Meta = Beyond

Discussions about the possibility of consciousness, free will, spirits, deities, religions and so on, and how these might interact with time travel, the Big Bang, many worlds and so on.

Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:39 pm

Meta = Beyond

Physical = energy ergo occupied space aka our finite physical reality.

There are various kinds of metaphysical and the following link helps to understand some of those. imho
https://sites.google.com/a/wildblue.net/rybonix/
Attachments
Simple Cosmos( H. Death ) copy.pdf
Simple Comos is graphic of initializing circumstances for beginnings and subsequent endings of our finite Universe, with variable potenials within the given geometric set.
(482 KiB) Downloaded 142 times
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:55 am

Meta is only 'beyond' in the sense that two is beyond one. Metaphysics is in the sense that vols 1-12 are on physics, and vol 13-15 are with that series, on matters not thus covered. It's not a kind of thing by itself.

Meta is the same root as english 'mid' "with, amomg', as in "midshipman" (man who is with the ship).

It's kind of like 'trivia', the closest translation of this in NE is "the three R's" (reading, 'writing, and arithmetic).
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:13 pm

As with many words, there can be many different associated definitions ex the words 'spirit and soul' may have more definitions than any others words in the dictionary(s).

My use of the word "meta" is specifically in association with one of those definitions labeled as "beyond".

Meta (from the Greek preposition μετά = "after", "beyond", "adjacent", "self", ....

Numerical two( 2 ) is beyond one ergo two( 2 ) is also outside of one in sofar as than two is multiple set of one however, being a multiple set of one( 1 - 1 ), two is not totally beyond one i.e. numerical two is inclusive/embracive of one and two does not exist as concept without i numerical one( 1 ) as two is eternally a set of two ones( 1 - 1 ).

My use of meta involves a far more reaching comprehensive set, than a simple, linear more narrow numerical set i.e. I've laid-out with some clarity, three specific definitions of metaphysical as related to the concepts of Universe( 3-4 sucatagories ) within contexts of abstractions of mind-- which include numeric's and infinity --- space, time and a specific quasi inbetweeness buffer-zone of existence.

I've given a link and PDF document for those who want to attempt to have grasp of what I consider the outlined list or hierarchy of greater, more comprehensive set of wholeness, and initializing circumstances, that inherently includes all possible, parts into a sum-total finite set of cosmically oriented concepts.

https://sites.google.com/a/wildblue.net/rybonix/

If others see in error in my outlines/lists, heirachies etc and have specific counter arguments, adjustments, or additions, that would invalidate any of my givens, I've always encouraged them to share their ideas.

To date, few to none have offered anything of constructive significant value to those givens.

It is kind of as Fullers states it, as we approach absolute truth, with the refining of our words and their defintions, it becomes harder and harder to refine those definitions further, as we approach( closer and closer ) absolute truth.

r6
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby Klitzing » Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:59 pm

"meta" clearly is "beyond".

But not a "beyond" in the sense of "outside", "exterior", "around"
(that one better would be given by "hyper"),
rather in the sense of "beyond the so far mentioned".

E.g. N. Johnson used for attribution of names to those solids,
which now are associated to his name, the prefix series
"ortho", "para", "meta" in the sense of:
"rightangled", "parallel", and "the remaining cases".

That is, "meta" well could mean "inbetween", "intermediate" then too.

--- rk
Klitzing
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Heidenheim, Germany

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Sat Mar 30, 2013 7:21 am

Meta corresponds to german 'mit', "with, among" or English 'mid' (eg midwife, midshipman). In the sense of 'metaphysics', the sense comes from topics discussed in a series of books, that came with the physics books. These books just happened to discuss spooky things like ghosts, the spirit world usw.

Likewise, "hyper" (above), is meaningful when one needs to invoke a space higher than usual. So if one is talking of 2d geometry, then 3d is hyperspace. The 4d is not itself 'hyperspace', since it is supposed to be solid in the context, and its hyperspace is 5d or larger.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby Klitzing » Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 am

:nod: Wendy, I like your explanation, its the closest I've come across!
Klitzing
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Heidenheim, Germany

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Sun Mar 31, 2013 10:27 am

As shown on my web site and implied in PDF, non-occupied space exists beyond the quasi-physical intermediate buffer-zone called gravity ergo metaphysical is beyond the quasi-physical and physical.

These are not complicated or complex abstractions and the PDF graphics depicts in 2D what I've intended in 3D.

As you say meta is clearly "beyond" so score one for agreement.

R6

Klitzing wrote:"meta" clearly is "beyond".

But not a "beyond" in the sense of "outside", "exterior", "around"
(that one better would be given by "hyper"),
rather in the sense of "beyond the so far mentioned".
That is, "meta" well could mean "inbetween", "intermediate" then too.

--- rk
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Mon Apr 01, 2013 6:53 am

"meta" is a live word which many people know the meaning of. When we were at school, they used to teach "ladin and greek roots". It's meaning is the same as 'midst', and 'middle' is related to it. So how is 'beyond' = 'middle'?

Meta clearly means 'in the middle of' or 'with', not 'beyond', and certianly not 'beyond' in the sense of the pdf. Something in 'trans-' would be more what is being sought here. 'quasi' means 'as if'.

You really ought look up the dictionary before naming things. Even the dictionary on wiki is suffice for this.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:37 am

In any case, the subject of metaphysics - spooks etc - are among us. People could hardly see ghosts wandering up and down the hall, if they were thousands of miles weg,
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby Klitzing » Tue Apr 02, 2013 8:19 am

Even so, they (the ghosts) are still beyond the so far occupied places - at least in general. Because, when they would occupy the same places (i.e. within people, within walls, etc.), they cannot be seen any longer (even to those who are able to see ghosts).

So also in this aspect meta could well be translated to midst among, but not in the sense of a within, rather as a between.

But your explanation with some chapters of a book, some dealing with scientific physics, and some dealing with metaphysics (thus being placed "meta" the physics), seems the most plastic explanation to me so far, Wendy. - This most probably would be the origin for the usage of that combined term (metaphysics).

And yes, it looks plausible, that the ethymological stem of the greek meta could be the same as that of the german Mitte or the english mid / middle.

But it also could relate to the stem of meter instead. That in fact is a true greek root as well (not a northern european one), like in geometer for instance. Here it stands for the unit of measure, respectively for one who is measuring (the eath = gaia), etc. - Then it (metaphysics) could relate to the stuff, which is one unit of measure apart from physics. (E.g. that unit being a chapter in the case of those books).

--- rk
Last edited by Klitzing on Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Klitzing
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Heidenheim, Germany

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:34 am

Ghosts usw. occupy the same space at a different frequency. This is why they can haunt places that we can visit. Sounds of different frequencies occupy the same space, without seeing each other.

But the source i gave first is what the wikipedea's dictionary gives for 'metaphysics'. i rather like the idea of 'this is physics as we know it', and this is mitganger stuff that we hope to explain in the realm of physics, rather like 'these volumes explain what we know, and these mit-volumes explain what we would like to explain.

If ye be wanting something like 'beyond' or 'across', then there's 'trans', eg 'transylvania' (Siebenbergen) = beyond the woods. (sylvan has the same meaning change of woods to mountians as does 'Wald' (weald) .. forests survived in the mountions longer than on the plains.

one would expect meter to come from the same stem as english 'mete', german 'Maße', (measure).

[i currently have a german virtual machine set up to play with - one has to watch the meaning of words (since german words do not correspond to the english), but it's fun to look up the etymologies of words found for the 'cowley' project.]
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby Klitzing » Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:14 pm

Nice attempt, but rather an opening for a side thread. :P

What is meant by transsylvania is the nowadays country of romania. It is spoken of from the view of central europe, esp. from the view of the ancient rome. Thus it indeed describes "trans" (beyond) the "sylva"s (woods). (Cf. to the opposite term, "cissylvania", which was the according name for that region of the balkan, which is closer to rome, i.e. the former yugoslavia.)

There is a special region within said romania, which is known as "Siebenbürgen" (be aware of the umlaut!). It was called so by the germans who went to settle there (the "Siebenbürger" saxons). - The translation of "Siebenbürgen" is just "7 castles". That is, in that special region (beyond the woods) there are 7 hills with castles on top (as those were placed usually).

Then it was a special duke of romania, who ruled very cruelly, spiking heads of enemies on pales at the wall of defense, etc. He was called :evil: Vlad III Draculea (i.e. the son of a dragon). But it was central europe, i.e. at the other side of those woods, where the fear raised up to myths on "dracula" and "transsylvania", which nowadays can be seen all over in vampire movies.

The names of "transsylvania" and "Siebenbürgen" (not Siebenbergen!) has no common ethymological roots at all. Both are just descriptive names of (distinct) landscapes.

Btw. both "trans" and "sylva" (just as "cis") are latin words. Whereas "meta", "hyper" etc. are greek ones.

--- rk
Klitzing
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Heidenheim, Germany

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:39 pm

0-- Abstract concepts space ergo intellect aka mind is metaphysical
-----------------------------
oo-- Macro-micro non-occupied space beyond our finite, occupied space Universe is metaphysical

( )-- finite, space occupying, quasi-physical gravity aka spacetime membrane(?) is metaphysical.

-O!O+ finite, space occupying, physical i.e. energy is the oscillating transitions between fermionic and bosonic existence.


That is three, cosmically most generalized forms of meta( beyond ).

Mind is concepts of space ergo meta-space is implied but not beyond not beyond intellectual concepts of space.

This is the first, cosmically distinct differentiation between mind( intellect ) and two catagories of space i.e. non-occupied space and occupied space.

If others cannot grasp these three elatively simple concepts then of the top of the heirachy ergo they are missing the concepts of the greatest set of wholeness.

Begin with the whole, and no parts can be left out....R.B. Fuller.....

Why most people, that, I attempt to communicate the above concepts have a mental block to non-occupied space, beyond our finite quasi-physical and physical Universe ideas of non-occupied space, is still a mystery to me.

I think it perhaps has to do with years of precondition thinking, makes it difficult for most people to think beyond all they have been told is existence. In fact that is the first error i.e. people tend to only think of space occupying as equaling existence, so to say there is an existence of non-occupied space beyond our experience is counter-intuitive.

However, all humans have the experience of a seemingly non-occupied space between two houses, or two trees, two auto-mobiles etc.....so, many of us know that a seemingly non-occupied space between two physical things is filled with other physical stuff we cannot see with our eyes.

So at this level of physical -O!O+ existence, as listed above we can can eventually arrive at the sub-category in the fermionic category of what we can visually see. It was Richard Feyman who firsted pointed out that pit vipers see in the infra-red( heat range ) which is invisible too human eyes, without being assisted by a an instrument.

r6


As shown on my web site and implied in PDF, non-occupied space exists beyond the quasi-physical intermediate buffer-zone called gravity ergo metaphysical is beyond the quasi-physical and physical.
These are not complicated or complex abstractions and the PDF graphics depicts in 2D what I've intended in 3D.
As you say meta is clearly "beyond" so score one for agreement.
R6
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Thu Apr 04, 2013 7:11 am

This sounds awfully like a puree of facts. It is quite possible that a world could occupy the space between us, but it has no moment on us, and thus is perfectly speculative. The realms of ghosts etc occupy our space, and sparingly interacts with us. Such is the realm of metaphysics.

But to suppose that metaphysis is beyond in the physical sense, is wrong. It's Beyond in the sense of 'needing to be transcended', a metaphor, so to speak. One might see that there is 'beyond good and evil', where the same material is analysied in a more complex matter (that good/evil and ying/yang is not the only dichotomy, and dichotomies and line-ranges do not all line up in nature). But it's not beyond in the physical sense: it is not beyond the rhine, or beyond the kei (transkei) or the forrests (transylvania), but beyond the range of usual thoughts.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:08 pm

Mind/intellect is beyond non-occupied and occupied space. See outline at link and PDF for better clarity. It is much more simple than people's false mis-projections of my givens.

Non-occupied space is beyond--- outside of ----quasi-physical gravity and physical fermions and [bosons.

Quasi-physical gravity is beyond--- outside of ---our finite fermionic and bosonic universe

Mind/intellect + non-occupied space + occupied space is top of the heirachy set of primary cosmic threeness.

However since mind/intellect is beyond a space, we are left with the set of only two kinds of primary space, non-occupied and occupied.

Again that is why mind/intellect is above or below the dotted line making mind/intellect distinctly separate from space.

We can further subcatagorise mind/intellect geometry, numbers, language absolute truth etc...

We can further subcatagorize non-occupied space although it has the least amount of potential subcatagorization.

We can further subcategorize occupied space ex fermions and bosons.

r6
[/color][/b]
rr6 wrote:0-- Abstract concepts space ergo intellect aka mind is metaphysical
-----------------------------
oo-- Macro-micro non-occupied space beyond our finite, occupied space Universe is metaphysical
( )-- finite, space occupying, quasi-physical gravity aka spacetime membrane(?) is metaphysical.
-O!O+ finite, space occupying, physical i.e. energy is the oscillating transitions between fermionic and bosonic existence.
That is three, cosmically most generalized forms of meta( beyond ).
Mind is concepts of space ergo meta-space is implied but not beyond not beyond intellectual concepts of space.
This is the first, cosmically distinct differentiation between mind( intellect ) and two catagories of space i.e. non-occupied space and occupied space.

If others cannot grasp these three elatively simple concepts then of the top of the heirachy ergo they are missing the concepts of the greatest set of wholeness.

Begin with the whole, and no parts can be left out....R.B. Fuller.....

Why most people, that, I attempt to communicate the above concepts have a mental block to non-occupied space, beyond our finite quasi-physical and physical Universe ideas of non-occupied space, is still a mystery to me.

I think it perhaps has to do with years of precondition thinking, makes it difficult for most people to think beyond all they have been told is existence. In fact that is the first error i.e. people tend to only think of space occupying as equaling existence, so to say there is an existence of non-occupied space beyond our experience is counter-intuitive.

However, all humans have the experience of a seemingly non-occupied space between two houses, or two trees, two auto-mobiles etc.....so, many of us know that a seemingly non-occupied space between two physical things is filled with other physical stuff we cannot see with our eyes.

So at this level of physical -O!O+ existence, as listed above we can can eventually arrive at the sub-category in the fermionic category of what we can visually see. It was Richard Feyman who firsted pointed out that pit vipers see in the infra-red( heat range ) which is invisible too human eyes, without being assisted by a an instrument.

r6


As shown on my web site and implied in PDF, non-occupied space exists beyond the quasi-physical intermediate buffer-zone called gravity ergo metaphysical is beyond the quasi-physical and physical.
These are not complicated or complex abstractions and the PDF graphics depicts in 2D what I've intended in 3D.
As you say meta is clearly "beyond" so score one for agreement.
R6
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Mass-O>Boson<-OMass

Postby rr6 » Sun May 05, 2013 11:57 am

MK, if our/your "space-time" Universe( occupied space ) is finite, then outside ergo beyond( meta ), exists as macro-micro infinite non-occupied space.

This is the first subcataorization--- inside - outside --- of "U"niverse, or Universe or universe etc.......depending on the individual terminological preference.

Non-occupied space beyond( meta )

Occupied space---includes your "space-time" --exists within non-occupied space

Non-occupied space ergo beyond( meta )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Non-occupied space = <>

Occupied space or "space-time" or spacetime, = ., or * , or o, or maybe expanded as O or O

Ergo <o> or expanded as <O>
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Mon May 06, 2013 6:59 am

These words have particular meanings. Use them correctly.

meta = in the middle of, amongst
quasi = as if,
ergo = therefore: non-occupied space does not imply beyond, and certianly not beyond = middle of. Next ye'd be saying that because Time square is in the middle of new york city, it is beyond it.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Mon May 06, 2013 12:51 pm

I've already explained how meta = beyond if not given links to the dictionaries stating the same. Reread previous posts.

Quasi, semi whatever, the intent of what is meant is obvious to me. If you do not understand, then you can ask me and/or get dictionary to help you understand that are various meanings to words.

You appear to me to just want to be difficult and not really attempt to grasp/understand anything Ive stated. Please move on or ask specific question to specific comments by me in my previous posts and I will try and answer them as best as I can.

I am not colloge grammar teacher, so, if you want to be ultra-anal about grammar, your speaking to the wrong person.

R6
wendy wrote:These words have particular meanings. Use them correctly.

meta = in the middle of, amongst
quasi = as if,
ergo = therefore: non-occupied space does not imply beyond, and certianly not beyond = middle of. Next ye'd be saying that because Time square is in the middle of new york city, it is beyond it.
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby Klitzing » Mon May 06, 2013 4:45 pm

Dear rr6,

don't be too harsh now. Wendy is clearly knowing what she tells. If she suggests "better" terms or "corrections", then she just tries to prevent clashes of meanings - might be ones in more general contexts.

Sure, it is up to you, to adopt those or not. But at least you should not be stubborn yourself, insisting on your own terms. If you won't like her suggestions, it would be wise at least to enter a discussion in the search for better terms for your aims.


Such phenomena occur often when bringing up some vocabulary from one context to an other. Esp. in cases of home-grown researches. Even research groups from different universities sometimes get into that.

Sometimes there is no way out, but to learn either meanings by heart, and will have to translate every announcement "of the other side". But if possible, one should aim to avoid that. - This is, what Wendy was pointing out.

Perhaps it might be that it is you who has not carefully read what she was telling you?


Btw., don't be disappointed by me either. I just come in to cool things down again.

If you would like to insist on your ideas / terms / etc. then it would be better to publish them in printed media. But as you've entered a forum, you clearly were willing to get discussions, no?

Best regards,
--- rk
Klitzing
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Heidenheim, Germany

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Mon May 06, 2013 11:14 pm

Things are not "hot" here that I'm aware of. Start with my word meta as I have used it is in no way incorrect or problematic in anyway and more so for those who do not want to be grammatically anal. This is obvious in here case as that has been her primary focus in her previous post in my regards.

She should drop it and move onto the concepts or drop it by just moving on to some where else.

If others want to know better what is meant by me, then they can ask. Again, meta= beyond and that is fine and dandy definition for all my needs and should be for any who are sincere in the heart to understand the concepts of anything I've stated. She is not. imho

So she should move on. imho

r6
Klitzing wrote:Dear rr6,

don't be too harsh now. Wendy is clearly knowing what she tells. If she suggests "better" terms or "corrections", then she just tries to prevent clashes of meanings - might be ones in more general contexts.

Sure, it is up to you, to adopt those or not. But at least you should not be stubborn yourself, insisting on your own terms. If you won't like her suggestions, it would be wise at least to enter a discussion in the search for better terms for your aims.


Such phenomena occur often when bringing up some vocabulary from one context to an other. Esp. in cases of home-grown researches. Even research groups from different universities sometimes get into that.

Sometimes there is no way out, but to learn either meanings by heart, and will have to translate every announcement "of the other side". But if possible, one should aim to avoid that. - This is, what Wendy was pointing out.

Perhaps it might be that it is you who has not carefully read what she was telling you?


Btw., don't be disappointed by me either. I just come in to cool things down again.

If you would like to insist on your ideas / terms / etc. then it would be better to publish them in printed media. But as you've entered a forum, you clearly were willing to get discussions, no?

Best regards,
--- rk
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Tue May 07, 2013 7:20 am

If you are going to wave red flags at a bull, you deserve it.

meta is a word that means 'middle'. You just can't uptake it and make it what you want to. even in 'metaphysics', the ghosts are 'visitors among us', not something that comes from mars or jupiter.

wendy is moderator, and in this role does look at nearly every post, to see if there is nothing untoward. that's what moderators do.

wendy is also a fairly active contributor, who keeps a dictionary on the internet. So while you might think that it's right to use 'inner' to represent 'outer', or 'middle of' to represent 'beyond', its not much less than the reproach that i have passed at other people who mangle language (eg boundless to mean infinite, or indefinite to mean infinite).

there are plenty of posts in the lists where i deal with inappropriate use of meanings of words, and muddled thinking. I'm pretty sure that reading of your several posts, it's more very muddled thinking caused by inapproapriate use of words. meta = beyond is a prime example. Metaphysics is 'beyond ordinary physics' in the same way that calculus is 'beyond ordinary maths', not a place but a depth of study. Ghosts etc are among us, not ten-thousand miles hence, but are beyond our kith to come to their understanding. I mean, if they were ten-thousand miles from us, we be no more bothered with them then the fauna of south america, or the strange fauna one finds on these rocky shores. Ghosts are in our speech because they are in our midst.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Tue May 07, 2013 8:39 am

Moreover, why are you sprouting yourself in front of a theoretical cosmologist? I mean, i have a degree in physics, and i continue to wrangle the stuff in way of metrology. Bosons are as much particles as fermions. In fact, the bulk of the world is made of bosons, not fermions.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

2nd One Ducks

Postby rr6 » Wed May 08, 2013 12:59 am

A troll walks into a bar. The 2nd one ducks.

A person named boson steps into a small public bathroom and latches the door. A sign then appears outside to let the next person--- whose name just happens to be fermion --- know the previously non-occupied space in the bathroom, is now and occupied space.

Two conjoined, at-the-hips twins(?)--- slightly different aspects( ex male and female ) for each of their half of existence ---step into the non-occupied space of a public bathroom. The name given to these two conjoined as one siblings is Universe.

Space is not the final frontier. Space is the initial top of the cosmological hierarchy/outline in understanding/comprehending Universe

"U"niverse = non-occupied space, occupied space and metaphysical mind/intelligence( I-ness + U-ness ) abstract concepts or mental constructs.

Uni verse = occupied space

universe = our individual feeling of our local universe's sphere of influence.

r6

r6
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

0 = Ziphra/cipher

Postby rr6 » Mon May 20, 2013 12:40 am

Zero is a non-counting number.

Zero = non-occupied space and non-occupied space exists as and infinite spatial set of nothing( void/non-occupied space ).

Zero = the the non-counting set of beads in the first row on an abacus, once that finite set has gone back to being a neutral set.

The oldest abacus's--- China? ---every discovered have 13 columns ergo were talking in the trillions--- i.e. 1,000,000,000,000 ---.

Were there a trillion beans in Mespotamia( Babylonians ) stone grain bin?

http://www.mediatinker.com/blog/archive ... tml#number

..."As already stated, the Hindus called it śūnya, "void."[212] This passed over into the Arabic as aṣ-ṣifr or ṣifr.[213] When Leonard of Pisa (1202) wrote upon the Hindu numerals he spoke of this character as zephirum.[214] Maximus Planudes (1330), writing under both the Greek and the Arabic influence, called it tziphra.[215] In a treatise on arithmetic written in the Italian language by Jacob of Florence[216] [58](1307) it is called zeuero,[217] while in an arithmetic of Giovanni di Danti of Arezzo (1370) the word appears as çeuero.[218] Another form is zepiro,[219] which was also a step from zephirum to zero.[220]

Of course the English cipher, French chiffre, is derived from the same Arabic word, aṣ-ṣifr, but in several languages it has come to mean the numeral figures in general. A trace of this appears in our word ciphering, meaning figuring or computing.[221] Johann Huswirt[222] uses the word with both meanings; he gives for the tenth character the four names theca, circulus, cifra, and figura nihili. In this statement Huswirt probably follows, as did many writers of that period, the Algorismus of Johannes de Sacrobosco (c. 1250 A.D.), who was also known as John of Halifax or John of Holywood. The commentary of [59]Petrus de Dacia[223] (c. 1291 A.D.) on the Algorismus vulgaris of Sacrobosco was also widely used.

The widespread use of this Englishman's work on arithmetic in the universities of that time is attested by the large number[224] of MSS. from the thirteenth to the seventeenth century still extant, twenty in Munich, twelve in Vienna, thirteen in Erfurt, several in England given by Halliwell,[225] ten listed in Coxe's Catalogue of the Oxford College Library, one in the Plimpton collection,[226] one in the Columbia University Library, and, of course, many others.

From aṣ-ṣifr has come zephyr, cipher, and finally the abridged form zero.
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Mon May 20, 2013 7:19 am

I count the number of times i have been to prag, or the number of elephants in the room. zero. Yes, zero is a counting number, it is what you get when the count is not started. The counting numbers are N, not Z+

Abacuses of the style used in china, were invented in rome, but are fixed devices that replicate loose stones on a board. The european style is to use counters on a table, with the columns marked. Bank, Bankrupt, Calculus, and Abacus all reflect the use of counters on a table.

In any case, if you consult a manual for the chinese or japanese style abacus, you will find that the number of columns is actually the working-space, and up to three numbers might be on it. Multiplication and Division are done by transferring between two numbers (eg subtract 1 here, add 17 there). In commercial transactions, one might have a row 'five items at 25c', the multiplication is preformed in the columns not used on the running total.

13 columns suggests a maximum value of six digits for a number. Maybe eight, since the columns were dynamically assigned.

Sumerian numbers are matters of 'division', not 'multiplication'. So a number that is four places long, lies *between* two two-digit numbers. So, eg 25 lies between 2 and 3, because the first column is the units column, and subsequent columns are fractions of units. 25 would represent what we write 2.5.

Zero, cipher, etc, is used for the symbol representing an empty column. If you have other ways of getting to the columns of a stone-board, you don't need to mark empty columns. For example, having a $10 note and a 10c coin, does not meen i need a special coin to show that the $1 column is empty.

If you're going to go into historical calculations, there are 14th century calculations in england which show that C represented 120. So there you go.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby Klitzing » Mon May 20, 2013 8:24 am

Can't speak of the medial englsh one, but to the romans "C" was considered 100, not 120.

Btw. german language has also old number names: Dutzend = 12 (engl.: dozen), Gros/Groß = 144 (engl.: gross).
An historical special importance of 120 is not known to me, so.

--- rk
Klitzing
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Heidenheim, Germany

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Mon May 20, 2013 11:02 am

Well, i suppose this is good for a read.

http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata ... 95_418.pdf

In practice, all germanic uses used a six-score hundred, and any that have writing back as far as the christian era, know of words like 'elefty', 'teenty', 'teentywise'. Even the gothic of wilfus's bible contains 'teentywise'.

One has 'a hundred men came as soldiers, eighty stayed and forty left', as a precise statement.

One is also reminded of Gordon's "Introduction to Old Norse", which in section 107, contains such gems as this, without any further comment.

Must dig out my copy of 'Muret-Sanders' to see what it says of a german word 'Hundret'. Should be interesting.

Code: Select all

                Cardinal
      10         ti'u
      11        ellifu
      12        tólf
                 ...
     100      tiú tigir
     110      ellifu tigir
     120       hundrað
     200    hundrað ok átta tigir
     240       tvau hundrað
    1200         þúsund

The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby rr6 » Mon May 20, 2013 12:47 pm

If I recall correctly 120 is one of those cosmic limits Fuller refers to, regarding the maximum number if identical triangles that can be applied to surface of sphere.

Cosmic limits

3 regular/symmetrical and stabilized by triangles are;

tetra(4)hedron---3-fold symmetry of 3D polyhedron
octa(8)hedron---4-fold symmetry "" ""
icosa(20)hedron---see 120 right-triangles ---5-fold symmetry "" ""

r6

Klitzing wrote:Can't speak of the medial englsh one, but to the romans "C" was considered 100, not 120.
Btw. german language has also old number names: Dutzend = 12 (engl.: dozen), Gros/Groß = 144 (engl.: gross).
An historical special importance of 120 is not known to me, so.

--- rk
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Re: Meta = Beyond

Postby wendy » Tue May 21, 2013 6:49 am

Fuller's 120 derives from the symmetry of the icosahedron. He was an architect with lots of sea experience, largely inappropriate for use on land.

The attached bitmap is for Richard Klitzing, who has not heard of Hundert being used to represent vi scores in german.
Attachments
hundert.jpg
The entry for 'Hundert' in Muret Sanders German-English dictionary of 1902.
(59.16 KiB) Not downloaded yet
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

120 - 240 Cosmic Limits

Postby rr6 » Tue May 21, 2013 12:11 pm

Cosmic metaphysical phenomena are far beyond any simple "sea" or "land" only set of concepts.

The maximum 120 identical triangles or was it 120 right-triangles, meets such cosmic linits criteria. These are indisputbale facts, irrespective of any irrelevant "sea" or "land" references.

These 120 triangle also come in two versions--left-skew and right-skew. So there is a cosmic limit of 240.

Virologist approached Fuller to better understand the triangular based geometry of the protein shells they had begun to find with virus's.

r6

wendy wrote:Fuller's 120 derives from the symmetry of the icosahedron. He was an architect with lots of sea experience, largely inappropriate for use on land.

The attached bitmap is for Richard Klitzing, who has not heard of Hundert being used to represent vi scores in german.
Our conscious existence as reality, along with the conscious comprehension of the existence of a greater finite physical/energetic Universe as reality, is the greatest illusion of reality via those conscious experiences and the associated dreams and recalling of those experiences.
rr6
Dionian
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 pm
Location: US

Next

Return to Consciousness

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest