overheard conversation

k: hey, can you explain the lecture notes? I slept through. I dreamt I was a primate eating pizza.
u: fun!
k: i haven't had a dream like that in what seems like a gigakalpa! i didn't want to wake.
u: i wouldn't have.
k: so the lecture notes?
u: they were on illusory platonism, schizotome and holotome resolution, phenomorphisms, godel belief sentences for b-e style gestalts, the cosmic mind and so on.
k: ugh. i should have ordered another pizza.
u: in the dream?
k: yep.
u: whee!
k: okay, what's illusory platonism?
u: illusory platonism is the effect you get from having gazillions of relations to an object, particularly in visualising or constructing it. primate mathematicians usually say: oh, we've got this finite sets thing or this categories thing or this mandelbrot set thing, and it's immune to perturbation, it's gotta have independent existence. it's a kind of well-bolstered religious faith.
k: but that's not all. there's some further incomprehensible footnote. can you explain that?
u: see, easier to instantiate things, things which are easier and more reliably drawn out of tumbolia tend to have, (and I can't insert the demo that the lecturer did without doing a memory image, which I'm too tired to do so here) smoother? more vitreous? willowier scents than do things which are harder to extract. I think the lecturer managed to extract a 'gestalt theoretic primate warfare echo oxidative topomorphase' while doing a reverse double somersault off a heptagonal granite frustum, which is, local-relative, pretty hard to reliably extract from Tumbolia.
k: uh-huh
u: the lecturer went on to explain that the persistence of the relational fiber cut in the case of schizotomes is what causes people to hallucinate simple schizotomes as holotomes. it's like one is the derivative of the other
k: the schizotome is a gloss, then?
u: effectively.
k: did the lecturer explain philosophies of mathematics, too?
u: it was a side note, but he did. platonism assumes a 'world of ideas', which is apprehended in a jnana-yogaesque direct-mysticism which doesn't require sense-isolation. logicism aridifies everything into a collage of dodge-em symbol-arama, which the language lovers, essentially the code-space masturbators love. They say "a-ha! it's all logic"
k: foul tasting logic-reductases
u: yep. not to be confused with logos-reductases
k: okay, what about other philosophies of mathematics
u: there's empiricism, which says "hrm, must experiment", but gets nailed by the intrinsicists looking for an easy consistent foundational flavor, because they want it to not have the flavor of variability.
k: -giggle-. so they'd never discover about accidental misprimes if they were on an embedded Grulding manifold?
u: you can imagine a primate mathematician losing it on a Grulding manifold, particularly an intrincisist one, who factors five into three and two on a Grulding manifold in a desperate attempt to figure out why their calculations weren't working the way they expected.
k: heh. I suppose then formalism is just the idolators of string-yoga?
u: pretty much. just another logos-reductase
k: and I suppose the intuitionists would balk at a bloyarang?
u: oh, our computers and minds can't make it, therefore it cannot exist!
k: yeah, just because our senses can't draw it from tumbolia, there are no relations to it whatsoever, we shall huddle in our Western Nihilism like cowering snailwyrms.
u: heh. and the same thing with constructivism, and so forth
k: the logos-reductase used is different in each: each relies on a rationalization of how the studied schizotome differs from holotome, then procedes to cordon off a language environment for the reasoning to procede in.
u: yep.
k: okay, next biggie. what's a phenomorphism?
u: that says *how* something is cut, once you know there's a schizotope and a schizotome, the relationship between holotome/tathata and the particular instance, especially mathematical in character, you'll need all kinds of excidiary/subsidiary information, like the barber of the chick who wrote the code that visualized the object in question, etc. it's not really analyzable.
k: gotcha. you could internalize the Suntoro space all night, and just end up with sickening large internal node synthesis rates on your local indranet
u: bingo.
k: okay, what about godel belief sentences for b-e gestalts?
u: oh this was really cool. imagine that you've got a religion. um. Nyerkori, let's say. And you'll draw a diagram showing the belief-strata from centrum to exterior, depending on amount of b-e condensation, right? there's a bit of code which the exterior, typically the lower order biological reproduction coupled parts of the religion, filters from the interior, because its appraisal is that "any piece of code which denies The Nyerkori religion is bad, mmkay?", and the behavioral instances that provokes prevents self-referential beliefs of the form "this belief which this statement corresponds is not believable in the Nyerkori religion" from getting to the centrum, because it holds that the centrum cannot cope with such contradictory information. primitive b-e type gestalts usually cannot cope with that. the centrum tries to sync the whole to the cosmic mind, and is usually entertaining (much to the surprise and shock of the exterior considered unreified), exactly such belief structures, because it makes a runtime unbounded find external holotome call and determines that the best way to do this is mediated tathatadhyana to its cells within the centrum, and aliased pranadhyana to those in the exterior, which usually ends up being translated into a marketing schizotome and causes ridiculous amounts of code-comparison based warfare in non b-e local relative space.
k: i'm going to go back to dreaming that I'm a primate eating pizza. wake me up for the sequel.