God of Sub-5 just dropped !!

[Donquixote]

 

[Elf]

Rope fuel…

 

[lalalanotlistening]

the comments are complimenting his voice, maybe its not over after all...

 

[JohnDon]

Hes a ton of potential tho, If he does Kent's course hes gonna ascend to hhtn-lcl

 

[JohnDon]

He has a ton of potential tho, If he does Kent's course hes gonna ascend to hhtn-lcl

 

[ReadBooksEveryday]

He seems cool

 

[BigBallsLarry]

the phrase he said makes no sense

"win some, lose most. Haven't won any"

How can you win some, and not win any, at the same time? Unless he's saying that 'I haven't won any', as a separate thing, and the first sentence is just a statement to start up his belief. That is intresting indeed...

Let's break this down mathematically...

Let's assume that G = total number or games you played, these are like 'trials' that you can win or lose. Social interactions, math tests, genetical wins and loses...

G = total trials
Each trial results in W (win) or L (loss)

The phrase the subhuman in the video said, clearly states that:

Wins > 0
Losses > Wins

(Win Some, Lose More)

Therefore, W+L=G with L clearly dominating.

Now this is where the contradiction begins.. Him stating 'haven't won many' completely breaks our mathematical system.

This implies, that:

W = 0
AND
W > 0

how can it be both?

Now we can solve this using numerous ways, one of them being simply moving goalposts.

Let's say, if

W1 = Wins in the long past
W2 = Wins in the current timeframe

Then the statement "Win some, Lose some" becomes historical, something of the past.. And "Haven't won any" becomes more recent, implicating that he hasn't won any battles as of recently. This would make sense - as with the recessed chin, we can see he has lost genetical wars in the past, but now we don't know whether he wins, or loses. Call it the Shrodingers Human.

Another way we can go about this is redefining entirely what the word "win" means.

What if "win" isn't a scalar, but a subjective metric?

Whereas:

W = objective win
WP = perceived win (subjective)

Then

Win some = W > 0
Haven't won any = WP = 0

In other words, he technically won, but none of the wins counted subjectively. That's an intresting take on the matter aswell, and is most likely what is happening here aswell.

We can go further than this, but we will have to complete rewrite the formulas we've been using.

Let us define a finite outcome space

Ω = {g1, g2, g3.......... gn}

each gi here represents an attempt, similar to the G concept we've had before.

With this, we can define an indicator function.

{ 1 if gi is a win
X(gi) = {
{ 0 if gi isn't a win

We now introduce a weighted outcome tenor to account for the intensity of each attempt.

Let:

Tijk = X(gi) x ϕ(gj) x ψ(gk)

Where:

ϕ(gj) = perceived effort density
ψ(gk) = genetic baseline modifier

We then define cumulative success magnitude as:

Σ = i=1∑nj=1∑nk=1∑nTijk

Now, to obviously make more sense, we add in the win entropy.

H(W)=−i=1∑nP(gi)log(P(gi)+ϵ−π)

With this, we conclude that if H(W) approaches 0, wins exist, but are informationally meaningless.

This allows wins to occur without being registered by consciousness.

This is already intresting but we can go further, next, we construct the asymptotic cope function:

C(t)=∫0tW(τ)e−τ2/(2σ2)dτ/∫0tL(τ)2dτ+ωω

As t -> infinity, we observe:

t->∞limC(t)=0

Meaning, even if wins spike locally, the long term narrative collapses.

Now we go non-Euclidean.

We Define a win manifold 𝑀𝑤⊂𝑅7Mw⊂R7 with curvature:

k = ∇⋅(∥∇W∥+δδ/∇W)

if k < 0, wins curve inward and self-cancel.

This mathematically formalizes as them "never counting"

We now discretize despair, let the perceived victory operator be:

V^=i=1∑n∣gi⟩⟨gi∣⋅θ(1−X(gi))⋅sin(ln(ln(i!))

Apply it to the life state vector |Ψ⟩:

V∣Ψ⟩=0

Operator therefore confirms: no perceived wins are mathematically detected.

Finally, we put this all into a short calculation.

[~] =  (∫0∞(ln(τ+1))ln(ln(τ+2))dτ+Γ(1/2)Γ(1/2)/∑i=1n(X(gi)e−i2+π3
))limk→∞kk/k!

Therefore

[~] = 0

With this, we introduce a parallel stabilizer.

Let truth value T ∈ {0,1,⊥}

T(“win some”)=1
T(“won none”)=1
T(system)=⊥

The contradiction does not break the system, and the system simply absorbs it.

As a final verdict.

 He won in theory.
Lost in aggregate.
And remembers nothing.

It's beautiful and disgusting at the same time, how fragile our life and perception of victory truly is.

@Daddy's Home @Insomnia @Orka @TechnoBoss

 

[Sub5kang]

Okay but I'm his Kang though so he's beneath me

 

[Sub5kang]

the phrase he said makes no sense

"win some, lose most. Haven't won any"

How can you win some, and not win any, at the same time? Unless he's saying that 'I haven't won any', as a separate thing, and the first sentence is just a statement to start up his belief. That is intresting indeed...

Let's break this down mathematically...

Let's assume that G = total number or games you played, these are like 'trials' that you can win or lose. Social interactions, math tests, genetical wins and loses...

G = total trials
Each trial results in W (win) or L (loss)

The phrase the subhuman in the video said, clearly states that:

Wins > 0
Losses > Wins

(Win Some, Lose More)

Therefore, W+L=G with L clearly dominating.

Now this is where the contradiction begins.. Him stating 'haven't won many' completely breaks our mathematical system.

This implies, that:

W = 0
AND
W > 0

how can it be both?

Now we can solve this using numerous ways, one of them being simply moving goalposts.

Let's say, if

W1 = Wins in the long past
W2 = Wins in the current timeframe

Then the statement "Win some, Lose some" becomes historical, something of the past.. And "Haven't won any" becomes more recent, implicating that he hasn't won any battles as of recently. This would make sense - as with the recessed chin, we can see he has lost genetical wars in the past, but now we don't know whether he wins, or loses. Call it the Shrodingers Human.

Another way we can go about this is redefining entirely what the word "win" means.

What if "win" isn't a scalar, but a subjective metric?

Whereas:

W = objective win
WP = perceived win (subjective)

Then

Win some = W > 0
Haven't won any = WP = 0

In other words, he technically won, but none of the wins counted subjectively. That's an intresting take on the matter aswell, and is most likely what is happening here aswell.

We can go further than this, but we will have to complete rewrite the formulas we've been using.

Let us define a finite outcome space

Ω = {g1, g2, g3.......... gn}

each gi here represents an attempt, similar to the G concept we've had before.

With this, we can define an indicator function.

{ 1 if gi is a win
X(gi) = {
{ 0 if gi isn't a win

We now introduce a weighted outcome tenor to account for the intensity of each attempt.

Let:

Tijk = X(gi) x ϕ(gj) x ψ(gk)

Where:

ϕ(gj) = perceived effort density
ψ(gk) = genetic baseline modifier

We then define cumulative success magnitude as:

Σ = i=1∑nj=1∑nk=1∑nTijk

Now, to obviously make more sense, we add in the win entropy.

H(W)=−i=1∑nP(gi)log(P(gi)+ϵ−π)

With this, we conclude that if H(W) approaches 0, wins exist, but are informationally meaningless.

This allows wins to occur without being registered by consciousness.

This is already intresting but we can go further, next, we construct the asymptotic cope function:

C(t)=∫0tW(τ)e−τ2/(2σ2)dτ/∫0tL(τ)2dτ+ωω

As t -> infinity, we observe:

t->∞limC(t)=0

Meaning, even if wins spike locally, the long term narrative collapses.

Now we go non-Euclidean.

We Define a win manifold 𝑀𝑤⊂𝑅7Mw⊂R7 with curvature:

k = ∇⋅(∥∇W∥+δδ/∇W)

if k < 0, wins curve inward and self-cancel.

This mathematically formalizes as them "never counting"

We now discretize despair, let the perceived victory operator be:

V^=i=1∑n∣gi⟩⟨gi∣⋅θ(1−X(gi))⋅sin(ln(ln(i!))

Apply it to the life state vector |Ψ⟩:

V∣Ψ⟩=0

Operator therefore confirms: no perceived wins are mathematically detected.

Finally, we put this all into a short calculation.

[~] =  (∫0∞(ln(τ+1))ln(ln(τ+2))dτ+Γ(1/2)Γ(1/2)/∑i=1n(X(gi)e−i2+π3
))limk→∞kk/k!

Therefore

[~] = 0

With this, we introduce a parallel stabilizer.

Let truth value T ∈ {0,1,⊥}

T(“win some”)=1
T(“won none”)=1
T(system)=⊥

The contradiction does not break the system, and the system simply absorbs it.

As a final verdict.

 He won in theory.
Lost in aggregate.
And remembers nothing.

It's beautiful and disgusting at the same time, how fragile our life and perception of victory truly is.

@Daddy's Home @Insomnia @Orka @TechnoBoss

Whatever you said fr

 

[banku don]

the phrase he said makes no sense

"win some, lose most. Haven't won any"

How can you win some, and not win any, at the same time? Unless he's saying that 'I haven't won any', as a separate thing, and the first sentence is just a statement to start up his belief. That is intresting indeed...

Let's break this down mathematically...

Let's assume that G = total number or games you played, these are like 'trials' that you can win or lose. Social interactions, math tests, genetical wins and loses...

G = total trials
Each trial results in W (win) or L (loss)

The phrase the subhuman in the video said, clearly states that:

Wins > 0
Losses > Wins

(Win Some, Lose More)

Therefore, W+L=G with L clearly dominating.

Now this is where the contradiction begins.. Him stating 'haven't won many' completely breaks our mathematical system.

This implies, that:

W = 0
AND
W > 0

how can it be both?

Now we can solve this using numerous ways, one of them being simply moving goalposts.

Let's say, if

W1 = Wins in the long past
W2 = Wins in the current timeframe

Then the statement "Win some, Lose some" becomes historical, something of the past.. And "Haven't won any" becomes more recent, implicating that he hasn't won any battles as of recently. This would make sense - as with the recessed chin, we can see he has lost genetical wars in the past, but now we don't know whether he wins, or loses. Call it the Shrodingers Human.

Another way we can go about this is redefining entirely what the word "win" means.

What if "win" isn't a scalar, but a subjective metric?

Whereas:

W = objective win
WP = perceived win (subjective)

Then

Win some = W > 0
Haven't won any = WP = 0

In other words, he technically won, but none of the wins counted subjectively. That's an intresting take on the matter aswell, and is most likely what is happening here aswell.

We can go further than this, but we will have to complete rewrite the formulas we've been using.

Let us define a finite outcome space

Ω = {g1, g2, g3.......... gn}

each gi here represents an attempt, similar to the G concept we've had before.

With this, we can define an indicator function.

{ 1 if gi is a win
X(gi) = {
{ 0 if gi isn't a win

We now introduce a weighted outcome tenor to account for the intensity of each attempt.

Let:

Tijk = X(gi) x ϕ(gj) x ψ(gk)

Where:

ϕ(gj) = perceived effort density
ψ(gk) = genetic baseline modifier

We then define cumulative success magnitude as:

Σ = i=1∑nj=1∑nk=1∑nTijk

Now, to obviously make more sense, we add in the win entropy.

H(W)=−i=1∑nP(gi)log(P(gi)+ϵ−π)

With this, we conclude that if H(W) approaches 0, wins exist, but are informationally meaningless.

This allows wins to occur without being registered by consciousness.

This is already intresting but we can go further, next, we construct the asymptotic cope function:

C(t)=∫0tW(τ)e−τ2/(2σ2)dτ/∫0tL(τ)2dτ+ωω

As t -> infinity, we observe:

t->∞limC(t)=0

Meaning, even if wins spike locally, the long term narrative collapses.

Now we go non-Euclidean.

We Define a win manifold 𝑀𝑤⊂𝑅7Mw⊂R7 with curvature:

k = ∇⋅(∥∇W∥+δδ/∇W)

if k < 0, wins curve inward and self-cancel.

This mathematically formalizes as them "never counting"

We now discretize despair, let the perceived victory operator be:

V^=i=1∑n∣gi⟩⟨gi∣⋅θ(1−X(gi))⋅sin(ln(ln(i!))

Apply it to the life state vector |Ψ⟩:

V∣Ψ⟩=0

Operator therefore confirms: no perceived wins are mathematically detected.

Finally, we put this all into a short calculation.

[~] =  (∫0∞(ln(τ+1))ln(ln(τ+2))dτ+Γ(1/2)Γ(1/2)/∑i=1n(X(gi)e−i2+π3
))limk→∞kk/k!

Therefore

[~] = 0

With this, we introduce a parallel stabilizer.

Let truth value T ∈ {0,1,⊥}

T(“win some”)=1
T(“won none”)=1
T(system)=⊥

The contradiction does not break the system, and the system simply absorbs it.

As a final verdict.

 He won in theory.
Lost in aggregate.
And remembers nothing.

It's beautiful and disgusting at the same time, how fragile our life and perception of victory truly is.

@Daddy's Home @Insomnia @Orka @TechnoBoss

no way bro wrote this shi for one rep

 

[BigBallsLarry]

no way bro wrote this shi for one rep

i got 2

 

[tightmason]

i can hear the pain in his voice

 

[Azie555]

the phrase he said makes no sense

"win some, lose most. Haven't won any"

How can you win some, and not win any, at the same time? Unless he's saying that 'I haven't won any', as a separate thing, and the first sentence is just a statement to start up his belief. That is intresting indeed...

Let's break this down mathematically...

Let's assume that G = total number or games you played, these are like 'trials' that you can win or lose. Social interactions, math tests, genetical wins and loses...

G = total trials
Each trial results in W (win) or L (loss)

The phrase the subhuman in the video said, clearly states that:

Wins > 0
Losses > Wins

(Win Some, Lose More)

Therefore, W+L=G with L clearly dominating.

Now this is where the contradiction begins.. Him stating 'haven't won many' completely breaks our mathematical system.

This implies, that:

W = 0
AND
W > 0

how can it be both?

Now we can solve this using numerous ways, one of them being simply moving goalposts.

Let's say, if

W1 = Wins in the long past
W2 = Wins in the current timeframe

Then the statement "Win some, Lose some" becomes historical, something of the past.. And "Haven't won any" becomes more recent, implicating that he hasn't won any battles as of recently. This would make sense - as with the recessed chin, we can see he has lost genetical wars in the past, but now we don't know whether he wins, or loses. Call it the Shrodingers Human.

Another way we can go about this is redefining entirely what the word "win" means.

What if "win" isn't a scalar, but a subjective metric?

Whereas:

W = objective win
WP = perceived win (subjective)

Then

Win some = W > 0
Haven't won any = WP = 0

In other words, he technically won, but none of the wins counted subjectively. That's an intresting take on the matter aswell, and is most likely what is happening here aswell.

We can go further than this, but we will have to complete rewrite the formulas we've been using.

Let us define a finite outcome space

Ω = {g1, g2, g3.......... gn}

each gi here represents an attempt, similar to the G concept we've had before.

With this, we can define an indicator function.

{ 1 if gi is a win
X(gi) = {
{ 0 if gi isn't a win

We now introduce a weighted outcome tenor to account for the intensity of each attempt.

Let:

Tijk = X(gi) x ϕ(gj) x ψ(gk)

Where:

ϕ(gj) = perceived effort density
ψ(gk) = genetic baseline modifier

We then define cumulative success magnitude as:

Σ = i=1∑nj=1∑nk=1∑nTijk

Now, to obviously make more sense, we add in the win entropy.

H(W)=−i=1∑nP(gi)log(P(gi)+ϵ−π)

With this, we conclude that if H(W) approaches 0, wins exist, but are informationally meaningless.

This allows wins to occur without being registered by consciousness.

This is already intresting but we can go further, next, we construct the asymptotic cope function:

C(t)=∫0tW(τ)e−τ2/(2σ2)dτ/∫0tL(τ)2dτ+ωω

As t -> infinity, we observe:

t->∞limC(t)=0

Meaning, even if wins spike locally, the long term narrative collapses.

Now we go non-Euclidean.

We Define a win manifold 𝑀𝑤⊂𝑅7Mw⊂R7 with curvature:

k = ∇⋅(∥∇W∥+δδ/∇W)

if k < 0, wins curve inward and self-cancel.

This mathematically formalizes as them "never counting"

We now discretize despair, let the perceived victory operator be:

V^=i=1∑n∣gi⟩⟨gi∣⋅θ(1−X(gi))⋅sin(ln(ln(i!))

Apply it to the life state vector |Ψ⟩:

V∣Ψ⟩=0

Operator therefore confirms: no perceived wins are mathematically detected.

Finally, we put this all into a short calculation.

[~] =  (∫0∞(ln(τ+1))ln(ln(τ+2))dτ+Γ(1/2)Γ(1/2)/∑i=1n(X(gi)e−i2+π3
))limk→∞kk/k!

Therefore

[~] = 0

With this, we introduce a parallel stabilizer.

Let truth value T ∈ {0,1,⊥}

T(“win some”)=1
T(“won none”)=1
T(system)=⊥

The contradiction does not break the system, and the system simply absorbs it.

As a final verdict.

 He won in theory.
Lost in aggregate.
And remembers nothing.

It's beautiful and disgusting at the same time, how fragile our life and perception of victory truly is.

@Daddy's Home @Insomnia @Orka @TechnoBoss

what the fuck nigga