Strange relationship between boolean logic (binary) and energy...

[Gannon]

I was thinking (more) today that if binary (numbers) can convert any recognizable data, into anything else (i.e. a number can represent a picture, or a sound, or a letter, etc,etc).

Then, what represents binary? If there are only two numbrs 1, and "0" (in binary)

Then binary must have some self-recursive property. I thought about it like this...

If 1(boolean-object-number) = yes, and 0 is not a binary number (because zero is really "null" = nothing in everyday usage... then 0 = not a number, then it really looks like....

1(boolean-object-number) = (positive)+ yes =*+ on*
-1(boolean-object-number) = (negative)- yes =*- on*


So it would look like

+1 is equal to +ON
-1 is equal to -ON

+1 = "+1"(1)
- 1 = "-1"(-1)

Therefore, the operators themselves (+ and minus) can also be represented as binary....

Therefore and because binary is a NUMBER, then it can have "fractional binary numbers"

Because a binary number is self-referencing in logic, so you'd have... (0.9+on) is equal to
+1 on.


+0.9 = +1 (and/or?) +0.9 (not sure hence the "?")
-0.9 = -1 (and/or?) -0.9 (at same time?)

Which is strange but it works...

so "binary operators"? are a 'superset-operator'? that is close or near energy equivalent to energy in some way? it makes my brain hurt... anyone who can clear this up would be appreciated.


It seems a boolean number contains a NUMBER and a VECTOR inside the number, and then also a "frequency" (i.e. part-on, part-off.... +0.6 = +1, (and/or) +0.6 (because it's a fraction of binary can be represented by binary, since it is a fraction of itself!)

so +0.6 is actually a binary number it would be like... a voume for "yes" (I am sort of yes, very yes, extremely yes(on/in-direction), etc).

 

[alpha88]

A) Where does energy fit in?

B) You might be crazy.

 

[Gannon]

Originally posted by: alpha88
A) Where does energy fit in?

B) You might be crazy.

Energy fits in = light has particle wave dality (and so do electrons) But...

If P is an object (distinct, has a boundary), then it can be represented by numbers, and binary numbers.

I was trying to figure out how rainbows were made, how is a photon "split" into a color? It didn't make sense to me, if white contained every color. Therefore wavelength's are oscilating with polarity (0/1) in 'fractal' shape (continuous). so it seemed to me that color was a 'division' of light, and light equally =1 in binary.. because distinct (numbers) of color coming from one object didn't make sense, unless it contained some kind of strangeness.

But light seems to have 3 objects... P(object), and w(object) AND the boundary object (that holds the two together in a "photon object"). Light is a compound object because it has distinct data that can be differentiated (each object, has a boundary, and therefore also
has data FOR the boundary itself)

The only way you will understand is if you use geometric figures on paper representing points and lines and shapes.

A line is a geometric oobject, but it is more then that, it is a CHAIN of (1) (it is like a infinitely recursive point (all merged, therefore all connected, therefore all recursive). So all boundaries are all recursive (merged-> joined-->recursive->connected).

Ok ... in boolean NUMBER (logic)

there is only ONE number (one) Here's the hard part....

ONE is not just a number, it is a compound object if it is a number. Here we go.

If a natural one can be represented by binary...

2^0 = 1


Then a biinary number can be represented like so
2^0(binary N) = 1

But it would have another component (the function)

function(add) binary number(1)
function (minus) binary number(1)

With a limit of 1 plus (the charge vector + or -) (since in binary logic, the only number is 1, or reflections (divisions) of itself.

If binary IS an number, it is both a number and an object, AND a function. That should make sense.

Here is the hard part ... this would mean that binary OPERATORS, also have BINARY numbers.

Since operators are objects (therefore they are ALSO numbers) because if they have NO DATA (no function data) they have no existence.

No data = no boundary (and boundary data) = no existence.

So a boolean number has 'boundary data' (boolean probability numbers???) that we can't see.

Use sheet of paper, (blank), draw a circle, that will be your binary number 1. But... notice how it is both a CIRCLE and an AREA (it has a boundary, and a data area), that means geometrically that the edge of the circle, also has numbers that represent its location (data).

You have to use geometry to really grasp it. Believe me it was fucking hard for me to get this far. lol.


OK here is the MAYAN numeral system... look at what represents the numbers... lines and points.

When we say "one" what we really mean is...

(function one newobject-function)(defineFunction)(object-one)defineobjectlocation(one)define(objectbounadry)
(stop-boundaryfunction-at-vector x)

That is what is contained in the number one, before we "write it down"

Because in different number systems, they are represented by geometric shapes.

Which got me thinking, that numbers are OBJECTS, but also SHAPES, they are "object-shapes-and-data-shapes".

Because a geometric object that can't be defined (in binary) doesn't exist.

Try to create shapes, using only binary numbers... this is what I did, and thats how I came up with the idea, there must be a "superset" of binary since binary IS an LOGIC-NUMBER therefore, and it is an object, so BINARY itself, should be able to represent SHAPES, of ITSELF (using only numbers between (-1 and and +1)

So all binary shapes would be fractals (divisions/reflections) of the the logical ONE.


It seems that binary when we see it as a "Yes function" is actually, fractally recursive.

It can be divided infinitely many times. Which means that when we say we are "leaning towards" something.

It can have infinitely many levels of "leaning"... think of it this way..


How much (+yes-on-(function lean) do I want to go to the store?

All of our words are complicated compound data-shaped-objects, with data-shaped-boundary(objects) and functions, embedded within the words.

I felt that there must be some kind of way that words and languages are encoded that is being missed, and I came up with the idea that maybe binary is actually
the "basic" -number- data of (non binary) all numbers.

It made sense BECAUSE, you can have fractalional REAL numbers
that go on forever.

The easiest way to think about it is when we are 'counting"

we are really COPYING the "one object", (mirroring it, or fractalizing it --> dividing it)

Since all numbers are made of the "first" 1, then what makes

3 is really

3 (1) objects

3 x 5 is really

3(one objects) and then (function multi-add) 5(one objects) then
create new (combined object after- equal object)


I'll show you basic binary (1, -1)


binary ones actually look like this

+ = (positive-attract(object-function(data))
- = (negativ-attract(object-function(data))


booleans can only be 1 or -1 BUT, since they are NUMBERS (distinct from themselves)

i.e. you can imagine them as spheres, squares, etc

like +(square boolean 1) and -(square boolean 1). That means the "numerals" we use are actually SHAPES which represent DATA. When we say "number" we mean SHAPE-OBJECTS.

So if bolean numbers could be represented by squares and circles (totally flat, all black, etc).

This means that we can FRACTIONATE the BOOLEAN SQUARE-OBJECT-NUMBERS

What we call "numbers" have weird self-recursive properties that I'm (trying to) figure out.

That is just for the binray OPERATOR Since a YES is really a VECTOR (only 2 in binary)

So when we say "yes"

We mean (attract function yes)
or (attract function opposite yes)

There is only one function (the yes function)

But it has a VECTOR functon inside it.

If boolean (logic number) is a YES function it would look like this (we'll add the zero this time) (operator)(function)

(+1)(object-function-(positive) YES)
(+1)(null object function = 0 = NULL)
(-1)(Object function(negative) YES)

 

[lousydood]

I vote for B.

 

[Gannon]

Originally posted by: lousydood
I vote for B.

Then explain in electronics, binary is represented with (-) or a (+) of some oscillating frequency of energy. You can't get a boolean (-1) if there is no power (energy).

This is what a boolean logic number looks like

There is only one function (the yes function)

But it has a VECTOR functon inside it.

If boolean (logic number) is a YES function it would look like this (we'll add the zero this time) (operator)(function)

(+1)(object-function-(positive) YES)
(+1)(null object function = 0 = NULL)
(-1)(Object function(negative) YES)

YES is an object, 1 = 1, represent 1 as a a big square and on a piece of paper and you will get what I am saying, you can't get it if you don't use geometry.

Because in geometry when you do shape transformations, you need enough data about the shape, locations and objects or nothing exists.

 

[alpha88]

Originally posted by: Gannon
If P is an object (distinct, has a boundary), then it can be represented by numbers, and binary numbers.

Very few things can be exactly represented in binary. We just make lots of approximations.

How do you represent Pi in binary?

Originally posted by: Gannon
I was trying to figure out how rainbows were made, how is a photon "split" into a color? It didn't make sense to me, if white contained every color. Therefore wavelength's are oscilating with polarity (0/1) in 'fractal' shape (continuous). so it seemed to me that color was a 'division' of light, and light equally =1 in binary.. because distinct (numbers) of color coming from one object didn't make sense, unless it contained some kind of strangeness.

Light is made up of many photons. White light is made up of many photons of different energies. Our eyes have three different sensors, which vary in their sensitivity to the different photon energies. When one sensor is predominately excited, our brains 'see' a primary color. Our brain puts together the various ratios of excited sensors to determine all the other colors.

A rainbow has the light stream split up, where the photons spread based upon their energy. Thus in each little area, we see one color, rather than them all mixed together in white light.

Originally posted by: Gannon
But light seems to have 3 objects... P(object), and w(object) AND the boundary object (that holds the two together in a "photon object"). Light is a compound object because it has distinct data that can be differentiated (each object, has a boundary, and therefore also
has data FOR the boundary itself)

Light does not have 3 objects. It has no boundary. It doesn't have seperate P(object) and w(object) (I'm assuming you mean particle and wave).

 

[firewolfsm]

I only read your first post because I don't have time for the second.

Now, understand, I would probably sound like much more of an idiot than you if I tried so start some theory so don't feel bad. It just doesn't work.

I don't see what you've accomplished.

 

[alpha88]

Here is a general rule for making new theories.

First, you have to understand all the old theories. Then you can make new ones to address problems with the old ones.

 

[Gannon]

Originally posted by: alpha88

Originally posted by: Gannon
If P is an object (distinct, has a boundary), then it can be represented by numbers, and binary numbers.

Very few things can be exactly represented in binary. We just make lots of approximations.

How do you represent Pi in binary?

You said: "how do you represent Pi in binary?"

By realizing PI is not a number! (because we're STILL DIVIDING --> changing and adding to the numnber --> boundary of the number keeps changing and GROWING, therefore it is a GROWTH function --> fractal growth function!!).

Pi is not "A number" it is both A NUMBER AND a function!! ... I had this idea when I saw real numbers repeating, when I had two mirrors and saw that objects repeated themselves indefinitely (counting) but NEVER "fractionated" into pieces! So any real number that repeats endlessly, is... a self-recursive=number-and-a function.... I know... twisted stuff!!

because you are constantly DIVIDING (anything that is growing is not STATIC, it is MOVING -> changing, therefeore --> it is a FUNCTION). Try representing pi with shapes and you'll see what I mean, each "number" must be represented by the numbers of one that number represents.

3 would look like (BOX+BOX+BOX)

When we say "number 3" we really mean --> function (1+1+1)

The "+" is the "radi boundary function" (function-distance between).

i.e 3 would be 3 squares then a decimal just represents the "boundary" of where
a 3 (BOX+BOX+BOX) ends and the box-pieces begin --> to infinity!

The easy way to think of this is to imagine this is to get two mirrors and hold a piece of
paper with the number "1"

you see the set of ALL ONES all at "once" until they collapse into the the boundary(merge)

This means when we count we are not "counting" we are doing functions.

What exists between one and two?

The RADI(boundary function)

The easiest way to see this is get photo shop and start representing all multiples of one(3 is really 3 ones).

 

[alpha88]

Pi is a number. It doesn't change. It doesn't grow. It's not moving.

Just because we don't know all of the digits (nor can we), doesn't mean that it isn't a number.

 

[Gannon]

Originally posted by: alpha88
Pi is a number. It doesn't change. It doesn't grow. It's not moving.

Just because we don't know all of the digits (nor can we), doesn't mean that it isn't a number.

Actually, yes it is, the "number" is not, because pi is not ONE number, it is MANY numbers.
(many objects) a new number is a new object, new objects don't get created if the function that creates them are stationary, do they?

Pi is a SELF-RECURSIVE number, it is both a number and a function.


I'll give you another function, very easy...

2/3 = 0.666 (repeated) on to infinity.

The easiest way to see this is to start representing each number (say 2) as shapes.

2 would look like on paper or in photoshop...

Then put the number above the numerals we use in columns.. above the shapes

BOX (and) BOX

 

[alpha88]

So Pi is three boxes and a smidge less than 1/7th of a box?

 

[Gannon]

Originally posted by: alpha88
So Pi is three boxes and a smidge less than 1/7th of a box?

Exactly. google "mayan numerals"

And check it out, other cultures used SHAPES to represent numbers, our numerals remember... are just ARBITRARY.. we could represent one with a dog, or an apple.

Or any OBJECT. because when we say "one" we mean we have "one object"

And there must have been a function to CREATE the "one object'


Because one APPLE is

Function attract-bind(oneobject and boundary(radius or radi) to (apple object).

Makes much more sense now doesn't it? heh.

If we could look at infinity, it would be looking at fractals, because essentially, a fractal is both a number and a function, in the same number.

I discovered that real numbrs (that have decimal fractions) are fractals (even if they don't go on forever) by using geometry for numreals instead of regulur numbers we use (1), etc).

 

[Nathelion]

I can't quite decide whether you are deranged, or a genius. Actually now that I think about it, you may be both. The line is usually very thin to begin with.

At any rate, you have to start defining your terms if you want anyone to understand what you're saying. Just to pick an example, it is obvious that "number" does not mean the same thing to you as it does in conventional mathematics.

 

[Gannon]

Originally posted by: Nathelion
I can't quite decide whether you are deranged, or a genius. Actually now that I think about it, you may be both. The line is usually very thin to begin with.

At any rate, you have to start defining your terms if you want anyone to understand what you're saying. Just to pick an example, it is obvious that "number" does not mean the same thing to you as it does in conventional mathematics.

The only way to show the logic clearly is to use a 3D program and have the calculations converted to shapes.

No sense --> no data --> no object --> no pattern --> no boundary-->no object --> no exist... Whew... thats the way I thought it out.

I have this strange ability to feel the meanings of words and find their roots (i.e. I can detect when a word or phrase, is vague) then I look it up on google to find a "precise" definition... and I always thought of WORDS as SHAPES.. like I could "sense the vagueness of a word" which I thought was weird.

To anyone smart enough--> Write a 3D plugin for 3D studio max or Maya Represent perform the PI function, represent every (digit) number as a shape

with the rule

for each 1 a number is composed of, it has a shape and a location(plane)

So it would look like this

1.2345 would be:

1 box for each number of one, a "number" we use contains. So 2 would be (box + box)

(box) then a special boundary for the "decimal" (can be whatever you want)

Then it would be (box) and(box) for 2 (on the same PLANE) like on a sheet of paper,

Each number would have it's own sheet in a 3D co-ordinate space.


This would probably mean that 'infinity exists', because all numbers are reflections or projections of the first, and the first number is self recursive truth. To see this (without terms) get two mirrors, and put any object in front of it while having the mirrors reflect back on themselves. -> you can see all "apples' to the limit of the mirrors.

TRUTH = TRUTH (1 = 1, all = all)

ALL NUMBERS, EXIST ALL THE TIME. ALWAYS. Why? One exists, what is one? one
is truth. Truth is one. ALL (ONE-shape(box)) IS ONE(one-shape-box).

Math is the study of patterns(of one), which STUDIES recursive reflections backwards, or forwards of itself.

The boolean Number exists, therefore all the reflections of the boolean number exists.

I have to work out the details, but as you can see it is related to fractals...

The only way you can do it is by using SHAPES to represent the NUMBER., and you have to visualize it... to really "See" it.

 

[futuristicmonkey]

Gannon, what level of education have you received? Major/minor?

 

[RossGr]

Real numbers exist independently of how you represent them. We commonly use a decimal representation, however, a binary representation is also useful, you could also use a ternary, or octal, or hexadecimal representation, and it would not change the basic properties of the real numbers. There is nothing special or different about how you represent a real number; binary numbers can represent ANY real number (to as many digits as you care to write) as can the decimal system. There is no point in dreaming up special properties of binary numbers, as they are simply a different method of representing a real number. Spend you time learning about the real number system if you wish to do something useful.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Gannon
Then explain in electronics, binary is represented with (-) or a (+) of some oscillating frequency of energy. You can't get a boolean (-1) if there is no power (energy).

This is what a boolean logic number looks like

There is only one function (the yes function)

But it has a VECTOR functon inside it.

If boolean (logic number) is a YES function it would look like this (we'll add the zero this time) (operator)(function)

(+1)(object-function-(positive) YES)
(+1)(null object function = 0 = NULL)
(-1)(Object function(negative) YES)

YES is an object, 1 = 1, represent 1 as a a big square and on a piece of paper and you will get what I am saying, you can't get it if you don't use geometry.

Because in geometry when you do shape transformations, you need enough data about the shape, locations and objects or nothing exists.

I highly recommend reading up on the calculus of variations. Its application in mechanics is that all vectors representing some conserved quantity (mass, momentum, or energy) may be represented as two single scalars. Those scalars happen to be potential and kinetic energy.

As for the rest of your stuff, I think you're confused about some basic physics, as other people have already pointed out. I'll agree that there is no necessary reason to use Arabic numerals to represent numbers, but that doesn't make the numbers themselves any less real. The "realness" of numbers and the existing mathematical systems that we use is evidenced by our ability to quantitatively model physical phenomena from first principles using this system. It turns out that these equations all have a common root in the Sturm-Liouville functional, which gives rise to the conservation equations that I mentioned above (that many people would call "equilibrium" or "field" equations).

 

[lousydood]

Trying to reason about the real world from nothing more than the structure of terminology is the classic mistake of ancient and medieval scholastic philosophers. Symbols are meaningless in themselves, semantics must be attached to them explicitly and then used as a language for communication, nothing more. Otherwise you fall into the trap of circular reasoning.

Thankfully, the nonsense that used to pass for philosophy is mostly wiped out in serious thinking nowadays. This is just an attempt at trolling, or a genuine net.kook, if there is a difference between those two, even.

 

[Soros]

This is gannon
(not at home,)

Originally posted by: RossGr
Real numbers exist independently of how you represent them.We commonly use a decimal representation, however, a binary representation is also useful, you could also use a ternary, or octal, or hexadecimal representation, and it would not change the basic properties of the real numbers. There is nothing special or different about how you represent a real number; binary numbers can represent ANY real number (to as many digits as you care to write) as can the decimal system. There is no point in dreaming up special properties of binary numbers, as they are simply a different method of representing a real number. Spend you time learning about the real number system if you wish to do something useful.

They do, but "Real nummbers" that go on forever, are self-recursive, if you expressed.

0.999...(repeating) as dinstint shapes(for this example that never split, even though a shape would split) it would look like

Then EACH 9 is not "a 9"

Each concept of 1 is by itself AN OBJECT, therefore a
0.9

is a (9 groups of 0.1)

It is not "9"

Numbers are abstractions for OBJECTS, there is no such thing as a number which is NOT an object, because ALL objects have boundaries, and if you have NO BOUNDARIES then you have NO DATA (boundaries = distintion)

If you have no DISTINCT number, then you have NO NUMBER

But a binary number is DISTINCT.

Tell what would a real number look like, since it is composed of 1's and fractions of ones, each TYPE of one, if it were represented by a color and a shape according to it's position in the SEQUENCE... this would prove you wrong very easily.

Since when we say "9" we define the number 9 to mean this(9-symbol)=(9 Groups of the number (1).

That's what a number is, all numbers are projections or reflections of the first, it would be impossible to argue, that numbers are NOT composed of DISTINCT one OBJECTS.

Objects are numbers, NOT the other way around.

There is no such thing as (9 groups of the number 9) because that would equal 9x9

9(groups-of-function) function(object(1) (mirror-to-vector) =

When you write a "2" two is a compound one it is not a "2", since 2 can be divide by one, it must be composed of 1.

This is what factoring is all about, how do you find "common factors"? There are no common factors if they are not recursive.

10 can be represented by

(2) and a (5)
or 10 (1)'s

Start visualizing numbers in a 3D space to get what I am saying, because it's quite clear you do not.

 

[KIAman]

Zero is a real number which has no corrosponding object. Assuming there was an object corrosponding with 0 (zero) then another object 1 (one) can be infinately cut into pieces the size of 0(zero).

 

[firewolfsm]

"By realizing PI is not a number! (because we're STILL DIVIDING --> changing and adding to the numnber --> boundary of the number keeps changing and GROWING, therefore it is a GROWTH function --> fractal growth function!!). "

You do know what fractal means right? Pi is irrational, there is no pattern or steady growth. It's not a fractal function.

 

[Soros]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
"By realizing PI is not a number! (because we're STILL DIVIDING --> changing and adding to the numnber --> boundary of the number keeps changing and GROWING, therefore it is a GROWTH function --> fractal growth function!!). "

You do know what fractal means right? Pi is irrational, there is no pattern or steady growth. It's not a fractal function.

I mean a "dividing" function, I confused "fractal" with divid. But fractals have patterns because they are repeating numbers, pi repeats BUT does not have a (distinguishable) pattern, but it does NOT mean it is not a function.

Like I said, if you represented ALL the numbers as fractions of a BOX, the shape of the boxes woudl appear to grow if you animated the function.

Each number (1) in all numbers is DISTINCT OBJECT

There are no such things as objects that EXIST that are INDISTINCT, because all objects have BOUNDARIES, and boundaries themselves are FUNCTIONS

functionbind(1) now you have a 1, that's exactly what you do when you write "1" or a "box" that represents some picture, sound or object.

Because if you are REFERENCING an object, even one that is not-typical, all objects have data, you cannot reference --> null.

what we call zero is not a number actually...

What we call zero is really an axis of reflection in the real world. There is no such thing
as a "zero divided object' in hte real world. you can't "zero divide" a picture, because there is NO PICTURE to devide.

When you say "I am going to divide an apple by zero" you are saying "I am not going to divide the apple")

I am going to divide an apple by (not-data).

This is why mayans represented zero as something else, it was a strange boundary

Because if zero is a number, then it has to be one, because ONE is the only number, ZERO is actually just a representation of a boundary, when we say...

0.9999 what we really mean is
Boundary(fractional 1 is the decimal)

. 99999

Same thing, zero is just a placeholder, not a number, all numbers are made of 1, even "10"
is not really "10
it is 10[boxes]

If you rerepesnted 10 as 10 boxes, you would see that there is no "zero" only 'ten (one-object) boxes.

ALl geometric shapes have boundaries, therefore any number that can't be represented as a shape, dot, line, etc. is not a number.

 

[KIAman]

A photon has a mass of zero. Photons exist. Photons are required for humans to discern boundaries. Boundaries are required to make an object. Object exists.

Zero exists.

 

[firewolfsm]

Ugh. REATARDS.

Yes zero exists.

Yes, every number can be expressed as a damn function, so? We're not graphing.

And 10 is short for 1+1+1 etc.

We know all this.

You're not proving anything.

You're just being flat out wrong from time to time.