True and False, the mystic of Asisa
-
L e AL
In every Liber (=^= Post in this Forum of Asisa) with the Element:
M e M,
You can find out, if the Post of Asisa is true or false, when you use the Nihillis Liber (def.: Nihillis Liber: NL e NL) and put the right "Sets" (careful!!! Russell's paradox.... Yeah, I made this mistake so often too....)
in this Libers.That means, all other Libers of Asisa is the secret of Asisa.
This mystic exists in our world, for
Theorem 1 of the secret of our world:
Every Woman has a secret in her!This theorem was defined by
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BHHUBZf7y4in the year of
*Watson (e) IBM?(And now Watson Answers: " Look the trailer, Idiot!"
)Theorem 2: The First Power of a woman is equivalent
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcapsSWIEa0 (=== u = undefined) -
@Asisa said
"So, if a woman learn the first secret, she can use the second secret....
See: www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6IsQv0nrKU
Leighton Meester is the sign "<=", less than "<=>" and the backwards of "=>"
e "Stay as you are, Leighton!""
With my signature follows:
e :def: "<=", so
Adam Brody logic (e) not- (Adam Brody logic)
short
A e -A == A<= -A == T <= F
There are more Elements in False than in True??
Raven paradox (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia):
The raven paradox, also known as Hempel's paradox ....etc etccan be solved easy with this...
So here is the first "Proof" of "I am a Thelemit:
If (Hempel's paradox) <=> (false) than why is True<=False?, based of Asisa's Nihillis-theorem?
OR(logic)
(Theorem in NL)
C:= ... <=> C:= T e F; C := Empty set;
= A (o) B; A := Nihil fit sine causa; A:= Empty set; B := Quid pro Quo; B:= 0 (maths) ANDA <=> B
What is A, B, and C in my story, when I am an Image of Keira Knightley?
Aleister would probably say:
(Nihil fit sine causa => Quid pro Quo) <=> (Ex falso quodlibet)?
Felicity Jones is the Theorie of Everything?
if Keira Knightley is NAND, thou art AND?Do what you wilt, my Little Asisa
-
Okay, we have to end this crap...
Logic is just "explainig" his self... If you do it my way, or veiled like the others is the same... There is no difference
So we start (again, ne Keira^^)
Asisa say's in a world like ours (Carefull!!! )
when I am a mother, I wanna be like Reese Witherspoon <=> true <=> True for Asisa...
&
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u_gSd9eIO8
=>
Russell Crowe:
Then try to learn,
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMC7TzusghUTo trust our Familiy <=> NOAH
-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr_nGAbFkmk
=> (not-2) Actors are underpaid...
This is The First Theorem of Thelema:
Give actors more money(element Kristen&Leo - Logic: the riddle can be solved with
Time = Money
For Gods out of of our Sphere like Adonai
-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EQMVTTW1Sk
O my God, this sounds terrible
(c) Liber "What fit, that fit <=> D")
So:
Nihil fit sine causa => Quid pro Quo <=> Ex falso quodlibet
=> Hilary Duff"
Principle of explosion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Ex falso quodlibet)"So Hilary Duff is the Theorem?
-
@Asisa said
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EQMVTTW1Sk
O my God, this sounds terrible (c) Liber "What fit, that fit <=> D")
So:
Nihil fit sine causa => Quid pro Quo <=> Ex falso quodlibet
=> Hilary Duff"
Principle of explosion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Ex falso quodlibet)"So Hilary Duff is the Theorem?"
With Aleister says:
Why not...?
I am Chasing the Sun/Son (e) AL(Secret door for Aleister: Hilary Duff has a Soul, so she is not important...
And we have to find the next possible Soul, which could be Asisa...
-
@Hermitas said
"I'm sorry, Asisa, but all of this is unintelligible.
I'm afraid I can't play along. I don't think anyone understands it."
The difference between Asisa and Crowley is, that
if you want to understand Crowley, it has to be done ca. (see Liber Laplace Deamon and his "God") like this:
(AND)logic
It is done quickly; yea, the seal is set upon the vault.
There is one that shall avail to open it.
Nor by memory, nor by imagination, nor by prayer, nor by fasting, nor by scourging, nor by drugs, nor by ritual, nor by meditation; only by passive love shall he avail. (c) PANSo Crowley just look into your heart and decide, if you are a chosen one... But this is (e) Crowley logic, so in the words of a fool:
Crowley decides, if he like you or not, and when he like you, he "talk" to you...Asisa is just pure Logic with
NL e NL <=> Hadit-Riddle... thats all...But the understanding of Asisa is only possible after the understanding of Crowley.. This is so, because Logic (e) Reality and Crowley (e) Crowley
And Asisa (e) Hadit-Riddle...-I think-
-
@Asisa said
"
But the understanding of Asisa is only possible after the understanding of Crowley.. This is so, because Logic (e) Reality and Crowley (e) Crowley
And Asisa (e) Hadit-Riddle...-I think-"But at the end, Crowley just wanted, that you know him better...
The "Snake" (e 65) above (so(logic)) quote=Asisa above is understandable for somebody, who can't "connect" the words, like this:"
[131]
61ฮฮฮฆฮฮฮ ฮฮ THE FOOL'S KNOTO Fool! begetter of both I and Naught, resolve this
Naught-y Knot!
O! Ay! this I and O-IO!-IAO! For I owe "I"
aye to Nibbana's Oe.(28)
I Pay-Pรฉ, the dissolution of the House of God-
for Pe comes after O-after Ayin that triumphs
over Aleph in Ain, that is O.(29)
OP-us, the Work! the OP-ening of THE EYE!(30)
Thou Naughty Boy, thou openest THE EYE OF
HORUS to the Blind Eye that weeps!(31) The Up-
right One in thine Uprightness rejoiceth-Death
to all Fishes!(32) [132]
COMMENTARY (ฮฮ) "When you don't know him, you think "hรค?"
But when you understand him, you say,
So you are talking about the alphabeth,
Okay, I help you,
it is OPQRS , so P comes after O is true (for you, because (you(e)you) is True!So this is true for you and me, but I don't know, for whom else (<=>
Talking with Books^^) -
@Hermitas said
"I fear people won't be polite to you forever.
Engaging in normal conversation without trying to prove the worth of all this formula and such would go better for you. You are not required to be super special."
No, I try to explain the solution IN MY WAY!
That means, you can listen or not...
But I try to
tried to write "Frank and Asisa" in here!Hope this was a true sentence for Aleister
could be a possible solution in the modal logic, but in Reality,