Does an Intelligent System by large considered as an Impure procedure?
In Systems Programming:
Procedures that modify themselves are called impure procedures.
Each processor executing an impure procedure modifies its contents.
Another processor attempting to execute the same procedure may encounter different instructions or data.
Thus, impure procedures are not readily reusable.
- bad human coding practice
A pure procedure does not modify itself.
To ensure that the instructions are the same each time a program is used, pure procedures(re-entrant code) are employed.
An intelligent system learns itself and updates knowledge.
Data used as instructions and instructions used as data, based on situation.
Can Intelligent Systems be considered as impure procedures from multiple views of execution?
"Riemann himself suffered a nervous breakdown, and the American John Nash went insane.
The poor man starved to death because he was convinced that everybody was trying to poison him.
It has often been said there is a very fine dividing line between genius
& insanity, and nowhere is that illustrated better than in the
field of Mathematics."
Do mathematicians suffer nervous breakdown, because they mechanically go in circles with calculations?
Since mathematics is philosophically broader than mere mechanical
calculations, how can such dogmatic calculators who resulted to go
insane be called as mathematicians?
I don't think some scientists are bald.
mathematics should penetrate through layers of thinking, not go in circles to result in nervous breakdown.
True mathematician should see the big picture as a systems engineer, not as a mechanic who totally rely on calculations.
I see the one who went insane, hit the wall and could not find a way to go beyond it.
What other formulas are available to accurately determine the distribution of prime numbers?
Would that make a difference if he's correct and your perception for
infinity is wrong to criticize too negatively? Please reference your
contributions to Prime numbers/RH.
Isn't it a matter that you don't understand the logical importance he made regarding the purpose of RH?
"we will probably never know just how many Mathematicians have gone
insane trying to prove it. Riemann himself suffered a nervous breakdown,
and the American John Nash went insane."
The Riemann hypothesis is part of Problem 8, along with the Goldbach
conjecture, in Hilbert's list of 23 unsolved problems, and is also one
of the Clay Mathematics Institute Millennium Prize Problems. http://www.claymath.org/millennium/Riema…
Why Riemann's Hypothesis is that much important?
Are you suggesting Riemann hypothesis is influenced by 'observer effect' at the quantum level?
What is the true interpretation for Anantarika karma in Buddhism?
Order in line of gravity [pali term = conventional meaning]:
1. Sangha-bheda = creating division of Sangh
2. Lohituppa da = causing Buddha to bleed
3. Arahan-tagha’ta = death caused to an Arahant
4/5. Matugha ta = causing of death of one’s Mother
4/5. Pitughata = death caused to Father
Lanka vatha’ra Sutra (mahayana) refers them as external immediacies [ Ba yani a nantariya ni] with a different interpretation:
Matricide = destruction to all procreative agencies and lust and joy
associated with procreation Patricide = annihilate ignorance
taking life of an Arahantha = put an end to passion and anger
Sangha-bedha = break all combinations of aggregates
draw blood from Buddha = destroy eightfold body of consciousness.
Results(vipaka) for Anantarika karma is said to be born at Avici Niraya.
Does the true interpretation for 'Anantarika karma' refer to 'distorting the core of Dhamma' in 5 methods?
You used 'infinity' in your comment.
'Ananta' means infinite/ beyond limits/extreme.
Does 'anantarika' mean 'with no interval' or 'infinitely away from core'?
Is there a difference between 'Anantarika' kamma and 'anantara' kamma?
Do religious Buddhists view Buddhism as a social practice?
I ask this question after discussing with a hard core religious Buddhist, who is willing to die for the protection of Buddhism.
Can Buddhism be categorized as basic level, intermediate level and advanced level?
Do religious Buddhists follow so called 'lokika (mundane) Buddhism' at basic and intermediate levels as a social practice?
Do Arahants(enlightened one) follow so called 'lokottara (super-mundane) Buddhism' at advanced level?
Please answer clearly.
After first 3 answers:
As a suggestion to help you see the big picture of Buddhism, let me take the most simple 'toilet' analogy:
Would you consider removing clothes as basic level, shi-tting as intermediate level and washes it off as advanced level?
Would you complete basic and intermediate levels only as a social
practice or would you consider the whole process as going to toilet?
Can there be so called 'lokika (mundane) Buddhism' and 'lokottara
(super-mundane) Buddhism' or simply 'Buddhism' that seeks freedom
(lokottara-nibbana) from suffering of lokika/worldly attachments?
@シトリン夢 Citrine Dream,
"Just as in the great ocean there is but one taste — the taste of salt —
so in this Doctrine and Discipline (dhammavinaya) there is but one
taste — the taste of freedom"
In that case, can Buddhism be categorized to levels?
Refuge in so called 3 jewels of Buddhism (Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha) as a
social practice is distorting the core of Buddhism. It is suggested by
spell-binding monk societies for their existence, assuming them as a
historical lineage to Buddha, which is a big lie.
There is no liberation in Buddhism privileged by a higher existence. Buddhism guides to freedom from all existence.
A true Buddhist who seeks freedom would not be loyal to any religious society!
Does Buddhism promote PATIENCE for suffering and/or joy?
Patience is promoted as a good social norm:
“If you are patient in one moment of anger, you will escape a hundred days of sorrow.”
“Sorrow and silence are strong, and patient endurance is godlike.”
"Abused patience turns to fury. "
"Patience is bitter, but its fruit is sweet."
These are a bit different social quotes for patience:
"Alcohol gives you infinite patience for stupidity."
"Humility is attentive patience. "
Would you agree if I say that Buddhism does not promote PATIENCE for suffering and/or joy?
Asevana ca balanam = Not to follow or associate with the foolish
Panditanan ca sevana = to associate with the wise
Suppose, Mr.A is wise & Mr.B is foolish.
According to Mahamangala Sutta,
not associate with foolish means, Mr. A does not want to associate with Mr. B
associate with wise means, Mr. B wants to associate with Mr. A
1. How can Mr.A and Mr.B associate & not associate at the same time?
2. By considering the demonstrated contradiction, Can Buddhism be justified as a social religion?
3. Can there be any contradictions in Buddhism?
Please read the question carefully, in order to answer with wisdom.
Why don't you answer the question regarding Mahamangala Sutta of Buddhism, instead of commenting your judgement on others?
Mahamangala Sutta is not commentary as you suggested. It is in Tipitaka - Suttanipāta (Sn 2.4 PTS: Sn 258-269)
I'm surprised to see your comment "You haven't demonstrated a
contradiction" and even sorry for you to believe "there can be apparent
contradictions in Buddhism".
Better find them clarify without leaving them for future.
Your bulk comment is misdirected from the question.
"How can Mr.A and Mr.B associate & not associate at the same time? " is the first question.
Have you answered that?
This is a critical question in Buddhism, not an opportunity for you to do counseling.
This question expects intelligence, analytical abilities and knowledge in Buddhist & Law to answer.
Hope to find direct answers to this question, with no respect given to false but popular interpretations about Buddhism.
Would there be a contradiction, if both wise & foolish persons
(puggalas) are in the mind of an individual, where to associate with the
wise and not to associate with the foolish at the same time?
I've answered the first question.
Note: scope of Buddism is limited to ideas and free from ideas only.
lokiya in Buddhism refer to triloka (kama, rupa, arup), not social aspects.
Sangha in Buddhism is collection of ideas (dhamma), where assumption to monks is just their way of living by spell-binding.
On what basis do you consider Bible context as beyond fictional nature?
Since Bibles in generally are printed paper, if someone challenges that:
God stated in Bible is no more than a fictional story character written
on paper who creates another fictional story with fictional characters
called 'man', how would you disprove it?
Are you trying to prove that Bible context is of fictional nature by
referring to 39 books and recently discovered Dead Sea Scrolls written
by people as well a few Papyrus manuscripts?
Can a story written on paper or spoken as word of mouth, etc prove a step beyond fiction?
Are basic units of Atom called matter or non-matter?
If basic units of Atom is called non-matter, does the accumulation of multiple non-matters create matter?
Are Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, quarks, antiprotons, antineutrons,
positrons (antielectrons), etc the particles make up atoms called matter
The term 'Non-matter' is used in science text. Google and see.
The more correct terminologies should be 'Phenomena' and 'Noumea', because all are mind based.
Why those particles are not considered as basic units of matter, Atoms?
'Parama'+ 'Anu' = Paramanu' = Atom
Please do consider the fact that short history of the west did not invent the concept of 'atom' (paramanu).
I'm not inventing any new terms here, but rather trying find out, why
the base unit is subdivided, and how such particles can be categorized
in terms of matter (the sensible scope of physics)?
After the first 6 answers..Girls & Boys,
are you aware of the 3 dimensional (denominator, numerator, answer) nature of division to consider different infinities?
I'm really sorry for the stupid schooling system.
By large, non of the answers correctly define infinity.
From where did the West borrow 'infinity concept' from? check 'Ananta' from the sources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu
sorry mate, I don't think the way you suggested.
The concept of infinity is defined as a range, like a finite range and is numerical.
It is uncountable/unimaginable, relative to
countable(Sankhya)/imaginable(sankalpa) finite range and vice verse,
meaning infinity is definable and can be expressed in numbers.
I've said too much and will let you think why I said so.
Please ask your maths teachers to learn the fundamentals in maths, irrespective of their paper qualifications.
Scope means boundary, the beginning and end for infinity.
Where does infinity start and where does infinity end?
After first 3 answers.. girls & boys,
If someone suggests "Infinity starts after finite and ends before completeness/holiness", would you agree?
Even Socrates may be humble to learn more about infinity!
Can't you compare different infinities where the cardinality of them differ?
Example: infinity (x) of integer numbers is larger than infinity (x/2) of even or odd numbers
How can you compare infinities without measurement?
Can you describe 'finite within infinity' at a single dimension, where
finite and infinity are exclusive to each other? I have no doubt that
you can do it by considering multiple dimensions.
If Riemann Hypothesis is baseless, can you either prove it or disprove it?
This question is referencing the
ignorance of 'different infinities' when proving 'The Golden Key' (prime
number relationship where Euler product formula equal to Riemann zeta
function), which is the basis for Riemann Hypothesis to assume a
definite pattern of 'prime numbers' derived from Riemann zeta function
within a specific scope.
Euler product formula is constructed as a multiplication using prime numbers(p).
Riemann zeta function is constructed as a sum using a series of integers(n)/complex variables(s).
Riemann Hypothesis is directly based on Riemann zeta function with limitations (non-trivial zeros, critical line)
Riemann Hypothesis is about an expected pattern of prime numbers using Riemann zeta function.
Since, Golden key defines the relationship of Riemann zeta function to
prime numbers, Riemann Hypothesis (assumed pattern for prime numbers) is
based on Golden key, and in-turn, based on Euler product as well.
Even, there cannot be a suggestion as Riemann Hypothesis, if Golden key
(relationship to prime numbers) did not exist at that time.
Though Euler product is perfectly true, it's relationship(equation) to
Riemann zeta function called 'The Golden Key' is an Error Proof. I am
sure about that.
Therefore, Riemann Hypothesis is based on a false Golden key and prime
number pattern cannot be derived from Riemann zeta function in any
The stage is open for you to comment and criticize.
My challenges to you:
1. prove Riemann Hypothesis is not based on Golden key
2. prove Golden key is true
3. prove Riemann Hypothesis is on firm grounds and ClayMath Millennium problem is valid
You may reference to your work and also may contact me personally if you're serious on this matter.
"... The detention of terrorists at Gitmo is subject to the Geneva
convention, but the convention defines these people as partisans.
Partisans have no legal protection as prisoners of war under the
convention's articles. ..."
Following is the 12 August 1949 Fourth Geneva convention (relative to
Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War), in which U.S. has signed
and ratified. http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/380?OpenDocument
The term 'partisan' is not mentioned there.
"... There are certain cases about which some hesitation may be felt. We
may mention, first, the case of partisans, to which Article 4, A (2)
Database 'IHL - Treaties & Comments', View '1.Traités \1.2. Par
Article', of the Third Convention refers. ... "
How does U.S. qualify those people with flesh & blood as 'Partisan' status?
USA defined term "non combatants" does not override and/or avoid the
Geneva Convention terms/ definitions. Simply, the acts of USA shall be
judged under the Geneva Convention (agreed superior universal code).
What are the difficulties for implementation? Any attempts?
Capture, detain and torture of any individual are conflicts initiated by USA and evidences are obvious.
Can you prove your comment?
Is there any way to defend innocent people (outside of any conflict), when fictional states harm them?
If constitutionally defined USA fiction can implement jail institutions
outside the lands of America (including by lease agreements), is the
constitution fraudulent to fail to judge those acts under the said
How can acts disrespecting human values be immune to be judged under
universal codes, and specially by the master 'people' with sovereign
rights? There is definite fault here.
People with flesh & blood always is superior and has jurisdiction over a fictional state defined on a piece of paper. @Jeff,
Can you prove your statement that US government is above the Geneva convention and the rights of ordinary humans?
What if some people do not wish to work in society?
Since society has a monopoly in
the country, what are the remedies of society for people, who do not
wish to join it (even not use their currency)?
social benefits are given for members for society only.
land, trees, waters, roads, travel corporations, etc are within the jurisdiction of society (defined in constitution).
This question is not about being lazy without work to live.
This question is about the practical possibility for an individual to
live with people as a community, by excluding from the society.
Who cares about being unsocial as long as people can interact each other without 3rd party judgement?
@Crown, If no one works for a society, the society defined under the constitution would break (void and null). Who cares?
Does that mean, people don't work?
With due respect, if you are a member of a society from birth, you are
no more than a fictional state written on paper, which I can use to wipe
If you apply for dual citizenship, can you be sure that you are no more than a born membership to the said first society?
Do you get the point I made clearly?
How to respond if you were unfairly destroyed by society?
Note: Please have patience to read this lengthy, but useful question description.
What would be your response if you are disappointed about social systems?
This situation is common when an individual experiences the other-side of marketed benefits.
Possible (not limited) responses in general would be:
Surrender to the same disappointed systems, because:
- no other alternative for individual survival (can't beat the monopoly, then join it)
- ignore costs as an isolated situation (rooted belief in benefits) to profit later
- pay costs to rehabilitate to force respect at the disappointed systems (blame self for the disappointment)
- fake loyalty to teach a lesson, destroy or take control of the system as a means of revenge
- believe recommendations of trusted others (to discard own experience)
Surrender to the alternative systems, because:
- as an alternative to survive & be away from enemy system
- as a means of taking revenge on the disappointed systems (destroy)
- as a means of taking control (takeover, by associating with more power forces)
- to destroy all similar structured and/or inter-dependent systems with the said
Be free from all systems, because:
- to achieve a unique knowledge about the structure (causes/roots,
conditioning, existence, weaknesses, etc) of any system and attachments
to it from a God's view, which is impossible for a system member to
stand-under, in order to be the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Conqueror,
the Unconquered, Untouchable,etc.
Quit main life (suicide), because:
- cannot take pressure/stress
- destroy disappointed systems by blaming for cause or suicidal attack
- no future hope in life and final conscious important decision for a living.
How would you respond for such a practically possible situations in your lifetime?
Can United States of America win the war against Devil?
Even if a lion wins battle
against a pig, it looses the war because the great lion king has to get
down into a stinking pit of manure.
Is this what happen to U.S.A, who regard itself as king of the world when battling(police) against self-defined extremists?
It is said that a well-trained priest who enters the cave of devil is
capable of leaving without change to himself and transforming the devil
to a saint, because he doesn't use evil forces against and in the likes
Why do we observe anger, hatred, genocidal statements from some people of America who justify the acts of U.S.?
Can they win the war in their own hearts, at least as the believers of Jesus love?
If USA can win the war against Devil, show how?
Even a little child would say more than 'yea'
If United States loose a war in big time, what would happen to good people of America?
U.S. has been continuously
involved in controlled (from start to end) wars through out it's short
history by giving various justifications and alerts to people of
As a result of U.S. blood based image, people of America are subject to
hatred, revenge and condemned as humanly unreasonable by the rest of the
world. This is an irrefutably obvious fact with common sense.
Power shifts and there are no guarantees for one to be unbeaten in every
war and battle, unless the sparrow never lands where the lion roars.
Even a small chameleon can take control of a big elephant by crawling into it's long trunk.
Same apply for David's fight against the giant Goliath.
If U.S. looses a war in big time by an unexpected party in an unexpected
manner (not nuclear weapons), which is a possibility, since people of
America are dragged into unlawful acts of crimes against humanity by
U.S., what would be the future for people of America, especially the
good people who have faith in the equal love of God to all people?
Can U.S. compensate the good people of America in such a situation?
Wisdom will tell you that there are many alternatives to win the same war, other than the bloody version.
I am sure that you're brainy to know the difference between 'noble sainthood pride' vs '3rd class gangster pride'.
Reply with violence should be the last or rather no option for
intelligent people, but evidently the first option for animals who
believe only in their physical powers.
Does al-Qaeda use similar weapons to face U.S. and its alliances?
Is the war fair and lawful?
Does U.S. use reasonable force against enemy, with technologically advanced weapons?
Isn't that unreasonable force in any conflict is unlawful?
Your comment says, U.S. use offensive war (not self-defense), in which
the attacking army seeks to take away rights enjoyed by another people.
It is proof that U.S is out of control as per Art of Peace.
Are you advising by your experience of living under the Taliban?
Don't you regard them as people with flesh and blood?
Do you accept western mass media preachings on face value without analysis?
Can you penetrate into their common agendas through their directed stories?
Other than investigate the story your self or referring to many sources, analysis is much more broader.
For example: pattern analysis, cross checking to find contradictions, balance of a story, etc.
Does United States diplomacy harm people all over the world?
It is a fact that U.S.
intelligence missions are carried out in the rest of the word as
diplomats and using NGO/INGOs, etc in an unfriendly manner.
As a result, the governments in the rest of the world use U.S. foreign
policy to over-scare/over-warn people/citizens, pointing at
international terrorism :
- to restrict civil liberties (harden laws),
- to condemn civil protests and opposition criticism as internationally sponsored,
- and simply to be in power (justify as political stability necessary to fight back foreign threats).
You can call this situation as ripple effect, butterfly effect, etc.
Therefore, artificial situations get created for bad decision making.
In other words, United States tactical foreign policy "Si vis bellum
para pacem" (put other nations off guard by cultivating peace) creates
dictators in rest of the world.
How do living breathing people with flesh and blood who live anywhere in
the world tolerate, if a fictional organization harm them directly
If so, what could be the practical solution, especially for people with not-so-rich economies?
@Top Source, Are you aware that :
CIA Covert and clandestine operations directed at or conducted with
allies and friends to secure support for controversial components of
foreign policy throughout the world?
Covert operations may include sabotage, assassinations, support for
coups d'état (sudden, illegal deposition of a government), or support
for subversion. Tactics include the use of a false flag or front group.
Please be open and human than being partial to hide the bad acts of a fiction to the man kind.
What are the benefits for Al Qaeda to wage war against United States?
There should be significant
benefits for United States to be at war throughout the history against
many communities in the world.
British Empire or simply Crown corporation also used a similar strategy for economy benefits, etc.
Though mass media conglomerate label Al Qaeda as an extremist Islam
organization, Muslims worldwide do not seem to support that
What could be the benefits for Al Qaeda to commit in decades of war against United States & it's alliance?
There should be some good reasons other than chanting "Allahu Akbar".
What would you guess and/or, what do they mention?
You might remember the 30 year civil war in Sri Lanka, which ended few years back.
Erik Solheim from Norway,
David Miliband from UK,
Bernard Kushner from France,
Hillary Clinton from USA
Robert O. Blake, etc
were some of many popular peace facilitators, who were active against that civil/international war.
It is surprising to note the arm trade based GDP in those peace loving
states, and how aforesaid names supported and justified wars/violence
around the world.
Why duality is honored in world politics?
Is current Mali situation and honest international effort?
Please read the question carefully and answer with an open mind.
Can states of weapon economies be peace lovers?
If china involved in arms trade, can it be a peace lover?
The adage you mentioned is the national policy for aforesaid weapon economy based peace loving states.
The reverse "Si vis bellum para pacem" meaning " if you are planning a
war, you should put other nations off guard by cultivating peace" is
true as their foreign policy towards rest of the world.
Considering the big picture, why such duality is honored in world politics to define "world peace"?
Aren't we purposely devaluing humanity?
"Indefinite Detention Without Trial" endorsed by Obama in an insult for humanity.
Is it constitutional for a U.S. President to discuss Prolonged Detention Policy?
If not, what disciplinary actions taken were against such acts?
If unconstitutional and no disciplinary actions taken, how lawful is the existence of U.S. Constitutions?
Even a king’s messenger, is responsible for the words of his voice.
Now, what message did President Obama of United states bring to good people?
Is that blasphemy and Madness?
What is the current situation of 'indefinite detention bill' embedded in
the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) under the 'Law of
"not for a time certain" means "uncertain time" = "forever".
"terrorist" is a fiction against a fictional system, USA.
Live People with flesh and blood suffer inhumanly, even without respect to natural justice.
Is US president Obama all about words with actions to be awarded with Nobel prize? Why do you see contradictions?
Under what laws are people held and tortured at Guantánamo Bay detention camp?
Though United States operate an
overseas naval base following the Cuban-American Treaty of 1903,
containing a military prison since 2002, the Cuban government opposes
the presence claiming that the lease is invalid under international law
as it was not a sovereign nation at the time.
If Cuba ratified the lease with full sovereignty, I would like to see the justification in full details.
Do people of America have power to control their fictional government, specially when carrying inhuman and evil acts?
What is the practical solution to respect humanity and to condemn such acts as unlawful?
No fiction can lawfully exist as second, if proven unlawful.
@The Ghost of Christmas Past,
Why the good people of America do not judge the acts of U.S. fictional government?
Why empower United States to lawfully exist?
I am discussing here about people with flesh and blood who have feelings, not fictional 'prisoner' states defined on paper.
@The Great Quizoo,
If agreed state parties change, the lease becomes void. I would like to
see the terms of the new contract agreed after consideration. Please
reference it to me for analysis.
Can you be sure that U.S. has always being within the terms of contract without any controversial issues?
@The Great Quizoo,
The whole powers of a fictional government including violence using weapons are defined on paper.
Taking jurisdiction over a piece of paper is simple.
What is the difference between Hindu vs. Buddhist meditation?
Let me present my view. You may present yours in comparison or in accordance, etc.
The main goal of Hinduism is Moksha/Liberation, where soul joins super-soul as to maintain existence/Nyaya (system/recursion).
Therefore, Hindu meditation is more likely a practice/repeat exercises
(example: Kasina, yoga, etc) for jhāna/Dhyāna absorption/strengthening
towards developing 'intuition thinking'.
Kasina meditation is also mentioned in Visuddhimagga, by Buddhaghosa (430 CE in Sri Lanka) as a treatise/dissertation.
In contrast to Hindu meditation practice, Buddhism uses a
study/logical/penetrating approach towards freedom/Nibbana from all
1. Samatha (tranquility/calmness) meditation for discipline (with short practice) &
2. Vipassana (analytical/ insight) meditation for development
Current religious Buddhists mostly do 'practice' meditation and as a
result, do not achieve the main goal of Buddhism, which is Nibbana.
The stage is for you to criticize [Nucleus] view and/or to comment and contribute with opinion, knowledge, experience, etc.
'people' here refers to a fiction, the God's creation in the Bible story book.
People who live & breath with flesh & blood simply act the role
of 'people' in the said constitution which is written on paper.
In turn, all Buddhist institutions, monks, followers, etc submit their rights to get registered under God based constitution.
This constitution contradicts with Buddhist way of thinking, even contradicts with 5 percepts.
Eg: Tobacco, Alcohol, Gambling, British BAR associated Law making,
inhumane punishment, Materialism based economy, mechanical education
system, discrimination based democracy & politics, etc.
Countries like Saudi Arabia practice Islamic Law and integrate with international trade.
How could a Buddhist Constitution for a Buddhist country look like?
What could be the distinct moral code and it's significance to benefit the public?