| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Douglas Eagleson" |
| Date: |
23 Aug 2005 09:31:18 AM |
| Object: |
A Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 7 |
A Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 7
Douglas Eagleson, 2005
A symmetry is never to be confused.
A property as a kind appears
symmetry. Implying the thing to
which the property belongs.
A physical observable is a kind
of property.
And the confusion appears the
property's symmetry. A concept
where the observable appears both
the property and the thing to which
it belongs.
Symmetry is often associated with
this fallacy of usage.
A reason for the fallacy in common
usage is the geometric symmetry
of shapes. A common analogy to
define all symmetry.
As the kind of property of certain
things the symmetric relation
is definable.
A relation of the alteration
defines. And the transformation
by alteration behaves in a certain
fashion.
Note that this analysis is to
define all kinds of symmetry.
And as such the analysis is
rigourous and simple. All symmetry
as the realm to which thought
applies is instantly defined, always
in formal relation to the selected
logic.
And there is a predicate relation to
make the same theory as this
definition of Plato's school.
Apon alteration a relation maintains
a certain thing's abstract existence,
while the particular vanishes.
A definition of sufficiency.
Abstract existence is maintained
while the certain thing altered
takes on a new form.
In the realm of all things to
which thought applies this simple
relation appears the correct.
A color as the thing is to be
altered in a symmetric fashion.
Making the degree of color the
thing. A thing's color appears the
fallacy.
A special relation of transformation
must be defined in order to
satisfy the definition.
A frequency of quanta emission is held
to cause the color perception.
Alter the frequency to cause
the certain thing's disappearance,
but maintain the original color
abstractly.
A hue is a symmetry of the single
frequency system of color.
Alter the frequency, but maintain the
color.
Add dye without changing the color.
Symmetric dye.
A certain color combination
in relation to the original dye
composition displays the hue.
Alteration by symmetry is this
science of the modern painter.
A certain red in relation to
the degree of redness appears the
mixture relation.
And this symmetry of color
appears to have the particular
red a variable, while the color
red is a constant.
A philosopher defines symmetry
without relation to geometry.
And abstract existence is the
peculiar appearence to this
definition.
In predicate theory such a
property of all logic is held
impossible. How can color
alter and be a constant?
A kind of trivial apparent
fallacy is the one of
predicate theory.
A degree to be assigned
to the single variable is also this
same fallacy inverted.
A theory in predicate had not
the ability to take the abstract
variable and relate to the
example. Predicate recognizes
the abstract, but has no relation
of the thing to all things.
So will redefine symmetry using this
transformation.
A things parameter is to be
altered. And the alteration
maintains the certain definition's
sufficiency.
And here the aspect of the altered
parameter held constant is either
abstract or real.
All fallacy is avoided by using
the concept of sufficient existence.
A color in predicate is then
altered by changing its dye color
or its dye.
And to change the dye without changing
color is the implied relation.
A fairly odd predicate with
the appearence of the paradox.
Ignore the paradox, it is a
sufficiency of completed
abstract theory in predicate.
I have already written on the
topic. A valid theory in predicate
will exhibit this paradox.
And so the example of symmetry
is given to prove the definition.
I gave both Plato's school form
and the predicate form.
Making this discourse a small
schools example, because the
thinker is relating school to school.
And the color paradox of modern
predicate is to be the last
question. Without this school's
resolution all color is three
dyes mixed.
And in modern color science the
hue clearly altered color.
And so the discourse has maintained
the standard of the schoolmaster's
analysis and uses this example
to discover another science as
hindered as color was.
Analyse color and its symmetry.
And in analogy discover the
next science to benefit.
And of course logic was the school
to display in example.
A thought may have the property.
Implying the logic must exhibit.
And to have the paradox display
symmetry without recongnition
of its existence is to be absolutely
without benefit of thought without
symmety's necessity.
Without this definition the paradox
would be without the value it
is today in modern predicate theory.
There is not a single theory in
predicate science free from falsifiable
necessity.
And recognition of the symmetric
necessity does what?
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: A Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 7 |
23 Aug 2005 04:12:27 PM |
|
|
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
A Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 7
Douglas Eagleson, 2005
[snip crap]
A property as a kind appears
symmetry. Implying the thing to
which the property belongs.
[snip more crap]
And to have the paradox display
symmetry without recongnition
of its existence is to be absolutely
without benefit of thought without
symmety's necessity.
[snip rest of crap]
222 lines of crap. Eagleson was expelled from Project Head Start for
underachievment.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: A Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 7 |
23 Aug 2005 09:35:36 AM |
|
|
I dunno what you are smoking, but *plonk* anyway.
Androcles
"Douglas Eagleson" <eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1124807478.816554.171540@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
|A Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 7
| Douglas Eagleson, 2005
|
| A symmetry is never to be confused.
|
| A property as a kind appears
| symmetry. Implying the thing to
| which the property belongs.
|
| A physical observable is a kind
| of property.
|
| And the confusion appears the
| property's symmetry. A concept
| where the observable appears both
| the property and the thing to which
| it belongs.
|
| Symmetry is often associated with
| this fallacy of usage.
|
| A reason for the fallacy in common
| usage is the geometric symmetry
| of shapes. A common analogy to
| define all symmetry.
|
| As the kind of property of certain
| things the symmetric relation
| is definable.
|
| A relation of the alteration
| defines. And the transformation
| by alteration behaves in a certain
| fashion.
|
| Note that this analysis is to
| define all kinds of symmetry.
| And as such the analysis is
| rigourous and simple. All symmetry
| as the realm to which thought
| applies is instantly defined, always
| in formal relation to the selected
| logic.
|
| And there is a predicate relation to
| make the same theory as this
| definition of Plato's school.
|
|
| Apon alteration a relation maintains
| a certain thing's abstract existence,
| while the particular vanishes.
|
| A definition of sufficiency.
|
| Abstract existence is maintained
| while the certain thing altered
| takes on a new form.
|
| In the realm of all things to
| which thought applies this simple
| relation appears the correct.
|
| A color as the thing is to be
| altered in a symmetric fashion.
|
| Making the degree of color the
| thing. A thing's color appears the
| fallacy.
|
| A special relation of transformation
| must be defined in order to
| satisfy the definition.
|
| A frequency of quanta emission is held
| to cause the color perception.
|
| Alter the frequency to cause
| the certain thing's disappearance,
| but maintain the original color
| abstractly.
|
| A hue is a symmetry of the single
| frequency system of color.
|
| Alter the frequency, but maintain the
| color.
|
| Add dye without changing the color.
|
| Symmetric dye.
|
| A certain color combination
| in relation to the original dye
| composition displays the hue.
|
| Alteration by symmetry is this
| science of the modern painter.
|
| A certain red in relation to
| the degree of redness appears the
| mixture relation.
|
| And this symmetry of color
| appears to have the particular
| red a variable, while the color
| red is a constant.
|
| A philosopher defines symmetry
| without relation to geometry.
|
| And abstract existence is the
| peculiar appearence to this
| definition.
|
| In predicate theory such a
| property of all logic is held
| impossible. How can color
| alter and be a constant?
|
| A kind of trivial apparent
| fallacy is the one of
| predicate theory.
|
| A degree to be assigned
| to the single variable is also this
| same fallacy inverted.
|
| A theory in predicate had not
| the ability to take the abstract
| variable and relate to the
| example. Predicate recognizes
| the abstract, but has no relation
| of the thing to all things.
|
| So will redefine symmetry using this
| transformation.
|
| A things parameter is to be
| altered. And the alteration
| maintains the certain definition's
| sufficiency.
|
| And here the aspect of the altered
| parameter held constant is either
| abstract or real.
|
| All fallacy is avoided by using
| the concept of sufficient existence.
|
| A color in predicate is then
| altered by changing its dye color
| or its dye.
|
| And to change the dye without changing
| color is the implied relation.
|
| A fairly odd predicate with
| the appearence of the paradox.
|
| Ignore the paradox, it is a
| sufficiency of completed
| abstract theory in predicate.
|
| I have already written on the
| topic. A valid theory in predicate
| will exhibit this paradox.
|
| And so the example of symmetry
| is given to prove the definition.
|
| I gave both Plato's school form
| and the predicate form.
|
| Making this discourse a small
| schools example, because the
| thinker is relating school to school.
|
| And the color paradox of modern
| predicate is to be the last
| question. Without this school's
| resolution all color is three
| dyes mixed.
|
| And in modern color science the
| hue clearly altered color.
|
| And so the discourse has maintained
| the standard of the schoolmaster's
| analysis and uses this example
| to discover another science as
| hindered as color was.
|
| Analyse color and its symmetry.
|
| And in analogy discover the
| next science to benefit.
|
| And of course logic was the school
| to display in example.
|
| A thought may have the property.
|
| Implying the logic must exhibit.
|
| And to have the paradox display
| symmetry without recongnition
| of its existence is to be absolutely
| without benefit of thought without
| symmety's necessity.
|
| Without this definition the paradox
| would be without the value it
| is today in modern predicate theory.
|
| There is not a single theory in
| predicate science free from falsifiable
| necessity.
|
| And recognition of the symmetric
| necessity does what?
|
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Eagleson" |
|
| Title: Re: A Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 7 |
23 Aug 2005 11:43:51 AM |
|
|
It requires the thinker, which you ain't.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
