Lost in Translation

About a week ago I had a terrifying experience. It was about 11:00 PM and I sat down to scry. The room was quiet. Everything was set up and ready to go. I said my prayers, connected to my spirit guides, and lit the small candle behind me. All was quite mundane. Then I turned off the desk lamp, allowing the room to bathe in darkness. Immediately I felt cold. An eerie chill ran down my spine. It felt as if I were sitting against a walk in freezer. "It's just the chi starting to flow," I told myself and pushed through - focusing on the orb in front of me. But the chill did not go away. It got worse, much worse. Suddenly I found myself shivering. My teeth began to rattle and a sudden, nagging fear formed inside me. Then the fear exploded! I was engulfed in a wave of terror as I suddenly realized "if you open a door to look out, you also open it for whatever is outside to look in!" I knew that something powerful was watching me and it quite literally chilled me to the bone. I got up, turned on the light, placed a cloth over the scrying crystal and immediately felt better. All chills were gone. All fear was gone. I thanked my spirit guide, said my prayers and put my scrying tools away. There would be no more scrying that night.

Soldiers (in feudal Japan - Samurai) were considered the top because their support was absolutely essential to maintaining the emperor's power. One of the best ways to ensure their support is to give them privileged status.

This was the same in feudal Japan. I recall somewhere a quote such as "merchants were despised because they neither worked or produced" - working defined as farming and producing defined as craftsmanship. Also, merchants had wealth but no land (in the sense of nobility) so they were simultaneously powerful and threatening to the upper classes.

There is also "teaching" and "learning how to teach." I sincerely appreciate your posts but too often it seems you throw words at people and expect them to figure it out. I don't enjoy saying this any more than I am sure you don't enjoy reading this.

http://www.alainconnes.org/docs/J-Kouneiher.pdf So he states that discrete is an internal reality while the continuous must be imposed externally. Then from the discrete the noncommutative logic is revealed. So then Connes states the "defect" of the classic symmetric logic is that real numbers assume an uncountable variable with a continuous range but then any other variable in that range has to have multiplicities that are infinite such that the continuous and discrete can not coexist. Fields Medal Math professor Alain Connes: O.K. so as I stated, Math professor Alain Connes sums up noncommutative logic from music as 2, 3, infinity. This is the same as Daoist logic. So consider music "pitch" as the phase. So we hear the Perfect Fifth as yang which is 2/3 but the Perfect Fifth is also 3/2. This is noncommutative in terms of geometry. So 2/3 is C to F as a subharmonic and 3/2 is C to G as the overtone harmonic. This basic noncommutative truth was covered up by the West in order to try to "contain" the infinity of time-frequency into a geometric continuum. So in the nonwestern music scheme - you only use the yang and yin to construct the scale. In the Western science scheme - these natural noncommutative harmonics are "averaged and divided back" into the geometric continuum to try to maintain the same value of 0 and 1. In other words "zero" is a negative infinity that assumes this materialistic geometric continuum based on symmetric logic. But in the nonwestern noncommutative logic - rather the yang and yin just continue infinitely as 2/3 and 4/3. In other words there is not statistical averaging as a geometric mean equation. So as Math professor Alain Connes summarizes: -Alain Connes What he states elsewhere is that the 3 is to the 19th or 3 to the 12th while the 2 is to the 19th or 2 to the 12th but they can be reversed like yin and yang. That is why they are noncommutative. by Fabio Bellissima, in Language, Quantum, Music Editors: Dalla Chiara, Maria Luisa, Giuntini, Roberto, Laudisa, Federico (Eds.) So with the standard WEstern symmetric logic the wrong music theory created logarithmic math and its inverse exponential function. 3/2 x 4/3 = 2 (geometric mean squared). log(3:2×4:3)=log(2:1) log(3:2)+log(4:3)=log(2:1) Now notice for this math to work - then 2/3 as C to F subharmonic can not be used! It had to be covered up and lied about. A Truman State University review on Scriba, Christoph J. “Mathematics and music.” (Danish) Normat 38 (1990), no. 1, 3–17, 52. Alan C. Bowen, "The Minor Sixth (8:5) in Early Greek Harmonic Science," The American Journal of Philology, 1978. Even though 2/3 is also the Perfect Fifth it would not fit into the symmetric commutative math structure to "contain" infinity as a closed geometry. But what quantum physics rediscovered is that there is time-frequency uncertainty that is noncommutative due to relativity. Meaning that as a particle goes towards the speed of light then its energy goes up in frequency based on quantum physics but based on relativity it's time also goes "up" meaning it slows down as an amplitude or wavelength extension. Louis de Broglie realized this violates the basic logic since Pythagoras that frequency is inverse to time. So de Broglie realized there HAS to be a noncommutative phase from the future - in the opposite direction - at the same time, as a 5th dimensional "guiding wave" to reality. Qigong Master Shen Wu: And so now I'll give the extended quote from Connes on music theory and noncommutative logic: Fields Medal math professor Alain Connes, No offense, but I'm not going to read a thousand words of quoted text on music theory. If the subject can't be distilled into simple layman's terms then I understand. I don't need to know the answer. Thank you for attempting to help me understand.

I've already done that. Commutativity itself is not the problem. If we were discussing just math then there would be no issue. But commutativity has been mentioned regarding logic so I want to make sure I understand what is meant in that that context. Is it as simple as something like "All Americans are human but not all humans are American?" If that is the case then I would like it explicitly defined. And if it is not as simple as this then all the more reason why we need to define it.

My claim, and original idea, has been that this is circumnavigating a T'ai Chi (Yin/Yang) symbol! Let's back up even further. Please define "commutative" and "noncommutative" within a logical context.

Go Diamond!

I stumbled across this TED video quite by accident. It's amazingly relevant. I know it's long-ish -- about 19 minutes - but it's worth watching. I'll place it in a spoiler so those who want to ignore it can easily do so. -Lost

Can you briefly explain, preferably with a simple example, what the difference between "commutative" logic and "noncommutative" logic is?

Brilliant! I would change the second line ever so slightly: "So too within awareness, with no occlusions can one yet be aware?"

I enjoy spending time in my garden. I watch the birds, the squirrel, the cats. I see traces of where the raccoons came through days before, and hear the sounds of the kids next door as they play in the pool. "Each according to their nature," I mutter softly, even as I contemplate my own nature.

That which is most obvious is also least noticed.

I read that book back in the mid nineties. It was interesting but didn't make a lot of sense to me. My main takeaway from that work was that there is a little cartoon version of Achilles from the Illiad who likes to ask questions. Oh, and there was a cartoon turtle, too.

It must be a sign! I hope they help you learn what you seek.

In many times and places throughout history, writing openly in criticism of the king or emperor was a sure way to get executed. Thus, much was written by way of metaphor. This could fall under that category. I'm not saying this is the case but it's worth considering.

You may want to find a local temple in your area. In most urban areas you can find at least one Buddhist temple. You don't need to be Buddhist to speak with one of the monks. They will be happy to let you join their meditations if you ask them. Just being in the same room as a dozen other people meditating can help you along your path. EDIT: If you are uncomfortable walking into a Buddhist temple then go to a Christian church. I have sat in the back of churches and meditated both while service was being offered and when the pews were empty. There is a certain calmness to holy places regardless of the specific faith.

Strange things are starting to happen. I sit in a dark room with a single light source behind me and the crystal sitting before me. The single light source can be a real candle (if the room can safely accommodate it) or a fake candle (the kind restaurants use nowadays). It takes a minute for my eyes to adjust. Once they do, I see the outline of the ball slightly lit up while the center of the ball is dark. Continuing my gaze, one of two things will happen: one, the center of the ball begins to glow in a misty light that dances along the ball like fog and rises from the ball in wisps like smoke; or two, the pitch black center of the ball begins to expand, consuming the ball along with my view of my hands and arms (that are resting next to the ball), growing until my entire field of vision is black save for a rim around the periphery of perception where I can still see the room. In either case I can blink and avert my eyes and everything returns to normal. So far I have not had any "visions." I do have the occasional injection of instant awareness though, which is similar to a vision, but I am beginning to understand much better what scrying is all about and am motivated to continue my endeavors.

All nouns I believe. Try this, just to see how it feels. Imagine that 'Tao' is a verb and 'Yin' and 'Yang' are actually adjectives/adverbs. For example: "The sage 'Taoed' through life, now in a 'Yinly' manner then in a 'Yangly' manner - ever changing, yet always the same."

Is Tao a noun or a verb? Likewise, are Yin and Yang nouns or are they adjectives?

Reading this thread is like having John Cleese reassure me that the parrot is not, in fact, dead.

I think it's time to put this topic to bed. I've spent more time working with imaginary numbers in the last week than I have since I was 17 in high school...

We've covered 1-5. Do you still plan to cover 6 or shall we leave that as self study?

n Imaginary Number, when squared, gives a negative result. Try Let's try squaring some numbers to see if we can get a negative result: 2 × 2 = 4 (−2) × (−2) = 4 (because a negative times a negative gives a positive) 0 × 0 = 0 0.1 × 0.1 = 0.01 No luck! Always positive, or zero. It seems like we cannot multiply a number by itself to get a negative answer ... ... but imagine that there is such a number (call it i for imaginary) that could do this: i × i = −1 Would it be useful, and what could we do with it? Well, by taking the square root of both sides we get this: Which means that i is the answer to the square root of −1. Which is actually very useful because ... ... by simply accepting that i exists we can solve things that need the square root of a negative number. Let us have a go: Example: What is the square root of −9 ? √(−9)= √(9 × −1) = √(9) × √(−1) = 3 × √(−1) = 3i (see how to simplify square roots) Hey! that was interesting! The square root of −9 is simply the square root of +9, times i. In general: √(−x) = i√x So long as we keep that little "i" there to remind us that we still need to multiply by √−1 we are safe to continue with our solution! Using i we can also come up with new solutions: Example: Solve x2 + 1 = 0 Using Real Numbers there is no solution, but now we can solve it! Subtract 1 from both sides: x2 = −1 Take the square root of both sides: x = ± √(−1) x = ± i Answer: x = −i or +i Check: (−i)2 + 1 = (−i)(−i) + 1 = +i2 + 1 = −1 + 1 = 0 (+i)2 +1 = (+i)(+i) +1 = +i2 +1 = −1 + 1 = 0 Unit Imaginary Number The "unit" Imaginary Number (the equivalent of 1 for Real Numbers) is √(−1) (the square root of minus one). In mathematics we use i (for imaginary) but in electronics they use j (because "i" already means current, and the next letter after i is j). Examples of Imaginary Numbers i 12.38i −i 3i/4 0.01i −i/2 Imaginary Numbers are not "Imaginary" Imaginary Numbers were once thought to be impossible, and so they were called "Imaginary" (to make fun of them). But then people researched them more and discovered they were actually useful and important because they filled a gap in mathematics ... but the "imaginary" name has stuck. And that is also how the name "Real Numbers" came about (real is not imaginary). Imaginary Numbers are Useful Complex Numbers Imaginary numbers become most useful when combined with real numbers to make complex numbers like 3+5i or 6−4i Spectrum Analyzer Those cool displays you see when music is playing? Yep, Complex Numbers are used to calculate them! Using something called "Fourier Transforms". In fact many clever things can be done with sound using Complex Numbers, like filtering out sounds, hearing whispers in a crowd and so on. It is part of a subject called "Signal Processing". Electricity AC (Alternating Current) Electricity changes between positive and negative in a sine wave. When we combine two AC currents they may not match properly, and it can be very hard to figure out the new current. But using complex numbers makes it a lot easier to do the calculations. And the result may have "Imaginary" current, but it can still hurt you! Mandelbrot Set The beautiful Mandelbrot Set (part of it is pictured here) is based on Complex Numbers. Quadratic Equation The Quadratic Equation, which has many uses, can give results that include imaginary numbers Also Science, Quantum mechanics and Relativity use complex numbers. Interesting Property The Unit Imaginary Number, i, has an interesting property. It "cycles" through 4 different values each time we multiply: 1 × i = i i × i = −1 −1 × i = −i −i × i = 1 Back to 1 again! So we have this: i = √−1 i2 = −1 i3 = −√−1 i4 = +1 i5 = √−1 ...etc Example What is i6 ? i6= i4 × i2 = 1 × −1 = −1 And that leads us into another topic, the complex plane: Conclusion The unit imaginary number, i, equals the square root of minus 1 Imaginary Numbers are not "imaginary", they really exist and have many uses. https://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/imaginary-numbers.html