Communities and Collections

Posts

Post has attachment

Public

to the liars: fuck off, you are nothing but pathetic microbe

to those who broke my heart,fuck of,and be thankful that i still talk to you

to those to whom i made a statement because i was believing a liar,which ultimately came out as false: i apologize

to everyone else : i am a bit devastated

to those who broke my heart,fuck of,and be thankful that i still talk to you

to those to whom i made a statement because i was believing a liar,which ultimately came out as false: i apologize

to everyone else : i am a bit devastated

Add a comment...

Post has shared content

Public

"Reflections Of Zion"

Another photo from Zion National Park on our Utah National Park Trip with +Natalia Stone +roma g and the one and only, +Ricardo Liberato!

#Landscape #Photography #Clouds #Water #Reflection #Zion #Utah #NationalPark

Another photo from Zion National Park on our Utah National Park Trip with +Natalia Stone +roma g and the one and only, +Ricardo Liberato!

#Landscape #Photography #Clouds #Water #Reflection #Zion #Utah #NationalPark

Add a comment...

Post has shared content

Public

Lets see how shares from Flickr are displayed in the new g+ look!

Add a comment...

Post has shared content

Public

Day 101 of 2012,

http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_rhinos

**rhinos killed so far this year. That's***165***1.65 rhinos killed every day!****Please**help us stop the rhino genocide! Help put an end to the poaching before it's too late.**Sign and share**the petition! Please!http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_rhinos

Add a comment...

Public

I am dead in my soul . you caused this . why you did this to me is not a question any more . es lag an mir . you dont need to prove that i am fine . I am

**not**fine . now happy cookie baking, while i slowly bleed to death .Add a comment...

Public

International space-app competition: http://spaceappschallenge.org/location/shackspace . Event takes place in Stuttgart. Everyone is Encouraged to take part, and enjoy with a small registration fee.

Add a comment...

Public

so yeeeeeeeeees i successfully transcribed all my work on a particular roject to another one, changed the algorithm, and wasted three more months of life, because my GP told me that i must do it in order to avoid my pains

Add a comment...

Public

snow-white coming to my town, in a few days. Everyone knows about her..

Add a comment...

Public

***A FORMAL STUDY ON LIES***

***PART ONE***

Clarification of Symbols: P: a statement

~P: NOT P, that is opposite of P

Q: a set of statements

W: a world

a v b : union of a and b

a V' b : disjoint union of a and b

o: the null set

a ^ b: intersection of a and b

a - b: exclusion of a and b

s(P): the state of a statement

>: ordering

||: number of elements

Definitions:

False: A statement that does not agree to a test. The test can be a thought experiment, a real observation, a deduction and so on. Different branches of science employ different tests.

Truth: If a statement agrees to a test

Doubted: If a statement is NOT placed to a test

World W: A collection of statements, on which the operation s(P| P in W) is defined, which can take the value of 0 (signifying false), 1 (signifying truth), or o (doubted), which followes the axiom of totality, and the axiom of absolutism.

null set: a set containing no elementsdisjoint union: union of two sets, where the intersection between them is null

Axioms:

Axioms of absolutism: either s(P) = 0 or s(P) = 1 or s(P) = o . s(P) = 0 implies s(~P) = 1. s(P) = s(~P) can not hold. a world where this axiom holds, is an absolute world. The universe the science attempts to describe is absolute. Note QM or similar theories DOES NOT imply the world being not absolute, they set a limit on the execution of the s operation.

Axioms of totality: for all P in W, axiom of absolutism holds. such an world is an total world.

Axiom of reflexivity : s(P) = 0 and s(P*) = 1 implies P = ~P* and vice versa

Axiom of commutativity : P v P* = P* v P

Axiom of symmetry: (P implies P*) implies (P* implies P)

Axiom of antisymmetry: (P implies P*) implies ~(P* implies P)

Axiom of necessity: P > R, P v P* implies R, P* is not axiomatically o

Axiom of sufficiency: P > R , P implies R v R*, R* is not axiomatically o

Axiom of necessity and sufficiency: P > R and R > P, R* and P* is o, implies axiom of symmetry, implies (P implies R) and vice versa and (~P implies ~R) and vice versa

Axiom of total ordering: for any two P and P* in W, at least one of the following holds P>P* and P*>P. If exactly one holds, then, it is a strict total ordering. in which case, holding both would imply P = P*

Axiom of total falsification: there exists one ordering >' for which, given s(P) = 0, P>'P*>'

P**>'

P*** etc implies

P*,

P**,

P*** etc are all false.

Axiom of transitivity: A>B and B>C means A>CAxiom of Armstrong's reflexivity: if p in P , then P implies p

Axiom of augmentation: if P implies P' and P implies P'', then P implies P'P''

Axiom of falsification: P and P* (and so on)

implies P**,

then there exists R, R* and

R** (and so on) , such that R and

R* and

R*** (and so on) implies

~P**.

s(R), s(R*) and

s(R**) (and so on) are not axiomatically 0, can be experimentally zero though.

Axiom of error : a particular test can show s(P) =0 though s(P) = 1, by other tests, and vice versa. Generally accepted rule is, the test which repeats the value the most times, or the test which has more statements implying the truth of it, is the true one.

~~~~~~~~

Introduction and motivation.

A recent sequence of events in my life motivated me to write this study. This handles itself around a formal investigation of certain interpretations i did to certain statements, and certain further interpretation of the same by the others. The study attempts to find any error in the deductive logic, however, i will also investigate certain other statements occured in a different point of time. I will denote each charachter by a number. xx.P: denotes the statement P of xx

The statements

01. P: Object A has Property B, S(P) = 1, r implies P, s(r) = 1

02. P': s(R) = 1 and R implies ~P. |R| is larger than |r|

02. P'': r*

01. P*: ~P

02. P'*: ~P implies X, axiom of symmetry

01. P**: X

02. P'**:

P'* implies Y01. P*

******: Y

02. P'

*******: P

01. P*

*******: but ~P

01. P*

********: ~X? (note, this is a test, T)

02. P'

********: ~X,

r** implies ~X

deduction:

========

AXIOM OF FALSIFICATION HOLDS. FURTHER TESTS ARE VALID. T is valid

~P > X and X > ~P is axiom of symmetry

therefore axiom of necessity and sufficiency

therefore X implies ~P and vice versa

therefore ~X implies P

s(~X ) = 1 (from test)

therefore s(P) = 1

s(~P) = 0 and P>X>Y

therefore s(X) = s(Y) = 0 (complete falsification)

Y>Z

Z: s(~P ) = 1 and s(P) = 1

counters the axiom of absolutism

therefore s(Z) = 0

agrees with axiom of total falsification

Y > W

s(W) = 0, from axiom of total falsification

Definition: A Lie is a claim of s(A) = 1, where tests show s(~A) = 1. if B: A is a lie, the ~B is also a lie. if C: ~B, then ~C is a NOT lie, and so on, the statements alternatively being lie and not lie.

proof:

A is a lie (from test)

B: ~A is a lie counters test

therefore: B is a lie

therefore: ~B is NOT a lie

therefore: ~~B is a lie

ad infinitum

P, from test

~P,is therefore a lie : P_

~P_ , is also therefore a lie (definition)

(axiom of total falsification therefore holds)

therefore ~Y

P therefore ~R

r**, from test

r** implies ~r* (observation)

therefore s(r*) = 0

therefore, r* is a lietherefore R v r* v ~P v X| ~P > X or R > X or r* > X is a lie

therefore, all statements previously made by person 02 in that context is a lie

Now,

me: person 01

my

***girlfriend***: person 02

P : A Long distance relationship for me and my partner is virtual, therefore it is not doable

r : My reasons supporting P

R: her reasons supporting ~P

X: That she loves me,and wants to do the relationship

Y: That i am to turn down any other girl, and remain in the relationship with her

Z: she did not lie to me, ~P_

W: She will remain true to me, as she needs true love, and she is there to offer me true love.

r*: If there is something she doesn't like of me, she will communicate to me.

r**: she does not like T

~r*: Since she does not like T, she breaks up with me, without the said discussion

Conclusion

02 lied . All the way. Needless to say, it led to disaster. We also introduce the definition of Complete Falsehood. In science, it is generally accepted, that if the same source updates there statements, then the final statements are more valid than the previous.If the updates counter the primary assertions and, some of them are used to support the others, it is known as Complete Falsehood. Here 02 updated ~P as P, and r*

as r**, which implies

~r*,and used ~r* to imply ~X Therefore, the acceptable attributes are P v ~r*, and anything deductible from that. Hence person 02 uses complete falsehood.

Add a comment...

Wait while more posts are being loaded