|Back to IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE page
|On creative effect of Thinking Language CORE
I t is twenty years ago that I could get the idea of Thinking Language CORE. I explain the story of those days in “IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE”. First I fall in the failure of wanting to create a symbol system such like an ethnic racial language. I had redefined a lot of noun and verb word as new symbols, there are many symbols, so I forget the symbols created by myself. Then I repeat what happened in the Tower of Babel. I had the aim that I would create the one to witch people would return who had dispersed to many languages. I want to change something seemed as complex thinking on natural language to anything understood better only by minimum symbols.
For Thinking Language, I referred to the symbol system of special field like as a wiring diagram, the computer language evolving rapidly at the age, and the mathematical system yet making the complex thinking. Not limited special thinking to which that systems aim to analyze, but just general thinking exposed almost only by natural language to which I aim to analyze. I had refined the methods of Thinking Language CORE with the samples such as the philosophical sentences, the mathematical explaining sentences, the legal sentences with old style, and the novels with complex structure. I placed the some of analyzing samples on “IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE”.
It had an ability to develop, but it had being slept for a while. Recently I add the section of “CREATIVE NOTE” on the page of “IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE”. Soon the monster of Thinking Language CORE wake up from sleeping, it starts to eat something as good taste.
First preys were “Dzogchen” and “Hathor”. It (as the monster) has the idea which the frames of those thought contents should be resemble, then it starts to suck these bones. They becomes as good taste. What miracle would “the question not being quested yet” make which it met there? It is a tasting the hors d’oeuvre of the cooking.
For the brain asking only sweets, the desert of “Einstein’s Special relativity” comes out. One of many stomachs starts the peristaltic movement for it. It makes original thesis ferment as some times by using Thinking Language CORE, and tastes with biting by a little, then it was clear that “the foreign matter” entering in the thesis which it could not swallow straightly, and which had change the taste of people secretly with moldy poison like as blue cheese. Thinking Language CORE shows the power as the method to mark those and make the efficiency of the check become to better level.
It may be turning not an article but a novel with over metaphors. I will wake up clearly, and I shall make the paper come back the system described on real world.
I only tried to argue for discrete samples about a possibility of thinking language in “IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE”. But upper two samples might become more concrete “fruit” over a category of “a sample”. It may be coming that the stage of arguing about “creative effect” of this Thinking Language with collecting full-scale samples.
(2) The aim of Thinking Language CORE
The words line up linearly in there using natural language. This may be from speaking language. If we would construct the language by the word with sound, it might be natural process. Because the mouth is only one a speaker, then it would order the style of writing language to be linear.
But there is original image for the thought before it shall appear as a talk. Not all images line up linearly. It is usual example that if we would image the triangle relation of men and woman or man and women, then might we make the images or symbols of three human beings being subject to the thought place at three peaks of the triangle in mind virtual space, and might we make any images of each human relations place at three sides of the triangle? On “the mapping diagram” in mathematics, the functions, the variables, and the mapping symbols are drown at the positions like as just such triangles, squares, and the ladder made with them. There may be strategy diagram on the team game of soccer and basketball and so on as something like it. Or please image the scene in TV drama in which the photos of the suspect and the people concerned are put on the blackboard and the relations between them or the evidences are written by memo for putting the human relations and evidences of the case in order.
There is other example. It may be captured such as fantasy story, it concerns the technique of “telepathy”. Then the thought before being sent by telepathy might be something like as clear picture. It is telepathy phenomenon that the thought are sent to others mind directly which seems not by any communication medium.
Or there is other one that if we would communicate with each own subconscious, then we could get good effect which we would use not abstract language system but more primitive one based on any image. For example, the image training used on sport training might be a sample for the communication with the subconscious. We are conscious bodies as thin beings who are parasitic on other life as “the fresh”, and we must communicate to the owner of “the fresh” by image language.
It seems to flowing to something like novel. I will come back to the theme of there.
The aim of Thinking Language CORE is that expression form is made which is more similar to such original thought. But if the original image would be something as the picture or the three-dimensional hologram such like a dance and a game play, not all people could replay such image. Then the language aim of communicating to others does not hold good. So it is necessary that moderate abstraction plus simplification about those images as past languages have introduced them. For example the animal images drown as the wall painting of Lascaux had been changing , via the hieroglyphs of Egypt or the pictograph of Maya, had been treated as more abstraction plus simplification, to alphabet and so on, or image other process that the kanji had been made from the inscription on animal bones and tortoise carapaces in China. There is unique episode. In the book of a title of “I came from the planet after ascension”, the letter written by “the characters of Venus” is on the page, which characters are used by the extraterrestrial beings living in the thin dimension space of Venus. If I would look this picture, it seems that the characters were changed from Maya pictographs with being deformed a little as an abstraction plus simplification. It can be felt about these Venus characters that as the people in the culture of alphabet language system on Earth are learned about the volume of information of the kanji. Those characters seems as the symbols are packed much information like as the kanji.
But I think that I will use as possible the words for rich expression of many natural languages used on the Earth now with a little compromising on Thinking Language CORE. I want to suppress a kind of number about the sign newly introduced as much as possible. And there is restriction that I do not write these symbols with hand but have to use the symbols existing on keyboard which control the word processor of computer being dominant in present culture.
If I would think the condensation of the volume of information, then I could not look for any character system but “the kanji” used in China and Japan. But the sequence of the kanji only seems as the sequence of simple design because it is one of natural language. One of the blind spots being fallen into by the language system on this planet is that something with the comparative fixed image as the subject and the object and other thing with the image not being able to be fixed as the verb are expressed by the symbols as like same morphology.
On Thinking Language CORE, I call the subject and the object as “a target word”, something showing the relation or the state such as the verb between the target words as “a relation word”, and I distinguish them, I think if the functional differences of these could be distinguished easily by the morphological differences, then whole structure of the thought could be understood easily.
So, for example, if we would set the symbol mainly constructed by the kanji for “the target word”, the symbol of alphabet system as English and so on for “the relation word”, the symbols of Persian or Arabia language for the symbol modifying “the target word” as assisting function, we could get good system being easy to distinguish. But we would have new question how many members could treat those symbols freely are on this planet. As I thought, the language should not hold good without enjoying some compromising and the affection of the tradition.
Then after we think these “aim”, we shall think about the technological or technical question how we explain something being near to the image of the original thought only a little in this situation with the compromise what do we for traditional usage on now natural language.
(3) The technical usage of Thinking Language CORE
I put it on the page collected in “IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE” that the more concrete systematic usage than what I will explain there. There I will explain simply the main usage from those.
If we would accustom a programming of a computer, then we became not to use it, the flowchart was used as the symbol system explaining the process of information treatment by the computer. In the case of the flowchart, we divine the processes of the operation and treatment into some parts, and write the name and the content into the box surround with the line or into something like a capsule, then show the flow of treatment between those elements as jointing with a line or an arrow. But recent programmers glances the flowchart being in their mind, and will write the treatment process of complex structure directly with the program language. Not only for their accustoming, but the reason that the computer language has been evolved such as it fits these operation.
One reason that the flowchart was not almost written is, as the practical problem, to be difficult how to draw it, and as the problem of less information volume explained on it. So, on Thinking Language CORE, I would learned not about these flowchart but about the techniques of next coming program language with powerful real effect.
On Thinking Language CORE, I would adopt the policy that we should not shut “the target word” being corresponded by the operation and the treatment with the special territory figure or the symbol. It is only described. But we must know the border with other element. I will do it by that we make the relation word and so on being entered between a target word and other target word, be marked with special symbols.
There the symbols marking the relation word are “the beak” and “the tail”. There is “a verb” as main relation word. For example I make the sentence of “a bird fly” change “a bird――fly＞”. There the relation word is “fly”, but if I would write it to “a bird”…”fly”, then I used only Pidgin language as one of natural language, so I would add the tail “――” and the beak ” ＞” to it, and I set the style as “a bird――fly＞”. On the case that “a cat run after a rat” having two relation words as a subject and an object, I set “a cat――run after＞a rat”. On the case that “a bee give nectar to a larva” having three relation words, “a bee――give＞nectar＞a larva” is good usage. And I have no fussing about the length of the tail.
“The target word” and “the relation word” are main structure bones, on practical thought there is a case that other assisting image should relate. For example if the difference of time or place would be quest, then I would make these contents be set the outer position of “／” generally as departing symbol. But the ideas of time and place are used comparatively, so as these distinguishing symbols I used to use “☆” as time and “＠” as place. I understand if would introduce some distinguishing symbols, we could treat easily, but there is the dilemma that if we would make the kind of symbols increase then the encryption became to advance, I think that about the symbols of other ideas, when we would use Thinking Language CORE, each user would define new symbols and use them. For example I used to use “▽” or “△” as human being, “◇” or “□” as abstract thing. But because I use “○” as “affirmation” and “●” as “denial”, then we could not make them have new meanings. It is good usage that if there would be the sentence of “a bee carries pollen to the nest”, then it changed as “a bee――carry＞pollen＞／the nest” or “a bee――carry＞pollen＞＠the nest”, and with comma, then “a bee――carry＞pollen＞, ／the nest” or “a bee――carry＞pollen＞, ＠the nest”. I do not think deeply about the difference of these subtle expressions. It is good that rough structure could be expressed.
About the relation word, we could think not only something having one direction as “――fly＞” but also other thing having both directions. It is useful that we could express something like the equal sign “＝” in mathematics equation to the place between the target words of natural language. For example if there would be “Birds and bees are flight animals”, then it could be “Birds and bees ＜equal＞ flight animals”, “Birds and bees ＜＝＞ flight animals”, or “Birds and bees ＜：＞ flight animals”, there were many such cases, then I would used to allow “Birds and bees ＜＞ flight animals” more simply. First I would used to add the tails as “Birds and bees ――＜equal＞―― flight animals”, if two target words were far each other, then I used the tails, but if they were near, then I omitted the tails.
There is other special symbol about the relation word. For example if there would be “a jockey makes a horse run”, then it could be “a jockey――make to run＞a horse”, because something to run is a horse, then “a jockey――make＞a horse――run＞”, and then it could be “a jockey――＞＞a horse――run＞”, I would think “――＞＞” as the symbol of strong action with the meaning of the causative verb” such as “make” in English.
Why are there the tail and the beak in these relation words? Because we could make “a bee――carry＞pollen＞, ＠the nest” change reverse “＠the nest，＜pollen＜carry――a bee”. And if we could freely write by own hand on more free paper, then we could relate the target words with the relating words from any directions such as the electric wiring diagram, so I had design them.
I used to add “；” to the end of such one sentence. But a period or long space are all OK.
To tell the other usage, I used to use “＊” such as the symbol of “variable” or “constant” in natural language, as the variables are used in mathematics and so on. For example if we would write ＊ａ : a cat, a bird, and a bee, then we understood only ＊ａ as the meaning of “a cat, a bird, and a bee”. We might used to use ａ and Ａ without anything, it is easy to understand that ＊ａ and ＊Ａ have some meanings because with ＊.
I used to use ［ ］ as the symbol showing upper (meta-) relation such like between a sentence and other sentence or such like between different sets of the sentences. (we could make the sentence 1 and sentence 2 relate each other with ＜ ＞ such as sentence 1＜＝＞sentence 2. I think a meta-order, for example to &(and), such as A［&］B ; A＜&＞B ; A&B. ) The symbols being used usually are, “if” to ［if］, “then” to ［→］, “inversely” or “but” to ［Ｚ］ and so on. We could use ［ ］, like as [if ] [then] [but] , with any word entering in ［ ］. I wanted to make this meta-symbol have a direction, but word processer always do unnecessary officiousness to uniform the symbol being without any direction, so I compromised such style.
We shall express long formed target word such as “birds having been evolved from dinosaurs” to “birds(having been evolved from dinosaurs)” or “birds(＜having evolved――dinosaurs)” with utilizing the expression, as the usage about the target word, form of mathematical function φ such as ｆ＝φ（ｘ） and mathematical argument such as ｘ. The expression being inside of （ ） explains the word being in front of （ ）. If we would want to explain the back word of （ ）, then I had used to explain with adding an apostrophe to the place between （ ） and the back word, but for the officiousness of a word processor, so the direction of the apostrophe should change against purpose, then I had not use that usage in almost case. If we would carry through the style of “birds（ ）”, then it might be few confuse for the side of reader. But it is only the problem of user’s choice whether the expression style is “birds（＜evolve――archaeopteryx（dinosaurs））” strictly or “birds（＜evolve――archaeopteryx of dinosaurs）”. We can use the function style to the state in the relation word such as “birds（＜evolve(via archaeopteryx)――dinosaurs）”. If we would not confuse, we could use all kind of basic usages freely.
I have used to make the usage of treating the word variable and the word constant with the asterisk symbol “＊” adhering to any character evolve, I can use only “＊” as any pronoun, as acting adjective, as acting adverb, as acting verb, as acting phrase, as acting clause, as acting sentence, and so on. For example if we would repeat same patterned sentences as “bird＜evolve――dinosaur”, “vertebrate＜evolve――amphioxus”, “chloroplast＜evolve――cyanobacteria”, then I would substitute only “＊” for the part being repeated in after second sentences. That is to say, I will want to allow the expression such next.
The points of almost usages may be such upper contents. Next I will explain in detail about concrete analyzing and creative effect with Thinking Language CORE.
(4) The policy of the analysis by Thinking Language CORE
To tell it generally, it may have more utility value, if we would utilize this Thinking Language CORE, not for the field of science course but for the field of the liberal arts. I compare the contents written in the book of “The Teaching of Dzogchen” with the contents written in the book of “The Hathor Material”, and I put together something being resemble each other on these meanings to “The teachings of Dzogchen and the messages from Hathor” being contained in the page of CHIMERA MEAM being in the home page of Kinohito KULOTSUKI. With what method dose a scholar not using Thinking Language CORE put together such sentences, to tell the truth, I do not know it, but I guess that a lot of scholars may have an intelligence of high level, so perhaps, they read each book, remember the contents, make the note with simple memo, or write them on the cards, and look the corresponding of them. The method with the card is good for putting information of thought in order, but it is hard work that we record the contents on the cards with natural language. And if a scholar would not have an intelligence of so high level and not so understand for the field, then it is not easy that these method would create moderate result. Even if a scholar would read the book firmly, add the mark to important part, and read repeatedly them, but for who had the brain with limited capacity of memory, it was like as water was poured into a desert.
But if the scholar could use Thinking Language CORE, some of these problems should become easy. It is like as the work creating huge and difficult program with good evolved computer language. If the scholar would think whole structure and next would concentrate on detail structure, then the scholar should not lose sight of the relation between them. So it is not necessary that the information volume being had to enter in the brain was made as large estimate. It is like that the method of good ordered solution in mathematics. For example it is not so difficult that the solution process for the simultaneous equations. The frequency analysis was difficult ago, but if we could use the wavelet analysis, then it should become easy to be analyzed. It is difficult that I make Thinking Language CORE evolve to same level like as a language of computer program or a method of mathematics, but if we would learn such policy, would make detail and whole structures in order, and would search them, then we could go back and forth freely in complex structure without wandering in the maze.
When I put together “the teachings of Dzogchen and the messages from Hathor”, I made important point in each book be put in order, and I made the content of each small part be translated to the expression of Thinking Language CORE. They are “the teachings of Dzogchen and the messages from Hathor (Hasthor)” and “the teachings of Dzogchen and the messages from Hathor (Dzogchen)” of creative notes contained in the page of “IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE”. They are selected from the books of 300 pages and 200 pages, each of them are put together in a few page. It took two days to put together these creative notes, and it took one day to construct the page of “the teachings of Dzogchen and the messages from Hathor”. If we would put together such creative notes with natural language, then it might take much time, and if we would create something like the thesis, then it should much more time or we could not create because we could not find the policy. Well but what we make the creative note with using Thinking Language CORE is same as what we draw something near to original image of these knowledge along the process, so it means that we see something near to the image being thought by the author of these book. What we can image as such, is what we “understand” it. What we could not translate it to Thinking Language CORE smoothly, is what we could not understand that idea. What we repeat to climb over such wall, is equal to what we reconstruct detail and whole frame of complex thinking. I will explain this in detail a little with taking the sample as concrete sentence.
(5) The analyzing sample_1 by Thinking Language CORE
I will quote next part (under Gothic part) from “the teachings of Dzogchen and the messages from Hathor” contained in CHIMERA MEAM page as an analyzing sample.
Hathors explain about “the relation between you and yourself or others” such as second item which is important when you would try to evolve the conscious height in Chapter 5 “Pyramid of balance” of “The Hathor Material”. I will look for the contents corresponding to this in “the teachings of Dzogchen”.
There are next expressions in page 9 of Chaper1 “the departure from usual dimension――body, word” of “the teachings of Dzogchen”. About this, I quote from original sentences (but, here it was translated by Kinohito KULOTSUKI).
I can really understand the pain of other people by observing my limit and my conflict. Then first I get the basis from something being experienced by myself for that I understand better the other people being around me and I help them. If I would recognize my state, then it could be possible that I helped other people. When I know how I help myself, how I work on my state, I can indeed make other people get an advantage.
There are total four sentences which repeat to appeal the contents with frame like same idea. This is the style of teaching on this Earth. It is repeating same thing by changing the expression each a little. Then some or any one hits. Or such as we drive a stake, it soon will enter the soil of our memory.
What I put together the content of Chapter 5 “Pyramid of balance” of “The Hathor Material” with translating to Thinking Language CORE, is next part of the creative note.
＠／Chapter 5 Pyramid of balance
( p 121 ) Pyramid with square base and a sharp peak ;
＜＞ ＠symbol (the conscious height) ＜evolve――▽（you）；
Four corner points (Pyramid base)
＜＞ elements (higher notice) ＜evolve――▽（＊）；
＊ａ : Four corner points (Pyramid base) ；
＊1(＊a) ＜＞, ▽＜relate＞fresh（▽）＆ energy body(Ka,…)（▽）；
＊2(＊a) ＜＞, ▽＜relate＞self（▽）or ▼（others）；
＊3(＊a) ＜＞, ▽＜relate＞ service（universe（▽），world，local society）；
＊4(＊a) ＜＞, ▽＜relate (consciously)＞
holy elements （world（▽））＜＞ soil，fire，water，air（space）；
To second item “the relation between you and yourself or others” in upper explain sentence, next of these CORE (translated) corresponds.
＊2(＊a) ＜＞, ▽＜relate＞self（▽）or ▼（others）；
While I will write the CORE for first and fourth sentences noted with blue character, relating this, of “the teachings of Dzogchen”.
I can really understand the pain of other people by observing my limit and my conflict.
▽：you，▼：others，○：affirmation（by meaning as ／can／）；
When I know how I help myself, how I work on my state, I can indeed make other people get an advantage.
（ｐ9）▽―know＞”▽―help＞ ▽, ／？”・”▽―work＞ state（▽, ／？）”；
［→］▽―○give＞ advantage ＞ ▼, ／indeed；
The mark when I would look for such part, was the symbol of “▼(others)” or “▼：others”. I could look for those rapidly with glancing the creative note roughly.
(6) The analyzing sample_2 by Thinking Language CORE
I will quote next Clause 5 (under Gothic part) from “The Problem of Einstein Special Relativity” contained in CHIMERA MEAM page as an analyzing sample with Thinking Language CORE. This part is what I analyzed and understood the structure of meaning content of something written in only 1 page within whole 29 pages of the thesis as “ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES” which makes Einstein Special Relativity be created. I researched many documents of pros and cons for Einstein Special Relativity, there almost were not what analyzed clearly about this part. Perhaps it is something that people of all over the world have failed to read over almost 100 years. On this analyzing chapter, I think, by such my pace, about the content of only 6 pages which said about two definitions of "The principle of relativity" and "The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light". If I would not have experienced such process but only read the sentences of natural language and assumed that I could understand them, and went forward, then I might fail to notice anything as “the core error where Einstein Special Relativity should disappear as perfect illusion”.
5. On the head part of “§2 On the Relativity of Lengths and Times”
This is the core part on logical development or operation of “Special Relativity”. I think that if I would read it rapidly then I should fail to see important point. What I say slowly, is until this §2. On from §3 to §7, I will explain only important part being thought. On from §8 to §10, I will not explain. Because I feel it is not necessary.
Einstein writes the definitions of "The principle of relativity" and "The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light" in the head part of this §2. Einstein renames as “the definitions” and adopt there, about the words as “two postulates” written yet in “introduction”. For we look how they are written and changed, I will quote there.
1. The laws by which the state of physical systems undergo change are not affected, whether these changes of state be referred to the one or the other of two systems of co-ordinates in uniform translatory motion.
2. Any ray of light moves in the “stationary” system of co-ordinates with the determined velocity c, whether the ray be emitted by a stationary or by a moving body. Hence （velocity）＝（light path）／（time interval）, where time interval is to be taken in the sense of the definition in §1.
The definition by Einstein about his way of thinking named as “The principle of relativity” is the content of upper “1.”. It was the definition very limited. I define the target words there which may be “the law which explain the state of physical systems changing”, “two coordinate systems moving each other with constant velocity” and “the form of the low when it explains the change of the state”. But it is difficult to image it, so I make “two coordinate systems moving each other with constant velocity” divine in more detail into “coordinate system K0” and “coordinate system K1”, and I set the relation between these as ＜move (constant velocity)＞,
(“＜＞” has the meaning of “each other”)
coordinate system K0＜move (constant velocity)＞coordinate system K0 ;
On “the law which explain the state of physical systems changing”, I set next, and I can use “law H” easily as upper definition.
Law H (――explain＞change of physical state) ;
And it is not written in upper definitions, we may be able to let “the change of physical state” be “event J”. Finally on the expression of “the form of the law when it explains the change of the state”, I set it simply as “form (law H)”.
Thus we set the elements for constructing the image, and we can show something as a sketch of an original image to next (by green character). “／” is the symbol for assistant explanation. There we can use “＠” as the symbol of “place” instead of “／”.
form（law H（――explain＞ event J）／coordinate system K0）
＜＝＞ form（law H（――explain＞ event J）／coordinate system K1）；
coordinate system K0＜move (constant velocity)＞coordinate system K0 ;
Well if we would not do for “2.” about something being done for “1.”, “symmetry” should be broken. I will analyze with Thinking Language CORE about only parts of “Any ray of light moves in the stationary system of co-ordinates with the determined velocity c” and “whether the ray be emitted by a stationary or by a moving body”. Other parts are what Einstein set the simple physical formula with the mix of natural language and mathematics symbol, and the comment for that. If we would substitute the part of natural language for symbol of a character, then it soon should change to physical description.
First on “Any ray of light moves in the “stationary” system of co-ordinates with the determined velocity c”, I set it as next.
light――（velocity c）travel＞，＠stationary system；
Next, with making reference to such expression, I show the meaning of “whether the ray be emitted by a stationary or by a moving body”, as next.
stationary body―emit＞ light―（velocity c）travel＞，＠stationary system；
moving body ――emit＞ light―（velocity c）travel＞，＠stationary system；
I will dear to change a part of these descriptions. It is as next expression.
moving body ――emit＞ light―（velocity c）travel＞，＠moving system；
There I used the word of “moving system”, it is also called as “inertia system” for the meaning of coordinate system moving together with moving body. If I would reset it by this word, then it should be next. (There I mistake a little. “Inertia system” means not only “moving system” but also “stationary system”.)
moving body ――emit＞ light―（velocity c）travel＞，＠inertia system；
If we would continue to read after original thesis with taking care whether the content of this expression dared to change thus might be used somewhere, then we might be able to see a figure of a trick. According like this, if we would use Thinking Language CORE, would guess the image of original thought (which might be), and would make the structure of the image in the thought be clear, then we should become to understand very easily what change would create different thought against this one. Even if intelligence itself would not change, whether the tool assisting was good or bad, then we got the effect as if our intelligence became high level (or we did not get it).
The difference of three expressions being imaged with such analyzing becomes very important key point for after thinking.
moving body ――emit＞ light―（velocity c）travel＞，＠stationary system；
moving body ――emit＞ light―（velocity c）travel＞，＠moving system；
moving body ――emit＞ light―（velocity c）travel＞，＠inertia system；
On after process, please refer “Problem of Einstein Special Relativity” (but I am sorry because it is only by Japanese yet, soon I prepare short paper same as that content by English) and so on.
On “The teachings of Dzogchen and the messages from Hathor”, if we would look for the patterns of meaning structure being good resemble each other from two creative notes, then we could create them to something like a thesis easily. While on “Problem of Einstein Special Relativity”, like this, we are confirming the true meaning of delicate expression about the content of original thesis by translating it to Thinking Language CORE, we will go forward in the maze of the unraveling of a mystery. There might be “a trick” not being find yet somewhere, perhaps Einstein himself had not noticed it. With having the conscious of awaking such, if we would analyze very hardly even something not being described as natural language, then we would get the possibility to unravel the mystery. As the tool for guessing operation, Thinking Language CORE has powerful effect. Once if we could unravel the mystery, it was not so difficult to argue about that.
was written at 2008.06.22 by Japanese, translated to English at 2008.06.25, and
checked at 2008.06.26)
|Back to IDEA OF THINKING LANGUAGE page|