Errors in Directional and Dimensional Logic

Almighty Darkness. Directional and Dimensional Errors.
Directional and Dimensional Errors.

Considering a one dimensional base, forward can only store, exchange, and use values for its directive of progressing in only that direction. This notion is similar for downward, backward, and upward. If this is the case, how can forward react to where another direction is? It should be impossible for forward to travel to 3 upwards and vice-versa, yet this logic persists in mathematics, geometry, and among other concepts. 
Is it the case that if both upward and forward exist ,as perceive motions, that a leftward dimension must generate? Leftward is upward plus rightward ( left = up + right). How or who decides that left or right should contain multiple directional properties while their constituencies don't? My question remains. How does upward or forward react to another? Could there be something else connecting them? Could there be a general direction or dimension that can exchange, convert, and process all its subclasses' values?

Rebuked Dimensional Solution Example.
Rebuked Solution Example.

In a possible solution, upward could be influence by an unknown forward activity while forward is repress by an unknown activity. I reject this solution because the methodology is proportional which doesn't account for everything. It cancels or removes data by making upward and forward properties redundant. It switches their positions or frames of reference without answering the main problem. What is allowing an independent forward the ability to react to an independent upward? I won't be using Pythagoras' principles here. 

Edit Update: These dimensional errors have some potential fixes. All directions at once, and mirage directions with mirage exchanges. Full details are here Distance(Remaining Time)
There are no suitable solutions from the above. All directions at once was not fully explored. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Isaac Newton Defeated

Image
  Isaac Newton's Gravitational Formula.  First thing to acknowledge is that Isaac Newton does not use a quantitative measure even though mass(quantity of matter) is label as a variable in his equations. His methods are proportional, and I'll link to some statements that I made clarifying differences between quantitative and proportional operations. Once you've understood these instructions, you can easily manipulate symbolic mathematical fabrications to conform to prior results through proportional manipulation. These methods alone don't completely  reproduce reality's outcomes or difficulties managing quantitative operations. Quantitative instructions have limitations and do not easily induce disordered confusion through subtracting, or ill-mannered addition of variables through proportional manipulation. I further that limitation by abandoning use for negative numbers, which removes information. 0.98 acceleration ,for the greater mass, flies into Dialect's fac...
Read more

Almighty Darkness

Image
Darker Daimon's Logic. Darkness is a concept of the mind. It is pure abstraction in mental frameworks . In constructs of Darkness,  Logic  is materialize by consistent and predictable  instructions . Inconsistencies and randomness possess no bodies in the darkest of realms because they're attributes for those whom seek blinding light.   With careful curtail sensibility to reason, all entities deriving from dark abstractions should convert to physical or external  reality. These  interpretations  can only be found here and another place. All other names have no association with me or my developments.  Darker Daimon's Logic. General Contents
Read more

Compatibility: 0.5 Plus 1 Dimension

Image
  Magnetic Cycles and Artificial Gravity Modulus Function First things come first, you'll have to understand prior dimensional instructions to understand what lead me here. You can catch up here if you hadn't:  Compatibility: 0.5 Dimension  . Artificial Gravity's inception and methods were introduced here:  Distance(Remaining Time)  .Alright, I'll try to make it shorter than prior posts, but you can't take my word for it at this injunction. The major difference here is with the notion of 2D. Second dimension, according to me, does not possess an inherent directional structure that emerges from entities settling or balancing into a 2d environment. What's unique to 2D is spin or rotation. Because 1D requires ranges of dense threshold levels across traveled distances, the entirety of 1D objects, and dependencies on density, it lacks the potential to reorient itself , as a unified whole, even though it can traverse directionally. More conflicting constituencies decr...
Read more