Nice to hear from you Q7. My ideas are heretical, and without the benefit of masses of people thrashing through all the details, so it is easy to ridicule, much harder and needs much more courage to stick through with all this when it is not spotlit.
I like first article in the long thread you mentioned - Copernicus used Euclid, Euclid had already proven his worth, so how can anyone challenge Euclid now? And yet I do. Butvery few people will want to hear, that has always been the problem, 400 yearsago, whenever.
The thread also starts by mentioning Einstein's FLEXIBILITY - changing his point of view - until he could derive practical solutions to complexpuzzles ofnature. Thisis exactly the challenge for Fractal Dialectics.
Because many academic careers are built on the ideas that I undermine, my FIRST book on all this only covers the most practical ways an average person can apply Fractal Dialectics for what the average person wants, a better life.
A better life is TIMING - being in the right place at the right time. And realising that often, now is not the time, nor the place. This is always my centralchallenge in my life. And yours?
We are consciousness in material form, but mathematics pretends, no problems, if you cannot live easily in society, you are unworthy to think, but in fact, the only real thinkers do not manage social skills -Einstein, Newton, etc were very odd and in their isolation they found answers. A theory of Everything also must connect to the basic challenges most of us face, the ridiculousness of living in a human body that needs so much, is so frail, and the emotional flow that sweeps through people. The tribal glue of let's ridicule this oddball -when in fact the oddballs always have the telescope or empirical results first.
I think you are being fanciful or attempting to ridicule, there is no logic in the latter part of your post about andromeda, Ra Uru Hu, or my website. Timing is a DEEP challenge. Currently my internet is still disconnected.
My conclusion isthat thisis a struggle too far to explain to closed minds. Thanks anyway for reminding me of certain key issues.
I hope that you have the guts to face empirical facts with logic. It is not only entertaining searching the shadows for sense among the nonsense, off piste the snow is really suprisingly experiential. Experience is heterogenous, and how can mathematics touch that? Basically Euclid is the contradiction to experience, not logic, and sucha genius, in his day, would surely go BEYOND our ideas today as he did in his own time.
Timing is everything, Q7. This species will not experience too many more yearsto know the limitsof time, any talkof crashing into andromeda is inherently espoteric when we cannot yet explain the mechanics of consciousness, emotion, life, and all that makes us more than a machine.
Time as a concept is so suspect I do say it iswrong. Timing, ah - yes, getting to post here and the choice to do this instead of other things, ah yes, timing, is everything for us as empirical beings. To assume that some God's eye view is there where Time is beyond human eyes is esoteric, religious, and cannot be right, it can only be a possibility that we can never touch see nor hear as the fabric of time is beyond experience itself. The concept of time is a fetish, a comfort, that academics seem to worship. Axioms are beyond proof.
Best wishes
Mike
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by quanta07 |