Results 1 to 20 of 75 for stemmed:mathemat
2 After the session I wanted to tie in Seth’s material on infinity with mathematical ideas of that concept, but my reading soon convinced me that such an idea was too involved a task for a simple note like this. However, I told Jane, in his own way Seth had incorporated mathematical ideas in his material: I saw correlations between his probable realities, his intervals, and the concept of an infinite number of points on a line—and that some mathematical definitions of infinity are considered to be more basic, or of a greater order, than others. Actually, in various branches of mathematics, from the works of Euclid (the Greek mathematician who flourished around 300 B.C.) to modern information theory, I found many relationships with Seth’s ideas. I do think that Seth’s material on the “origin” of our universe can be termed an “ideal point,” embracing our mathematical systems, and that his concept of All That Is has no “limits” in mathematical terms. I do not know whether my comments here will make sense to mathematicians.
My tentative inquiries led me to ask Jane if she thought the axioms of Euclidean geometry, say, are innately valid in describing the mind’s inner reaches, or whether, in ordinary terms, those propositions represent conscious acquired interpretations of our visual experience. She hadn’t thought about it. When I asked her where she might have obtained her intuitive mathematical knowledge, she just laughed.
...An encyclopedia of mathematical knowledge... [...] The particular volume or edition of the encyclopedia came out in the fall, and at the time this guy was working there was some kind of mathematical dispute going on, and a schedule set for some kind of conference to be held at the university for mathematicians from all around. The dispute had mathematical and philosophical connotations, because the ideas were wrapped up with science somehow.
(We would like to insert a note here to Roger, to the effect that we would like him to go over the two sessions and give us a detailed written summary of the data given through Jane, in answer to the mathematical questions he sent Jane. [...] Jane’s mathematical knowledge and vocabulary [and mine] is so limited that any valid [or invalid?] data obtained in trance by Jane, on this subject, is of interest to us; the more we learn about these two sessions, the easier it will be for us to interpret another facet of trance experience.
Congratulations to our mathematical genius, Ruburt. [...]
The mathematical data I have also somewhat explained. This is more difficult because of Ruburt’s lack of mathematical vocabulary, and the fact that conceptual patterns were given in intuitive mathematical language—not in a precise narrow range at all, and answering deeper questions than those asked. [...]
(Before the session Jane and I discussed the reaction of Roger Sullivan, of Lexington, Massachusetts, to the two sessions dealing with his mathematical questions. [...]
In other words, larger mathematically intuitive, pure-theory ideas were presented as well as circumstances would permit. [...]
[...] There have been people throughout history who mentally performed mathematical feats that appear most astounding, and almost in a matter of moments. Some, had they lived in your century, would have been able to outperform computers (just as some are outperforming computers these days!). In most cases where such accomplishments show themselves, they do so in a child far too young to have learned scientific mathematical procedures to begin with, and often such feats are displayed by people who are otherwise classified as idiots (idiot savants), and who are incapable of intellectual reasoning.
Indeed, when a child is involved, the keener his use of the reasoning mind becomes the dimmer his mathematical abilities grow. [...]
[...] Because she has to deliver it linearly in words, which take “time,” she cannot produce her material almost at once, as the mathematical prodigy can his or her answers, but in their own way her communications with Seth are as psychologically clear and direct as the calculator’s objective products are with numbers, or the musician’s are with notes. [...]
[...] We have read about relativity, for instance, in popular paperbacks, and some other paperback books on a variety of subjects that might have included various kind or examples of mathematical formulas, etc. [...]
[...] Then, too bad you’re not a mathematical medium, Jane.
[...] Jane said she feels that some of the words she “gets” aren’t correct mathematically, like “assemblage of integers.”
[...] As far as she knows, she doesn’t have “the slightest mathematical vocabulary.”
[...] Now, mathematics is not nearly understood within your system. A fourth and fifth-dimensional mathematics cannot be initiated from within inside your own system.
As one number quite simply can be added to another without denying the validity of either number, nor the individuality of either number, so a different kind of grouping also takes place (pause), involving (pause), mathematical manipulations of these other intensities that reside within the number units.
[...] Not long after the outline for his Special Theory of Relativity was published in 1905, it was said that Einstein owed its accomplishment at least partly to the fact that he knew little about the mathematics of space and time.
The heavenly bodies as moment points conform to certain mathematical principles, though your idea of mathematics is extremely limited. Even using your mathematics, you can still only conceive of reality in certain terms. [...] Your mathematics still deals, comparatively speaking, with a very slim area. [...]
(Recently Jane had been reading an essay in which entropy, the mathematical measure of unavailable energy in a thermodynamic system, was discussed. [...]
[...] From within the room inhabitants watching would be able, through mathematical deductions, to deduce exactly how long the ball would keep its continuous bouncing activities, at what rate the motion of the ball would lessen, and at what future time the motion would cease entirely.
[...] What a shock when he discovered that the world was ignoring what he thought to be his important contribution to mathematics. [...]
He was, in a fashion only, sexually ambiguous, his mathematics expressing what he thought of as an acceptable male aspect while the artistic levels in his mind, now, he related to his feminine aspects. [...]