E. D. Definition. 'The Fundamental Theorem of Dialectical Arithmetic'.

Dear Readers,



A new 'text-module', specifiying the Encyclopedia Dialectica definition for one of its key concepts, 'The Fundamental Theorem of Dialectical Arithmetic', has recently been cleared for posting to the www.dialectics.org  Glossary Page by the F.E.D. General Council


I have also posted this 'text-<<monad>>' here, below, for your convenience.



Regards,

Miguel

Graffito: The 'Humanocidal' Ruling Faction of the Ruling Class.

Dear Reader,



Below is our graffito -- our symbol -- depicting the nature of today's globally-ruling, 'humanocidal' faction of the capitalist plutocracy, the faction which we name 'The Rocke-Nazis'.

For more about this, see --

http://feddialectics-miguel.blogspot.com/2013/04/plutocracy-proclaims-planned-planetary.html

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/MaladyAndRemedy/MaladyAndRemedy.htm


Regards,

Miguel

Karl Seldon's Sagacious Sayings Series -- #5. 'The Fundamental Law of Marxian Theory'.

Full Title:  Karl Seldon’s Sagacious Sayings Series, #5 --

‘The Fundamental Law of Marxian Theory’;

‘The Fundamental Law of the Human Species’;

‘The Law of the Tendency of the Human-Social Forces of Production to Rise’.

Dear Readers,




From time to time, I like to share with you some of the gems of insight that leap from out of the '''multilogues''', among Karl Seldon and other members of the Foundation, and from the transcribed versions, published internally, including of those '''multilogues''' in which I did not happen to participate, when and if those [edited] transcripts are cleared for public sharing by the Foundation's General Council.


Here's an excerpt from the transcript of a recent orientation presentation, by Karl Seldon, for new recruits --



[Karl Seldon]:

“Throughout '''human prehistory''', in Marx's sense, that is to say, all the way from ‘anthropopoiesis’ until the formation of the successor system to the presently-predominant, capital-relation-based global social formation -- i.e., until the formation of the predicted system that we call ‘political-ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY’, or ‘‘‘Equitism’’’ -- the human-social forces of production tend to grow, to rise, although unconsciously so, in terms of any of the deliberate motives of the human beings who conduct this growth; unintentionally on their parts, but rising nonetheless, and spawning a whole series of new social relations of production ‘socio-ontologies’ -- the slave-relation, the serfdom-relation, the barterable-commodity-relation, the money-relation, the capital-/wage-labor-relation, and the predicted next, generalized-equity-relation -- in the process, so that the human-social forces of production grow through a whole series of critical quantitative thresholds for qualitative change; a whole series of human-social ‘metafinite singularities’; of revolutions in human-social self-productivity, in social ontology, and, fundamentally, in social-relations[-of-production] ‘ideo-physio-ontology’. ...”

Global Samizdat Site: 3 New Essays, posted in 2015.

Dear Reader,



I want, hereby, to call to your attention, three new essays, posted recently -- this year, on 12 April, 10 May, and 15 May, respectively -- to the Global <<Samizdat>> web site, www.global-samizdat.org, specifically --


http://global-samizdat.org/Global-Samizdat/GS24_StateCapitalismVersusPoliticalEconomicDemocracy/GS24_StateCapitalismVersusPoliticalEconomicDemocracy.htm

http://global-samizdat.org/Global-Samizdat/GS25_UntamedGardeningTips/GS25_UntamedGardeningTips.htm

http://global-samizdat.org/Global-Samizdat/GS26_NothingnessExaltedTimeAndTimeAgain/GS26_NothingnessExaltedTimeAndTimeAgain.htm


-- and I would urge you also, if you are so-inclined, to offer your anti-plutocracy, pro-democracy essays for posting to that site as well.



Regards,

Miguel

E. D. Definition. 'IRREPEATABILITY'.

Dear Readers,



A new 'text-module', specifiying the Encyclopedia Dialectica definition for one of its key terms, ''IRREPEATABILITY''', has recently been cleared for posting to the www.dialectics.org  Glossary Page by the F.E.D. General Council


I have also posted this 'text-<<monad>>' here, below, for your convenience.



Regards,

Miguel

Karl Seldon's Sagacious Sayings Series -- #4. The nature of Nature.

Dear Reader,

From time to time, I like to share with you some of the gems of insight that leap from out of the '''multilogues''', among Karl Seldon and other members of the Foundation, and from the transcribed versions, published internally, including of those '''multilogues''' in which I did not happen to participate, once those [edited] transcripts are cleared for public sharing by the Foundation's General Council.


Here's an excerpt from the transcript of a recent orientation presentation, by Karl Seldon, for new recruits  --



[Karl Seldon]:

"There is [as far as we know] only Nature [with '''human Nature''' included therein, as a, later, part thereof], but Nature is inherently -- "by nature", as it were -- evolutely 'auto-onto-dynamical'."

   

For more information regarding these Seldonian insights, please see --

 

www.dialectics.info

 

 

 

 

 

For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of ‘dialectical art’ – as well as illustrated books by the F.E.D. Press, see --

https://www.etsy.com/shop/DialecticsMATH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

¡ENJOY!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Miguel Detonacciones,

 

Voting Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.];

Elected Member, F.E.D. General Council;

Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison;

Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.

 

 

 

 

YOU are invited to post your comments on this blog-entry below!

E. D. Definitions. '''Dialectical Arithmetic''' & '''Dialectical Algebra'''.

Dear Readers,



A new 'text+ module', specifiying the Encyclopedia Dialectica definitions for its key terms '''dialectical arithmetics''', and '''dialectical algebras''', has recently been cleared for posting to the www.dialectics.org  Glossary Page by the F.E.D. General Council


I have also posted this 'text+ <<monad>>' here, below, for your convenience.



Regards,

Miguel

E. D. Notation: Basal >>Monads<< Signs Designs Defined.

Dear Readers,



A new 'text+ module', specifiying the Encyclopedia Dialectica designs & definitions for its Categorial <<MONADS>> signs -- symbols for the UNITS, or '''logical INDIVI[sible-]DUALS''', of a given, ontological KIND, that are the implicit content of, and that are represented collectively as, a UNIT[y], by their KIND-<<ARITHMOS>>, i.e., by their KIND-CATEGORY -- has recently been posted to the www.dialectics.org  Glossary Page.


I have also posted this 'text+ <<monad>>' here, below, for your convenience.



Regards,

Miguel

E. D. Notation: Categorial MULTIPLICATION >>Aufheben<< Operation Signs Designs Defined.

Dear Readers,



A new 'text+ module', specifiying the Encyclopedia Dialectica designs & definitions for its Categorial MULTIPLICATION Signs, has been cleared for posting to the www.dialectics.org  Glossary Page by the F.E.D. General Council.


I have also, posted this 'text+ <<monad>>' below, for your convenience.



Regards,

Miguel

E. D. Notation: Signs for Analogy, Dialectical [Self-]Contradiction, and Propositional [Self-]Contradiction Relations.

Dear Readers,



A new 'text+ module', specifiying Encyclopedia Dialectica designs & definitions of Signs for some species of 'Non-Identicality', has been cleared for posting to the www.dialectics.org  Glossary Page by the F.E.D. General Council.


I have also, posted this 'text+ <<monad>>' below, for your convenience.



Regards,

Miguel

A Dialogue on Dialectics. Excerpt -- The Dialectical 'Meta-Number' Signifying Singularity [Ontological Revolution].

A Dialogue on Dialectics.  

Excerpt -- The Dialectical 'Meta-Number' Signifying Singularity [Ontological Revolution].

Dear Reader,

Reproduced below is an excerpt from the [edited] transcript of a recent dialogue, 

with a long time comrade of mine, about dialectics.  

I have labeled my comrade’s remarks with “I1” for “Interlocutor 1”, and my remarks with “I2”.

Enjoy!

Regards,

Miguel

I1:  It would seem that as there is empty and full zero, so there is empty and full dialectics?

I2:  Great insight -- thanks for sharing it!

As I see it, yes -- drawing from slightly different connotations of "empty" and "full" from the connotations drawn on in F.E.D.’s ‘empty zero’ versus ‘full zero’ distinction -- there are also "empty dialectics", versus "full dialectics".


To my mind, two examples of ‘‘‘empty dialectics’’’ are the following --

1.  The Peano successor function, s, which resides at the core of the first four, first-order Peano Postulates, which axiomatize the first-order, ordinal arithmetic of the "Natural" Numbers, N = {1, 2, 3, ... }, propagates an "empty dialectic", but that "empty dialectic" is the intuitive seed of what we call the 'Seldonian First Dialectical Arithmetic', of the ' "purely"-qualitative ordinals', i.e., of the NQ 'meta-Natural meta-Numbers', which, if still only abstractly and generically so, can be interpreted to model "full dialectics", as the seed, or «arché», of all of the other, later, ever more "full-dialectical" Seldonian dialectical arithmetics as well, that follow, beyond NQ, in the Seldonian method of presentation of those dialectical arithmetics. 

Here's why I call the operation of the Peano successor operator an "empty dialectic". 

The definition of the Peano successor operator is ultra-simple:  s(n)  =  n + 1, for any "Natural" Number n in N.  The Peano successor function, s, operating upon any "Natural" Number, outputs the successor "Natural" Number to any "Natural" Number upon which s operates.

This operation/definition comports to the fundamental, «aufheben» character of all dialectics:  its "output" or result combines "conservation" [the n of s(n) is still preserved "in" n + 1], transformation/"determinate negation" [ n + 1 is NOT n, and is not so in a determinate sense:  s(n) is greater than n by exactly one "Natural Numbers" unit], and "elevation"/advancement [n is increased/lifted/advanced/superseded, in s(n), into n + 1, by a gain in value of 1 "Natural Numbers", "purely"-quantitative-ordinal unit]. 

But this is merely a “purely”-quantitative shadow of «aufheben» “dialectic” -- the FORM of «aufheben» dialectic-in-general, but EMPTY of any of the qualitative, ontological, ontology-expansion, ontologically revolutionizing CONTENT of even the generic stage of «aufheben» dialectic represented by the NQ, the first stage, of the Seldonian meta-systematic dialectic of the dialectical arithmetics, for which the N alone constitute the 0th stage.  It is therefore, to my mind, "empty dialectic". 

2.  When an equation modeling physical actuality, such as -- to begin at the psychohistorical beginning of such -- the Newton gravity equation, as a "purely"-quantitative equation, arrives at a division by "empty zero", 0, signifying, in this specific case, a collision of, e.g., two mutually-gravitating planets, planet 1 and planet 2, via the disappearance of any distance, r12(t), between their centers of mass, for a finite value of its time parameter, t -- call that moment of collision t* -- so that r12(t*)  =  0, the result is, apparently --

F12(t*)  =  GM1M2/r12(t*)^2  =  GM1M2/0^2  =  GM1M2/0  "="  "oo"

-- signifying a Newtonian gravitational force of infinite magnitude.  However, what actually happens, in physical fact, is that the gravitic force between the two planets 'dis-existentiates', along with the two planets themselves.  This "oo" answer is INFINITELY WRONG -- departs INFINITELY from empirical actuality -- because everything that actually happens remains finite throughout, and because "model error" ["residual"] is the difference between the finite value actually observed/measured, say f, and the model-predicted value.  ANY finite value, minus"Infinity", is "still" "infinite", thus yielding an infinite residual, or "[negative-]infinity residual"; an infinite model error  --   f - oo  =  -oo. 

Note that "oo" is NOT [even] a "Real" Number, so that, at the moment of planetary collision/singularity, the Newton Equation becomes, in effect a "Goedel-Incompleteness-Asserting Formula deformalizing unsolvable diophantine equation" for "Real" Numbers arithmetic:  its solution is not possible within the "Real" Numbers; its solution takes us outside/beyond the set R.

This Newtonian "unsolvable diophantine equation" becomes a "solvable diophantine equation" when re-expressed within the 'seventh Seldonian dialectical arithmetic', the R-subsuming Rmu arithmetic, when this "purely"-quantitative equation is 're-qualified', by multiplying it by the appropriate combinations of the 'metrical qualifiers' for the metrological units of sec., gm., & cm., and by 'ontological qualifiers' qualifying/distinguishing Planet 1 versus Planet 2, & via a new kind of number -- via a new element of number 'ideo-ontology' -- in the form of what we call the 'full zero meta-number' -- a 'qualo-quantitative, existential zero', for more about which, see --

 http://feddialectics-miguel.blogspot.com/2015/04/an-arithmetic-in-which-division-by-zero.html


Moreover, the value "oo" is a mere FORM, a FORM that is EMPTY of any of the real, qualitative, ontological, ontology-expanding, ontologically revolutionizing CONTENT of this gravitic dialectical process of collision that it attempts to model.

What really occurs is that the two "opposing"/colliding planets produce a "complex unity" of mutual fragmentation/mutual dis-integration, and mutual coalescence/mutual re-integration, producing, in combination, new planetary and sub-planetary ontology, qualitatively, ontologically different from the ontology -- consisting of Planet 1 and/versus Planet 2 -- whose existence was implicit in the model before t*.


This kind of Newtonian, gravitic, collisional dialectic is precisely how stellar/planetary systems, such as our Solar System, BUILD THEMSELVES.

Such systems are a natural-historical cumulum of countless Newtonian collisional singularities -- of planetessimals colliding with planetessimals, yielding planetessimals PLUS PLANETOIDS, of planetoids colliding with planetoids, yielding planetoids PLUS '''DWARF PLANETS''', of '''dwarf planets''' colliding with '''dwarf planets''', yielding '''dwarf planets''' PLUS PROTO-PLANETS, and of proto-planets colliding with proto-planets, yielding proto-planets PLUS  PLANETS... all instances of the Seldonian '''Fundamental Law''', which is the 'strong contrary' of the Boolean "Fundamental Law".

Each planetoid unit is a meta-planetessimal unit, «aufheben» made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of planetessimal units.

Each '''dwarf planet''' unit is a meta-planetoid unit, «aufheben» made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of planetoid units.

Each ''proto-planet'' unit is a meta-'''dwarf planet''' unit, «aufheben» made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of '''dwarf planet''' units.

Each planet unit is a meta-''proto-planet'' unit, «aufheben» made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of ''proto-planet'' units.


Each such collision corresponds to yet another Newtonian "division-by-zero" singularity; each one produces a "qualitative, ontological change", an "ontological" revolution, changing the ontology of the "solar system"-in-formation.


Each such qualitative, ontological change "singularity" in the course of the 'qualo-quantitative self-meta-evolution' of a "solar system"-in-formation, if described by Newtonian, "purely"-quantitative gravitic equations, is described by the uninformative, misleading, quantitatively infinitely erroneous value "oo". 

That is why the Newtonian, "purely"-quantitative description of this gravitic, collisional, solar-system 'self-building'/'self-«bildung» dialectic is an example of an "empty dialectic":  all of the qualitative, ontological, ontology-expansion, ontologically revolutionizing CONTENT of this process of "solar system"  'qualo-quantitative self-meta-evolution' is missing from this Newtonian description. ...


... Apparently, the only way that the "purely"-quantitative mathematical models of the -- still present -- epoch of the "exchange-value" «mentalité» can describe FINITE, but qualitative, ontological change/revolution, is as an "INfinite" quantitative change! ...

... "Infinite" quantitative change is the quantitative '''shadow''' of ontological change, of qualitative change, of ontological gain -- of ontological revolution ...