Why humans can't get rid of their egos ?

[Age]

I am not after continuation. Just at least one example or one piece of evidence

You have ignored and dismissed what I've already presented to you (with "examples" of your exact text/claims and inconsistencies). So I'm done with that. You've ignored and dismissed other people too... yet you keep insisting that we're all not providing you with sufficient feedback to shed new light on, or deter you from, your claims and views.

Write one NEW LIGHT, which, you PERCEIVE, will deter me from my claims and views now in capital letters so that we can SEE IT.

THEN we can discuss IT.

Just because you have/give "sufficient feedback", based solely on YOUR views, does NOT mean that I have a view nor claim that needs deterring.

Have you ever considered that it is YOUR claim or view that might need deterring?

Until you SHINE a True LIGHT by EXPOSING these claims and views that you PERCEIVE "NEED" deterring away from, then we will NEVER SEE who's views and claims actually NEED to be deterred away from.

Name just ONE claim or view that I make, which you perceive is wrong or needs deterring away from, and then give me a chance to respond, then we can SEE who and what is wrong and needs to be kept away from.

If you do NOT provide any thing, then that will say far more than what you are TRYING TO say here.

Now you asked why people go away when you ask them questions, and I gave you an honest answer based on what I've seen of such communication/interactions.

YES you gave what you have PERCEIVED. You, UNFORTUNATELY, misinterpret what I say, and then THINK/BELIEVE that YOUR misinterpretation is actual and true fact. Until you clarify and discuss with me my views and claims, then you will NEVER know what I am actually saying. As far as I can tell from YOUR writings you are so far off track about Me and MY writings, that this is beyond even being funny anymore.

For example you wrote: People who hide behind their own convoluted distortions of words and meanings and applications--as if it's some sort of profound knowledge or reasoning--typically seem to be trying to maintain/nurture some self-indulgent delusions.

Your convoluted distortion here is attempting to hide the FACT that you have absolutely NO clue whatsoever what this SUPPOSED self-indulgent delusion is. Unless OF COURSE you can prove me WRONG here and provide an EXAMPLE as EVIDENCE, so that WE can have a LOOK AT it, THEN I can at least be able to provide a response to what YOU are actually talking about. BECAUSE with NO evidence I, for one, have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about and referring to here.

You HOLD BELIEFS and ME and make up ASSUMPTIONS to just about everything I write, and proceed to THINK from this completely distorted VIEW of me.

Communication that seems unconscious, false, and continually in denial may not be very interesting to interact with long-term.

ONCE AGAIN, a load of accusations, which I have absolutely NO idea what they are exactly.

WHERE is the "unconscious" part/s, the "false" part/s, and the "continually in denial" part/s?

Sorry... I'm just repeating some of the feedback you've received repeatedly,

What are you "sorry" about? I have INFORMED on many occasions I WANT criticism, feedback, and/or to be SHOWN where I am WRONG, but I have also asked for this with actual examples, or pieces of evidence, from MY writings.

I DO NOT want criticism, feedback, and being SHOWN where I am "WRONG" from people's PERCEPTIONS and ASSUMPTIONS. Could I make this any more CLEARER.

From my perspective... each of us has a unique trip that is pretty much for our own entertainment -- and we're all magnificent creators.

And, from my perspective, 'you', thinking that your unique trip, which obviously involves the abuse of children and "others" is for YOUR OWN entertainment, is just another unique trip. And, 'you' are ALL magnificent creators. BUT there is FAR MORE to LIFE then just your one tiny little perspective of things here.

If you want to just carry on exactly how you are now, and NOT take any responsibility at all, and just enjoy your OWN entertainment, then go right ahead. You are completely free to enjoy your OWN unique trip how you WANT TO. Some just prefer to ENJOY the one unique trip IN and WITH the company of "others"

We are also easily deceived by our own hypnotic indulgences.

And that comes across VERY CLEAR, to me. Just HOW MUCH 'you' ALL are so easily deceived by your OWN hypnotic indulgences is VERY, VERY CLEAR and and just as OBVIOUS.

Now let us SEE if you can provide any actual and CLEAR examples of WHERE there is any WRONG in what I have said here. Or, if AGAIN you will just provide YOUR own PERCEPTIONS and say some thing like that I am deluded, et cetera.

Either do not like what I write nor the way I write and so do NOT read it anymore, and just move on, OR, find actual and real fault in what I write and/or in the way I write, and then provide examples/evidence of such, and then be prepared to DISCUSS "that" with me.

[Logik]

I am not after continuation. Just at least one example or one piece of evidence

You have ignored and dismissed what I've already presented to you (with "examples" of your exact text/claims and inconsistencies). So I'm done with that. You've ignored and dismissed other people too... yet you keep insisting that we're all not providing you with sufficient feedback to shed new light on, or deter you from, your claims and views.

Write one NEW LIGHT, which, you PERCEIVE, will deter me from my claims and views now in capital letters so that we can SEE IT.

THEN we can discuss IT.

Just because you have/give "sufficient feedback", based solely on YOUR views, does NOT mean that I have a view nor claim that needs deterring.

Have you ever considered that it is YOUR claim or view that might need deterring?

Until you SHINE a True LIGHT by EXPOSING these claims and views that you PERCEIVE "NEED" deterring away from, then we will NEVER SEE who's views and claims actually NEED to be deterred away from.

Name just ONE claim or view that I make, which you perceive is wrong or needs deterring away from, and then give me a chance to respond, then we can SEE who and what is wrong and needs to be kept away from.

If you do NOT provide any thing, then that will say far more than what you are TRYING TO say here.

Now you asked why people go away when you ask them questions, and I gave you an honest answer based on what I've seen of such communication/interactions.

YES you gave what you have PERCEIVED. You, UNFORTUNATELY, misinterpret what I say, and then THINK/BELIEVE that YOUR misinterpretation is actual and true fact. Until you clarify and discuss with me my views and claims, then you will NEVER know what I am actually saying. As far as I can tell from YOUR writings you are so far off track about Me and MY writings, that this is beyond even being funny anymore.

For example you wrote: People who hide behind their own convoluted distortions of words and meanings and applications--as if it's some sort of profound knowledge or reasoning--typically seem to be trying to maintain/nurture some self-indulgent delusions.

Your convoluted distortion here is attempting to hide the FACT that you have absolutely NO clue whatsoever what this SUPPOSED self-indulgent delusion is. Unless OF COURSE you can prove me WRONG here and provide an EXAMPLE as EVIDENCE, so that WE can have a LOOK AT it, THEN I can at least be able to provide a response to what YOU are actually talking about. BECAUSE with NO evidence I, for one, have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about and referring to here.

You HOLD BELIEFS and ME and make up ASSUMPTIONS to just about everything I write, and proceed to THINK from this completely distorted VIEW of me.

Communication that seems unconscious, false, and continually in denial may not be very interesting to interact with long-term.

ONCE AGAIN, a load of accusations, which I have absolutely NO idea what they are exactly.

WHERE is the "unconscious" part/s, the "false" part/s, and the "continually in denial" part/s?

Sorry... I'm just repeating some of the feedback you've received repeatedly,

What are you "sorry" about? I have INFORMED on many occasions I WANT criticism, feedback, and/or to be SHOWN where I am WRONG, but I have also asked for this with actual examples, or pieces of evidence, from MY writings.

I DO NOT want criticism, feedback, and being SHOWN where I am "WRONG" from people's PERCEPTIONS and ASSUMPTIONS. Could I make this any more CLEARER.

From my perspective... each of us has a unique trip that is pretty much for our own entertainment -- and we're all magnificent creators.

And, from my perspective, 'you', thinking that your unique trip, which obviously involves the abuse of children and "others" is for YOUR OWN entertainment, is just another unique trip. And, 'you' are ALL magnificent creators. BUT there is FAR MORE to LIFE then just your one tiny little perspective of things here.

If you want to just carry on exactly how you are now, and NOT take any responsibility at all, and just enjoy your OWN entertainment, then go right ahead. You are completely free to enjoy your OWN unique trip how you WANT TO. Some just prefer to ENJOY the one unique trip IN and WITH the company of "others"

We are also easily deceived by our own hypnotic indulgences.

And that comes across VERY CLEAR, to me. Just HOW MUCH 'you' ALL are so easily deceived by your OWN hypnotic indulgences is VERY, VERY CLEAR and and just as OBVIOUS.

Now let us SEE if you can provide any actual and CLEAR examples of WHERE there is any WRONG in what I have said here. Or, if AGAIN you will just provide YOUR own PERCEPTIONS and say some thing like that I am deluded, et cetera.

Either do not like what I write nor the way I write and so do NOT read it anymore, and just move on, OR, find actual and real fault in what I write and/or in the way I write, and then provide examples/evidence of such, and then be prepared to DISCUSS "that" with me.

If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole.
If you run into an asshole at lunch, you ran into two assholes today.
If you run into an asshole in the evening, you ran into three assholes today.
If you run into an asshole on Monday and on Tuesday, it's a bad start to the week.

If you run into assholes all week, all month, and all year long, you're the asshole.

Age. You are the asshole.

[Age]

That is extremely EASY and SIMPLE to answer and SHOW.

Show it then... Don’t just say it, show it ....Where is the individual self?

Wrapped up in individual thought/s.

Within every human body there are two selves, the individual self and the true Self.

You believe that Self is easy and simple to answer and show...and the above reply is your answer to my request to SHOW it?

I do NOT believe any thing. HOW CAN some thing as simple as that,NOT be understood YET?

And YES is the ANSWER to YOUR question here. That is; YES the above reply is MY answer.

Age.. all you've done is described it..you haven't shown it...if the individual Self exists which you say it does, then show it...does the individual self exist as a physical seen thing?

OF COURSE NOT.

Do you understand the term, "I SEE what you mean", when some one is TELLING you some thing? Things can be and ARE 'illustrated' in words, therefore things can be 'SEEN', which also means UNDERSTAND, from WORDS.

DESCRIBING things, with WORDS, is EXACTLY how things are SHOWN, and SEEN/UNDERSTOOD.

You, especially, "dontaskme" KNOW that there is NO PHYSICAL self, therefore WHY would you even ASSUME and/or EXPECT that I was going to POINT to some physical thing?

...if so, show it? That's all I'm asking you to do..maybe I didn't make it clear enough for you...so I'll do that now....does the individual self exist physically?

NO, OF COURSE NOT. The individual self NEVER has and NEVER could exist physically. That would, literally, be physically impossible. Now, did I make it CLEAR ENOUGH for you?

...or is it just an idea, a thought...?

The 'individual self' is NOT just "a thought". The 'individual self' IS, literally, the invisible thoughts (and emotions) within an individual physical human body. Both thoughts and emotions are obviously INVISIBLE, to the physical eyes.

Now does that make sense. If it is NOT understood, then just say so, and I will see if I can SHOW it in another way.

Below in the rest of your response you state the following...

each seemingly "separate" human body has its own unique individual experiences, which ultimately become the invisible thoughts and feelings that are held within each unique, "separate", individual brain with each human body, then this is what causes the apparent 'individual self'. So, where the individual self is, is within each individual human body.

Here you have stated that the individual self is within the body, because you assume that's where the thought (I exist as a separate self exists)...is that what you are saying?

NO. NO. NO.

I WAS saying what you were proposing right up to the point when 'you' started by saying "you ASSUME, and then 'you' just got further and further OFF TRACK with each following word. Until you were so FAR OFF TRACK with the "I exist as ..." words that absolutely EVERY thing was being misinterpreted and taken out of context.

Do you see then if that is the case then the individual self is actually invisible, it's never been seen, it's only existence is an invisible thought

Besides the FACT that you did arrive at a correct conclusion here you did come to it by the WRONG means.

You started the sentence with the ASSUMPTION "Do you seen then", which is based solely on the FACT that you had made the WRONG ASSUMPTION, based from your previous words. You had ASSUMED that I was going to say YES, instead of NO. You, however, did correct this with the following words "if that is the case", so that is now fine. But so NO miscommunication EVER takes place it is far better to KNOW what my answers ARE before proceeding.

Now, I agree that the 'individual self' has NEVER been seen, with the PHYSICAL EYES, and its existence is the invisible thoughts AS WELL AS the invisible emotions.

The individual self, (small s), is the one that thinks it knows what is true, right and correct. This self is the one that talks about "i see ...", "i do ...", "i am ...". As the thoughts evolve as an individual body ages so to does that individual i, self, (small i). For arguments sake a human body is born without thought. But gains thoughts along the way. 'Thought' is just a word describing the body of knowledge containing views, perceptions, ideas, concepts, beliefs, assumptions, opinions, et cetera, et cetera. All of an individual body of knowledge, within one human body, combined with all of the internal feelings within that unique human body, at any given moment, form the individual self. This individual is always changing as the unique human body has its own "separate" individual different experiences. Because each seemingly "separate" human body has its own unique individual experiences, which ultimately become the invisible thoughts and feelings that are held within each unique, "separate", individual brain with each human body, then this is what causes the apparent 'individual self'. So, where the individual self is, is within each individual human body.

This self though is completely invisible to the human eye so that is WHY it can not be seen. But it can be point to, through descriptive words. Descriptive words (language) can and do illustrate things. ALL things can be SHOWN and SEEN, through and with the correct and proper language.

This self is not only invisible to the human eye, it's invisible to the SEER period...As the SEER ...CANNOT ....SEE ITSELF.

BUT, to me, the SEER is NOT the 'invisible self'.

And, to 'SEE' can also mean to understand. Do 'you' understand some of things you do just through words and language?

Words / language are fictions they are optical illusions of light and sound heard as words ..but ultimately point to nothing.

Words/language can POINT TO 'thoughts and emotions', which can NOT be SEEN at all, with the physical eyes, but they can be SEEN and UNDERSTOOD, by some thing.

You are FREE to BELIEVE that there are some things that can NOT be SEEN nor UNDERSTOOD, and that words/language can paint a FALSE picture. I, however, SEE things differently. As I KNOW that through words and language the BIG picture can be SEEN and UNDERSTOOD for ALL of Its BEAUTY.

As I have also explained I am NOT here in this forum to paint any picture of what is right or wrong in Life. I am just here to learn how to express better.

No-thing (word) can ever experience it's own presence or absence.The entity's totality is experiential.....It emerges into imaginary existence within the gulf between subject and object.It can never see it's self simply because it exists only as an idea.

But It can DESCRIBE through words Its Self, and thus paint and, literally, ILLUSTRATE a very CLEAR True and Right picture of Its Self.

There is no self actually there / here except in this [CON-ception) aka fictional story.

Just remember that 'YOU' are FREE to BELIEVE absolutely any thing you WANT TO BELIEVE.

But please do NOT expect EVERY one nor ANY one else to BELIEVE what you BELIEVE is true.

To me, there is NO PHYSICAL self actually there/here BUT there is an invisible individual self there/here.

When you try to point to the actual location of the individual SELF ...where is it?

Where i point to is the individual self is within an individual human body.

SEE, this individual self (the individual thoughts and feelings within this human body) writing under the banner "age", can now be SEEN through these very words.

The word is not what it is pointing to...words are a fiction upon no-thing - put there by no-thing.

If words are a "FICTION" upon no-thing, then what 'you' BELIEVE, from and with WORDS, and just WROTE in and with words is then ALSO FICTION. Now, what does "dontaskme' mean when they are using the 'fiction' word here?

How are "you" defining the word 'fiction' here?

For example: there is no water in the WORD water.

Thank you for this enlightening piece of insight. (Just to be clear that was sarcasm. Not out of disrespect, but just out of jest).

Who is this i that can point to an individual i ?

The VERY thing that came up with and gave the EXAMPLE "there is no water in the WORD water". That thing that did that, used a human body, to express that "thought", which is just them self. Through the actual use of words, and literally through the written word, 'you' have just pointed back onto who/what the individual self IS.

..that would require you to have two i's...

BUT there IS NOT two 'I's. (But there are many 'i's). There is only One 'I'.

As I have explained previously there is just far to much to express and to explain for ALL of this to be done and understood here, in this forum. The people here are far more concerned about expressing their views and making claims that they are RIGHT instead of learning about what "others" want to express.

one to point and the other to be that which is being pointed to ...
In reality the self cannot point to itself...it would have to split itself in two...there simply is no individual self, there is ONLY NONDUAL SELF...

The NONDUAL SELF is thee True Self, which is NOT the individual self.

No, as I've explained above, no individual self can be SEEN..it's only an invisible idea, it's an invisible construct.

That is because the individual self, literally, comes from invisible ideas and invisible constructs. ALL of that which is invisible, like ideas, concepts, values, beliefs, et cetera, et cetera, and which makes up 'thought' itself, is the individual self.

If 'you' do NOT like that idea, can NOT construct how that could be, do NOT believe that it could even be true, do NOT want to even consider it, then ALL of that is fine. As I have said 'you' are FREE to BELIEVE whatever you want to believe is true.

That which is apparently SEEN is the SEEING that can never be SEEN. The idea that the SEER can be SEEN isn't true...there is no ''thing'' Seeing or Being...although seeing and being IS apparent.

I hope you are CLEAR now on the distinction between SEEING/KNOWING/UNDERSTANDING from the physical seeing of physical things with and from the physical eyes.

I also hope that you KNOW that we are in AGREEMENT that what is invisible, like ALL 'you' individual selves ARE, can NOT be SEEN, from the physical eyes.

That's all that can be known, it's known via direct experience. Everything else is a fiction, a conceptual overlay upon Not-Knowing Being and Seeing.

Do 'you' KNOW the thoughts' within that head?

If yes, then is that via 'direct experience'?
If no, then so be it.

Again, how are 'you' defining the word 'fiction' here?

It's obvious that there is an intelligence behind all life..but that intelligence doesn't belong to any locatable knowable ''thing'' ..

.

BUT that 'intelligence' KNOWS EXACTLY WHERE It IS. It even has a particular name for WHERE that VERY location that It is IS.

Just because 'you/dontaskme' individual self does NOT yet know, does NOT mean that the True Self does NOT yet already KNOW.

Or, does "dontaskme' really BELIEVE that if they do NOT yet know some thing, then that also means that the 'INTELLIGENCE BEHIND ALL LIFE' also could NOT yet know as well?

If that is what you BELIEVE, then please do NOT expect "others" to BELIEVE the same.
If, however, you do NOT believe that, then JUST MAYBE the 'INTELLIGENCE BEHIND ALL LIFE' does KNOW where It IS AND does have a name for this place? (We will have to wait and SEE).

[Age]

You have ignored and dismissed what I've already presented to you (with "examples" of your exact text/claims and inconsistencies). So I'm done with that. You've ignored and dismissed other people too... yet you keep insisting that we're all not providing you with sufficient feedback to shed new light on, or deter you from, your claims and views.

Write one NEW LIGHT, which, you PERCEIVE, will deter me from my claims and views now in capital letters so that we can SEE IT.

THEN we can discuss IT.

Just because you have/give "sufficient feedback", based solely on YOUR views, does NOT mean that I have a view nor claim that needs deterring.

Have you ever considered that it is YOUR claim or view that might need deterring?

Until you SHINE a True LIGHT by EXPOSING these claims and views that you PERCEIVE "NEED" deterring away from, then we will NEVER SEE who's views and claims actually NEED to be deterred away from.

Name just ONE claim or view that I make, which you perceive is wrong or needs deterring away from, and then give me a chance to respond, then we can SEE who and what is wrong and needs to be kept away from.

If you do NOT provide any thing, then that will say far more than what you are TRYING TO say here.

Now you asked why people go away when you ask them questions, and I gave you an honest answer based on what I've seen of such communication/interactions.

YES you gave what you have PERCEIVED. You, UNFORTUNATELY, misinterpret what I say, and then THINK/BELIEVE that YOUR misinterpretation is actual and true fact. Until you clarify and discuss with me my views and claims, then you will NEVER know what I am actually saying. As far as I can tell from YOUR writings you are so far off track about Me and MY writings, that this is beyond even being funny anymore.

For example you wrote: People who hide behind their own convoluted distortions of words and meanings and applications--as if it's some sort of profound knowledge or reasoning--typically seem to be trying to maintain/nurture some self-indulgent delusions.

Your convoluted distortion here is attempting to hide the FACT that you have absolutely NO clue whatsoever what this SUPPOSED self-indulgent delusion is. Unless OF COURSE you can prove me WRONG here and provide an EXAMPLE as EVIDENCE, so that WE can have a LOOK AT it, THEN I can at least be able to provide a response to what YOU are actually talking about. BECAUSE with NO evidence I, for one, have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about and referring to here.

You HOLD BELIEFS and ME and make up ASSUMPTIONS to just about everything I write, and proceed to THINK from this completely distorted VIEW of me.

Communication that seems unconscious, false, and continually in denial may not be very interesting to interact with long-term.

ONCE AGAIN, a load of accusations, which I have absolutely NO idea what they are exactly.

WHERE is the "unconscious" part/s, the "false" part/s, and the "continually in denial" part/s?

Sorry... I'm just repeating some of the feedback you've received repeatedly,

What are you "sorry" about? I have INFORMED on many occasions I WANT criticism, feedback, and/or to be SHOWN where I am WRONG, but I have also asked for this with actual examples, or pieces of evidence, from MY writings.

I DO NOT want criticism, feedback, and being SHOWN where I am "WRONG" from people's PERCEPTIONS and ASSUMPTIONS. Could I make this any more CLEARER.

From my perspective... each of us has a unique trip that is pretty much for our own entertainment -- and we're all magnificent creators.

And, from my perspective, 'you', thinking that your unique trip, which obviously involves the abuse of children and "others" is for YOUR OWN entertainment, is just another unique trip. And, 'you' are ALL magnificent creators. BUT there is FAR MORE to LIFE then just your one tiny little perspective of things here.

If you want to just carry on exactly how you are now, and NOT take any responsibility at all, and just enjoy your OWN entertainment, then go right ahead. You are completely free to enjoy your OWN unique trip how you WANT TO. Some just prefer to ENJOY the one unique trip IN and WITH the company of "others"

We are also easily deceived by our own hypnotic indulgences.

And that comes across VERY CLEAR, to me. Just HOW MUCH 'you' ALL are so easily deceived by your OWN hypnotic indulgences is VERY, VERY CLEAR and and just as OBVIOUS.

Now let us SEE if you can provide any actual and CLEAR examples of WHERE there is any WRONG in what I have said here. Or, if AGAIN you will just provide YOUR own PERCEPTIONS and say some thing like that I am deluded, et cetera.

Either do not like what I write nor the way I write and so do NOT read it anymore, and just move on, OR, find actual and real fault in what I write and/or in the way I write, and then provide examples/evidence of such, and then be prepared to DISCUSS "that" with me.

If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole.
If you run into an asshole at lunch, you ran into two assholes today.
If you run into an asshole in the evening, you ran into three assholes today.
If you run into an asshole on Monday and on Tuesday, it's a bad start to the week.

If you run into assholes all week, all month, and all year long, you're the asshole.

Age. You are the asshole.

For a person who professes to putting me on the ignore list, at least three times already, you really do appear to enjoy wanting to keep returning and talking to, or about, me. It is a shame, though, you only feel like responding to me some times and NOT when I pose questions to you nor when HIGHLIGHT and SHOW the errors in your so called "logic" and "reasoning".

By the way if there was any thought at all that saying "i am a hole on an animal's body" was going to affect me in any detrimental way whatsoever, then so be it. The maturity, or lack there of, in saying the above speaks entirely for itself.

[Logik]

For a person who professes to putting me on the ignore list, at least three times already, you really do appear to enjoy wanting to keep returning and talking to, or about, me. It is a shame, though, you only feel like responding to me some times and NOT when I pose questions to you nor when HIGHLIGHT and SHOW the errors in your so called "logic" and "reasoning".

By the way if there was any thought at all that saying "i am a hole on an animal's body" was going to affect me in any detrimental way whatsoever, then so be it. The maturity, or lack there of, in saying the above speaks entirely for itself.

So? I am immature. And you are an asshole.

I guess we both have work to do, eh?

[Lacewing]

blah, blah, blah

So much noise. Not worth wading through or taking seriously. Good luck to you.

[Logik]

blah, blah, blah

So much noise. Not worth wading through or taking seriously. Good luck to you.

So tactful. You have to teach me your ways

[Eodnhoj7]

The more you fight it...what are you trying to do reinvent the wheel?

No. I am trying to prevent YOU from doing it. I am trying to get you to see that others have observed that which you are observing.
I am trying to get you to the top of that pyramid so you don't have to re-discover all of human knowledge from first principles.

But, of course - your time is your time and you are allowed to waste it as you see fit.

Then how can you argue all is assymetric?

[Logik]

Then how can you argue all is assymetric?

The structure of your mind is symmetric. Your expectations are symmetric. Logic is symmetric. Scientific models are symmetric.

Reality is not.

This discrepancy between symmetry and asymmetry is precisely how information flows. You expect X but Y happens - information!

[Eodnhoj7]

Then how can you argue all is assymetric?

The structure of your mind is symmetric. Your expectations are symmetric. Logic is symmetric. Scientific models are symmetric.

Reality is not.

This discrepancy between symmetry and asymmetry is precisely how information flows. You expect X but Y happens - information!

I see, reality is not symmetric. So the programming, grounded in "x,y,z" empirical phenomena...is not symmetric?

[Logik]

I see, reality is not symmetric. So the programming, grounded in "x,y,z" empirical phenomena...is not symmetric?

Do you see any symmetry in Quantum Mechanics? It's just models.

[Eodnhoj7]

I see, reality is not symmetric. So the programming, grounded in "x,y,z" empirical phenomena...is not symmetric?

Do you see any symmetry in Quantum Mechanics? It's just models.

I see...so one particle effecting another particle "x" distance away is a model?

You do understand reality is assymetric, according to you, but programming is literally grounded in empirical phenomenon (ie the computer and what the computer is formed from?)

[Logik]

I see...so one particle effecting another particle "x" distance away is a model?

You do understand reality is assymetric, according to you, but programming is literally grounded in empirical phenomenon (ie the computer and what the computer is formed from?)

Do you even know how to do estimates? How to make worst and best-case predictions? How to ACTUALLY measure things? Even your own uncertainty?

That's what I use computers for. Data sampling. Monte-Carlo simulations. Predictive modeling.

[Eodnhoj7]

I see...so one particle effecting another particle "x" distance away is a model?

You do understand reality is assymetric, according to you, but programming is literally grounded in empirical phenomenon (ie the computer and what the computer is formed from?)

Do you even know how to do estimates? How to make worst and best-case predictions? How to ACTUALLY measure things? Even your own uncertainty?

That's what I use computers for. Data sampling. Monte-Carlo simulations. Predictive modeling.

So these estimates, because they are grounded in an asymmetric reality (computers, as the computer is part of reality and all reality is asymmetric), are also asymmetric?

[Logik]

So these estimates, because they are grounded in an asymmetric reality (computers, as the computer is part of reality and all reality is asymmetric), are also asymmetric?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval

The models I work with have a 4 to 6 Sigma precision.