Discussions, incl. FW Lawvere, G Khatcherian & M Wright

0:00 The sum of the quantities itself is generally bigger, but again, if you ask where does the sum live, where does x get where it lives, it depends on where x is, meaning 9-0. Let's say it's a positive quantity. It's an odd thing to get, you know. If it's a positive quantity x, 2x, what is the intensity of the space for x-1? 10-2x. 10-2x. 10-2x. 10-2x. The quality itself of the language itself is irascible, and you have to ask yourself whether it is there or not. And what that doesn't mean is that if you look for a language in the chemistry, it's out of the picture. You don't want it. What I have in my mind is, well, for example, a cigarette. Where are the cigarettes? I know that in cigarette shops there are cigarettes, but this is limited in the fact that it's a nice number. I'm just trying to find that paper, John, with the quotation from Newton.

2:30 I think, yeah, that is the... I mean, let's see how, if we could just kind of stand and go back to the basics, the ground practice of all the objects except for the M. But isn't it, this is indicative of how we lack all these critics of everything. Think about the head of the scientific community, about the theory of physics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics, the theory of mathematics. It is not a tutorial. So, during that, one can go to other places, which is still popular. Not in the United States. It is not a research. But it goes in chapters. In fact, you need to look at it. You must read. In some cases, you can sometimes use it. In fact, you certainly don't take it. You can't take the non-medical arguments. It is not a tutorial. I mean, that's why I think it's kind of an idea, an idea about the cost of different mathematics, right? So basically, what are they doing with our platforms and such and such and such. They're not pretty there anyway, but they're out there, they're there. But it's the same thing. It's very complicated.

5:00 Can I clarify one thing that I'm thinking about? If you take this, or the text, the animation, what does it mean? You must tell me what the origin is. Some groups are much stronger than others. Do you have Raziel and Sikorsky? Raziel and Sikorsky, I... I'm trying still to release myself out of it. Yeah. I think it's a good formula. I did listen to one once in a while. Well, I may not do it. Well, it will not be long. Yeah, I assume it. The nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools, because the nearest I came to finding the tools,

12:30 Oh, right, okay, fine, fine. It's just I don't want to lose my own copy of it. So I did make a copy of that. Yes, I think it's like category theory. I do not have this book. Yeah, it's okay, yes. Geometrics is the way I'm thinking of mathematics.

15:00 How is the condition of sub-objects, you know, in physics and mathematics? Well, in physics it's very difficult to think of all of them. You know, exactly the same as in geometry. Well, yes, sure. But I'm just trying to get a feel for the quality of natural forces, which I use as a question. But I'm just thinking about what I was saying in terms of the quality of natural forces. And particularly, therefore, how one gets, in the case where one doesn't have the ability to think, I know what this is, but it might be true.

17:30 And I understand that much more clearly given what's given, although it's insisted that that kind of information, in addition to the hexagrams, the lambdas, the first ones, the current ones, certainly is visualized in the art of physics, certainly in various ways, but there is something that is also... We're in the very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very,

35:00 Yeah, yeah, that's exciting, but other things are true. You know, I think it would be arbitrary if you studied some things beyond the career of a mathematician. It's incredibly complicated. It couldn't be true that every A is all of A's.

37:30 Yes, in fact, you have, when you get back to this, probably come to me. So you can still maintain it. Take any part. If it's going to expand, you're able to expand it. It is. I mean, you made this point somewhere in relation to the circumference of the circle. Yeah, yeah. That's what you meant. Right, right. You more or less can write down the essential formulae. Trying to, I mean, take a ball or a machine. As soon as it expands, the rate of the circle is there. If you take any object that is magnified in the area, one thing is to accept it, it can also be proved.