Arguing illogically would really make a sense: But how to make a nonsense argument?

Published June 14, 2016 by anirbanbandyo

Creating an world beyond Turing and Russel is not easy, the journey to the world of non-arguments is full of obstacles. One mistake and you return to the world of Turing. On the other hand, being non-sense is actually being random, with no rules. That takes us again nowhere. The other route is the Fractal tape or frequency fractal universe that we suggested. If Turing-Russel arguments were binary arguments, our route is “nested arguments”.

Here are 12 ways of arguing like a stupid that will make sense how universe argues and processes information at all scales:

(i) No question is born in the universe without an answer, they are born together, live together: Always a question always has its answer in it, no question could be created without an answer. Say a question is a triangle and an answer is a square then both are played in a single time cycle. If one plays a triangle, then the square is played out, and if a square is played then a triangle is automatically played. Elementary truth cycles self-assembles but never break apart. There is no true and no false. No distinct question and no distinct identity of an answer. A pair of truths make a cycle i.e. QA doublet or multiplet.

(ii) A QA doublet is not an absolute one, there is no absolute truth, every truth is decomposed into a set of new QA multiplets: thus, its a fractal network. There are only two ways the decomposition works. QA doublets have self-similar ordering (IFS) or one inside another. Thus, the analogue of an argument is QA doublet, but it is never a sum or step by step output of another set of arguments or QA doublets. Fractal decomposition of arguments is feasible but not sequentialism or parallelism.

(ii) Elementary arguments, hierarchical arguments are progeny, they are created. Both co-exist as separate identity in any set of arguments. Truths have their own plane and several planes grow spontaneously in an argument. A non-sensical argument is alive and extremely unpredictable. Unpredictability is not the sign of randomness, but a single observation of nested rhythm could originate from several alternate situations which are fundamentally different.

(iii) No answer or Question is complete, there is always a question that invalidates the answer, fixing that to evolve answer is a journey to completeness (Godel hinted, never suggested a route to explore incompleteness). Since there is no fact no true statement, the information is not just numbers. Just like in a flute a static point is generated, in the dynamic world, we get nodes and anti-nodes due to interference with a boundary. Similarly facts are static points, it is an emergent feature of our system. The static points would not conflict when we combine waves to form nested network of waves or arguments.

(iv) Logically circular or circular logic is the unit of a singular logic to enter inside and go above, always bring circular logic but follow the boundary limit of an observer. Earlier, logically circular was a matter of shame, but for us, it is a matter of pride, it is the foundation. A pair of observers noting a fact would note different things.

(v) Infinite number of planes and their arrangement makes a reality sphere or arguments: Evolution of an argument: Since question-answer couples always together, every possible solutions are connected to the question contextually. A question could have many answers in different contexts. All are mapped in a 3D nested time cycle geometry. There are two ways an argument evolves. First, increasing the length of the flute Second, editing the position or the number of holes in the flute, global change means keep the weight between the arguments same, only change the perimeter of the time cycle. Second, editing the holes means changing the geometric shape itself.

(vi) A truth is not a statement but a geometric shape, the motif of argument is to make the geometry more symmetric and integrating the geometries into one singular geometry at the highest level. Every single set of arguments form a geometric shape and a complex pattern of composition of basic geometries should form to compose a complete argument, the shape would be symmetric and follow the rules of geometries.

(vii) A logical argument cannot be stated without suggesting the angular orientation or location of an observer on the sphere, i.e. perspective of an observer sets the truth: No logical argument could stand alone, isolated, it needs a support, even though a fractal arrangement argues that at the top there should be one argument, but even that would require at least three perspectives, one from the arguments below that makes it, one from above or the argument it constructs with others, and one the perspective of an observer. A true argument does not have an idiom or universal truth, no assumption, all assumptions are environment and context dependent. There is never a truth or a false statement.

(viii) “Bing” does not contain an information but a “silence” does: Evolution of dynamic and geometric phase is everything, amplitude, mass, space all are illusion, only time is real. Time does not have any direction, time does not flow, it adjusts relative positions of “bings” on its surface thats why past present future like perceptions appear. There is only “phase” in the universe, dynamic and geometric phases. This is the philosophical foundation of nonsensical arguments.

(ix) Expansion of 12 tune Raga is the way to expand an argument. We cannot add them one after another, place simultaneously, considering all as truth like Quantum, then, we take always a circle of 12 argument cycles and then expand them, just like Indian classical Raga and our prime number theory. An argument or question answer couplet cycles perpetually making it perfect. The rule morphing comparison is the route to auto-correct an argument.

(x) Morphing with the universal geometries is a drive for the argument, there are 10 ways of making an argument in the non-argumentative world. Every natural event has a geometric arrangement of argument and the practice or game of argument is to morph with the nature’s geometrical arrangement of argument. How to form an argument in the world of nonsensical argument: 1. Negative approach (neti-neti): Start with everything as wrong and always try to negate everything that is concluded. 2. On the reality sphere change the point of an observer or change perspective of an observer and repeat the cycle. 3. The philosophy of infinite series e and Pi and Phi regulates how integral systems evolve, an argument follows this relation of linearity, more you repeat, closer to truth. 4. Breathing of Brahma, a periodic oscillation in the form of an argument construction, 5. Tear drop and ellipsoid fusion, philosophy of a pair of poles division from a single pole 6. The swastika route of arguments, outflow of arguments reverses the orientation of the spin. 7. The Om route of arguments (three imaginary worlds) 8. 1=0=1…What that is a point is nothing and everything at the same time, full and hollow are the same thing, we can enter and see eight types of times operating simultaneously (8 levels of consciousness, Yogasutra), and 12 layers one inside another. 9. The argument of Biratapurusa and Varnasram post Hiranyagarva: Viratapurusha has sensory and basic organ systems, these are lists how a structure of an argument to be framed. 10. The argument of Brahman or universal resonance: All arguments should sync each other, march towards sync of millions of arguments come from putting them inside a singular cavities and arrange them fractally.

(xi) The universal geometric relationship evolved in the number system is emergent non repeating. However, that regulates the evolution of argument and self-assembly & disassembly of QA doublets. An argument always have one less variable than the fixed truth and total number of variable and truth should compose like our number system metric, hence the network of argument could be constructed. If there is a little change in the most static argument all nested arguments would change simultaneously, this is a result of the fact that “everything is connected to everything” or “universe is a frequency fractal and consciousness is its music”.

(xii) There are 10 limits of nonsense arguments that are actually responsible for making sense: 1. One could enter inside an argument 12 times to generate 12 fundamentally different dimensions, however, if we enter more, then the relevance to the first argument becomes faint. We need to change the starting argument point regularly to sustain relevance in the nested fractal like argument practice. 2. An argument is a flute of Krishna, it nests packets of quantum oscillations in slower rhythms (beating), 3. Only 12 prime made wheels make elementary wheels of nested arguments. 4. A true argument is one that has a pair of simultaneous truths (12 triplets). 5. 10^11 truths or pattern of 12 primes (up to 37) is the limit of an argument. 6. There is a 64 matrix of teardrop to ellipsoid transition. 7. Triplet of triplet fractal forms the boundary of any information content. 8. Phase is the only variable, or relative position with respect to time. 9. Only 10 dimensions are feasible, we derive this from the number system, this striking result comes from the gravity and quantum mechanics, however, in our formulations too, more than 10 dimensions are not possible. 10.

Our world of non-sensical arguments suggests that a doublet or binary logic could be right for the 50% of the time, hence, our contribution of nonsensical argument is to complete the world of knowledge that were left out i.e. 50%, here we try to see the universe of triplets pentate to a couplet of 37 arguments putting together that makes sense.

 

One comment on “Arguing illogically would really make a sense: But how to make a nonsense argument?

  • Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s

    %d bloggers like this: