than you little bitch. You’re so stupid you can’t even comprehend a value system outside your own. Nodes and edges isn’t the same despite whatAI told you. You need to be 18 to post here and not repost obvious AI shit

>>40676583
>lol
Fuck you pansy bitch

>>40675102
>base-8 number system
Or the other Base-8, Vortex Mathematics, where Zero doesnt exist (or that it does but is a non-null value approaching infinitesimal.)

>>40676601
>>40676605
Would it help if I said the graph edges were on Mars?

>>40676616
>non-null value approaching infinitesimal
https://youtu.be/JU9ICaPZUCg

>>40676503
This isnt alien math it's just some idiot who thinks 1+1=3 what are we even saying here?
Dissenting opinions and calling someone out isn't indicative of a government agent. And anyone willing to think that needs to seek help and clearly suffer from paranoid delusions. You honestly think feds are here to debunk 1+1=3? Come on, man.

Glowies attack and then when you point out this is a unique and interesting topic they send in namefags
Flerfer posts are probably next but the glowies don’t know how to handle this because no one ever posts about martian math on this website

>>40676637
Are you serious? It’s just a hypothetical. No one is saying Basiago was right, they’re only considering the possibility. Why are you so angry at this topic? You guys are freaking out over the coolest idea alive seen her in months

>>40676646
Paranoid delusions.

>>40676622
It would help if you had an IQ over 75

>>40676646
>they send in
Do you work in Number Theory, Advanced or Abstract Arithematic, Metrology, or Theoretical or Mathematical Physics?

Mayhaps you should focus less on your ego driven intuition...it led you to believe your own LARP.

>>40676660
>anime poster
>glowie shill
>wont debate but insults instead

>>40676666
You’re using a name on this Antarctic penguin milking board?
Cult of passion you are a chump and everyone tells you that everyday
Get a life you nasty Jewish piece of shit

>>40676655
You cannot infer what I feel through my posts, stop projecting. You're clearly upset because I don't believe in this stupid crap that has no foundation besides hearsay and some moron using their lack of understanding kindergarten math as an example.

>>40676664
Sorry, you're right, 1+1=3 even in human math even though numbers and their connections are different types of object and naively summing multiple types destroys the meaning and utility inherent in distinguishing between types at all. The entire history of math and logic and computer science is wrong.
• posted from my iPhone

>>40676669
What is there to debate? You can't be serious. Just calling me a glowie does nothing but prove you're a schizo and need help.

>>40676677
>using a name
Because if you out one on people will remember the retarded shit you say in other threads and your LARP will be up.
>a chump
Psycho-Social heirarchy power play, youre socially driven, like a woman or small boy.
>everyone tells you
The society is the one you see as poweful, so you attribute it with yourself, as you have to it, like a woman.
>Get a life
Im in Armenia on my way to Iran, but the war started so Im staying put for a couple months while I do Genetic and Cognition research on;
>Jewish
Adam and Eve, the Son. There was another "walking" in the Garden. The Father. Adam was passive, while Eve the protagonist. Matriarchal lineage.

You must be talking about Israelites, the nose-Jews, you know...the ones the Bible says "will claim to be Jews but are not".

If...only you knew anything about any topic you speak of, but its all controlled opposition propaganda, a golem's directive you have swallowed...*gulp*.

>>40675019
hmh as I suspected, you're a retarded faggot who can't say anything useful

>>40670762 (OP)
>Implying mars exists.
Choke on a dick jew

>>40677445
What makes you say it doesn't

>>40676714
>the Bible says
Your racism is cringe but it's not as cringe as your total incomprehension of your own sacred text. The passage you're quoting is referring to specific sects found in two cities in the 1st century AD. It's nothing to do with your bizarre 19th-century British Israelite race theories. Look up the context on the Savior's quote or stop quoting Him.

This concept of 1+1=3 kind of makes sense, considering relationship as a third entity, where every pair of objects makes a kind of "relationship object" to be counted, but it quickly becomes complicated.

For example, if I had a bag of 10 pebbles, would an alien count it as a bag of 55 objects?
(10 pebbles have 45 unique pairings, plus 10)

And if I handed an alien a bag and said "there's 55 objects in here" would he know there are 10 objects plus 45 pairings?

How would a relationship be determined? A standard would need to be established or it could go on forever, is the bag holding the pebbles a relationship too? What about the alien holding it?

Maybe if the system was strictly only about including paired relationships it could work, but then, another problem:

I could hand an alien a bag of 10 pebbles and say to him "this bag contains 55 objects" that's not very clear. What are the objects? I would have to explicitly state :
"This bag has 10 pebbles, with 45 relationships, making 55 objects"
Or would I just say, "this bag contains 10 pebbles" and leave it to the alien to infer that there are 55 objects?

It seems there would still need to be a standard counting system, to establish that there was 10 pebbles in the first place, and then a relationship counting system where the pairings are added to the classic system, otherwise how would you know whether 10 meant 10 objects or 4 objects plus 6 relationships?

It seems like our classical counting system would be the baseline counting system, since you would be required to know the number of actual objects before you can count the number of relationships.

So I'm not sure what benefit this alien system would have because:

It's an added complexity because you'd need to use 2 systems
Theres potential ambiguity on what a relationship actually is
Numbers would quickly become huge. 100 pebbles is already 5050 objects.

So, it seems only beneficial as a complimentary system, similar to systems we use already like

>>40678678
>So, it seems only beneficial as a complimentary system, similar to systems we use already like

Like in certain graphs where edges are considered a relationship.

>>40678678
Continuing:

Some replies in this thread seem to suggest that in this alien society they don't use classic system at all, but that doesn't make sense.

Say for example, in this society, they all know that a bag of 10 pebbles is actually 6 pebbles with 4 relationships, so they always say "here is a bag of 10 pebbles" and everyone can deduce the number of objects to the number of pebbles based on unique pairs, then, they'd STILL NEED TO BE TAUGHT THE CLASSICAL SYSTEM in order to deduce "there are 6 Peebles and 4 relationships.

Deducing large numbers would be complex too
Here's a bag of 5050 pebbles (100 pebbles +4950 relationships) the equation gets complicated. Even for just 100 pebbles you'd need to use quadratic equations, and you'd constantly have to work out the total from the baseline count, for everything.
You could argue that a more intelligent species could find this simple, but it still seems like an unnecessary layer of math in day to day life.

Maybe aliens use classic system day to day but really love combinatoric type math systems and graphs for their more complicated math.

אב

>>40670762 (OP)
Supposedly the concept of time is just humans being retarded or some shit

And as usual, I consider the topic of the thread all day, post a reply and the the thread fucking dies.
Happens all the fucking time, no matter how long or short my posts are.

Just want to know if others agree it seems more like a complimentary system rather than a single concept, or perhaps I'm being too human-centric.

>>40674652
If 2 equals 3 the whole mathematical edifice crumbles. The AI explanation seems simple because it's not a complete system, just an example to justify the dumb premise you forced upon it.
Math is objetive. Martians could count on base 13, but the underlying rules would be the same. There's not "our" math.

>>40680362
nta but in hebrew mathematics 1 equals 2998

>>40680362
Wrong but you’re obviously too stupid to see this. Even in terms of earth systems we see different ways of doing it
>>40680439
Based soul

This is a great idea. It’s cool just to consider and I can’t believe how much vitriol op got for just thinking of different possibilities
Keep bumping

>>40678675
>the Bible says
Molecular Biology and Evolution Theory have been debunked. You assume your priests in lab coats are "Papal Infallible", for you are a cultist. You have government education...but the world is the hands of Satan, thus you learned Satanically.
>racism
Theres that Molecular Biology field you dont understand. Lineages is seccessional Molecular exchanges, why are you talking about science when you are not a scientist?
>The passage you're quoting
Genisis? Thats referencing events prior to the Ice Age, thats 10,000-12,000 years ago. Authorship date is irrelevent, so are age dates of characters in it.
>1st century AD
Why is the "Lineage of David" such an important part of Prophethood in the three Abrahamic religions if "belief" is the concrete validator? Youre basing your world view of idolatry. You worship yourself.
>specific sects
"Belief system" is what God used to great Adam and Eve? Thats subjective, not objective. Why are you LARPing about Theology and Molecular Biology?
>19th-century British Israelite race theories
Your undertanding of everything is modern propaganda, all of it. Ive been to Israel, and Khazaria, and Giza, and everywhere else, studying this.
>Look up the context on the Savior's quote or stop quoting Him.
Youre not a believer, you are a Satanist LARPing. Jesus bends the knee to me, I am The Father. I know the true nature of Jesus, via gene-Expressions and Parthenogenisis. Judas is his counter part. Eucharist is the reuniting of the The Church.

https://youtu.be/mDP2xhRFh8I

You dond even know what a Jew is, yet you are not correcting Jesus' words while claiming to speak for Him? SATANIST.

The topic is Pure Mathematics, stay on it.

>>40680362
>the underlying rules would be the same
Yes and...
Those underlying rules can be changed, and then math changes. Math is all built on axioms. Pre-calculative assumptions.
Look up Set Theory.

>>40670762 (OP)
"I met Martians, they taught me math". Now say it with a Ralph Wiggum voice.

Isn't a problem with this that reinventing math whould be really fucking hard for our little schitzo brains , like.

>>40678864
This anon is getting somewere but how much energy we need to explore this satisfastory.

Not enough.

>>40681554
>This anon is getting somewere
He founded his "alien" math in the exact same system he uses. He did absolutely nothing.

Ancients did math without numerals, everything was based on proportios and ratios. Pi "discovered" before 3, because 3 is another abstract concept. He mentioned pebbles, those are rocks, not "numbers".

You are VERY hueman.

>>40681652
>Pi "discovered" before 3
*Hint*, because Pi is based off of the proportion of 1, it doesnt matter how big or small the circle is. 2 never exists because the length is arbitrary and solved as "side length 1".

I already covered this above...but huemans cant comprehend Xeno Numeral Theorum.

>>40670762 (OP)
simon parkes claimed greys, tall whites, and mantids used a 12-base number system.

Alright, hueman-mortals, Im off to an art museum to study Anthropology and Geometry. Im going to try and extrapolate hyper-objects from 2-D Geometries.

Folk Art Museum
Հովհաննես Շարամբեյանի անվան Ժողովրդական արվեստների թանգարան

https://youtu.be/ebgOGmruqgg

>>40681756
12 base is probably better and more popular
Divides by more numbers

Other planets don't have Jesus, so of course they have would have shit math.

I love ladyboys with big, juicy asses.

>>40681784
And I can mathematically prove it.

>>40681786
Same!

>>40681788
Fruit.
>>40681784
Fruit.

>>40681779
>Other planets don't have Jesus
Jesus was a representstive of the foundational Meta-Gene of fungus, which is itself a reflection of Physics. Judas being the reflection of plant.

Plant and fungal is Euchistic, growth and decay. Meta-expressions of Physics through Biology. So, no, other planets would have Jesus, or would but they would also have an issue of killing it, so Warhammer space crusades in very much on the table.

Life isnt some arbitrary nonsense derived from a fantasy dimension.

>>40681756
>greys, tall whites, and mantids used a 12-base number system
12 inches to a foot is base-12. Base systems were originally based off of something tangible, Meteology, not simply "numbers" but "measures".

t.Base-36 cycpher-decoder

>>40681764
>art museum
What base system does nature use to create sunflower seed arrays?

https://youtu.be/9TCYJMw72Cg

>>40681756
>12-base number system
>>40675102
>base-8 number system
I have no doubt both of you are inferring base-10 systems converted into another system. Duo-DECImal meaning 2&10-mal.

When in base-8, and you are at 7 and count one more, you role over to 10. Same for 11 and base-12. Both are "whole sets" represented with 1 and a 0.

This is "huemie" maths.
[violentlt spits off to the side]
(Royal) We dont takes no kindly to yer Humie scum Numerations 'round here!

I LOVE BIG VEINY THROBBING COCKS~

>>40682008
I just had a snack'em huemie sammich, now Im off to the Russian Art Musem.

https://youtu.be/WHZzeyML-IY

Are all huemies embarrassing degenerates? I wouldnt know, I only associate with Xenos.

>>40682017

CoP, why are you replying to yourself?

>>40670762 (OP)

Finally someone that understands the alien connection and significance. All the debate in this thread can easily be cut through, what you are arguing is that logic and religion are FUNCTIONALLY the same, materialists are struggling because they're stuck on the material aspect of math, because mathmatical concepts inherently suggest quantity.

An alien civilization most certainly would operate on a foreign logic system which certainly would result in different technologies, though the mathematical portion of it would just be secondary. The hard part is trying to envision a logic system BETTER, (more valid) than any of our current logic systems.

>>40682094
That is to say, (if people who can get past my use of the word god) is it possible that god could favor a logic system more than our classical definition of logic?

>>40682110
>is it possible that god could favor a logic system more than our classical definition of logic
The Trinity is defined as three 1/2's equating to 1. The logic you are inferring is not logic but predictability and coherence.
>materialists
Basing Mathematics on arbitrary, detached from reality, rulesets creates nothing more than Combinatorial puzzle boxes.

Im not interested in hueman made Mythmatics, neither are aliens.

>because mathmatical concepts inherently suggest quantity.
>>40676616
>Vortex Mathematics
Welcome to Number Theory 101, take a seat, read the syllabus-thread, and dont interrupt the class again.

The concept is sound and is possible.We have this concept of including paired relationships already and have used it in math systems for years.

Math is universal, it doesn't matter if we think of it as. 1+1 pebble, or 1+1 cyber-gleepglorks.
The alien system would still need to use our classic system as a baseline to deduce relationships:

"My gligger Glorp just gave me 10 hyperdimensional glopgloops, so that's uhh, 6 glopgloops with 4 relationships"

they'd have to do this for everything, which might be easy if you're much more intelligent, but it quickly becomes complex. (numbers get huge, even 100 is 5,050).
Their mental calculations would be using quadratic equations or something similar just to work out 100.
Maybe it's really easy for them, but since classic system is always a baseline, it seems unnecessary in most situations, just as it's unnecessary in most of our situations.

so basically, math is math, its just that it can be conceptualised or utilised differently by other lifeforms, but the logic is always there, it's universal.

However, perhaps they are much more empathic than we are and consider relationships much more than we do. For example, their care systems and housing systems could use this relation system, emphasising and including value of connections between individuals, like partnerships or other social bonds. Those aliens would be just as important as the objects. It wouldn't be 10 houses, but 10 house and 45 unique pairings. Their relationships would be important. something we tend to forget, in our indifferent classical math.
>>40675622
>A system of math based on bonds over objects would probably have far reaching effects on society. It’s hard for people who are constantly thinking in terms of objects owned. Imagine a tax system based on something like this? Where more bonds (frens, family, coworkers means you pay less. Being isolated would mean paying more. Just as an example

They deal in infinities the only real numbers

>>40681970
That's the Fibonacci Sequence, not any particular base

>>40670762 (OP)
>1+1=3
No wonder Martians nuked themselves

>>40683006
lol

>>40682980
>That's the Fibonacci Sequence
Then what is the value of the first 0 in the sequence?
>not any particular base
It is one of THE base systems in Reality (Real Number R).

I used it for a kind of Dynamic base system seperate from the Decimal system, removing the zero leaves you with constant values...because reality goes infinitesimal or universal. The smaller one looks the smaller things become...but at all scales the value value of that 1 is the same but dependent only to that scale. 1 universe is the same as 1 electron, but clearly those are polar opposites in magnitude.

Or in otherwords...in the Fibonnaci squares...it doesnrlt matter if its the 1,000th square or 1st square, the next square is knowable and derived from it proportionally, that is the base of its counting, itself. In the same way 2 is known because 1 is the base its counting from.

You cant "count" beans with Xeno Numeration, thats not what its used for, and this is why huemans struggle to comprhend it. Ever seen the meme about "I would like to buy Ω apples, please." Its a riff on this very topic, and how people mis apply it to Applied Math.

Pure Math and Applied Math have different purposes, and parts of either simply dont translate to the other.

>>40683006
wait till you find out, those Martians are our ancestors.

I was wondering why this retarded ass thread has so many replies and now I see it's because the namefag schizo is just spamming it.

>>40683187
Nice blog post, but this isnt /s4s/, go back to "express your ego".
>>40683151
>2 is known because 1
https://youtu.be/DIal4k5kR3k
"You take care to define 0 and 1, then the definition of 2 is 1+1, which is trivial to show as {0, 1}."
>>40683151
>what is the value of the first 0
>>40676521
>by redefining the number 1 as a proportional appoximation from* Pi
In order to do Xeno Mathematics you must redefine Everything, from scratch, in order to prove 1+1=Infinite and Unknowable.

2 doesnt exist, it is simply 1+1...but what is "1"?

>namefag thinks I'm going to respond to his schizo-ass

>>40683243
>look ay me having an emotion!!! Give my ego attention, look at meeeee!!
Stop spamming off topic bullshit.

Post Mathematics or go back to /b/.

>>40670762 (OP)
>=3

>Still responding to me and seething

>>40683269
>and seething
Heh...they literally cannot stop or approach reality in any other way. Definitionally Schizophrenic, as the vast majority of huemans are. A disharmony of the Collective Intelligence of a being, the purpose of a huemans existence is to become whole, to become (the) 1.
>>>/sci/16717791
If you wish to have a therapy session you need to post in my office on /sci/.

>>40676463
Grifters are successful at grifting precisely because there will always be a segment of the population who need to feel smarter than everyone else.
It's really just a matter of telling those people that what everyone else believes is wrong, that the people who believe in it are sheep, and that the "truly smart" people are the ones who listen to what the grifter has to peddle.
Then those people are the "smart" ones, who get to secretly grin to themselves when regular people go on with their "normie" talk.
It's a trick as old as time. There are many out there who don't want to believe that they're not special and that most people are, in fact, smart like they are.

>>40683286
Faggot

>>40683239
All units are just collections of 1s.
10 things is shorthand for 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1

1 is 1.

Interesting thread absolutely destroyed by retards throughout.

>>40683289
[pats you on the back]
You feel better now? Emotions are a powerful thing. Being a slave to them like a toddler is tough, huh?
[rubs your back while nodding]

https://youtu.be/T647CGsuOVU

Thinking orthogonally to the Cartesian number line in order to view linead numbers hyper-Dimensionally, √(−1). Its all vectors, which inherently gives its a Geometric frame.

>>40683307
>10 things
You mean 1 ten? Like 1 hundred, 1 thousand, and so forth? Now we have multiple 1's but they are defined radically different.

>>40670762 (OP)
Where I come from [x, y] and [x, y, z] coordinates systems in fractal space are essentially treated like the numbers 2 and 3. 4 then is [2x, 2y], while 5 is [2x, 2y, z]. Three dimensional space of course ends throughout fractal partitions of the number line, which we build with variable coordinates as demonstrated along with a potentially infinite number of dimensions, each given a new unique symbol. For instance, this first happens at 11 with [3x, 3y, 3z, 2p]. We use different symbols, but I'm doing my best to translate connotations.

I wonder if Tesla new my people.
3 = [2x, 1y]
6 = [3x, 3y] or [2x, 2y, 2z]
9 = [7x, 2y] or [5x, 2y, 2z] or [3x, 3y, 3z] or [2x, 2y, 2p, 2q, 1n]


Each form is an ordering, which we relate to the symbolic base representation. Ascending by powers of three yields powers of two ordering forms in magnitude. These three numbers are a bridge between traditional magnitude and ordering, and we see each interweaving of orderings between dimensions as a logical semantic system of recursive relation. It accounts for everything your species calls fate.

>>40670762 (OP)
You are never ever leaving this enclosed plane alive you retarded golem. CGI is all you get in this life, which is more than you deserve anyway.

>>40683342
No, they're not radically different! All figures are just groupings of 1s. Whether you say a hundred 1s, or 2 hundred 1s, it's just names for groups of 1s.
They're just names of collections, they don't make anything fundamentally different.

It doesn't matter if you call it 2 hundreds or anything, it's just shorthand for 1+1+1...(200 times) The grouping is just for convenience, it's not a different concept.

1 is the basic identity for a unit to be added or multiplied (and multiplication itself is shorthand for unit plus unit plus unit)

It doesn't change them fundamentally. I feel like you are conflating philosophy with math. Like you're confusing the mathematical practice with philosophical questions about ontology of numbers, and ending up wrong on both.

>>40683427
>It doesn't change them fundamentally
So 1 and 1,000 are the same?
>1 is the basic identity
"In mathematics, an identity is an equality relating one mathematical expression A to another mathematical expression B."
Ah, ok, 1=2, and 2=2,000. I understand.
>I feel like you are conflating philosophy with math.
I know for a fact you do not have a PhD in Mathematics.

Fuck my ass with anal beads~~

>>40683447
nta but 2/3 of those equalities work

>>40683460
I had to copy and paste that Academic jargon because I dont study idiocy.
>>40683427
>they're not radically different
The number of 1's under each definition RADICALLY CHANGES THE DEFINITION.
>>40683460
>2/3 of those equalities
Thats Set Theory defintions? Yeah, I dont use those because you, and they, still cant define the number 1.

Equality meaning equal? How can 1 have a equality to ANY other number that itself isnt defined by 1?

This is the "crisis in the foundation of Math".

>>40683448

Caught red handed.

>the >schizo who thinks the Holy Shroud is a hoax

>and that >Vincenzo Ruello isn't a genius

>is a flaming faggot

>>40683475
>>is a flaming faggot
Oh yes, daddy, I am~

>>40683475
Your "PhD" sources are a bunch Schizophrenics or charlatans "lying (to themselves) for Jesus".

Professoe Dave would have a field day with your crowd...a fitting opponent for a "Master's degree warrior".

>>40683483
Speaking of Dave...I want him to rim my ass~

>>40683473
I said I'm not that that anon, take ur pillz boii
no I'm not a ZFC fan or w/e
no I'm not explaining my field specifically to an angry schizo namefag LOL

>>40683490

A wise man once said...

"AHH NIGGA YOU GAY! BWAAHHAHAHHAAAAH!"

>>40683499

What field do you have, fucknuts? Are you even a scientist? Be specific.

I'm a group theorist, for one. My current area of research is the finiteness of B(2,5).

>>40683499
>I said I'm not that that anon
You think I give a shit? Pull your own cock out of your mouth, you misread the thread and are so self engrossed you couldnt even follow the posts without your response being centered on your feelings.
>I'm not explaining my field specifically
Because I would fucking destroy your sense of self worth if you did.

Come on, son...open that can of worms.

>>40683522
Btw, anyone know any good place to hire male prostitutes?~

>>40683501
I am~

>>40670762 (OP)
Wasn't he the guy that claimed he's going to be the president in 2028?
Basically, wait 3 years for all to be debunked.

>>40683656

WTF CoP?

>>40683447

>so 1 and 100 are the same?
no theyre not the same, my point is that that every whole number is just a collection of 1s. the nature of numbers being a collection of 1s is the same for every number, but yes of course the fucking quantity is different for each figure.. but the principle is the same: every whole number is built by repeatedly adding 1.

>"In mathematics, an identity is an equality relating one mathematical expression A to another mathematical expression B."
Ah, ok, 1=2, and 2=2,000. I understand.

i think youre confused about what "identity" means. "Identity" is a property, not an equality between all numbers. its not the same as saying 1=2 or 2=2000. its not saying all numbers are equal, that would make no sense... the identity of "1" in math is a multiplicative identity.

>The number of 1's under each definition RADICALLY CHANGES THE DEFINITION.
yeah, the quantity is obviously different, therefore has different properties. 1 is obviously different from 100. but the PRINCIPLE is always the same, numbers are made up of 1s.

>I know for a fact you do not have a PhD in Mathematics.
of course i dont. im just a midwit who feels like you arent entirely correct. we dont need phd's to have a discussion. youre being lame. you could have discussed something like platos theory of numbers being non physical entities or anything, but instead decided to attack me . well done sir, such a rare type of response on these forums.

>>40683665
>https://andy2016.com/
"...our great nation’s accomplishments in time travel and Mars visitation. He has done so as one who served bravely in the two secret U.S. defense projects in which time travel on Earth and voyages to Mars were first undertaken."
Wew.
[looks at the bottom of the page, sees wierd lines, click the top one, goes to a gay porn website]
WOW...did not expect that.

>>40683690
Im not putting any effort into you. You failed to catch the irony of my post in me making it so retarded even you should have recognized the error YOU MADE.

>identity
>principal
>equality
Philosophical semantics, I asked for a definition and youre giving me an amorphous word game.

>>40675530
>"beleive"
That sounds retarded, try beLIEve instead.

>>40683693

>[looks at the botom [sic] of the pafe [sic], sees wierd [sic] lines, click the top on [sic], goes to a gay por [sic] website]

Liar.

>>40683712
why would you make a retarded response in the first place? seems to me you gave a half-assed attempt at research, coldnt find anything that really contradicted me, and sperged out and just copy pasted some shit, hiding behind "irony". well done. nice try at using the phrase "philosophical semantics" too,when every point ive made has been well established mathematical logic. I’ve just been explaining basic mathematical facts. how numbers are constructed from collections of 1s, and what “identity” means in arithmetic. These aren’t “philosophical semantics,” they’re foundational concepts in mathematics. but ok yeah fine, im done with you too.

>>40683815
>why would you make a retarded response in the first place?
To highlight your ignorance.

Firstly, youre clapping back without understanding what was just said to you, I feel like Im talking to an argumentative woman who wants to fight.

Secondly, you cant even recognize your own errors, making this a purposless debate.

Lastly, do you argue with professors often? Just now? Im not "pulling shit out my ass and on the fly" like you, my thesis in Pure Mathematics was on Number Theory. *This Exact topic.*


This is why "Alien Math" isnt talked about, midwits confuse their surface level understanding of Arithnatic with Abstract Number Theory. You recognize English letters in Russian sentences so you argue with a Russian about what the sentence says...why?....

>>40683931

You are not a PhD, you crackpot nigger.

>>40683931

Your dissertation was in NT? Tell me. What specifically was it on? Shimura varieties? Elliptic curves? Modular forms? The Langlands program? Be specific.

>>40683931
ive previously argued that such a number system that includes unique parings would be entirely possible, and i explained how.

clap back at what, if you just admitted it was bullshit? you literally pulled shit out of your ass to try and make it look like "oh shit hes arguing with a retard lol!" well done. you argue with professors like this do you?

if i sound like a woman, you sound like a retarded 14 year old who would rather devolve into shit than actually discuss anything.

>Andrew Basiago said he met Martians
Wow a guy said something
Proof or suck a huge fucking cock spook nigger

>the schizo is still shitting up this topic with nonsense

>>40683974

abasiago.net/imagegallery/2014-09-08.png

Unedited pic.

>>40683938
>>>/sci/16719215
>No crackpots here. All have PhDs.
You dont even know what "science" is.
>>40683953
>>>/sci/16719265
>I only ever got a Master's, and that was in history.
You are Schizophrenic.

>>40683959
>ive previously argued
So you DO argue with people about topics you have no understanding of.

Ma'am, your "feelings" have bearing on technical discussion, snd saying "no u r" is what women and children do when they dont know what else to say.

>you literally pulled shit out of your ass
Professor of Mathematics, Nunber Theory, THIS IS NOT A GAME OF WILLPOWER, MA'AM.

>>40683427
>I feel like you are conflating philosophy with math.
This is antithetical to Mathematical rigor, you jave ZERO foundational Mathematics knowledge, your highschool level of understanding IS NOT NUMBER THEORY. You are lecturing me with elementary school level shit.....AT A PROFESSOR WHO LECTURES PROFESSORS.

The gaul, the lack of self awareness, the sheer ignorance coupled with unshakebale certainty....its.....its.....WOMANLY.

>>40681970
these are caused by oscillation and dynamic symmetry among proportion and are well represented in math, despite the base. probably best represented in geometry wherein you don't really need numbers at all.

>>40682000
i always thought the 9 11 rollover was rather symbolic.

>>40684234
>>I feel
Sorry, I quoted the whole sentence. "I feel" is you admitting you have no fucking clue what youre read or clapping back with.

Get your PhD or put on the skirt. There is not third option.

>>40684258
>among proportion
>despite the base
What is Phi defined as? A proportion from 1. Same for the hypotenuse of a square.

Nature builds from the center out, not outside lengths 1 first, in the square example the hypotenuse is calculated in its entirety and 1 becomes an approximated irrational, as with Pi, and others. If the perimeter of semi circle is 1, its radius becomes the inverse approximation Pi.

>wherein you don't really need numbers at all
Ah...but thats the very base system Im looking for. Its;
>oscillation and dynamic
Dynamic, Organic, base systems. Hyper abstract number systems that you cant just convert into Applied because theyre all irrationals, and switch, on the fly, base systems. Multi-base systems, Combinatorial systems, Geometric systems.

The beggining of "Alien Math" is thinking is base-Pi, base-Phi, base-sqrt2, 1 becomes an abstraction all together, trancedental 1.

"We" hand wave this away when "we" write out Pi or Phi, because it contains what isnt containable, the foot remains grounded in 1 being the perspective to which we view them, not the other way around, which is possible...but this has rammifications to the psyché. Orgamisms formulated their view of reality using the same perspective, inverting it inverts how you see reality.

>Isaiah 5:20
"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter."

Inverting your Cognitive perspective can invert your morals as well...

>>40684284
i never pretended to have any clue. i came here, as an idiot, interested by the topic.
i mulled it over throughout the day, how such a system could work, 1+1=3? then i saw a post about how graphs and nodes include "edges" this gave me something to research. i learned stuff and never pretended to be right. my thought process is all there, how a relationship consensus could be defined, and how, in my very limited knowledge, it seems they would still have two systems, our classical and their relational, which would be built on the classical.

ive contributed far more as a midwit asking questions than you have trying to be an esoteric little shit.
i havent had the privilege of being taught by a professor, or have a degree in number theory, as you supoposedly do. you could have contributed, or shared ideas, or argued. and i am fine with being told im wrong. i learn something either way. this is supposoed to be about ideas and learning, its not about ego. (not that a retarded tripfag would understand).

but, since you clearly dont know what "argue" means in the context of discussion, its clear you dont really have a degree. but if you did, this is how you choose to use it? you shit up the thread with nonsense, and pretend to be a retard, wow! you really showed us midwits!

you dont need to try and obfuscate the discussion with bullshit. tell me and show me how im wrong, and i would say, "ah, i now see, differently. thanks for clarifying. dont be a cunt who thinks "see, you dont understand complex topics because you cant even tell when im being ironically retarded!"

im tired of fucks like you shitting up these threads. "im esoteric bro, you wouldnt understand". "they think im retarded but little do they know its advanced 5D irony" kek gottem". you give nothing. you just shit up threads. no one thinks youre funny, or smart, youre just more bullshit that they have to scroll past, as they sigh. at least your trip makes you easier to filter. thanks for that.

The last system I had a crack at was Atomic, why, when, how, atoms form, electron shells, to protons, and what effects neutrons have on it.

It should be closely related to the periodic table, and how right now its represented in a 2-D plane, but it shouldnt be, as that isnt how things grow.

>>40684543
Put on the skirt, Stacey...you need to stop "clapping back" at men who mansplain you.

>>40683307
What is the definition of 1?
>1 is 1.
Circular defintion.
>>40683690
>identity
>principal
>equality
Circularly avoiding defining it through;
>>40683427
>confusing the philosophical practice with mathematical questions
Ontology of "what"?

I need not hear more from you, wench, I need only to quote your record.

>>40684587
ive been posting since the beginning of the thread. i know youre trying to bait me, but i really am tired of fucks like you, as are most users. "im not angry, im just disappointed."

>>40684637
>"im esoteric bro, you wouldnt understand"
Get a fucking job, Stacey.

>>40684258
>represented in geometry
https://youtu.be/e-9K7xJUvAg

Metrology rooted in something physical, being the base system, so it will have correlations to reality, Physics based Number Theory via Metrology, though in reverse in this case. Im seeking a univeral unit of measure that isnt derived from a geo-centric unit of measure, which the mile, and meter and second, are.

>>40684751
>meter and second, are.
"...defined as a specific value in a vacuum, approximately 299,792,458 meters per second."
Two geo-centric units of measure that are also using very different base systems, though proportionally should hold close to universal units as celestial harmonics are a greater magnitude median of universal.

I felt it was close many years ago, changing systems may yield results but my research took my into other directions, namely Biology, Evolution, and Cognition.

>>40684780
I wonder what you think of a theory I recently thought of. Namely, that the epigenetic system plays a modal role in encoding and is instrumental in emergent evolution (for instance, the appearance of the compound eye in the fossil record). I mostly dabble in biology as a hobby of research, but I practice linguistic and computational research.

>>40684751
>Im seeking a univeral unit of measure
The metaphor, which is a sort of and gate conditional, is a type of measurement that is universal. It operates semantically, and semantics is of course the study of meaning. In semantic prime theory the root of all possible meaningful constructions is boiled down to sort of proto words, semantic primes. There are five categories of proto words and 7 types of proto languages, each of which defines a field of interpretation for said words.

A universal unit of measurement is a tricky business, as each measurement is minimally 5 dimensional.and describes 4 dimensions that we see as 3 changing over time. We can envision this measurement space though as 5 hypercubes, each with sides of length 1 in a normalized semantic field.

>>40674469
>1+1=3
>So these martians are just as retarded as the grifter making it up?
Are you calling the US Treasury Bond market retarded grifters?

>>40687240
Based and sound. Money pilled

>>40685808
>proto words
Mathematical Linguistics, turning concepts into vectors for a hyper-Matrix. Hot and cold being a vector line with a center zero point of median (1(hot)+1(cold)=3 (points of reference)). Given enough vectors things like "apple" can be multiplied by "disappointment" can yield orthogonal results like "Garden of Eden's Tree". Catagory Theoritic application to conceptual notions.

https://youtu.be/FJtFZwbvkI4

>5 dimensional
>4 dimensions
9.5-Dimensions in 2017 and around 2023 10-Dimensions, so many possible orientations are created it begs the need for a universal unit of measure to add coherence to the total system, hence why I am looking for one.

Because of such high Dimensions there are multiple units of mostly universal measure, the reason it is so difficult to find is the very nature of some of them precludes the use of the other, the exact same reason General Relativity's and the Standard Model's Mathematics cant cross apply to the either.

Solving the unit of measure could also yield the result for Physics, "solving" Physics.

>>40685808
>semantic field
But all words from all languages are in the exact same field, they all came from people that exisy in Reality.

No matter how disperse they are theyre tangent to each other on many dimensions, evem down to vibrational in the airwaves, which roots them in Physics, or Electromagnetic being ths pulses and Collective Computation of the cells in the body to illicit the sound, and the varied definitions of the exact same word, Thesaurus Matrix.

Youre gunna need more Dimensions.
:^)

>>40688192
>But all words from all languages are in the exact same field, they all came from people that exisy in Reality.
Every dialect is a unique semantic field, every formal language is a unique semantic field, and normalized just means taking every word vector and shoving it in relational order between 0 and 1.
>you're gonna need more dimensions
Naw, higher dimensions exist but aren't needed for conveyance. Compression is neat like that. The 5 hyper cubes I mentioned earlier should make a plus shape. How the plus is oriented in alignment determines the measurement, and it can exist in any number of dimensions.

>>40689834
>dialect is a unique semantic field, every formal language is a unique semantic field
You dont study Linguistics, do you?...

https://youtu.be/6OP8Y66WcBY

>taking every word vector and shoving it in relational order between 0 and 1
You did exactly that with "semantic fields", but reduced it into a binary, because trinary isnt just "one more", it adds the hueman scale to infinite length vectors, and is exactly why you fail to incorporate other fields into the same universal field. Without a center point it implies your positive IS a negative, your Maths becomes erroneous.

This isnt "semantic word play", youre dividing things I am unifying while telling me theyre different (as if I didnt know or make perfectly clear I know better). Everything conceptual, linguistic, and material, are connected.
>but aren't needed for conveyance
Then correlate concepts like love and repulsion with Theoretical Physics.

Why would String Theory need so many Dimensions then?....only AFTER you have made enough connections can you hope to reduce the Dimensions. If you had you would be, easily, able to correlate all languages...easily. Instead youre working with a small, segemented, partition, of things while claiming it is universal.

Connect it with "All Things", not simply state they are.

>5 hyper cubes
Thats is a tiny ass object.
>should make a plus shape
It makes many shapes.
>How the plus is oriented in alignment determines the measurement
Measurement of what? Where? Give an example.
>it can exist in any number of dimensions.
No, 5-D objects can only exist in 5-D or higher planes without existing only partially at any given time.

To measure hyper-objects in real life one must make countless number of measurements of them in order to measure what Dimension it is. I do this with a BioMagnetic field, hundreds of thousands of measurements, its also much larger than 5-D.

>>40690069
>You dont study Linguistics, do you?
I did before I began researching linguistics professionally, why?

>You did exactly that with "semantic fields"
Sort of, I just described the process of normalization, by which we transform languages into higher dimensional representations for things like AI. Normalizing between a larger pair of numbers is possible, but it processes like deep learning less efficient. It all comes back to the chain rule in back propagation.

>your Maths
I haven't shared MY maths yet.
>youre dividing things
I was asked to. I presented a standard unit through those divisions, one that could be conveyed in geometric terms (though that's not how I think I understand most people find it helpful).

>Why would String Theory need so many Dimensions then?
We don't know how many it needs (there are multiple versions) and have yet to get it to work regardless. By most modern accounts in physics it's a failed theory. That said, describing the precise mechanistic operations of the universe is different from the task of making a unit of measure. Units can be oriented and arranged to perform measurements to match contexts, and mine is based on the logical structure of the metaphor, which is also what early work in computation nlp like Word2Vec was loosely based on.

>Thats is a tiny ass object.
It's a 4 dimensional unit arranged in 5 dimensions
>It makes many shapes.
Right, but the + shape allows for layered integration on diagonals through higher dimensions.
>Measurement of what? Where? Give an example.
Of anything anywhere. A precise example is beyond the scope of this conversation. I started designing this concept for proof automation a few years ago.
>No, 5-D objects can only exist in 5-D or higher planes without existing only partially at any given time.
Fractal dimensions and limits of perception. Need I say more?

>>40690151
>I began researching linguistics professionally
Then why didnt you know the connections between languages? Why didnt you know English has adopted words from many languages spanning thousands of years? Making it a field of fields.
>which we transform languages into higher dimensional representations for things like AI
Thats exactly what I do (and just explained, how are you not recognizing this...?), but I do it in ways AIs cant and they do it in ways I cant. Ive first studied it around 2017, AIs turning the alphabet into mathematics, base-26, add numbers you get base-36.
>processes like deep learning less efficient
And I can do it in fractions of a second, because "nomalization" is also median and hueman scaled, being the center. There is no center with 0&1, only -1&0&1.
>That said, describing the precise mechanistic operations of the universe is different from the task of making a unit of measure.
That is exactly what Theoritcal Physics is doing, a precise measument. If you make differences in any variable then others wont align correctly, power scales, time scales, etc.
>It's a 4 dimensional unit arranged in 5 dimensions
Youre just sampling the same plane of a Dimension multiple times? Im constructing the entire thing, and yes...it requires experiencing "multiple perspectives at the same time".

I was talking about Physics Dimensions, if Mathematical then its absolutely miniscule. I consctuct 4-D objects in my mind regularly. Try a 1-D hyper-object like a Klein bottle, the object is the same from both perspectives; both.
>for proof automation a few years ago.
AI maths is boring and not interesting at all...since Im literally explaining to you how AIs think and you seem oblivious to it.
>Fractal dimensions and limits of perception.
Im well aware of fractional Dimensions and limits of perception is your weakness, hueman-mortal....

Why dont you catch the similarities of how I think to your "AI"?...you worship a calculator.

>>40690243
I know about that. Most people do actually, linguist or otherwise. People tend to be less familiar with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis and where it holds however. Yes, we borrow words. We also often change what they mean entirely. People build/alter language over time through communal speech, and so different communities have different semantic fields with different orderings of relation, different connotations, different priorities, etc.

>There is no center with 0&1, only -1&0&1.
Oh, you'd probably have more fun talking to me about quantum computing then. Every step in that field is a triangulation or a completion of a square. It's the field of emergent choice.
>Youre just sampling the same plane of a Dimension multiple times?
Actually, a hypercube has 24 unique faces, that's 24 different "planes that are being sampled." It's not an arbitrary construction. When 5 hypercubes are assembled as I described it becomes 116.

At bare minimum you have to get past the symmetries of 29 after all.

>AI maths is boring and not interesting at all...since Im literally explaining to you how AIs think and you seem oblivious to it.
The same could be said about me explaining to you. How do you reconcile this?

Also, I build AI. It's a very limited tool at this stage of development. I'm sorry to hear you're such a tool as well.

>>40690333
>I know about that.
Cool, then youre a reductionist. Meaning we're talking about radically different things. Namely, you removing Dimensions of information in order to make it managable for yourself to feed to AIs and I am incorporating an amount of data would make your AI melt.
>Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
Ah, a middle wit citation. That explains why you cant comprehend my posts while believing we're talking about the same thing. Your lack of Linguistic understanding has led you to believe you hear what I am saying because you Cognitively blot out the processing for it, leaving no record of its existence in your memory.

You remove reality so you can process it better, but didnt realize it came at a cost...

>We also often change what they mean entirely. People build/alter language [...]
An infinte division of infinite variable...no wonder you need AI. Your perspective is self defeating. Focusing on differences but now you cannot see the similarities.
(You say you do but this is an emotional defence mechanism, clear by your being unforthwith with concrete information and constantly being in a defensive reactionary stance.)

>>40684512
>it contains what isnt containable, the foot remains grounded in 1 being the perspective to which we view them,
>>40688170
>some of them precludes the use of the other
*cough* Cognitive Sciences *cough*...what AI can never touch on.

>>40690333
>The same could be said about me explaining to you. How do you reconcile this?
By you not recognizing what I say but simply react to me pointing out to you you not recognizing it...

>It's a very limited tool at this stage of development.
It forever will be.
>>>/sci/16176731

Too much "AI" and CompSci, it is your crutch.

>>40690491
>>>/sci/16176731
If only I could post pictures...but alas, Im range banned where I am at.

Two AIs speaking in coded language to each other. Turning language into its own language.

>>40690491
Oh, so that's all new to you then? I moved into practicalities a long time ago. What you're describing is best described in modern English as woo. I don't say that to condescend, only to place it in relevant semantic space which has been constructed by the society we live in. The tower of babel is being built again and it is going to fall because of woo.

>>40683736
no

>>40691627
Maybe

>>40690531
>that's all new to you then
New to huemanity, uoure not reading what I type...youre teading your own emotions. Woman perspective. Constantly lying too.
>I moved into practicalities
No you didnt, youre full of shit and a habitual liar.
>modern English as woo
"Woo" means "Im not smart enough to understand so will just assume it doesnt make sense."

You dont work in AI, you know nothing og Linguistics, you modeled nothing, you are mentally ill and LARPing on the internet to get interactions from me.

>The tower of babel is being built again and it is going to fall because of woo.
Youre not a scientist, youre an irrational woman who's political worldview is Satanic. You worship yourself, this is the definition og Satanism.
>Babel
Stfu, Satanist, ego driven, emotional worldview, constantly lying, proding fight. Youre the error of God's creation. Made in the image of this world, the thing Satan loves; You.

>y um, y um, r amun
[writes on note pad symptoms and prognosis]

Their delusions feels familiar, I sense this isnt the first interaction, she has confused high communication ability with high intelligence so she fails to catch truth or novel information when presented with it, just emotional posturing and bluffing, like an animal.

Garden variety Schizophrenic with delusions of grandeur. "Just imply you know better" but never show how or where, dodges all verification and moves on to another topic when pressed.

>>40670762 (OP)
Yeah, this sounds like something an absolute brainlet would come up with. Math is universal truth. The language could change and the symbols, terminology and things like the orders of governance, but the logic behind math is a discovery and bound to the nature of the universe. If you’re using classical logic, then 1+1 can never equal 3.

>>40693759
>If you’re using classical logic, then 1+1 can never equal 3
>>40688170
>(1(hot)+1(cold)=3 (points of reference))
Stop talking about "logic", you dont know what it means and confused it with "confirming to my sensibilities.".
>Math is universal truth.
You dont study the definitions of Mathematics much, do you? The definitions are convoluted while also overly precise in order to reinforce other Mathematics; a giant ruleset to confirm itself...circular definitions that change with time.

"Universal truth" doesnt change with time.

>>40691627
You can't deny how bad "beleive" sounds, putting quotes around it doesn't help.
Lie in the word believe needs to be exposed.

>>40693799
If an alien goes to an alien McDonald’s and orders two alien cheeseburgers, when he counts them, he’ll have two alien cheeseburgers. A third won’t magically appear. Not unless there’s a buy two get one free deal anyway, or the workers have your level of intellect and fucked up his order. Also, take your meds.

Look at this dumb ass shit...

Natural Number:
>1 is the first positive whole number in the sequence of natural numbers (1, 2, 3, ...), sometimes also including 0.
That tells me what its related to, not what it is, it even uses itself in its own definiton "Natural Number".
Multiplicative Identity:
>When 1 is multiplied by any other number (e.g., a real number, an integer, or a complex number), the result is that same number. For example, 5 * 1 = 5, and 1 * 7.2 = 7.2.
Again, it defines it by what it does, not what it is.
Unit:
>In a broader mathematical context, 1 can be seen as the fundamental unit or building block upon which other numbers are constructed. For instance, the number 2 can be defined as 1 + 1.
It defines 1 as to that which constructs 2 which itself is defined as 1+1, circular.
Successor:
>In the context of Peano axioms (a way to define natural numbers), 1 is the successor of 0.
1 is defined as "not 0".
Set Theory:
>In set theory, 1 can be represented as a set with one element, often {0}, where 0 is the empty set.
1={0} now, a "set" of nothing but something, incoherent, illogical, circular, nonsense.
>Elements can be numbers, letters, variables, symbols, or any other mathematical object. }
Since when is .1 not an object? Its magnitudinal value is an arbitrary size and scale without a comparison until compared to 1, like Pi being rational until converted into base-10 via relation to 1.

>>40676521
>calculated the entirety of Pi as part of Euler's Identity
Make 1 an incoherent and irrational abstraction, Pi is real, 1 is not.

>>40693884
>two alien cheeseburgers
>>40693885
>1 is not.
Two varied approximations of 1 "hamburger".

You dont comprehend what I posted, youre just pushing your ignorant hueman understanding to promote your ego to yourself.

>take your meds.
LARPing a Psychiatrist now? I thought you would be a Mathematician given youre peaching it! Double major?

What was your thesis in Pure Mathematics on? As well as Psychiatry. I work on both fields, so dont worry about "filtering me", I dont filter posts for my response enjoyment, Im not a piece of shit, Im not hueman.

>>40670762 (OP)
What if it's about both the parts and the sum of it?

1 + 1 = 2 (two 1s and one 2) = 3

Or to make it visual, 1 square + 1 square = 2 squares + 1 rectangle

>>40673857
Kek
1 can identify itself as 1.5, so 1+1=3.

>>40684448
>What is Phi defined as? A proportion from 1.
you don't need numbers. study euclid's elements.

what you are calling "1" classically would just be your porportional base metric. all your building would unfold from it, but there would be no standard metric. like cooking by parts. you have the ratios, use whatever metric you like within that. this is also how harmonics and transposition work. these are all born out of greece due to euclid.

>>40693988
>porportional base metric
>>40676521
>by redefining the number 1 as a proportional appoximation from* Pi
My base metric was Pi in this example. 1 became an irrational approximation.
>euclid's elements
Where Pi, Phi and all manner of numbers, are *constructed* in their entirety.
>there would be no standard metric
Just showed above...and below.
>>40693885

So much for your "base metric".

>>40694036
>>proportional base metric
is not primary. absolutely superfluous to design.

>>40694036

>>40694036
>base metric
Oh, and Euclids examples being Geometric means its directly ties to Metrology. Stand Unit of Measure, otherwise any "side length 1" of varying lengths are all labeled "1".

Since its in physical reality...it should have a correlation to Physics, thus "Universal Unit of Measure", not dependent of Geo-centric units of measure, which...[sigh]....Ive already reiterated above.

Im done, this thread is becoming circular. Xeno Math out.

https://youtu.be/Md098_t4vwI

Op here
Thank you for everyone’s contributions

>>40674265
>>40675252
Do you have a source for this? Not challenging, I am curious to read more as grad student mathematician.

>>40693525
not going to happen

>>40693822
bitch it's 4chan
we deny'n math up in this joint
doesn't matter if you like how we say it

>>40670762 (OP)

I never bought this notion because every major technological breakthrough has been socially, economically, and technically disrupting. Electricity, refrigeration, artificial lighting, telephones, radios, transistors, computer chips, most certainly the Internet - all of them have caused huge and permanent disruptions to the status quo.

It makes no sense for the USA to keep some major technological leap a secret - if anything it makes more sense to leverage any and all leads now while the collective West is still ahead of the BRICS block, because the gap is rapidly closing and once it's closed the West will never have dominion over the rest of the world again.

The notion of a "secret weapon" makes no sense - in fact having a weapon be secret does you no good when you can use the *threat* of that weapon to your advantage in negotiations. Nukes are significantly more practical as tools of negotiation than they are as weapons. An alien death ray or some craft that can bend time and space around it would serve as incredibly effective tools for negotiation and power projection. Keeping them as secrets serves you no practical purpose.

Now having disinfo officers paid to troll around forms and at meetups and claim that there's secret alien tech - now that does wonders for psychological warfare. Makes the USA seem esoteric and like they have even more power hidden away.

>>40693885
>1={0} now, a "set" of nothing but something, incoherent, illogical, circular, nonsense.
this namenigga can't put an empty box into another empty box, lmao

>>40670762 (OP)
>Like 1+1=3
idiot. math is a fundamental property of the universe and 1 plus 1 will never equal 3.
you can use different notation to signify a number, but the number itself has the exact same value

>>40670762 (OP)
Can you remember exactly what he said? Because 1+1=3 is not a good example.

>>40670762 (OP)
OP has not heard of different bases
base 2, base 10, base 16
You need to be 18 to post here, OP.