/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10804353
stop smoking crack

>>10804353
...sir, I just want a big mac with fries

>>10804353
>most basic form of existence
true and false

>>10804390
>stop smoking crack
You and OP ain't got shit on my bias.

In this method I prescribe, existence is exhibiting a lenseing via collapse.
That collapse is inherent. Because a factor exists without resolve point.
Giving the illusion of time, space, and motion.
It would be like the effect one has visually when they come to a stop, after a long time in motion.
Extreme version would be a dolly zoom effect they do for movies.

This lenseing is what I conceive was used to infer that Inflation is real.
With this method, lenseing happens in all directions and values. Thus would explain Redshift.
It also as a direct case caused from the method to derive CSP existence.
In no way does it rely on assuming that a thing is to exist before it does.
Or become from noting without a relative, rational cause.
It may appear from no point. But is acceptable by logic, and rational in why it needs to apply.
To any sensibility.
"Rutherford, this is system of equation!"
"For Christ's sake, Soddy, don't call it equation. They'll have our heads off as Kinematics."

Cryptic system path is a post tenths record dictating the summary of all records method.
All data is existent. In it's most efficient form to be contrived.
(time is used here as a placeholder for cascade events)

In no way can I conceive, that existence would be inefficient in any way.
So thusly the method to explain it, and sustain it. Must be absolutely versatile.
And exhibit exponentially more data then it, itself can contain.

It must be built upon allignment of a variable with a mathematical constant.
The constant must posses a infinate potental quality without that being whole numbers.
And be subject to irrationality, and rationality in both the whole and parts of its value.

I postulate that we can create a equasion based off such a constant.
And I'm convinced that existance of a constant there of does.
With this we could give and create what amounts to a vector that has 'perfect' spin.

>>10805346
A spin so right. That it proves it's right, by extension of the data inferred from it.
Aligning all paths with intercession, so that known quantity inherently achieves cohesion and cohesiveness.
All the Whilst still maintaining irrationally.

This would be achieved by no one path being greater or lesser than the other by vitue of propagation.
As all paths and all intersections are by default the same representations therein, equal and opposing.
Originating from the cataclysmic event birthing it at a single point.


The nexus of this proposition to deriving state, from position is a true Bohmian quantum state.
But not as they're known in any mention I've seen.
They're contrived to exist as just as becauseism. Thus is flawed.

I believe if CSP is a successful formulation.
It inherently will fix Bohmian explanation as a result.

I believe cataclysmic waveform collapse can be and always will be derived from 0 potential.
An axiom must be considered true if the logic is without instance or potential of affecting out come.

0 velocity, 0 matter, 0 time, 0 space, 0 acceleration.

Logically this axiom cannot possibly have any outcome as a result of itself to any aspect it's involved with.

However, inversely it does upon deriving anything from it as a sole frame of refrence.
It's a single reference frame.
The only measurement you can derive is distance from it via acceleration.
This comes at cost of all other motions.
As logic dictates what's gained in measurement incurred unknown potential of any and all other forces the object has, as we know it to be now.

It may be a single reference point. So how does that birth any more measure than distance.

From two reference points, the only deviation from them in a 2d plain is gained.
That is incorrect

0 & (> 0) is two points of reference. Indisputable and calculable.
How do you gain a new reference point?

>>10805350
If it is to apparate in a straight line. The cascade will always fail.
Because linear systems cannot know it's own position in the value, only what's directly adjacent.
So linear calculation only ever resolves in 2 points. As a middle value can only point/look one way at one time.

So this is is where what I call Quantum stacks are birthed.
A Quantum Stack is something I've inferred from Bohmian.
Quantum stacking is where outcome from improbability comes from.
We know of Quantum wave as a potential of position.
But these stacks are for impossible and unlikely quantum events.
So that Quantum wave may propagate without failure.

With that.
A 3rd reference point is always made available due to QS between the first two points but slightly off canter.
It's not and can never be in a linear position to the first two points.
It is made in contact with 1 & 2, but off line of sight. So that 1 & 2 can see each-other But 3 is not required to be looking at either 1 & 2.
As contact confirms position.
This conserves observation. Whilst giving greater perception of surroundings.

The stack gains potential whenever a state exists where less action happens to failure. Or when action can't happen.
Then the quantum stack gains possibility of action for inciting an action that will cause more action.
This will always be to cause greater potential than the state was before where it acted.

As the Cryptic System Pathing is without time relevancy.
A quantum stack may act upon a uncharted state of CSP that are a result of redundant space between paths.
This creates instance of enormous potential that fracture from CSP but are still quantifiable from CSP's vector.

>>10805360
A Quantum stack must always force action. In the case of inaction.
Saving all state from critical error.
It's not a random effect. It's based on quantum probability droop.
That it's most likely to stack in a position that will propagate the most results.
Effecient and subtle. But also just reciprocation and reproduction of CSP origins.

Qunatum stack branches are directly intersectable with the original Point Zero Axiom CSP vector.
Intersecting Stack Branches are derived from the resolution of a vector being irrecoverable by nature.

-To proof this theory.

We need to calculate a minimum vector that intersects itself the minimum times it requires to have Pi implode equally from intersections.

Sounds impossible because Pi can't be resolved.
But it's resolution is not in having the full denotation value of it's decimal.

The solution is in stipulating property's of the Point Zero axiom vector correctly.
Interconnections should be made when values of the vector segment have been exhibited only just enough.
So that other interconnections of differing relative vector segments upon it include the reaming data as result of it's path so on and so forth.

The vector itself must be a complex vector by default.
Segmenting the vector is not a new equation. But the points between interconnections.
The success of a segment is a unique state it exerts to and from those connections.

To 'fuse' each segment. Quantum stacking is applied from the intersection.
And every intersection if mutable exist in the same point.
Remember this a bit by bit calculation.
3d shapes are just center points given walls.
The result of fission must be logical.
A quantum stack cant have infinite potential at 2 points.

This cascade is a bit per bit calculation (in essence) untill home is reached.
It is expressable as a complex vector.
I concieve that this will exceed graham's number in orders of magnitude.

>>10805370
Because the paths of unique vector segments intersect.
And be that time doesn't exist. Change of direction is imperceptible.
So when successfully calculated, intersections are CSP's derived from different potential than the Point Zero Axiom.
The Zero Point Axiom must also resolve. By return of the vector to the point of origin.
In effect collapsing any evidence where a state of zero potential existed.
Continuity must be evident in each interconnection, logically related with Quantum Stacking.
As to prove that each point equates the same.

Resolving to Point Zero confirms implosion. So long as The CSP equates from all Axioms as the same value.
Regardless of start value.
And that Quantum stacking is logical


In regards to Quantum stacking.
They are inherent quality that are derived from CSP.
They're Proven by cSP resolving a in logical equation.
A Quantum stack branch and other occasions will be exhibited at all other instances in the same way.
It's fractioral in the macro. But not exceeding any boundary that was prescribed by resolution of axiom CSP.

That does not mean that they become of infinite value. As they are just repercussions mirroring CSP.
They are the same, and do no new thing, in it's explanation or existence.
Other than existing to a set of values that's the same.
If it's indeterminate of difference to anywhere else.
It has not exceeded any dimension that gives a new value.
No determination of Quantum stack events existing is possible.
Relative position to one or other in the CSP is impossible to determine.

And there so we have it. A theroy of acheveing exsistance from no potental.
That forfills what I know of, as mandatory in order to attain existence.

>>10805346
>>10805350
>>10805360
>>10805370
>>10805376
Just have sex

>>10805387
It's overrated and nowhere near as mentally engaging as what ever the fuck I'm using to give this madness a positive connotation, so others when the dreaded, 'what have you been doing?' comes about are none the wiser.

>>10805346
>>10805350
>>10805360
>>10805370
>>10805376
Can you unironically tldr basic english this please? I'm interested but too much of a brainlet to understand.

>>10804353
It's just a childish variation on the Ontological argument OP. Kant did away with all that shit centuries ago.

>>10806286
Effectively I'm attempting to rationalize what would happen if 0 became 'self' aware.
Like a cataclysm that was mandatory. Because 0 is the same as infinite in terms of un witnessed potential.

0 velocity, 0 matter, 0 time, 0 space 0 acceleration.
0 = 1 of nothing. Nothing has infinite boundary, infinite measurement, infinite potential.

Boom!

Zero has been defined to exist. 1st dimension is born.
What's the next logical course of action?
To go in a random direction till you run into your own ass. 2nd dimension is formed.

But here's the issue. One frame of reference is technically only available.
But in a presumed 3d plain. Where you only have a 2d measure. Your angular momentum is unknown.
That fluke of observation logic allows for a non linear move to be made. Giving a frame of reference outside a straight line.
Then out and back to define a 4th dimension.
(I think nothing higher than 4d as it's just non frame data. Like signal clipping.)

Forever plotting infinite courses though a infinite 'super absolute solid'.
With that, all courses are accessible at all times.
But it can never hit a boundary. The transition to the second dimension created a vector.
Because you can't maintain a straight course without 2 points of reference. Try it. Get your dividers/compass out and try to map a straight line without creating a 3rd point to measure drom.

If you're familiar with pi analytics, you'd be aware of it's irrationality and normality.
I believe this would also apply to the superstructure, because of the inerrant vectoring.

Nothing is moving, only plotting can/has happen/d. Conceptual data is incorporeal because it's defined within a course.
All courses are connected. So irrationality and normality exists by default on any course by extension.
Time is nonexistent. Only where it's been is known. What lays ahead is unwritten, but effected by previous paths it knows it's coming upon.
It is a collapse witnessing itself.

pi's forever edging illusion

>>10804353
non-existence is a failed concept, everything that exist always existed since non-existence can't produce the existence

>>10806438
Is zero point axiom deletion via a data overwrite acceptable?