Summary of Findings (In Closing...)

Discussion concerning the first major re-evaluation of Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal System of theory, updated to include counterspace (Etheric spaces), projective geometry, and the non-local aspects of time/space.
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:54 am

Summary of Findings (In Closing...)

Post by ckiit » Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:10 am

I joined this forum on Dec. 21 2019 with the purpose of seeking input on an idea I was (am) developing
to resolutely undermine/collapse the conflict(s) (ie. sufferings) associated with any/all state(s) of BELIEF:
in particular, belief-based ignorance(s) contributing to the long-standing ' believer vs. unbeliever ' crises
(however while noting this also implicitly/explicitly concerns the many outstanding "beliefs" in/of
Establishment Science).

Despite the circumstances (the details of which are known to any/all this may concern) I am happy to note
I ultimately was able to attain the feedback needed to solidify a structure which serves a planned future endeavor.
In light of, I thank RSoT and members both for their work on RSoT and any/all help given to me directly/indirectly
as I will now be returning to my own task outside of RSoT. I will continue to utilize the 'Other Theories' forum
as I (re-)construct CKIIT to accommodate RSoT's most recent developments:

The Approximation of Pi Problem
(resolved by measuring the circle
whose diameter is √5 such to re-couple
Φ and π and whose reunion re-couples
rational terminating numbers to
irrational non-terminating numbers):
π ≠ 3.14159...
π = 4/√Φ
π² = 16/Φ
*16 = Φπ²
(e = MC²) <- General Relativity (Einstein)
1 = 16/Φπ² <- RSoT (Larson et. al.)
*wherein 16 = Φπ² is the rational precedent
to/of Einstein's e = MC², the latter being
but a shadow/outline of the former.
πbywayofΦco.jpg (273.87 KiB) Viewed 170 times

This was a needed correction which has already (rapidly) lead
to further development(s) as for example found here: ... 4330#p4330

The correction of π from the approximated 3.14159... to 4/√Φ was expedited
due to the discovery of Jain viz.
It is the opinion of the author that whereas the discovery itself is indeed important,
the one who discovered it has elected to use the discovery to enrich himself
rather than pursue ways about which he may use it to enrich the whole of humanity.

Recovery of Universal Axes
In the same way Larson intuited that there be a natural relationship
between space and time (the nature of which being one in/of reciprocity)
there exists a natural relationship between rational terminating numbers
and irrational non-terminating numbers. This numerical relationship
can be used to recover (such to actively employ) a discrete axes composed of
two binary roots (ie. as in relation to location and/or (dis)placement(s)) and
two binary operators (ie. as in relation to direction and/or orientation)
the shared conjugation in-between them being seen
if/when subjecting unity to a (square) root operation:

Let unity be 1.
√1 = +1, -1
+1 = Unity
-1 = Unity (not)
all that is unity as +1 and/or
all that is not unity as -1 wherein
is∞not (equiv. all∞not) describes two
discrete conditions s/t=1 and s/t≠1 and
whereby unity is attained to by way of
the multiplicative operation (-)(-1)
as in: not not unity = unity
(the very same we let be 1).
bperet wrote:
Wed Jan 01, 2020 2:16 pm
Essentially, the positive root of √+1 = +1, so it never changes. But when you get to √-1 = +1i, it forms a recursion into other dimensions, j, k, h... other rotational planes beyond the standard, Argand plane. Makes sense that this kind of dynamic growth pattern would equate to knowledge, because ignorance keeps you static!
RSueqnM2.jpg (79.64 KiB) Viewed 170 times
It is this conjugation ±1 to which all real/imagined binaries (bodies)
are incessantly both implicitly and explicitly subject to and of.
The motion(s) associated with moving from a state(s) of s/t = 1 ↔ s/t ≠ 1
are captured by a causation∞cessation axis (location in/as time)
and an all∞not axis (direction in/as space over time).

The crucial function (effectively both terminal and terminus)
is the function for/of which (corrected) π is a root of
and whose other (related) roots outlines a polar symmetry
which can not not underlie (thus govern) all real (ordinary)
and imaginary (complex) number systems (mathematics), the reason for which
I have (and continue to) recommended numerous times that RSoT consider
trying the Millennium Prize Problem re: The Reimann Hypothesis as
this discovery accomplishes a resolute proof that:
The real part of every non-trivial zero of the Riemann zeta function is 1/2.
-Reimann Hypothesis
is true by Ananke (the mythological "goddess of necessity"
whose quality is practically in being inductively rooted,
rather than inventively imagined).

This clarification can be used towards the establishment of
a united (unifying) scientific mandate (endeavor) to ceaselessly pursue
the cessation of any and/or all forms of human suffering
in accordance with a united acknowledgement(s)
that ALL degrees and/or ALL magnitudes acting on (as) ALL CAUSE(S)
of ALL forms of human suffering are now ALL measurable
in/as discrete units of MOTION (ie. energy).

Number Axesbef.jpg
Number Axesbef.jpg (130.96 KiB) Viewed 170 times
πbywayofΦro.jpg (260.92 KiB) Viewed 170 times

R1→O1/2→O1/2→R2 as R1→A→Ω→R2 composes one π, and
R2→O1/2→O1/2→R1 as R2→A→Ω→R1 composes one π, thus
2π (equiv: ±π) captures any/all (outstanding) conjugation(s) in relation to unity (ie. √1 as 'roots of unity' in relation to π yields
±π thus implicitly/explicitly concerns a/the unity+/-not dichotomy and wherein -(-1) or ' not not unity ' is equivalent to unity).

This birotation/biorientation clarification/means can be used (in conjunction with a scientific method of retroduction)
to successively recover any/all ' roots ' (thus cause(s)) of any/all s/t phenomena (incl. bodies) which exists in/as
some particular function of time (incl. human source(s) of human suffering as suffered/endured by human beings).

Unification of Space and Time
The reunification of space and time (ie. Φ and π) alone is enough to prompt a transformation of all science(s)
and can be used to inspire the establishment of a united mandate to pursue the causation/cessation
of any/all forms of human suffering, as it can be (and will soon be more formally) further hypothesized
that the presence of the decay agency (ie: death, as experienced/endured/suffered over time) is only so present
if/when the condition s/t ≠ 1 is met, thus the converse condition s/t = 1 describes the absence of BELIEF-based ignorance(s)
causing, sustaining and/or otherwise impeding on the cessation of some/any/all forms of human suffering (of human origin)
as otherwise captured in/as some particular displacement configuration satisfying s/t ≠ 1.

What is important to note here is the converse condition s/t = 1 allows for an infinite number
of s/t configurations so long as the integrity of the relationship (ie. reciprocity) is consciously concerned
and preserved.

These conditions are for any/all relevant and practical intents/purposes in equivalence to/with the properties of any possible
dichotomy of two transcendent trees (of living, of knowledge of good and evil) in actual existence
as they must underlie (by necessity) the whole of " Abrahamic " theology (for being at the very root(s) of).
This clarification can bring a much-needed resolution to the concerned (otherwise perpetual) conflict involving the discrete state(s)
(ie. bodies) of ' believers ' and ' unbelievers ' wherein the cause/source of any/all suffering(s) associated
is now discretely measurable, thus can be known, thus can be progressively ceased until the condition s/t = 1
is globally satisfied.

It is both in my hope and interest that RSoT successfully irons out a formal physical theory of the universe as
the author will be composing a book entitled ' from whence human suffering? ' divided in two halves:
problem and solution. The first half will summarize the problem(s) by highlighting the most problematic beliefs
(as a summary of the past ~5 years of my own research and analyses) and the second half will be the formal rendering
of CKIIT wherein the solution will responsively reconcile the former. This will invariably involve drawing attention
to the work of Larson (ie. RSoT) thus the efficacy of the solution will be in relation to the degree(s) to which
RSoT is able to develop/formalize a front-to-back of a full physical theory of the universe.

I have recently been accused of " thinking in 1D " and yet in knowing where condescension begins, unity exists not (ie. ends),
I find substantive utility in this such to highlight the barrier(s) that do (and will) weigh heavily on the success of RSoT moving forward
from a strictly analytical perspective.

Unity is not any particular (ie. discrete) location/place of being (ie. has no implicit/intrinsic associated dimensional geometry),
it is a state of being. Any true state of unity divides not (as in the case of ' believer vs. unbeliever ' actually being a true division
rather than a true religion) but rather acts only on that which serves to cease division, not cause/perpetuate it.
If even attempting to assign dimensions to a thoughtful unity, it is actually ironically subject to/of a simple 1D orientation:
either one is oriented inwards (towards) unity or one is oriented outwards (away) from unity, as:
Both are metalogically valid, as it is strictly a matter of the local root(s) (of a body)
wielding (thus yielding) the substance of a particular belief: to merely believe to absolutely know,
while knowing not not to believe such to be so, in thus being wrong,
one is thus certainly absolutely dead wrong...
Displacement Factor
It is for this reason that having a conscious knowledge of ignorance entails just that:
having a conscious knowledge of any/all degrees to which ones own being
satisfies the (displaced) condition s / t ≠ 1 such to consciously factor in any/all of ones own (dis)placement(s) (ie. constituency of)
and/or subsequent distortions before even attempting to make a measurement(s) (ie. judgments) of others (ie. judge not lest ye be judged) as
even in accordance to the concerned Edenic account, in/by blaming both the woman and God,
Adam demonstrated he could not account for his own actions.

Suffice it to say that the particular condition which satisfies what can only be
the first (original) sin of man may be resolutely clarified:
the inability to account for ones own action thus
given we live in an ever-motioning universe wherein bodies are ever-motioning to action,
the author tries his best to account for (ie. acknowledge) what his own limitations are, and factor accordingly,
yet if/when I reach this same primordial condition in/of others, I know not to engage further
if until others know themselves before (whence) attempting to know anything (further) of who I am.

If even allowing that good and evil may exist (for the sake of argument), irrespective of what good and evil actually are (and/or are not)
the state of ' belief ' is invariably and immutably required to ever somehow believe evil is good (ie. the opposite of what is true), thus
any state of ' all-knowing ' (god-or-no-god) implying any true knowledge (incl. of so-called good and evil) must compose a corpus
(ie. a body of knowledge) of all: who/what/where/why/when/how (all coefficients of conscious (con)scientific inquiry),
if (and/or) if not:
which principally entails that one
(at least try) to know all
what not to believe of themselves lest
they somehow end up really believing themselves
to be something they are really not.

To Close
Consider a ' believer ' who calls themselves an ' analyst '.
All true analyses must end (and thus begins) at a/the point
to/at which their own belief-based ignorance(s)
prevails/prevails not over their own conscience (faculty),
thus ' belief ' cannot be a conscious process (ie. a virtue),
rather is an unconscious stagnation, (ie. a vice).
"In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth."
"In the beginning BANG created the heavens and the earth."
Which one (if any) is one willing to believe in?

In the end, there is one particular question
(the first, the last, and/or perhaps the only)
in the mind of the same who inquired of Adam
concerning his own eating of one particular tree:

' from which tree dost thou eat? '

and yet this is the very question before which no ' believer ' can stand
(given the believer knows not from which tree they even eat
for wantonly going about being " true " believers)
and thus is same question which collapses the crises
along with any/all human sufferings associated.

Post Reply