Ripheus23

???

Not necessarily in the event the Ripheus story was publishable even possibly, but "just in case"...

So I think that the Beast, the False Prophet, and the Dragon are also the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. That is, they are three kinds of sin, viz. the final offenses. The early Christian theorists did, if faintly here, recognize the existence of this problem...

[A tropey-sounding story, haha!]

Long ago, when the Morning-god, Ramn Surdur, tried to destroy the world, He was bound into the Shadow of Heaven by the power of the Firelights. For thousands of years, in the City Under Heaven alone, these lights burned to uphold the Shadow. But a crisis of war arose that threatened our protection with extinction, whereafter the Firelights ignited themselves anew elsewhere, to strengthen their purpose to the last. So it was that the City Under Heaven lost splendor and influence, until this very day...

[Deviant element: the doctrine of the antagonist, here, revolves around a quasi-stigmatic image of the Atonement. I.e. there is a supreme evil, the actual nature of, or precursor to, the Morning-god, but this was not originally some primordial malice as such, but instead the theory was that the Atonement wrought by the ancient Savior required the Savior to suffer the bridge-analogies of the final offenses themselves, to wit rape, torture, and murder, at the hands of at least one individual person. So, the deviant element is that to save the world by suffering in its place, the ancient Savior had to be tortured and murdered, but also raped, and the one who raped the Savior was transformed by this action into Ramn Surdur or its predecessor/source/lord... How to integrate the Christian theme here with the prologion-theme of the Shadow-binding, IDK yet. I don't even have any actual characters haha!]

"... outwitting the wicked,

One sin of theirs

And one grace of mine

At a time..."

❣❀

You must remember that the final offenses are not united as the Trinity is. Their "unity" in the entanglement theorem is enough of an illusion to tempt us to the profane belief, here. However, it is true that due to their entanglement, romantic injustice and recursive disgrace can be intercomputed: the four forms of amendment "go with" the square of metafinity, so that for the problem

• Find the appropriate degree of punishment for the sin of romantic injustice.

... the solution goes for: [absolute finite: A; relative finite: B; relative infinite: C; absolute infinite: D] so that the priority of redemption over retribution gives us A = punishment, B/C = forgiveness/apologies, and D = redemption (atonement, salvation even). But if even the worst punishable sin (note: recursive disgrace is proto-talionic at least, but it does not seem as if transcendental delusion is the kind of thing that can be externally "avenged") merits absolute finite retribution at most, does it follow not that no sin ought to be punished so gravely as is required in the system of damnation?

[Of course, to tempt the victims [subjects] of this injustice, with the motive of vengeance, seemingly justified, is of the will of transcendental evil, here. For the rage of those violated in the first place is translated into the power of damnation itself, is it not?]

Hmm...

• []()[]()()()()[][]()()[][][][][][][][][][]()[][][]()()()()[]...
• [][]()()[][][]()()()[][]()[][]()[][]()()()[]()()()[][]()[]()...
• &c. ...

Don't these potentially map to nonrepeating decimals, except represented in the equivalent of binary? That also suggests a gloss on binary, I suspect: instead of 0/1::true/false, we have 0/1::possible/actual. I think that's probably even more fitting since false does not = 0, but -1 (I know in propositional space by itself, the absence of truth+ is equivalent to the presence of truth-, and true/false is a propositional opposition, but...).

At any rate, this would imply that the cardinality of the set of sigma-actuations is equivalent (as such) to the cardinality of the continuum. Allowing that every sigma-actuation represents a possible world, this would imply the abstract existence of at least aleph-C worlds. [This would be a far more massive multiverse than the string-theoretic one by itself, then... Not sure about Everett's or Tegmark's, though. Tegmark's seems to contain universes whose component cardinalities (if that description makes sense!) are whichever aleph-X there could be, in which event these self-transfinite universes would have to contain infinite stacks of systems of multiverses or what, individually. So who knows!] Now I'm in the camp that believes aleph-C = aleph-1, and so that 2 to the power of aleph-0 = aleph-1. [I think those beliefs go together...] So I don't have to suppose that the cardinality of the known universe's mathematical equations (the level of infinity from which the numbers for the equations are drawn) is greater than aleph-1, at least not as such. Indeed, it appears that irrational numbers occur in physics equations so it would appear that the universe is thus condensed at least from the ether of the continuum, so to speak. [Btw, this means both (A) finite/mortal/w/e beings can grasp infinity but also that (B) this turns out to be a potential let-down as there are still infinite numbers of infinities that we can't (yet/easily) grasp, and so on.]

It occurred to me that:

• If corruption is the negation of good predicates, and not the addition of evil predicates, then even corruption can be "reduced to" a destruction-like process, in which case Apollyon alone can represent the Form of Evil, it seems. Maybe.
• Also, in assertoric propositional logic, {X is ~true} = ~{X is true}. That is, contradictory negation collapses into contrary negation, and vice versa, so to say. This does not happen in term/predicate logic, to my knowledge. Anyway, there is a different application of the axiom of opposition, therefore, when it comes to honesty and mendacity, namely, an act can be the physical opposite of a true assertion (e.g. assassinating a whistleblower) or the logicwise-opposite, as in a lie. So the Form of Evil, in lying, is not reductively identical to physical opposition as such (maybe this contradicts(!) the Apollyon-as-the-FOE idea!).
• But also anyway, then, the morality of lying vs. truth-telling can be mapped onto the priority of the concepts of right and evil. I.e. since truth is more strongly correlated with right, and since the true and the right are conceptually prior to the false and the evil, action expressive of the truth carries with it a prima facie or as they sometimes say pro tanto justification.

Jesus I didn't even think when I was doing it but I totally made a joke how-to video "How to Atone for the Vietnam War" on Memorial Day haha

... This was a clever argument, arguably(!) one of the most clever the demons ever came up with. On a knife's edge did they balance the possible damnation of entire worlds...

It was said, then, that right was what was done according to nature, and that wrong was to do what was unnatural. But in this event right and wrong would not be pure opposites, besides which all wrong would exist inside of all possible right, here, which amounts to the apotheosis of desolation, one might dread... However, the more important point down the line was to deviate from the axiom of opposition. The entire process was, so to say, half a red herring: the primary external victims would suffer greatly as a result, but not because hurting them was in and of itself more interesting to the demons than was hurting anyone else. It just so happened that these ones suffered from a special weakness which, if the demons exploited it, allowed them to open some of the doors to the apocalypse.

So anyway, because what these people do does not cancel out something already-existent action or state of good and right as such, but is merely different from such an external state, it is not contrary to goodness and so is neutral if nothing else. Because this must be so, the control narrative has to be constructed by which to deviate these people from the truth nevertheless.

You start out from a statistical weakness, the question of romantic luck, for them. You see, you have to think that there's much less chance for them to find one person to have a special love for, that is the greatest of all they can feel, here, i.e. it is statistically harder, just so, for them to achieve their romantic ideals. You prey on this [if you are a demon, as it were], because you know this is their weakness: they don't participate in the competitive scheme that you do, they look at other guys and think not so much, "How can I win one over on him?" but, just so to admit this, "I wonder if there's any way I could hook up with him?" Or whatever, haha.

Anyway, this is their first weakness, here...

... [...] ...

... So the demons set it up where these people would be tempted to forbidden sadness on one hand, or promiscuous dissolution, elsewise. Convinced, thence, that romantic ideality is a moral illusion, an impossible gambit, an unacceptable promise, a gilden ticket to the heart of damnation even: you must convince these people that they are guilty, in every necessary way, in order for them to accept being sacrificed to the Destroyer's altar at last.

I noticed that the logic of my argument about action vs. inaction, in ethics/responsibility theory, seemed to lead into an argument about moral dilemmas, too, and now I think I can explain just how these issues fit together. The connecting concept has to do with the semantic satisfaction conditions for imperative sentences/prescriptions. Negative imperatives have negative compliance conditions, compliance being the status an imperative has for semantic satisfaction in the way that assertions/declarative sentences have truth as their satisfaction status.

So, it is false that we are responsible only for wrong things that we allow to happen. If we were responsible for those, we would also be responsible for all the good things we allow to happen, because if we were not equally responsible as such, then negative culpability would be more important than positive attribution, which would entail the concept of wrong/evil (moral opposition) being more important than the concept of right/good. But evil is not more important than good, hence... Also, though, it is false that we are responsible for the good we allow. This is because positive imperatives have position actions for compliance conditions, whereas prohibitive imperatives have inaction for a compliance condition in general. The asymmetry, here, disallows(!) the equivalence.

Now, in the case of a moral dilemma, if one of these were inescapable/unsolvable, it would follow that no matter what you did (thereof), you'd do something wrong. But since you are not imagined to be capable of doing nothing whatsoever in such a case (which is questionable, after all), there is no general compliance condition available for the imperatives that are ranging over you in a conflicted manner. That is, for a moral dilemma to irrevocably go through, it would be necessary for prohibitions to have positive actions for compliance conditions. It is true that indirectly, by inference from a set of imperatives some of which are positive and others negative, one can relate a negative imperative substantially to a positive action, but not as its internal semantic satisfaction. Accordingly, within the zone of a solid dilemma, one would have to have negative imperatives with positive compliance conditions, which cannot be true.

The train of thought that transcendental delusion rides, travels from a mistake about the oppositional priority of good over evil (in that the concept of evil depends on the concept of good to have distinct meaning, as the opposite of what is good (it just is any such opposition; there is no self-defining essence of darkness besides this)), to a distorted perspective on doing-vs.-allowing-harm, to the ethical cataclysm of indefeasible dilemmas. From there, of course, it goes to retribution-vs.-retribution and chugs along back to the galaxy of the final offenses...

The idea of antimatter being on the "other side" of the Big Bang, going the "opposite" direction in time, is not mine, I mean my reason for supposing that might have happened was mine (to the extent that I vaguely recalled the thing about antimatter going backward in time being the same as matter moving forward, somehow), but some other physicist (a real one!) came up with the notion already. I found that out from a YouTube video today.

Anyway, if this is all some (admittedly very weird) attempt to solve Hilbert's sixth problem, one thing I had not achieved as of yet was a "deduction" of the intrinsically probabilistic nature of the quantum manifold. I had hand-waved the problem in my head by squaring the probability waves with the requirement that space be perfectly occupied, and it was for this reason I characterized the so-called Higgs/fractal filling of space, below the Planck threshold (sort of), in my theory, as a "quantum fractal threshold." However, I can't say that I am sure there's an inherently probabilistic geometry in my system, not clearly anyway.

However...

There IS an easy deduction from deontic logic---sort of---basically, if free will requires a nondeterministic reality in some way, then the fundamental manifold of the quantum world will be nondeterministic, which in this case translates to probabilistic. Unfortunately, the only deeper application of this notion I have, is difficult for me to process: the "trick" is to think, "For the mathematical pattern of the universe to correspond to a 'fair gem' requires a metrodynamic form of 'fairness,' which can be analogically computed via the concept of the Platonic dice." Now, it is not just any of the dice that we get to roll, though. Only those computed already by the transequent order of the kairogenetic axioplex, are given. So, we have the 4-sided and 8-sided dice, in 3-space; we have the 5-sided, 16-sided, and 600-sided dice, in 4-space [this is mostly because of tetrahelical correspondence, which is fitting, after all, as tetrahelical motion is "ideal" rolling motion for simplectic structures as such]; we have no 5-dimensional dice at all, as far as I know (though we do get a set of "marbles," haha!---the universe as a game of dice and marbles together...). So, the encoding of the Platonic dice, through the sequence of genesis, amounts to the imposition of a probabilistic structure on the rolling of the dice, and so in turn the changes in their corresponding particle sets.

More specifically, though, it seems as though maybe knotical-graphical correspondence can do the "trick."

http://www.math.uchicago.edu/~may/VIGRE/VIGRE2011/REUPapers/Hoberg.pdf

Basically (I'm not saying this is in the above .pdf, I'm saying this is how I'm applying the stuff in general), if you can compute braids and knots simultaneously, you can get braids from knots if given the latter. Now, my theory does seem to give us the latter: when the 5-dimensional crystalscape collapses, it (more or less literally) compresses its mass-energy "downwards" into the other crystalscapes of the lower dimensions, causing all the strict lines of the gemstone architecture to resonate, i.e. spheration adverts to them as their curvature, and due to the axioplex (as a metrodynamic graph-theoretic function), we have the firmament upon which to build the quantum starscape (so to speak) as the axioplex has a relation of special equivalence with a knot-theoretic geometry, which is infused into the axioplex itself (apparently?). That is, the knots that emerge from spheration allow us to compute the braids required for braid statistics, i.e. the superlanguage of plektons.

Now, this might very well falsify my idea [actually, my idea also involves "predicting" that gravity waves can induce deja vu, which if already known to be false, well... or, setting that aside, the deeper parts of the idea involve the "prediction" that certain specific aleph-numbers will be involved in the full equation that states the axiom of physics]. At least, it seems to mean that my idea requires the universe, during the Big Bang, to have been plektonic. So somehow, we'd have to show you could decompose a bosonic-fermionic universe, out of a plektonic one...

Now, my theory goes off "space is never totally empty anywhere," but is this true of time? I was thinking it might be, but in the more exotic sense that there is never a period of time that is always empty. So, if an infinite linear tetrahelix is flowing horizontally while spinning, it will implicitly trace an infinite set of overlapping spheres (out perfectly from the linear horizon). So if all "space" was compacted in a possible cylinder at the edges of the tetrahelix, the flow of time could "fill up" all time over all intervals combined while leaving some regions temporarily(!) empty, timewise, so to say.

But, the other idea I had was that the three logic functions that give rise to sigma-actuation, could be mapped to the front of the tetrahedron on the edge of a helix (even if there was an infinite helix, it might have an edge, as a ray, so to say), so that as it spun and moved horizontally, it would by this means compute the transequent order of modality, i.e. the +/- infinite sums, and the possibility/actually infinite sums (two for which direction is "read from"). And the quantity of sigma-actuation at each point would map to the angle of each of the infinite tetrahedra, so it would never repeat exactly, unless the entire system were folded into the fourth dimension of space and somehow transformed into a tetraplex or something (600-cell, otherwise to say!).

[Note: using [] as possible and () as actual, and going from

• () goes to []()
• [] goes to ()[]
• () goes to ()()
• [] goes to [][]

we could start with pure possibility, and get an infinite string of actuality bounded by pure possibility:

1. []
2. [][]
3. []()[]
4. []()()[]
5. []()()()[]
6. []()()()()[]
7. []()() ... ()()[]

So if we summed up this entire manifold, we could extract an infinite "amount" of ()-ity from []-ity, thus circumventing part of the problem of how there is something instead of nothing, so to say...

But, at any rate, since the []/() alternations would be mapped to the different orientations of the tetrahelix, we can imagine an infinite succession of these alternations that is "not a rational fraction of the circle" traced by the spirals, as such, or whatever, so rather than following some preformed repeating sequence (just as in the synthesis of (7) above?), we would add in either []'s or ()'s, at whichever interval (from whichever intervals are available at each subsequent stage) was relevant(!).]

NOW, though, I also had a weird and/or storyish idea, namely, let's say the Planck incident actually represents a "damaged" stage of reality, and the expansion of space is a recrystallization of a life-like manifold, i.e. what if the greater universe is "healing" and this is causing the continued, and accelerated, expansion of space? Granted, this depends on a complex para-metaphorical interpretation of the terms, to even be remotely possible: if the Planck incident resulted from a collision of particles in a pure time-verse, which left an objective vacuum in a (3-dimensional) time-space, and so the "essence of reality" (so to speak?) rushed in to fill the vacuum, like a liquid, and the strands of the liquid were these little "realitarian"(!) tetrahelix sigma-actuators...

This would have to be relevant to one character in one story I came up with re: these quasi-physics lectures, to be sure...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometrization_conjecture !!!

Quote

Research using virtual reality finds that humans, in spite of living in a three-dimensional world, can, without special practice, make spatial judgments about line segments, embedded in four-dimensional space, based on their length (one dimensional) and the angle (two dimensional) between them.^[12] The researchers noted that "the participants in our study had minimal practice in these tasks, and it remains an open question whether it is possible to obtain more sustainable, definitive, and richer 4D representations with increased perceptual experience in 4D virtual environments".^[12] In another study,^[13] the ability of humans to orient themselves in 2D, 3D and 4D mazes has been tested. Each maze consisted of four path segments of random length and connected with orthogonal random bends, but without branches or loops (i.e. actually labyrinths). The graphical interface was based on John McIntosh's free 4D Maze game.^[14] The participating persons had to navigate through the path and finally estimate the linear direction back to the starting point. The researchers found that some of the participants were able to mentally integrate their path after some practice in 4D (the lower-dimensional cases were for comparison and for the participants to learn the method).

That's from the Wikipedia article about four-dimensional spaces in general. It makes me wonder if my notion of a sort of "purpose" in the universe, consisting in the transformation of our physical perception into a geometrically (not---quite---mystically) higher-dimensional form, is possible, at least in the sense that concrete understanding of 4D-space would help with deontic logic, say.

Now, actually, I haven't mentioned it fully yet, but there's a cognitive argument for a 5-dimensional limit on our physics theories, sort of. Namely, we can use dimensional analogies to "intuitively" compute 4-dimensional structures, e.g. as by saying that the net of the tesseract is a layout of cubes just as the net of the cube is a layout of squares. We also have faithful rotational analogies (the gem-like imagery on Wikipedia, for example), stereographic projections, etc. We have some of these for 5D-space, but they are intuitively weaker, depending more on abstract than tangible geometrical analogies. So, 5D-space is the "cognitive limit" of analogical intuition, so (on Kant's scheme, say), it is the limit of what we can acquire empirical evidence of (for the time being!).

"One might wonder: it is all well and good that we can turn a triangle into a fractal that is also a net, which net can be folded into the tetrahedral foundation-stone for a tessellation involving another structure as well, and that these can fold and unfold into other geodesics and spherical and helical forms, and so on and on: but what does this have to do with anything, ultimately? Would it not be possible to graph the concepts in question using other structures? It has to be the special requirements of the system that render the 'algebra' at issue, tractable, i.e. since the transconstruction of the axioplex and its 'halo' shapes follows a set parametric, the problem posed has a determinate and, hopefully, unique answer: and that answer is the objective physical universe."

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-combining/ This points, albeit mostly just in my own mind, to the transconstruction of deontic logic from erotetic, assertoric, and imperative logic (with modal logic interwoven somehow).

These are relevant to the hosohedra I was considering as part of my "theory," although I haven't quite wrapped my head around them haha!

An image I made from other images

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpiński_triangle Hmm, this indicates that the Sierpinski action can condense into/out of any other "parallel" shape (i.e. any isodimensional shape).

goes to [net]

This net of the tetrahedron is also the initial graph of the Sierpinski action of the unit triangle:

So, dimensionalization+ proceeds across the net-vector (as Planck time passes, the nets produced by the Higgs-Sierpinski action are folded together into the unit of the next-dimensional manifold). Retrodimensionalization (of the spheration wave) compresses/rebounds all the energy, "downward," stereographically, maybe, i.e. maybe the octahedron at the 3-dimensional stage is stereographed into 2-space as the 3-Venn diagram?

I think I have come up with the silliest neologism in my theory to date: "the quatrumvoidal redemptrix-axioplex." Actually, it appears in the foolish sentence, "The quatrumvoidal redemptrix-axioplex is the 3(?)-kairoplex."