So did?

So did /x finally come to a conclusion on this guy? I have yet to see anyone challenge his methods, all I've seen is normies attack the 1•1=2 and his character, which is completely irrelevant. Although it's obvious he's a shill what about his patents? Serious discussions only

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We decided he was bullshitting. His patents are on decorative designs, (diamond earrings, wave blocks) not functionality.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This, and note that you can patent anything, so long as it does not duplicate an existing patent. There is ZERO requirement that a patent actually represents an invention that does anything at all.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What the hell was this homie even bragging and about

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      he says 1x1=2 therefore everyone else is wrong and he is right

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Terrence Howard is highly demonic.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How can you tell?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The eyes

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    roganites are a plague of pseuds.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Not really. Never met any other fans, but Rogan himself is entirely agnostic in almost every conceivable way. He doesn't make assertions, if he seems to it is only to entertain a certain premise.
      It is middling-IQ pseudo-intellectuals trying to act as gatekeepers of their fields that are the real epidemic of pseuds. Instead of acknoweledging superior intellect suggesting tgat something might be, they act like the fact they don't have a specific degree in what they are talking about makes them a dumb pleb. They also must maintain the status-quo that validates their own contributions, and therefore ego, as well as justifies their wages. Since they put in the time and money to get a degree, they must enforce its requirement for input in order to maintain the value of their investment. They can also simply pretend education=intelligence in order to puff themselves up further.
      All that being said though, this particular guest IS making very big claims and acting like he's some sort of enlightened god, he just seems nuts but I guess we'll see what comes of his patented technology.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Normies will believe anything. Did you see what they did for a donut?lol

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    he's delusional, probably needs mental evaluation

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i can't help but assume that he is being propped up by glowies in order to dilute common discourse. joe rogan's podcast has an astounding level of reach over the general public; it is a rare channel though which fringe topics are able to breathe comfortably into the thoughts of millions of people. call me paranoid—maybe i am—but that doesn't mean i'm not probably right.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >/x
    >pointless shit
    Begone, moron.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Pointless yet had people like you seething over it. If he's so wrong why mad?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Mad at OP shitting up the board, not at some moronic literally who. If I had to be mad at every moron that crosses my path I would spend every second of my life replying on this board.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I have to admit that at first I laughed at him, but then I saw this video and this guy shows in a more intelligible language that most of the things Terrence Howard is saying are true. Everything checks.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      why do white people steal everything black people think of?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Unironically interesting.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This is part of your life where you come to terms with the fact that most famous black celebrities are LEGIT Satan worshippers. Being black in America is all about idolatry, usury, dealing and doing psychotropic substances, and using a public microphone to display the full extent of your Satanic Luciferian Schizo Gnosis that was conveniently learned entirely on the streets.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You literally worship a brown israeli rabbi who died on a stick. have a nice day you dumbass moron

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      how do we save rhe souls of the Black person

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Guaranteed if he was white /x/ would be on his wiener 24/7 and they'd probably make a whole general for him. Since he is not, they automatically dismiss him because /misc/ has fricked their mind so much to the point where it convinced them all blacks are idiots when clearly Terrence is smart as hell and made Joe and Jamie look like absolute morons who graduated from McDonald's parking lot.

    Terrence is going to be the key to the new age. Some of you may have watched Randal Carlson's lectures on Sacred Geometry. The reason why Terrence is so important is because he was able to figure out practical methods of using this sacred geometry. He has 2 new significant inventions. The lynchpin that can literally rotate on its axis and moves very similarly to UFOs and his new plasma propulsion system. Randal talked so much about plasma in his lectures and he even believes it the Ancient Egyptians knew about it and possibly utilized it.

    It's not only that. Terrence's interview shook something in people. Not everyone felt it. The ignorant christcucks absolutely hated it because he kept talking shit about the catholic church and all the evil and ignorance they spread which is true. And the close minded E-scientist plebbitors also hated it since he dismantled their very understanding of the universe and called out all the Academic cucks for debate anytime they want. But those of us who are on the verge of enlightenment felt it. And it will only get better from there. The new age is upon us. Religious gays and atheist gays will perish. Welcome to the future baby.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He's only being listened to because he's a black science man. A white guy saying the same shit would be homeless, not on JRE.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Absolutely not. If you've bothered to read what I wrote you'd realize that Randal Carlson also talked about the same things when it comes to sacred geometry. The only difference is that Terrence found practical methods to these things. Walter Russel whose Terrence's work is based on was white. You gays are so fricked in the head that you judge a person based on their race when your judgment should be based on their theories, knowledge and work.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Randal Carlson has been a published author for almost 30 years. That's what it takes for a white man to go on JRE and give alt science/history views. A black guy who sang "whoop that thing" gets 3 hours without being challenged in the slightest.
          >you gays are so fricked in the head that you judge a person based on their race
          You brought up race, champ.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >A black guy who sang "whoop that thing" gets 3 hours without being challenged in the slightest
            and thats all? The guy has an enormous reach to normies compared to randal carlson
            lets just hope he isnt an arnold

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            "enormous reach" has no relation to domain credibility. Kim Kardashian has "enormous reach" for normies, but that lends no credibility to her views on astro-physics.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >but that lends no credibility to her views on astro-physics.
            very true but I wasnt talking about his credibility, his reach alone has already put the seeds of his idea into the minds of millions. Randal Carlson did the same but to less people and you can also argue his credibility with "formal academia"

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          and randall is a boomer freemason repeating what he is told to repeat.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        fax

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The only response of value.
      You would think a few /x/philes would have studied Pythagorean music theory and the relationship of vibration to geometric form.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I looked into it, but so much of it is missing that it's worthless.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1602647.The_Pythagorean_Sourcebook_and_Library

          No you didn't. You didn't even remotely scratch the surface.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You read A book, that's cute. list the frequencies, your claims, and empirical evidence to support it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why are you on /x/? Is it to make posts like this?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Joe and Jamie actually are absolute morons who graduated from McDonald's parking lot though. So what's your point?
      You only need to listen to him speak for about 5 seconds to understand that he's a charlatan. A certain kind of people (of which there are plenty on this board) are of course keyed into charlatans, they automatically latch on to whatever "spiritual" bullshit they spew. You don't have to be a Redditor, christcuck or /misc/tard to see this c**t for what he is: a charlatan and a grifter. Nothing else.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >dismissed because he's black
      How do you explain Neil Degrasse Tyson dismissing him? Black on black crime?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        that's not black on black
        that's luciferian god-complex pedophile on schizo black

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >made Joe and Jamie look like absolute morons who graduated from McDonald's parking lot
      these two don't need additional help to accomplish this.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >made Joe and Jamie look like absolute morons who graduated from McDonald's parking lot
      That's not a hard task at all...

      The only response of value.
      You would think a few /x/philes would have studied Pythagorean music theory and the relationship of vibration to geometric form.

      If you studied any Pythagorean theory you'd realise how utterly idiotic he is.
      His entire idea of 1x1=2 spits in the face of Pythagorean theory.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        But 1x1=2 is true in Backward Romanian.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >blahblahblah
      Results are all that matter. I will form an opinion when he actually makes something.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Go away Terrence, we know it's you.

      The Lynchpin is literally taping a bunch of fans together frick off.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >an object is just its basic constituents described moronicly!
        you're not as smart as you think

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    1x1=1 in a currency like value system
    1x1=2 in our multidimensional reality

    I dont fully grasp the physical reality of subatomic particles yet but I feel like im getting somehwere.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >/x
    >conclusion
    >group consensus
    Holy frick you have to go back.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >go back
      Your mom's busy

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The more shills seethe post the more I think they don't want some idea of Terrence to be nooooticed.

        You read A book, that's cute. list the frequencies, your claims, and empirical evidence to support it.

        Obvious israelites.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I'm just trying to figure out if he's been debunked. I could care less about the other shit

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >debunking something that can't be proven in the first place
            a fool's errand

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            i'm still waiting for "askldjf;'aas;ldknvv903inomsadlknv" to be debunked. so far, nobody's done it they just kinda cope

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The fact that anyone takes him seriously is a testament to how little you have to do if you’re black.
    Literally everything he’s said is some schizo shit that everyone has had access to on the internet for 30 years except the 1x1=2 shit, which is moronic if you actually look at the paper.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What about the planet video

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the program is running on a computer which follows 1*1=1, exactly like the one you are using to read this post of mine

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this mutt took The Three-Body Problem too seriously

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He seemed lucid to me the last time I saw him on Rogan. Maybe a little eccentric but nevertheless held together by a fairly tight-knit framework of logic and reason coupled with coincidences that pass the smell test due to sheer number of times it coincided. Just another guy trying to figure out the mysteries of the universe while he questions everything. That doesn't sound like a guy that needs mental help or something like turning him off his path to course correct instead of leaving him be, crazy or not. Either he's right or wrong and I hear a whole lotta right from him. OP a gay

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >tight-knit framework of logic and reason
      if you're moronic

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      he's very obviously a low caste that got initiation he didn't deserve. he saw some shit that his monkey brain couldn't integrate and now he's some flavor of schizoid or bipolar. this is why normies shouldn't be allowed to do entheogens, its pearls before swine. the elixir is just poison to the unworthy. the most obvious sign is grandiosity, like its his duty to save the world. everything he says is a twisted version of the truth, only a matter of time before he kills himself or somebody else, ego like that can't be sustained

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I bet he has more money then you

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >I bet he has more money then you
          Whatever money this jogger has, he's spent it on diamond earrings and $4000 basketball shoes.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I watched for like 35 mins and it was cool but not cool enough for my attention span. Seems lile an earnest seeker with a lot to say and cool ideas and stuff.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >my attention span
      (You) problem.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Just use an ai summarizer if ur brain is that fried from tiktok

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's weird seeing educated people kneejerk debate the semantics of his thought process while simultaneously refuting outright to engage the content of his discussion (they cannot follow it or get filtered). Every single person who tries to debate the nature of 1 (cubed or squared) or of root 2 immediately gets upset and insults his intelligence, citing grade school arithmetic "everyone knows that 1+1 = 2 terrence" because they're too implicitly racist to challenge that the entire point he's making is that the implicit assumptions (taught in schools) lead to drastically irresolute consequences felt in physics level mathematics and would rather just assume he's a dumb Black person who literally is too moronic to do 1+1 = 2.

    The foundational axiomatic (flawed) premises culminate in a math that is "close enough" but constantly has to invent new concepts (named after researcher of the month) to patch holes in unverifiable sections of the predominant model. Mathematicians would rather patch the holes in their understanding than admit the wholes in their understanding are coming from an accurate yet imperfect paradigm.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >It's weird seeing educated people kneejerk debate the semantics of his thought process while simultaneously refuting outright to engage the content of his discussion
      That's because there is no content in his discussion. His discussion is complete gibberish. In the first three minutes, he argued that the orbital frequency of molecules was in visible the light spectrum, not even grasping that light is a wavelength and function of energy contained within a frequency. He claimed he dreamt up the Grand Unified Field Theory before it even existed (which is odd becasue he doesn't seem to grasp basic precepts of this theory). He posited that atomic orbital frequencies (which are quantum mathematical functions that change with energy of electrons) are constant and measured in cycles per second (Hz) ... which is beyond absurd and would place them in our audible frequency range. After listening to him, I question his ability to wash himself or feed himself properly. Nothing he said should discussed seriously.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not here to argue in favor of anyone, but I can't see the problem in saying a frequency is measured in cycles per second (Hz), isn't that the unit of measure for frequency?
        Am I missing something here? :/

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's hard to decipher this dude's gibberish becasue he doesn't understand what he's talking about. What he's probably talking about is the Emission Spectra of the Periodic Table of elements. When electrons make the transition from high energy to low energy states, each electron state within an atom will have a different wavelength due to the relationship between EM frequency and photons emitted. So, basically heat an element and it will give off light. Here's the main problem with what this dude is saying: visible light is emitted in a specific frequency with varying wavelengths. Red is 400-480 THz (EM frequency) with 625-750 nm wavelength. He's ignoring the wavelength part of this and he doesn't understand harmonic reduction. What he's probably saying (because he heard it from someone else) is you can reduce the EM frequency of an element harmonically until you get to a range of frequencies eventually audible to the human ear. But it's not fricking 80.5 Hz for Hydrogen and Carbon. And this photonic phenomena results from a shifting EM frequency in the atoms that comprise the elements, which going back to what I said in the previous post, was likely due to the wave-like function of electrons in the atomic orbital frequency ... which is a range of frequencies and from this range is only a probability and you can't fricking reduce a range probability into the specific audible frequency (80.5 Hz) and even if you could, you are ignoring wavelength.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >you can't fricking reduce a range probability into the specific audible frequency (80.5 Hz)
            Not disagreeing with you in the slightest on the overall point about his words being nonsense, and the irreducibility of the range.
            Point of contention on "80.5" Hz. That being in the audible range is only when it is describing the pressure wave vibrating the atmosphere/air.
            Plenty of things could cycle at 80.5/sec and not be audible to humans.
            It really depends what he meant by "atomic frequencies", because if he thinks it means the whole molecule is moving around in space then yeah - that would be audible.
            But I could forgive someone else talking about some sort of atomic vibration at that frequency that has a les literal meaning, similar to how up quarks and bottom quarks arent talking about location.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Point of contention on "80.5" Hz. That being in the audible range is only when it is describing the pressure wave vibrating the atmosphere/air.
            Energy doesn't need air to "vibrate" it just needs a transmission media (which can be air). Energy and light still travel through a vacuum.
            >Plenty of things could cycle at 80.5/sec and not be audible to humans.
            The main point here is that the EM frequency of Hydrogen and Carbon isn't 80.5 Hz. It's in the THz range when measured in the Emission Spectrum for the Periodic Table. He's alluding to frequency harmonics and saying that 80.5 Hz is an exponential harmonic reduction from the actual EM frequency of Hydrogen (which changes).

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Energy doesn't need air to "vibrate" it just needs a transmission media
            That's my point. To say "80.5 Hz is in audible range" only makes sense if you are specifically talking about pressure vibrations through air.
            >the EM frequency of Hydrogen and Carbon isn't 80.5 Hz.
            My point is that even if it was, it wouldnt be audible, because this frequency has nothing to do with pressure vibrations through a medium.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >To say "80.5 Hz is in audible range" only makes sense if you are specifically talking about pressure vibrations through air.
            Correct. And the point you bring up is a good one. This dude is even more ludicrous than I realized.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      1x1 means I am going to take 1 and add it one time to zero.
      This gives you the answer of 1.
      This is why any number times 1 equals itself. This is also why any number times zero equals zero since you aren't adding anything.
      This is about as basic as basic can get. Giving any kind of credence to literal Black person math is brain dead behavior and you should be institutionalized or gassed if you do.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Obvious glowBlack person thread. I restate my point from the last glowBlack person thread on this topic. You should be forcibly sterilized if you kept watching after this single digit IQ moron said:
    >Hydrogen is visible. Carbon is bisexual.

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I hate that fake emotional voice he does, the way he goes out of his way to sound like he's on the verge of tears to make what he's saying sound more impactful. It's both manipulative and very low IQ.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If this interview took place in 2016 he would have been the laughing stock of the internet, but because it's the 2020's, everyone thinks it's deep. COVID really fricked everyone.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >but because it's the 2020's, everyone thinks it's deep
      No real person actually thinks it's deep. This is just an extension of the Black person-worship psyop. Continue to demoralize people by elevating absolute gibberish that some potato-level IQ black person spouted off on a podcast with International reach.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Trismegistus

    He's right. You guys confuse thinking for yourselves with the mob collective agreement, and the irony in seeing you deny it is a testament to that.

    The multiplication symbol is a substitute for multiple lines of addition. I.e. it's easier to write 1 x 3 instead of writing 1 + 1 + 1.

    The multiplication symbol should not be used for anything less then 2, otherwise it should by default revert to symbol of addition.

    1 x 1 technically doesn't make sense because there are no multiple lines of addition.

    Therefore, it's just 1 + 1.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Trismegistus

      1 x 1 = 1 Isn't real and has no real world applications and doesn't do anything. It doesn't exist as an equation. It can't be input into anything whether it be data or programming to do anything because it's just the number one. This fricking 1 x 1 nonsense shouldn't exist.

      Go back to a simpler form of calculating.
      I want you to draw 1 x 1 and tell me it doesn't = 2.

      I want you to take a picture of 1 dot then draw an x, then draw the other 1 dot.

      How many dots do you see anons?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Trismegistus

        Now if I'm not fricking mistaken, if 1 x 1 = 1

        There should only be, one, fricking, dot.

        However since the insistence to create an equation out of it, an answer must arrive out of inputting this sequence of numbers, if you want a force a number out of it.

        There's two dots.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        is 2 x 3= 1 correct using this logic, since there are two numbers and their value doesn't matter? (yes)

        • 3 weeks ago
          Trismegistus

          2 x 3 = 6

          The rules of math don't change because of what I'm bringing forth, you're just refusing to think beyond your mind control and think that whatever I'm saying changes everything about math altogether, when it just ends there - you're an idiot.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Uhm, it's not true it has no real application. Saying 1 x 1 = 1 has no real application is denying the importance of the neutral element of multiplication (1).

        A first example that comes to my mind is calculating a one square meter of surface. If your sides are both 1 m then the surface is 1 x 1 = 1 m2.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Trismegistus

          >If your sides are both 1 m then the surface
          If there are 4 sides to a square and they are 1 meter per side, that's 4 x 1 anon.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Dude, stop arguing with the glowBlack person namegay troll. You aren't having an conversation in earnest. This whole thing is a demoralization psyop.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yup.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        How many squares does it take to make a stack that is 1 square wide and 1 square tall?
        That is what the multiplication symbol is performing.
        By your logic, to make a tower that is one square wide and one square tall requires two squares.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Trismegistus

    Take two fricking apples out of your fruit basket.

    Multiply 1 apple by the other apple.

    You now have two fricking apples.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Trismegistus

      Take 1 Apple out of the fruit basket, and multiply it by itself.

      You can't because it was always one fricking apple. It was always 1 apple before the stupid fricking equation and it was 1 apple after the fricking equation.

      How is this not easy to understand?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this isn't how multiplication works, though. when someone says 1x1 = 1 they're not implying you're starting with two apples.

      A better way to think of it is like
      "apples per basket times number of baskets"
      If I have 4 apples per basket and 10 baskets I get 4x10 = 40. And now I can count all my apples and indeed, I have 40- the multiplication was a useful tool to predict something about the real world.

      Now you can see how 1x1=1 makes sense. If each basket can hold one apple, and I have one basket, then I have one apple.

      I hope I have illustrated why multiplication is a reliable and useful tool.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Trismegistus

        Right, so the meaning of multiplication has changed over time and as a result mathematics and STEM fields have suffered greatly. I understand, thank you.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          no what I mean to say is, multiplication, as most people understand it, is "how many of something do I have"
          Like if I have four groups of 3 apples, how many apples do I have? I have 4x3=12.

          I don't think this causes any suffering. it is a useful tool. It doesn't stop you from doing any other kind of calculation if you want to do another one. if you wanna do something different you can- but the way multiplication works, like the concept most people are referring to when they say the word "multiplication" would make 1x1=1.

          There is use in multiplying with numbers under 2.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Trismegistus

        When multiplication was first utilized

        It was a much simpler invention then what you're trying to describe multiplication as.

        Instead of writing 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 it was easier to write
        5 x 1

        I'm sure the ancient greeks had your idea in priority though.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Your 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 is exactly what

          this isn't how multiplication works, though. when someone says 1x1 = 1 they're not implying you're starting with two apples.

          A better way to think of it is like
          "apples per basket times number of baskets"
          If I have 4 apples per basket and 10 baskets I get 4x10 = 40. And now I can count all my apples and indeed, I have 40- the multiplication was a useful tool to predict something about the real world.

          Now you can see how 1x1=1 makes sense. If each basket can hold one apple, and I have one basket, then I have one apple.

          I hope I have illustrated why multiplication is a reliable and useful tool.

          was showing. You're adding 5 instances of 1, you're adding 5 baskets with 1 apple each.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This is a very good analogy.
        Multiplication basically brings the calculations to multiple dimensions, unlike addition which stays in a single dimension.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Multiply 1 apple by the other apple.
      what is apple x apple? that doesn't make sense to begin with. you can't multiply an apple by an apple

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      is this trolling? i really hope it is, or im frightened at how poor your understanding of simple math is.

      1 item multiplied by one is just counting that 1 item once, therefore 1.
      2 items multiplied by one is just counting those 2 items once, therefore 2.
      1 item multiplied by two is just counting that 1 item twice, therefore 2.

      its so simple a child can do it

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Trismegistus

    If you want to be an butthole about it, the real equation you're looking for is simply, thus

    1 = 1

    You don't need the fricking multiplication symbol.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I wonder what kind of wormpill/heavy metal supplement was he taking on the podcast

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He'd be better off just saying multiplication as such doesn't exist in nature, except as shorthand for repeated addition. Unlike Peano arithmetic, Presburger arithmetic is sound, complete, consistent, and decidable.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      sounds like someone was filtered by Skolem arithmetic

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Most likely a mind slightly broken for whatever the reason. Still not as unhinged as half this board, so..

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Trismegistus

    If something so basic, so simple, and can be replicated because of the "scientific method".

    This is an example of how the breakdown of society starts. We literally can't agree on what 1 x 1 means.

    For the actual answer, it doesn't matter. It's the reaction we're experiencing that was the true experiment.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >It's the reaction we're experiencing that was the true experiment.
      i agree, actually. the fact that so many people took this guy seriously (after actually hearing him) is the real interesting thing.
      on one hand it does make me fear for the future of humanity, but on the other hand it does give me comfort as a skilled worker.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >It's the reaction we're experiencing that was the true experiment.
      i agree, actually. the fact that so many people took this guy seriously (after actually hearing him) is the real interesting thing.
      on one hand it does make me fear for the future of humanity, but on the other hand it does give me comfort as a skilled worker.

      Some people will always (rightfully) question authority, especially authority they do not understand. Unfortunately some people have that key trait while being just plain stupid, and entirely untrained in methods to test knowledge.
      The scientific method has a key fatal flaw, but it's still an okay system for determining physical law and its exceptions, because it's repeatable, documented, and accessible to anyone.
      But that's the thing, if you don't understand the scientific method and offer no other objective means testing to your theory that can be infinitely repeated by anyone with the means, your theories are pointless at best.
      1 x 1 = 2, because we defined the multiplicative action to be sets of objects being counted. 2 sets of 4 objects will always equal 8 total objects, because that's how we define multiplication. 1x1=1. Howard may have defined a new mathematical operation and called it multiplication, but he ain't multiplying shit.

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i just watched a quick video of him. i didnt have high expectations because i thought it was really stupid he thinks 1x1=2. and yeah, holy shit his explanation is beyond stupid for why he thinks that. but i was pleasantly surprised by some of the things he was saying. he's not very eloquent, and clearly doesnt have a very in depth understanding of what he talks about (and has a big ego), but he brought up some very good points about the new physics and limitations in the current framework/paradigm

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >/x/ is one person
    Anyways, I don’t know how worthy the guy is of being defended. From my understanding, math is unique in the sense it’s the one tautological knowledge system we have. So it seems bizarre to assume that one grouping of one (which is what I understand multiplication to be) would equal of sum total of two. Of course, math is the one thing the makes the gears in my brain short circuit. Not to mention that truth can, at moments, seem counter intuitive and people take comfort in base assumptions that may not actually correlate to anything real or significant. However, I lean more towards him being wrong and I don’t think contrarianism should always be defended even if it’s needed much of the time.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >So it seems bizarre to assume that one grouping of one (which is what I understand multiplication to be) would equal of sum total of two.
      he literally thinks the numbers are physical objects and one of them is disappearing

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Well that’s quite silly.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Well, because when you say one, what do you mean, one what? It has to be something.
          Say, an apple.
          So let's multiply 1 by 1...
          One apple by one apple.
          I bring my apple to multiply it, you bring yours...
          There's 2 of them.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's not multiplication.
            Multiplication is a description of the following, 'x set of y objects.
            If you have 1 set of 1 apples, you have 1 apple.
            If you have 64234 sets each of 1 apples, you have 64234 apples total.
            You cannot multiply objects themselves, that is simply silly.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          see? i'm not even samegayging. this is real:

          Well, because when you say one, what do you mean, one what? It has to be something.
          Say, an apple.
          So let's multiply 1 by 1...
          One apple by one apple.
          I bring my apple to multiply it, you bring yours...
          There's 2 of them.

          >one what? It has to be something.

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    3 minutes into it and he already sounds a poster in this thread, of course he’s full of shit

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >3 minutes into it and he already sounds a poster in this thread, of course he’s full of shit
      You doubt that Carbon is bi-sexual? You sound like a bigot.

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He's definitely knowledgeable and gifted but he should underline the main points and compile a structured theory/system instead of rattling off stream of consciousness style. Maybe start out with a high level overview of the electric universe and how that contradicts the theory of gravity before going deep into examples & math. As it is now many people, Rogan included, are engaging the discussion about 'that guy and his wacky ideas', without grasping the whole of what he's trying to say. Someone already versed in these concepts will pick up what he's putting down, but his style of presenting isn't ideal for 'converting' people hearing about the concepts for the first time.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >He's definitely knowledgeable and gifted
      from the eyes of a moron
      the rest of us don't care

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        if you smoke enough weed you can literally sound like him, but it'll only make sense when you're high

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why do you think he's wrong about gravity being not a force but an effect of electromagnetism? Enlighten us.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Explain why he's wrong, I've seen other physicians praise his new discoveries

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Can you just frick off back to your flat earth threads?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >physicians

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >all I've seen is normies attack the 1•1=2... which is completely irrelevant.
    >Getting basic logic wrong is irrelevant.
    If he can't understand that one group containing one thing is one, what makes you think he understands the secrets of the universe?

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Hilarious a polgay would call anyone else an impressionable moron, kek

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Dave

    that guy is such a poser
    embarrassing!

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Dave

    [...]

    >meanwhile /x/ was convinced to believe 1x1=2 overnight by some literal schizophrenic Black person lmao

    this board is full of idiots

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    No, it's for literally everything other than that

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    [...]
    >meanwhile /x/ was convinced to believe 1x1=2 overnight by some literal schizophrenic Black person lmao

    this board is full of idiots

    There's one namegay who follows the 1x1=2 idiocy and everyone else rightfully calls it moronic

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Wasn't he ousted from ironman because he's a flagrant woman beater?

    I don't buy the canceled shtick. He doesn't have anything profound to say. Plus his physiognomy looks like a woman beater.

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If he was actually a mathematical genius, he would solve some millennium prize problems, or at least work on doing so.

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    wannabe cult leader

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    dude you gotta like conjugate waves and sheeit

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *