So Mises was wrong in stating that there are no constant relations in economics. Instead, the constant relations are limited to those harmonics (intermediary, or externalities) that limit the consequences of causal relations.
Source: Original Site Post
-
So logic has no non-trivial value, since the function of logic outside of mathem
So logic has no non-trivial value, since the function of logic outside of mathematics – which consists of nothing but constant relations sets is merely the falsification of inconstant relations. Instead, semantics, grammar, and syntax serves to limit relations to sets of constant relations the way lie groups limit causal relations. -
So logic has no non-trivial value, since the function of logic outside of mathem
So logic has no non-trivial value, since the function of logic outside of mathematics – which consists of nothing but constant relations sets is merely the falsification of inconstant relations. Instead, semantics, grammar, and syntax serves to limit relations to sets of constant relations the way lie groups limit causal relations. -
Skepticism is nonsense, but preserving contingency is not only sensible but nece
Skepticism is nonsense, but preserving contingency is not only sensible but necessary. -
Skepticism is nonsense, but preserving contingency is not only sensible but nece
Skepticism is nonsense, but preserving contingency is not only sensible but necessary. -
Mathematics by the virtue of consisting of nothing other than positional names,
Mathematics by the virtue of consisting of nothing other than positional names, preserves constant relations, since only constant relations are expressible. In language we can engage in all sorts of association by non constant relations. By speaking in actions we speak in constant relations. It has taken me far too long to simplify it down to something that digestible. -
Mathematics by the virtue of consisting of nothing other than positional names,
Mathematics by the virtue of consisting of nothing other than positional names, preserves constant relations, since only constant relations are expressible. In language we can engage in all sorts of association by non constant relations. By speaking in actions we speak in constant relations. It has taken me far too long to simplify it down to something that digestible. -
SMALL STATES FAIL FASTER for the simple reason that they run out of credit capac
SMALL STATES FAIL FASTER for the simple reason that they run out of credit capacity faster – that’s why. -
SMALL STATES FAIL FASTER for the simple reason that they run out of credit capac
SMALL STATES FAIL FASTER for the simple reason that they run out of credit capacity faster – that’s why. -
Gpu’s And Topological Data Structures
Via Kashif Vikaas I suppose that its not common knowledge but we were doing this back in 2006, and if you’re going to store data in manifolds (topologies) of N-dimensions of relations, then you can used various pathing algorithms and even possibly N-dimensional visibility algorithms to search content far faster than any existing technology. This was our intention with Runcible’s technology. It was just too early and I realized that it was billion dollar research and development effort that I am not intellectually or emotionally of Financially or physically capable of managing without multiple nervous breakdowns. lol The problem at the time was storing data in each geometry but I think that’s teh difference between indexes and content, and that we should view geometric search engines as indexes of n-dimensional relations. If you have some vague understanding of what I’m saying here, this is why I understood that (a) actions, and (b) vitruvian semantics, grammar and syntax (metaphysics, and (c) Property in toto, provided computational commensurability in an unclosed data store. Why? Because for humans to understand anything it must be reduced to an analogy to experience, and as such human perception limits serve as a set of units of measure of all of reality.