Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[synchro1]

Did somebody mention Buddhism?

@Tinselkoala,

Haiku by "Matsuo Basho":

The old pond;
the frog.
Plop!

[synchro1]

@TheoriaApophasis,

This quote from you serves as conclusive proof that you are a certifiable lunatic:

"[The Divided Line; (Plato's Republic 509d-511e)] You have to imagine, then, that there are two ruling powers, and that one of them is set over the intellectual world (The One and Being-On [Phi]), the other over the visible (the 'shadows', the Mimesis of Nous and that of matter). I do not say heaven, lest you should fancy that I am playing upon the name. May I suppose that you are making this distinction of the visible ([1-Unity, also 1/Phi phenomenally], or Unity-Noetic 'forms', 1/Phi Memesis [shape] and 1/Phi [matter] 'shadow' = The Lesser section) and of the intelligible (The One and Phi [1/phi, 1/phi, and Psyche .381967] = The Greater section) fixed in your mind? I have. Now take a line (Totality, i.e. = 1, also = 4.236067, or 1/.236067 [primordial Dyadism of Unity of the Monad], Pan, Pentagram) which has been cut into two unequal parts (One and Phi ratio), and divide each of them again in the exact same proportion (which gives (1) Phi [1.618033]), (2) One, (3) One, and (4) 1/Phi [.618033]), and suppose the two main divisions, one to the visible (Lesser = Noetic forms [1-Unity], and 'shapes' [1/Phi] and matter-'shadows' [1/Phi]) and the other to the intelligible (Greater = Phi and the One), and then compare the subdivisions in respect of their clearness and want of clearness, and you will find that the first section [#3 and #4] (Noetic forms [1-Unity-1/Phi], mimesis [1/Phi], and matter, 1/Phi [.618033]) in the sphere of the visible consists of (noetic) images (Kosmos Noetos, Nous-Eidos). And by images I mean, in the first place, shadows (shapes-Hyle-matter 1/Phi [.618033]) and in the second place, reflections (noetic reflections-Mimesis, Kosmos Aisthetos), in water and in solid, smooth and polished bodies and the like: Do you understand? Yes, I understand. Imagine, now, the other section [#1 and #2] (The Greater section, Being-Phi [1.618033] and Hen-the Absolute-1), of which this (the lesser section, the Noetic forms and 'shadows and shapes' i.e. matter) is only the resemblance (a mimesis of the 1st hypostasis and Being-On), to include the animals (animate life, all empirically ensouled Being-Zoe-Phi) which we see, and everything that grows or is made. Very good. Would you not admit that both the sections of this division have different degrees of truth (one being the Lesser section, the relative/image/semblance [Noetic forms and 'shapes and shadows' 1/Phi-matter], and the Greater section, the real, the genuine [Phi-Being and the One]), and that the copy (both matter-'shadow', noetic empirical shapes in union with the Psyche = Phi-On-Being, which is an Eikon of the Monad) is to the original (The One), [i.e. that by ratio, Phi is to One as One is to Phi] as the sphere of opinion (doxa, hypothesis [Phi] ratio to Gnosis [1, Nous]) is to the sphere of true knowledge (gnosis)? Most undoubtedly".

[synchro1]

Matsuo Basho:

[synchro1]

"Go to the pine if you want to learn about pine, or to the bamboo if you want to learn about bamboo. And in doing so, you must leave your subjective preoccupation with yourself."

[TheoriaApophasis]

This quote from you serves as conclusive proof that you are a certifiable lunatic:

FIRST, i would have to be convinced you even UNDERSTOOD It  (which you dont)


SECOND, id need to see substantiation, WHICH you will never provide.



both are missing , hence your fatal ERR