To Support the Logical Society: Use Cash App Sponsorship Code: B T F S N W
The only thing I truly want people to know about me is that my articles are not regurgitations.
I have a tendency to say "we," though I work alone, I saw "we," as if humans were a collective. There are many who rehash research, and while it is useful to an extent, it gives the impression to society that all articles are rehashed. When reading comments about my definition of zero, the number of comments on Facebook which showed a screenshot of a calculator showing “undefined” or “indeterminate” was rampant; the second most popular was “whoever told you that does not know what they’re talking about.” This is how far down society has progressed. I spend 5300 to 5700 hours a year on research and learning.
I study myself and observe everything.
It is what I have enjoyed most since childhood. I learned to play hard video games by trial and error. The water temple in the Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (N64 version) is now considered the hardest puzzle of all time.
My research involves more forensics than knowledge.
I would love to help create a life where all humans are given the tools they need to reach their full potential. This can only be done by looking at the issues from many perspectives, which is what I’m experienced in doing. My background is in business development, product engineering, and software development, so those are a few areas I specialize in, but my interests are broad. I used to want to be a director as a child for movies, but as I grew older, that slowly died as I wanted to know more about the universe. The first attempt at this was writing stories and creating worlds, and by age 10 in 2003, I was introduced to 3D software by my brother. I was obsessed with it.
My Evaluation of an Infinite Number.
That occurred around the time my stepfather entered the picture. At 12, he taught me to view the world objectively and to put myself in the shoes (or perspectives) of others. This has always been something I held onto. My mother taught me about infinite amounts when I was eight years old. It did not appeal to me. She first explained to me it was an endless amount, but this concept did not immediately sink in. She then informed me it was a number with an endless number of zeroes that would never fit in a book. I had attempted to persuade her otherwise by cramming a notebook with zeroes. I had clearly misunderstood what she was trying to say. I showed her my zero-filled notebook, and she explained that infinite was so large that there was insufficient space in the universe to write it. In 2021, after finally realizing what infinite was, I defined what it was. A question that I had unconsciously been attempting to resolve for the previous two decades.
Discoveries Are Never Logical.
While mathematics and science require little imagination, I argue that imagination is required to discover and create. While OpenAI has an extremely sophisticated machine built essentially the entire knowledge of the collective internet, it is incomprehensible to new ideas. It cannot fathom the idea which is trained in its database. It is incapable of comprehending any idea that has not been decided as true within its database. It is incapable of discovering the properties of novel compounds. It can decipher a wide variety of patterns... to a point. AI possesses only knowledge. It can crossbreed knowledge, but it will never truly comprehend or interpret it.
So, when you’re trying to solve a problem, it’s easy to get lost in logical thinking. You’ll go round and round in circles — sometimes for years — before you finally grasp the concept of infinity. In this sense, the only logical approach is illogical. And is that not what science is about? Discovering the illogical ideas to be the logic? If the logic were the logic, then no advancement would ever be made. Humans would have it all figured out.
It many cases, the extremely obvious turn out to be the correct answer. It was just illogical. Humans always say, “if it was so easy, why hasn’t anyone else thought of it?” If that were the case, humans again would live in a world where there remains nothing left to be discovered.
Many individuals have stated that “a standard textbook will refute this theory.” That is the most senseless, and unscientific thing a human being could ever say. It does, however, corroborate my hypothesis that public and private education institutions impair one’s cognitive ability.
Where do we draw the line between what is true and what is not? It should be an easy question.
Albert Einstein Nor Any Human Were Geniuses nor Were They Gifted from Birth.
I do not believe in geniuses. It is a purely human construct that applies to a very limited set of activities. Humans believe other humans are born with abilities, whether cognitive or artistic. Human thought is extremely narrow-minded, so it’s unsurprising that thought stops there. When Einstein’s brain was analyzed, it was discovered that he possessed a significant advantage over the average human in areas associated with cognitive processing because the areas were greater in mass.
That is equivalent to every member of the medical and scientific communities being perplexed by the death of a bodybuilder. Imagine millions of humans with PhDs debating the origins of the bodybuilder’s muscles and concluding unanimously that the bodybuilder was obviously born with the muscle-producing gene.
You know why Einstein, and every other genius, was intelligent? Because they exercised their minds. Public education does not exercise your brain. It actually deteriorates it. Memory and recall do not make up indicators of intelligence. This is a sign of being able to copy and paste.
Humans are born with traits which allow them to develop the habits needed to enjoy doing the activities which train a particular part of the brain. I always thought Einstein was a “proper” boring guy, like all the others. It turns out he never “earned” a PhD as one would normally earn it. He earned it by releasing his papers. I have always disliked celebrity gossip because to me, that is a tremendous waste of time, and so, I always refused to learn about celebrities. Einstein was different because I found that much of the material attributed to Einstein was actually made up. I compiled the research of Einstein with another person, and I found I shared all but four of the two-hundred and nine environmental, characteristic, development, and trait that he had.
I did not speak until approximately the age of 4. I did not need to. I would only observe others and communicate without speaking. But after I started speaking, I would not shut up. Which brings me to the conclusion that the trait I was born with which allowed me to cognitively train my brain was the trait to observe others and figure out the world by those observations.
You Can Only Become a Genius in a Subject if you Enjoy It.
While there are people who can perform tasks better than you, have you ever considered the possibility that those individuals simply enjoyed the activity? I study mathematics for the sheer enjoyment of it. I use chemistry to dissolve gold and precipitate it back into a solid. I avoid activities that bore no interest to me, which is the flaw in public education. I was adamantly opposed to public education. It caused me to consider how much I despise mathematics, chemistry, physics, history, and language. Ironically, mathematics, chemistry, physics, history, and language are my areas of interest. I spent 1500 hours reconstructing Latin, during which I gained a valuable insight and knowledge of German, English, Latin, Italian, Indo-European languages, Sanskrit, Indo-Aryan, Dutch, Romanian, Spanish, Portuguese, Ecclesiastical Latin, Contemporary Latin, Ancient Latin, Classical Latin, Medieval Latin, Old English, Medieval English, Early Modern English, Ancient Greek, French, Hindi, Danish, Catalan, and Indo-Armenian. You’d be surprised at the degree to which our languages are similar. The evolution of languages is an interesting subject to study. There is a great deal that language classes do not cover. Rather than that, they spend an entire quarter reading a book. It is simply not a productive use of time.
I did not begin attending school until seventh grade, when Algebra was introduced to me. I failed my first test completely because I grew up with the resources needed to do activities that required trial and error. Aside from the physical world. My favorite video games were problem-solving/puzzles like Ocarina of Time.
They call it a puzzle, but a Rubik’s cube is not a puzzle. I despised Rubik’s cubes because I viewed them as a memory exercise rather than a cognitive ability. That is how I feel about them at the moment. I’m not sure I understood why I despised mundane puzzles as a child.
I Was Among Only the Few Able to Pass a Mathematics Test in my State Against ~78,000 Other 11th Grade Students.
Within a few months, my tests were above 90%. In grade 11, along with every 11th grader in my state, I took a newly developed computerized test. The test was eventually swept under the rug, and everyone except those who passed was required to take a paper test written quickly by teachers within the State. The State would then require in later years for students to take both a computerized test and a paper test, with the higher of the two scores being used.
The state used, or at least had, four different systems for grading students. These scores would correspond to the percentage a student receives, and the estimated number of students who fall within that range. It is a somewhat arbitrary system, but they are not technically incorrect; however, they were incorrect in associating the scores with the level of success they believed the state’s students would achieve. Thus, the 5th percentile was to be the score that denoted “exceeded expectations” and was defined as a score greater than 95%, as they believed that only 5% of students would achieve this tier.
The state expected 3,800 students to achieve a score of 95 percent or higher in the “exceeded expectations” category. Only three students advanced to this level; and I have no way of knowing for certain whether the other two students exist, as the only confirmations I received were:
1. A school district neglected to delete a section of a bubble chart where two of the bubbles were nearly touching the 95 percent line.
2. and from my counselor, who was giddy with joy to the point of shouting and spitting. A person I was aware of who did not shout or spit.
I assumed she was excited because I was failing math because I refused to do useless daily math problems. I do not think I ever opened my math book outside of school.
I did not know it was because, so few students passed the test. ~90% of all students in the state failed to meet expectations in the first round, which left a remaining percentage of 9.010042 percent for “met expectations.” The second test was significantly better, but not significantly so. The percentage of students who did not meet expectations decreased to 51% failing.
School administrations have always been a source of conflict for me. I despised the manner in which they teach students, and most school board members are pretentious and, for the lack of an appropriate word: useless.
I’ve always thought it was pointless for schools to teach memorization and not problem-solving skills.
Which is better: a computer with a lot of memory but a small processor, or a computer with no memory and a large processor? The answer is a computer with no memory and a powerful processor, as processors can still process up to 3MB of live data.