Up to this point I have used shapes to define the different types of analytical models used by psychics, seers and doctors to the self. I have avoided dealing with the so called occult because there is little point in perpetuating mystique. There is much more of value that can and will be understood that for the time may appear unknowable. It is the same with science, this is science.
I refer to this type of language as a "Red Code." This I do because of the seeming obscurity and difficulty that comes with, "The Coding Density Threshold." When ever we need to learn a new language there is that point of commitment, that point where we must immerse ourselves into the totality of this new experience. Long term, short term and what I call a mid term memory must be actively engaged to learn anything new. I've worked with this coding issue when understanding the symbolic languages of poetry, math or religion. As a relative nube to the techno revolution, I'm very happy to see software code definitely is a "Red Code." Seemingly insurmountable. But in the same way there is no #hashtag for "A NEW TYPE OF CODE" software codes as of yet have no clear theory. That is not because that ultimately there wont be a grammar for the syntax and usage of coding languages, we are still at the beginning of these new language geographies. Just like our shared histories of language, grammar and theory was the afterthought of these social conventions. Intelligence precludes understanding. My work, a grammar of "Psychics and Intuitive Diagnosticians" is and will emerge from our immersion in this new medium. It's true. A truly dense "Red Code" never ceases to be esoteric, at least not outside the boundaries of common usage. Here in the U. S., French isn't just considered esoteric, it's considered vulgar and alienating. That's the U. S. Peoples resistance to learning new language is merely a defect of the mature human brain.
