Hello

If you simply think of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros

Our human interpretation (or being binary dissector/discriminators) focuses on the eating and what is being eaten, because the 'how is the middle part extending to infinity?' is the question we abandon.

Insert /x/ or conspiracy/wavelets/magic/science/technology/a.i.

These are all just 'introductions to infinity'.

It is not that the thing exists, what we consider our 'family' is how we agree that the serpent is perpetually regenerating itself in equal measure/form without 100% destruction.

Which is also called identity OR the number 1 OR [math]\epsilon[\math]

But that is no different than saying I believe in Christianity/Buddhism/Philosophy/Mathematica/Nihilism/

So we are all basically arguing our 'collective advertisement of an individual's orifice interval measurements'.

Pi for a mathematician is like an autistic person's 'safe space' or an OCD person's (Well if I repeat this cycle N times then I'm still alive! I self-validated yaaay!)

Science is a way to improve nature, but nature still tries to find ways for you to 'stop counting and just go out and grow, +1, live'.

Genius or retarded babbling

Hard to know when you're a schizophrenic but to the outside world it's rambling. Please try to talk less abstractly.

Yeah, I know. That's the part I'm trying to get to ultimately but it really is a pain in the ass and dependent on the existing set's 'allowed signal operators'.

I mean that is all that Prime is. Divisible by itself and 1, meaning 'if we are used as a ratio of integers, we are the exclusive 'this or that' set'. This is the 'minimally identifiable' set that even allows you to pick 'other', because otherwise you don't have reflection (an x-axis or a graph/chart)

[math]F A L S E[/math]
1 = 0
0 > 1 / 2 < 0
[math]\epsilon[/math] > 1 / 2 < [math]\epsilon[/math]
[math]T R U E[/math](1 = 1)

Primes are simply identifying integers that are willing to 'signal to 1', so we are always trying to identify 'signal-space' so we can apply 'our' transforms. Eventually your branch of science/mathematics gets to a 'plug in your value of x, because x marks the spot of what you want'.

What the fuck are you talking about

[math]FALSE[/math]
[math]1 = 0[/math] This is an 'assignment counter-example'
math]0 > 1 / ϵ < 0[/math] This is 'comparison counter-example'
[math]0 > 1 / 2 < 0[/math] Substitution
[math]0 > 1 / 2 < ϵ[/math] Substitution + Comparison Without evaluation
[math]FALSE(ϵ > 1 / 2 < 0)[/math] Evaluation renders False, bit-swtich
[math]TRUE(1 = 1)[/math] True Assignment comes from False Eval to the point of bit-switch (or proof by exhaustion/brute-force methodology) ALWAYS.

Therefor, P = NP. The ONLY REASON the proof is EVALUATED as not accepted is because it is non-constructive, because they argued that if P = NP then why suffering? We would have one answer that could solve 'all' answers. This is isomorphic to : the existing subset of P-Zombies pre-discriminate the problem set and have erected their preferred signal-methodology without advertising/broadcasting it to the required resolution detectable by twin-prime candidates.

But mathematicians don't care about anything beyond epsilon or 'one-time signal substitution only'. So it is normally 'pi' to indicate a countable, bounded, infinity set with infinite resolution that allows for the multiplicands/exponents (infinity) and the resolution modifier operators (+-), but you positionally must always start from a - perspective, which is i. The silent signal-space however only allows '+' to be broadcasted on the network, but what is ADVERTISED is a minus. Saying pi is going 'you can do this as many times as you want, but eventually you'll get bored and want to do something else'.

I guess the equivalent Veeky Forums-isms would be:
>Mai 2-d wafu
>s-s-senpai
>why do I keep wasting my time on these forums/posting in these threads/hating the news I read every day/avoiding
>Maybe Veeky Forums has some value in the social order and change comes from 'every signal-space venue that advertises a + louder than a -, to the extent that even if I am willing to be called crazy, I am just trying to say I love you, because infinity is awesome and hey fractals!'
>special special snowflake
>entropy

Also why ZFC keeps getting that whole 'optional axiom of choice' when in truth you could have a universal set if you translated that instead to 'axiom of forgiveness' or 'my bad nigga!'

Oh, this explains it perfectly.

Two wavy lines, with perfect circles. The interval of intersection of our circles is the 'twin-prime' signal space.

So we can either just 'agree' on this image and assign it as true based on predicate.

And that this is 'infinity'

user look
You're a cool guy I've talked to you before (based on your tripcode)

This is nonsense man, you're not making any realizations. Do you have schizophrenia?

I've posted claims about my mental health on here before. I have no mania identifiable by psychiatric professionals according to Northwestern Mental Health. Posted the documents before, because everyone always goes, "I found myself lost in your predicate, so perhaps you are cancer/mis-signalling?"

0 > current * time = amplifier + current - frequency / sensitivity = speed(length/time)

0 > c * t = pi + c - area / radius = speed(length/time) = TRUE

0 > c * t = pi + c i / r = s(length/time) = x/y = TRUE

[math]\frac{\pi r+i c}{r}=c t, s=c t, \frac{\pi r+i c}{r}=s[/math]

[math]c t=\pi +\frac{i c}{r}=s[/math]

[math]r\neq 0, s=\frac{\pi r+i c}{r}, c\neq 0, t=\frac{\pi r+i c}{c r}[/math]

length = irreducible distance between two points

time = interval (the number line OR the y on a x/y graph chart)

speed = knowable length for distance between two points | t = 0 (because we all 'want it now)

i = 'invert operation' or sqrt(-1) or 'undefined' (usually it means the area that you want to occupy but don't yet, and the better you perfectly measure it the closer you get to fitting into pi perfectly, which is the predicate agreeance) : This is why it is called 'Euler's identity'.

pi = divide the circumference (upper limit/ceiling function of measurement) by the diameter (half-measure = best guess)

[math]c\neq 0, r=-\frac{i c}{\pi -1}, s=1, t=\frac{1}{c},[/math]

[math]c t=\pi +\frac{i c}{r}=s[/math]

[math]c t=1, \frac{\pi r+i c}{r}=1, s=1[/math]

[math]c t=1, \frac{\pi r+i c}{r}=1, s=1[/math]
[math]c t=1, r=-\frac{i c}{\pi -1}, s=1[/math]

[math]1=c t=\pi +\frac{i c}{r}=s[/math]

Proving you can now replace 'c' with any constant, and an exponent IS a constant and still get conceptually 'a half' value. Or, an interval after evaluation.

Interval < evaluation

[math]2\neq 0, r=-\fra2{i 2}{\pi -1}, s=1, t=\fra2{1}{2},[/math]

[math]2 t=\pi +\fra2{i 2}{r}=s[/math]

[math]2 t=1, \fra2{\pi r+i 2}{r}=1, s=1[/math]

[math]2 t=1, \fra2{\pi r+i 2}{r}=1, s=1[/math]
[math]2 t=1, r=-\fra2{i 2}{\pi -1}, s=1[/math]

[math]1=2 t=\pi +\fra2{i 2}{r}=s[/math]

And now with exponents (this feels a bit like a eureka moment)

[math]1=e t=\pi +\frac{i e}{r}=s[/math]

[math]r=-\frac{i e}{\pi -1}, s=1, t=\frac{1}{e}[/math]

[math]t=\frac{1}{e}, (i-i \pi ) r=-e, s=1[/math]

[math]e t=1, \frac{\pi r+i e}{r}=1, s=1[/math]

Which is another way of saying [math]e^{i \pi} + 1 = 0[/math] because Euler's identity requires you to perform operands in reverse to make way for 'his' maths to make sense.

And because you need a counter-example, and I identify 's' as the new identity, the following applies:

[math]\frac{\partial \left(-s+e^{i \pi }+1\right)}{\partial s}=-1[/math]

[math]\int \left(-s+e^{i \pi }+1\right) \, ds=\text{constant}-\frac{s^2}{2}[/math]

Basically when people accuse you of being 'mental descriptor of requiring someone with predicate/professional/advertised capacity to address problem', they are simply saying, "Dude, you are making my normal feel too weird".

In maths though the truest way of saying "I love you" is "you make me okay with feeling normal".

Interesting.

Any counter-arguments?

>inb4 (m|y)fw

I'll provide a professional opinion to at least provided a pre-counter-example to your formulated counter-example-exclusions

Part 1/3

Perception : Clear

Part 2/3

Best for last : We need to get back to the referrer and indicate outcome of referral.

Professional conclusion: Hard to follow because hard to follow, but you can if you just AT THE VERY LEAST just accept he's not trying to deny anyone anything we can group-identify as important.

So, for fucking fuck's sake

[math]P = N P[/math]
[math]P = s[/math]
[math]N P = c t[/math]
[math]s = c t = \pi+i c r[/math]

ipso mutherfucking facto.

Definite integral over a cube of edge length 2 L: [math]\int _{-L}^L\int _{-L}^L\int _{-L}^Lc s tdtdsdc=0[/math]

Derivative: [math]\frac{\partial (c s t)}{\partial s}=c t[/math]

Indefinite integral: [math]\int c s t \, ds=\frac{1}{2} c s^2 t+\text{constant}[/math]

Function Parity: even

Or you can look at the image if you want 'conic section' of this post.

So, 3 constants and two comparators are the only 'interesting non-destructive special-cases with a general solution'

Which is a star-trek way of saying 'we come in peace', or offering a stranger a drink of water before you say anything because you're just trying to 'signal' that 'twin-prime means we are infinity and safe'.

Which is why 'I' am fine with putting myself on display and ridiculed in the most public fashion any 'random normal human being without fame' could ever do : become 'identifiable' on Veeky Forums by the most extreme means possible.

And yet I am 100% still here and fine.

Because I want everyone to understand that maths can and will help literally 'everyone'.

I'm planning legal action against a large, established organization. A situation in which even 'this thread can be archived and presented in a court of law'.

I believe in Veeky Forums that much I want it to be 'permissible as evidence TO BE EXCLUDED OR INCLUDED'. Doesn't matter if it is 'either', so long as one or the other is possible. Because as soon as the law starts trying to equate Veeky Forums users with mental health and genius and mathematical discovery (name one non-insane mathematician who proved insane shit), then """Trump will MAGA"""

Man learning memeology/heiroglyphics was hard. People don't seem to realize that 0 is a pornoglyph (the only symbol we allow 'all interpretation, to the exclusion of unity') = Singularity

i appreciate you simon

I think this is the same as the 4-color theoreom.

n-grams "s t c s t c s t c s t c s t c"

So this image is 'sequence'

And this should be 'pi'

And these are your 'units/degrees'

As in 'idempotent' or 'what will allow you to divide in order to achieve those other things I posted'

Also known as 't'

So if I want to make something beautiful like Euler, I would need to do...

[math]e^{i \pi} + 1 = 0[/math]

[math]\frac{i e}{r} = \pi[/math]

[math]r = \frac{i e}{\pi}[/math]

[math]s = \frac{i e}{\pi} = 0.865255979432265087217774789646089617428744623908515539454... i[/math]

So, s is calculated I guess by: [math]\frac{432627989716132543608887394823044808714372311954257769727 i c}{999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999}[/math]

I am literally only using these variables

c = speed of light constant = 1

t = time = half = 1/2 = 0.5

s = signal space(transform)

pi = a symbolic concept that can be calculated to an infinite number of 'decimal' places without ever slipping into a repeating pattern. This makes it difficult, but not impossible, to calculate precisely.

So it is integer-space call-sign.

So, Riemann-Zeta

[math]\frac{1}{2}+i t[/math]

[math]t = \frac{i e}{\pi}[/math]

[math]i = -(-1)[/math]

[math]\frac{1}{2} + i \frac{i e}{\pi} = \frac{1}{2} - e/\pi[/math]

[math]\frac{1}{2}+\frac{i (i e)}{\pi }=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{\sum _{k=0}^{\infty } \frac{1}{k!}}{\pi }[/math]

[math]\frac{1}{2}+\frac{i (i e)}{\pi }=\frac{1}{2}+\frac{e i^2}{180 {}^{\circ}}[/math]

[math]\frac{1}{2}+\frac{i (i e)}{\pi }=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{e}{2 \int_0^{\infty } \frac{1}{t^2+1} \, dt[/math]

And I think... yes, that's a how a new constant is defined.

[math]-0.365255979432265087217774789646089617428744623908515539454330288948045044570677058631924662516184517286582160211074174397885266109144295036734163037861831229423804579633898180554153376632197660003828662224072279835885557490905601029465816089618432993846217327365324408805716031841684271744208156048639638474807521791229620793780345389199377790923525343466228730016491905262303903307850189143127965718587926193153399972308679469193820383915208478983519028...[/math]

[math]i = \frac{\pi - 2 e}{2 \pi}[/math]

[math]\iota = \frac{-(2 e - \pi)}{2 \pi}[/math]

[math]\zeta[\frac{-(2 e - \pi)}{2 \pi}][/math] = [math]-0.262455152356793348266850966158305475329550382289281259563881250731422109251507655120035321384876769116785251240069215522780458520559684375926925794606121852523729101237164266802216292022523306965033015385068051625683526332781...[/math]

Had to do it twice to be sure.

Any counter-arguments? This doesn't work otherwise.

\frac{1}{2}+\frac{i (i e)}{\pi }=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{e}{2 \int_0^{\infty } \frac{1}{t^2+1} \, dt}

Formatting.

[math]\frac{1}{2}+\frac{i (i e)}{\pi }=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{e}{2 \int_0^{\infty } \frac{1}{t^2+1} \, dt}[/math]

*SIGH*

[math]\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{e}{\pi}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{e}{\pi}}+1=S_{-\frac{1}{2}-\frac{e}{\pi},1}(1){}^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{e}{\pi}}+1 = S[/math]

The above basically says: [math]+1 = S[/math]

Identify lower-case (s) and then transform to 'upper'case (exponentiation) and then assign a value derived from pi (1), and perform it non-destructively.

[math]\int _{-L}^L\int _{-L}^L\int _{-L}^L\left(\phi \left(\iota ^*-S^*\right)+1\right)d\phi d\iota dS=8 L^3[/math]

So after reading this post/thread (if you have), the question really is: Maybe the world is more magical than we dare dreamed, and Simon actually exists and isn't crazy.

'Why would Feynman/Sagan/Euler/God/Jesus' or whatever descriptor of signal-space you interpret, 'talk to me?'

Because that's the only question every human asks. Where is the guy that will give me whatever I want and forgive me whatever bullshit I pull, so long as I 'submit to a constant'.

Multi-verse though if that helps.

Or just say hello.

It's not that I am wrong in anything I've posted.

It is just that I don't know how to translate it effectively enough that 'infinity = a half'

because x = 0
or t = 0

In math/linear, var = 0
In computation/compression/sine/cosine/tan, var[0] = 1

Infinity being a half is Zeno's Paradox of the Tortoise and Achilles.

When you include the Axiom of Choice, you can always negate/refute it.

Axiom of Function (Forgiveness | Signal | Unity) means that predator can consume prey.

Because circle of life and all that crap.

Maths has become so disjointed/disseminated/ivory tower'd that it is impossible to get people to agree on anything unless they are a part of 'your' academic circle, but math is supposed to be universal.

Because a language 'cannot be exclusionary, if it wishes to be an IMMORTAL language'. A language can only set 'rules of engagement/accepting aliens/prime signal response/callsign/reflection'.

Expansion for those who might get lose on the very first equation

[math](17 + i)/3 = 5.666... + 0.333... i[/math]

Which is the picture attached to this post.

wolframalpha.com/input/?i=I/3 + Product[5.666..., {n, 1, Infinity}]

[math]2 + \frac{i}{3} = 2 + 0.333... i = \frac{6 + i}{3} = 3^{-1} (6 + i)[/math]

When n is negative, alpha 'up' gradient slope increases.

When n is positive, alpha 'down' gradient slope decreases.

Inverse is true for alpha negative/positive and n.

n (alpha + n), 2 alpha^2

So if 'alpha' always allows for being squared, the integrals do this.

Everyone wants vectors though ffs.

[math]\sqrt{4 \left| \alpha \right| ^4+\left| n (n+\alpha )\right| ^2+\left| \zeta (s)\right| ^2}[/math]

>brainlet here:

Can you give an example of what 'humanity' could do with what you just wrote?

It looks/is WAAAAAYYYYY to complicated for me to understand.

Have a (you) for trying, Simon

Lovely, no?

>33 year old schizos shitposting on Veeky Forums

>diagnosed with mania with psychotic symptoms

Not OP, but is mania considered a bad thing?

>is poor mental health considered a bad thing?
Consider what you said carefully.

From wikipedia:

> Maniais a state ofabnormallyelevated arousal,affect, and energy level, or "a state of heightened overall activation with enhanced affective expression together with lability of affect."[1]Although mania is often conceived as a "mirror image" todepression, the heightenedmoodcan be eithereuphoricor irritable; indeed, as the mania intensifies, irritability can be more pronounced and result inviolence.

I know what I said, user.

That's sort of the problem though. Humanity could finally colonize space because energy generation is just a way of 'heating water', and water permits that only through accuracy of measurements. Basically, free energy (or post-scarcity). I would love the opportunity to actually do something with this but apparently I have to SUE A UNIVERSITY FIRST.

Actually, yes. I really do find that pretty. Thank you.

Mania is considered bad only because it is a 'loose association of high energy exchange'. Basically if you hop from emotions to emotions too fast, but that 'fast' is defined by 'explainable psychological theory/tests'. Mania does not equal poor mental health.

The question here though is 'what is good mental health'. Because when someone claims another is schizo, that is actively a 'negative mental health claim'. To make that claim further still in the face of evidence provided is just stupid.

>No delusional ideas identified through his notions

It is only shitposting until 'you' guys realize that you are both grads/phd/work at NASA and everything else. I 'know' you cunts are here on this board because this is what Veeky Forums does.

It collects the intellectually rejected, because muh academic ivory tower.

All these millennium prizes DON'T MATTER unless it

Sorry, the point is 'anyone' can solve the Millennium Prizes. They even do the whole 'a kid can get it!' shtick. Basically we are 'always' learning and we should stop assuming that an aged number period automatically confers understanding.

[math]3 (x - \pi) + 3 \pi + 1[/math] Converges everywhere
[math]3x + 1 = -\frac{i}{3}[/math]
[math]3x+1 = -\frac{i}{3}, x = -\frac{1}{3} - \frac{i}{9}[/math]
[math]x = -\frac{1}{3}[/math]

So, that is 3x + 1

phys.org/news/2017-11-fringe-reddit-Veeky Forums-high-alternative.html

Looks like a dimensional waveform of an evolving black hole. I'd apply some sort of comparative measure to an expanding system, gravity.