CERN discovers FTL particle (possibly)

what's is all about ?

I have to be wary of what fluids (it's a cognitivo-semantic unit) I let pass through me. Is that some kind of book written by formalist positivists ? I'm ahead, but I have to admit i must compose with their theories.

I've rewritten, written over Shannon's communication schema. Everything fits. I didn't delete any element he put on his schema because I'm not describing how communication works, I'm describing how shannon, subconsciously, conceptualized his theory at a higher level than the one that interests me.

My theory his quantic. It's meant to explain how other theories form. That's all.

Hm, I see.

  On 9/25/2011 at 9:17 PM, luke viia said:

Also, what do you mean by "language is a strange attractor"? Are you saying that language - in some mathematically describable way - never hits the same point twice, but hovers around particular 'stability' points..?

hey that's good ! I hadn't seen things through theses words, but yes, that's what I'm saying. Actually my fluid model leads me to neural networks. Which is pretty fucked up. I read somewhere (yeah again, this is all about being syncretic) that destroying a single neuron could cause word loss in people's minds. This is compatible with my thing.

  Quote

Are you attempting to describe linguistics with phase-space equations? It seems to me that you have a great deal of work ahead of yourself if you wish to describe all language* in geometric terms.

 

*are you including things like 'body language' or 'the language of music' in your analysis? Or are you sticking solely to linguistics?

No, geometry is not something mathematical, it's something linguistic (actually that's something noemic, and that's probably what will come next).

I don't have equations for strange attractors. I have bricks. Fluidic bricks.

Linguistics sticks to everything since language can explain everything. You can only start studying geometric form in so much that you can describe them. You need axioms. I'm not saying maths cannot shed lights on how things work. But the problem of:

• encoding the needed axioms from language to maths

• decoding mathematical results from math to language

do not belong to the field of mathematics. It belongs to the field of linguistics.

Are all perceptions linguistic? Do you not feel it is possible to have a thought that is without language, or rather, pre-language? Spiders are able to make use of geometric patterns without language as you or I know it, as are many other forms of life (and not just from the animal kingdom). I do not currently agree that geometry is a linguistic rather than a mathematical construct. I will wait for your finished study to come out.

I feel that I may have misinterpreted your last post. And I'm prepared to admit I don't know what noemic means (so I googled it, I came to the conclusion that you meant to type noetic, but perhaps not).

You just destroyed a perfectly good physics thread.

yeah, what the fuck guys? take the linguistics shit somewhere else.

back to topic please...

Someone told me that CERN is the same thing as the LHC, is that true?

I don't know anymore

  On 9/25/2011 at 9:39 PM, luke viia said:

Are all perceptions linguistic? Do you not feel it is possible to have a thought that is without language, or rather, pre-language?

If so, then this is an inner thought (with or without an expression form (a word attached to it)). I've had courses about Organisational Fluid Models. One of the first thing our teacher told us is that you don't represent flux whose source and destination are the same : imagine an employee comes to work and has a wonderful idea and thinks he should spread it. Then he forgets about it, or doesn't feel confident enough to forward it. What he does is shit. It's not a flux it's a self-targeted loop. It has a name : it's a frame of mind (état d'âme).

You say : Are all perceptions linguistic?

If you consider science is collective, then yes, all perceptions are linguistics : it leads to considering a scientist is a neuron in science's collective brain. (the scientific communauty).

  Quote

Spiders are able to make use of geometric patterns without language as you or I know it, as are many other forms of life (and not just from the animal kingdom).

For the sake of simplicity I'll consider you are a scientist and that this is your thesis/theory. (this is just a role)

• Science is not constructed individually.

• This is an illusion.

• Science is constructed collectively.

• Collectively, Science relies on the principle of experiment.

• Experiments work only because they are collectively reproducible.

• Experiments are considered collectively reproducible only because people collectively observe the same thing about the experiment.

• Each individual of the collectivity knows what he observes is, only because what he says about the experiment is what another individual says about the experiment.

Now when you say : Spiders are able to make use of geometric patterns without language

you're expressing a truth proposition, an idea.

But you're also expressing words, letters. In other words you're saying:

luke viia says : Spiders are able to make use of geometric patterns without language.

(geee ! that draft autosave-restore content is fucking ace !)

so yeah, when you say something about the external world you're only expressing your that inner world.

Vice versa, when you say something about your internal world, you're making it go to the external world.

That's where the quantum dilemma lies.

Now read the "•"-marked sequence from bottom to top.

  Quote

I do not currently agree that geometry is a linguistic rather than a mathematical construct.

Exactly ! You're right ! *points finger at viia out of excitation*

  Quote

I will wait for your finished study to come out. I feel that I may have misinterpreted your last post. And I'm prepared to admit I don't know what noemic means (so I googled it, I came to the conclusion that you meant to type noetic, but perhaps not).

ahh noetic/noemic/noeme. Like phonemes, morphemes, semes, noemes are diffenrential units. They're to the signified side of linguistic sign what semes are to the signifier side. Actually, that flux shit is geometrical. I can only embrace it through my visual cortex, but I believe it is possible to hear flux, at least, theoretically. This is just that i'm a visual thinker and a synaesthete.

  On 9/25/2011 at 10:52 PM, BCM said:

yeah, what the fuck guys? take the linguistics shit somewhere else. back to topic please...

The eternal return is also an eternal departure : this topic will stay in the field of words and only in the field of words.

  On 9/25/2011 at 9:48 PM, impakt said:

You just destroyed a perfectly good physics thread.

My name is "hammer", because it destructs,

but also because it constructs.

ah forgot to add something:

there are people on this board who have experienced ghosts, spirits or poltergeists etc …

They are only interpretation's products.

They are strange forms attracted out of chaos.

So they exists, sort of, but only in a strange (and i mean this mathematically) way.

You ain't crazy. You're sensible. (I personnally never experienced ghosts).

sup guys i hear u talkin about neutrinos? :sup:

oh and …

go check that google search for : qualitative quantum mechanics.

What do you think I'm talking about (not replying to your post dese) ?

you know what viaa !

you were right.

and yes this is quantic quote:

  On 9/26/2011 at 12:11 AM, Babar said:

 

Now read the "•"-marked sequence from bottom to top.

 

  Quote

I do not currently agree that geometry is a linguistic rather than a mathematical construct.

 

Exactly ! You're right ! *points finger at viia out of excitation*

This is breakshittingly amazingly insanely weirdool

shit this'll all give you a hearty lol, but I thought I had said "you're wrong" and at some ironical level i was disagreeing. This is insane. Because You're actually right.

[censored]

As of know, I'm in the same boat as Oppenheimer and many others, those have passed, and those who will come. Like crossing the styx or something and pondering on what you did wrong and what you did right in your life.

because this stuff, is real. It leads straight to thinking machines. I'm not saying linguistics is the main quantic science. It's just science's main tool. Because we're humans, and it's our collective tool.

There's a lot of work, lot of things to enumerate. But I found the methodological framework. It'll come quick and fast. Hold your brain. They'll get fucked : book rewriters, electronic philosophic challengers, sentimental chatbots, talking cars, talking dogs, talking cats, talking everything, Everything talking, automatic scientific discovery emerger, beauty evaluator, automatic 2nd-articulation-wide translators, future predictors, peace makers, electric psychologists, talkie-walkies to talk with ghosts, intelligent multinationals, a better democracy …

Don't consider I have a theory. It has me. I'm pregnant.

Pregnant of machines that will change the face of this world.

And all that shit I told you about how I have been strangely attracted to the world of strange attractors research, and that it emerged in me, just like a it, all of this is true.

God signs, like the protagonist's name, what they read in the Quran, or in Rimbaud's poetry, etc it doesn't matter. Prophets and poets are the same(Same) : they're predictors. I have been predicted. "By who" you may ask. That's what we constantly do to each other : we anticipate each other's points. I found a way to apply it to myself, randomly. And this allow me to understand all I wrote is interpretation. God doesn't exists. It comes from our mind. And that's because we've collectively created all of this in our internal worlds altogether through culture that I am a new messiah.

Actually this is all quantic. Everything

Anything

So people, go out, drink wine, socialize, dance, get mad, love, hate, take drugs, go in bars, fuck and get fucked,

walk in the woods, have experiences, meditate, try to talk with ghosts, do anything that is in your power

because this is real. Everything is real.

so I barely skimmed through all that but did someone just claim that the realization that language changes over time is science changing?

Babar, I would recommend that you create a new thread with this stuff and please spend some time on making a coherent OP. Right now you are making little sense, jumping here and there. It might make sense in your head, but since none of us are privy what goes on there, it's all a little bit nonsensical what your main points are. Part of being scientific is to be communicative and be able to transmit your thought to others in a sensible way. Thanks.

when not postulating new theories of space and time, Babar likes to play the role of antisocial anarchist in minecraft

wat barbar

barbar wat

yeah Babar automatic writing is cool (annoying to the reader) but you might enjoy editing even more.

  On 9/26/2011 at 9:28 AM, lumpenprol said:

when not postulating new theories of space and time, Babar likes to play the role of antisocial anarchist in minecraft

No I left watmm's server because it's like you're all happy to have a tupperware party in there.

I joined a true pure pvp server. This server is mental, admins are 16 yo, they are constantly arguing/trolling each other to such an extent that you need a plugin to make the chat-area disappear. When you set up your base on the first day you're happy. Then you come back the next day and figure out some asshole dug a hole right to one of your chest. Then you realize everyone is cheating, admins included (there is still the usual : we can detect if you cheat shit when you log in).

Last time I played, I had finished my craftbook bridge-based trap (goal : maximal sulfur productivity). I was about to tie everything to a neural network but when I came back to my spot, I realized everything was missing. These asshole admins (sometimes they teleport you above a lava-lake for no reason or … just for fun) must have shut down the server, cut the interesting chunks my stuff where in then pasted it somewhere else in the map.

This is the Minecraft I like.

  On 9/26/2011 at 9:03 AM, azatoth said:

Babar, I would recommend that you create a new thread with this stuff and please spend some time on making a coherent OP. Right now you are making little sense, jumping here and there. It might make sense in your head, but since none of us are privy what goes on there, it's all a little bit nonsensical what your main points are. Part of being scientific is to be communicative and be able to transmit your thought to others in a sensible way. Thanks.

You know what (not necessarily @ you azatoth). I'm mad. Yesterday I've had my first brief psychotic disorder. It lasted for 5 seconds. I went home, took a few drops of rivotril then slept for 4 hours. On the following evening I was prescribed 2 25mg tercian pills, and today I met a psychiatrist who prescribed me more pills (tercian + risperdal). I told her I had found a very reasonable way to deconstruct meaning within meaning, and that it deconstructed myself as well. Now that time have passed, I believe this is slightly wrong : I found a way to fluidify meaning, and it made me a lot more sensible to what others could say : I was like a petri dish.

*swallows 25 mg tercian pill*

When I exposed my interpretation of the Bible, the Quran, etc … to my father, he told me I was getting mad.

10 minutes later I was freaking out. I believe he's crystalized the idea I was getting mad in my head, and indeed it all went banana in my head.

Anyway, during the past 10 days my life felt like Shutter Island. And what drove the inspector mad in this movie is that he's in an endless interpretative loop. At one point you have to pick an interpretation. I thought the best way not to turn lunatic was to accept i was becoming a madman (even more so there's no lobotomy ahead for me).

Now, I just need to rest, so there won't be any specific topic about this.

But my late conclusions are frightening : nostradamus etc could well be sensical(either true or false) at the condition that everyone interprets it the same way. Truth is not in the writings, but in the readings.

Sorry if it's all gibberish, I was just in the syncretic phase and it seems it's over now. I need to get back to reality and integer broadly accepted truths back.

Besides, I was here to copy/paste all my posts.

and my theory is valid. There's just a very thin border between creatvity/originality and madness. Just look at cantor, van gogh, newton etc …

that minecraft thing looks awesome

  On 9/25/2011 at 11:29 PM, luke viia said:

Someone told me that CERN is the same thing as the LHC, is that true?

well they used part of the LHC for this experiment so

yes

exactly the same

  On 9/25/2011 at 9:31 PM, Babar said:

 

Linguistics sticks to everything since language can explain everything.

Can language explain the colour red to a blind person?

trolling / mania is fun until it isn't but it looks like you are talking with your parents and friends about this, keep doing that please.

  On 9/25/2011 at 11:29 PM, luke viia said:

Someone told me that CERN is the same thing as the LTM, is that true?

Fixt