What does it mean that my logic and reasoning could solve a problem?
Meaning the one who gave me the problem could solve it already.
Yet there are those who have gone through all the courses of problems, all ending in relatively the same place mentally.
However, there are still problems they can't solve.
What does it take for a breakthrough?
To know when to employ math known to mankind and when I can't.
To know when I need something new or when I can use something old.
This, I believe, is the crux of the matter.
Otherwise, I try to invent new what is already done and so go nowhere except to prove to myself what all these people knew from a different perspective.
What exactly does this expenditure of energy for solving a math problem do?
After I forget about solving it, what do I have?
I have conquered a bit of logic and reasoning; just as this sentence does, but math takes more effort usually.
It is precisely the reason that math requires more effort than reading or writing that there is a following behind it.
That's probably why I'm into it.
Because not everyone does it due to its difficulty.
So it is an exclusive group.
This is why it is bothersome to know others have excelled beyond me in math, because they have put forth the work; that they were tired enough of their ignorance to accomplish so much.
It is nice to know what I
could and couldn't accomplish from seeing them.
99% of mathematicians will never put forth a new theory or solve a once unsolvable question.
It would seem my whole life of math would prove futile in light that this exclusive "club" only allows 1% to make a dent in human history.
Therefore, I must strive, see it as a process of unending steps, and pray that I will add some work to humanity's progress.
Learning for me must come from a need to end my ignorance rather than to further my understanding inasmuch as furthering understanding is infinite while becoming tired of my ignorance happens after a period of time after learning something new.
The universe and all it's organizing power must sing in my soul it's anthem of mystery before I can crack a book.
How do I speak of my love for you without any ludeness?
Why are you such a ****** creature to me?
There is no dimension which is not ****** to me, why?
That you have never spoken about any theory? Or any event?
Should you not just be detached from the world to me?
Not concerned with the wider world, but with your own people?
She concentrates on attracting others.
She wants good money, a good job to get the things she wants.
I try to find a way within to behold her desire, her beauty.
Like there was a secret door that could make her step out of my body and into my room.
Like my heart must subtly feel for her presence.
I must make her my goddess to be worshipped in the land of beauty.
To let my heart be swept up in her world of people.
People talked about, people hated and loved.
A world of opinions about people.
So many people.
I fear her beauty will one day fade.
Not in ten years, or even twenty years perhaps.
But later in life.
I hope that by that time her world will grow beyond people, beyond drinking and fun.
I hope she reflects on her life, and comes to great discoveries about herself.
But she reminds me of the song "girls just want to have fun".
I've never known how to be with that kind of girl except to drink, smoke, or do the drugs that they are doing.
At that point I become an experiencer who thinks only of my reality.
The other people, even her, would become secondary.
I would seek the mysteries of reality and seek to explain them.
To unravel what aspects of life are that could build a bridge to the mystery.
Yes, she is a beauty to behold, a dear to interact with.
But I feel my destiny of love lies elsewhere, not in ****** beauty, but in beauty of thought.
Disbelief or doubt is my natural disposition.
With this I try to explain away what is inconclusive.
To a Christian leader, I have another gospel, so my prophet is false.
To a Muslim, I am an imposter because I believe in innovation.
To a Jew, I am not of the Chosen Ones.
To an atheist, I am unreasonable or delusive.
To a Buddhist, I cannot attain enlightenment.
Thus, to the secret societies of belief, I am a disbeliever, mad, and ignorant, going to hell, karmic or not, or to die a mortal death.
How can my healthy doubt have any way with explanation?
To incorporate the masses, we provide governments and universally make declarations as the United Nations.
Should I lose belief to satsify the masses: agreeing with them that I'm a disbeliever and coming to terms with atheists?
Just stand for love and unity.
Thought, memory, future, imagination.
2. Self, will, reflection.
4. Universe, events.
5. Body, people.
The only things I can seem to write about.
Scattering amplitudes and galactic momentum horizons prove that observation needs a proof, so what does trying to make up on observation do?
It is like trying to peer in another universe.
This is what consumed me trying to come up with theories in physics.
Yet it is still done today, although the theorists have quite selective imaginations.
Even in peer reviewed papers, any theory without evidence is treated just as a child's imagination.
The graviton is so allusive.
We observe that it must exist due to larger observations, yet we don't have the measuring device to see it scatter.
Even if we could, it may create what would keep it shrouded.
I conclude that until I observe something big, I will not try to observe its qualities, and if I notice something small, I'll remind myself that it came from something big.