2. Collection

Step Two of Learn to Count in Twelve Easy Steps

What happened previously:

Step 1:

We have introduced additional describing aspects of the logical sentence a+b=c. Next to a, b, c, we also make use of u=b-a, k=b-2a, t=2b-3a, q=a-2b, s=17-(a+b|c), w=2a-3b. For a graphical presentation, see: 1.graph.

Question relating to Step 1:

Joe Brenner, from Switzerland writes: “This way of thinking is potentially quite dangerous. Alfred Korzybski, author of Science and Sanity, had an ‘easy’ theory of the mind ‘that a high-school student could learn’, and it led to Scientology.”

Answer:

Leaving the path of orthodox thinking can end in sectarian extremism. The approach of the Twelve Easy Steps is subversive in that it disobeys Teacher’s instruction, “Thou shalt not look into (a₁-b₁)-(a₂-b₂) if a₁+b₁=c=a₂+b₂ and a₁ ≠ a₂.” Where this might end is indeed unpredictable.

Step 2:

Today we introduce the set of additions we shall use. We generate the 136 smallest pairs of a, b and their aspects {a,b,c,k,u,t,q,s,w}.

Reason why:

We demonstrate properties of the individual before building the background of the multitude. To be able to do so, we need a multitude.

Why not less:

We see that Nature uses two sets of information carriers that come both in triplets of four units. Therefore, we need four basic units. We see that the basis of counting is related to the expression 2*i**2, and this gives 2*4**2=32.

Why not more:

We shall introduce the terms ‘sequential’ and ‘contemporary’ in step six. We shall see in step ten that congruence between sequenced and contemporaneous states will become inexact above n=136.

Data set:

The data set we use can be found here.

Remark: The column “Permutáció” (permutation) shows the sequence of the arguments used at the creation of the table. Its necessity will be discussed in step ten.