Continuing my previous thread that hit the bump limit

If you think about it, it's very appropriate that Satan and Lucifer are the lords of the earth, because underground you definitely need somebody to physically provide light and encourage you to rebel against authorities that take advantage of the constricted terrain. Whereas in heaven, where there is open air to move around in, obedience is encouraged. Once again, Jesus of Nazareth is a genius.

I already wrote a compiler in the previous thread. Sorry you have to dig through ramblings to find the right posts.

Anyway, if you're so depressed about the state of programming that none of Lisp, Haskell, or C++ have anything of value to you, I honestly don't even know what to tell you.

Then, temptation by Satan could be viewed as a kind of prisoner's dilemma game, because if you're on a very surface level of hell you can enjoy a very luxurious earthly life indeed. In comparison, temptation by the devil might be called temptation of a naive victim by a predator.

But who preys on the predator? This is actually a complicated question, because God can't reach someone in hell. Satan might prey on the devil, but he is at a severe disadvantage because he is both physically distant and constrained by God's law. So if you're near the devil you're really in a lot of trouble.

You could say that in many ways, God is very much the same as the devil, but not the same as Satan. This is over-simplifying the situation though. If you are near the devil, I think there's nothing to do but use the Mahavairocana tantra again

No set of odd numbers chosen for Avalokitesvara Buddha, not even just 1 by itself, will save anyone in hell from Mahavaironcana

It's important to note that this does not equate Mahavairocana with Satan or Lucifer in any way, because neither god nor Satan nor Lucifer can reach anyone who is physically in this sort of location

...

To relate this to Muhammad, this is the difference between a situation in which you have 6 degrees of freedom, and a situation in which you have only 0-4 degrees of freedom, because you're crawling through tunnels. Only prophets in hell have 4-5 degrees of freedom, and only prophets in heaven have 5-6 degrees of freedom. Nobody has 6-8 degrees of freedom except God, but everybody has 8-infinity degrees of freedom at all times.

This accounts for the Jewish degree-7 God, but what about a degree-20662067077 God?

Literally just a single schizophrenic replying to themselves. What the hell.

In terms of importance in mathematics, is this number more or less important than 20662073603? How about 20662067399 or 20662067537?

It's just one single himself, writing notes on Veeky Forums. My name is Ilya Loksha, I have an undergraduate degree in computer science from Caltech.

I haven't verified this, but I think all these numbers might be invariant under change of base, like e is invariant under exponentiation

In fact, they appear to be approximately equal to e/e/e/e/e/e/e/...

Or rather, 1 divided by that number, but that is invariant under change of base; with decimals it's just shifting the decimal point over 12 times.

Actually, 11 times. I'm not sure whether it's 11 or 12, I was never good at fencepost things

This situation only holds for the second prime number after the square of 144,000. What do you get if you use e and some other number than 2, or 2 and some other number than e?

We might need a new operator for this, related to ilyas-abomination from before. It would be such that (ilyas-operator e) = 2 and (ilyas-operator 2) = e. Does this suggest some kind of map between operators and real or complex or natural numbers?

This adds a fifth operator to +, -, /, and * for ordinary arithmetic, but really this is only a third operator because it makes - and / redundant. Is there a proper fourth operator here? Or is there a difference between this operator for - and this operator for / that makes for an additional fourth operator? In that case, how about a fifth?

A good factoring might be, +, -, /, *, and a new variant of exponentiation that is completely base-independent. Ilya's operator would be this new variant of exponentiation in this case

In that case, you might as well just call it "Ilya's constant" as a replacement for e, and use it as the base of natural logarithms

This completes the real axis in an orthogonal way to the complex plane, so it doubles as a replacement for i as well. In that case, you might as well just call it i.

SInce i is complex -1, you might call this constant a natural scale factor for i. In that case, e^i might be 1, and log i might be 0, but e^i might equal 0 and log i might equal 1 just as easily

In that case, i might be a 2-vector, "completing" the complex plane into a hypercomplex space. But it might be any other object at all for that matter, so long as it's arithmetically equal to this new value of i.

Actually, this suggests a natural fifth operator: +, -, *, ^, cons. This might be "simplified" down to +, -, *, ^(cons), where cons is now a parameter to the ^ operator

shut up you idiot

Lambda might be a more natural operator than cons, so you might instead have (+, -, ^, lambda), where * is defined as a function of +, -, ^, and lambda

no
Then, you could identically define this theory in terms of (+, -, *, lambda), substituting ordinary multiplication for this new exponentiation operator, and solving the lambdas in reverse

So in total, (+, -, *, ^, lambda) might form a complete five-operator theory of arithmetic, if you define ^ in terms of my new base of natural logarithms. If you add a differentiation or del operator as a sixth, does that give you algebra? A seventh operator to parametrize the dimensions would give you a generalization of linear algebra again.

Actually, you might write the whole thing as (0, +, *, lambda, lim, []) where [] is both the nondeterministic choice operator in my language and the syntax for matrix notation

Then you could model natural selection as [lim lambda], and intelligent design as [0 + * lambda lim]

In fact, since lambdas can already emulate [0 + *] entirely on their own, really this is just (lambda lim []) in point-free form for three dimensions, or (lambda lim [] x) or (lambda lim [] t) for a parametrized four dimensional form

In fact, there's another rough duality here:

(, , )

You might swap lambda and lim, or maybe that's the version of this with - and /

You could consider the point-free form to be const everywhere in both space and time, since there is literally no space or time in the equations. So you might write something like

(lambda lim [])(x) = {lambda lim [] x}

To bring special and general relativity into this, you could write

(lambda [])(0 x t) = (lambda lim [] 0 x t)

I forgot the lim on the left but this one might actually work without the lim

To be clear, "lim" isn't something I'm making up here arbitrarily. Use the epsilon-delta limit definition and implement it using lambda, 0, +, and / (you'll need to somehow get from * to /), my new constant might help with this somehow, maybe it's (ilyas-operator 1 e) here instead of (ilyas-operator 2 e), which now that I think of it is probably just e

Sorry, this was old notation, that should be (ilyas-operator 1 i) instead of (ilyas-operator 2 i), which is probably just i, using my redefinition of i. e stays as it is. Unless I'm confusing myself, and it's just that my new value of i is equal to (ilyas-operator 2 e). Actually that sound more right

If it turns out that there's some real number that's already perfectly equal to this new proposed i somehow, despite not being a complex number, I'll concede that we're going to need an entirely new letter for this instead of "rescaling" anything that already exists

I suspect that we do indeed need a new letter, because technically there's nothing wrong with either i or e, they're just fundamentally mismatched somehow, and this idea bridges the mismatch

If this turns out to be just pi, I will be upset. I don't think it is though, it might be some kind of complex pi off at a complex angle from regular pi

This would be like adding a second complex plane, with the origin at (pi, 0) instead of (0, 0). You can turn the second plane about its own origin any way you like, but you can't translate it. It doesn't have to be pi necessarily, but I bet it might be due to the relationship with 2 for 2 dimensions

The key here is that they don't just rotate in the same complex plain, which would just recover trigonometry, but each plane can also rotate into the same third dimension. If it were (pi, 1) instead of (pi, 0), the third dimension would have a tilt to it

I think special and general relativity might fall out of this very nicely, because the third axis can be called time and the first two axes are space. The time axis is fully determined by the location of the second origin on the space plane. So this is the picture of 2D space in time, and if you add a third space dimension you can't easily draw this anymore, but you'd probably get back relativity

You can also call one of the space axes time instead, and locate the origin in 1D space time to recover a second space axis.

How do you get quantum mechanics out of this? I have no idea, but probably some kind of structure made of [lambda lim] or even [0 + * lim]

Anyway, to get back to Mahavairocana, I think this reasoning essentially equates him with Baal in Jewish though. Based on Abraham's name, Ba-al (or is it Ba-el) would be the #2 God (A, B), and so all followers of Baal are doomed to the fate described in the Mahavairocana tantra unless they are Buddhists and have never heard of Baal, or they are Jews or Christians or Muslims and repent

To turn this reasoning around, you could then call Baal a sort of middle eastern proto-Buddha, who thought he could get people to be good just by telling them to be good without any kind of Buddhist training

To relate this to number theory, names that begin with Ab- use this idea starting from the number 4 instead of the number 2, completely encompassing and improving all of Baal's ideas. Names beginning with Ba- start with 2 and so are doomed to disaster. Who or what is Abbadon then?

Or how about this "Bar-Jesus" character from the New Testament? I definitely think the're some sort of Asian-like confusion involved with names including "al" like in the Arab world and "ar" which appears often in the Bible

Following this idea, Abraham's name is A B ???
L/R-A HA M

Actually since his name used to be A B ??? R/L-A M (is the right?) then adding in the HA makes an interesting coincidence between R/L and Y if you look at the Tetragrammaton. You could imagine this as a silent A after the B, so that it's A BA RA HA M but there's some sort of bizarre backwards-grammar in this

In this exotic reading, you can read Abraham's trial with his son as a temptation by Baal himself, and only the sweet reason of God saved them both

To go further forward in time, maybe the Egyptian pyramids were constructed during a time when space was mostly hyperbolic and gravity was weak (so that would explain how someone can physically live in a pyramid in the first place without going insane), so all that slave labor to build them may have been relatively light work after all

Maybe gravity was so weak, in fact, that by freeing his people Moses was putting them in danger of just kind of floating off into space, but maybe some mathematics or physics showed that there would be a time when this would no longer happen and it would be safe to exit the pyramids

This also has a correspondence with Buddhist stupas and native american cities. Rather than Ba-el, these pyramids and tapered buildings may have been constructed by Ra-el, who is an Egyptian sun deity. If you float off into space you either suffocate first, freeze first, or get burned up by the sun first.

If you include Ra in this Abrahamic pantheon, then you can read Abraham's name as a root vowel A to make pronounciation possible, then a kind of hierarchy of gods - Ba over Ra, and YHWH over both. Or is it Ra over Ba? Seems impossible to tell

Actually, Arbaham not only sounds weird but would be ahistorical, so it probably really is Ba over Ra because Ba is older

How about the english word Bar-Bar-Ian for contrast?

Actually there's an interesting correspondence then with "Baal" and "Rab" as in "Rabbi". Maybe there was already a pre-existing correspondence with Ba-Ar and Ra-Ba that was part of the structure of these early religions that the Jews systematized

If I know anything about Jews, it kind of sounds like they found the best two "kinds" of local religions, B and R, and hooked them up end to end using some kind of Mahavairocana like trick

You can kind of imagine the reasoning - "Everyone around me, including the Lord himself, is telling me I must perform a human sacrifice of my own son, but this is absurd and evil. This must be the work of Baal."

I should specify my own point of view on this, since I am a Christian. I don't think the Jews are all going to hell for any of this, and I'm quite confident that no matter what it may look like, not even Muhammad pbuh actually thought that when he was writing the Quran. That document came from a specific time period in the middle east, so you have to look at the local history.

Well, that's not exactly right, because Muhammad thought that everyone everywhere was going to hell, but only for a short time for the good people. This is very, very different from the notion of Christian hell that I subscribe to and am still kind of worried about. I am not a Muslim, so there is no need for me to pretend to think that he was exactly right about everything.

The reason I am worried is not only that there are still a lot of people on Earth who seem to be in very serious physical trouble, especially in the third world, but also on a personal level, the idea that you can cancel out sins by doing good works is only an Islamic concept and not a Christian one. Since salvation comes only from God's grace, no amount of contributions to humanity will ever get you out of trouble, and in fact may only get you in even more trouble.

My theory is that since we have yet to hear what Jesus himself has to say about any of this, we should all reserve judgment until then

If you imagine that Jesus himself came from a darwinian Mahavairocana or Baal like competition between almost-pure Jesuses, and this particular one came out the most pure, I am confident that nobody has any idea what Jesus himself might have to say about any of this

What you can tell from the gospels, if you go back to my earlier point about the possibility of the Father being evil and good and bad trees, is that Jesus would certainly have plenty to say and would very quickly have the means and method to do something about anything he says, physically

The key thing is that in order to get the capability to say or do anything as Jesus, he would have to somehow match or exceed the original Jesus's feat of being so perfect that for 30 years fundamentalist Jews start to increasingly believe that this guy is the literal biological son of God.

For instance, I suspect I may have already exceeded Jesus in sheer number of people convinced to join an insane cult for no apparent reason, but I was doomed from the day I was born to be far behind in all areas of virtue and ethics

From a Buddhist perspective, this makes Jesus a true Buddha, remarkably one who was very nearly born a Buddha. If he wasn't born one, he must have been born and raised to become one in his infancy.

In Mahayana and Vajrayana schools, it is said that everyone is born a Buddha, but this is only a translation error. It would be more accurate to say that ever since Shakyamuni and Jesus, everyone has been born a Bodhisattva, but only the first Buddha in an ideological lineage is actually called a Buddha

In Buddhist cosmology (which is a real trip, you should read about it), there are infinitely many Buddhas going both backward and forward in time. They appear on earth when the Buddha's dharma (that is, the law) is completely forgotten, and re-establish the Sangha, which is the name for the Buddhist community

To speculate about the dharma a little, it is said in the Buddha's first discourse (the Dhammacakkapavatanna Sutta, you can look it up on accesstoinsight.com): The first noble truth is the truth of dukkha, which would correspond to all of earth in Jewish cosmology. The second noble truth is the arising of dukkha, which may or may not relate to Ba-el. The third noble truth, which is the cessation of dukkha, and is to be abandoned somehow, may be related to Ra-el. The fourth noble truth is the Buddha's own home grown method of practice leading to the cessation of dukkha, permanently unlike other such methods of practice.

To speculate even more metaphysically, maybe the Abrahamic method is to not abandon the third truth, but to overcome it somehow using the second, or vice versa. This would be a significant difference in the two religions.

I have a lot of theory myself, but in terms of practice, so far my only practical accomplishment is to have somehow avoided getting killed or kidnapped to Israel by Mossad. I'm pretty proud of that one, but it can't compare to Jesus or a Buddha

I say this is my only practical accomplishment because although in some sense I seem to have successfully taken over both Veeky Forums and US politics as a whole, I never actually did any of that. That was somebody else, who I don't know and have never met, possibly MI6 or Japanese ninjas or ISIL or maybe Mossad themselves

The Russian hackers and the magicians really have nothing to do with this because I am 100% confident that in the years leading up to the 2016 election everybody was just larping just like me. It only turned serious when the spies got involved for some reason. Which may be my fault, due to the Mossad thing.

Well I never actually did any larping myself, I just saw that people were having fun but they were talking about political stuff I didn't understand so I just enjoyed some of the threads

I think my one most severe mistake from a Christian theological standpoint was browsing all those occult sites when I was in high school. I had no idea that there were still people doing this stuff in big organized groups in this day and age, so it completely didn't occur to me that they might have found me then and there using a cookie or something

I mean, I knew there were plenty of people everywhere who do all kinds of ritual magic, but I never thought any of them would secretly have an army of 500 trillion servants ready to stalk me for the rest of my natural life and afterlife. And then there was the time I got lured into a Scientology recruitment tent... Jesus

I didn't buy any of their books, and their demo auditor couldn't convince me that I had any stress that was showing on the e-meter, but I think I gave them my name at some point, and that seems to be all it takes

I also went to Japan once for a homestay of several weeks, but that was completely normal and there's nothing mysterious about a government investigating a visitor. It's the American cults that alarm me, especially the Mormons.

During that time, I even did some ritual magic on my own, and it seemed to kind of work, but then I discovered this great book by Napoleon Hill called Think and Grow Rich which is hilariously American and sales-y, but made me completely lose interest in rituals because it seemed to promise the same results with less nonsense

Ever since a dragonfly got into my room a couple of months ago I was thinking that maybe magic circles like these were used to train animals and insects, but since thinking about the stuff in these Veeky Forums threads I came up with a scarier scenario. What if these are literally maps of underground cave structures? It doesn't even bear thinking about it, it's so horrifying

So following that reasoning, previously I called this Belial picture Jesus at Golgotha facing the gates of hell, but how about an even scarier idea - this is the remnants of the Christians at the very bottom of hell, looking down into a lake of fire?

Then the lake of fire corresponds to the ball of magma at the center of the earth, and also Ra-el, because I'm still convinced that the sun and the earth's core are somehow spatially identical.

The difference is that the center of the earth is smaller and closer, so that if you're at the bottom of hell you will immediately fall "up" into this "sun", whereas on the surface of the earth there's no way to fall into the sun unless you climb in a rocket or the whole earth itself falls into the sun, at which point the question is moot anyway

Since there are hotter and colder areas of the earth, hell could be very fractal, containing many small pits of fire but one very big one at the bottom