You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
I consider completed concepts as anything that is completed in/onto itself. We can look at religion as a quick example, because a religion contains a completing feature, like a snake biting its own tail. With god as the creator, we do not need to explain the beginning, because that aspect is already taken care of.
Looking at the binary system, but also the decimal system, I also see completed concepts: they capture all, but all is captured only according to the specific concept. Religion may show aspects of being limited, but these mathematical systems show their limitations as well.
Nobody's non-existentialism is also a good example of a completed concept. Anything that we can experience can ultimately be brought back to a larger idea of non-existentialism. It is the point where some words have lost their meaning/their importance, such as the word to exist. We can find a stunning truth in non-existentialism, but only after accepting the premises.
In religion, if one does not accept the idea that god created the universe, the question quickly comes back to the forefront how the universe began. When not accepting the premise of non-existentialism, many questions come back to the forefront as well. Yet when accepting the premise, we can move on and do other hopefully more beneficial things.
The most important aspect to understand of completed concepts is according to me that they place themselves on top of other completed concepts. The Christians place themselves above Hindus, the Hindus place themselves above Christians (just to name two religious expressions). It is close to impossible to be Hindu and Christian at the same time, and a choice must be made to
a/ choose for one of them;
b/ choose for another religion;
c/ decide not to choose;
d/ decide not to choose.
C and D are not identical. One can decide to not make a decision because both are considered of such great value that one prefers to not undermine either one, or one can decide neither has any value and so a choice is not of any importance. Two people each making one of these two choices are two different people: one is very religious, the other is very much not interested in what these two religions have to offer.
It is always dangerous to end with a charged word, such as the truth. As far as I can tell, completed deliveries can be found in science, philosophy, religion, and possibly in various other aspects. They tend to overlap each other, move into each other's territory, but none of them in specific is the one and only completed delivery: only as a collective do the various concepts deliver the truth for a TOE.
Would this then also defy those words? Because, am I not writing a singular delivery here? I think I am not because concepts that are abstracts can be plural in nature, but they are experienced as singular. My delivery is then just an abstract with a pluriform delivery of completed concepts. Only the completed concepts combined (overlap and all) deliver the overall truth.
The difference between a structure based on unification and a structure without unification hinges on the question if nothing is just plain nothing or if nothing is mighty fundamental. Read In Search of a Cyclops with titillating mathematical evidence (see homepage) to find out if separation belongs to the fundamental basics of our universe - or not.
...the binary system can express all. And I need it for my binary number-I Ching Idea of mine.
Okay, Profpat,
You made me curious. Will you please explain your binary number-I Ching idea?
The difference between a structure based on unification and a structure without unification hinges on the question if nothing is just plain nothing or if nothing is mighty fundamental. Read In Search of a Cyclops with titillating mathematical evidence (see homepage) to find out if separation belongs to the fundamental basics of our universe - or not.
A quantum computer could, say, discover the prime factors of a very large prime number in a split second, through the superposition of doing all the divisions at once, while a classical computer would take near to forever to do it. (Encrypted codes will not last.)
A quantum Profpat could achieve superposition with all women at once, thus removing the time factor that prevents him from giving unconditional love to everywomb.
A quantum Profpat could achieve superposition with all women at once, thus removing the time factor that prevents him from giving unconditional love to everywomb.
Profpat said, some posts earlier, that his research on women indicated open, closed, and maybe, sort of like the three states of a quantum qubit being 1, 0, or maybe 1 or 0 (superimposed).
Profpat said, some posts earlier, that his research on women indicated open, closed, and maybe, sort of like the three states of a quantum qubit being 1, 0, or maybe 1 or 0 (superimposed).
Did you enjoy your time off?
There we go again - when will people realise Protheory explains this!
Three potential truth values:
Positive - negative and neutral
Yes - not Yes (no) - not yes and not no (a big maybe!)
Time off spend on making video for youtube - Profpat will like it I'm sure!
Last edited by Lloyd Gillespie : 10-21-2007 at 12:07 PM.
What about Choice E all the above. This way we have Mahatma Gandhi pick:
Later in his life when he was asked whether he was a Hindu, he replied:
"Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew." Best to all,
Linear Mode
