Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

The matrix is multiplied with the state vector via a process operating one row at a time. Here we see the top row of the matrix being rotated and aligned with the vector, then the functions are applied to the corresponding data. Each element of the matrix row represents an input channel for a particular system. It's input functions receive and process the available data.

(...)

This program has been optimised as a software algorithm and has thus diverged from the matrix mathematics (whilst retaining exact logical equivalence) and it has converge onto a more SCSPL oriented approach.

(...)

This indicates that matrix mathematics is an information process that is logically equivalent to a set of iterative processes operating on a shared information space.

(...)

I am dealing with mathematical and software representations of both a system theoretic and an SCSPL based metaphysics.


Taken From: http://www.anandavala.info/TASTMOTNOR/IST_CTMU.html

Spellbound, please don't ruin the philosophy forum on this board with your 'CTMU' insanity.

(Aug 30, 2015 06:50 PM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]Spellbound, please don't ruin the philosophy forum on this board with your 'CTMU' insanity.

You have my word I won't overdo it.

(Aug 30, 2015 06:52 PM)Parametric Wrote: [ -> ]

(Aug 30, 2015 06:50 PM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]Spellbound, please don't ruin the philosophy forum on this board with your 'CTMU' insanity.

You have my word I won't overdo it.

Or better (there's a prize-contest going on for the next month you could participate in), just ask Stryder if he could make a new sub-forum that's open to specifically allowing controversial interests. Something other than MR's existing "Weird and Beyond" group, which seems devoted to paranormal affairs.

Even if the new group winds up having "alternative" in the name, that's at least still an available slot for posting to one's heart's content in about a passion. And as you can tell from the accumulating number of views of posts over time, there are a lot of guests (non-members) who read this board. (I don't feel Stryder would allow bots to be included in the tallies, anyway).

(Aug 30, 2015 06:38 PM)Parametric Wrote: [ -> ][...] I am dealing with mathematical and software representations of both a system theoretic and an SCSPL based metaphysics. Taken From: [url=http://www.anandavala.info/TASTMOTNOR/IST_CTMU.html]http://www.anandavala.info/TASTMOTNOR/IST_CTMU.html[/url

That's interesting from the standpoint that if anything can lend credence to a system that claims to have one foot in science as well as speculative philosophy, it would be the implementing of it as the scheme / influence behind a technological design which actually works.

But that said, I lack enough personal time / interest to trudge through its specialized nomenclature to merely superficially inspect how well it might hang together. Again, simply producing an actual working technology that makes possible whatever it claims would be sufficient to begin dazing critics of CTMU.

In fact, that could be the only avenue left which the advocates of Christopher Langan have for getting the mainstream intellectual / scientific community to pay attention or rouse their interest. Almost every extra-philosophical field of endeavor has also had its own in-house, esoteric terminology which disinterested outsiders initially balk at. But what got each excused from being "techno-babble" by review boards is any legitimate results those disciplines eventually outputted. [Though that's hardly the sole way for defusing such cautious skepticism.]

(Aug 30, 2015 08:47 PM)C C Wrote: [ -> ]

(Aug 30, 2015 06:38 PM)Parametric Wrote: [ -> ][...] I am dealing with mathematical and software representations of both a system theoretic and an SCSPL based metaphysics. Taken From: http://www.anandavala.info/TASTMOTNOR/IST_CTMU.html[/url

[url]


That's interesting from the standpoint that if anything can lend credence to a system that claims to have one foot in science as well as speculative philosophy, it would be the implementing of it as the scheme / influence behind a technological design which actually works.

But that said, I lack enough personal time / interest to trudge through its specialized nomenclature to merely superficially inspect how well it might hang together. Again, simply producing an actual working technology that makes possible whatever it claims would be sufficient to begin dazing critics of CTMU.

In fact, that could be the only avenue left which the advocates of Christopher Langan have for getting the mainstream intellectual / scientific community to pay attention or rouse their interest. Almost every extra-philosophical field of endeavor has also had its own in-house, esoteric terminology which disinterested outsiders initially balk at. But what got each excused from being "techno-babble" by review boards is any legitimate results those disciplines eventually outputted. [Though that's hardly the sole way for defusing such cautious skepticism.][/url]

[url]

Thank you for your response CC. I personally find reason to believe that the CTMU can indeed lead to breakthroughs in technology. Here are two links I've found which supports the idea: https://books.google.ca/books?id=nnpChqs...&q&f=false

https://philosophynow.org/issues/102/Mat...nd_Reality
[/url]

Clarification of the concept of syndiffeonesis.

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xt...e=56808826

so parametric is spellbound ?

(Sep 24, 2015 06:17 PM)krash661 Wrote: [ -> ]so parametric is spellbound ?

Yes.