Recent Forum Posts
From categories:
page »

my theory is that if 0 cuils is reality, with all of the flaws that come along with it. negative cuils would reach closer and closer to a [Platonic Ideal].

A theory on negative cuils. by DemonhordeDemonhorde, 08 Apr 2019 19:03

I don't think negative cuils would make it look more like a person. I think it would show the camera taking the photo, and show the past of the photo's subject, and would give you more of an understanding than a photo should.

Defining abstraction
23purdue57 (guest) 09 Nov 2018 00:54
in discussion Cuil Unit Forum / General Discussion » Defining abstraction

"1 Cuil: if you asked me for a hamburger, and I gave you a raccoon.

2 Cuils: If you asked me for a hamburger, but it turns out I don't really exist. Where I was originally standing, a picture of a hamburger rests on the ground."

I don't see how scenario 2 is an abstraction of 1. Its just a literary twist. Scenario 1 isn't an instantiation of 2 in anyway.
I see that its tricky to really define a unit of abstraction but it seems clear that whatever framework you use, instantiation should correspond to moving down the ladder and abstraction should correspond to moving up the ladder. (similar to differentiation and integration)

1. 5 rocks on a table
2. (5 objects) abstraction of rocks OR (a number of rocks) abstraction of 5 OR (a number of objects)

I'm new to this sight but I have thought about this before. I don't know how "real" this en-devour is and the literary twist thing makes me skeptical. Why are we assuming that this unit is has all of the same properties as integers(associative property ect.) ? Sets don't.. Vectors don't, propositions don't.

Defining abstraction by 23purdue57 (guest), 09 Nov 2018 00:54

Thank you for the comment, it would certainly be helpful if a standardized system could be agreed upon.

I have been attempting to approach the -x‽, -∞‽, and ∞‽ 'issues' from different angles for awhile but I was stuck in my own head and couldn't think of a way around what I thought of as a problem. But what you've said is a perfect way of dealing with infinities and negatives.

Negative, positive, and base Cuil.
Along with potentiators to increase or decrease through many Cuil circumventing the need to shift Cuil to Cuil.

It's my personal beliefs Cuil is a facet of existence.
Unknown and only perceivable to a single observer. Granted the number of single observers together at once can recognize shifts in Cuil together.

So what is flawed in the only theory.
That base Cuil is a 0. That 0 is the truest form of reality.

We associate these scores, to an individual's perception, yet this is a governing force like time. In order to accurate estimate which direction in Cuil we shift, one must find the estimate of the current Cuil of the world.

The world's governing Cuil is base.
All first person accounted for Cuils are their own tailored to them.

Next flaw in theory, that one Cuil jumps from an extreme to another.
We can account for fractional cuils and that one leading to another is like a magnitude in earthquakes but that's too hard to do for something that can't be measured against a control.
So 1 Cuil to the next is very slight. So say 10 cuils deep, that's when things in the world start to drastically change around the world one perceived.

The multiplication of a Cuil can be effected by a number of things.
Such as, True Belief in ones understanding of existence.

Or the recognization of the hints in life such as coincidence, to be signs, or something typically implausible by sheer ratio. You wouldn't win the lottery, so what are the odds you met that person in Denver, whom you've only met once before in California.

To change the base Cuil of the world we live in certainly needs a mass amount of conscious support.
We all can change the cuils pertaining to our own perceived reality, but together, True reality then begins to become more abstract. On a global scale.

So, base Cuil is 0. - No.

Base Cuil would be represented by the current distance of abstraction, from true reality of earth.
Incomprehensible what the base Cuil of no abstraction would feel like.

Positive Cuil still remains farther from reality, negative closer.

. Keep learning on.
Locus of all knowledge.

CuilInMyReality (guest) 28 Jul 2018 00:53
in discussion Cuil Unit Forum / General Discussion » Anti-Cuils

If Cuils are the numerical measurement of the abstractness from reality in a closed conscious system, then the anti-Cuil could potentially be the measurement of opposing reality which balances out the closed system of experienced abstractness. This works similarly to the laws of conservation, for every level of Cuil there is an opposing anti-Cuil of the same value.
In the expressed situation where the subject is observing and recognising that they are experiencing a 1 Cuil event where reality is abstracted through whichever medium, the anti-Cuil, value of 1, prevents the event and subject from interacting and spreading the event into the 0 Cuil environment outside the 1 Cuil event.
From this I propose that for the existence of anti-Cuils, a point where the abstraction is greater than 0 in a reality where 0 Cuils is the expected in a percieving consciousness, that a field exist around the subject such that the abstraction is held whithin the subjects perception and not identifiable by observers outide the 1 Cuil field. This field exists as a sort of bubble with the inside being the >0 Cuil event and the outside the =0 Cuil reality. The field perimeter forms from the opposition of the Cuil field (generated by the event) and the anti-Cuil field (generated by the pre-existing 0 Cuil reality, by a form of reality elasticity, where the Cuil value is naturally pulled to 0 through the diffusion of abstractness to form a reality universally shared and accepted as real by observing subjects). The volume of conscious subjection to the >0 Cuil field, or its understandable ‘size’ is determined on the type of abstraction taking place. Should the abstraction be that the platonic idea of what a hamburger is, is changed, then all corrisponding beings that hold the previous platonic idea are affected. Thus it can be as small and insignificant as the change in memetic composition of an idea held by one concious mind until it’s eventually reverted through the anti-Cuil field. Or more drastically is the event in which the field takes place on a transdimensional scale where universal laws become both infinitely relevant and infinitely irrelevant and can be disobeyed or obeyed at any random point in an observable state relative to an experiencing subject…
However anomalic Cuil event fields are something that can only be proven through experiencing and remembering such an event from both observational standpoints, before and after Cuil diffusion, as the diffusion of abstraction leads the event to becoming part of the 0 Cuil reality where it is then always remembered by observers and experiencers as real and ‘normal’.
FYI: I wrote this without complete understanding of previous theories and ideas surrounding the Cuil. What I have said is subject to change and is in no ways to be taken seriously unless you want to listen to the ramblings of a 16 year old at 1 o clock in the morning. Seriously. This is just a supposed idea to the anti-Cuil theory stated.

by CuilInMyReality (guest), 28 Jul 2018 00:53

An Anti-Cuil is an idea i've been thinking about, what if, instead of getting farther from the reality of a situation, you instead got closer to it?
I standby the idea that this would mean more detail is added to the situation, and you get to see more of the whole picture, with enough levels of Anti-Cuil leading up to describing the creation of the whole universe, all the way to the creation of the first hamburger, leading to the eventual popularity of hamburgers in the United States, to how the hamburger made it's way to you, once it had been asked for.
Maybe this would be the wrong way for Anti-Cuils to manifest though?

Anti-Cuils by Djb0iDjb0i, 11 Jul 2018 12:10

I am for this reinterpretation, as it standardizes Cuil measurements.

I think your -x‽ problem is not actually a problem, as long as you state that this calculates |x‽|. If you think about it, the Reddye Number -∞‽ is supposed to be the most consistent, most real thing. However, in practice this requires nothing short of genius to achieve, so to a person inhabiting 0‽, it will seem as removed from reality as ∞‽, which I think should be called the Babel Number (named after the Library of Babel). This is true if we treat the Grand Mesh like a Riemann sphere, where -∞‽=∞‽. This is also analogous to the fine distinction between genius and madness, where something hyperreal requires a step of 1 Cuil in the negative direction.

We know that the Observer is necessary to measure a Cuil, appearing as "you" in a given Cuil. I'm opening the question: who is "I" in a given Cuil? We know the standard account of "you ask me for a Hamburger." The "you" is the Observer, but who is the "me"? Is it the Narrator? The Reader? Is the Reader narrating? Is "I" just another character, like the small dog? Is "I" just a figment of the imagination, meaning, "you ask me for a hamburger" is really at 1‽? Is the real protagonist "you"?

Personally, after reviewing several Cuil I have come to the conclusion that "I" is the Narrator and the Creator of the system.

What are your thoughts?

Who is the "I" in a given Cuil? by j1ng3rj1ng3r, 30 May 2018 18:04

This theory attempts to solve the issue of inconsistency of quantification of the Cuil value of a given instance.

The real difficulty in trying to define how Cuils increase, whether linearly, exponentially, or logarithmically is due to the basis that one must analyze not only how Cuils affect reality but also what they are affecting/changing. It is believed that there is a difference between 𝛥x‽ and 𝛥 of the Cuilian Effect (changes made by x‽ that removes a given situation from reality) on reality. At the end of this theory, the postulation will be that Cuils are linear in their numerical growth, but exponential in their Cuilian Effect.

It has already been clearly defined that Cuils change aspects of reality, as we perceive it to be, hopefully that perception is relatively close to the actual state of reality, i.e. 0‽.
It has also been agreed upon that the higher x‽ the further removed from reality the observed circumstance is. However, most examples given have simply added more and more details, that subsequently, have been altered in order to reach higher degrees of Cuilian derivation from 0‽. Which is all well-and-good if you don't mind counting an astronomical number of Cuils in order to quantify 𝛥‽. Thus, if 𝛥‽ is linear, x‽ is a direct result of the number of objects in a scenario, i.e. how "big" is the picture; does it include just you, me, and a hamburger? Or does it also involve music, you, me, creation, a song, a hamburger, and the universe (reddyenumber4's last example on Reddit). This results in the necessity for ∞‽ possibilities, since there is no, known, perceivable end to the universe. But this is not rational for a useable system used in the measuring of deviation from reality. Especially, because in this 1-detail-change = 1‽ system, any new changed detail increases the number. There seems to be no way to avoid ∞‽, which instead becomes necessary because the subject could be handed a picture of themselves being handed a picture of themselves in room full of pictures of them being handed pictures, in all of which there is an entire reality, or at least a picture of a reality, that allows for an infinite number of infinite diversions. Which would mean Cuils are completely useless as a quantifying system since they increase too rapidly to be measured.

Thus, this theory proposes that we must first define our reality (which must be subjective) in order to even begin to understand how it is being altered and to what extent. In order to do this we have to analyze our existence, not even necessarily as humanity as a species, but as constituents that are cognitive of the whole, and decide where the lowest levels of reality exist. Or at least, our idea of the lowest level. This theory then proposes that 1‽ affects the most superficial strata of reality, 2‽ the second, etcetera. This may seem oversimplified, however, if we consider the levels of reality to progress from the Epistemological (notated as E) level (at 0‽ this is the strata wherein Platonism and logic take affect, is subjective to the frame-of-reference of the viewer, and has the least affect on reality [because it is merely our perceptions/reactions to stimuli]), to the Non-epistemological (notated as NE) level (which is defined as a level consisting of concepts that are purely Euclidean or Newtonian, i.e., they rely solely on the rules of geometry and physics and require no observer to interpret them. E.g. the behavior of atoms and the bonds they form. Concepts such as, "materials' properties change based on the way atoms bond." This is a concept that is foundational for everything that is made of matter, living or nonliving. Thus, it is quintessential for the operation of everything that follows, or that is more complex than a single atom), wherein changes will be incredibly far-reaching and define everything thereafter. Finally, the Causal (notated as C) level (the changes in this strata are nigh incomprehensible as the results will be paracausal. That is, they will have no regard for time or causality, which are arguably the two most archetypal laws of our universe). For example, a Cuilian change in the NE strata could change life to mean plasmoidal, omniscient entities. Why? Because physics or geometry has changed, which could change the necessary qualifications for sentience, which could change the process of thinking or knowing [which is pretty far-reaching]. Meaning that the deeper you go, down towards the base that our reality is built upon, the more all-encompassing the Cuilian Effect. I.e., if you have a Cuilian change in the NE level it is possible to change something at the quantum level, which is an all-encompassing, causal alteration, however, changes in the C level means results that are not bound by any limitations, as opposed to any reality-altering changes in the other levels that are still bound by their own rules. Paracausal changes are not bound by rules, even their own.

It would make sense then that the strata level change wherein the change(s) occurs is x‽. In order to account for changes in different strata without running into 𝛥x‽=∞‽ this theory argues that the number of the two strata be added together. Therefore, E changes take place at 1‽, NE changes occur at 2‽, C at 3‽. Thus changes in the first two levels would be a 3‽ scenario (NE + E = 3‽). It is then postulated that the highest Cuilian value that may be applied to a situation is 6‽ (unless more strata are discovered).

Examples with the above Cuilian Laws:
0‽: I ask for a hamburger and you give me a hamburger
1‽: I ask for a hamburger and you give me a raccoon (the platonic[E change] idea of what a hamburger is has changed)
1‽: I ask for a hamburger and you give me a picture of a hamburger (E change)
2‽: I ask for a hamburger and a raccoon gives me a hamburger (something has changed in the genetics of raccoons[NE change] that allows them to develop to the point of being intelligent, sentient beings.)
3‽: A raccoon asks for a hamburger and I give him a picture of a chair (genetic change in raccoon [NE change], idealistic change of what a hamburger is [E change])
6‽: I manifest an infinite number of planets and an omniscient star-being called a raccoon asks for a kjnasdvoib (C-change allows for paracausal result of infinite number of objects and for the manifesting taking place before the request [lack of time], NE change allows me the ability to manifest objects at will, as well as the existence/ability of a being to be omniscient (the raccoon), E-change causes the idea/word "raccoon" to be an omniscient star as well as allowing for a "kjnasdvoib" to be the name of an object)

This system then allows us to quantify x‽ as well as 𝛥‽ regardless of how absurd the situation without having to count to any number up to ∞. This still allows for an almost infinite number of variations (Cuilian Effects) of the situation and subsequently a near infinite number of digressions from reality (including recursions) even in an 1‽ situation. For example, if there is a scenario where a change at the NE level causes all physics to be different, that could change everything about the scenario. I could be a dog asking a tree for a chair and be given a rock. But it would have the same meaning to the participants of the scenario because there would still be a Theory of Forms in this reality, a form of Platonics. Hence, my asking another being for something that I need or want. This is definitely a crazy scenario, but it's only a 2‽. Why? Because there is still time, philosophical constructs such as desiring, asking, and giving. So, as strange and dreamlike as it is, it's not too far removed from the concepts of our reality.

If this is true, and the levels of reality are stratified, then x‽ can increase linearly, with an exponential Cuilian Effect. This not only makes quantifying x‽ possible, but it also allows for, and solves the issue of quantifying any situation regardless of the frame-of-reference of the viewer.

Obviously this system does not allow for -x‽ in a quantifiable sense, because it seems that since the base definition for a Cuil is the degree that an instance is removed from reality, only impossible situations can be measured by Cuils. Intellectually, -‽ would arguably exist but there seems to be no way to measure something that is possible of occurring using a notation used to measure the impossibility of a situation. If true reality is 0‽, which I would agree is impossible to achieve unless everyone has the same exact perception (a change that could be caused by an E-change in a 1‽ situation, thereby creating the 1‽ = 0‽ paradox), then it is impossible for anything to be hyperreal. Nothing can be "more real than reality" if true reality is unachievable.

By these rules though, a -x‽ situation is possible in a 1‽ situation wherein the definition of "real" has been changed such that the definition of "hyperreal" is not only different from what it is in a near 0‽ reality but also possible. This is where we run into a recursive loop (for more info on recursive loops read Douglas Hofstadter's "Gödel, Escher, Bach," now we are in a 1‽+-1‽ = 0‽ (also, since this system allows for linear increments in x‽ we are able to add the Cuil values, just like when we determine x‽ of any situation). Which brings us back to the 0‽ Paradox because by definition we must be in an, at least, 1‽ scenario for 0‽ to exist.

In this system the Cuilien Effect of the deviation from reality does not have a linear relationship to the Cuilien Value of the situation. The rate of exponential growth of the Cuilien Effect of a deviation is relative to how many aspects of reality have been altered due to the original deviation.

I hope reddyenumber4 reads this and I hope you all will give your feedback. I would love to continue this discussion, especially if there are real (or perceived) flaws in my The Theory of Linear, Stratified Cuil Value.

MrMcPants (guest) 27 Feb 2018 17:29
in discussion Cuil Unit Forum / General Discussion » the 8th Cuil


by MrMcPants (guest), 27 Feb 2018 17:29

and I asked your brother to give you a remittance. So, and my brother had more than 10,000 debt, and a dozen years, how are not clear, gave up all the property, but also 20,000, follow-up to give money. But they think that getting me to college is my greatest favor. I knew that the return was so low, let me off to serve my dad.

your brother to give you a remittance by site (guest), 03 Feb 2018 14:29

property seemed to be confiscated. Ten years later, he passed away and my mom said that my dad has no legacy. When I was in college, my mom did not want to use the savings for me. When I was senior, I said that I had no money

property seemed to be confiscated by gues (guest), 03 Feb 2018 14:28

I have always been reluctant to discuss with them the harm to me. How much my dad deposits I do not know, he worked to 50s, before the illness also intends to buy land self-built buildings. After he became ill

I have always been reluctant by new (guest), 03 Feb 2018 14:28

My mom told me that in an ordinary family, let you drop out of school. It was my darkest time, my father could not protect me, I did not know what would happen in the future. Six months later, they bought a house in the city.

My mom told me that in an ordinary family by admin (guest), 03 Feb 2018 14:27

I was small on the wall lettering, vowed to leave the house. I have no money, can only rely on reading, reading out, the farther the better from them. When I was in junior high school, my grade was the best of the whole grade. My dad insisted that I go to college. I was admitted to the city's best high school, my dad was ill the next year.

I was small on the wall lettering by Here (guest), 03 Feb 2018 14:26

Why is this so? I really do not like my family, I was a second-class citizen. For example, when no one was in the house, my grandmother insulted me with the hardest words and insulted my dad. I picked up a bucket of water and poured it on my body. My brother came and smiled at me. I packed my clothes and went to my dad Running unit, five or six years old ran ten kilometers, saw my dad, he only silently hugged me in his arms cry.

I really do not like my family by Homepage (guest), 03 Feb 2018 14:25
Rat LordRat Lord 26 Nov 2017 15:38
in discussion Hidden / Per page discussions » What Is Cuil Theory?


It's not a party until you summon a lesser demon.

by Rat LordRat Lord, 26 Nov 2017 15:38

Is it a unit vector? Is is a constant? pls elaborate

What is a Cuil? by NotALoveSongNotALoveSong, 04 Aug 2017 23:20 By the time the staff of the mission center came forward, the situation had reached a fever pitch.

This is not only the quarrel between the quarrel between the black sun and xiao yuan, but has become the antagonism between the higher and lower powers.

He also didn't expect the event to turn into such a subliminal way of keeping the original ink behind him, and he would be able to stand in the way if something didn't work out.

Looking at the firm arm in front of her, she felt a warm heart at the beginning of her life. It was also because of her that she could not give her the name.

Actually, this matter · · · the early ink came out of the back of Designer Belt, the words did not finish, was interrupted by xiao yuan.

page »
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License