2+2 = P — eodnhoj7
4 = p — eodnhoj7
After the first sentence, I did not even bother reading it. — eodnhoj7
But the equation is equivalent to P — eodnhoj7
It does not mean that the laws change but that, they associate such that the phenomena expresses the conditions we refer to as cyclic. — BrianW
Do not mistake the nature of laws with the nature of phenomena. Do not attribute the characteristics of phenomena to those of laws. — BrianW
Phenomena are always changing but the laws are ever constant. — BrianW
. All axioms are points of origin; hence all axioms as progressive linear definition and circularity are points of origins. The point of origin progresses to another point of origin through point 2 and cycles back to itself through point 3 with this linear progression and circularity originating from themselves, through eachother and point 1.
Point 1 is original and exists through points 2 and 3 as points 2 and 3.
As original Points 1,2,3 are extension of eachother as one axiom, while simultaneously being nothing in themselves as points of origin that invert to further axioms respectively; hence originate as 1 and 3 through 1 and 3 as 1 and 3 laws — eodnhoj7
If I look at the sentence:
"The dog ate the cat." These words are inhernent axioms as points of origin in themselves and effectively exist as point space.
Using "(x)∙" as a symbol for point space, which as an axiom is in itself a point of reference to the observer denoting that these laws are not just limited to language but language as symbolism is not just limited to the written word but thoughts within the observer, the sentence can be observed geometrically as:
(The)∙ (dog)∙ (ate)∙ (the)∙ (cat)∙
This sentence in itself is an axiom as a point of origin and can be observed as:
((The)∙ (dog)∙ (ate)∙ (the)∙ (cat)∙)∙
While the same applies to the letters which form the sentence:
(((T)∙(h)∙(e)∙)∙ ((d)∙(o)∙(g)∙)∙ ((a)∙(t)∙(e)∙)∙ ((t)∙(h)∙(e)∙)∙ ((c)∙(a)∙(t)∙)∙)∙
And The paragraphs, pages, etc. as well (this will not be observed for brevity). — eodnhoj7
1. All axioms are points of origin; hence all axioms as progressive linear definition and circularity are points of origins. The point of origin progresses to another point of origin through point 2 and cycles back to itself through point 3 with this linear progression and circularity originating from themselves, through eachother and point 1.
Point 1 is original and exists through points 2 and 3 as points 2 and 3.
As original Points 1,2,3 are extension of eachother as one axiom, while simultaneously being nothing in themselves as points of origin that invert to further axioms respectively; hence originate as 1 and 3 through 1 and 3 as 1 and 3 laws... — eodnhoj7
1. All axioms are points of origin; hence all axioms as progressive linear definition and circularity are points of origins. The point of origin progresses to another point of origin through point 2 and cycles back to itself through point 3 with this linear progression and circularity originating from themselves, through eachother and point 1.
Point 1 is original and exists through points 2 and 3 as points 2 and 3.
As original Points 1,2,3 are extension of eachother as one axiom, while simultaneously being nothing in themselves as points of origin that invert to further axioms respectively; hence originate as 1 and 3 through 1 and 3 as 1 and 3 laws... — eodnhoj7
— eodnhoj7
. All axioms are points of origin; hence all axioms as progressive linear definition and circularity are points of origins. The point of origin progresses to another point of origin through point 2 and cycles back to itself through point 3 with this linear progression and circularity originating from themselves, through eachother and point 1.
Point 1 is original and exists through points 2 and 3 as points 2 and 3. — eodnhoj7
Fallacy of Authority if referencing the nature of the circle as pointless. Pythagoras and the Hindus with the Monad and Bindu (respectively) observed the point as the origin of the circle. — eodnhoj7
The circle cannot do this would stemming from the point, with the point as origin simultaneously being beyond movement in one respect and void in another. — eodnhoj7
3. The standard intepretation of the circle as pure movement, observes the circle originating from nothing (the center point). The circle cannot exist without an origin and this origin is the point through Pi. — eodnhoj7
All points of origin are nothing in themselves, hence observed through the other laws progressively and circularly with laws 2 and 3 being points of origin in themselves with law 2 progressing to 1 and 3 and law three cycling through 1 and 2. — eodnhoj7
Going back to the premise of the thread, if material is the medial, what is a medial? — eodnhoj7
The cycling of axioms, whether abstract, empirical or both, is addressed in the above laws. — eodnhoj7
If the laws are not connected to the phenomena then are they really laws? If the definition is not connected are the laws really true? — eodnhoj7
The laws progress to further laws with these laws cycling back to other laws (example can be the definition of mass, volume and density as laws in physics). — eodnhoj7
In simpler terms all assumptions are points of origin and progress to further axioms while cycling back to the assumption to prove whether the assumption is correct or not. — eodnhoj7
And the axioms existing through eachother is circular "Point 1 exists through Points 2 and 3 as points 2 an 3" while maintaining a progressive expansion as point 1 progresses to point 2 and point 2 to point 3. — eodnhoj7
Wow...you are actually a liar...the "Point has no Center point?" — eodnhoj7
Pi is dependent upon a diameter and the diameter is dependent upon the radius. — eodnhoj7
Definition of point of origin. : the place where something comes from : the place where something originates. The package's point of origin was somewhere in the U.S. the point of origin of the fire that burned the building down. — eodnhoj7
If there is no center point then how do you get the diameter or the radius as half of the diameter stemming from the center of the circle? — eodnhoj7
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.