VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 07:24:34 04/02/10 Fri
Author: Anonymous
Subject: Faith and faithfulness

It is known in mathematics, specifically in the probability field, if you flip on table a piece of coin with, naturally two sides, you would get always 50% of probability to either side to take the top position of the coin after being relaxed. Was it meant if you flip it only trillion times for example, you would get half-trillion of coin-face on top and half- trillion of coin-rear on top, on the route of this trillion flip test? The answer is "no". If you repeated the trillion-test so many times, you would get always a number that around half-trillion of each side but never exactly half-trillion, even sometimes you will get results really far from the supposed half-trillion. Yet if you repeated the test many times and took the mathematical (simple mean or square mean) medium out of all the results of all trillion-tests as testing-units, that medium will ever tend to get closer to the half-trillion point on the probability graph. Here again there are conditions to be mentioned, on so far the factors that controls the coin flipping are free from any clear inclined influences as so far the results would be closer to the half-trillion point; in other words, as far the influential factors are chaotic unreasonable it got closer to the subject point. In other words I may tell, as far as the coin flipping is of "absolute freedom" as the result got closer and closer. How far we expand the test unit container for higher number for more than trillion (trillion of trillion for example), and How far we repeat this test-unit for example trillion times, we get closer and closer to the half percent point. Finally we get a result that this "mid percentage point" does exist truly even though we can't reach upon it practically. The probability of coin flipping is 50% to get one of each side on top, achieved accurately only if we test it infinite times, there, there would be no probability but only "certainty" of 50% of this side to be "had been happened" and 50% of the other side to be "had been happened", exactly and equally.

"Certainty lays at infinity" as term I habituate to use, is not idiotic obscure poetic dogma of mine; no, it is mathematical faith takes the poetic pretense.

There is no one scientist in any scientific field on this planet earth believes in otherwise of this. It is a mathematical faith (completely acceptable by all without exceptions).

As usual, as plain normal, eyes of human searches mainly for what may give him more control in shortly sighting manner forgetting about the "truth" that he never might to get in bare hand although it got all his life and his entire being and existence, here it comes the role of faith as inevitable factor in Long sighting manner. In our here issue, the mathematicians focused only on the possibility of every event on the route to predict its probability strength for promoting "short sighted control abilities" they may gain and forget about the last possibility event at infinity, how it would look or would it behave? Does this possibility behave like all previous events on the route? What is its meaning and its effect on our life?

Although it is of absolute impossibility to physically and substantially study that last event at infinity, yet it existed and affected the entire universe certainly, yet it is of the rational capability to subjectively and imaginatively study that last event at infinity, I mean yet within "mathematics" as it was the case since the beginning in science dawn.

First of all we should study what is the meaning of the word "infinity". The concept "infinity" is not a "fantasy ghost". "Infinity" to me is "physical and substantial concept" rather than "physical and substantial quantity" not as likely many mathematicians perceive (not "it is or it is not" but "rather", rather it tends to be "concept" rather than "quantity"). Yes, it is quantity but tend to be rather conceptual.

One example of thousands I know, suppose that the "infinity" is a countless quantity as commonly perceived, okay, what happened if I wanted to draw a circle with diameter of infinity? Certainly I need an infinite size "compass" to draw such circle that its line will lay at the horizon edge of the entire universe, even I predict strongly its line should lay outside the universe. Is it the case? If so, then rather considering it having quality of countless quantity reaches us to impossible conceptual fantasy. The true case is, when you want to draw an "infinite" diameter circle, only you need a piece of "straight ruler device" to draw a simple "straight line" on this limited size paper in front of your eyes within your limited ability as human being. The fact is that the straight line is a circle with infinite diameter according to one of the common agreed definitions of what straight line is in geometry. If "infinity is an "countless number" or "countless quantity" hence never there would be a straight lines in the physical universe that we know and cognize, never there would be straight lines in science, and it is not the case, the case is, there are straight lines/infinite diameter circles. Here I would like to develop the idea further for better, I would tend to say the "infinity" is a "definite conceptual quantity that can be handled" and it is not a "countless quantity that can not be handled", if it was a countless quantity, again we would not be able to draw straight line; it is not true.

Another quality is noticed about the issue "infinity". Phenomena that depend on variables substitutable by numbers, within our abilities to count and record that number; it has some qualities and after our physical limits reached, it disappeared and it again appears physically with some qualities from infinity horizon but with different qualities this time. Like the previous example, the circle at infinity is a straight line. In fact, the reason is that the major part of this infinite circle lies out the universe and only we see a part sector of its circumference on the paper, so it is ever within our universe appears as straight line. The point here to state is that the edge at infinity could be at hand simply and all what we need is the understanding.

Here the conclusion, "infinity is a conceptual quantity that can be handled". And we handle it in everyday life and it is not of fantasy.

All the above is an introduction to study the last event at the horizon of infinitely flipping the coin as probability experiment. Let us give the "infinity" the symbol "I" while we are studying the flipping coin experiment. According to the above mathematical faith, there would be certainly a number of events as (I/2) of one side occasion, and (I/2) of the other side occasion of the coin. In just adjacent to the last two flips at infinity "I", occasions happened for "one side" (I/2 - 1) times and for the other side the same. Yet the one before the last is not of certainty, it is probable to be either side of the 50% probability. However, one of either side will consume its opportunities and complete the (I/2) supposed quantity before the other, with no more chances to happen again according to the above mathematical faith. There it reached to the "final event" at infinity with one of both possibilities is completed and fully consumed that meant it is certainly known to be the other side definitely and it doesn't follow the rule 50% probability, it is sort of absolute certainty to tell that it is the side that hasn't consumed its entire range of possibilities. So the last flip is of different, distinctive and unique kind to celebrate while flipping it. By no mean, by no reason, by no influence, by no known law, by no known human conscious idea, when you flip it you already know which side will take the top of the coin; although it is absolutely chaotic that it should be absolutely free of any clear sighted reason, the top of the coin is of certainty to be known of which side. We can tell that it is a singular event point on the probability graph with 100% certainty.

I remember a friend, long time ago, was collecting rare and historical coins as a hobby. Once he brought me a coin telling me that it valued more than its nominal pressed value, because they did a mistake while pressing it, they stopped the machine and they fixed it and this coin was the only been got out. So it is unique. He asked me, can you find out the mistake? I took it in hand trying to find anything distinctive raises it above nominal value, but I didn't find. He told me that I am witless for I should notice. The mistake was that they replaced interchangeably the back graphic on the front side and face graphic on the rear side; the places had been misplaced mistakenly. In fact I was witless because it took of me a minute until I laughed at his kidding. I answered, before pressing them there was no distinct feature made either side to be front or rear, it was completely arbitrary without least mistake about, I laughed. Later I laughed no longer when I discovered that majority of people we probed been taken by this trick, I felt sad for the lack consciousness in people. If we were tricksters we would gain a deal of money by this trick, however we didn't.

What we should emphasize upon here! Perception pressed on events is completely arbitrary of human nature rather than the abstractive truthful nature; rear side and front side are arbitrary, so is life, death, melodic, cacophonic, yellow, red, black, white, ugly, and beautiful; etc. Just you arbitrarily started one and the next flows automatically. If we focused on and gave importance for which side would take the dominance to take place at the last event at infinity hence we merely had been taken by our invented untruthful deception. It doesn't matter at all the side labeling but the events as just events in our study. The lives and dead nature altogether comprise the universe; together they are a series of events whatever apparent meaning we press on them and on us, their abstractive truthful qualities are what make it work indeed. Human receives all his entire environments through a series of events; human is event to another human, human is events to himself. Locally in time and space we try to reason the relation between events but when we go so far we lost among the complication of reasoning, so what we say about reasoning and logic doesn't work any longer for helping us understanding such extreme complication that out the ability of entire human kind and his whole computers together either. That time we put aside reasoning methods and use another method such as the "probability methods" rather than reasoning and logic, or sometimes we are using a mix or mingle of them. Both methods are right but one works rather easily on smaller scale and the other work easier on larger scale, that is.

In general sense and on universe scale, it is not this simple double coin case, whatever the number of sides it includes; there is a very important fact that the last event at infinity with its unique qualities is in dominance over other events. It is like some device with infinite number of sides as polyhedron; hence it is sphere, the "probability sphere" is the probability device of the universe, yet the last event retains its qualities no matter how many possibilities available for each event in the universe, no matter how many events we need to pass to reach the "last event", It retains eternity of its qualities of whatever. Away reasoning and logic, in methodological probability, the universe detains infinite possibilities for each event and infinite events for this "last event" to happen, parallel infinite routs, it happens, here no longer the word infinity is enough, so I think the word "endless" is better, I don't know farther word than "endless", it is all what I can. I'll call it the "event at the endlessness"; or the "endlessness horizon event" because it happens with such unique quality of "absolute certainty" only once at the "endlessness boundary" of the "universe spherical probability devices".

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let us discover about this "endlessness horizon event"/EHE and ritually celebrate a bit around it:

1) The ever-simplest probability case existed physically in front of our eyes, to study is the double base device or coin-like, the probability of every event before infinity is 50% and the probability of the EHE is 100%, yet it is a very limited local case with only two possibilities available for each event.

On scale of the entire universe, the probability of each event before endlessness boundary is infinitesimal tending to zero because it is not a coin with two sides or a dice with sex sides but it is sphere with infinite possibilities for available events, you may say it is close to zero% for each event, yet the EHE happens with absolute certainty of 100%, it is the only absolute true certain event compared with all rest events; other events are of diminished probability value on scale of universe although they were what fill the universe with infinitesimal probable existent events.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It is the unique and the only.

2) Chaos, complete-freedom and unreasonableness, words, words, and more words are in verbal languages. How the imagination of mankind is rich to invent psychological symbols from the virtual redundant resource of his brain! Which merely is a willingly established delusion from survival sense introduced itself to rebalance back the weight of the fear of his lack of "environment and self understanding". It is a short-sight satisfying-balance, it feels him the "control" although it is fake, and in fact it pulls down his legs down in rather bottomless fiction like drug abysm. Poor human he is, on course of more fears he got and felt; he splashed more unstructured detonations on his fear and lack, for covering and blurring, he resorted to escapism in his inner wild jungle of instinctive thoughts like beasts and disguising preys. How it happened until today he couldn't reconstruct this wild view of primitive animal world, if he really controls his thoughts in his brains and in this commercial propaganda ambush among that political fraudulent civilization!

Escapism for the animals is decentralized natural intelligence-instruction (natural laws are intelligence as they may be expressed in mathematical expressions whenever we could). It worked on their body and instinctive reactions as a result from balancing-power within nature between the strong and the weak like "weak plus escapism equals to strong", for perpetuating different kinds with wealth of dissimilar traits as balanced rights for every sort to take equal chance in existence.

While for this piteous creature stemmed out as human, escapism is centralized-fantasy delusion-deceptions (fantasy laws are deceptions as they cannot be expressed in mathematical/logical/rational of any sort/ expressions whenever we try) work on his kind and derogating his reaction to be spurious instinctive while he lost major part of his natural instincts for building his centralized intelligence and consequently he lost both. As a result from unbalancing-weakness within human between "the fact of his restrained belongingness to natural laws whatever he attempts" and the "fact of his deliberate imagination over natural laws that gave him the ability for every attempt without right sometimes", like "the delusive pure subjectivity" plus escapism may substitute and suppress "pure objectivity". Delusion beast and reality prey, if it continued this way, it will decompose the mankind because of the unbalance within the mind of him.

Escapism for animals is one of the evolution ways and perpetuation ways because it is natural mandate, while it for the mankind is one of the deterioration ways and decomposition because it is unnatural deliberation.

Back to Chaos, complete-freedom and unreasonableness and many other idioms and words belong to the same category. Although of the pretended wealthy diversity of this word category, the "hidden indirect fact"/ "reality" behind is the psychological denial to his physical limitations. In the fury of his imagination forth, occasionally he tend to break his prison limits rather than quietly expand it a bit wider without dangerous strains; his limit is his life and existence. The road is open because yet he is an infinitesimal probable event on universe scale. The fact straightly is, he doesn't know all the reasons to predict the behavior of even the least of him so what about the universe! The fact straightly is, he doesn't possess more than infinitesimal control on the course of universe events. Yet he should consider wisely and carefully the very generous gift of his complete ability of control on his inner consciousness, with its joys and pains, with its delights and tortures, with its evilness ad goodness, with its hopes and despairs, with its wisdom and foolishness, with its being wealthy strong human inside poor piteous animal.

Had you really believed the tricky word "chaos" and its siblings! Piteous you are. It is a kind of escapism to believe that there is an event could happen without relation to other event or influence in the universe (unless it is another initiation of another universe with possibility of having different laws) for evading considering our limited physical abilities and us were infinitesimal probabilities like any other point event on the universe course of events. When you use this word you are covering on your lack abilities, while when I use it I denote and knock on your weakness, you initiated the trick and I was using it against you.

Mathematicians yet were kind people, not so far but kinder than others. When the reasons accumulated more than available abilities or senses to predict out that there more reasons out of ability to know, cognize or measure, they use the methodological probability tools to predict and statistically to record the events. They admit the facts without escapism whenever they can. The way to watch the results; is to found bases under the weight of their probable happening, regardless of mother reasons. Do you not forget some point here! There is no mathematical expression to represent the chaos; what a mystery you feel now! Why not!! Incentive mystery is good for intuition.

To me chaos never meant more than infinite number of reasons and influences, each is of infinitesimal probable weight to effect on event, all events are reasons that influences back on a subject event. It is a continuous stream of causes like the idea of quintessence/ether. To me "chaos" is "infinite-stream ether of dissolved infinitesimal-possibilities that cause an event". The distinguished clear body reason melted in the stream for no longer could be separated and caught in hand or brain as seemingly been diluted in space of the infinitely reasoning. Chaos physically and substantially is neither absurdity nor randomness, at all.

On the universe course of events there is always a probability weight for each event no matter how infinitesimal. It meant in other words, there are reasons and influences out of our sight and insight except one event that could reach a weight of 100%; it meant whatever the reasons and influences that effect on other normal events, the EHE happened certainly without any doubt with omni-capability. Is it the point of true "chaos without escapism" (I mean absurdity)? If it were the point of chaos (here I am talking about chaos on sense of absurdity), it would be impossible to weight its probability but we know that its weight is 100%; so it is not the chaos/absurdity point but the only absolute certainty point that none of the effects and influences, known and unknown together, may decide its happening; it persisted to happen anyway, it persisted to happen no matter of influences of the other normal events. It involves its own reason; it is the reason and event in one thing, some way.

******************* It is of absolute persistence.

3) EHE is the LAST and STAND-ALONE event on the course, no reason or event after its eventuation on the course; all events before it on the course were of diminished value. So it didn't birthe another similar event and no other ascendant-event birthed it, it is just stand-alone.

******************* It didn't birthe and it had not been birthed.

4) Yet there is the greatest important to study about:
On the double base coin the reason behind that one event take the weight of 50% to take place, there is another one possibility shared the double sided space/plain of possibilities. On the same way, on a cubic dice with six sides, the reason behind that each event to take the weight of 16.7% approximately to take place is there another five possibilities shared the space/cube of possibilities. The summation of all possibilities weights occupied the space of probability should be always 100% that ONE of them should happen; and the probability of which would happen, it would be due to its weight within that space.

If we reduced the probability testing device to a single side device, which is impossible for us human to imagine its shape, however, anyhow, it would be the 100% event again, it is the EHE. It would be the start of what is called "reason" and consequently what is called "event". And it is very agreed with all the above, remember it is the reason and the event involved in one. It is the only event that is able to exist with or without "all the rest of normal events that is the entire universe".

On the universe probability sphere/UPSphere; it is not a local limited/imperfect human experiment, it is the existence of the universe itself at endless scale. It is not flipping coin on one-dimensional sequence of events, happened one next to one. It is parallel multidimensional block of events happened all every moment, at every place and moment, around the universe. On UPSphere there is no wait for the EHE to happen after infinitely flipping the dice or the coin, no, but the universe itself is the entire course of mechanical space and time space. Because there are already infinite or better to tell endless of events already happened all over the universe, this gives UPSphere a bit different behavior. We can tell that EHE is already happened without delay after sequence of events and because it doesn't need other reason to push to take place, all what it needs, is itself as that out-imagined single side probability device even before the ignition of UPSphere or the universe in simple; beside the endlessness horizon.

Where is the place the EHE exists, as already we know it happened? In simple limited probability experiment the mathematicians interested only to make summation on the probability weights available for each event as far as we are from the EHE, it is happened out our short sight. Which will lead always to 100%, and when the EHE happen it would have 100% weight and force all other events to have 0% weight that yet would make the possibilities summation is 100% in consistency.

On the universe physical scale, the integration of infinitesimal weight probabilities along the entir universe course (integration is summation process at very general wider sense rather than the simple 2+3=5, it is the tool to handle the summation of infinitesimal changing quantities); anyway should equal to 100% of unity. But yet there is the EHE with its 100% weight that should lead that the integration could be 200% of unity that is impossible unless it physically happened at the "boundary" of the UPSphere to keep the integration yet 100% within the sphere, it is not an arbitrary event with value of 100% probability among others, it is also distinctive to them in character. The UPSphere is not arbitrary experiment device like dice, and EHE is not an arbitrary chosen event within others; it takes place completely out or at least at the boundary of the UPSphere.

So we know that EHE doesn't exist within the UPSphere. The EHE presence within the UPSphere is inevitably to close the course of probable events; its non-presence will vanish all the probability weights for any event because it is the end key of the probability uniformity construction of the universe; which makes the entire universe the sort of chaotic-absurdity this time truly without escapism and there will be no uniformity of equal chances for every possibility to take chance, it means collapsing the universe. And it is not the case; at any moment and at any place when some possibility takes the dominance to happen as event, the other possibilities take the place as reasons and influences for this specific event, and this what that specific event needs to happen and to comply to the probability prediction laws. And this should be the case, while the EHE is a reason and event in one, it should exist out the UPSphere physically as event and it should exist within the UPSphere as a reason and influence as a must for the uniformity and continuance of the universe; within the consistency of the 100% totality it should exist as reason like others everywhere and every moment. At the boundary of UPSphere it existed alone without any else event and reason as one and there the totality 100% condition would be satisfied again. So we can say it is the dominant reason of the presence of the universe.

******************* The EHE or the "endlessness horizon event" has a very common name among the earth and among the history and surely among the entire universe, I mean among the creatures it is "GOD of HEAVEN".

Let us in brief collect the results: 1) It is the unique and the only. 2) It is of absolute persistence under none, any and all circumstances. 3) It didn't beget and it had not been begotten. 4) The "endlessness horizon event" is a reflection from "GOD OF HEAVEN".

Finally;

All the previous were my personal faith and it is my sole responsibility; I don't represent any one but only myself alone.

And this is my "faithfulness":

<<<<<
Qur’aan; frame No. (112); "The faithfulness"; in Arabic called "Al-ejlass" with letter "J" pronounced like in Spanish language not like in English:

1) Say, he is Allah/(all due he) the unique one.

2) Allah is the persistence.

3) He didn't beget and he had not been begotten.

4) And there were absolutely none that was akin to him.
>>>>>

And for more understanding;

<<<<<
Qur’aan; frame No. (2); "The cow":

255) Allah, no God but he, the living and standing, it never get him either oscitance or sleeping, for him the ownership of what in heavens and what in earth; who is that who can commend at his presence except by his permission! Knows what is between their hands and what behind them and they don't gird any of his knowing except what he willed, his throne widely contained the heavens and earth altogether; and for saving them, upon him it doesn't take any leading way and he is the upper sublime and the great"
>>>>>

((((All my life since the first time I learnt about this equal probability phenomenon like the fifty percent of the coins, since I was young, I felt unsettled strangeness; always I felt that there should be rather deeper explanation for this universal physical phenomenon, the books and scientists never had given any serious explanation or interest beyond its observation. Here for first time in my life it relaxed all burden off my brain. All the existence of whatever created, they altogether can’t make that effect; it is God himself very directly and in full direct touch, he only who can exercise this effect and control on the entire existence. Very simply, this the top head of all knowledge of mankind; "reins of entire existenc is in hands of God". Wait a moment, is it new claim or say! Well, I don’t think so.
))))

*** March 8, 2002

"Further approach to the term infinity and its end adjacent limit point"

When I put the above essay in some discussion group it arose a question in mind of one of them about "how to measure infinity", so I made this further approach for it was a good question.

When we talk about infinity, we are indirectly talking about something else of infinitesimal value and vice versa, infinitesimal=1/infinity, infinity= 1/infinitesimal. Distribution of any definite quantity in infinite space leads to "infinitesimal density", concentration of any definite quantity in an infinitesimal space point is "infinite density". Infinity and infinitesimal are absolutely tied.

Counting the numbers in definite manner in brain of human that might be considered infinitesimal in comparison to the true universe can't be done successfully unless it is replaced by conceptual treatment. Thus we find wrongly that 1/0 = 2/0 because wrongly we conceptualize that infinity=infinity, although in fact the term infinity merely expresses indefinitely large number as same as infinitesimal merely expresses indefinitely small number. I think that while the denominator tends to the smaller direction, the "infinitesimal" expression became the fact "not zero as mathematically we express" and the numerator be just a conceptual unit, not one, not five, not 2673.9 and whatever but just amorphous unit quantity. When you see a piece of paste and measure its weight, saying that it contains 5.5 Kgr, yet it is the same piece of past without fractioning, I mean it is one unit quantity. When you say "1/1" you mean that there is one kilogram of substance for one liter of space volume, for example, when you say "1/0.5" you STILL means that there is one kilogram of substance for "contained-in" half liter of space (symbolically neither really nor abstractly, because we used to say two kilograms of substance per one liter) and so on. The reality is that any "denominator space volume" will contain any "numerator quantity" for physically it will not be divided, in fact it will be likely contained. The conceptual reality is, whatever the numerator and the denominator, they are unit per unit.

For more, when we say ten over two equal to five, it gives the wrong perception of division while I trust the root meaning rather than surface apparent ramifications, I mean to say the result is not the wrong simplicity of five, rather it is two units of "something contains ten units of something else" and "five" just expresses the "rate" within the space of the container.

Only we have three conceptual numbers, infinitesimal, infinity and the unity in between. Unity is the center-point/midpoint between infinity and infinitesimal in the conceptual counting system.

What is the relation between "numerical counting" and "conceptual counting"? Our brain is vessel for numbers when it concerns mathematics, can it contain all numbers of the universe whatever it is limited or unlimited? No it can't because it is not the universe. We should numerically count from one pole to the other pole just directionally with lacking the ability to reach the other pole certainly. The extreme common and very normal is that we start from the infinitesimal that close to zero upwards to the infinity and the infinity looked like conceptual quantity at the horizon of our psyche. Is it everything? No, the point is when we need, we have the right to count from the other pole, I meant we count from infinity not zero as normal and familiar, to study some distinct cases like studying the "endlessness horizon event" case. To express the normal numbering accurately we should say; "one from zero/infinitesimal", "two from zero/infinitesimal", "three from zero", etc. but because it is the extreme common conformist way we unconsciously say for brief, one, two, three, etc. If we used the infinity as reference to count from, we may say "one from infinity", "two from infinity", etc, but our ability certainly is absolutely limited to count from one side to reach the other side in one shot. Only we are able to count from alone one reference pole.

We missed a very important point up to here, as a definite "zero" should be the end point that is adjacent to the "infinitesimal" getting smaller, there is a definite "horizon number" should be the end of the "infinity" getting larger and between them there is a unit we used to rationalize or fractionalize. We can hold the entire counting system only conceptually beside a little part numerically.

The amendment we should develop since here is, the pure conceptual counting include only three standing points, "zero", "unit" and "horizon number".

For human psyche, we normally start from one of the two poles and rationalize the "unit" in the way to the other pole. Very normally unwittingly we are using mixed "conceptual and numerical" counting, always from the zero pole. It never happened that we counted from the reference "horizon number" before here occasion.

The abstractive cosmic numerical system is held conceptually in "unit/zero=horizon number", numerically it is "number/infinitesimal=infinity", is it a mess to what is known in math? I think it is just an amendment to learn to count from the other pole, pole of infinity and its adjacent end-point as "horizon number", to learn to count from both poles rightfully.


Written by;
Ashraf Moussa
Egypt, Cairo.
May 16, 2002.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.