While, it's not explicitly about Jesus, but certainly, Jesus probably inspired it. I don't think it's really about Jesus, though. It's kind of a bad literary criticism to intuit messages into a poem that aren't there, but I'd say the poem likely was inspired by Jesus. That's definitely a wholesome thought.
But don't be esoteric. One has to tone down esoteric readings, because then you probably do the same thing with the Bible. Surely, when Jesus was a child, He followed Mary around, and probably stuck by her. As it says "And everything the child did, brought joy to Mary's heart." But, you can't get too deep into it. When you do, and seek hidden symbols or messages, that's esotericism, and not generally something one wants to do in any form of interpretation.
Certainly though, that tension of the Biblical Imagery is there, as it was written in a time when Biblical Motifs were often alluded to. But, it's an allusion, because the lamb is literally a lamb. But, then it could be referring to Jesus in the sense that He's like the lamb, being so innocent. That we love Jesus, like Mary loves her lamb, yet the lamb was a sacrificial animal.
It's interesting, because I was thinking about this a while ago, too, as I was driving. This exact thought, the beautiful motifs of Jesus being Mary's lamb hit me, and elevated the poem. But, when one does analysis on anything, don't put meaning into it that doesn't follow. It'll thoroughly elevate one's reading experience.
I mean, we kind of carry our little lamb around, too, and it shocks people at our schools and our work and everywhere we go. But that's drawing an interpolation from the poem, which you're allowed to do. But that's personal, and not really what the poem means.
Category: Analysis
On Infinities
{}[A] line, or plane are infinite[: b]ecause a line represents an equation, that incorporates all numbers within it. So, X=Y is a line, that comprises all numbers in existence. Or x^2 is all the parabola that represents all the functions of x^2. So, a plane would be an infinite shape, taking up one infinitesimal part of a x/y/z graph, but incorporating all numbers within that two dimensional space, either in the i, negative or positive. So, it has to be bigger than a line. It must. Therefore, some infinities are larger than others. {}
157
Why does a 157IQ have to change the world? Couldn’t they just do their work, and be happy? Like, write poetry, or find easy ways to explain basic math concepts?
The world doesn’t need changed. And when we tried to change it, it didn’t get any better.
On a Square with Side Lengths and Area = to 1
Way over my head. I'm just not very good at doing math. Basically, I just did a system of equation, and got this answer "y^2-1/2y+1=0". Not sure if that's a solution.
2x+2y=x*y
And then 2x+2y=1
And then
x=1/2-y
And then 2(1/2-y) + 2y =(1/2-y)*y
And then 1-2y+2y = 1/2y-y^2
And then 1=1/2y-y^2
And then -y^2 +1/2y-1=0
And then y^2-1/2y+1=0
Someone explain to me what I did wrong, if anything.
But it's not possible because it's an imaginary number or negative. You'd have to work in other dimensions to make a square like that, or work in negatives, so nothing in physical space can accomplish that.
A Response to Carl Sagan on American Stupidity
People in the fifties hated Cowboy Shows, and said the same thing. It’s not the glorification of stupidity, but the technology that amplifies it, and gives it a bullhorn… and then wicked people who know how to manipulate the masses through symbols, images and black and white ideas.
People are not very brilliant. And never were. You read something like the Ulster Cycle, it’s hilarious the kind of politics they did, such as presenting bare chested women to invading armies and getting offended at pig roasts.
Like, Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great—both having about 140iqs—were just those rare sorts who came in an advanced society, and those advanced societies were cultured by traditions. That’s where we went wrong, was attacking the traditions. As that’s the education of the lowest common denominator, is religion, myths, history and tall tales. Which, for the most intelligent, they must also grapple with the genius of someone like Jesus in order to shepherd the people right.
Christianity is just true. The simple need it. The intelligent need it. Everyone needs it. But, they need tradition, too. George Washington and the Cherry Tree they need, they need to know about the World Wars, the Revolution, Slavery, Abolitionism, the Civil Rights Movement, The Civil War, they need the old Nursery Rhymes… the old movies preserved a historical tradition and connected us to an authentic history. That was destroyed around 2010, and also the language got reinvented and simplified.
We’re dealing with a malicious actor, but it’s no person or bodily entity. It is indeed the devil working through many seared consciences wanting to sincerely improve the world.
Number, Operation and Geometry And Pontifications on Riemann’s Hypothesis
Algebra would not work without geometry. Neither would Group Theory. And if you can't figure out why Double Primes would be useful in finding a pattern in primes (useful, not saying they could, because it could still be completely random, but then maybe that randomness could be used to establish a pattern for understanding randomocity, and would be a geometry we could use to understand that), then I can't explain to you why all that other stuff is true.
But if I try, think deeply about [what I'm saying]. Algebra works on the consistency of number and operation. Which has its root in geometry. We can only know algebra and operation works, because we observe it in geometry. Without geometry, there would be no algebra, or any use for it. As all things explained by algebra, relate to geometry. Everything in math, relates to a physical representation, and if it can't, it's not usable. That's why there are not negative cubed roots, but there are quartic.
And double primes are important for finding a pattern in prime numbers, because it's the only pattern we have to go by, in primes, is that there are double primes.
{}
"Algebra can work without geometry". [but] if it could, apples could grow without seeds. It's just nonsense [to say that]. And everything else, in Group Theory, in order to solve it--which I don't know what Group Theory is--you'd need a geometric representation, to get to the abstract answer for other uses.
That's why Riemann's hypothesis is finding a pattern in Primes. Which, if the Zeros were the whole of it, we'd find all the primes. Which we cannot do, so it's quite arbitrary. Whereas, the only pattern we have, that's real, is the twin primes. I'd think anyway... It's just simple to process for me.
Riemann's hypothesis is probably working toward a constant, or equation that can give you a basic geometric design to solve other abstract solutions. Kind of like how quadratic equations get you to a bunch of uses, but ultimately it works on the basis of a square's area.
[So], when you do equations- {} balancing them, you're basically taking two shapes, and then molding them into equal shapes, until you balance the equation. That's the right way to look at it. As, you can relate two shapes together, if they're equal, and come to a true solution. That's just the principle of an equality. Or really, you're just deriving two shapes that are equal to the same number.
[T]he Quadratic Equation, {} is a simple analogy. It's basic stuff, but very complicated in the theory. And people who are solving Riemann's Hypothesis, are trying to find a system of logic, that describes Prime Numbers, that's like a quadratic equation in that it has many uses, and trying to create a shape that describes it. And by having that shape, and that system, you can then reach to higher concepts, that need the logic to be completed. Or like Pi, there's a constant that is defined by a circle's shape, and that's something we measure, and use all the time, to get the correct solution. Because it's the real number that defines a circle.
Wokism and DEI
That’s the driving force of it. That’s why companies like Black Rock are the largest pusher of it, and working it into all the colleges. It just makes a lot of money. It controls people, makes them frustrated, and then polices them through products. It’s the next wave of totalitarianism. Is control through products. It’s how they’re overtaking the legitimate order and law structures. Once they have the monopoly, they’ll have their products be the only ones available on the market, and will control the populations through product availability, and social credit. And why they use Wokism and DEI is that it’s popular, unnatural, and doesn’t do anything but cause waves of disruption and frustration, which is good for generating mass movements. Then they brand the counter movement, too, which stokes the flames even higher.
Postmodernism
At best, Postmodernism is like working in a different base number system, than Base 10, and then working tirelessly to tweak Base 10 equations to fit the number theory into this new base system. Not only does it overcomplicate the simple matters of truth, but it also works out wrong answers more frequently than the right ones.
Also, realize, humanity is primed for Base 10 math, as we have ten fingers and ten toes. As it's the natural way our counting is done, and I see no more natural thing, than to derive a species of number system based on that. So also Postmodernism is doubly flawed, by trying to conform Logos into a framework that isn't especially intuitive to humans.
As a computer programmer, one uses Base 2. So 1 +1 = 3 (10) in this system. Yet that's fundamentally different than Base 10, 1 + 1 = 2. As you can see, an entirely different language is presented in both, like it were Russian and English. But the fundamental science is still the same in both, but the number fundamentally different. As with moral truths, there is science to it constructed around Language and Interpretation, of which the Postmodernist retranslates and reinterprets everything over and over again, until nothing makes sense, but the native speaker plainly speaks.
Need To Knows For a Complete Primary Education
Universe
Galaxy
Star (There's several kinds, of which the smallest is a blue dwarf and the largest a red giant. The sun is a white dwarf. There's also collapsed stars called neutron stars and pulsars amd magnetars and black holes and way out in space there's quasars which are newly forming galaxies)
Planet
Moon\Dwarf Planet
Asteroid\Comet
Meteorite
Then
Exosphere
(Thermosphere which I Forgot)
Mesosphere
Ozone Layer
Stratosphere
Biosphere (Troposphere)
Crust
Mantel
Outer Core
Inner Core
Molecule
Element
Atom
Electron
Proton
Neutron
Quark
Energy Kinetic and Potential
Acid
Base
Asia
North America
South America
Africa
Europe
Australia
Antarctica
Pacific Ocean
Indian Ocean
Atlantic Ocean
Arctic Ocean
1776 Declaration of Independence
1492 Columbus Sailed the Ocean Blue
Helper Verbs
Indirect and Direct Object
Noun
Verb
Adjective
Adverb
Conjunction
Interjection
PEMDAS
Line
Ray
Plane
Point
Square
Rhombus
Triangle (All Species)
Rectangle
Trapezoid
Quadrilateral
Pentagon - Decagon
Pythagorean Theorem
Cursive
Holocaust
American Civil War
World War I
World War II
American Revolution
Vietnam
9/11 and War in Iraq
Jim Crowe
Slavery
Hitler
Martin Luther King Jr.
Julius Caesar
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Franklin
Alexander the Great
Genghis Khan
Cyrus the Great
Attila the Hun
Alexander Graham Bell
Thomas Edison
The Wright Brothers
Rosa Parks
Harriet Tubman
Betsy Ross
The ability to read at the very least George Eliot and William Shakespeare, and comprehend it fully
MLA and APA citation
And some Roman and Greek History and Philosophy
Every American child, should at the very, most absolute least know all of these correctly at the bare minimum, coming out of High School.
If not, the education system has failed.
And I'd also argue so much more.
Some Music Theory
Some Color Theory
Some Constellations and Stars
Some Geography
Exposed to the great Artworks
Some Mythology
These Is Fighting Words
I just think the issues are more nuanced than [Gen Z is lazy]. If I'm working my tail off, and still living with mom and dad, that's not a very good incentive to get better at what I'm doing. Not to mention, you could reach grandmastery at something, like say knife smithing, and still have nothing to show for it.
Like honestly, Freemasons and chess players aren't the only grandmasters. Someone put these douchebags in their place. Like making nosism archaic, when everyone fucking uses them. And then inventing Royal We. We don't want Royalty.
Tell Webster to get real, as redefining English isn't going to make people stop using it.
B. K. Neifert 