I wanted to take a test for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. And the second question was, "Are you a modest person?" And the two answers were "Modesty doesn't become me," and "I am basically a modest person."

I thought to myself, "Well, I cannot answer this." For one thing, I estimate my writing abilities to be as good as any author on my bookshelf. I estimate my intelligence to be high. Because there's actual evidence of it being so--not in viewership, but just in what I read in my books.

But, Modesty does become me. I don't particularly want to be anything beside modest. I just want to make my money from writing books, because I worked to do it--and not much--and I just want the apportioned income from my work. I don't want J. K. Rowling fame. Or Elon Musk world changing. Just to sit and go to my creative work...

But I am not modest. By all means, having talent like mine--if you call it talent, I do--I should be celebrated, or at least read and purchased for what I do write.

So, as Socrates' eros, I am in a mean between ignorance and wisdom... I desire to be modest, but am not. But it does become me, as I don't want fame, success or the torture of losing myself to fortune. Nor do I want the humble punery of poverty to steal from me my hope.

A circle's constant is π/4 and a square is 1. (π/4)=/=1. That's also how we derive calculus, is through this same idea, of a curve proportioning area. You can multiply π/4 with any number, and get a relative circle constructed inside the square. Interestingly, the perimeter of the square and area, will always coincide with the circle's perimeter and area. They're just fundamentally different numbers, though.

You could say the same for a hexagon constructed in a square, but again, you can't square the hexagon ether, as there will be an eccentricity ascribed to it, such as the square root of 2 is for a square. Sure you can probably get a number to fit in a square made from a hexagon, but like a square has an eccentricity of square root of two, a circle's is consistently π/4 on all sides--hence why intersecting chords theorem works. So it's a bit different, but a hexagon will have an eccentricity like π/4 or square root of two, too. How that would be used, I don't know.

I hate this world. So much. Just… why? All of it. Why? You work, you get paid, you eat. That’s how it should be. Not people stealing from you, not people working in slave shops making iPhones and then exporting them to rich countries, not medical doctors breaking you with bills, not idiot interpretations of our stories…

Like, if people just had a few nice things, kitchen appliances, and work and good relationships, that’s really all you need. Not buying en masse new products, and throwing out antiques and replacing them with Ikea furniture. Like, imagine this: A person actually learns Carpentry, in a local town, and sells his furniture to people all over the world through advanced networks of logistics. And that man, in turn, pays local businesses and local food markets, and he eats. Is that too hard to accomplish? And somewhere, they have a sustainable forest, which they harvest for woods, and somewhere, they have an iron ore mining operation, where people are paid equitable salaries to mine ore, and a metal forger makes it into steel, and a nail company buys it, and makes nails, and a timber company makes raw wood, and that carpenter takes some of his money, buys those resources. which ship to you by that advanced logistics, and the carpenter shapes wood, and sells it all over the world at a profit, and no advertiser puts him to shame with their cheap shit. That’s my imagine song. And medical is a utility, therefore paid by tax funds. And you can have whatever religion or weird idea you want, and even write and talk about it so long as you aren’t physically hurting anyone or anything, and no abstractions of that, either, to make weird gray areas that don’t make any sense.

“I'll tell you what you did with Atheists for about 1500 years. You outlawed them from the universities or any teaching careers, besmirched their reputations, banned or burned their books or their writings of any kind, drove them into exile, humiliated them, seized their properties, arrested them for blasphemy. You dehumanised them with beatings and exquisite torture, gouged out their eyes, slit their tongues, stretched, crushed, or broke their limbs, tore off their breasts if they were women, crushed their scrotums if they were men, imprisoned them, stabbed them, disembowelled them, hanged them, burnt them alive.

And you have nerve enough to complain to me that I laugh at you.”

And I say to you, your ilk does the same when they get into power.
That's not religion's fault, it's just human nature.
Of which, true religion's the best elixir against.

[I]s it plagiarism, or just the verbiage of their ideology? You can only say something so many ways. Like New Mexican Cave Painters didn't plagiarize Naqadan Potters. It's just the ethos. It could be plagiarism, or just limitations on human thought and imagination.{}

Which to get to the nitty gritty of communication, it only is properly understood if real. Which, if something's real, it produces similar chains of logos. Not to say that all real things are good, either. There is evil in this world. Like it could come from a vein of egotism and self centeredness. But you definitely hear a lot of people say similar things, that aren't plagiarized. 

I've heard people verbatim have conversations I remember having as a youth. Just saying.

It's only plagiarism if you copy it from somewhere, and then try to hide that. Not by observing something, and then coming to a similar conclusion. You find a lot of things are similarly worded across different cultures that had absolutely no contact.

An eas[y] way [to calculate pi is] to use a Sine Function. I saw a person use them and got several digits quickly.  {,,,}[P]i is just a number that tells us a thing is a perfect circle. As everything, from area to circumference--even different pieces of it--ratio to pi if something's a circle. That's also how Sine functions intuit rates of change in calculus, is by telling you the difference off of pi a thing is from the slope on the curve. Which basically gets calculated from the curve of the parameter, but also works in Areas too. Which is neat, because when you have a piece of pie, it's actually equal to pi, but there's straight lines on the parameter, and actually the number pi is [completed] from the parameter of the circle. [Just like it would be in calculus, when you factor in a rate of change, and a slope, the area beneath it is shaped through the curve; and that area is useful in attaining real, physical measurements, such as distance in acceleration versus speed. And of course, one takes different sums of the series, and completes it through intuiting the logic by a formula.]

So, this does not mean "Base" as in the system we understand it. Rather, Base 1 math, is reducing everything down to its simplest form, to avoid the radical. As if you augment shapes above base 1 the radical factor exponentiates, and creates useless numbers.

In fact, all geometry is understood at Base 1. Heron's formula, for example, only works in Base 1 Math. As does Sine and Cosine, although one can use those to further understand greater ratios, the ratios must first be described in Base 1 for all other axioms to follow suit.


Q.E.D.