1/17/26

That is like a pythagorean theorem, but I don't think a+b=c is the same as a^n+b^n=c^n. Basic algebra shows that you can't transpose exponents through addition. You can through multiplication, but they need to retain the same coefficient. You did create something like a pythagorean theorem, but in things like Heron's Formula, you see how when you multiply the numbers, it becomes different, and stops working. So, I think it's basic algebra to say that those two equations are different, and can't have the same number theory applied to them. Just because of how exponents work.

I also think to derive formulas, you have to do them through observing structures. A math formula is like a sentence. It describes a shape of some kind--which is why we use them in science--so I think the logic of a^n+b^n=c^n where n equals 2 is describing a specific pattern, where we discovered it through looking at a square. What a^3+b^3=c^3 would be, we don't know, but the logic is still valid, but it describes a specific shape. That's all our formulas are doing.

1/18/26

{}

I mean, if it's just saying arithmetic works, we just know it does. It's actually slightly different than a^n+b^n=c^n, if you want to get into the nitty gritty. But, if it's just validating the logic of algebra, we already knew this. It's just something we already knew. It's actually counterproductive to say we don't. You'd invalidate all of math doing that. And I think math works well enough, that we know it's valid.

But generally, exponentiation is a bit different than addition. Is what I'm saying. When you exponentiate, you do something a little bit different. Just like all four operations are different from one another. But, we know they work with absolute certainty, because they produce testable results. It's just something like division, where we see math work in all places, we know it doesn't need to be changed and take the leap into trusting it.

1/20/26

a + b = c has something to do with prime numbers. It's not about validating addition or arithmetic. I have no idea what it means. And I'm okay with that.

15 - The Cat in the Hat Dr. Seuss

50 - Aesop's Fables

100 - Island of the Blue Dolphins Scott O'dell

     130 - Encyclopedia Encarta 

150 - Maximum Ride James Patterson 

    167 - A Brief Space Opera

     160 - 700 - My Collected Writings B. K. Neifert

    162 - Hans Christian Andersen Fairy Tales

     170 - Bitter Medicine, B. K. Neifert

    170 - The Love of Another, B. K. Neifert

     170 - Amelia Chronicles, B. K. Neifert

    176 - The Riddle in the Sea, B. K. Neifert

    178 - War and Peace, Leo Tolstoy

    182 - Grimm's Fairy Tales

     180 - Wisdom of B. K. Neifert, B. K. Neifert

     189 - Brothers' Karamazov, Fyodor Dostoevsky

200 - The Prince and the Pauper Mark Twain

     140 - 290 - Storyhouse, B. K. Neifert

     230 - Dear Author, B. K. Neifert

250 - The Wizard of Oz Frank Baum

300 - John Carter of Mars Edgar Rice Burroughs

     310 - Horace's Odes and Epodes

     340 - Hail Britannica, B. K. Neifert

350 - Consolations of Philosophy Boethius

      200 - 370 - Bread of Harvest, B. K. Neifert

400 - William Wordsworth's Ecclesiastical Sonnets

     50 - 400 - Flirtations with A'te B. K. Neifert

     420 - Oxford Guide to Philosophy

    431  -   Silas Marner, by George Eliot

     440 - Princeton Encyclopedia of Literary Terms

450 - Baron Byron's Childe Harold

500 - Don Quixote  by Cervantes

    200 - 790 - Fruitful Years B. K. Neifert

550 - William Blake's Jerusalem

600 - The King James Bible

650 - William Shakespeare's Sonnets

700 - T. S. Eliot's The Wasteland

     730 - Fairyland, B. K. Neifert

750 - Comedian as the Letter C by Wallace Stevens

     760 - Young Shadows, B. K. Neifert

     777 - The American Mythology, B. K. Neifert

800 - Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene

850 - Ulysses by James Joyce

900 - Cantos by Ezra Pound

950 - Finnegan's Wake by James Joyce

Godel has a good argument. I think the premise is proven. If God must exist, then God exists. It seems that God must exist, otherwise there's no substantial way for reason to operate. As we've seen a lot of regression over the years on even the barest and simplest facts. Science is doubting addition these days. That's not a good look for it. There has to be a concrete at which reality is real, and a place to stop reducing things to further logical operators. There must be a point where we have faith. As without reality, there is nothing real. God substantiates what is real, by holding it together. Without belief in God, reality begins to break apart for lack of faith--and that is hell, in a nutshell.

Well, for me, it’s someone writing college level essays at 3, and doing multivariable calculus at 3 also.
Let’s put it this way. I have a very high IQ. But, not at that Mega Level IQ.

I can figure something difficult out after a long time thinking about it. I have good metacognition—which is looking over my reasoning for any faults—I have very accurate recall of events, even from when I was a baby.
I have issues doing algebra. Or issues with syntax. Because I have a condition called “Dysgraphia” which is a writing disability that forms when you hit your head, so it causes your coordination to be bad, which leads to bad handwriting, and in my case it also led to a problem with what I call “Froms and Minuses.” I get “Froms and Minuses” backward, so sometimes my syntax is a little sloppy, and you need to read my writing through contextual clues, and not through syntax. And also, when doing mathematics, I slip up, and get negatives backward, as my mind misses sharp details.

So, what I can do, is solve problems that need very high metaphorical cognition. So, instead of doing math, I understand why it works. Which is why I’m a poet… is because I can properly communicate an idea—and that’s part of the Dysgraphia diagnosis, again, is that I have sloppy handwriting, and sometimes get my letters backward, but can write the concepts the right way—and I can understand any concept, if given enough time.
So, if doing physics problems, I’d mess them up. I’m kind of specifically built to write books, and poetry, and things of that nature.

Because my mind has certain gears to it. I relate it to Saiyan Transformations in DB.

At my base, I’m just a 100IQ person.

Then I turn Super Saiyan when I sit down to concentrate. About 110.

I turn Super Saiyan 2 when I’m walking around, or listening to music. As my mind is connected to my vestibular system, and when I’m in motion, my mind thinks at a higher level. So about 120. I can also access near hyperphantasia level imagination when I’m moving, as opposed to when I’m just sitting.

I’m Super Saiyan Blue, when I’m reading, or listening to a lecture. I can have accurate recall of a large portion of information I hear in a lecture, or what I read, by breaking it down to its core components and themes. And I can subconsciously recall it later on, when the situation arrives. Kind of like a memory palace, but through word association. Which would be about 130IQ.

I go Ultra Instinct when I’m writing, or doing some kind of composition. Like, demonstrating why geometry works in pictures, or writing a poem or essay, as in this I have the best metacognition, and can look over my work, and see if there’s any faults, without having to use too much memory. So about 157IQ. Because here, both sides of my brain work together, as writing activates the left brain, and creatively composing activates the right brain hemispheres.

And what I normally will do when writing, is go take walks, to compose an imaginative scope of a piece of writing I’m about to do, get the bare bones of it in my memory, and then come home and write it, through the memory of what I had just witnessed or thought about.

Let’s take it back a bit.

What is Genius?

Is Genius latent ability? Or is it a providential gift, that allows a thing to flourish?

The Greeks thought of Genius as the providential force that allowed a vineyard to produce sweet fruit. Or to make the play at the theater brilliant. Or in my case, it’s the thing that lets me open a page to exactly the place I need, to get a point of context. It’s the guiding hand of Providence over your work, to guide you and let you begin to fully develop.

So, in our world today, Genius is being rejected. All forms of it, is considered wrong. In fact, our world is antagonistic against Genius in all forms. That’s kind of why things are getting worse and not better. That’s what Wokeness is, is an antagonism against Genius. Or the modern art movements. Or the movements regarding science and literature.

So, who’s to judge? There is no judge. It’s simply the providence of the moment, moving someone to the point where they produce something. Be it a carpentered drawer with no screws, or a painting that’s photorealistic, or a jewel smith who makes a beautiful gem, or a cook who makes a beautiful meal, or a lumberjack who knows the physics of a falling tree, and how to bring it down with precision.

So, there are no “Geniuses” any more, because they quite simply are not allowed to exist. And whenever someone comes up with a solution—and there’s many—it gets blocked. And people make discoveries, and they get buried. A good example, is we know where the Exodus took place, but the entire beach was renamed, and then that name was used on the opposite isthmus, and confused a lot of people… and we also know the Jewish Religion is old, due to a discovery they made where they found the Curse Tablet at Ebal, which has both sacred names on it, showing the religion is authentic—and the sacrificial ashes are all clean animals.

So… that discovery was blocked. What is genius? Well, genius looks like madness now, because a lot of it is just blatantly rejected, and replaced by things falsely called science. 

One can get to Degrees by Radian, but there is no direct relation from Radians to Sine and Cosine. As in, there is no way to get to Sine and Cosine algebraically, therefore, Cosine and Sine must be memorized. The reason for this, is Cosine and Sine work off of 90 Degrees, or 1/2π, and Radians are in base Pi, Degrees in base 360, and Sine and Cosine are in Base 1. Meaning, you can only know the ratios of Sine and Cosine by already having the exact measurements, and not by working through it algebraically. For transitioning from Base π to base 360 to Base 1, I must stop you there, because Base 1 must be described by the axiom of the shape itself, and only its axiom. What is in Base 1 only can be described in Base 1, because anything beyond it skews it by exponentiations.

Errata: You can use calculus to find Cosine and Sine, through Euler's Formula, by working through a Unit Circle, and making e^i*Radian = Cosine (Radian) + i Sine (Radian). In fact, that was Euler's work. Which coincidentally, makes e^iπ=-1 if you set the equation to equal it will be equal to (-1 + 0i). Now, equations work like this, where you set the equation to equal, it molds the shape into and equality, and can be worked through that, which is why when doing geometric constructions, you must have an equality, for it to produce correct results. As the equality molds the shape into a useful tool.

Errata Secundo: The formula for Euler's assumes Sine and Cosine already, therefore, it must still be measured. The formula, it simply places the values of Sine and Cosine on the perimeter of the unit circle, on a Cartesian plane.

My process.

First thing I do, is I wake up. I drink a cup of coffee or two. I put on Bob Ross and watch him paint a picture. Then, I get up off the couch, and go on quora and write about a dozen answers. I watch a few videos on YouTube (always educational). And then I take a walk. Sometimes at the State Park, sometimes through my neighborhood, sometimes instead of a walk, I drive. I get a Coca-Cola, or I quaff a couple of cups of Green Tea.

During this whole time period, I do intense amounts of thinking. Delusions? They become fodder for my poetry. Delusions which turned out to be true? Also fodder for my poetry. Lol. I just imagine things, and let my mind wander through the entire corpus of what I’m trying to figure out. A lot of intense thinking.

Normally, there’s a subject for the day. I do the same thing I did as a youth, when I ran around in the basement, and played war with a stick. Only now, I take walks and drives, and think. Really think. Like, I’m talking intense thinking. Everything I do think about, turns into fodder for a poem.

And at that point, after writing dozens of Quora Answers, after arguing with people in comments sections, after watching a few educational videos—every now and then I read a chapter or two of a book, or I read an essay or a poem suggested to me through coincidence—I get an intense thought. And that intense thought is what all the previous wandering and working was done.

Now, granted, I might write about 10,000 words a day. So, remember that. So, when I finally do set down to write my poem, all that subconscious energy gets focused into one point. One solitary point. And that focus becomes a poem. Could be a good poem. Could be a bad poem. Could be a villainous masterpiece, it could be a saintly excursion. Maybe a Character comes to mind, a metaphor, a moral, a synthesis. Sometimes material is working through me for years before I set down and write it.

But, when I do, the poem usually gets written pretty quick. It just comes from the tip of my thoughts. It comes from spontaneous exertion. It just writes itself, it seems. That after lots of practice. And, once that is done, I put the poem into a selection, which then gets boiled into another selection for my books. As composing the poems into comprehensible larger works is part of the joy. Arranging my poetry is half the fun of writing it. I love arranging poems, and fitting themes together.

But then, there is this moment while writing it, where the idea comes. It just comes. It’s this strong, lucid idea, and it just spontaneously arrives, usually after a lot of walking. As I walk, I compose the themes—because I’m very imaginative when I walk… My body has to be moving for it to do its deepest thinking—and I start to compose verses, which usually don’t get remembered fully, except in a subconscious block. I’ll compose poems while I walk, sort of like Wordsworth used to do. I go over the themes, and I compose it mentally, building a framework—-or sometimes if it’s a longer piece, I’ll write a plot map, and usually follow it loosely—and then, suddenly, I begin to write. And then the finished poem arrives. And I edit it, and I read it, and I wait while writing it, until it gives me that moment of perfect peace. When the poem feels peace, I finish. Sometimes I choose a poetic form—like just recently I did a blitz, which was probably the hardest poetic form I ever wrote in, coincidently, due to the lack of grammar it was hard to keep focus on using no punctuation while also keeping the strict poetic form, which I broke in true fashion as that type of form is meant to be broken; it’s in the spirit of the poets who made it—and I move onto the next piece. After about a hundred or so poems are finished, I compose them into books of poetry, arranging them by their quality. I don’t say any of my poems are poor quality, but put them next to some of my other poems, it doesn’t flow right, so it has to go with poems that are like other poems. Arranging them is fun, actually. I get a lot of joy out of arranging the pieces as much as writing them, because I can flesh out stories better and mould themes more concretely, whereas when the poem first comes out, it sort of fits randomly. But, I have the poems in their original compositions and order on my blog.

But, that’s how.

Finding Sine

First convert degrees to radians.

1/57.2958 x/y

Where y is the Degree and x is the Variable of the Radian you're trying to figure. Cross multiply.

For Sine

1/.9069 x/y

And here is the base number for one radian. So you would put the radian, converted from degrees, into the x, and the y will be the actual fraction the degree is equal to.

So one radian is equal to .9069.

Doesn't work. Because it's two different base number systems.

But converting Degrees to Radians does. Since it converts the Base Pi to the Base 180.

Basically, sine and cosine has to be memorized, or physically constructed to work.

Also, the arc of the curve, on Sine and Cosine, makes the result different, as it only forms to the basis of a Right Triangle's Geometry from a radius. Meaning, it cannot be derived this simply.

With discipline, comes high mastery. Regard, there is no skill that is not hard won. There is no trade, that hasn’t its secrets. Acquire wisdom, and listen to the rebuke of the affectionate master, but scorn the folly of the scoffing fool. Fear not to be told over and over again, where your strike had not made a perfect weld. Practice your swing 10,000 times, and you shall make the steel good. So it is, harden the body to do your work, and sharpen your tool. Take the blows of your mistakes, and shape a better weapon in the forge in the next day’s steel. Take the repeated blows, and take every one with a lesson. Know the secrets, and do not shun them. Do not think you can find them for yourself, for one master may find one secret, but a thousand masters found a thousand secrets. Learn and teach. Beware of those who speak blame, and those who claim to know, but know not the engines by which the craft is made. Yet, listen to he who is small, for he may be a great and mighty master himself, but has found small fortune. Do not pride yourself as a giant, like you know everything. Learn from every mistake. And be not proud toward your Master, nor a churl to your student. With love, rebuke, and with kindness shape the instrument.