JamaicanBushman

Once again, I don’t really like this sort of challenge because this isn’t a natural realisation I’ve come to. It’s uncomfortable, your asking me to prove something I haven’t claimed. What are the practical uses of complex numbers? I’m disappointed that you haven’t commented on the prospect of the turning the light around connection, the red cinnabar connection or my partial understanding of jing, qi and Shen and their connections. This leads me to ask did you read the Kaufman paper, or my comments? You haven’t acknowledged any of what I’ve said. I believe this is a fair ask. The thing is you can’t actually plot complex numbers on traditional 3 dimensional Cartesian space. One axis must include imaginary numbers, this axis, this direction is invisible to us. Isn’t it’? The i axis isn’t vertical, horizontal or depth is it? This is an honest question Did you watch the video on non communicative geometry. It states that the internal ruler/gauge principle was a trick used to simplify and explain something that was impossible to explain, a lot like invisible numbers, which are a part of complex numbers. Furthermore we know that with communicative math two numbers can not multiply to produce a negative number. Can you prove that communicative maths can produce an imaginary number? Finally after me not knowing the answer but being willing to search for one I found this https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/147166/does-my-definition-of-double-complex-noncommutative-numbers-make-any-sense which leads to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion Which leads us back to here https://www.google.co.uk/search?safe=off&client=safari&hl=en-gb&ei=8sAmXOOjFcKNlwSy1qmgAw&q=quartenions+eddie+oshins&oq=quartenions+eddie+oshins&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.3..35i304i39j33i160l2.28650.29096..29334...0.0..0.141.396.2j2......0....1.........33i21.m7RpYn2zU5g So in that quaternions extend the complex numbers and are therefore complex numbers. Quaternions are non communicative. As shown. I’m not researching this for you any further. It’s not where I need to be on the path right now. whats a Quaternion, I don’t know, seems to be an equation that models 3D objects spin, but you should be able to tell me. Infsct you should be telling us. So can you tell me what the difference between a complex number and a Quaternion is. It seems it’s got 3 dimensions of imaginary numbers in it. Which leads me back to what is an imaginary number in real life? anyway let’s get back to voidisyinyang and see what he has to say

Yes I’m a follower of Voidisyinyang. Although he’s only just finding out. TL;DR when solving imaginary (Why lateral, why not invisible, not directional enough?) numbers we have to separate in a particular way. for example: sqrt of -25 = sqrt of 25 times sqrt of -1. There has to be the sqrt of -1 to produce 5times sqrt -1. Invisible algebra. We can’t do: sqrt of -25 = sqrt of -5 time sqrt of -5. We can see this in video3 of the series mentioned below around 3 minutes in. Also notice the times symbol used is the same in this video about non-communicative algebra. This maths is a case in point. I went to the complex number lesson thread, I got turned of by the communication style. Luckily there was an interesting post with some interesting points early on I beleive there is a link to Taoism after looking at it and according to voidisyinyangs previous work and my new understanding. Imaginary and complex numbers are unappealing because it’s hard to ground them in reality, in my opinion. To which I answer: Yes; I don’t know, they are discrete and good for classical objects like apples and asteroids at a surface level of 3dimensions and; I’ll come to that in a moment but first i got stuck by the time this video came up and I watch them until part 11 although I think I slept through part 9. And from the way I understood it I began having small incomplete eureka moments. I’ve never understood this part of Voidisyinyangs work (can I just say Drew?) before but I believe I understand a little more now. I’m not a mathematician or a physicist (quantum or not) but I’m interested and like to understand, so bear with me. (Also I’m writing long posts because I get ten a day and don’t want to waste them). This following video helped me understand non-communicative geometry. It seems he answered you question early on with a Kauffman paper and a quote “These Majorana Fermions can be symbolized by Clif-ford algebra generators a and b such that a [squared]= b[squared]= 1and ab = −ba. One can take a as the iterant corre-sponding to a period two oscillation, and b as thetime shifting operator. Then their product ab is a square root of minus one in a non-commutative con- text.” in terms of the problem with treating complex numbers as communicative, I Hop I’ve shown you they aren’t from early on. I may be wrong. However in real life it seems imaginary/invisible/internal/lateral numbers deal can speak to the kinds of quantum objects such as the mirage particles ( which seem to be virtual photons ). I add internal to the list of names (for the ironically and unimagintaively, poorly named) imaginary numbers as it perhaps could relate to this internal ruler/gauge principle from the non-communicative geometry video. Interestingly that mirage particle novel insights and experiements study voidisyinyang posted talks about not only virtual photons, but also turning the light back around. A name for meditation, zen, daoist and Buddhist. Im not sure how I feel being objectified as some sort of test subject to test voidisyinyang. Although this adds to his sage factor. I also expect to be disagreed with. I’m not even sure if what I said is right. But it feels right, to my gut

I think voidisyinyang would appreciate if you challenged him on the mistakes you say he makes in mathematics. What mistakes in particular? Everything I’ve researched that he’s said has proved accurate. Voidisyinyang is certainly operating at a high level of complexity. This is confirmed by the fact that he has been working in a new field of study ecomusicology for some time. This is one of the markers of a high MHC (Model of Hierachical Complexity) level as explained in the listening society. We should never mock or disparage someone who finds who finds it hard to communicate ideas. This is senseless. I don’t think it’s wise to suggest he doesn’t understand what he’s talking about when you are basing that on a difficulty to understand someone. Ignorance is rarely the best option, it leads to apathy. You have already said you are sceptical about qi as a concept. In my mind jing is electrochemical neurohormones, qi is electromagnetism and Shen is light. I could be wrong about that. However this matches up with jing in the gut (which produces the most serotonin), qi of the heart (which produces the largest electromagnetic field) and Shen in the brain (with the highest concentrations of biophotons). This alone leads us to acknowledge that they may have known more than we do about our bodies by looking within, as opposed to looking without. Let us be real, we are all suffering from information overload, which means we don’t do as much research into what he says because it would mean losing time doing other things. Also our attention is not operating at a maxium. In terms of your original question you could do as you normally do when it comes to meditation and visualise a light in your gut, red according to a wise mans research. Working to open your lower Dan tien will provide a foundation for strengthening the practice you already are committed to. Perhaps he does wish to be understood, but only those who are truly able to understand and who truly want to. This is akin to the sages of Old writing using code names, such as swallow the red cinnabar pill. This could be mercury sulphide (not the best idea), it could also be swallowing saliva infused with properties from the centre of the lower Dan tien. The Dan tiens were called cinnabar fields, and the centre of the lowest one was red (http://www.goldenelixir.com/jindan/dantian.html) Studies show that pranayama breathing can change the chemical content of saliva (1st https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4383272/ 2nd https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-016-1286-7 3rd https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4501575/ ) This is also know as the Golden nectar. I just gave references and as we are studying ancient esoteric (science) texts. It’s necessary for research. Let’s not be overly hard on voidisyinyang. He does good works. From my limited understanding this paper relates to something I’ve never understood about voidisyinyangs research. Borrowing energy from the future and virtual particles. Correct me if I’m wrong on that linkage voidisyinyang. The way these mirage particles are likened to the particle-antiparticle pairs that spring from quantum vacuums makes me think I’m not too far off. Quantum vacuum fluctuations to me is a confirmation of the all (yin and yang separated) emanating from the void (which is yinyang apparently) To be fair to everyone. I too have trouble understanding your blog posts and your style of communication. I liken it to the first time I read the dao de jing. I liked what I saw, and I understood very little of it. I reread and did research and joined dots and I still am. I came to understand more. I’m not even sure if I want this all to be too simplified. I don’t even know if it can be yet. I’m not even training as much as I could be. Still I keep coming back to your posts simply to prompt me to train. And to understand and be able to explain to myself and others this amazing process. Thanks for sharing about the polyphonic singing. It led me to believe perhaps we can save the world, if we were able to transmit this felt wisdom as intellectual knowledge. and thank you all for reading my first post 🙏🏾

Hi everyone, I believe that void is yinyang. I believe that it is difficult to communicate higher level concepts I believe that the closer we get to explaining daoist inner alchemical phenomena the better off humanity will be. Without our it we will continue to destroy the world with out alchemy in the form of science. That is all.