Systematic Analysis of Symbolic Languages

Saturday, March 1, 2014

What Is The Code? Finding the CODING DENSITY THRESHOLD

                   A systematic analysis of Symbolic Languages, be they mathematics or lyrical poetry, demands that we decompress the pressureless dust, (This term is borrowed from astrophysics to describe the infinitely dense, infinitely massive pointless matter singularity at the Big Bang.) Like the Big Bang, the amount of information available to be studied and processed is infinite. An accurate multi variate statistical analysis, (Relative to say just one subject like languages,) is one of the most cumbersome forms of Calculus possible. Indexing a directory for important usable vocabularies (data systems profiling) is endless, especially now with code. Now that we have the processing capacities of computers, we may catch up with the naming of different terms we use to describe our unique perceptions. Resultantly, we are seeing an exploding revolution in personal and utilitarian languages. Identifying the social boundaries that define language exclusivity is generating innumerable elite subcultures. "What Is The Code?"

                   Because almost all of my work in Intuitive Diagnostics is directly derived from diverse irreplaceable cultural histories, I am confronting interpersonal language barriers directly. We also get to see the constant advance of a largely expanding computer language code, and yet the Coding Density Threshold of human interaction and sensitivity is still almost completely ignored. Our modern short attention span and technological creep, feeds this dangerous fracturing of our languages. Preferred styles of communication and colloquial tribal language etiquette is often considered law within these exclusively elite sub cultures.

                   I have often been accused of exploiting peoples biases by association with highly partisan "New Age" B. S. By measuring the relative vagueness or over generality of my "psychic readings," I find I am relatively esoteric with a High Coding Density to my language. This is why I prefer reading for skeptics. People with strong opinions, often being just a little intellectually constipated, we are just as often very shrewd and discriminating. This is why I promote an open "Complementarity." Understanding the complex language subtleties of just one of these diagnostic methods, like "Chinese Medicine," does not translate easily. My beautifully dynamic system of diagnostics, which incorporates anthropometrics, ergonomics, biometrics, physiognomy, chirography and chiromancy, and my own system of Social Recursion modeling identifies our self defining mutual distinctions, our personal and maybe exclusive identification boundaries. Most people will not be able or willing to understand, I may as well be speaking Greek.

                  I site, "Mutually Conflicting Virtues" and Contrasting "Necessary Vices" like BASELESS OPTIMISM with RATIONAL PESSIMISM. (both are necessary) Whether I am right or not, these modelings are Meta Formally Logical. I define a norm relative to a linguistic polarity. This singular unity is subject to an Enumerative Partition. (by two in this case.) The domain of these polarized natural extremes is a factor of human diversity. Symmetrically Coalesced we redefine totalistic human variability. Get it? I didn't think so.

                  Let me see if I can make this any simpler. I have managed to directly hit the Coding Density Ceiling. My work in applied esoteric diagnostics has Point / Counterpoint. Popular opinions on these soft (spiritual) technologies is also changing. And the change is to our shared languages. What was once esoteric has now become colloquial. Code is probably just a word for any new unfamiliar language. To some of us, "Code is Poetry." Thank you. You have been very helpful.