Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: Thought experiment, don't know where else to put this.

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90

    Thought experiment, don't know where else to put this.

    Where to start...

    Let's say you have a circle. This circle represents all possible outcomes (infinity). Within the circle, is another circle. What is within the inner circle represents the mean of all the possibilities (reality). That is the only thing that is within the inner circle.

    This theory assumes you can only add possibilities and cannot subtract them.

    Now suppose that the space in between the two circles is to be split up into different sections. Each section is a different possibility.

    Now suppose that the number of possibilities are symmetrical, and the solution to explain this model must follow occam's razor.

    If the possibilities are symmetrical, then the amount of different possibilities there are would be 12. Let me (try to) explain.

    You would have to assume that the possibilities must be symmetrical from all angles, otherwise it would not be a pure model. This requires that you have to be using perfect numbers. Perfect numbers are ones that are prime numbers that can be represented logically and wholistically.

    Let's assume that the mean of all possibilities is a 1. That is the first part.

    Let's assume a perfect number isn't actually one number, but several numbers because 1 number isn't enough to contain more than 1 possibility.

    Since there are multiple variables that make up what the mean of all possibilities is, the sum of all possibilities is 2 because it is a duality of 2 parts of a whole. This is the second part.

    But the possibilities are compounded based on this number of 2 parts because 1 possibility for the number of all possibilities and 1 possibility for the mean of all possibilities isn't enough to explain the totality of the system since the mean of all possibilities and all possibilities are 2 different things. So you have to add another number to quantify that the sum of all possibilities and the mean of all possibilities is greater than the sum of its parts, which is 3. This is the third part.

    3 is the total number of parts that we are assuming make up every possibility and the mean of all possibilities.

    3 can't be the total number of possibilities just by itself because it only accounts for representing 3 parts and it excludes the duality of all possibilities, and the mean of all possibilities. So 3 doesn't satisfy the perfect symmetry of all possibilities because 3 is asymmetrical.

    So the duality that should be represented by the lowest common denominator of what is symmetrical is a perfect square number. That number is 4. This is the fourth part.

    But 4 doesn't satisfy the essence of the totality of the system (3) because it is limited to being static because it lacks the integrity of totality, so more possibilities must be considered.

    In this way, 3 represents the totality of the system and 4 represents the pattern we can see as symmetrical. So we have to find the least common denominator of 3 and 4, which is 12. This is the fifth part.

    12 works because it satisfies both the symmetry of all possibilities and the totality of the system we are using to determine what is the sum of all possibilities and the mean of all possibilities.

    Some interesting things about how 12 relates to 3 and 4: if you plot 12 points in space symmetrically as a parameter in the shape of a square, if you follow from a place that connects one side to another, you get 3 points that are independent of the other points and 1 point that is a joining point between the 3 points and another set of 3 independent points and this happens 4 times. If you multiply 2 (duality) by 4 (symmetry) you get 8. If you multiply 2 (duality) by 3 (totality) you get 6. If you then put a symmetrical 8 point circumference in space parallel with a symmetrical 6 point circumference in space, you get 12 points. I say all this to say that 12 satisfies the least common denominator of a perfect unison between totality and symmetry.

    OK, I spent way too much time on this model. If I made a logical error or if clarification is needed, please point it out.

    [Edit]OK so I stopped a little short of the goal post. 12 doesn't satisfy the problem of perfect symmetry so you would have to make 12 a square which is 144. So 144 is the number of all possibilities for any given possibility.
    Last edited by Quick; 01-20-2018 at 12:13 PM.

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90
    How would you write this as an equation?

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90
    Need help here:

    But 4 doesn't satisfy the essence of the totality of the system (3) because it is limited to being static because it lacks the integrity of totality, so more possibilities must be considered.
    I want to say 4 doesn't work because it's a quantity that is only in addition to the system as a whole which would mean the pattern has to be a multiple of 3...

    But now I am changing the means to get to the proper ends and I don't think that is how math should be done???

    I am prolly not getting any feedback on this at all, so IDEK why I am doing this.. I don't say this to be manipulative, it's just that it shows that there is a disconnect to practicality.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90
    OK, so here is my first crack at it.. (it's prolly going to be a right mess)

    144=1+2x+3xy+4z where 3xy+4z=12

    >.<

    Not possible to solve I am guessing...

    But what if we plug in 1 for x and 2 for y and leave z as an unknown???

    That would give us:

    6+4z=12
    4z=6
    z=1.5

    I am lost at this point...

  5. #5
    Elite Member mmm4444bot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    9,418
    Quote Originally Posted by Quick View Post
    Let's say you have a circle. This circle represents all possible outcomes
    All possible outcomes of what?
    "English is the most ambiguous language in the world." ~ Yours Truly, 1969

  6. #6
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,728
    Quote Originally Posted by Quick View Post
    Where to start...

    Let's say you have a circle. This circle represents all possible outcomes (infinity). Within the circle, is another circle. What is within the inner circle represents the mean of all the possibilities (reality). That is the only thing that is within the inner circle.
    OK. I am lost on the first paragraph. Are these circles supposed to be Venn diagrams? The possibilities are restricted to numbers, right? I mean, how do you calculate the average of an elephant, a robin, and an earthworm? Not just numbers, but an infinite number of numbers, correct? Why would a set of numbers necessarily include the the mean of those number? Why is the mean "reality"? If I have one person who is 6 feet tall and another who is 5 feet tall, does that mean I REALLY have two people who are each 5.5 feet tall?

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90
    All possible outcomes of any given situation.

    @mmm444bot
    Last edited by Quick; 01-21-2018 at 05:43 PM.

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffM View Post
    OK. I am lost on the first paragraph. Are these circles supposed to be Venn diagrams? The possibilities are restricted to numbers, right? I mean, how do you calculate the average of an elephant, a robin, and an earthworm? Not just numbers, but an infinite number of numbers, correct? Why would a set of numbers necessarily include the the mean of those number? Why is the mean "reality"? If I have one person who is 6 feet tall and another who is 5 feet tall, does that mean I REALLY have two people who are each 5.5 feet tall?
    No it's not a venn diagram. It's one circle and another that is smaller than the first one that is perfectly centered within the first one. You wouldn't calculate that average of an elephant, but you could do something like the average weight of an elephant. There are different possibilities for how much that elephant weighs, but there is only one reality for how much that elephant weighs.

    The mean is reality because it would be like the average of all possible weights of the elephant. This theory assumes that there are a limited number of possibilities for any given situation. It's more of a model than a proof or anything like that.

    [Edit]OK so I guess it could actually be a venn diagram, but it would just be one where the overlap is completely self contained and there is just either where the two share a commonality or just the first circle that represents all the possibilities.
    Last edited by Quick; 01-21-2018 at 05:58 PM.

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90
    I think this thread is either going to be very long or it is going to be cut short. The reason I think this is because I ran it by a friend of mine who has a math degree and he basically said there was a lot of stuff that I was thinking about this model that I don't really explain in enough detail. And given IDK how much of it people are going to be able to know what I am referencing, it's prolly going to be a while before people know what I am talking about enough to say whether I have made logical mis steps or not.

  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    90
    This picture is originally what I was thinking given there were only 12 possibilities:

    Misc Image possibilities.jpg

    But then I realized it would have to be 144 possibilities instead of 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •