< 0116 | 0120 | 0122 >

.01

.02

.03

.04

.05

.06

.07

.08

.09

No one knows what quantum theory *IS*. That's the point. It isn't an "is".

Ronald Green

That remark is the prototypical strawman with every other fallacy in its wake that is the mayhem.

Althought both are word, the "is" re. "A 'is' B" (word-word) is anything but "A 'is'." (existence(non-word) word).

Everything, quantum or macro, is word. The error is the integration of points (word) to be qualified by its megalithic existence (to be or not: to *is*). One or two derivative orders of "dynamics" is its naively duped rationalization by endless complexification. That things "exist" in periods of time or space or anything beyond a point is "it *is*," which is the error that is the mayhem.

Quantum theory is no less (or more) word than any world. A personified universe, one engaged in action, no matter how non-teleological its self-organization is, is the ERROR. In fact it is the junkie junk (fallacy), necessarily instigated by zombie self-as-other deception and guru mental disorder (mind).

https://www.facebook.com/groups/pointi/permalink/442382433465638/

Ronald Green, Now is anything but the only point that everything is word. Now is word. History is word. Infinite spacetime is word. So is everything else. The question is, is it true to word, or is it the self-contradiction that it is not word, but that some noumenal world or God determines its "ontological" nature?

If everything is word, why bother arguing? There is no discussion because discussion is word, Pierre is word, is is word, and so is ad and infinitum, which is also word.

"The word stops here" is a good slogan for you. But slogan is word too.

Ronald Green

Argument is nothing but the synthetic antagonism that things exist.

The point is the strawman that the idea is that word exists seeps into the supposed discussion, far more insidiously than the most fervent God-faith and they are multiples (integration) stacked up against each other.

Strawman is word.

Ronald Green

_____________

No, it is not if it exists, that is exactly the point.
More exactly...

No, strawman supposedly is not word if it exists, that is exactly the point... the inanity of the agent-subject is that what it really is, is beyond word, and that insofar it is word, that bit of it is its mere representation, the mere word that represents it.

The ontological is sheer spiel.

So something that exists is not word?

Ronald Green

_____________

Existence is word as if non-word and is the self-contradiction (self-as-other deception in a myriad of combinations and orientations) that is the mayhem.

Existence is THE nonsense. It is the bullshit that is the mayhem.

so existence is not word?

Ronald Green

_____________

Everything is word, therefore existence is non-word word.

Existence is the bullshit that is the very root of the holy abyss now gone farcically sacred, the unspeakable, unknowable but nevertheless meta-anthropically integrated noumenon-universe. The difference between word and the noumenon is clear. The error is that it exists. The supposed noumenon is regression as if it is progress of the oceanic void that things are mere anthropic derivation from some megalithic integration as denial in terms of intersubjective fields of mutual transference by personal attack (like strawman and projection). It is denial of word, denial that everything is point-derivative form, that it is form, and that form is word.

Existence is self-contradiction.

The noumenon is white-light mindfulness. It is the ultimately infinite psychiatric insanity, mind.

Isn’t denial word? Or is it a non-word word?

Ronald Green

_____________

Right. Everything's a joke, and we're all with intersubjective humility and self-deprecating transference galore, the butt of the joke, the subject (of something) instead of the point. Farce is the holy void. That's the answer. Mayhem ecstasy.

Disgusting is utterly insufficient. Or creepy. Or any personal invective. Non-word word is triadic, i.e., the rationalistic logic of ontological integration: deception, fallacy and mental disorder.

Very close, but not quite. "Disgusting or creepy is insufficient," re. "existence." That everything is word needs not even be implied. That non-word word is self-deception, fallacy and mental disorder to the bottomless void-regressive extent of zombism, junkism and guru-insanity is not point-i personal. The idea that it is, is. Thad and Ronald's feelings or constitution, or anyone's (being hurt) are the point, but only "in-deed" as the error, non-word word.

Word will break through somehow, even while it is the error that it is non-word. Such how or why is sheer what, rather than how or why. Slow.

Heated or not is word, even if it is non-word. Point-i word is absolutely stressless. It is as "deep state" as x with infinite ease. No force, power or control. It is no infinitesimal integration subject to Gödel's incompleteness, or farcical paradox as the abysmal complication or metastasis, the psychiatric narcissismus that it is ontological (about the "dynamic" multidimensional orders of existence, hard to grasp). It is that everything is utterly the point that it is word.

The error of quantum space theory, for instance, is that the superfluid is not 100% frictionless if it exists. It is only that if it is word.

Infinite self-similar fractal regress does not cut it.

Okay the "argument" is that the friction is so low that it is no more than the quality we know as entropy. And that is force. Yet gravity is not a force. Yet it is, with empathetic duplicity like Roland and the "observer."

If anything exists, everything is a force. Sorry.

But it is not. It is word.