Hi Stan,
Gusee this time i work alon with no need of approval, sense is brought upon the self, and not vice versa, to what ? the self to the self? and the external?
I ahve been talikng and I have been geting answers, but of the questoins there were none. Unfortunately thiese days I have a problem wtirith writing and things form in an uncostumed maater.
I t is not me to question but it is yourself, it is also in my case, and to every case that is.
Thought about the second law, and it was a mild approach of what is going on?
Cause the second law comes form physics and math and there is an a great string of connections of how it is created and how it manifested, and why it persevered, you did not take the strings seriously.
Certainty, of math, Godel gave them uncertainty?
So in a computational way how do we foolow
math to godel to math again but this time a different math, or no math at all?.
Why the certainty of math?
If you give one answer it is not the case, the strings give many possible answers, and still remain open.
Does Godel provide you with an answer to your axiomatic proofs of second law and what about Godle himself is there something that disprooves him? could I find a nwe way of describing rather than the old?
Still we do not work together we work apart trying to proove our theories, and not what is going on...
2008/7/1 < complex-science@necsi.org>:
Thanasis --
There is a description that consciousness is at rare events consistent and axiomatic in its behavior and when it moves towards axiomatic thesis of consistency it has terrible time doing it, (might it also collapse?). So in that scale one might ask why. Why it remains vague. The difficulty of memorization could? be an example- proof of this.
A thing that changes continuously in a pattern has difficulty in changing its pattern but the fact is why? why do we have such trouble changing ourselves, which axiom is the axiom when axioms constantly change?
I am looking for its characteristics in order to define her. (Characteristics I call a description beyond borders, of its phenotype, without correlations.)
Can I ever express what I want to like the first time-unless I memorize it, or it comes out of memory? If my ruminations are free every description will be different and at rare times would they be of the depth I desire in order thought is identical to expression, as to give me a sense of fulfillment. And the question is why the different ruminations, what this means for consciousness lying in certain margins of meanings.
The consistency could lie in places where the theory of the noose takes place, the base that negates itself, as is Godel theorem, which disproves itself.
Now to dynamics themselves, I wonder what bifurcation is indeed. You see now in my world there exist a variety of phenomena and events which are expressed in a multi faceted way.
There is a hypothesis I have not checked yet, and do not know if I will, that the Greek language and therefore mostly the ancient Greek where it derives from, is an axiomatic language, and has a similarity to logical structuring or is of stricly logical structuring?.
Which means what in the multi faceted world were everything is connected?
Math and Greek are of similar origin? of ancient greek origin? And if it is ?
so?
What do math really create with their sympolism?
Possible answers?
S: Certainty. Not possible in the World, but possible in math and logic (if you keep it simple!).
So does have to do with Godel, dynamics with Godel?
math of Godel to math to dynamics to language to Godel
We forgot something Greece.
We add that up.
Greece to ancient
And this is dynamics?
"The pendulum of the mind oscillates between sense and nonsense, not between right and wrong"
Jung
math of Godel to math to dynamics to language to Godel to Jung to math to dynamics
Sense to math?
math to sense?
we go again
math of Godel to math to dynamics to language to Godel to Jung to math to dynamics
sense to math to Greece to ancient to math to sense to Godel to Jung?
ancient goes to?
yes history
history to ancient to math to history to ancient
math of Godel to math to dynamics to language to Godel to Jung to math to dynamics
sense to math to Greece to ancient to math to sense to Godel to Jung to history to ancient to math to history to ancient to Godel to dynamics to history to dynamics to ancient ....
Tired.
Does anyone want to continue with other interractions, what is the number called ? infinite, and it comes from?
God it sounds all Greek to me?.
S: Have another hit.
STAN
If one does not understand a person, one tends to regard him as a fool as one said long ago.
But who cares about Jung, Jung thoughts were nonsense he says that the greatest and most important problems of life are all fundamentally insoluble. They can never be solved but only outgrown.
?
Wonder what growth could be...
Should I add a sense to growth to the calculation and calculation to Godel to fundamentally insoluble?.
Best,
Thanasis, unemployed physicist, guess some kind of a fool, whatever a fool is,( guess my Greek is better than my English)
Ps:Should I add that up to the list? and that is which list?
and the purpose of the list to the ones subscribing to dynamics to me to the ones who created it to me to language to purpose to sense to Godel to logic to madness to sense to language?
Sense is being...
wonder who said that?
what sense and what being?
Welcome to Gestalt
|
