GENIUS FORUMS

What would happen when you could make finite seem infinite and infinite seem finite? Would it be a change of perception or logic? If you place finite on the x-axis and infinite on y-axis depending on the location to which you get closer or further to/from zero using either x/y could give you the "perception" that finite seems infinite and infinite seems finite, a clear deception in mathematics but who is to say that it is not used in the world today? For example with the creation of time, everyone views it indifferently, to some the days seem too long (maybe forever) and others too short (maybe split second), of which we all get to experience both. Should we time by clock (counting) logic tells us it is the correct time frame, yet when we sense time and are notified that time is up it feels longer than it should have been.

For some reason I was gardening today and this idea just popped up in my head and I wanted to get feedback on what people think, not about everything i have said but the first question "What would happen when you could make finite seem infinite and infinite seem finite?"

Hai Kim wrote:What would happen when you could make finite seem infinite and infinite seem finite? Would it be a change of perception or logic? If you place finite on the x-axis and infinite on y-axis depending on the location to which you get closer or further to/from zero using either x/y could give you the "perception" that finite seems infinite and infinite seems finite, a clear deception in mathematics but who is to say that it is not used in the world today? For example with the creation of time, everyone views it indifferently, to some the days seem too long (maybe forever) and others too short (maybe split second), of which we all get to experience both. Should we time by clock (counting) logic tells us it is the correct time frame, yet when we sense time and are notified that time is up it feels longer than it should have been.

For some reason I was gardening today and this idea just popped up in my head and I wanted to get feedback on what people think, not about everything i have said but the first question "What would happen when you could make finite seem infinite and infinite seem finite?"

A perception (deception) is a limit. At the limit, the onset of an eventual extrapolation is initiated if one wants to understand aspects in their infinity. This means one samples some data and measures the superset for the purpose of a potentially meaningful extension. For thereafter, mathematical induction could provide universal existence. Uniqueness and existence are key concepts in mathematics but how many keys are there anyway ? On the other side, understanding the infinite through the finite requires either some advanced curve-fitting skills and a set of balls or tits (or rather both) functioning as some kind of suit protecting you from cosmic radiation and the invasion of alien forces in your body, or, it may require death (and rebirth), or, one may also require e-books, ordinary books and NO live teachers pretending they can explain everything. The alien shit occurs at a stage where you subconsciously know your abstract machines are a potential danger for certain establishments on earth and "danger" is a relative term. Leaving this aside in a full understanding of the nature of imagination on this planet, x/y is a ratio, distinguished from your intention with the symbols. You probably meant "x and y" but you knew this in your intention. It is also dangerous to expand your consciousness in these directions...that is...in trying to make the infinite finite. You need "k times yourself" distributed over time curves T,T',T'',... and some good intercoms if you want to survive the real dream imposed by the transparent belief-system called mathematics. But it is more easy to understand complex phenomena than obviousness itself, interrelated in complexity. Complex does not refer to complexity here, but to perception. One sees finiteness in the end. It depends on how much your will desires a structure of the self to be fragmented.

One answer to your question could be simple;

If you are making things infinite using a finite structure, then you may be proving "for all..." and the other way around you may prove a "there exists..."

But this is incomplete and therefore bullshit. Everything is bullshit. Things are not complete, so one gets hooked, other things seem complete and one is satisfied. Uniqueness and existence...correlation is also closely related...and especially quantummechanics if one wants to capture some portion of infinity in a vessel (finite structure).

So one can use; For all X, there exists an Y, where Y feeds your mind back "back" into the machine requiring X; while this machine will providing recursion as a measure to capture portions of insanity where incompleteness comes as Z, poking in your back while you may realize that pokey is an existent elephant eluding you by hiding the fact that pokey = opkey = operational key so that you may shout; "where the hell is it ??!"

Hai Kim wrote:"What would happen when you could make finite seem infinite and infinite seem finite?"

Why do you care?

An enlightened mind knows they are one on the same. A dried up leaf and Britney Spears are part of the same seamless reality.

prince wrote:

Hai Kim wrote:"What would happen when you could make finite seem infinite and infinite seem finite?"

Why do you care?

An enlightened mind knows they are one on the same. A dried up leaf and Britney Spears are part of the same seamless reality.

I care because I see something that shouldn't be seen, and in order for me to comprehend this I have to ask select questions, especially those that register into my brain as "thought" and lingers throughout the day. You can but ask yourself so many questions, it helps to rationalize my thoughts and ideas with the world in which reciprocates limitless information.

Additionally I am not asking if they are part of the same, but what would be the result of such things? You seem to miss the question at hand, this is where critical thinking comes to play.

dejavu wrote:Manatron:

"Everything is bullshit"

lol Everything is a joke at least, until it isn't.

it ?

time as a whole, as the Universe, can't be created. This is simple since the act of creating time would be time itself, and thus since any attempt to create time IS time itself, time can't have a beginning. You said something about a creation of time earlier.

dejavu wrote:Yes, no bullsh. Who for me and you. Nobody is the universe.

The universe is full of bodies but the question of hai kim is pointless. In another post, i ended with the question; precognition or creation ? This means that one cannot be sure if the universe is created or sensed but, if one asks a question like hai kim in this thread, then another person can literally construct a universe because one sees the other's transparency. If facts were presented by hai kim, then it would be a matter of relativity for one to reply.
On the other hand, nothing can be comprehended if it is not brought in relation to something else. On this forum or in most forums, one can end a thread and feel satisfied, not realizing that he or she may continue her of his internal affairs in the next thread that will be created eventually...but it is not necessary for this to be a case, because it is subjective. The point is that time can be created for the fellow human. But time itself, is then created, not the personal space of the other....space autocorrelates nevertheless, but aside from this; creation depends on the intention and mode of action and if the mode of action is self-organizing, then one becomes the universe and understands a very lot and if the mode of action creates dependency, then one is swallowed by the universe in awe because the universe is incomprehensible to extent. This means that it is a relative thing. God can make mistakes on his own plane of existence while the creations of god (humans) see him as flawless. He is flawless in the end, but not at the beginning.

I'll take it to the edge....Time travel is possible and ghosts do exist. One can travel back in time with the mind or in the future...UFO's exist as holograms...Jupiter is a sun on its own plane...neptunus is inhabitated....the sun is a point of focus for energies from outer space...The Self can be distributed over time....great inventors are created by their fans because of feedback loops....secret underground bases do exist....the planet is under heavy and non-metaphorical mind control...People are harnessed electromagnetically...

If anyone wants to argue; concerning these things...lets bring it on.

time travel is to receive energy from a non-local experience from the past

Manatron wrote:

dejavu wrote:Yes, no bullsh. Who for me and you. Nobody is the universe.

The universe is full of bodies but the question of hai kim is pointless.

There is a direct correlation between my question and self-awareness, what appears to be "pointless" to you is not to someone else as I am building on accomplishing something of a great feat in my lifetime, don't judge my question's character, there would be no point in typing random things as that would be a waste of my time and more importantly, the readers time.

Steven Coyle wrote:time travel is to receive energy from a non-local experience from the past

yes but what happens if there are people present in local time to the time traveller ?

Hai Kim wrote:

Manatron wrote:
The universe is full of bodies but the question of hai kim is pointless.

There is a direct correlation between my question and self-awareness, what appears to be "pointless" to you is not to someone else as I am building on accomplishing something of a great feat in my lifetime, don't judge my question's character, there would be no point in typing random things as that would be a waste of my time and more importantly, the readers time.

It is not my intention to attack you hehe. I am also saying (not in a direct sense but..) that your question is correlated with your self-awareness gained somewhere in the past...i am saying that "internal affairs" are always united in essence but that it may not seem that way at a first glance. It is pointless because it contains no points. It is universal and i do not attack universal questions....don't worry about it its nothing :)..but if you feel attacked...this means that you are afraid of something..that does not concern me really...but for what it is worth...i am sorry if i made you feel that way...
you want to know how many people are getting on MY nerves on this forum and in the world in general ? it is a constant conflict which does not exist in reality. The only ones that exist or could manifest are the ones that are being attracted. This means that nobody is my enemy but i myself...But you are someone else...

same spacetime

(f) = 2/4avb x 1/2x

Steven Coyle wrote:same spacetime

(f) = 2/4avb x 1/2x

What ? Can you explicate ?

Affects the under (subconscious ethereal layer) through the un (under conscious) to expedite a new zoomer: same spacetime.

(read it with "we re")

Steven Coyle wrote:Affects the under (subconscious ethereal layer) through the un (under conscious) to expedite a new zoomer: same spacetime.

(read it with "we re")

But how exactly ? How does information enter the subconscious mind to expedite this formation or zoomer of yours ? That is, how do you crack the code or how does transcendentalism aquire knowledge ?

Only a few know the secret of a village...

zero sum energy

Do you know it ?

Ah zero point energy...but there has to be some methodology

neurons and protoplasm

Those are concepts, but what about language ? An entity that everyone shares. Neurons don't tell anything, because if it would tell something, then it would only give you the synapse weights you have to pay after the self-programming.

the secret is language and writings

Neurons enable photons to function in a non-axormic function; as if, we all function through and through. Photons know how to react due to their zero point sum intel. Due to further invoice I must disappear into the ether (which surrounds us all now).

take [neuron] for example....This word does not mean anything. One can measure it by slicing the brain in half after a false understanding of language. Secrets are inside the language. The purpose of a neuron is deduced easily from the word itself pluraly.

neurons (start)
neur_ons (split)
neur_us (ons = us = dutch)
reun_us (permute)
reunite_us (expand)

the sole purpose of neurons is to be re-united. But this doesn't tell anything if the price is to be paid after the configuration. I must refrain myself if you know what i mean (there, you said the same and you know what i mean). Processes are accessed and not used as a mere reference. The only reference that i can remember are words which are not related in a specific neural architecture, so it would provide false information if i related them to finiteness. Facts are only useful for integration and not for reference.

neural pathology is deemed illiterate

pathology

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art ... lekey=6387

pathos = disease
logos = treatise

Treatise ? Logos means [word] or [thought] so if [treatise] has to be justified i can say that it is merely a treatise of words and sentences in the treatment of diseases. Field extension. If the treatment of neural dis-eases are a function of mathematical processes that are mimicked effectively in surgery, then surgeons are not illiterate. They are working for men who like to help people with "mental disorders". But not every schizoïd person needs help if it is all about language. That is, if language provides the key to self integration while the schizöid knows this, then there is no need for an operation; viewed from his eyes. A dis-ease in the psychological context is a feeling of un-ease. If on the other hand, other schizoïds or autists see no other choice, then professionals may help. Where is the medication in all this ? In a means for measuring. It is experimental in most cases.

where I was just at with mine with my brother