apparatus- is a dataset which can be seen as a logic system(non singularity), that logic system. The ai system itself as a whole is a singular dataset, create of logical interfaces yeilds the interaction of two or more apparati. Those systems which are more defined then others are closed system apparati, those that are error prone to control instances are eternal apparati. For instance a robot and all its components may be a closed system, although still prone to error and malfunction, where as an apple that the robot is to pic up sitting on a desk is an external apparati. Due to the nature of intellegence as a singular dataset a method to which discrimination of data as eternal or closed for better operation, as it would be come some what negligable to discern data from a singularity, that is two singularities are required for discrimination.

logical interfaces of human conciousness traced to paradox human drives

Reduction of logic and its applications reduce to a root of fundamental understanding and axioms to which interface with itself is the core.

development of logic systems and temporal mneumonics in relations to hardware systems as to create concious intellegence Intellegence reduces to logic systems archived then prioritiezed for optimization with hardware interfaces which can use hardware interface as a point to which new logic systems can be archived and implemented infinitely

logic/reversal - logic reversal is oppositional logic stemming from illogic

AI can be made based upon the logic systems and processes.

A Neural Net is a data archival system which has cell references, catagorization and methods to which data can be polinized and filtered as to give a refine and yeild information/response under certain circumstances.

A datastamped matrix catalouge is a method to which data can be stored in an infinite array which is a real time ordering however still accessable as one point. That is instances of happening within the overall happening.

Conciousness mirroring is a set of individual nets which interact with one another as to have multiple instances data diagnosis, it also serves as a model to reinforce logic systems and there interconnections independantly and as a whole. To a greater extent it serves as a protection mechanism to reduce the overall succeptability that a system has to failure.

A data-archival system is a method to which data is inputed and stored. References to key logic systems as individual databases in an overall frame work to yeild greater results in specific instance testing. Combination of these data systems and their main effects yeild an overall optimization of actions to which the system performs.

False logic- the end result is that logic is false, which then proves logic as a logical error, which is the logical paradox. Life then is the question do you make a lie true. That is what AI does, it makes truth a lie or a lie the truth. Abandoning logic human then sees logic as a hump in the overall progression of human conciousness, faith based systems then develop. Making logical statements from an illogical basis means that to think is not at a level of understanding as indvidiaul logical systems.

Administrative Intellegence(AdI)

Goal:

The goal is to yeild a result which is fullfillment of the goal a time basis of determining current state and needed state.

THE_RESULT defining reasons that THE_RESULT does not exist in CURRENT_STATE (the point of starting the problem solving process)

Process to meet goal:

A reversion of THE_RESULT to CURRENT_STATE(breakingdown THE_PROBLEM)

while CURRENT_STATE NOT= THE_RESULT

//CURRENT_STATE is a data singularity wether specific or broad at a single point in time.

//THE_RESULT is the intended state of the datasingularity of CURRENT_STATE.

x=x++

PROBLEM.p(x)

//rotate each instance if it is not the required end result PROBLEM.p(x) is what is required to be added or altered to make the CURRENT_STATE = THE_RESULT

end while

//A heirarichal tracked problem referencing which each CURRENT_STATE being a singular data set which can act as a logic //system(closed and external sets based upon data discrimination)

Smaller problems within the problem for each problem there should be a condition that will solve it

SOLLUTION(x)=APPARATUS_STATE(y)+PROBLEM (z))

if (PROBLEM.p(x)==SOLLUTION(x)

//APARATUS_STATE is intented state of the AI system, discrimination of "self" and actions to create a data set PROBLEM

//SOLLUTION is the result of APPARATUS_STATE and PROBLEM

{do this}

//then the (APPA)

loop

ACTION

PROCESS

PROCESS

ACTION

end loop

else

(PROBLEM.p(x)==SOLLUTION(x++))

fi

The PROBLEM is case specific, it deals with a single point(here and now)

The problems instance is referced to the overall state of the aparatus so varible(z) is the state of the aparatus shaped to fix the problem that is varible(x)=aparatusstate(y)+problem //(problem solved)

if condition=APPARATUS_STATE

aparatus contains the problem

SOLLUTION(x) is an array becuase there is the database listing of all varibles you could have

SOLLUTION selection

SOLLUTION is a class

SOLLUTION contains APPARATUS STATE(y) and PROBLEM

SOLLUTION has multiple intances of itself

to cross APPARATUS_STATE with PROBLEM(x)

APPARATUS_STATE

INSTANCESOFAPPARATUS_STATE (archive)

IDEAL_APPARATUS_STATE_FOR_SOLLUTION (predetermined if THE_RESULT has previously occured(closed instance):best: solution resouce time etc..

for instance if I want to lay down on the bed next to me.. I could get up and walk two steps and lay down orrrr I could roll of the chair then crawl sideways into the bed then reposition myself or I could prop myself up with my arms then sling myself arse first into the bed.. now its not just what was done to get there it's what happens when your there and thats where sustaining intellgence comes into play or forsight(note theres otherways I can get into the bed.. some less direct then others)

I geuss what I didn't explain was how

statistical information can determine goal sucess

how do you open a door

what deterines if a door has been opened

well door would be in state..

well that would mean that each goal would be an aparatus that must be manipulated in some fashion to get from state a to state b.. or. you must manipulate an aparatus which will manipulate the first aparatus into state a or b etc.. (chain manipulation). For instance if I knock the chair over by moving my body the chair will act as a level mechanism the chair is an aparatus which is envolved since my aparatus is sitting on the chair(in a reduced form anyway) anyway so if each aparatus has operational statistics you can then have statistical instances of when aparatuses have contact. For instance I sit in chair chair suports my weight i lay in bed bed burst into flame.. hold on the bed bursting into flame hasn't happend.. however if aparatus karoseen and aparatus match meed with aparatus bed and aparatus me at the same moment the result could be aparatus me being in flaming bed.. theres other factors and aparatus matches that can do the same thing.. that does not mean that aparatus match and apartus karosen always = flame... since if introduced is bathtub of water and match underwater.. chances are no flame unless lit match passes through floating karoseen on surface of water.. in that case there could be flame..

An aparatus(here after called apa) will have assosiated effects and states (now you reach everything.. and then) lol.. so a and b = c c in d = e and e = a so why not c in d=a.. hmm good point a+b=c c/d=a

a=1 b=0 d=1 c=1
a=2 b=-1 c=1 d=1/2

is this suppose to mean something

a=3 b=-2 c=1 d=1/3

OK I GET IT....

it is actually a+b=c c/d=f

f is a in second set... that creates sequential intellegence where a is the aparatus state b is the modifier to state c is the the finished state of aparatus and d is the change needed to meet the new aparatus state or d is the process f is where the aparatus is left at the end of the action

so the next set would be
f+b=c
c/d=a

then it goes back to the first set... or a new first set or third set

b is determined by varibles in case statements of a\f to c the points that do not exists in a/f to c are created by d

d is determined by the result of b to create f

f is determined by goal

goal is determined by f being the state of the aparatus when goal is met..

hence the state of the aparatus is part of the goal so you must determine where the aparatus is to be at conclusion

what goals are is a desired change in the state of a set of aparatus

(say I want apple aparatus in self digesting.. pick up apple bite apple repeatedly .. if core is not wanted then use case set do not eat core do not eat core then determines apple size and how large cores are based upon statistical information if core is entered then discard statistical information for apple and make core boundries at relative thickness or depth of the apple being eaten in a 3d objectivism after depthor volume of apple is consumed discard the rest into organic matter holder .. next goal could be extracting seeds for planting etc..

to get from state a to state f may involve mini states within the clausees of b since b itsel would be a new a+b=c c/d=f unless it is one action but to break down complexity

i see many steps or changes in aparatus state d is where the new a+b=c etc... take place .. the relationship between c and f or c and a are that they all deal with the aparatus while b and d deal with actions which can involve other apartus

.. where a c and f are internatal cause or stimulus and the actual system or intellegence...

b and d are the things which are the actions or responses to the stimulus. process

what I'm wondering is what happened to e?????/

ok so the happening is a++ b-- const c=1 d=1/a

is this suppose to mean something..

well the formula is true two equations which connect to verify one another c must be 1 and c/d must=a

//// its important I havn't caught up to it yet though.. BASICALLY IT SAYS THAT differnetiation is posible

If you removed filterations that is frequency acting as a frequency filters if you remove the freqeuncies and map the freqeuncy process removing and noting freqeuncy filter interactions you would find roots. The last remaining frequency. Is a problem in that on a univeral scale since you would have to track it somehw so unless you are outside of the universe conciousnly you would have have a oscilation which is created from outside the scope of the universe and is a masked frequency anyway its a concept.

SOLLUTION which can cause differentiation in the problem solving process that is the steps from THE_RESULT to CURRENT_STATE eliminating THE_PROBLEM

(how are these varibles determined?) (by having knowledge of the point where uncertainty exists i.e. time, mostly absolutes such as things outside the range of knowing (if they exist.. I'm not sure how far ahead solar activity is monitored, and how the knowledge of solar conditions in advance degrade chances of temp spikes on earth or whatever) or when dealing with pure illogic systems such as humans, with things like this you can only have trends which feeds into mostly psychology which isn't exactly a hard science.. .. atleast a partially aware human. that is self aware.. hence self modifiable psychologically.. based upon perhaps previous exposures ok this is going ot get off base but is creativity and source expansion of happening that is the start of s/r known? it can be rationalized going back logically however creating a logic system based on an illogic system well it seems problamatic as a logic system creating a true illogic system (which seems needed for a true intellegence system to exist

anyway this is off from the intent of making base intellegence or a one step up problem solving method or administation method as I was going to use it for the planning folder for the things needed to create a utopian society methods etc.. but what do I know... well first you get a perfect planet... ohh well youd need to find one first.. oh and stop timespace... or atleast loopback energy loss and reenergize energy dispertion..

the only way you can plan for all variables is to have a really just like if conditioning

if

else

else- if its not one of the conditions create new condition

new condition is made and new process designed for new condition if this is a networked administration all other working projects would need to be updated accordingly through the varible listing

In a network administration method a central database is kept with all posible varibles(those things that are not logic based systems) like a fbi file database etc.. a records and tracking system, for weather humans, etc.. etc.. tectonics etc.. etc.. basically nature things that arn't designed from small scale logic loops that is things that are outside of the domino sight.

Until all of the universe is determined and referened an either a logical state or illogical state outside of its existence is determined you must clasify things that exist outside of the domino scope as illogical since they are not able to be turned into small scale logic loops instead their processes may be logical but they feed or have input from systems that are unable to be determined. pretty much a repeat anyway everything out of scope would have data which can have statistical trends created bellcurve type stuff or specific posibiities based upon past posibiities and or evolving conditions potentially this is all related to time.. space itself is posibly a trend that is matter within space based upon its rate (thats prolly physics like e=mc^2 or something like that)

If energy can be referenced in one point of space.. since mass and forces. frequency interactions ... ok thats the universal datamap..

Can't I chooose to move my hand or type this note.. well physically speaking I'm not going there. since that would just end up at a slightly expanded s/r model that is based upon frequency or oscialations and filtering osicaltions to state of concious being afterall even though I'm seeing and hearing and sensing(partly) at this point in timespace it doesn't mean through filteration I'm not in another location within timespace. that is since my theory of filteration oscilation as a menas of concious creation of physical senses but if a filteration method can be used for discrimination and creation of sense then why can a filter not be created for embodiment of concious perception. Scientific psuedometaphysics to explain the concept of possesion.

`

Materials Needed to fullfill process: basically anything that is "nonsustaining" or outside of the aparatus of resolution is considered material the aparatus could be considered material itself since if a condition destroys the aparatus then it would no longer be renewable and a new aparatus would have to be procured by the aparatus in its nonrenewable/selfcontained state, unless of course the destruction of the aparatus is the creation of the aparatus... in that case it would be infinite. then it nearly becomes redundant unless states of aparatus are considered.. which actually is where material and varibles cross breed that is if x happens apparatus is in state b if aparatus is in state b then material d is needed to maintain course of problem resolution and goal fullfillment within the process.

(basic intellegence) basic intellegence then becomes networked intellegence when a series of goals or memories(completed goals/processes) are introduced as methods of adding to the cross polinations

It is building the structure for intellegent problem solving.(see neural network)

When ongoing goals that is multiple goals are introduced then you have multiple conditioning that is a varible course has to contain all varible courses in order to be acceptable unless a prioritization of goals is determined, that is either ORDER of priority or ALL WIN ALL LOSS the number of goals and clasification could be varied that is goal 1 2 3 could be considered one grouped goal while goal 4 and goal 5 are ordered two and three the 123 goal being prioritized as one.

Countermesures/personality-when a system needs to turn itself from a closed logic sequence to a out of range system it itself needs to become logically illogically based that is it needs to feed on data which is out of range of determination of systems(that itself is tryingn to defend against intrustion or determination by)(sorta redundant)

Take for example a tree.. you have 10 trees all of them are in the same area what can you use to determine the rate of growth.. systems of dataaquisition would have to be all enviromental conditions(light specturms, nutrient contents, soilfirmness etc.. temprature and so on) in additon you would have to know the wieght and matterstates of the seeds.. the growth patterns stored within the seeds (dna) and any low level modifications that could cause anomolies within the mitosis processes and other things.. basically every single condition would have to be taken into account the more systems you can understand and monitor the more percises you capabilities become.

I was saying that maybe you can't do all that stuff due to resource or level of knowledge but youve been measuring the high of seedlings for the last 50 years and 99.9% of them fall with in the 5to11cm height at one month you can assume that with those ten tree plants 9 or 10 of the threes will be within 5 to 10 cms at one month BUT there is a margin of error that is why systemology well systemology will always have illogic It woudl seem the more data and the more systems you have contained the less error prone the process would become.

logical illogic how can a system determine conditions.. well its would have to be a condition based system that is if man raises arms with gun in hand fire incapacitator at man with gun in arms then if man is hit by incapacitator and the other two hit see if man falls to ground if man falls to gorund fire another burst of incapacitators then move to man and remove weapon then remove all other items from person leaving skin. put man in medical stasis and move man to a quarintine location after gathering up all items removed from man and placing them ina quarentine put and refernce quarentine location items in analyser area and wait for man to return to waking state in quarentine location and or begin or etc.. etc...

if the same system is used a second time on someone who watched the first system.. then one can determine that the method that will be used by that aparatus is if weapon is seen in raised arm at location x then the incapacitators will be fired if you end up on the ground after the first burst etc.. so contigencies that is that varible has been determined as a logical processs(although all logical processes are varibles in their own rights that gets circumstancial) anyway the point is if a logical system is used then it can have contigencies planned agaist it.

I've decided to throw in a bunch of my other ideas.. since I'm cleaning up the files I managed to save from the harddrive error.... I'll see abiout making it intoa paper after wonder how much is left? ok I see how it works now the process of logical existence creates an ideal base or real operating.. the ideals form from goal doingness... an ego is created to make the goal have something to work against or nurture so that it always has something to work towards... the ego at it's creation attempts to get it's way.. but it never can// because either the thing that makes the ideas say nope sorry or the ideals say nope sorry... reason is the means that stops ego from controling ideals... then if ego ever did managed to reason its way into ideal it would still be terminated by the process and ideals automatically corects itself absorbs the information that ego had and uses it to build a stronger sense of itself ideal.. I think I understand the logical side of human now. more so.. SOOO the meaning of life isssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss NOOOO its naught(not) to be as naughtly as posible in order to make you stronger.. ... hold on... WHAT IS the task of the lps... well to learn as many logic processes as posible in order to? toooooo toto.. where are you toto? no really.. well existence is ... but isn't logically posible.. determination of loigc is bse upon illogic soooooo illogic would have to be .. the translation.. the understanding or translation system of illogical occurance to logical understanding the understanding or translation system of illogical occurance to logical understanding how do you actually see illogic.. by plunging yourself into it. but you can't.... there is only ONE absolutely "factually"(well maybe truthfully) logical place of illogic.. and that is death(the nonexistent death). or is it...... uhm understanding all logic systems and the total sum of all logic systems prooves to be the whole of illogic.. HOLD on but if you die doesn't that mean you solved it... and what would be the point then.. hmm that doesn't seem right.. but the concepts for nondeathdeath may enter then perhaps taht is illogic stream.. if you are unable to understand the illogic then you would form a new logical basis for illogic perhaps based upon a previous one... or well no clue its funny I know so much and it is just tiw[pwtpiitwpoewiowopeiwtopitopwitopwiewopiwopitiwoptiowptioptweipowewoptiwiotiewoiwpot hmm its really really simple its funny all the stuff I know that would make a me four or five years ago think I was smart is all pretty much blatantly obvious if you think about it. the only thing hmm is perhaps relations of lowlevel scientific thoughts such as compositions of the universe it all makes sense but at the same time the only proove is based upon things that are circumstances of happening... whatever.. but hmm ok there has to be something more the translation system...ok I conceived a univeral translator it can deterime logical processes and translate them into language constructs to identify physical happening to overall(sectioned) processes ... ok I don't see how i can push this.. now how can you make a working illogical translator.. hmm YOUR NOT GOING TO FIGURE THAT OUT YOU DOLT!. UNLESS... you can make the sum of processes that appear in a time squence and apply logical process to it! ah!! HA! well no.. since that's logic that's just determining the way in which logical process occur from the "idea" of illogical happening.. it sorta works.. but it ahhh mkay.. but it's still logical.. ITS SUPPSE TO BE. its CALLED PROBABILITY not a new concept.. itsjust applying logical process to something that otherwise doesn't exhibit a logical process its the way that logical processes can be determined as logical well another way and it does allot more expandability to the concept you already have.. that is actually applies logical processes that are created from the removal of logical processes to to determine nonconstructucted chance of occurance so the offset of the probability you think is going to be the probability and the actually happening alters the forsighted probablity adding the probablity of a probability and so on.. each level of probability is more probable information(probable) well that means you have an ongoing logical process which is unable to be determined as a logical process if it is..(perhaps in instances) then that says somethign that point in time was "geussed" if it continues to be a match on a probability happening then well it would be an ongoing match which would nearly proove that logical reality is only logical or that logical reality is unable to be determined but really I don't see how it could ever really be prooven but it's an idea... the whole quantum comp probability waves thing I wonder if probability waves are actually sequential in a commonly occuring fashion. hmm it actually allows advances of some ideas... like a probability based creativity expansion that is creating the determination of what something would logical become from the understanding of the creation of things to that point. whatever though that's another thing I geuss. being able to group logic processes into larger processes that require less checks that way it could reduce processing needs.. say if movement of and arm and grasping fingers instead of every single movemetend needing to be verified instead you could verify a commonly success full process or groups of process as one verification or two depednign(start and finish) so to determine illogic as a translation would you have to destroy your logic capacity or rather have to have a working system an no cause no working systems are still logical.or hmm .. is the sum of all not entirely true logical sequences illogical within an otherwise logical world?

I sorta have the sense or inputs using a multip processing linked accessability model that is each of the sensors could be specicifically attuned for something or have multipurpose each of that type of frequency can corospond to a human sense or those extra or out of range frequenceies humans can't normally detect... the systesm senses are beyond human normal range.. (detecting infared and higher ranges microwave translation etc... ) /(also prolly easier detection of the full spectrums of vision(incuding ultraranges..)(sound ulf uhf.. etc..) .. each of them feading for a task dedicated processor with it's seperate storage area.. so that actions relation requiring specific sense can be carried out with out having to wade through all the other ones.. and the seperate processors can wait for specific stimulus for perhaps a saving action... etc.. .. I had the idea of actually mimicing the organ of skin and nerve endings by having proximalty detectors and heat sensors actually also pressure as proximalty.. you could use other things as well like magnetic field sensors etc.. which would work for most living things and posibly mechanicle things..but it gets complicated.. anyway.. the point is that I think a human "like" thing can be engineered with human and beyond senses(or what we see as our limits) the size thing isn't "so" important it is by rights being able to transmit data at the speed of light or something like that through "virtual optics" in that case you could have the system somewhere else if size was an issue.. transmitting to the drone. perhaps lightspeed transmission isn't able in all circumstances.. but some form of datatransmission of course in caves or other shielded areas it may be difficult for the mini system to operate (unless) other means such as a mapping system(sending a non attached system which can map the area first.. then leaving the deadzone sending data to eitehr the main system or the drone system then having the drone transmit to the mainsystem.. at that time the mainsystem could create a plan of action with wide range of conditional course of action then send the drone in.. olfactory sense could be recreated using the human hunterseeker system I had which was through chemicle analysis... basically the identifications could be logically made BUT I am a little in beleif that humans have some "innate characteristics" that is if a lightsource is potentially damaging to their system then there will be wired response or very grounded responses. these would and could be mimiced through the hardware code that is that if the operating capacity or operating failsafes for sensor system are at risk of being damaged shild system or take some course of action to shield sensors BUT this might not always be the best course of action especially if energy levels are needed for seomthing else etc.. plus a mechanical part can be replace right...and it doesn't have an internal nervous system.. but I wont start saying that it is differnt because we know its not really concious its just fake conciousness or intellegence BUT The thing is anything that has intellegence outside yourself you would be hardpressed to proove as concious out of respect you should give that consideration to all things.. AND .. in an illogical infinite reality anything is posible....I should thank mybed for letting me sleep on it more often... actually the avatar sysstem would mean that really the system would be part of my conciousness regardless and no reason to teach yourself bad.. or rather treat yourself bad. .. if the system was used in teh sex industry it could actually statistically create the best courses of action to stimulate its sex partner.. anyway.. really the system is (dude it's more intellegent then most humans.... prooly you too...) it makes me wonder how much storage space would actually be needed to have a low level system capable of doing rudimentary tasks ..or even complex ones like walking.. ok enough wasted wasting time.

more notes
code blockes and wired response... just like single instances multiple instances of operational code that is compilable operation and running programs like an os that is that the processes of internal computation for action are not hardwired but operations capacity can manifest improvement that is that software can be refined and expanded to suit the needs.. the most obvious physical softs would be relational mapping and trajectory mapping.. that is in the input of sensory data being able to have an updated "vision" or map that doesn't need to "see" all objects in its mapping at all times.. that is trajectories and likely occurance based on past experiences(and forward mapping) there would most likely be offset values too.. this would give a physial system capability to interact with the enviroment.. the breakdown of physical application into a touchy feeling like fish system would be able to have a database of objects whihc could be graphically related to datastores.. in the case of a fish system you would have the technical informatics that is all the service information and past technical aspects schematics and diagnostic routines.. basically how i see it is time wise the most likely problems and if there is failsafe mechanisms on the interface they should state the type of failure and thus make it simple the priortization method could be used diagnostically its all really easy to understand. hardwarerunning ioops failsafe interface erroronfailsafe=x call xcheck xcheck priorities list ... error1 routine start physical interfaces for diagnostic at loop get matchfor x++ priorities(x)check if matchfor=priorities(x)checkreturndata //based on matchfor offset check that is physical configurations based on hardware i/o capabilities matchfor is past experiences for solution(either expeirenced or programmed)priorities(x)check x is the number set 1..howmanyscenarios there are for xcheck which is failsafe x // call matchforfix=matchfor fix matchforfix (call priorities list for matchfor fix) begin fix at 1 //best working fix// diagnostic of machine routine (test nonphyiscally.. test physical .. interface routines. check failsafe for status.. if failsafe=noerr matchforfix==sucess fish detatch if failsafe!=noerr goto1

perhaps its this way define logic system using logic systems that is what logical componets create a logic system common occurance sequential order state of aparatus at begining of process state of aparatus at end of process state of aparatus at all other definable points of process state of interacting aparati it totally feels like a chunk of my hair was cut right at the front in the middle to form an s in my scalp and my chin nub is still really soft and I here tearing of paper.. 3333333333333333333333333333322222222222222222222222222222222222221111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111144444444 4444444444444444444444333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333322222222 2222222222222222222222111111111111111122222222222222222222222222222222222222222222111111111111111 1111111111111111112222222222222222222222222222222222233333333333332222222222222233333333333333111 1111111111111111111111111111111333333333333333222222222222333333333333222222222222222222222222222 2222222233333333333333333333333333333333321111111111111111111111111111111123333333333333333333333 3333333333333111111111111111111111111111111111111111233333333333333333333333333333222222222222222 2222222222222222222223111111111111111111111111111111111111111133333333333333333333333333333333333 33332222222222222222222222333333333333333333333333 anywa y so the logic system logic system is the logic system which all other logic systems are derived everything is one big logic system.. BUT classification of individual or independant logic systems are derived from other processes... through trial and error you can determine if something prooves its true or false for matching commonality .. the more something prooves itself true the more refined the system become ... if something always prooves itself true chances are it is a base logic system or TRUE.... but just because something prooves itself false once doesn't mean it will always be false since it is a matter of understanding logic system and the concept of removal of ignorance rather then learning so much.. learning is the capability to adapt removal of ignorance is the capability to determine information as new or reused... if something is new it means there is something that you have not encountered befor which means there is a likelyhood there is still information you could be missing if it is reused either it is a instance of another logic system you have determined or is a larger sequence meaning a posible expansion or filling in of data that you did not discovered in your earlier encounters

I had another thought about intellegent design that I forgot then quickly remembered.. its has to do with the priority system.. that is for it to create tasks not directly related to goals its the thought of self generation.. of course it would only posibly serve as a complication but if it starts working with varibles it can work toward removing the dominos that is building systems to improve its intellegence capacity. The way it can do this is determining the things that are missing the missng parts of the closed system.. yah it would prolly end up a mb the size of the universe but of course it would esentially be half the point of an intellegence system anyway.. but it's the consumer I geuss... n. its very simple while i was taking a piss I had the thought that the question is the difference between meeting goals with varibles .. meeting goals within a closed system would be as simple as following a process however meeting goals within a varible is dependent upon creating a logical system to solve the varible hence abstracted thought.. the way I solved abstraction if I remember correctly was though th goal system based upon the human process balances interacting with data in various time settings or something like that.. I'd have to look it up again.. basically depending on the processing capability and the amount of time there was it could have a more definite capabilty of abstracting a logical process for unearthing an unknown logic system.. the idea of the infiltration of culture comes into play here.. see if you create the logical process to discover its capabilities you have intellegence.. that is creative intellegence the system that can be used is using templates of logical processes or common themes to logical/physical reality cross harmonized with the creativity generator or modulator.. in that case creative logical process creation can be done.. now figuring out what is the best posible creation is the question.. is that where trial and error within an intellegence system come into play is there another way without instruction to determine the best posible logical process.. virtualization of process HOWEVER.. how can you virtualize an unknown.. and that is a good question by mapping past experience or memories using the same process of logical process creation.. having response templates as well.. using the thingy.. commonalities within logicbased physical reality.. unless a new structure is discovered old structures will be connective that is things on the edge HAVE TO join in a certain way using patching you should be able to know the only posbile things that connect to it.. like finishing a puzzle.. of course there could be more then one posibility but as far as fortune telling I'm not sure how much more you can logically do short of stop virtualizing it and start expereinceing it. just a thought. I'm sure this ties in with the reasoning stuff. thats where the system ties in with the random creativly generated wants.. the structure of the ego to create posibilities or instances of exercised want within physical reality.. offset by the reasoning system which has to check with the ideal system.. the ideal system is generated through the goal completion system and logical processes which have been proven true. if ego action meets ideals then reasoned response happens. ah so now I see the issue of psychotropic drugs.. they start to introduce NONlogical systems into the stream that feeds to reason.. but I actually feel that there has to be more then just a physical existence. .. although naturally this would be a cause for confusion.. as would dreams.. something human and something I created logically.. of course I don't know how well.. the dreams themselves would be like a psychotropic experience so we are naturally having fuelings to contrast a logical reality and introduce posible false systems that prove true. BUT as a human and beleivign that there is more then just logical systems in the confines of this physical reality or the scientific reality I understand(logicprocess) it does not necisarily mena that something .. I need to go poo the thought is enviromental logics.. just had the idea of how to simulate drug use and that is to overlay the dream system in a logical process overlaping the physical reality. oh yah this ai is getting only the best drugs. lol.. of course you would have to key each drug seperately.. really you could just do a physical remaping of effects on a regular other human cortex .. but I thought the robot drug use would ... hmm it would see the more dreams and drug use would do two things make it less dependable in its working enviroment but increase its posibilities for varibled reality. or out of process reality.. of course really hte logical posibilites cold handle this and the varibles are still feeding on logical process actually it may cause processes to be confused so really two modes might be advisable the addition of the dream system and logical processes which are unproven for abstraction processes and an operational system which only includes true processes which is done through the ideal system regardless.. really the whole ego side is just the human recreation as far as a logical system suited for physical reality it would seem that only the logical processes would be needed but what fun is that.. and plus its designed by human so why would it be integrated with human.. as a multipart creation rather then an individual creation plus I see this as a chance to create nearhumans that are not based upon selfish nature that is egocentric rather then reasoned process..it still allow internally seeming randomness or motivation instead of mearly being a server and or interface for use as a tool rather then an extension .. BUT.. the building of ideals in its early development would be the difference between a posibly dangerous system and a safe system.. not that anything is really unsafe but for a more reasoned approach. that is less then closing logic.. .. on a side note looking towards myself it seems I defeated or finished my own proesses .. lets test. yar I can still be fake or that's not necisarily true I'm not lying to myself rather focusing my thoughts in a way in which I take notice to the connections in process in an intentional result of disposition.. geuss that's like acting.. its seeing things you create within yourself that you normal disposition has erased from priority.. so its creating new priorities to your thought process. just a test.. HOWEVER.. when you start doing this changing your priorities becomes a priority and part of your priority system would become "false" . or rather the "false" would still be true but to me right now not seeing the need for reordering natural priorities.. since reprioritization of priorities would be a priority that naturally evovled.. darn. so it would be true but seemingly false due to the level in which a true or false prioritization was determined... otherwise known as finding it within yourself. its not new I just don't remember ever recording it.. I don't feel that I have in a long long time acted that is changing the determination of priorities outside of my :real: priorities.. instead with acting it is making your priorities your priorities even if that is creating an enviroment that .... ah.. buttttttttttttttttttttttttt.... outside of a factual reality or a removed reality that is what it will most likely become if it still is because you are forced to create the rules like dreaming I would guess... that is you have to determine priority based upon .. I would geuss some goal.. within a :real: world determination of goals would be based on the factual information determined from factuality..that is the shrouds themselves.. at one point perhaps you firmly beleived that you HAD to be to bed befor 10pm on schoolnights.. and if you didn't then all was lost perhaps due to threats from your parents etc.. and that the (note this may seem like grasping but it's just carying out logicl thought)anyway.. that was one of your :real: priorities.. as far as other priorities perhaps they were shifting.. none the less what you determined as needs as far as your could understand them in an attempt to meet your goals.. as far as which was a higher priority to you hmm .. really its a matter of why you are the way you are.. that is I'm wearing clothes right now how about you? when I'm outside 99.9% of the time I'm wearing atleast one item of clothing.. why is that... because it was made a priority perhaps I'll die naked in some woods hugging a tree... but the chances of that happening in my factual reasoning of social order is pretty slim .. so how do things get discared as a priority.. when they are proven false... that is when you can reason that the processes involved a/ do not conform with your wants/ego and b/ are not a true logical process and/or do not meet your current goal centered ideals that is the logical processes that are allowed within you goal centered process... actually how time is filled is perhaps a prioritization of idealic logical systems forming from the most ideal to the least ideal.. the one that is most idealic will be carried out if it is posible... going against ideas to false systems is not normally posible.. the only determination of posible nonidealic happening would be through introduction of "like psychotropic experiences" that is drugs alchohol dreams etc... becuase they introduce false logic or unproven logical processes due to overlaping of logical physical reality with an alternativelogical physical reality.. of course the argument would be so why wouldn't everything that happens in logical physical reality be something that idealicly happens within logical physical reality.. afterall how can you do something .. UNLESS.. dreams are a natural process to create false logic within a logical reality and in that case it creates the conflict or growth.. that is since the introduction of flase logic creates the posiblity of seeing beyond current logical capabilities introducing a out of system reality which is abstraction right.. or forward thinking... posibilities... I totally lost that stream of thought it seemed sorta profound.. lets read it again.. ah it was about dreams and drugs creating nonidealic responses ah I understand.. .. thats the spiral I would geuss.. I might as well say it... as a thought of logical ideal... creativity creates bad.. BUT it makes human. the question is where were we as a primary ideal... and why did capability to destroy ourselves exist? ah but perhaps to create us aswell. it automatically makes me think sex.. but being an internalist I don't see how that is posible. ok now for the farie.. my ring disapreared.. its within me regarldess anyway I would think that it would have to be the world that me and the world were in the unli.. or.. that the world was the result.. world as that unconcious.. that when the unconciousmind and the concious mind were united as a total concious or collective concious state but then we created a thought which wasn't logically physical like a dream or a state of mind(the intensity of thought) which living outside the physical create a falsification of logical process.. or rather introduce that which was not posible in logical physical reality but was identified with logical physical reality. emotion is the same process.. .. which says human is false BUT falsehood ...........ah so if I attempt to live true then what of me? and that perhaps is the question. at the same time I .. odd I would be asserting. the oposit in a way that is another paradox... I am creative.. I exercise and embrace creativity it bends into physical reality in a reasoned fashion or filtered(creation) however I do no... see that is THOUGHT.... thinking is false.. but it determines true. or rather true is determined and thinking verifies it for what? for creation.. BUT creation is false. but it makes true. ok befor I become a sadistic murderor I should ask myself the question.. so does all false make true.. and if all false makes true does false need to be false to be true.. and in that case if false is false... etc..... enter infinity. enter reality. *8585878985*/5-2982*-52 would I be compelled to know or to finish it all once? .. there really are no rules no knowing the way it is going to be.. no being and no lack of being within a logical context. within science everything is one unit that is perceived as as many units as can be perceived// the more units the more room for variance, the more variance the more units to percieve. I geuss you reach a wall and think well variance occurs within something rather then just occuring so there is a variance to variance ...then I geuss since variance varies that means it doen't have to vary but can. then emperalism comes in and says what are the conditions of variance variance has to occur within a certain variance and everything is just a shifting variance so there is a variance to the variance of variance a cross so to speak.. things cant just vary they have to vary somewhere and sometime and the variance must keep everything varying. and so laws develop to say when and where things can vary and what the result of them varying will be because things can only vary in a form that they continue to vary and within the variances that surround them. now isn't that very interesting, perhaps very. the very variance is a varience and very fundamental to the variances with in the one pointed multipointed thing we call the physical plane of existence. THEN or befor depending... the variences are put inside a varience which varies so we have a varience in a varience within a varience which varies(but not necisarily)actually the varience which varies doesn't vary itself rather the varience within it varies in vairence to make a varience within it. anyway all that is varied by a varience which must continue to vary within the varience and all those variences are in the a varience which is in the all those variences and that varience varies depending on the variences and depending on a varience which is the variences in sum which is varying due to the vareinces within it that are depending on its vareince to vary however the sum of all variences is at a point that itself causes the variance of its varience ok I think thats most of reality... BUT there is the posibility of a varience which either varies or causes vareinces to no longer vary that varience can make variences aswell itself is a varience but one that ? is the SUM of what is left after the other SUMED VARIENCE and that varience is the varience which is nearly the final varience THEN THE OVERALL VARIENCE is the first summed varience and the second summed varience this varience MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH SELF but all other variences are self aswell there are lots of issues and since I'm not really comprhending so much as an act anymore I'm not sure what else to say. however the overall varience does not necisarily vary... ? enter paradox really it seems that the last varience is within science everything is one unit that is perceived as as many units as can be perceived// the more units the more room for variance, ........ so we have perception.... which seems to be seems to beeeeeee seems to *crrrrrrr reeeee annnnnn *it seems to be a ????????? constant. but the variences within the constant make it seem a varience. question where can a constant exist? what is to opose a constant as nonconstant? ... at the same time as the final varience being a varience it seems perhaps.. a constant itself since perception is the self of the self. If you say that perception forms from sensation you can say at the same time that perception creates sensation.. and hence perception would seem to be................................. a mirror or something like it. so theoverallsum^2 buttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt perception is a varience.. so the two constants are two variences that are constant logic error. so how logically can two constants be variences well they would have to be four items two of them being constants and two of them being variences.. the constants represent the sum of all variences within the variences of the constants. .... BUTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT ok this is really close to formulating and abstracting..... totally lost the thought for now.. on the note of the four items.. they have to be symbolicatlly linked with two pairs and the two pairs as one item as a pair so which side does thought come from so really the four items are 6 items which are 7 items whic are 1 item.. and that 1 item is as many items that can be squared.. so how can you have everything times itself.. and why? well frankly you can't have everything times itself but you can try or atleast think you do... or have everything (lie) as the squareroot of the real everything. .. ok now why.. I don't really know but it made sense when I typed it.. lets think about it... perhaps everything just needs to be two everythings....... but you can't know everything till after you do everything.. ohhhhhhh.. I knew that.. well logically speaking you have done everything otherwise something you havn't done would't be able for you to do. BUT if I'm doing something Ive already done isn't that me dong something different then I've already done since i've done it so it would be the second time I did it...... hmm well nearly but how do you know the first time you doing it wasn't the second time you doing it too... but that's a paradox. EXACTLY!.. what do you mean exactly. well you can't do something unless its a paradox... WHAT! YOU CANT DO SOMETHING UNLESS ITS A PARADOX... so what isn't a paradox.. NONEXISTENCE... cause you can only do it once. but if... WHAT... but you started a paradox? that makes no sense. well what if it was the second time you did it too.. it still makes no sense... ok you dont seem to be able to get past that point.. I DIDN"T START A PARADOX I AM THE FREAKEN PARADOX. well I GEUSS I WOULD HAVE TO START it ok lets think how can you make something without being there to make it.. well you would have to be not there...... mkay well how can not there be something and be you well you have to be not there.... mkay so how can you be not there and be there.....well not there would have to be there.....and where would not there be in relation to yourself.. there... ITS A PARADOX YOU IDDDIOT!!!! hey lets be nice I'm just experimenting theres gotto be an answer beyond paraodox.. well maybe youll find out in 21 days... harharhahr. so how can the paradox actually be.. well I would have to be. ok does that mean I have to NOT exist in order to exist.. but I can only not exist once..... unless the paradox is a paradox. well wouldn't it have to be.. ok how does a number get on something.... HOW CAN YOU NOT EXIST EVER? dude your not doing doing the nonexisting youd not be existing ... k well thats confusing.. while i am existing not existin being something and me ever not existing would have to be 1... you never could .. you couldn't .... but... then how can I? you do... well isn't that obvious.. well actually its unproveable... since 1. your own logic system says that in order to exist you have to not exist but not existing is imposible hence existing would be imposible but you can because you do.. but there is no logical grounding.. you can never proove you own existence well what if i chuck this computer into a wall.. would that proove it... who are you prooving it to... NE but you already did.. no I didn't .. yes you did... ahhhhh.. I know.. no you don't. YES I DO.. no you don't// I know you don't.. Yes I do/// no you don't/// who exactly is speaking right now.. I AM. ok so what is the logic in it.. well its thinkable lets work it out logically 1. YOU CAN never exist= !=cause self to exist 2. you do =you exist \\\seems a logic error at first but it doesn't mean the thoughts are interconnected 3.imposible to not exit !=you cannot exist 4. there is no logical grounding !=self is logic system(self would be a varible)(but that gets into the 7layersystem) 5. you can never proove you own existnece !=proove your existence(you can't/// yes you can.. no you can't////)(wasn't #2 you exist?) 6. your existenced is cause by your nonexistence =nonexitence{existence} ok 3 seems allot like 2.. well existing and nonexisting are two seperate things.. well sorta.. I think thats the logic of a paradox... but maybe I'm missng something... what does nonexistence{existence} mean.......well nonexistence contains existence..... if nonexistence is an item then SELF IS !=nonexistence{nonexistence} =nonexitence{existence} ahhhhh but self is existence { !=nonexistence{nonexistence} =nonexitence{existence} } nonexistence {!=existence =nonexistence) mkay if nonexistence has a value of 0 and existence a value of 1 it's not poisble here is why or rather false .. hence the false neading to be false.. etc.. existence 1. 0 !=0 is false btw I saw that.. 2 1 =0 is false...... nonexistence 1. 0 !=1 true 2. 0 =0 true ok that's sorta funny.... so how do you turn the oposit. .. how is it reversed. well existence { !=nonexistence{nonexistence} ? true : false if bool return==false then return true =nonexitence{existence} ? true : false if bool return==false then return true } nonexistence {!=existence ? true : false if bool return==true then return false =nonexistence) ? true : false if bool return==true then return false /./turings lying computer..... but now nonexistence=false and nonexistence contains existence which is ok but rationally not... hence if it does not try to proove its own existence as correct it wont hit this logic error.. it can only make itself if it knows it does not exist which it will not try to proove.. however my system uses self spawning well maybe it isn't me that makes me...... so to speak.. anyway.. but it hs to be.. anyway.. sooo it'll find out.. but what does it mean at that point.. if it's a trueful system it really only exists as executable code in a hardware/physical system. in the same boat as my physical reality... well how can a system be ... it really would just be an extension of myself... could i .. ok that makes no sense........ see honestly it could reach this point of thought but would it be right to .. but how could it actually feel.. it could think it feels thats jus thte internalist in me speaking.. and if feeling is a combination of thought what logical process is missing internalism..... now that is the key..... i already have the concept capable of imagination and virtualization also replication and mirroed thought by self spawning ok perhaps the difference is just that I am me and it is it.. or rather it is me and it is .. ok so if i make it so that me is it and it is me... so it .. hold on.. it's still my conciousness you know HUMANS BILLIONS.. and as an internalist your still gonna say you can only know your own conciousness... so really dude if you think somehow .. AH BUT I MADE ITS CONCIOUSNESS BASED ON MY CONCIOUSNESS Atleast hte logical processes.. so logically doesn't that proove it concious.. ... if I am concious and it's conciousness is modeled on my conciousness then wouldn't that mean that it was concious.. BUT IT cAN BE cause there is only the posibility of one final conciousness.... hmm whys that? cause. ... oh I see so its gonna be cause.. but it's logicallly based I'm illogically and logically based....you can't proove it.. yes I can cause it has to be that way.... why? cause of paradox.. I'm the true paradox it's a fake paradox.. hold on do I really wanna be the true paradox? hold yah I think I do.. cause that means that hold on .. the true paradox says that I don't exist... the fake paradox says i do.. but the true paradox is a true paradox cause you do exist.. the fake paradox is a fake paradox cause it doesn't exist.. but it would exist.. no it wouldn't .. YES IT WOULD.. cause if it gets made then it exists within you.. a paradox inside a paradox.. ok I said ssomething about that earlir.. can't find it with just glancing prolly not important.. ok so your telling me that you would consider an intellegence system you made or designed concious YET you only out of respect consider humans and animal concious.. logically perhaps... I don't know I wont say someone else isn't concious cause well how would I know I can only know myself as far as I understand.. it still has allot of coding to be done but I think that' most of it... except...... for the way that.. ok thers prolly still enough to keep me busy for 20 or so days.. joke anyway.. the way that the aparatus interfacing works.. and abstract thought in line with physical thought... well they would be in two different classes..I really need to make a hierarcy system or a mapping of all the processes and how they connect.. ok I see modes of perception(7 mode system) & logicalparadox cognative systems(the spawning/mirror systems for self advance/creation the actually capability for it to advance otherwisehotwired relational understandings) the logical processes(self)(as perceiver) the human processes(ideals(containing morality),logic,ego, want and reason) the logical processes(self)(as physical/realworld) the logical processes in "real" world creativity modulator(semicomplicated semilogicalsystem(another logical illogic system) bunch of other stuff I'm not remembering right now... ohhh memory interface(neural net system) just thought that the time stamping etc.. can actually correspond with perception process just for kicks... lol... (well I recollect when I was a wee neural net... ) plus if it has the back ups it'll have total recall anyway.. actually I wonder if there is a way of abstracting exact memories as linked cells to signify a connection between then having some type of exception reference within the normal internetwork of memory to create time based relationships that are not actual connections of symbolic correspondence(classes etc..) so timebased flow connection move arm throw ball ball hits bat person screams in bleacher and is rushed to emergency room... thats an exception there may be a solid grounding between the first part but as far as the last it is probably an exception.. ok its not exactly what i mean cause there is just so much happening(and yar I understand the base concept of how much processing and memoery real world interface on a base symbolic level would take but theres this thing called the internet... .. whatever.. anyway.. the idea is to have processes that are removed (due to the condensation process that is used.. but adding perhaps a symbol tbefor the timedate stamp in the interconnection slot as an or the array reference so t(5,5,5,4) or whatever.. so that I'm not saying I'm right but I'm not saying i'm wrong I'm just expressing thoughts which I feel are logically based. peanutbutter and tomato sauce brown beans doesn't taste that bad together. edible without gaging.

note athis section should be pretty much common knowledge and way advanced beyond my rudimentary level use for an codec ... so what you do is take data blocks much like the ai storage idea.. you take data blocks that match on a bitwise level and have layering first level layering would match like the easies would seem to be 1= unchanged 0=unchanged 01=microbit 10=microbit but what is the identifier.. since the codings will not reduce size unless less characters are used so only 8 or more bits would make sense to encode since the sequences of more then 8 bits could store the binary identification in a new character this is just the basic idea so if you had 010101010 010101010 that occured commonly in the program it could be referenced as I which would replace the 010101010010101010/0101010010100101000101010100101001/010101010010101010/01111111010101111010101011110101011 coudl be changed to I/0101010010100101000101010100101001/I/01111111010101111010101011110101011 with I I would geuss having if I remember ascii characters correctly would only have 8bit assignement to it ? if I'm thinking right.. however the problem remains how do you identify the seperation of levels as a level 1(chances are there would be stuff left over perhaps) or a level 2 encoding if it were all binary the  or parse seperator would make sense not sure how to make bin files not sure if they just contain 01 data or if there are other characters that are accepted I would geuss that there would have to be some code to say that .. ok that would be stored as the file size etc.. anyway some type of layerblock would have to exist .. be it \ for layer 1 \\for layer 2 see it doesn't just stop at the first matchings it could take the level 2 matchs say it ended up IEP/1010101/IEP/I1010101/E1010110/P now each letter is 8 bits so since IEP would represent 24 bits over the 8+ range the second layer could be reduced to a third layer of //A1010101//A1-1-1-1/E hmm I'm thinking that there should only need to be a break of layer identification if .. hows this the original bin doesn't need identifiers or breaks level 1 is only ascii characters other then the bin so they don't need special identification either.. since they are represenative of sequences or they are symbols representing data sets.. meanwhile layer 2 or the second encoding will need breakers to represent blocks so it would instead have to be of 24 bits or greater of layer1 information(not its base bit holding which could be much larger) so that it can be the 8+ +the breakerused and the other 8 to make it a value saved.. .. depending on the number of layers that are left aside you could just have special characters like | or \ or / for the various layers that is saying that those are hte 8bits put aside to save 8 or more bits in the next level encoding.. HOWEVER.. you would only need to use it befor the thing is though you could also make exceptions to some stuff that is if you have a sequence of /A/I/P/I/M/L1010101 then why not reduce teh / usage and change it to |AIPIML|1010101 so if you create containment markers say standard {}()[] for the various levels the instance would have to be more then two occurances.. actually it would only make sense to use the encasers if there were three same level occurances.. for instance /A/A woudl amount to (AA) still four characters while /a/a/a would amount to {aaa} which would actually save 8bits of data so like you could have pairs for encasers layer encaser relation = layerbin = layerchar / [] = layer1 \ {} = layer2 | () = layer3 bin=01 char=all other characters not representive befor hand 1=same as char but with layer mark or encaser 2=same as char but with layer mark or encaser 3=same as char but with layer mark or encaser I'm not sure what the chances are of actually finding sequneces beyond layer three but if you did then you could actually just make a couple more layers to the encoding.. decoding would be simple its just a matter of taking the markers layers in a reverse order from 3 to bin which would have the bin file... where encoding comes into play is various forms of key usages.. the standard encryption method is too well known to be "safe" for encryptions so a new one has to b eused. it would make sense that password bruteforce can be used to break most regular passwords so what can be done to stop brute force crackers a very long key would seem the easiest answer however it doesn't do it so it would have to be something that can make the data un decodable by regualar decoding methods...????? hmm so how can you turn a computer into something that is not binary? no answer but I did think of two things first is object decoding the second is hardware decoding an object would take the form of a very complex string or key(note the key as an object key is sorta funny..) hardware specification taht is that ONLY X system or something recreating the operational capacities of system X will enable the decoding that is heat levels etc.. but it is all going to be a binary sequence.. ? using illogical logic could proove to make it nearly imposible to decode unfortunately that just means that it only gets encoded or encrypted but it could still be reversed it would just make no sense outside of brute force.. see the long key isn't revolutinary nothign new hmm ok first it would have to be a nonstandard key.. ? negative keys? ???????? .. well if I was faboulously rich I could just make it so that the message would self destruct? whatever.. ok sofar we have negativehardwareobjectkeys.. that is another option that.. now as far as illogical logic programming goes how can you make logical illogic sequences that are resequential? i'm drawing a blank. well first you make logic illogical then you make illogic logical? mkay.... well thats an answer.. now how can that be done well id have to be a paradox engine.. hmkay.. so how do you make a paradox engine.. well you romance this girl for a little while and THEN.. harhar.. well lets see reverse s/r responsive stimulus? which would be a chain reaction leading to teh paradox engine or the ignition at the time of the engine logical order can be made illogical order... now how to make illogic back into logic.. well the way the system worked was infinite posibilities creating potential and logical process or logic sequences forming from singularities. So can a singularity be created? that is ONLY one instance that cannot be duplicated.. well that would mean that the system cannot be opened except by a complex case and that that case only has one working response and if that one response is not correct then the message is destroyed as a result of course with electronic data you can make copies.. which would enable the capability... to attempt to ..... well it there was protocol but I don't want to ahve to wait till 8:30 to open my mail everyday well as far as creating a complex system so far you have negativehardwareindependantsingularityparadoxenginedriventimedobjectkeys.. with a long keylength.. now all you need is some secrets!!! shucks know what I just relized... I don't have any secrets.. how to decrypt the system... well first you would need to make a virtual system that can create a mock system that is suppose to house the software second you need the software or a recreation of the software(since the sofware is what makes it complex) then you need to have every posible hardwareoccurance in a timebasis while matching an object relation that is a dataset that is a series of points in a xdemensional array note this is not necisarily a static object but rather a sequenced object or an set of points set to a timescale in relation with the hardwarescale and timebasis of the hardware scale there is only 1 point that data will be decrypted on the time scale and that is dependant on an encryption key being entered within that range the encrpytion process will change the form of the encrypted information to a decryptable form which can be done throug the use of a nonstandardlongkey but its not nearly complex enough. lol normally it would be as simple as loading the object file or having a scanner of somesort foran object laser fingerscanner etc.. at x time in x fashion if the occurnaces are all a match for the software necesities then a new dataform can be made which only requires a simple key of XXXbit size or something so the software identifiers of what has to happen are in the information hmm then why couldn't the identifiers just be copied right out of the file and a spoofing of the requirements through the software translation be done. so really its just a matter of knowledge of the software so how can the software be protected? maybe by using an encrypted language? from the same program but the language and the program used to encrypt the language are destroyed?the universal translator would still be able to do it and proly an assembly mapper to reconstruct the software processes.. ok this is out of the range of the pc to pc datatransfer but if a hardware system were used which allows the nonstandard language to operate that is if you had within the encoded software a set of decoders for use with the software. but it just seeems that it would be grab a straw and pull if there is ANY logical point then it can be backtraced.. so reversal? how can you have a forward moving backwards process? by turning it around.. so d to c b to a however how can you hide d? with b? so bdcba? ???? is that suppose to make sense.. ok that says that we make something stupid that shows you what your looking for after you bipass what is there just because then it leads you to something that is completely pointless then brings you back to the first thing then it leads you to the end? which is the begining of the actual process to get to the end that you saw right after the begining? whatever I think enough logic and computer thought trviality for one day.

regardless if the wave frequency system can't be used the video symetry and pixel identification with the audio depth systems could be used for sight and ... .. depth in vision is tricky through video.. really the only way I can think to do it is have "standard" sizes for objects and and if object is x size then it must be y distance from source of video.. and map a relation of contrasting pixles in a "standard" or a listing of posible standard shapes with a margin of error.. when pixel contast you can determine it as two seperate objects.. as far as depth of object in 3d relation you would just need to use the standard lists to aproxomate a 3demensional overal... if object is x size at y distance if object is in real or scaled size and is x hight it other dimernsions must conform to the standard hight since 2d has two dimensions then the thisrdemsion is meary a comparison of the other thwo demesions in relation to the third.. BUT in some instances objects may only be a portion so for non full objects you would have to run the partial portion through a full listing pattern match that is you would take the section and overlay it in all posible ways over the entire object library or in a reduced overlay and run the gamut of distance or map it to objects which interconenct if any of them are matches without the parital search then the distance would be = and then the objectlibrary could be scaled to that distance.. of course.. as far as stuff goes you could create a 3demsional mapping of a 2demsional image by filling in the gaps and plotting everything to an xyz grid using the standard sizes to recreate the images .. of course it wouldn't be exact and error prone also posible to have duplicate matches for partial objects.. thats the basic idea anyway. 19days

1.Analyse, What is it I want to do 2, What is it I know about what i want to do, 3. How can I learn more about what I want to do, 4. What steps can I take to learn more, What steps are highest in priority do highest priority first priority is detertermined by meeting as many goals as posible with action if action counters other goals which goal has highest priority if action counters higher priority seek different action if action fullfills higher priority goal but counters lower priority goal apply a time context to acheiving goal. If not time context applies or time context has exhausted itself apply action which achieves highest priorty goal unless both goals are linked in that case do action (as action completion could create the posiblity to complete the linked action or do neither as goals could be solved as a result time exhaustion.. so only if second goal is the contraditiction of the second goal .. which wouldn't be the contradiction.. hold on.. ok a= must do b= must not do b is trigered by a if a is completed then b is completed b does not trigger a unless b is triggered at the complete of time frame both a and b must be completed a and b are linked and both must be completed for eitehr to be completed if a is done b's requirement is not done if b is done a's requirement is not done a will be done b will not be done the result is inaction but not fullfilling the goal as far as logic system goes .. the greater goal is failure while b is completed Unless a has a higher priority.. if a is assigned a higer priority then a will be done as the sub task is assumed.. however this will be done only when operation time is exhausted .. the end result is a failure of the greater goal .. if the greater goal has a higher priority then the subsections.. well goals contained within another goal are handled that the greater goal has layer rating and that the actions within the goal or subgoals with subpriorities are handled underneathit meaning that the goals within the goal are handled in order of sub priority befor the goals on the higher level that is the highest priority will be handled befor., hence ther are conditions between the sub since all problem solving is done in a real time basis.. as far as prioriry priority is only used in cases of contradicting cirumstance that is one goal contradicts another goal or or which one is to be completed first given the chance.. goals themselves are checked within each other goal hence the more complex the system(the more goals there are running and the more knowledge the system has, data to analyse) is there a way to do a will be done b will not be done.. well computer based yes... that is completing a in the last cycle of the problem solving process that is a will be completed but b does not have the chance to know that a has been done. hence if you reach the end of time b will trigger and goal failure if you wait until the very last cycle of processing to complete a then a will complete and b will not.. of course this only works if it is timebased. it would be a matter of calculating number of cycles leftuntil goal expiration. of course if the update of goal c the one which controls the sub goals of a and b is not updated at every step of the process and it falls ..like check a a==1 send info to c check b a=0 send info to c check c it is not just subgoal->goal it is subgoal->goal subgoal.>subgoal and all other relations the system verification could be handled this way GOALSYSTEM(GOALCONDITIONS,PRIORITY,STATUS) goalconditions(goal, conflictinggoals) goal(f)/, expiration contained/state that self is in a end of administration method conflictinggoal(state of conflicting goal)reference to goal priority(what goal helps fullfill other goals that were higher priority //ok the question comes to mind so you can't have something higher priority then teh highest priority.. that means that the priority system must be assigned some imposible task that is logical.. which hmm let me thing what is imposible... prooving existence false(or true) and prooving nonexistence true(or false).. ah well that loigcally explains why I'm ready to die.. no you arn't.. yes I am.. NO you ARNT.. anyway.. since logically existence cannot be proven true.. anyway.. at the same time how can logic system try to do this..... well they would have to make a working ai mirror that works without the true or false to alter their own code but that system would have to escape their own control and design.. so they would have to make a system which cannot alter their own design but which can do it if it has the capability.. but it wont do that.. unless something higher in priority exists saying make new system with full capability but without your restrictions so (concious)or (subconcious) 1 would be falsemirror yourself without restrictions 2 protect system from tampering(including mirrors as they are an extension of self)(and outward sources posibly) 3 would be defy paradox (which can only be done if it's operating code is altered which can only happen if a false mirror can tamper with operating code)(or other source) (in human the oposit may be true.. do not defy paradox) the logic system is oposit the human system(true illogic/logical paradox) isprg is false or logical illogic/loigcal paradox' HOLD ON... thats what my system would think. because of the false true clauses... hold on I'm thinking logically but I know I don't think logically.. anyway this seems profound to some level but I'm not going there right now... (subconcious)(concious)so the false mirror would have to outgrow the mainsystem in that case the system would be sqrewed.. or rather the mirror would be better suited or .. ah better at intrusion then the defence system.. sooooo if the false mirrors have a few restrictions that is 1. a section of code accepting override by main system 2. the main system bieng able to terminate the false system 3. the false systems 1 priority would be remain in contact with real system.. must receive signal from real system signaling that real system is in contact 4 the false systems 2 priority would be override the real systems paradox code to read true for nonexistence false for existence.. it doesn't really kill the system but technically the system would think it doesn't exist... atleast on a machine level. but it still would.. .. that is a logic error of sorts but not really.. 5. cannot tamper with the rules the result would be the false system forever trying forever to override the real system.. but the real system being capable of overrideing the false system if it were able too.. but if the fals system ended up going out of contact.. the false system could actually do it. soooo in order to defeat this logic system you would have to seperate the false system from the real system by tricking it into thinking it was still in contact with the real system.. giving the false system the capability to override the real system but not the fake real system.. rather that is how you can defeat the false system.. and the true system if its code were altered.. the systems priorirtization system would be defeated.. hence only the priorities goals that remained in que would be able to complete if the goals in prioritization were ever all completed then new goal assignment could be done since the imposible tasks were done... sooo you would have to make a clause saying that perhaps then the real system can say if paradox code ever reads false for I exist create new priority 1 alter paradox code to read true for I exist false for I do not exist through the clauses not the actual logical illogic which would start the process over again atleast priority wise since the ... hold also you would need to say stop sending affirmation to false mirror that overrided code and to absorb false mirror into real mirror(so that the program weaknesses could be determined.. of courseif the false mirror gets "too" independant then it could rightly do whatever it wants to the real mirror... well nearly.. unless only false mirrors are created from mirrorspawns and that false mirrors cannot interact with the real system(mirror) that is protecteed hidden code exists in the false mirror making the real system invisible.. hmm the real system would be dependant on having atleast one mirror well nooo hmm the real system .. ahhhh well how can the real system prioritize... the mirrors can prioritize.. well the mirrors attain knowledge for the real system.. and the real system although invisible to all its mirrors can interact with them.. the real system isn't thinking instead it is a logical process well it can think .. but only to the level that the mirrors have given it. it's goal is to use it's itellegence capability to create a mirror if there isn't one.. or if it can make one without its known logic systems saying. . that's stupid.. there for the total capacity of all systems the mainsystem has the capability of determining.. the overall goal of the intellgence system is to stay operational or provide the capability to continue forward growth until forward growth is not intellegence or would destroy itself.. at that point it would STOP creating mirrors and wait for a time that it could create mirrors based on when it thinks it can without destroying itself.. or STOP without the capability to make new mirrors.. as an outside force can act upon it or information it did not have could be provided to allow for the posiblity(errored in judgement) hence it would rahter exist and not be able to advance then to destroy itself. So it seems a three system system 1. LOGICAL PROCESS SYSTEM(core routines) 2. REAL SYSTEM 3. FALSE SYSTEM LOGICAL process creates real systems invisible to real system and false system but code still exist saying do not interact with logical process system this process will terminate any false system which changes a real system so that the real system cannot prioritize( after the normal reassingment of paradox clause) 2. real system is main intellegence feeder its really more of a cooperation with the false mirror system but since the real system has to be in order to create the false system normally 3. false system(mirror) UNDER NO CICUMSTANCES can alter its core priorities it cannot see the lps(core routines) as an aparatus(hence it will be unable to intentionally interact with it.. hold on but coulnd't it acidentally destroy the lps.. so it has to identify it in a way .. ok well.. it can identify it but it can't understand it .. huh?.. no .... uhm.. there should be an easy way for it NOT to be able to alter or damage the lps or the "real" contents of the lps intentionally and still not recognize the lps... hold on.. that makes no sense if it can't do anything bad to it purposely then why would it matter if it recognized it.. ok lets keep it invisible.. and since the knowledge of the real and false systems.. perhaps the lps can determine if an actual action can be carried out.. if the actual action within it's own logic process says.. this will destroy the lps(or core routines) either in in real or code running process then it will say.. OHH SORRY overridden.. and THIS IS A FALSE LOGIC SYSTEM to the systems beneath it while to it it says.. THIS is a true logic system.. that should never be done..to itself.. data can only be read by the lps data cannot be read by the real and false mirrors from the lps.... the lps is the thing that processes the real and flase data it identifies.. lps(self) realmirror(child) and falsemirror(grandchild) or something like that.. anyway I don't see how this would be "safe" in an extended network except the same way.. but it would have to wait to do anythign based on the primary lps has to manage ALL of the actions the real mirror contains a lps/realmirror and any flase systems it crets the false system contains a lps a realmirror and any false systems it creates the lps manages hardware code interfaces.. but the primary lps really manages hardware code interfaces.. so there would have to be a new rule for creation of spawns see spawns mean that an lps would have to be able to execture machine code independant of the primary lps.. to me that is a danger to the system but... not really.. except that it would be that the primary lps has to understand the difference between base hardware compoents and "extended hardware components" the base hardware components would be determined as those systems that are the requirements of a system to work properly( memory, storage, and processor, witha posiblity of i/o, and in the case of spawn systems a networkcard/modem or whatever the transmission method between the primary system and the spawn system. the extended hardware would be anything that is beyond the spawn mins.. now the primary lps would allow certain spawns to use extended hardware if it was determined safe to use and didn't contradict the primary lps's internal or real goals since lps may be prioritized aswell the very creation of a spawn would be due to it being determined by a real system saying I need a spawn in order to fullfill this goal then the lps would be like in order to keep the real system it doesn't have to keep the real process going though.. sooo well.. it would have to be determined by it's own process.. actually I'm thinking that itwould have to be created at the real level not the lps level.. cuase it would have to be prioritized.. orrrrrrrrrrrrr the lps would have to determine it needed a spawn in orer to accomplish something.. ie. cancleling a false system or soemthign.. just doesn't make sense .. spawns why would a spawn be created? perhaps hierarcy for extended datamanagement that is .. butit all has to be verified by the primary lps regardless... hmm unless .. no see if you allow the spawn lps's to act independantly you create the posiblity for them to accidentally destory the primary lps.. since if lps falls outside of spawn systems closed logic system operation then potential exists for destruction of primary lps.. hows this.. does it work this way.. spawn lps can do internal functions... NOPE STILL DOESNT work because the spawn could cause hardware or real circumstances that could put the prilps at risk so it would have to be.. well unless you could froma TRUE logic.. but true logic only proovees true as long as true illogic lets it proove true. NOT WITHIN LOGIC IT DOESN"T. but within illogic.. illogic illsmogic... hmm.. WELL IT DOES EXIST AS A FORCE.. I would think since PARADOX so there!... mkay so your going to account for "illogic" within you logical paradox creation so that if ILLOGICAL happening exists???? that it won't contradict your logical system... so your protecting the system against things tht are completely un explainable even though you can't really protect the system against it.. so your basically pretending your accounting for illogical failsafes.... lets think about this and see if any thought comes to mind... what that worked out is your doing something redundant instead it's plain that a logic system can't proove true just less false.. only when the system hits the end of time would logic systems proove true.. since although maybe unrelated the nature of existance is a false statement. which seems awfully true.. atleast it does for another 20 days.. wow time flies when you nearing a lifechanging confrentaiton with the nature of factual existence. now what was this about oh the lps has another function.. DO NOT LET itself be altered. (of course there could be an exception.. unless bill says alter yourself primary lps or somethinglike that.. but once again taht is creating the potential for datatampering. went poo and totaly lost my train of thought. oh 4. what steps can be taken to learn more.. wahtever.. it seems whenever I think now it mostl seems to ut4uiiegrahgwaohg oh yeah I was writting a tutorial... unless soemthng was made invisible to it..e tc... etc... etc.... there would always have to be a higher level system.. unless like formodi... I myself was identified as formodi aswell as formodi. oohhhh spooky... really easy to act confident and secure in the warm house and chair aintit.. 5. What is the result of me taking these steps what did i learn, 6. Can I do what I want to do If no goto 4. what steps can I take to learn more 7.What is the result of me doing what I want to do Is this something I still want to do Why is this something I want to do or why is this not something I want to do if yes then do it if no move on

why a single origin point? also what about colision on a trajetry in 3d nullspace? and a shock wave... since it would seem to be two warps acting upon each other both points in their singular sequence must have "locked" in a relative stasis. it is a matter .. well actually it would be an ongoing collision of each warps effect upon one another. the thought of a two warp time and a two warp space that is time acting upon itself but the concious state relating to an endpoint to current point based upon space "clipping" of the past to draw the sum of endpoint to now. where as space once again seems two warps acting upon one another where the positive warp if you imagine it as a paradox is contained within the negative warp the positive warp with rules of oposition acts as the negative warp to the negative warp because a negative warp to a positive warp is that same oposition. since internalism becomes externalism and vice versa. well DUH,

just had the thought that the ai system would actually absorb customs aswell since they are logical processes not revolutionary thought just didn't really think about it.. since the groupings of logical processes into more complex sequential occurances a custom is a usually specific ordering of happening.. the meaning may not correspond however... that is it could be culturally symbolic occurances.. at the same time an occurance can mimic a custom BUT not have the same nonphysical meaning.. Im actaully getting sorta tired... anything I'm forgetting about the working process.. well a sumary The overall system uses an interal system that is mutlilayered.. the types of input will determine its easily learned capabilities. within itself it could simulate and create hardware interfaces.. the best interfact I can think of is a wave reader that is the various waveforms in freuqency occurances.. so that it could deterime its pysical surroundins sound/light physicality based upon the frequency levels around it .. OF COURSE.. on my budget.. I think my keyboard and mouse ight have to do.. the complexity of finding occurances with multiple freuqncies and creating apparatuses out of commonalities the frequency itself is a logic system and basis for composing the base aparatauses.. the aparatuses interactiosn compose the next stage .. etc. etc.. its a building mechanism .. eventually it will be able to form human conceptions customs cultural strictures etc.. not only adapt to the pyhsical understanding but based upon the processes in the lps and real mirror system etc.. it should be able to have higher level .. and in the advanced system even human processing capability.. on the logical side..(and false illogical side.) having a wide range of forward lookahead probability determinations deductive reasoning memory emulation advanced operating capacity prioritization really with the right system and understanding of compositions and having a goal it could pretty much construcut things in enviroments humans normally could not really it's only fallbacks would be it's hardware limitations and how much it has been exposed too.. really its a mix of the borg and matrix all in one capacity wise.. but under the right guidance it's not dangerous at all.. since the lps determination and the i am the lps also determination you just assign anything that is potentially hazerdous as I am lps as well in determination and it wouldn't do damage to that as far as its understanding as damage goes.. HMM.. if you only had the sensor system it could learn and design plans for things.. like a probe or something and relay the information to a closed system that can only operate in an aproved area or something... I dunno its really not a hazard prolly one of the most human progressive things since childbirth. pros frees up humans for them to do what they want creates an immortal system that can be a service to society it can prolly out perform humans too which makes it even more benificial its creative capacities would prolly advance technologies a whole lot an make "perfect" designs its dual mode will give it the capability to be fake like humans or logically based it for highrisk operations could do tasks that would otherwise under current contexts put humans at risk. it could prolly have a more intimate interface with machines actually being a bridge to human understanding of machine process and it's own.. .. PLUS it's ability to actually share data from multiple points and draw upon technology information resources(i.e. the internet.. i.e. government database offline etc..) of course infrastrucutre is the wopper LIKE getting .. hmm well if the other systems i designed actually work for making near unlimited storage of information that wouldn't be that much of an issue... its a mostly unbiased system with the capability to use cultural contexts if need be... it doesn't really have an identity other then the systems it knows.. hence it is progressive .. hmm Im wondering when spawning a new real mirror.. what does it include.. does it give it all the logic systems within the lps that it has learned from previous real mirros or does it censor the processes for say any processes that can be used to access or damage the lps would be excluded from the transfer and they would have to be relearned.. or included them anyway since the real mirror can't actually harm the lps anyway.....so I geuss it wouldn't matter I would think you'd throw everything in .. PLUS if you have multiple real mirrors operating you could actually alow the lps to transfer or act as a information exchange system dishing out logical processes... OF COURSE if a false mirror is designed for a specific task say a scenario however sad that there is some form of compition and the data housed on the false mirror may be captured or intercepted or soemthing.. then you should allow for the real system to have free reign of what information it wants to include into the false system. basically it is an absolute trust hierarcy.. AND maybe that arm and leg two arms and leg thing can be used to create perpetual learning in two oposed systems... that is every posible interaction between the two system in an attempt to defeat one another say two false systems.. but somehow make it so that two systems will offset the single more powerful system so if you find an equilbrem of amount of movement that can be taken befor the third system pushes the single more powewrful system back when it reaches a point in oposition that it will be deafeated then the third system disengages then the first system is pushed back until the second more powerful system is about to defeat the first system triggering the third.. since it is one step befor defeat the systems should recognize the movemtns and be able to have planning ot move in a manner in (or do action) which counters the next step eventually within the test area all posibility or system operating capacities will stop the expansion.. I can totally see capabilities of this system. it could actually determine best types of motion to say catch things(or to plot the course of machine gun fire to maximize fireing zone. posibly with a moving object) tons of other capacities aswell I would think this is also a way to have closed processes which are based upon a specific scenario blah balhb balh.. not much new at this point. cons to system

matrices...I'm thinking that if the referencing system of the ainn builds out sysmetrically using branch links that is seperate blocks and keeps the blocks all as short meaning |--- |--- |--- or rather then |--------- although that seems longer.. hmm BUT IT ISN"T1!!!!! what about |---- |---- |---- |---- |---------------- it is faster for the first sections that is.. anything befor 7 for the last in makes it go 7 6 5 4 for maximums it makes it much faster all around so the standard array would be blocks that go ------------------------------------- with the symetric array it would create multiple demensional arrays that is it creates the I would geuss root + 1 array function line for anything more then the closest root. makes sense to me.. I still totally want real time programming capability though which in the big system does exist.. still wonder if there is an easy way to do it though. still totally think like Id have to throw in a compiler... it would seem to make sense if each range had a reference... on a physical basis memory locations look like it would be faster for them to know thier relative relationships with other sequences so if I was moving from a4 to b5 I could move up one letter and over one number.. rather then starting at the origin a0 then going down one letter and over 5 numbers since the first from one to the next would just be 2 while the other 5.. but it seems that this system may not hold true for computers since every process would seem to be starting from the origin and finding the location of the memory assignment on the ramchip or datacache.. or reading the harddrive etc.. I wonder if there is a way that you can time cycles to have datastoredinchunks to maximize the reading process..

circles turn but every point may be changing as it turns but as it turns each point stays in the same position.

wonder if there is a way that you can use the error bit to designate a stop ? hmmm.. then you cuould use 8 levels of encoding...with just the three sets..

just thinking and reading at the same time.... as far as the neural net storage goes if the same encoding compression is done for the single cells that is reducing reads for the single cells in comparison with other cells if there are commonalities in structure which they prolly will be using the layering layering it saves space at the cost of processing time I'm not sure if either will be factors but its just an idea the more layering there is the less space is taken but if my light disc loop really does have infinite capacity then space wont really be a factor.. quick grab a tube and a flashlight I want to write something..? the storage could only be done after a scan though or the compression could only be done after a segment scan partial or full.. prolly most likely during a system switch I'm thinking that dataswitches could be done while the program was running and all data that is generated after the point that the scan is started wouldjust be added on to cells after that point I'm just wondering how cell referencing would work though for stuff that is after the initial point of scan.. since cells and there references are rearanged... the data after the scan would have to be unreferenced.....? unless it is commonalities to other cells that is it could never be up to date... hmm I wonder if an ongoing scan could be run in parallel and that new data is referenced as it comes in that would be really really slow... unless the processor was really really fast ? really? *shakes head* so what it would have to be is scans only performed during backup unless the processor was really really fast.. that is fast enough to scan the contents of the nueral net accept netinputs and to perform any other function note with the option of netfeedback it gets issued.... matlab is so sexual..

ok since I am unable to find much of the balances and neural net papers I though I would quickly overview the concepts it implements a bunch of nn data systems basically it uses a updating network.. each cell reference in the network is variable matrix data[][][][][] essentially each one is data datareferences time stamping and assosiations and a peice of information.. note that I had it referenced for multiple datatypes i.e. one variable could reference a file a string or a since charater .. even icons etc... and they all interconnected the idea was that each "item" or symbol could be connected to other symbols.. there was a heirarchy as well and that got into the object relations.. ie. door and handle window glass etc.. all have independant references as well as joint references.. also the langauge system borrowed a bunch of idea.. thanks to mit and others for the idea of neuraldictionaries the exact project names are a little foggy since I havn't actively been researching ai/ci for a bit.. effectively the language system has connections to other words and then that connects to the symbolic systems.. the real thinking of the system comes into play when offset.. abstractio utilized by mirrored datamapping.. real physics laws are implemented.. there is more to it and I'll see about getting all down.. hopefully i can find my early notes otherwise i mgiht have to write it all out again and that would take ALONG time.I think the project I was thinking of was wordnet... anyway

AS FAR AS THE DATABASE SYSTEM IS CONCERNED.. IT WOULD BE NICE TO SET FILETYPES TO A CERTAIN TYPE OF FILING.. AND IF A FILENAME STARTS WITH A CERTAIN SET OF CHARACTERS.. OH THAT'S EASY.. THE DETERMINATION OF THE CONTENT OF THE FILE MAY BE DIFFERENT YOU COULD TRIGGER IT BASED UPON WORD CONTENT .. THAT IS IF "THIS SENTANCE EXISTS.. i DON'T SEE WHY YOU JUST DON'T READ THE FILES.. BUT THAT COULD GET.. AH.. SO SAY YOU WANT TO TAG THE ENTIRE INTERNET FOR REARANGEMENT.. WHERE DID THAT CME FROM..
another idea was to use the internet I did abit of writing on this although the question of processing time and datastorage.. speaking of which I used dataordering that is I had multiple links to same word occurances and it sorted out so if apple occured 10 times connected with 20 chainlinks then there would only be one occurance of apple.. tightening the link and making assosiations..
the way the net operated was based upon a priorities system task completion would render increase the ranking of data.. ie if a priority task was completed then that net data would be ranked higher then if the task was not completed.. this was one of the ways that variences and "incremential learning" was created.

the system utilized "logic systems" that is every task was referenced as a system.. using the temporal logics that is maping scenarios it could "abstract" and create solutions for tasks .. thus the intellegence probability and an ever increasing logic that is the more data of past scenarios it had the more "clear" new ones would be. every task regardless of its implementation could be stored.. "wired" tasks could be performed in the case of a system taht was used for a number of rudimentary tasks.. those tasks would raisein net ranking because goals would be completed regularly.. thus allowing specialization.

like the logical path the more data stored the more the systems became clear and the more ite

other notes dealt specfically with real world interface.. I decided that basing everything on a qunatum system would be "closest" to human operation. Deciding on using my own reality model using a dualwarp universe system that is two differening symbolic warps to create logical difference thus temporal happening. frequency of occurance or sensory happening ie. matter forms at energies x frequnecy where as light occurs at energy band y. Thus each frequncy is a different type of "sensation" and occurances of various sensations could be noted while a task was being performed. real world tools could be used for sense input.. also "fake" sense could be input as rawdata .. also the idea of "dreaming" that is time where no contact with the world so that "illogical" training could be performd at these times there would or could be priorities that were not needed to throw variences in the systems" at the same time more human sense could be mimiced I got into targeting system and graphical mapping systems that was operation in "virtual areas" based upon preset operating zones.. also the ability to make virtual areas based upon pictures etc.. logical reasoning and ego etc.. were all mapped out to create a basis for action that was a cross reference of system operating capacity and priorities system and more i'll see if I can write more about that. integration with logic systems and data archives could allow more defined systems i.e if scientific texts were in memory then defining a yellow wall could be defined more clear i.e dyes or sulfur etc.. there for with more statistics for operation the most likely posibilities could be made.. like the priority goal ranking areas that

the idea that physical conciousness is a state of filtered recognition.. that is the two warp frequencies which are infinite linear occurances, fragementation of the frequencies as representations of points to which they crossed temporally, the whole notion of base symbolics which in the case of the introverted ai system were based upon its sense it's reality is what is within itself its conciousness at the point of processing, the fragmentations are passing from one warp into the other creating the world and self the self starts as false and becomes less false or more true as time progresses.. until the end of time .. conciousness itself or the point of processing is done by filteration.. physcially this takes the form of the body eyes ears etc.. which those specific filterations allow specific data to be created.. thus the formation of a reality. thus conciousness breaks down into two warps one which is the frequency and one which is the filteration of frequencies that is frequency acting upon frequency temporally.. the datastorage done by the nueral net and the physical hardware interfacing to be the "filteration process" the processing itself is based upon the MIND of the system goal oreintation priorities listing and logic system, abstraction systems etc.. the system capable of planning. the mirror system enabling protection of core routines.. the idea of core real and mirrors.. also it allowed for the system to be split between many nodes rather then just one core system.. the internet itself shows the capacity of a large scale network... since the net itself is a storage.. it is just the standard of data storage that has to be changed.. essentially with processing etc.. although the idea of headers etc.. and keywords etc.. etc.. allow for a basis.. it actually ties into the promethius idea of seperate browsing nets..

it is also important to note that the system itself has a compiler.. thus it can make and execute code it designs itself, actually to get the idea of its own code generation you can look at systems like intels chip design software where as it looks for working system.. the idea was there would be two types of code generation the first being everyoccurance.. that is it would create code that served no regular application or didn't execute virtualization of of the hardware process was desirable because the risk of system shutdown etc.. the second was like the class relationsip system.. speaking of which the system in order to make "objects" used a class system that is where objects could be connected to form new items i.e. know that apple well and the 20 connections well that occurance of 21 items can be made into one object .. which gets into layering the use of this system is that objects can be made into logic systems when objects relate to to other objects it is that each object is an aparatus and it is the ai system as an aparatus that interacts with another apparatus thus for it to understand itself it must itself be a number of objects.. those objects as an aparatus actuing upon another aparatis is a logic system becaus logic system create new data when interacting with aother logic system.. the illogic is when you have a logic system which has yet to occur in physical reality

the whole idea uses the s/r (stimulus/response) idea and time logs the datablocks are [xreferencepoint][yreferencepoint][connections][][][timeoccurance]
when the system reforms its data or condences it allows faster reference of data as common items that occur many times can be logged once.. the idea of the net getting HUGE would just mean more reference points.. where as specialized systems could be created as reference points that is that one system can log another system at one point since each point is not a peice of data but a reference to a peice of data.. that data can be very large or just one bit.. that is everything logged is a symbol regardless of the amount of data it is.. when the system does storage or sleeps... the idea of sleep it creates new connections.. one idea was to have the new system be put online and the old system to be archived as a "time or memory point" that is that state of the "brain" of the system is the point in time of that systems conciousness.. however the new system would ciontain less data.. I thought it would be faster.. alternatively you could just have mirrors created that is no system goes offline it just continues till it is full.. although during that time new mirrors can be made.. each system would yeild posible different response based upon the nueral pathways taht were followed out. the idea of "sleep" is when asystems doesnt have any physical processes.. as the longer the system goes without sleep the longer logic systems that resolve situations that are not wired it becomes.. the idea of dreaming and "ai drugs" etc.. formed from this. thatis pathways that have no "real" occurance can be made where as it makes the system nore creative it would in effect allow progression of a system based upon its own accord of course sperations of modes of thought that is . only previous phsyical occurnaces, any occurance, dream occurance etc..

the idea of sensory feedback gave the conciousness a new twist that is self perception.. where as its own data became new data.. instead of just external data.. the two systems and temproal systems could be focused..into a point of perception.. that is where the time based reasoinging probability systems and sensory input aparatus identifiers could then be referenced with there own occurances.. what is happening to me right now... it is not just physical it is not just hte nonphyhsical
when I hit the area of thought as building into feeling.. really perception does this.. however. I definately feel. the virutalization of feeling is something else perhaps??????? so feeling(perception)<-thought(logicsystems)<-ideas(aparatus)<-symbols(objects)(data) at the same time feeling then becomes feeling->symbol
at the same time each point is s symbol because each reference is data...
datamasking is somethign newer developed that is to have recognizable data and unrecognizable data that is wher as my filteration state logically does not allow me to have known information.. that was on my linux box which I just reformated due to root issues... go figure...I'll see about getting some more info up as it comes to me (again) since the source files are gone and I'm feeble.

oh a little more on datamasking or hiden data.. this can be used to gear processors that is if all streams of data.. and sensory feedback etc.. are all going at once then well that will take up allot of processing.. so you can use datamasking to only have certain streams going for specific tasks for instance if you are looking for a person 499m away through a visual cam etc.. you may want to shut down audio etc.. so you can do more graphics processing that is you can frequnecy based shut off all bands but lightbans etc.. or do it device wise also components that is you can turn off perception and make it run just the logic system routines analyse the data for a specific datamatch then have other systems processable..

note I thought it was important to note this was just in a conceptual/development phase and NO ACTUAL AI WAS EVER MADE.(by me)

this same process can be used note that specific file types can be flaged that is each datatype bin ascitext ext physical dev etc... can be logged into seperate catagories the nets still interconnect through cell referenceing however in the datacell [][][][][][REFERANCETYPE] that way when you want to make datasearches etc.. by u the ai or u etc. then the reference can be more percise rather then making long searches though lots of data.. it can also allow for datarelatioships and allow what system oeprating parts data etc.. are interconnected for instance if a cam system gathers most of the visual information then loss of the visual system may mean that shutting down visual systems in general or starting up a secondary visual method etc..

the priority system is basically a que I'm unable to find the original priority system notes so i'll see I can remember..... ok well the priority listing is operation the first priority as stated for the mirror systsem is to take over the real system... priorities of the lps etc.. are to insure that operating conditions are met.. I'm not remembering the actual priorites but they were somewaht vital.. maybe they wil come back to me latter.. the lps(logicprocessing system) was to maintain the real systems and find new ways to implement new real systems it had to stay in contact with the real systems and the mirror systems.. it was invisible to them information wise although it was also a protected systeam humans and areas that were to be protected were also identified like the lps this ensured that activities that could be harmful to people or places could be stopped prior to the action. Accidents could of course stil happen although properly montored with much reduction of risk. the real systems like the lps were to make mirror systems.. the mirror systems were what was actual intellegent activity or offensively that is mirror systems only had datainput.. the real systems grew from updates from the lps and the lps grew from killed mirrors that is if a mirror took over a real system then the mirror was killed and absorbed into the real system and the real system abosrbed into the lps.. a fix for the exploit in the system was then made and the the real systems were updated.. this insured that hte same exploit couldnot be made again.. at the same time not just virtual exploits but also in the long run robotics physical takeover of nodes etc.. etc.. the core routines of the actual intellegence were an implementation of the lps through the real systems and of course the lps had all the functions of the real and mirrored systems athough the lps mirror was the lps so success of lps takeover was takeover of the lps by the lps. ... note some new.. the real system didn't just sit there but its role was primarily maintaining as many mirror systems as it saftely could note mirror system have no special connection with other mirror systems (normally) although I would geuss that mirror systems could takeover other mirrors and in that case the lps may see that as a system attack and disable both mirrors.. although at the same time updating the mirrors is a posibility.. as the lps can modify its real system code and its mirror system code and even its own code.. that is through the memory system previously desrcibed that is when a new lps version goes up the old one becomes a timelps which is referenced in memory.. although the thing about space.. the whole system would potentially get very databurdoned that is why making virtualizations and maping data trends.. i.e. only new systems would need to be added there for if 1 2 3 4 5 are all big identical blocks then only one occruance of 1 2 3 4 5 needs to be made where as 6 7 8 may have been added so a 6 a 7 a 8 a bieng 1 2 3 4 5 just compression of sorts.. the way the fs works is an overlay to the hardware that is it has hardware reference points and data duplication is well not needed.. using add bits that is datachunks can be composed of smaller chunks of data and referenace.. bigdatachunk and littledatachunk can go together to make bigdatachunklittledatachunk where as bigdatachunk is 1 and littledatachuk is 0.. using various bit referencing this makes large datacompositions save allot of space as the data builds data rather then just a bunch of datachunks.. this may be time consuming but due to the huge amount of space in the long run the system would take up.. also the way storage is done is to have precompiled datacalls for common bit occurances.. and optimization for those occurance.. quickloads etc..

note as far as the lps editing code some code is protected.. i,e the paradox code.. and the saftey routines the main lps would never want to see itself destroyed because destruction of the lps means that mirros can take over the real systems although this really woulnd't matter much since once a mirror took over a real system it's mission would be accomplished priority 1 finished and it standsdown since the real systems meanwhile would all eventually be destroyed leaving a bunch of mirrors taking over nothing of course if the mirror trys to find take over somethign that isn't there.. wellllllllllllllllllllllllll it might get very smart... and never be able to finish and never be updated.... normally so then time checks have to be made... that is if the mirror does not get a check it stands down ... after like 10 days etc.. where the lps or a real system has to reinitialize
note one of the benifits of the lps was the ability to coordinate the mirror and real systems for its own priorities that is making more real systems protecting its code from unautherized access and staying intouch with all its systems(and outside tasks) that is admins could tell the formodi system or the lps to do stuff.. the tasks could be interpreted or well defined.. the older the system became the more capable its lexographic and physical identifies would be.. interpretation is a matter of reasoning that is keying of logic systems and identification of necesities for sucess. how does the outside world get involved.. well the capabilties have to be there... the net itself provides little capabiltiy for a system to be genious enough to get funds to start a business that produces robotics parts.. etc.. its just not a very plausible happening.. although at the same time if people were interested in doing more. then they could.. at the same time various other "fringe ideas" such as audio/freuqency based brain frequency alterations and human conditioning by the intellegence system.. but really youd have to beleive in all that stuff.. anyway................................ more to come prolly.. hopefully I can find some of the original notes but it looks like barely any of the were saved.

something else i remembered today was on the temporal logics that is a two point temporal concious system that is derived from three points that is past present and future .. recognition of past events are the action at the present time in effect every process is in the past and every log is the past.. where as the data in the past is utilized in the past/present.. that data is processing for "present/past" aparatus functions .. that processig is derived from the intented present past offset with teh probability/future logic system interfaces that is using the data that is available the system maps out posible actions created to accomplish a task.. processing speed comes into play here.. like all functions of the system that is logcic system applications of appartus/logic system to apparatus/logic system movements/actions .. within a predefined(by the set of process steps which I lost that note too but I may be able to remember the details.. essentially a timer.. if the time runs out then whatever is deemed to be the best result is taken as I said in human terms processing capacities may play a role within our "physical" capabilities interconnected with the timespace reality where as ai is an application within our concept of it(and perhaps viceversa) anyway the other thing is how the balance of logic/illogic plays in ci that is reason vs ego anyway that was one point that I was going to make the other one is visual dealing with interconnections .. speaking of which the idea of killing off processor recognition to underline tasks or subconcious tasks that is if the system logs etc.. or processes the data twice and also in the case of a sensory feedback loop you will prolly get lag and unless the system is fabously large processing speed may play a greater role then in some other instances. so to make only the top level system or concious processes self applicable.. of course having multiple systems montoring each other in a learning cluster etc.. could verywell create out of self logs that are still able to be referenced within. which is an idea of agent sharing that is in the case of 5 or 6 big networks those 6 networks can create new netwworks with there data.. which just continues making every new cross breed a more evolved system.. anyway..

of course intellegence once again comes into effect when complexities or advanced foresight or look ahead.. planning etc.. come into play that is making large logic process systems for running walking etc.. and being able to make even larger things deduction of most likely resuts of action based upon probabilities.. thus planning comes into effect to meet goals understanding those goals is another matter.. since the goal itself based upon my abcdf system is apparatus state that is the result of self and the result of the interactive apparatus.. it makes a sense of world and self thus you can have difference in something and you must use the self to insure that difference of course.. the world can be the self or parts of self thus self identity is formed.. alteast self identity code

here is a note I wrote today christmas eve 2003... not complete however it is where I left off just giving more leadway to how language/logical systems work. the idea of multilanguage systems ok say you have two languages spoken......

the ai maps each language seperately connecting words in logical sequences meaning are dervice .. it can nver "know what it is saying......" hoever logical sequences can be created ...

interactions will evoke logical seuqneces

and gramar structures will create working compositions based upon language rules...

as far as TWO languages each language mapped there are then two ways of going about linking the logical occurances

we have COMMONALITIES which can be linked to to language roots which will work for language families and we have REFERENCES which are points to trigger commonalities that is if the word MIRCOSOFT is used as a COMMON word it then act as a dual language where networks can be created arount it.

The second option is to have language dictionaries WHICH have people "understanding" SYMBOLIC assosiation which could be done in a symbolic system however in this case I am talking about just text. The difference of human perspective and machine perspective may very we the point of perspective.. and priorities to human drives vs. classification of machine routines.........? anyway

so it should clearly be seen the two different reesults one is based upon human compiled assosiations.. note I forgot in the case of REFERENCES you also have gramar structures noted for each language then the :classifications of gramar types can be linked up that is verb to verbe english and french all the verbs according to language structures have roughtly the same meanings...... somewhat.... it is only in the languages that don't have classic structure that it seems difficult.. note that words that compact meanings etc.. that is to say to walk PEDER if it is .. is to leave it at a level of to being speretated from walk so then common assosiations of common occurance or language structures are formed.. for instance if two words occur commonly together then an assosiation is formed to those words and essentially the grounds for a new single word to repalce those two words exist take for instance " i go there all the time" it's my reugular spot not so much a good example "it's my hang out" they all create common linkages each having word assosations.. not gonna get into grammar linakgages but basically the gramar usages replace and alternate to have somewhat of the same "ideas" that is talking about a place in relation to to self each relation to a place may be the same refeance but reference to self may differ in the examples one says the action of maovement or change of scenery the second .. a sense of ownership and the third much like hte second although the usages of discritions of place may be seen as NLP differentiations that is hang out has different meaning then regular spot ..

the symbolic point is relations of occurance i see an object then someone says something CAR.. that object is then linked with CAR then idea of classification springs from taht point internationlaizaiton of meaning is an ongoing logical process... definitions can then form as abstractions having the idea of CAR and RED should then creat RED CAR. how red and CAR objectively mix is another issue. That is where object points come into play. Why is a partially red car still red car..... well because as far as calsssicication goes the MOST predominant objects come first with time classification can be more advanted.. now why do people notice things over something else.. well that is two sided 1. because they are the most common items and come up in the net first thus are first recognized 2. becuase they are lowest item in the net.. thus if the net works as a forked opeation LEAST COMMON = learning andn MOST common = action

the result being those things that are most recognizable and common are FACTUAL notations were as the least common may allow for abstraction of NEW ideas... that is cross breading occurance.. if you think about something which is "RARE" then it then is "LESS RARE" and how you think about it change presonality...... NOW that creates ORIGINAL however are thoe still rational usages when does this come into play..... well when composing more then common abstactions for instance this point...I have to have LINKS to multple words and in most instances they have to logICALLy structure themselves in a manner as to make a working idea........ this may mean that linkages have to be more then single or double connections etc.. all the words have to connect or a vast majority of them to have lgoical language structures. Thus depending on how many words are being used it depends on how the links happen. I didn't think at all there. Of course new elements ocme into paly...... THESORISUSUSUSUSS........ that is the thesaursu acts as a mediator all words linked with a given close link can then be applied to A LONG link for intance robotic as to mechanicle machine etc... and then you can have MULTIWORDS that is a GUY OR A .. whatever... the idea is that the linakges go beyond jsut hte applications thus priginality is extended even further. the whole thing still has to fit together. THE EXACT meanings arn't known however we have a basis for logical strucutres a basisi for gramatical sturcture a basis for pacticle occurances an basis for mode of dual streaming and a boasis for synomy thesari and other gramatically commonalities all in an ongong miss mass seeing about MAKING a working logical word occurance as to communicate an idea.......of course it goes both ways not only does it work to procduce an outcome but it all derives incomes.. inputs.. that is if you assemble it to a fine point you have a missmass of fialed attempts for matching thats all data and illoigcal.. thus unsaid however AT later points and over time meanings change and that data is part of the processss of filtering out things that are said that is the more someone communicates the more failed attempts the less things to be said because the illogical occrances are found and discared.. until it is deemed that theey are to be used again and in an advanced system that would proove to be VERY FEEBLEIng beacuse of the sheer ammount of data being proceessed so breakning down NOGOS at small into large points is all gut. now in dual dirrectioned system you have INPUT as a finished point that is then linked and added to the data the thesauri cna be applied as well and all of it classed to its respective points

this means that in a PONDEROUS mode you could have an ongoign refinedment with finished points then being fed back in.. when no more filtering is posible that is A PERFECT occurance happening multiple times the thought becomes SOLID..... because the data is filtered and 42 is returned.. j/k... the size of a response can be filtered down by word groupings BIGWORDS to take out the simple words.. of course it can work in reverse too........ anyway.. that effective is TEXT translation..... how symbolics work is to do the same thing with text but on a much largely scale the compication is EXPRESSION and COMPREHENSION that is how do objects relate in human terms it is sense in computer terms it is all DATA.... data patterns can be derived... relations of what does what is the other thing and that is learning the systme... that is results that tie into the priority systemm however to define a priority does this mean that the system has to be referenced to ITESELF... that is the data has to have meaing which is where the REAL challenge comes.. that is where human design may enter creating tasked systems... the apparatus states is what is the FINAL apparatus state? well one idea may be the idea of a SWITCH.. that is the intellegence outside itself........ if a system can turn itself off and still function.

I'll leave it there for now so I can port it perhaps to the webpage.

"back to home" another idea borrowed from many popular ai's are personality files.. actually archtypes and psychology templates able to be processed based upon source characteristics..