I've Eliminated 'irrational' numbers

ken kpaulc at [remove]earthlink.net
Thu Apr 22 01:36:52 EST 2004

As usual, because it's Obvious, I neglected to
state the main thing explicitly [my 'heart' is
heavy today because today is the 2nd Anniv-
ersary of my Dad's Murder].

"ken" <kpaulc@[remove]earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BxJhc.6614$e4.5553 at newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "mat" <mats_trash at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:43525ce3.0404211624.1750cf8b at posting.google.com...
> > > 11. It does this be-cause when A and B go-
> > > Irrational, they balence each other =Exactly=!
> > > ...
> > > "Bye-bye, 'Irrationals'.
> >
> > So do irrational numbers exist or not?
> "Number", itself, is, 100%, a learned mental
> construct, so all sub-forms of "Number are
> also learned mental constructs.
> The closest "Number" gets to being physical-
> ly-real is in "counting", but, since no two phys-
> ical entities are Identical, "counting" is also
> a learned mental construct.
> So, in what way do "learned mental constructs"
> exist?
> They 'exist' as a communications-interface trans-
> form of their underpinning nervous system 3-D
> energydynamics.
> Although nervous systems' 3-D energydynamics
> =can= be =described= using Numbers, nervous
> systems' 3-D energydynamics occur sans-Num-
> bers, except in the dynamics of the communi-
> cations-interface transform, where they 'exist'
> only as learned mental constructs and their
> learned transformation dynamics.
> 1. "Number" is as a 3-D "solid".
> 2. Given point A and point B, there're infinite
> ways of "going" from the former to the latter.
> What happens in Maths is that, when a particular
> method becomes established within an individual
> nervous system [see the discussions of the 'levels'
> of "creativity" in AoK], to the degree that it is com-
> municated, it tends to be learned by other nervous
> systems, and this shared learning results in Maths
> "hovering"-around the learned mental construct,
> establishing a Maths "island" [Eray Ozkural, comp.
> ai.philosophy, 2004-04-19] that is the shared
> Maths method -- which tends, strongly, to 'blind'
> folks to 1 & 2, above.
> "Irrational Numbers" are such a mental-construct
> "island" within the mental construct of 1, above.

What is an 'irrational number' when one 'route'
from A to B is taken, is not an 'irrational number'
when another 'route' from A to B is taken -- which
is what I did in the Proof. There're infanite such
other 'routes'.

The 'routes' =can= be distinguished, and hierarch-
ically-ordered on the basis of their relative energy-
consumption efficiencies, which is 'just' more TD

[There's much more to be said with respect to this
stuff, but, today, my 'heart' is all Brokenness, and
I don't care about "Numbers".]

k. p. collins

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list