Mark Anthony Taylor

Litigant in Person acting against DB and others for precious metal price manipulation. Conspiracy theorist. I am listed in the Epstein files as a whistleblower.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

Please RT, demand your constituency MP act. ask them WTF is going on with #pedogate cover-up. #pizzagate is real, and its hit the UK now.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@skdh You need to move on Sabine, and go with the flow.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@QueenAnticommie Mobile phones.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@Bitcoin_Teddy Mars by next Friday eh?

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@PhilosophyOfPhy Time, the non-reciprocity of memory relations.

Taken from my essay

https://t.co/JuLM2DwaST

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@skdh @802_indy Consider writing a screenplay instead, you dont have bother with all that description and 'he said, she said.'

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@JohnNosta Like Wittgenstein?

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@Bitcoin_Teddy He is a fraudster - a criminal.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@chaosengineerr How to fix the cost of living crisis.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@TheGriftReport I'm glad I can't swim. I'll phone the lifeguard in the morning.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

The essay does go further that just pure ontological neutrality, it explains why QM solutions are fictional, specifically the boundary conditions of the differential equations ensure that no complete and consistent biography is being used. A complete and consistent biography might constitute a 'reality' or a solution that matches the world. But my arguments says that there can be no complete consistent biography, ergo no QM interpretation of what the world is. Every QM scenario is an idealization, a fiction.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@skdh You should try putting through Grok, see what it tells you. I have put my screenplays through it I started about 15 years ago. I realize now how much editing they needed. Grok gave me the warts and all.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

The point of the essay is that the ontology lies between the biographies. So the interpretation is ontologically neutral. Imagine you have a reading of Oliver Twist, now a solipsistic anti-realist might say Oliver Twist is an artifact of my imagination as is Charles Dickens, whereas a realist would say Dickens existed and Twist was his legacy. But my position is that Twist is a fiction, and its up to the philosophers to debate the ontology of the context in which that fiction exists. Its not a physics problem.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@TheVixhal Herman Weyls' take is we start with integers => rational, or ratio of two integers. Then we take roots of polynomials. And then other number has to be defined by some some over process. He considered the number line to be the set of classes of such definitions. Constructivism.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

Suppose you carve up a ruler into halves and you apply that recursively. Eventually you end up with atoms, so they are 'atomics' - the indivisible, the quantification of geometry, or rigid body geometry. When you try to split further you are transforming particles, and distance only appears in the calculation as a result of the uncertainty principle (high momentum/energy ~ small distances). So geometry does not appear to be as simple as mathematicians say it is. I think points are fictions, and bad fictions at that.

[iM Clausewitz @iM_Clausewitz]

@JDVance We can't breath!

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@CurtisDaly_ Shouldn't we be demolishing them then?

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@TedPillows Cash positions.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@EdwardJDavey Says Davey who practised a two-tier system against innocent postmasters.

[Mark Anthony Taylor @Shyreman]

@omnicoherence @skdh Did you actually read my essay?