Monday, January 13, 2014

That Axiom's Dreamscape

[Furthering the..
"mathematics' paradoxes"..]

Blog-post # 413:
(413 = 7*59.)

Five new poorly "scanned"
art inanimations:

All Syzygies
Collectively Misaligned

Quanta Severed Via Spectra

In Polyplied Multigons

Misperceptions Somewhat,
More So, Or Always
Of Misperception

Sane Analysis;
Any Is As A Lens

(Last image's title
is an anagram below.)


This is of those many
.. unspec(tra)ific
.. sp(el)ectromagnetisms.

(Ten -- ...
'Leave this ten?'
'That is eleven.')

Mathematics' paradoxes:
Axioms dream that space.


The sums are
beyond most data;
Yet as numbers
add too as them.


This spectrum is
clearly in that;
.. The crystalline
prism has cut it.


Unto stained
Most segmented
continua are lit.


Sanely as.


Sane analysis:
Any is as a lens.


Lens sees:


The eyes see their
visions decay.
Each is every yet
inside these so.


Enticed is that
algebra sans numerals.
Thus letters balance
inside anagrams.


Sin: Souls'
enticed this.


Dividing by 2 (and getting
an integer) is surely...

breaking even..


Some unsung minor celebrity
who does comically exaggerated
impressions in movies is a..

'caricature actor'..


The gender-based glass-ceiling
of the male-dominated
corporate-world can be very
much a..
for women to overcome.


Polluting the atmosphere with
CO2 should be prosecuted as a
... 'heat-crime'..


What blood-type did the
pessimistic editor have?


(And that is why he hated
grading blood-tests.
.. Phlebotomist students
"Hey, I got a (type) B+
on that blood-test.
What you get?"
"O-, 'cause I made too
many type-O's.")


As they alternate between
having positive values and
having negative values,
sine-waves thus are..


Both the positive numbers
and the negative numbers
must be impossible,...

because they are..
divided by zero...

Seriously, hahahhahhaahaaha,
Although the real-number-line
is DIVIDED between positive
numbers on one side and the
negative numbers on the other
side, it is still said that
"you cannot divide by zero",

Thus,... there is no actual
division-point between the
positive and negative numbers.
Thus, the positive numbers and
negative numbers are, as a
group, indistinguishable
from each other.
Thus, each number equals its
own negative.
Thus, all numbers equal zero.
Thus, no numbers can divide
into any others.
Thus, either no numbers exist,
or the mathematical concept
of division does not exist.
Thus, math contradicts itself.
Thus, there is no contradiction
in the assumption that, both
simultaneously, zero cannot
divide into any other number,
and zero does indeed divide
the positive numbers from
the negative numbers on the
Thus, mathematics remains
consistent after all (even
whenever it disproves its
own self, as it does
sometimes),... and also
our misunderstanding of it
remains consistent (although
inconsistently so, sometimes).


A -1 dimensional universe is
quite... pointless..


Existing here
within this sphere:



Brain-cells are in a way like
the opposite of people.
An individual brain-cell is
not that smart, relatively.
But collectively, however,
brain-cells can achieve great
intelligence and awareness.

People, in contrast, can
collectively become MUCH
LESS intelligent collectively,
it certainly seems, when they
gather in groups than when
they are only thinking for
themselves (and also..
not only ABOUT themselves).


Maybe the Earth's latitudes
should be divided into

Of course, already there are the
tropic-circles, the equator, and
the polar-circles.
But maybe the latitudes can be
further subdivided.

And maybe the boundaries of these
season-zones might jut and meander
irregularly due to political
boundaries, just as the
time-zones now do.
After all, if even the time-of-day
can be altered for purely
political reasons, why not the
seasons too!?*
("Ha! Our nation has more
summer-time than our neighboring
nation has!")
Although, it might make some sense
for these boundaries to wiggle
about somewhat if so based upon
altitudes and other natural
geographic features.

*(I must have already posted about
my silly suggestion of maybe
moving the seasons by one position,
and maybe calling this
"Summer-Savings Seasons" or


Regarding the dream I had years
ago -- which I think I posted
about here(?) -- where there was
a chess-game setup consisting of
one side's pieces being pieces
of shrimp** and the other side's
pieces being pieces of broccoli:

1) I think I already shared an
old insight (mine? or did someone
else come with it instead?) that,
I guess,.. the pawns were prawns..

But a newer insight I may not
have shared yet is that I guess
the kings/queens, however,
were crowns..

2) So, point 1 (the two puns) has
lead me now to wonder about (but
I am not motivated to think too
hard about this) the workability
of a chess-variant where one side
is completely made up of pawns
and the other side is completely
made up of king(s)/queens.
What, for one thing, would be
the rules to determine how
anyone could even win this game?

If this variant is purely
representative of the real
social-order (as it appears to
be on the surface), then the
rules, obviously being completely
determined for the benefit of the
monarchy side, most likely are
NOT, exactly, this:
The pawn side wins if any of the
pawns are still alive at the
time in the game when any/the
one king is put into check-mate,
or, conversely, the monarchy side
wins only if all the pawns are
annihilated before any one king
is check-mated.
Such a who-wins rule would then
have been much too easy for the
poor pawns to overcome their
lower loser life-status and win.

In this variant, however,
surely no pawns can ACTUALLY be
queened, even though the pawns
are deluded into thinking this
is possible... if they only try
hard enough and not be so lazy..

And furthermore,.. the pawns on
their one side might fight
amongst themselves during the
game, if this variant is to be
quite true-to-reality (but each
piece here has much more
individual free-will than
real-life human pawns have).
Some might help their fellow
pawns, but the other pawns will
then turn on these "socialists"
and may even side with (and/or
be manipulated by) the monarchy
side in an attempt to suppress
that alleged socialism.
However, some of the "socialist"
pawns may also side somewhat
at least with some of the
monarchy pieces, no matter how
bad this alliance is in-fact
for their causes. Thus, the
"socialists" amongst the pawn
side may even fracture as a
group further and turn on each
other. Meanwhile, the monarchy
side may have a bit of
infighting too. But they will
unite in any effort intended to
harm all pawns collectively,
and especially will unite so to
harm the socialist pawns and
especially will even more so to
harm the sub-group of socialist
pawns allied with almost none
or none of the monarchy pieces.
And then the monarchy broccoli
pieces will just spy on
everybody and win; the end.

Broccoli Versus Shrimp;
yeah, Reality Chess,...
which, ironically,
I once DREAMT about.


** Why do we refer to "pieces
of shrimp" for shrimp fillets,
when these "pieces" each make
up the majority of the shrimp?

It is an odd term.
It is like if we only cut
the feet, tail, and head off
of a cow, maybe gutted it
too, and then called the
remaining carcass in-its-
entirety a "piece of cow".

Yes, this would indeed be
literally descriptive, but
somehow still an odd way
to put it, in my opinion.

News-related world-play.]

Regarding the..
'Lowdown sneak':

This sounds a bit like
a spoonerism for a related
term used in the news.
[Only the second vowel-sound
is incorrect, but it is still
close enough.]

So, I was thinking of a
political cartoon idea
(which must have been done
already) where a family comes
home to find a thief in the
act, with all the family's
most personal belongings
strewn all over and
all quite astray.

The thief says to
the violated family,
"I am just looking for ways
to keep you people safe!"
(Maybe he is looking for
those people's safe, too,
but I digress.)

That thief's name must be..
'Enis A.'

Spell his name backwards,
it becomes 'A sine',
which phonetically sounds
like.. "A sign".

^Is THIS a sign?..



No comments: