Oh lastly I not sure if Qanal is one word (like Canal) or a play on Q anon but when I read it I just see anal like butt sex. Maybe Im just gay but perhaps consider alt names lol.
About a year ago (peak of the QAnon retardation, when the result of the election still was unclear), I started writing a linear algebra library that uses fractions (synonyms: rationals, quotients, standard math notation is capital Q) instead of floats. I realized pretty quickly if you backprop the constraint into math (specifically the branch of math called Analysis), you end up with math that's a lot simpler and makes a lot more sense. Hence "rational analysis" or QAnal for short.
I'll talk a lot more about QAnal in the future, but here's the math angle:
There's two main renaissances in the history of mathematics: the Greek renaissance (~600 BC - 300 AD) and the European renaissance (~1200-2000). The European renaissance probably starts when Fibonacci introduces Europeans to the Arabic notation for numbers. It's not clear when it ended, but it's clear that it *has* ended. The train starts derailing around the year 1900 and by 2000 it's clear something has gone severely wrong.
The Greeks viewed geometry as primary, and arithmetic was something that falls out of geometry. Probably the most fundamental development in the European renaissance was Descartes' idea of using a coordinate grid to do geometry. In the Cartesian system, arithmetic is primary, and geometry is something you can do with arithmetic. The advantages of this are obvious, especially in the age of computers.
The Europeans then tried to retcon all the Greek geometry into the Cartesian system. It doesn't really fit. To make it "fit" you have to invent a fake arithmetic called "real numbers". This is where you pretend that things like pi, e, and square root of 2 are numbers. All of these "irrational numbers" come from trying to shoehorn geometry into arithmetic, where it doesn't really fit.
Irrational "numbers" are not really numbers, they're really processes that produce successively smaller intervals of numbers. If you know the first trillion digits of pi, you still don't know pi, you've just narrowed it down to a very tiny range.
I think mathematics is better when you're honest about what you can and can't do. It's simpler and more beautiful.
QAnal makes a sharp distinction between things that can be done exactly (exact analysis = XAnal) and things that can only be done approximately, or where there's some notion of precision (precise analysis = PreAnal).
What results is something that's a lot simpler, a lot easier to handle, and a lot more beautiful than if you wish away the approximations using real numbers or limits.
Wildberger stole this idea by figuring it out 2 decades before I did.
I will say I think improvement can be made to the accuracy of the blue/red/green definitions.
First attempt:
Blue Pill: Believes the useful lies are the truth.
Red pill: sees *that* the useful lies are lies.
Green pill: see *why* the useful lies are useful despite being lies.
I agree that pretty much all “heterodox” thinkers, left or right, progressive or reactionary, would land in the Red Pill camp.
Also seems that the only people who are green pilled (i mostly agree with your list but that Minor Dissent guy is a fag) have a pretty deep understanding of darwinian selection, which is a pre req to understanding how “imperfect and flawed things” but which are less imperfect and flawed than their predecessor end up dominating given that their competition is not against the perfect platonic form (what the utopians want) but actually the pile of shit that actually currently exists.
Also would say that full green pilling also understands why the blue pill and red pill are useful—the dialectic between them, blue being thesis and red anti thesis, blue yin, red yang, their “conflict” actually the force which moves ideas forward ultimately closer toward true platonic truth (something that can only be neared but never reached, like in calculus. and something which is moved toward nonlinearly with lots of volatility, though with a trend over time upward like the market cap of any new tech innovation).
The distinction between the "partial green pill" and "full green pill" you laid out, I called it "green pill" and "chromopill". The chromopill is more or less what you described in the second-to-last paragraph.
Great first post. As mentioned previously, love the idea of the Green Pill. Root certificate analogy very interesting and useful too.
Also I laughed for a minute straight at “ We’ll start with a quote from a nigger who didn’t write his own compiler”.
Looking forward to reading more.
Oh lastly I not sure if Qanal is one word (like Canal) or a play on Q anon but when I read it I just see anal like butt sex. Maybe Im just gay but perhaps consider alt names lol.
About a year ago (peak of the QAnon retardation, when the result of the election still was unclear), I started writing a linear algebra library that uses fractions (synonyms: rationals, quotients, standard math notation is capital Q) instead of floats. I realized pretty quickly if you backprop the constraint into math (specifically the branch of math called Analysis), you end up with math that's a lot simpler and makes a lot more sense. Hence "rational analysis" or QAnal for short.
I'll talk a lot more about QAnal in the future, but here's the math angle:
There's two main renaissances in the history of mathematics: the Greek renaissance (~600 BC - 300 AD) and the European renaissance (~1200-2000). The European renaissance probably starts when Fibonacci introduces Europeans to the Arabic notation for numbers. It's not clear when it ended, but it's clear that it *has* ended. The train starts derailing around the year 1900 and by 2000 it's clear something has gone severely wrong.
The Greeks viewed geometry as primary, and arithmetic was something that falls out of geometry. Probably the most fundamental development in the European renaissance was Descartes' idea of using a coordinate grid to do geometry. In the Cartesian system, arithmetic is primary, and geometry is something you can do with arithmetic. The advantages of this are obvious, especially in the age of computers.
The Europeans then tried to retcon all the Greek geometry into the Cartesian system. It doesn't really fit. To make it "fit" you have to invent a fake arithmetic called "real numbers". This is where you pretend that things like pi, e, and square root of 2 are numbers. All of these "irrational numbers" come from trying to shoehorn geometry into arithmetic, where it doesn't really fit.
Irrational "numbers" are not really numbers, they're really processes that produce successively smaller intervals of numbers. If you know the first trillion digits of pi, you still don't know pi, you've just narrowed it down to a very tiny range.
I think mathematics is better when you're honest about what you can and can't do. It's simpler and more beautiful.
QAnal makes a sharp distinction between things that can be done exactly (exact analysis = XAnal) and things that can only be done approximately, or where there's some notion of precision (precise analysis = PreAnal).
What results is something that's a lot simpler, a lot easier to handle, and a lot more beautiful than if you wish away the approximations using real numbers or limits.
Wildberger stole this idea by figuring it out 2 decades before I did.
I will say I think improvement can be made to the accuracy of the blue/red/green definitions.
First attempt:
Blue Pill: Believes the useful lies are the truth.
Red pill: sees *that* the useful lies are lies.
Green pill: see *why* the useful lies are useful despite being lies.
I agree that pretty much all “heterodox” thinkers, left or right, progressive or reactionary, would land in the Red Pill camp.
Also seems that the only people who are green pilled (i mostly agree with your list but that Minor Dissent guy is a fag) have a pretty deep understanding of darwinian selection, which is a pre req to understanding how “imperfect and flawed things” but which are less imperfect and flawed than their predecessor end up dominating given that their competition is not against the perfect platonic form (what the utopians want) but actually the pile of shit that actually currently exists.
Also would say that full green pilling also understands why the blue pill and red pill are useful—the dialectic between them, blue being thesis and red anti thesis, blue yin, red yang, their “conflict” actually the force which moves ideas forward ultimately closer toward true platonic truth (something that can only be neared but never reached, like in calculus. and something which is moved toward nonlinearly with lots of volatility, though with a trend over time upward like the market cap of any new tech innovation).
Thats all for now I think.
The distinction between the "partial green pill" and "full green pill" you laid out, I called it "green pill" and "chromopill". The chromopill is more or less what you described in the second-to-last paragraph.
ah that makes more sense.
Second attempt. Still bad.
Blue Pill: Believes the useful lies are the truth (thesis)
Red pill: Believes the useful lies are lies and that truth comes from rejecting them (antithesis)
Green pill: Believes the useful lies are useful despite being lies and that the truth comes from understanding why they are believed. (synthesis)