Consequences Of Using Non-Customized/Ready-Made Compound| 4/7/17;1: Are all ready-made conformations compound? (4/7/17; 1)
Can elements be customized? (4/7/17; 9)
Link: Life and Language in Amazon Jungle Book; Not existing structures (exploratory way);
Use Of The Not-Needed| 4/7/17;10: Do all structures evolve according to certain need, is it needed to customize/create our own structure? (4/7/17; 10)
Am I using certain exploratory ways in the conformations where they don’t exist? Does this ease certain actions and non-ease certain actions? (Clarification required; 4/7/17; 11)
[To be answered; might change next action] Optimal Compound Element| 22/6/17;17: Is it optimal to know only the compound elements required for attaining the utility? (20/6/17)
Compound Elements And The Structures Built From Them| 14/7/17;1: Do less compoundness magnitude compound elements ease the action of attaining utility? Why do you have this notion? Less compoundness magnitude compound elements seem to allow knowing the working of compound structures at a smaller scale, allowing to know the working behavior of small structures forming the compound. Doesn’t knowing less compound element give more clarity? How is this clarity allowing the attainment of utility at ease? (22/6/17; 15)
Won’t knowing the less compoundness magnitude compound elements to know the compound utility require more time? If ease is at reducing time, won’t this decrease the ease if we start from greater magnitude element? (Clarification required; 22/6/17; 17)
Need Of Many Compound Elements| 14/7/17;1a: If I want to know the working of atom, would it be more easy to know it (i.e. attaining the utility), by knowing evolution of language, evolution of exploratory way and the evolution of mathematics, than attaining the same utility, if possible, by knowing only the evolution of mathematics? | Does knowing only the evolution of mathematics allow knowing the working of atom? As experience on atom is not had, but is known indirectly (see Creations Of Fire book), the knowing seems to require to know the evolution of language, evolution of exploratory way also? Why? Here compound language, math and exploratory ways seem to be not translatable into conformations of reality till their evolution is known. (Clarification required; 22/6/17; 16 | 28/6/17; 21)
How does ease of attaining utility vary with the use of compound elements’ compoundness magnitude? | Is ease determined by the time required to know the compound elements and on their allowing for attaining utility? (21/6/17 | 28/6/17; 22)
How is ease of attaining utility determined? See 28/6/17; 22. (21/6/17)
Need Of All Elementary Experiences For Optimal Decision/Action| 17/7/17;7a: It seems that I need to know elements for knowing the working of world; to know them I seem to need certain compound elements (I seem to need to know compound language produced by atom-containing-humans before knowing the elements, atom); for knowing these compound elements required to know elements, won’t it be optimal to know only those compound elements which give clarity to those compound elements enabling to know elements? (21/6/17)
Do we need to know elements to know the working of the world? If I know compound elements and not the elements, won’t I not be able to know the working of the conformations not formed by the compound elements and even the conformations of the elements from which the considered compound elements are formed; doesn’t this mean that I will not be knowing the working of the entire world from compound elements? | Doesn’t this make me ignorant of certain parts of this world? Does ignorance allow making optimal decision? (22/6/17; 1 | 28/6/17; 25)
Expected Exploration: What is decision? See 29/6/17;16;
Why do you need to know the working of the entire world at every scale? | I seem to need to know it for making optimal decision of what we need to do here. See 22/6/17;1 & 28/6/17;25. (Clarification required, 22/6/17; 2 | 28/6/17; 23)
Need Of Optimal Action| 17/7/17;7b: Is optimal decision of what we need to do here, an action for easing us in the conformations (consequences?) we face in this world? (Clarification required; 29/6/17; 17)
For making the optimal decision, why do you need to know the working of entire world? See 22/6/17;1 & 28/6/17;25. (28/6/17; 24)
How to know all the exploration to have completed before depending on the attained exploration? Is it…(incomplete thought)
Other Ways For Making Optimal Action Than By Having Elementary Experiences| 17/7/17;10Are there other ways of making optimal action than that by having elementary experiences? (17/7/17;10
Miscellaneous| 6/5/17: What problem does language cause upon its direct usage? (6/5/17)
Would we be having clarity on what those compounds are if we don’t know the pre-stages? If we don’t know them clearly, won’t it be difficult to know structures built from them? Isn’t this the problem seen in reading theories in non-evolutionary manner? Does this same conformation apply here? (6/5/17)
Links: See thought with the reference on Solomons;
What is the need of clarity of elements of compounds, if compounds itself are giving the required utility? (19/6/17, see 16/6/17; 1)
I seem to be basing on the problem due to compound usage of theories, which seem to have non-practical constructions, whose correctness needs to be checked, requiring to know their evolution or origins?. And theories seem to have structures whose tangibility can be experienced only after knowing their origin (e.g. technical meaning/tangibility of the word “stability” in chemistry; does that mean common stability? doesn’t that have mathematical or precise meaning?).
optimal now to know a way to completely explore in all the possible ways known to me? (20/6/17)
Using Compound Element| 16/6/17: Is it required that experience on compound element be had only after knowing its elementary working? (16/6/17)
Now I am using laptop, whose working I don’t know, I haven’t sopped using it for not knowing its elementary working. I am using it for the utility of recording thoughts via its compound working observations, which seems to not require knowing its internal working. If I need to get the utility not allowed from the compound usage, I might need to know its elementary working. (16/6/17; 1)
Is selection of compoundness of element a function of utility? (Clarification required, 16/6/17)
Next explorations: Processing the above thoughts with all the other known thoughts; linking with need; knowing the cause of stucking (if it is the case); stuck from the structure of the word “principle” or “problem”(?); Dissolution;
If I have experience on the evolution of the exploratory way atom, won’t that allow knowing other similar exploratory ways? Is there no other way of knowing similar exploratory ways? (18/6/17)
I may not know the working of the compound elements, but aren’t they giving the utility? (18/6/17)
[To be answered, might change next action] Possibility Of Going From Element To Compound| 20/6/17: When is it not possible to go from element to compound? (20/6/17)
[To be answered; might change next action] Consequences Of Using Compound Elements| 21/6/17: Aren’t there only compound elements? Aren’t any considered parts breakable into parts? (21/6/17)
If the broken parts are having same nature (?), doesn’t that enable to calculate the behavior of compound element of any compoundness magnituded? (21/6/17)
Clarification needed; recorded for holding the notion: I am seeing consequences only due to usage of compound elements where I don’t know have clarity of the need of doing it; won’t I then need to explore consequences in every other actions? (21/6/17)
If I am using compound elements, I will be able to form other compound structures formable from those compound elements, but will not be able to form every structure which its elements will be able to form. (21/6/17)
For the utility of knowing other similar exploratory ways as elements, doesn’t it seem that I don’t need to know all the elements (atoms working, molecules working, humans working, etc)? (18/6/17)
Is it that, if a particular compound element is giving all the requirements needed for a particular utility, it is more optimal than other elements? This seems to be not the case (?), why? (Clarification required, 18/6/17) Links: Speed of attaining utility; mixing of compounds giving unpredictable actions;
Consequences Of Compound Step| 1/7/17;1: Is it optimal to know the non-ease consequences of compound step before a compound step? (Clarification required; 1/7/17; 1)
Knowing Compound Element| 23/6/17;6: Experience| Creations Of Fire Book.
Is it possible to know compound element completely without knowing the elements? (21/6/17)
Can compound element be known without knowing elements? (23/6/17; 3)
Compound element is made from elements; to know properly the behavior of compound elements, won’t I need to know the working of elements? (23/6/17; 4)
Can’t we know the working of the compound elements by observing their conformations? What if we don’t get certain conformations, which would allow us to know about it? (23/6/17; 5)
How can we be sure, by the observations, on the working of compound elements without seeing/knowing the elements? (23/6/17; 6)
Is there no other way of knowing the compound than by observation? (28/6/17; 27)
Optimal Compound Element| 4/7/17;15: How to know optimal compound element to attain an utility? (4/7/17; 15)
Is optimal compound element the conformation composed of elements which can allow attaining utility in least time? (4/7/17; 16)
Threshold Compound Transition For Attaining A Utility| 16/6/17: If I want to talk with human present in other place before the invention of phone, I would have needed to know the elements required to make that device, but for that utility of talking using the compound device phone, it seems that no elementary working knowing is required. Is it possible to have such threshold compound step to get the utility? (Clarification required, 16/6/17)
Utility: For using compound elements;
Why do you want to use compound elements? Can’t you use elements? (12/6/17)
Clarity Of Compound Elements Of Human Language| 8/6/17: Nothing yet…
Miscellaneous: Which experience need I have to know more on compound step usage? (12/6/17)
Non-Permanence Nature Of Compound Element And Permanence Nature Of Elements| 4/5/17: Nothing yet…
Clear Compound Elements| 4/5/17: Nothing yet…
Optimal Compound Step| 4/5/17: Nothing yet…
Consequences Of Compound Knowledge Action| 17/1/17: Aren’t the compound structures built on certain principles which the transitional user may not know? If the user continues using them without knowing their initial principles, won’t they prove inefficient? How? (4/3/17)
Creation Preference Notion (CPN)| I am thinking on whether to take the compound step of knowing something, whose knowledge may be had after knowing other elemental steps. Before taking any such steps, I want to know the consequences. (17/1/17)
Links: Optimal path;
Compound Elements| 16/1/17: Are you not finding the elements from compound experience, in your most of the thought explorations? In my most of the thought experiences, I don’t know often the elements, I try there to know them from compound structures. [Gen] Should I go from compound experience, even when I know the elemental experience? Now, it seems that experience on mathematical infinitesimals to be more elemental (isn’t that a thought created by human? can that human creation be elemental?), I am stuck there with a problem there. (Clarification required, 12/2/17)
Experience (E)| I was reading coordination chemistry for my test, and I was observing on the textbook to be giving only compound experience, like introducing words like "stability", which gives a usual sense, but it is not given on what it is that in atoms having that notion of stability. I saw, seeing textbook to be given such compound elements, upon which we seem to have been thought to use the concept, but the compound elements were seeming to be not clear. (16/1/17)
Isn't mathematics’ compound elements more clear than that of chemistry? (16/1/17)
Identify on what you mean by compound elements here. (16/1/17)
Try exploring compound elements providing textbooks with WordPress giving tools, which can be used only for specific purpose, and not helpful in inventing or discovering new tools. (16/1/17)
Clear Compound Elements/Dependent Compound Elements| 16/1/17: Exploration Notion| I now have the notion of seeing compound characters of certain things, like that in chess (whose evolution I don't know, but I can play from the compound rules knowledge), in contrast with compound elements of the chemistry textbook.(clarification needed, 16/1/17) Are you saying about Chemistry compound elements being not clear than that in chess? (12/2/17)
Experience (E)| My English teacher was saying that the same book read again later a time, to mean a lot than before.
Thought (T)| If we know the elemental data rather than the compound one, won't we be able to achieve the complete utility of the book from the first read itself? (22/1/17)
Consequences Of An Act Using Compound Element| < 22/1/17: Nothing yet...
[Gen] Percentage Use Of Compound Structure Vs. Percentage Use Of Elemental Structure| 26/1/17: Notion Origins (NO)| I started thinking on the use of compound-human-constructed, atom-as-element characteristic board games for constructing the mathematics of principles. Here I am trying to use compound board games, before even trying to know the elements, the origins of the game from the human, and the behaviour elements constructing human. I seem to be giving here more preference to compound than the elemental structure. (26/1/17)
Links: Optimal Path;
[Gen] Optimal Compound/Elemental Structure| 12/2/17: Origins Notion| I don’t know whether to explore on the human created (is that?) infinitesimals first to know on atoms and then on understanding me, or whether I need to first understand the working of me first and then go on to understand the elements? (12/2/17)
Advantages/Disadvantages Of Forecast View/Fore-coming Conformation Knowledge| 16/1/17: Think on thinking being forecaster/transitional act. (Clarification required, 16/1/17)
Experience Notion (EN)| In college, the theories seem to be known before, and sometimes they seem to be taught without having complete reasoning link of their creation.
Thoughts (T)| Does forecasting makes one lean towards the known result and miss out the complete result? (23/1/17)
Does forecast knowledge hinder other ways of attaining the same stage?
| How? (23/1/17 | 19/6/17)
On a wider level the history of slavery with regard to reading and writing is a curious one, and it reveals attitudes to literacy in the ancient world rather different to our own....reading and writing were themselves soon as a threat to the freedom of the individual democratic citizen, whose independence of speech and thought was highly linked to the fact that when reading was first practiced in Greek, it was always done aloud. One's spirit resided in one's breath. Early attic funerary inscriptions pleaded with the passer-by to "lend me your voice" before anouncing who lay buried there. Once the reader looked at the words and began to read them, it was as if the reader experienced a kind of spirit or voice possession; one's voice box was literally taken over by the breath of the writer. One sixth-century inscription from Thassos in the northern Aegean reads: "I am the tomb of Glaukos." Just imagine the feeling of standing in front of it and reading those words aloud to yourself! The experience was equated with loss of control over one's won bodily actions; one's autonomy felt compromised. A love of reading was viewed with some suspicion, as being unsuitable for free citizens and grown men. The metaphors used for this kind of activity in Plato's work, and other writers down to Catullus, are the same as those used for prostitution or for the passive partner in sex. The reader is "buggered" by the text. Reading is to lend one's body to an unknown writer - it is servitude.
Use of compound element seem to be utility dependent. (Clarification required; 19/6/17; See 16/6/17; 1)
Element From Compound| < 12/2/17: Haven't you come to the principle "coming from element to compound", from a compound way?
Is it possible to reach elemental principles from compound elements?
Transition Problems | 06/08/2016: Experience (E) | Read Organic chemistry topic "UV-Vis Spectrophotometers" for exam sake, where I found the requirement of memory to hold the proof of the deductions. (06/08/2016)
Thought (T)| Memory usage seems to increase to reduce the logical discontinuity in the understanding of a concept, thus to make it continuous in an illusory way. (06/08/2016)
E| Read the section on "Quantum Mechanics and Atomic Structure" of Solomons, Frhyle and Snyder's Organic Chem. (07/08/2016)
Thought (T)| The experience which is not factual but a theory/hypothesis of the fact, whose all parts should be shown practically and not just the end results, seems to be represented as a fact--i.e. factual representation of the non-factual, giving the impression of smooth going without any logical discontinuity; the deception of making not-proven-factual statements appear factual, seems to be making the smoothness. (07/08/2016)
Supports (S)| For example, in the Huygen's principle wave picture is used to explain the practical consequences of interference and diffraction, where the wave picture is used only as exploratory model and the wavy nature of light is not "seen" by anyone (is it?), it is not practical, but the end results are shown to be matching, here the data of waves shouldn't be represented as factual, unless and until it is proven practically. (07/08/2016)
E| When understanding concepts in my tenth standard with limited data, only from my text book, I patched up the gaps in the logical understanding by some false notions, which I came to know to be wrong. (16/08/2016)
T| We may have false logical notions behind the concepts taken in a transitional way. These false notions may fool one to proceed with false belief of proper continuity in understanding of a concept. (B6P33, 15/08/2016)
Comments
Post a Comment