### I have transcended

Posted:

**Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:59 am**> If an algorithm is infinite, there is no output, and if it's

> completely random, there is no algorithm!

>

> This is actually a very deep mathematical law!

>

> I'll explain this better.: If there is eternity, the concept is

> unmade and unchanging - it never began and never ends, it is an

> eternal platonic form. With infinity there is motion (if you cunt it

> as a whole, motions occurs)… the act of

> counting an infinity from the ether, is motion itself. Infinity =

> motion.

>

>

> It's considered a mathematical proof ala Cantor from over 140 years

> ago that all of the real numbers cannot be counted...

>

> I use a techinique called 1 dimensional flooding to show that all of

> the reals cannot be counted in one list with one dimension, which is

> differnt than Cantors diagonalization argument.

>

> use the lists..

>

> 012345678910...

> 123456789101...

> 234567891011...

> 345678910111...

> 456789101112...

> 567891011121...

> 678910111213...

>

> etc...

>

> To do one dimensional flooding, you simply add an infinite list to

> each place in the previous infinite list… plus 1

>

> 024681012151...

> 036912151821...

> 048121620242...

> 051015202530...

>

> When the list converges at infinity, there is no way to begin counting...

>

> 12345678910...

> 13579111315...

> 14812162024...

>

> Because you never pass the zero's.

>

> This is the proof that we cannot determine the limit of how much we can

> count.

>

> Sorry forgot to add the disproof of Cantor's diagonalization argument...

>

> Once you do one dimensional flooding, you have to expand to another

> dimension to keep listing the sequences... diagonals can be subsumed

> by a third dimension, say list 1.1, or list 5.7 etc... or a 4th

> dimension 1..1, 5..7, etc...

>

> It's actually easy to absorb the diagonals by starting from the center

> and listing them from top to bottom in sequence using another

> dimension... what this means is that cantors proof that you cannot

> count all the reals is FALSE!!!. It also means that you cannot find

> the limit on what can be calculated!!!!!!!!! except that it cannot be

> everything!!!!!!!!! (I'll disprove this later!)

>

> what this means, is that there are no powers to infinity, each

> dimensional flooding is just as large as another dimensional flooding,

> but they are still "uncountable" because of dimensional flooding!!

>

> My technique for sequencing the rationals.... I call it the mirroring

> technique, because i realized that if you mirror all of the natural

> numbers you have all of the decimals.

>

> The way it works is that the first ten numbers are counted just as

> themselves and their negatives:

>

> 0,1, -1,2, -2,3, -3,4, -4,5, -5,6, -6,7, -7,8, -8,9, -9

>

> Then after that you count 10 and then the next number is the mirror of

> 10, which is 01 and then you move the decimal point in once to get the

> 12th number being 0.1, then the thirteenth number (not counting the

> negatives which are numbered every other) is 0.(1 repeating). These

> steps continue until you reach three digit numbers and higher. Once

> you count 100, you then count the next number as 0.01, then 0.0(1

> repeating) then 0.(01 repeating), then you count 101 and it's mirror.

> If you keep marching in the decimal point when the number that's about

> to be mirrored ends in zero it causes infinite overlap. The number 100

> ends in a zero, so after you mirror it you only march the decimal in

> for one place to the right, if you march it two places to the right,

> you end up with 00.1, which is the same mirror that you get when the

> number 10 is mirrored, and will occur an infinite number of times as

> the zeros expand and you keep marching in the decimal point (which

> will give you infinite overlap as the sequence expands).

>

> However, if the number doesn't end in a zero, you keep marching in the

> decimal point, say the number 102. The next number is mirroring it, so

> it's 2.01, then you do the repeating decimals by next counting 2.0(1

> repeating) and then 2.(01 repeating), then you march the decimal point

> in once more to get 20.1, and then you do the repeating decimals by

> having 20.(1 repeating). (If you march the decimal in one more time,

> you get 201, and have infinite overlap as well.) Then you count the

> number 103 and then mirror it and do this forever.

>

> I also disproved Chaitin's work on infinities.... it's actually very

> simple...

>

> Disproof of Chaitin: If an algorithm is infinite, there is no output.

> If the algorithm is completely random, it's no longer an algorithm.

> Therefor... every infinite number has a finite algorithm to it that's

> shorter than that number (when dealing with infinities).

>

> I'm going to top myself and give you a law and it's implications:

>

> The set of all sets is not a subset!!! (the set of all apples is not an

> apple)

>

> Watch this !!!

>

>

> It's so easy!! It's basic set theory!!!

>

> You either have 1 or 2 or 1 and 2...

>

> 1.) 1 cannot know 2 or 1 and 2

> 2.) 2 cannot know 1 or 1 and 2

> 3.) 1 and 2 cannot know 1 or 2

>

> These are all mutually exclusive and actual!!

>

> It's a concrete disproof!!

>

> It's the same argument in terms of presence and potence ...

>

> It's impossible for any being to have an omnistate!!! For a being to

> be omniscient, it must know what we don't know, and not know it, as well as what it

> knows (everything)

>

> 5.) The Real Numbers… (Moving irrationals in sequence) (using It's Champernowne's number) (ordered! sequential! transcendental! by definition) (all irrationals)

>

> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> ………………………………………….

> ………………………………………….

> ………………………………………….

> <...312111019876543 : 345678910111213…>

> <...121110198765432 : 234567891011121…>

> <...211101987654321 : 123456789101112…>

> <...111019876543210 : 012345678910111…>

> ---------------------------------------------------------------

> <...111019876543210 : 012345678910111…>

> <...211101987654321 : 123456789101112…>

> <...121110198765432 : 234567891011121…>

> <...312111019876543 : 345678910111213…>

> …………………………………………...

> ……………………………………………

> ……………………………………………

> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

>

> As my mirroring technique for counting the rational numbers expands,

> you interpolate it with this sequence for every digit (the grid

> above)…

>

> You slowly spiral out from the middle of this infinite sequence grid!

> (one axis is negatives and the perpendicular axis is decimal points)

>

> As you spiral out, you list 8 consecutive directionality's, up, down,

> right, left and all the diagonals… (these are added dimensions)

>

> This sequence will count the reals. 8 numbers added on top after each

> segment of the rational sequence.

>

> Whenever dimensional flooding occurs, you have to add a new operator

> to render it in a single list… I'm using 12 operators here to count

> the reals (that I'm not naming).

>

> You can use brute force to decrypt anything with the set of reals!!

>

> Also: View my videos by typing "Jason Teague Philosophy" on you tubes

> search engine

>

> Thank you

> completely random, there is no algorithm!

>

> This is actually a very deep mathematical law!

>

> I'll explain this better.: If there is eternity, the concept is

> unmade and unchanging - it never began and never ends, it is an

> eternal platonic form. With infinity there is motion (if you cunt it

> as a whole, motions occurs)… the act of

> counting an infinity from the ether, is motion itself. Infinity =

> motion.

>

>

> It's considered a mathematical proof ala Cantor from over 140 years

> ago that all of the real numbers cannot be counted...

>

> I use a techinique called 1 dimensional flooding to show that all of

> the reals cannot be counted in one list with one dimension, which is

> differnt than Cantors diagonalization argument.

>

> use the lists..

>

> 012345678910...

> 123456789101...

> 234567891011...

> 345678910111...

> 456789101112...

> 567891011121...

> 678910111213...

>

> etc...

>

> To do one dimensional flooding, you simply add an infinite list to

> each place in the previous infinite list… plus 1

>

> 024681012151...

> 036912151821...

> 048121620242...

> 051015202530...

>

> When the list converges at infinity, there is no way to begin counting...

>

> 12345678910...

> 13579111315...

> 14812162024...

>

> Because you never pass the zero's.

>

> This is the proof that we cannot determine the limit of how much we can

> count.

>

> Sorry forgot to add the disproof of Cantor's diagonalization argument...

>

> Once you do one dimensional flooding, you have to expand to another

> dimension to keep listing the sequences... diagonals can be subsumed

> by a third dimension, say list 1.1, or list 5.7 etc... or a 4th

> dimension 1..1, 5..7, etc...

>

> It's actually easy to absorb the diagonals by starting from the center

> and listing them from top to bottom in sequence using another

> dimension... what this means is that cantors proof that you cannot

> count all the reals is FALSE!!!. It also means that you cannot find

> the limit on what can be calculated!!!!!!!!! except that it cannot be

> everything!!!!!!!!! (I'll disprove this later!)

>

> what this means, is that there are no powers to infinity, each

> dimensional flooding is just as large as another dimensional flooding,

> but they are still "uncountable" because of dimensional flooding!!

>

> My technique for sequencing the rationals.... I call it the mirroring

> technique, because i realized that if you mirror all of the natural

> numbers you have all of the decimals.

>

> The way it works is that the first ten numbers are counted just as

> themselves and their negatives:

>

> 0,1, -1,2, -2,3, -3,4, -4,5, -5,6, -6,7, -7,8, -8,9, -9

>

> Then after that you count 10 and then the next number is the mirror of

> 10, which is 01 and then you move the decimal point in once to get the

> 12th number being 0.1, then the thirteenth number (not counting the

> negatives which are numbered every other) is 0.(1 repeating). These

> steps continue until you reach three digit numbers and higher. Once

> you count 100, you then count the next number as 0.01, then 0.0(1

> repeating) then 0.(01 repeating), then you count 101 and it's mirror.

> If you keep marching in the decimal point when the number that's about

> to be mirrored ends in zero it causes infinite overlap. The number 100

> ends in a zero, so after you mirror it you only march the decimal in

> for one place to the right, if you march it two places to the right,

> you end up with 00.1, which is the same mirror that you get when the

> number 10 is mirrored, and will occur an infinite number of times as

> the zeros expand and you keep marching in the decimal point (which

> will give you infinite overlap as the sequence expands).

>

> However, if the number doesn't end in a zero, you keep marching in the

> decimal point, say the number 102. The next number is mirroring it, so

> it's 2.01, then you do the repeating decimals by next counting 2.0(1

> repeating) and then 2.(01 repeating), then you march the decimal point

> in once more to get 20.1, and then you do the repeating decimals by

> having 20.(1 repeating). (If you march the decimal in one more time,

> you get 201, and have infinite overlap as well.) Then you count the

> number 103 and then mirror it and do this forever.

>

> I also disproved Chaitin's work on infinities.... it's actually very

> simple...

>

> Disproof of Chaitin: If an algorithm is infinite, there is no output.

> If the algorithm is completely random, it's no longer an algorithm.

> Therefor... every infinite number has a finite algorithm to it that's

> shorter than that number (when dealing with infinities).

>

> I'm going to top myself and give you a law and it's implications:

>

> The set of all sets is not a subset!!! (the set of all apples is not an

> apple)

>

> Watch this !!!

>

>

> It's so easy!! It's basic set theory!!!

>

> You either have 1 or 2 or 1 and 2...

>

> 1.) 1 cannot know 2 or 1 and 2

> 2.) 2 cannot know 1 or 1 and 2

> 3.) 1 and 2 cannot know 1 or 2

>

> These are all mutually exclusive and actual!!

>

> It's a concrete disproof!!

>

> It's the same argument in terms of presence and potence ...

>

> It's impossible for any being to have an omnistate!!! For a being to

> be omniscient, it must know what we don't know, and not know it, as well as what it

> knows (everything)

>

> 5.) The Real Numbers… (Moving irrationals in sequence) (using It's Champernowne's number) (ordered! sequential! transcendental! by definition) (all irrationals)

>

> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> ………………………………………….

> ………………………………………….

> ………………………………………….

> <...312111019876543 : 345678910111213…>

> <...121110198765432 : 234567891011121…>

> <...211101987654321 : 123456789101112…>

> <...111019876543210 : 012345678910111…>

> ---------------------------------------------------------------

> <...111019876543210 : 012345678910111…>

> <...211101987654321 : 123456789101112…>

> <...121110198765432 : 234567891011121…>

> <...312111019876543 : 345678910111213…>

> …………………………………………...

> ……………………………………………

> ……………………………………………

> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

>

> As my mirroring technique for counting the rational numbers expands,

> you interpolate it with this sequence for every digit (the grid

> above)…

>

> You slowly spiral out from the middle of this infinite sequence grid!

> (one axis is negatives and the perpendicular axis is decimal points)

>

> As you spiral out, you list 8 consecutive directionality's, up, down,

> right, left and all the diagonals… (these are added dimensions)

>

> This sequence will count the reals. 8 numbers added on top after each

> segment of the rational sequence.

>

> Whenever dimensional flooding occurs, you have to add a new operator

> to render it in a single list… I'm using 12 operators here to count

> the reals (that I'm not naming).

>

> You can use brute force to decrypt anything with the set of reals!!

>

> Also: View my videos by typing "Jason Teague Philosophy" on you tubes

> search engine

>

> Thank you