Catch-22

[wildcat]

When we divide the agent do we divide the object?
Let's have a catch of 22.

Say 9 X 3 = 27
> 9 X 8 = T(27)
on account of (22/2) - 8 = 3

9 X 4 = 36
11 - 4 = 7
9 X 7 = T(9 X 4)
9 X 5 = T(9 X 6)
9 X 2 = T(9 X 9)

22 = T(22)
22/2 = 11 = T(11)
we need 100 - 1

Back to 9 X 3
= 27
> 99 X 3 = 297
on account of 11 - 3 = 8
hence 99 X 8 = T(99 X 3)

>9 X 4 = 36
99 X 4 = 396
11 - 4 = 7
>99 X 7 =T(99 X 4)
9 X 5 = 45
>99 X 5 = 495
11 - 5 = 6
99 X 6 = T(99 X 5)
2 + 9 = 11
>99 X 2 = T(99 X 9).

- 22 + (22/2) = - 11 etc .. :

- 22
- 11
x00
+11
+22
+33
+44
+55
+66
+77
+88
+99
110
121

14/2 = 7
99 X 7 = 693
T(693) = 396

we need an U-turn.

 

[wildcat]

- 1 + 100
(100 - 1) + 22 = 121

Differentiate X = T(X)

121 = (21 + 19 + 17 + 15 + 13 + 11 + 09 + 07 + 05 + 03 + 01 + 0)

the U-turn:

121 - 0
100 -1
81 - 4
64 - 9
49 - 16
36 - 25

99 X 7 = T(451 - 55)

check
100 = (19 + 17 + 15 + 13 + 11 + 9 + 7 + 5 + 3 + 1)

100 - 1
081 - 4
064 - 9
036 - 25

330 - 55 = 275 = 55 X 5:

99
77
55
33
11

(T1 X 55) + 22
= T(275)

 

[miss fortune]

so this goes back to the question of "is the whole a thing unto itself or a composite of it's parts?"

 

[wildcat]

Exactly. One is all we ever had. It is all there.

 

[wildcat]

The question of whatever reminds me of our earlier discussion of the interelationship of 100 and 36. In view of the dichotomy above, another lesson in basicness.

100 = T(5) X 2 =
(19 + 17) + (15 + 13 + 11 + 9 + 7 + 5 + 3) + 1
=
+19
+17
+15
+13
+11
+09
+07
+05
+03
+01

= the dichotomy of T(2) X 5

The d. of 36 = 19 + 17
The d. of T(36) = 15 + 13 + 11 + 9 + 7 + 5 + 3

T(1) = 10

100 - 36 = T(36) + 1

 

[wildcat]

Apropos we define the axiom:

100 = the number in loci.

When we illustrated the function order, the axioms were there but we did not define them.
What was the number of the loci we needed to illustrate the function order?
As I recall 16 X 4 = 64 = 2(32) = 8 X 8

32 was the number of loci for function order. We doubled the number for the reason to illustrate the interchange. The key number was 9.
9 X 4 = 36
8 X 4 = 36 - 4 = 32

Number in loci for the interplay of axioms =
100 = 64 + 32 + 4

Number of loci = 36 - 22/2 = 100/4 = 24 + 1

100
25

4
1

Function is an eight-game. Four in the middle.
4 + 4 = 8
4 - 4 = 0

We have differentiated the number in loci and the number of loci.

36 - 22/2 = 5 X 5 = (8 + 8) + 8 + 1

Definition:
The number of loci for the axioms is eight: ESTJINFP
The number of loci for the complementary axioms corresponds the number of the functions.

That is eight axioms require eight complementary axioms and again eight loci for the interplay of the axioms and one for equilibrium.

 

[wildcat]

The functions are complementary units. In other words, interplay is interchange.
Therefore the functions take the place of the complementary axioms in the loci.

The Axioms

E
I
P
J

NSTF

Axiom (A)
Complementary Axiom (C)
Eqilibrium (E)

ACACA
C000C
A0E0A
C000C
ACACA

Number of loci: 25
Number in loci: 100

1 X 25 = 25
4 X 25 = 100

4 - 0 = 5 - 1 = 6 - 2 = 7 - 3 = 8 - 4

0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 7 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 64
64/4 = 16

2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 = 64/2
32/4 = 8

+ E
= 1 X 1
1 X 4
respectively.

 

[Aleksei]

Wildcat, no offense but you need to start expressing yourself in complete sentences. I can never understand shit of what's going on in your posts.

 

[wildcat]

Wildcat, no offense but you need to start expressing yourself in complete sentences. I can never understand shit of what's going on in your posts.

Complete sentences? What it is?
I played truant every time we had grammar at school.
I try free association.

One hundred is the figurelein here.

44444
44444
44444
44444
44444

How many fours do you see?
Five and twenty.

Five-and-twenty times four makes a hundred.

Think fourwise.

36/4 = 9
36 - 4 = 32
32/4 = 8

Axiom

8 - 2 = 6
8 - 6 = 2
8 - 8 = 0
8 - 0 = 8

Complementary Axiom

8 - 7 = 1
8 - 1 = 7
8 - 5 = 3
8 - 3 = 5

ATTENTION

(8 - 0):2
= 4

ATTENTION

ACACA
C000C
A0E0A
C000C
ACACA

 

[Ginkgo]

The functions are complementary units. In other words, interplay is interchange.
Therefore the functions take the place of the complementary axioms in the loci.

The Axioms

E
I
P
J

NSTF

Axiom (A)
Complementary Axiom (C)
Eqilibrium (E)

ACACA
C000C
A0E0A
C000C
ACACA

Number of loci: 25
Number in loci: 100

1 X 25 = 25
4 X 25 = 100

4 - 0 = 5 - 1 = 6 - 2 = 7 - 3 = 8 - 4

0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 7 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 64
64/4 = 16

2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 = 64/2
32/4 = 8

+ E
= 1 X 1
1 X 4
respectively.

Is this what they mean when they say that MBTI is a personality Matrix? A system composed of complementary parts that abide by functions?

 

[Unkindloving]

For frick's sake. Can we get another INTP in here to translate? I can't understand your super computer coding amidst a series of tubes. It's like running ground meat through different meat grinders a few more times.

I've actually been made curious, but make the mind pain stop

 

[wildcat]

Thank you Mystic Tater.
The A complements in the linear. However, we are in the lookout to find the C.
We only need the A to find it.
The loci for functions is found in the C alone.

The C is definitively unlinear. This is exactly what I was trying to say in the posts I wrote today.
It is the C is where you find the types. Therefore axiomwise, MBTI is entirely unlinear.
Here we have the linear (A) and the unlinear (C) in the loci. Differentiated in the equation by odd numbers for C.

 

[Ginkgo]

Thank you Mystic Tater.
The A complements in the linear. However, we are in the lookout to find the C.
We only need the A to find it.
The loci for functions is found in the C alone.

The C is definitively unlinear. This is exactly what I was trying to say in the posts I wrote today.
It is the C is where you find the types. Therefore axiomwise, MBTI is entirely unlinear.
Here we have the linear (A) and the unlinear (C) in the loci. Differentiated in the equation by odd numbers for C.

The types are not linear because they are multidimensional. The are composite and expose themselves in different imminences as you look at them in different angles. If they were linear, then what strange worldviews we could have. However, we have given them a linear format by putting them on paper, which is entirely unfitting.

I could be off but this is my interpretation.

 

[wildcat]

For frick's sake. Can we get another INTP in here to translate? I can't understand your super computer coding amidst a series of tubes. It's like running ground meat through different meat grinders a few more times.

I've actually been made curious, but make the mind pain stop

OK I try again.

Say we have axioms N,S,P and R.

N complements S
P compements R
and vice versa.
In straight lines.

NP complements SR
PN complements RS
PS complements RN
SP complements NR
and vice versa.
Not in straight lines.

It is the idea of MBTI. The loci for functions, and therefore for the types, is off the road.
Mystic Tater pointed out the dispostion in his essay on the matrix.

A: Straight lines
C: Not straight lines.

A

04444
44444
44444
44444
44448

C

44444
14444
44444
44447
44444

0 + 8 = 1 + 7

 

[wildcat]

The types are not linear because they are multidimensional. The are composite and expose themselves in different imminences as you look at them in different angles. If they were linear, then what strange worldviews we could have. However, we have given them a linear format by putting them on paper, which is entirely unfitting.

I could be off but this is my interpretation.

This is exactly it. I could not have said it as well.
Very good. Thank you.

 

[Little_Sticks]

The types are not linear because they are multidimensional. The are composite and expose themselves in different imminences as you look at them in different angles. If they were linear, then what strange worldviews we could have. However, we have given them a linear format by putting them on paper, which is entirely unfitting.

I could be off but this is my interpretation.

This is why the world needs more Tater.

 

[wildcat]

Yes. The world needs more Tater.

DICHOTOMY OF A

By the primary axioms, clockwise A B C D, we reach the secondary axioms,
clockwise a b c d.

DXXXA
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
CXXXB


XXdXX
XXXXX
cXXXa
XXXXX
XXbXX


We now differentiate quantity and quality. 1a. Dichotomy of A:
If the vertical declension represents quantity, the horizontal declension represents quality.
Parallely, vice versa. One or the other. Not one and the other.

Vertical declension: Quality:
Horizontal declension: Quantity:

XXXXA
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX

100 =

44444
44444
44444
44444
44444

=


01234
12345
23456
12345
01234

+


44444
22222
00000
00000
00000

1b.

100 =

44444
44444
44444
44444
44444

=

00024
00024
00024
00024
00024

+


45654
34543
23432
12321
01210

We had vertical declension to represent quantity. Horizontal d. to represent quality.

 

[wildcat]

A word before I go on.

100 =

86420
86420
86420
86420
86420

8 - 4 = 4
6 - 4 = 2
4 - 4 = 0

2 - 4 below zero etc. Numbers missing.


We had quantified

44444
22222
00000
00000
00000

parallelly in a diverse dichotomy of A

00024
00024
00024
00024
00024

 

[wildcat]

What does not show is on the other side. Exclusion complements inclusion.
We had

01234
12345
23456
12345
01234

representing the declension of quality in the dichotomy of A. (1a)

The Dichotomy of B

XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXB

100 =

44444
44444
44444
44444
44444

=

01210
12321
23432
34543
45654

+

00024
00024
00024
00024
00024

alternatively


100 =

44444
44444
44444
44444
44444

=

00000
00000
00000
22222
44444

+

01234
12345
23456
12345
01234

One process. Two dichotomies.

 

[wildcat]

The dichotomy of C.

C = - A

check


A:

45654
34543
23432
12321
01210

+

00024
00024
00024
00024
00024

or

44444
22222
00000
00000
00000

+

01234
12345
23456
12345
01234

C:

43210
54321
65432
54321
43210

+

00000
00000
00000
22222
44444

or

01210
12321
23432
34543
45654

+

42000
42000
42000
42000
42000

check

45654
34543
23432
12321
01210

-

01210
12321
23432
34543
45654

= 0

check

4 - 0 = 5 - 1 = 6 - 2 = 5 - 1 = 4 - 0 = 4

3 - 1 = 4 - 2 = 5 - 3 = 4 - 2 = 3 - 1 = 2

2 - 2 = 3 - 3 = 4 - 4 = 3 - 3 = 2 - 2 = 0

And the potential missing numbers surface:

1 - 3 = 2 - 4 = 3 - 5 = 2 - 4 = 1 - 3 = - 2

0 - 4 = 1 - 5 = 2 - 6 = 1 - 5 = 0 - 4 = - 4

check

44444
22222
00000
00000
00000

-

00000
00000
00000
22222
44444

= 0

42000
42000
42000
42000
42000

-

00024
00024
00024
00024
00024

= 0