The Law of Identity

[henry quirk]

I'm on the east side of the room...I walk over to the west side of the room...I was me on the east side and I'm still me on the west side.

I buy an apple from the market...I carry it home in my coat pocket...at home, I take the apple, the apple I bought at the market, and put it on the table...it's the same apple all the way through, from vender's stand to its place on my table.

A is A

[nothing]

I'm on the east side of the room...I walk over to the west side of the room...I was me on the east side and I'm still me on the west side.

Hence: +A and -A describe the same subject, but from opposite perspectives.

I buy an apple from the market...I carry it home in my coat pocket...at home, I take the apple, the apple I bought at the market, and put it on the table...it's the same apple all the way through, from vender's stand to its place on my table.

A is A

Did the apple move away from (-) the market?
Did the apple simultaneously move toward (+) your table?

If a visible planet is orbiting a mass towards an observer, does it blue-shift?
If a visible planet is orbiting a sun away from an observer, does it red-shift?
Is there is only one planet whose apparent properties depend on its relative motion?



*A is constantly in motion, thus requires a basic orientation
which has the ability to capture to/from modalities.

[surreptitious57]

A is A is obviously true but A [ where A is any physical object ] is constantly changing over time
Because everything that is known to exist is in a state of motion both internally and externally

So the apple you buy at the market is not EXACTLY the same apple that you put on the table when you get home
Externally it has experienced motion and internally there is also motion within the atoms the apple is made from

Change is a CONSTANT phenomenon that affects ALL objects regardless of whether or not our senses can actually detect this
In order for the apple to be EXACTLY the same then no change / motion would have occurred anywhere at all in the Universe

[henry quirk]

"Hence: +A and -A describe the same subject, but from opposite perspectives."

Unless you're plottin' coordinates on a map, the + and - are unnecessary. A is A no matter where or when A happens to be.

If you are plottin' coordinates on a map, the + and - can say sumthin' useful about A's location, but say nuthin' about A itself (A's identity).

#

"Did the apple move away from (-) the market?"

Yes, I carried the apple away from the market.

#

"Did the apple simultaneously move toward (+) your table?"

Yes, I carried the apple to my table.

As designators of the apple's location, + and - can be useful, but + and - say nuthin' at all about the apple's identity.

#

"If a visible planet is orbiting a mass towards an observer, does it blue-shift?"

Yes, light seemingly compresses.

#

"If a visible planet is orbiting a sun away from an observer, does it red-shift?

Yes, light seemingly stretches.

#

"Is there is only one planet whose apparent properties depend on its relative motion?"

There's only one planet and it remains the same planet throughout its orbit. What changes are the relative positions of planet and observer, these relative positions determine how wavelength is apprehended. Light itself is unchanged.

A is A

##

"So the apple you buy at the market is not EXACTLY the same apple that you put on the table when you get home
Externally it has experienced motion and internally there is also motion within the atoms the apple is made from"

The apple doesn't transmute into uranium as I carry it home; I don't transform into a penguin as I walk across the room.

A is A

[henry quirk]

I buy it, bring it home, set it on the table.

I watch it rot, watch its condition change.

Over the course of six months: the apple goes brown and squishy. It gets downright nasty. Eventually, all its juices are gone and it begins to dry. It is withered.

Is it the same apple?

Yep.

It's condition changed, not its identity.

A is A

-----

I was born in 1962: a glorious, beautiful monster.

Now, at the beginning of the last year of the current decade, at 57: I am the same glorious, beautiful monster.

My condition has changed, not my identity.

A is A

[RCSaunders]

A is A is obviously true but A [ where A is any physical object ] is constantly changing over time
Because everything that is known to exist is in a state of motion both internally and externally

So the apple you buy at the market is not EXACTLY the same apple that you put on the table when you get home
Externally it has experienced motion and internally there is also motion within the atoms the apple is made from

Change is a CONSTANT phenomenon that affects ALL objects regardless of whether or not our senses can actually detect this
In order for the apple to be EXACTLY the same then no change / motion would have occurred anywhere at all in the Universe

Of course the apple changes but this is a mistake if you mean because it changes it does not remain the same apple. Every entity is whatever all its qualities (attributes, properties, charecteristics) are. An apple is an apple because it has all the qualities of an apple.

It does not matter how much change there is, internally or externally, so long as the apple continues to have the attributes of an apple, it is the same apple, the apple in which those changes occur.

A is A, does not mean A cannot change, it means an entity is whatever its attributes (qualities) are that identify it as an, "A," no matter what other qualities it might or might not have, including those that can change. If by a, "book," is meant, "an entity with pages and a cover with printed readable material," it will be the same book no matter what size, color, type of paper or color ink is used, or even if a few pages are torn out, from time to time.

[RCSaunders]

I buy it, bring it home, set it on the table.

I watch it rot, watch its condition change.

Over the course of six months: the apple goes brown and squishy. It gets downright nasty. Eventually, all its juices are gone and it begins to dry. It is withered.

Is it the same apple?

Yep.

...

My condition has changed, not my identity.

A is A

If I had noticed your last two posts I would have skipped mine. You are exactly right, Henry. Why do so many people try to make everything so unnecessarily difficult?

[henry quirk]

I buy it, bring it home, set it on the table.

I watch it rot, watch its condition change.

Over the course of six months: the apple goes brown and squishy. It gets downright nasty. Eventually, all its juices are gone and it begins to dry. It is withered.

Is it the same apple?

Yep.

...

My condition has changed, not my identity.

A is A

If I had noticed your last two posts I would have skipped mine. You are exactly right, Henry. Why do so many people try to make everything so unnecessarily difficult?

Hell if I know.

[Impenitent]

damn boat builders...

Imp

[henry quirk]

damn boat builders...

Imp

Sly boots.

T's boat, I think, is a special case.

[Arising_uk]

The Law of Identity really means: the pinnacle of the ignorance of man.

It's difficult to discuss given you've essentially barred such discussion, so I will be short.

A = A (?)

This is not the Law of Identity. The equals sign is a mathematical one not used in Propositional nor Predicate Logic(at least not until later in First Order Predicate Logic with Equality, where it is carefully defined)

...
√1 = +1, -1 ...

This just says the square root of 1 can be +1 or -1, it does not violate the law as the square root of 1 cannot be +1 and -1.

√A = +A, -A

See above.

A ≠ A (incomplete)

No idea what this is supposed to mean?

A = *A

Why not just say A equals B? As *A is not the same symbol as A.

...

Aristotle ignorantly did not factor into A the potential for limitation(s)
relating to the limited perception(s) of the observer(s) of A concerning motion. ...

Wow! You've got some chops calling Aristotle ignorant, have you actually read any of his works?

[nothing]

This is not the Law of Identity. The equals sign is a mathematical one not used in Propositional nor Predicate Logic(at least not until later in First Order Predicate Logic with Equality, where it is carefully defined)

The equals sign is irrelevant: A is not endowed with the universality of being able to move.

This just says the square root of 1 can be +1 or -1, it does not violate the law as the square root of 1 cannot be +1 and -1.

The square root of 1 is both +1 and -1: both are equally valid. The same is true for *A, whose mathematical notation would be √A.

Why not just say A equals B? As *A is not the same symbol as A.

Because A is not B.

Wow! You've got some chops calling Aristotle ignorant, have you actually read any of his works?

He's dead, and so is his logic.

[henry quirk]

[RCSaunders]

The square root of 1 is both +1 and -1: both are equally valid. The same is true for *A, whose mathematical notation would be √A.

You have made an egregious category mistake.

"A," is a pickle. What is the square root of a pickle?

In the law of identity, "A is A," A refers to an existent, not an abstract concept like number.

[nothing]

The square root of 1 is both +1 and -1: both are equally valid. The same is true for *A, whose mathematical notation would be √A.

You have made an egregious category mistake.

"A," is a pickle. What is the square root of a pickle?

In the law of identity, "A is A," A refers to an existent, not an abstract concept like number.

Whoah, there. Let's go through this.

A category mistake, or category error, or categorical mistake, or mistake of category, is a semantic or ontological error in which things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category,[1] or, alternatively, a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property. An example is the metaphor "time crawled", which if taken literally is not just false but a category mistake. To show that a category mistake has been committed one must typically show that once the phenomenon in question is properly understood, it becomes clear that the claim being made about it could not possibly be true.

There is a cosmological constant to which all bodies are relative to:
the expansion of the universe; the speed of light, c,
their own particular displacement(s) marked by the gravity
of their own body, thus:
A can not equal A, as A is a combination of two:
+cosmological constant
-gravity of body

Therefor, to-and-from c are universally valid arguments: +c (to) and -c (from).
Because all bodies are in relation to, considering body A, the same must contain
intrinsic variability +A and -A to capture orientation and/or velocity to/from ±c.

A ≠ A
√c = +c, -c
A = +A, -A
A = *A
___________________________
*capacity to orient/move in relation to c

Now *A can be any displaced body from c, unity, or less/greater than.

Now imbue *A with the following:
I Am = Impetus of body
the Alpha = universal operator: '+all'
the Omega = universal operator: '-not'
*the beg: = +universal root of any object/subject
*the end = -universal root of any object/subject
__________________________________________
*wherein the beg/end is the real root(s) of any temporal phenomena



Now *A can navigate universal roots by use of their own operators: all, and not.
Now *A can choose their own roots: to know, and/or to believe, as two "trees":
To know all thus not to believe thus tends towards all-knowing, whereas
To believe all thus not to know thus tends towards all-belief-based ignorance causing suffering/death.

They reflect the trees of Eden, and are both local within and universal without.

"A," is a pickle. What is the square root of a pickle?

A pickle is not a breathing body, thus A works for 'dead' objects as +A.
This is why A can not describe all universal phenomena, such as breathing bodies
whose intrinsic capacity to breathe mandates a reciprocal relationship between + and -
in the same way space and time are reciprocally related.

In the law of identity, "A is A," A refers to an existent, not an abstract concept like number.

Neither breathing nor the speed of light are themselves "numbers".
The speed of light can be measured in any unit desired,
but it already is a natural unit
of one unit of space over one unit of time:

c=1s/1t
√c={+spacial, -spacial}, {+temporal, -temporal}
√c={all space, not space}, {all time, not time}
factored:
√c={all, not}, {space, time}

Therefor the {alpha/omega/beg/end} quaternion is the light of the universe: the photon,
having 0 mass/displacement from c, as unity.