Hayawic General Law (HGL) and Hayawic Specific Law (HSL)
Dr. Raiek Alnakari
The Hayawic General Law (HGL) to any Form is the same.
But in spite that ,each specific Structural Life’s Form Validation (SLFV) and specific Functional Life’s Form Validation (FLFV) has a Hayawic Specific Law (HSL)
This (HSL) is differs from being to being based on each’s Interest Square Unit (ISU) technique as a (HGL) application related to :
1- Specific Multi Dimension Hayawic From’s Unit.
2- Specific Multi Kinetic Hayawic From’s Unit.
3- Specific Multi Containment Hayawic From’s Unit.
4- Specific Multi Probable Hayawic From’s Unit.
5- Specific Multi Relativities Hayawic From’s Unit.
The (HGL) set included the (HSL) set included the causal,functional, Values and circumstantial context of the Life’s Form Validation (LFV).
This is including even the possible Life’s Form Failure (LFF) or the Hayawic Disorders Including inadequate and erroneous,
Example of the (LFF) : humans’s disorders,trees ‘s disorders, thought’s disorders or any behavioral disorders
Goals :
1- The Hayawic General Law (HGL) can be used as a interest Square Unit (ISU) technique
o measure the vitality of interest exposed by ISU technique
2- The Hayawic General Law (HGL) can be used as Life’s Form Validation (LFV) to treat each from’s specific structural and functional entropy
Filed under: صور ناطقة |
حوار المنطق الحيوي لتحقيق إرادة الحياة: الحرية.. 
1. Each BEING is a FORM even it seemed without form
Reason: because of the fact that any being is a way of Formation multi-dimensional unit
At least contain the time-space form, each of which is forming, vari,appear/disappear with in a form.
2. Each form is a Kinetic, even if it seemed static
Reason: because of the fact that any static form is – Necessarily – resulted from potential differences..
Hayawic Logic Application to Test Pattern Generation Using the Interest Square Unity (ISU) Technique Marguerite “Peggy” J. Palmer
3. Each form is containment, even if it seemed empty
Reason: because of the fact that any multi-dimensions and multi- movements form is
– Necessarily – a multi- below containment inside and outside..
4. Each form is probabilistic, even if it seemed determine
Reason: any form of multi-dimensional, multi-movements, and multi-containment form, is – Necessarily – a multi-possible tracks and limited/devoid of energy, if not renewed ..
5. Each form is a relative , even if it seemed absolute
Reason : Because any form of multi-dimensional , multi- movements , multi- containment , multi- tracks is – Necessarily – depending on multi validity of common sense interests based on multi- speed degrees between flow or blockage of Hayawic Universal Common Sense Interests:
The proof of the validity of the Common Sense Interests is Life accepted valuse to the Most People, by Less Expensive, Less Effort and More Accurate for:
1. Life Experimental Standards.
2. Life Unit Standards.
3. Life Priority Standards.
4. Life Obligation Standards..
Notice: this is aginst what so call Murphy’s laws
: “If anything can go wrong, it will”
because the Life Willing is to free any Form from its Entropy
by knowing and treting each from’s entropy as a mear leak of common sens flow
Therefore there are multiple applications for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases, whether related to health or texts, policies or religious beliefs and non-religious system
Or examine the mental and non-mental communication systems, electrons or organic ,real or virtual ..
—
Dr. Raiek Alnakari : Hayawic General and Specific Law -Relationship Prospectives for diagnosis and treatment
ِ
Hayawic General Law (HGL) and Hayawic Specific Law (HSL)
Dr. Raiek Alnakari
The Hayawic General Law (HGL) to any Form is the same.
But in spite that ,each specific Structural Life’s Form Validation (SLFV) and specific Functional Life’s Form Validation (FLFV) has a Hayawic Specific Law (HSL)
This (HSL) is differs from being to being based on each’s Interest Square Unit (ISU) technique as a (HGL) application related to :
1- Specific Multi Dimension Hayawic From’s Unit.
2- Specific Multi Kinetic Hayawic From’s Unit.
3- Specific Multi Containment Hayawic From’s Unit.
4- Specific Multi Probable Hayawic From’s Unit.
5- Specific Multi Relativities Hayawic From’s Unit.
The (HGL) set included the (HSL) set included the causal,functional, Values and circumstantial context of the Life’s Form Validation (LFV).
This is including even the possible Life’s Form Failure (LFF) or the Hayawic Disorders Including inadequate and erroneous,
Example of the (LFF) : humans’s disorders,trees ‘s disorders, thought’s disorders or any behavioral disorders
Goals :
1- The Hayawic General Law (HGL) can be used as a interest Square Unit (ISU) technique
o measure the vitality of interest exposed by ISU technique
2- The Hayawic General Law (HGL) can be used as Life’s Form Validation (LFV) to treat each from’s specific structural and functional entropy
إعجابإعجاب
بداهة سارية Roulette Wm. Smith, Ph.D.
Dear Raiek,
I now have had an opportunity to thoroughly review the attached documents.
In general, my concern is that you conflate your research and findings far beyond their substantive value. And, perhaps most important, I wish to stress, once again, Hayawic and UniLogic schemes have no relevance for studies of common sense.
During the past few days, you have used the word “seem” in your email messages (e.g., BEING is a FORM even it seemed without form [July 19, 2015]; Each form is a Kinetic, even if it seemed static [July 19, 2015]; Each form is containment, even if it seemed empty [July 19, 2015]; Each form is probabilistic, even if it seemed determinative [July 19, 2015]; Each form is a relative, even if it seemed absolute … depending on multi-validity of common sense interests [July 19, 2015]) with the term having virtually no meaning. In English, the term “equivocation” describes this “double-speak.”
Again, your prose, thoughts and logic reveal no notion of “common sense interests.” Nor is there any “Universal Commonsense Interest Square.” You also claim “The proof of the validity of the Common Sense Interests is in Life values of the Most People, Less Expensive, Less Effort and More Accurate” (July 20, 2015). Validity, effort, accuracy and expense have no relative or absolute value in any conceptualization of common sense. Nor is there any relevance for notions of reliability (in contrast to validity) or Murphy’s law.
I believe you fail to separate your own views and values from the underlying representational system you seek to promulgate. This is increasingly evident in your notions of form, being, static, kinetic, containment, relative, absolute, probabilistic, determinate, life, freedom, and entropy. My experiences and views differ from yours on all of these matters, and there are no requirements that our experiences and views must coincide.
With that background, what can be claimed of Hayawic and UniLogic schemes? First, they represent fascinating representation schema that may be cultural artifacts of your personal and/or religious traditions. There is nothing universal about the representation schema and/or any underlying logic. And, there certainly are no universal “axiomatic” foundations insofar as axioms, by definition, refer to logical / mathematical “truths” / “truisms”.
Lastly, one of your recent communications refers to “logistic regression.” Does this have statistical import in the sense that one thinks of logistic analyses and/or regression analyses in quantitative statistical analyses? What about qualitative analyses.
My advice is that your interests will be well served if you cease all claims and attempts at suggesting that Hayawic and UniLogic schemes go beyond the the precise definitions you proffer. Your work takes on an aura of comic absurdity when you use terms such as “seem,” “common sense,” and “commonsense.” This also extends to conflated claims about reasoning in machines.
Although I feel awful having to be so stern in this written critique, my real concern is that you have failed to hear, understand and heed my concerns when proffered during our cordial and private conversations.
With warm and cordial greetings,
/rws
4 mins · Edited · Like
بداهة سارية Raiek,
In looking over my message below, I neglected to point to the most serious challenge and problem associated with your writing, thoughts and reasoning. To wit, you consistently misuse the adjective “common.” You seem to believe that “common” as in “common sense” is the same as “common” as in “commonality.” For example, it definitely is appropriate to use “common” (associated with “commonality”) in your Hayawic and UniLogic schemes. Stated somewhat differently, Hayawic and UniLogic schemes do have representational traits that could be common for different entities (i.e., there may be issues of commonality). Even if you profess notions of “sensate” (as in “sensate beings”), those notions of the sensate have no relevance for the “sense” associated with non-universal aspects of herd behavior in “common sense.” If anything, your writing points to the advantage of always using the word “commonsense” instead of “common sense.”
With warm and cordial greetings,
Roulette
15 mins · Like
بداهة سارية
ترجمة آلية: عزيزي Raiek،
الآن وقد أتيحت لي فرصة لإجراء مراجعة شاملة للوثائق المرفقة.
بشكل عام، قلقي هو أنك تخلط بين البحث والنتائج الخاصة بك إلى أبعد من القيمة الموضوعية. وربما الأهم من ذلك، أود أن أؤكد، مرة أخرى، وخطط Hayawic وUniLogic ليس لديهم صلة للدراسات الحس السليم.
خلال الأيام القليلة الماضية، كنت قد استخدمت كلمة “يبدو” في رسائل البريد الإلكتروني الخاصة بك (على سبيل المثال، يكون هو شكل حتى بدا أنه بدون شكل [19 يوليو 2015]؛ كل شكل هو الحركية، حتى لو بدا ثابت [يوليو 19، 2015]؛ كل شكل هو الاحتواء، حتى لو كان يبدو فارغا [19 يوليو 2015]؛ كل شكل هو احتمالي، حتى لو كان يبدو حاسما [19 يوليو 2015]؛ كل شكل هو أحد الأقارب، حتى لو بدا المطلق … حسب متعددة صلاحية لمصالح الحس السليم [19 يوليو 2015]) مع المصطلح وجود معنى عمليا أي. في اللغة الإنجليزية، فإن مصطلح “مواربة” يصف هذا “الكلام المزدوج”.
مرة أخرى، لديك النثر، والأفكار والمنطق تكشف عن أي مفهوم “المصالح الحس السليم”. وليس هناك أي “العالمي المنطقية ساحة الفائدة.” أنت أيضا يدعون “والدليل على صحة تحسس المصالح المشتركة في قيم الحياة لمعظم الناس، وأقل تكلفة، وأقل جهد وأكثر دقة” (20 يوليو 2015). صحة والجهد والدقة ونفقة ليس لها قيمة نسبية أو مطلقة في أي تصور من الحس السليم. كما أنه ليس هناك أي صلة لمفاهيم الموثوقية (على النقيض من صحة) أو قانون مورفي.
2 mins · Like
بداهة سارية
ترجمة آلية: عزيزي Raiek،
الآن وقد أتيحت لي فرصة لإجراء مراجعة شاملة للوثائق المرفقة.
بشكل عام، قلقي هو أنك تخلط بين البحث والنتائج الخاصة بك إلى أبعد من القيمة الموضوعية. وربما الأهم من ذلك، أود أن أؤكد، مرة أخرى، وخطط Hayawic وUniLogic ليس لديهم صلة للدراسات الحس السليم.
خلال الأيام القليلة الماضية، كنت قد استخدمت كلمة “يبدو” في رسائل البريد الإلكتروني الخاصة بك (على سبيل المثال، يكون هو شكل حتى بدا أنه بدون شكل [19 يوليو 2015]؛ كل شكل هو الحركية، حتى لو بدا ثابت [يوليو 19، 2015]؛ كل شكل هو الاحتواء، حتى لو كان يبدو فارغا [19 يوليو 2015]؛ كل شكل هو احتمالي، حتى لو كان يبدو حاسما [19 يوليو 2015]؛ كل شكل هو أحد الأقارب، حتى لو بدا المطلق … حسب متعددة صلاحية لمصالح الحس السليم [19 يوليو 2015]) مع المصطلح وجود معنى عمليا أي. في اللغة الإنجليزية، فإن مصطلح “مواربة” يصف هذا “الكلام المزدوج”.
مرة أخرى، لديك النثر، والأفكار والمنطق تكشف عن أي مفهوم “المصالح الحس السليم”. وليس هناك أي “العالمي المنطقية ساحة الفائدة.” أنت أيضا يدعون “والدليل على صحة تحسس المصالح المشتركة في قيم الحياة لمعظم الناس، وأقل تكلفة، وأقل جهد وأكثر دقة” (20 يوليو 2015). صحة والجهد والدقة ونفقة ليس لها قيمة نسبية أو مطلقة في أي تصور من الحس السليم. كما أنه ليس هناك أي صلة لمفاهيم الموثوقية (على النقيض من صحة) أو قانون مورفي.
1 min · Like
بداهة سارية I believe you fail to separate your own views and values from the underlying representational system you seek to promulgate. This is increasingly evident in your notions of form, being, static, kinetic, containment, relative, absolute, probabilistic, determinate, life, freedom, and entropy. My experiences and views differ from yours on all of these matters, and there are no requirements that our experiences and views must coincide.
With that background, what can be claimed of Hayawic and UniLogic schemes? First, they represent fascinating representation schema that may be cultural artifacts of your personal and/or religious traditions. There is nothing universal about the representation schema and/or any underlying logic. And, there certainly are no universal “axiomatic” foundations insofar as axioms, by definition, refer to logical / mathematical “truths” / “truisms”.
Lastly, one of your recent communications refers to “logistic regression.” Does this have statistical import in the sense that one thinks of logistic analyses and/or regression analyses in quantitative statistical analyses? What about qualitative analyses.
My advice is that your interests will be well served if you cease all claims and attempts at suggesting that Hayawic and UniLogic schemes go beyond the the precise definitions you proffer. Your work takes on an aura of comic absurdity when you use terms such as “seem,” “common sense,” and “commonsense.” This also extends to conflated claims about reasoning in machines.
Although I feel awful having to be so stern in this written critique, my real concern is that you have failed to hear, understand and heed my concerns when proffered during our cordial and private conversations.
With warm and cordial greetings,
/rws
Just now · Like
بداهة سارية
Write a comment…
Choose File
OLDER
حمزة رستناوي
11 hrs
القانون الحيوي لأي كائن هو نفسه القانون الحيوي العام , أما القانون الحيوي المُحدد بكائن معيّن فهو قانون خاص بشكل هذا الكائن , و يتعلّق بطريقة و أبعاد و احتمالات تشكّل هذا الكائن , و حتّى الأشكال و التعبيرات الممكنة بما فيها القاصرة و الخاطئة للقانون الحيوي المحدّد مشمولة بالقانون الحيوي العام , في سياق وظيفة احتمالية نسبية لم تتوفّر لها حيوية كافية لتجاوز القصور الوظيفي الخاص بهذا الكائن , و مثالها موت البشر أو الشجر و كذلك الفكر و السلوك الجوهراني الأحادي للبشر فهذه في قصورها تبقى شكلا حركيا احتوائيا احتماليا نسبيا أي شكلا ذو خصوصيّة ظرفية يشملها القانون الحيوي العام , و يمكن قياس حيويّته المصالح التي يعرضها.
” رائق النقري”
إعجابإعجاب
Ali Sharifpour
Hi ,
I read the critique, but I am not qualified to directly respond. I do not know what the study of common sense entails in an academic or semantic sense, so I can’t really respond to the critic’s letter.
I do believe the critic is somewhat emotional in his response but that’s all I can really understand at this point.
I do believe your logic or philosophy of logic does have value to help rational/analytical people see life and existence as a matrix of possibilities and choices more deeply than just a simple statement. Seeing every being as a possibility and form and the universe as such really helps to see the role of choice in the universe on a deeper level. Everything seems connected with everything else when you explain it in your fashion. I think this reached my mind on a much deeper level than other ways of expressing the same, or similar ideas (like ‘life is possibility’). And I do think it has value on a personal level as well as potentially in data analysis or IT, but I am not sure exactly how. I will definitely think about how it can be explored.
I have often tried to help my friends in Iran to think about life and thought as a river and to increase the flow instead of creating a dam or blockage as you put it. I have often used the idea of certain types of music, rhythm or dance to try to help them with this concept or emotion. Your logic helps those who are used to analytical/left brain thinking, to understand this concept.
But as for the critic’s criticisms I can’t really address them directly because I am not familiar with logic and philosophy enough to ascertain how subjective or objective this system of logic is, and I don’t understand the critiques of the semantics, like ‘seem’ or common sense. Perhaps with some reading and research I may be able to analyze it more.
But I do think there is a lot of value in this logic and I hope to work on it more with you in time.
إعجابإعجاب
read the critique, but I am not qualified to directly respond. I do not know what the study of common sense entails in an academic or semantic sense, so I can’t really respond to the critic’s letter.
Raiek
There is no one singular study about the subject
Dr. smith hem self know that that why he is a denial surprise from the first time i meet hem last year
If you go to see and to compare what there is in this subject you will conclude this Hayawic common sense is so like any new discovery! more ever the ability to understand the HAYAWIC FORM it will the matrix of any person common sense level
So as a Hayawic researcher, this study will be the first very important step to do update’s researcher
Ali
I do believe the critic is somewhat emotional in his response but that’s all I can really understand at this point.
Raiek
Yes, because he did not present any proof so ask hem
Ali
I do believe your logic or philosophy of logic does have value to help rational/analytical people see life and existence as a matrix of possibilities and choices more deeply than just a simple statement.
Raiek
You have to present your examples real proof
Ali
Seeing every being as a possibility and form and the universe as such really helps to see the role of choice in the universe on a deeper level.
Raiek
Very good
Ali
Everything seems connected with everything else when you explain it in your fashion.
Raiek
It is not my personal fashion but Hayawic Law
Ali
I think this reached my mind on a much deeper level than other ways of expressing the same, or similar ideas (like ‘life is possibility’). And I do think it has value on a personal level as well as potentially in data analysis or IT, but I am not sure exactly how. I will definitely think about how it can be explored.
Raiek
This one of your challenging task
Ali
I have often tried to help my friends in Iran to think about life and thought as a river and to increase the flow instead of creating a dam or blockage as you put it. I have often used the idea of certain types of music, rhythm or dance to try to help them with this concept or emotion. Your logic helps those who are used to analytical/left brain thinking, to understand this concept.
Raiek
Thanks
Ali
But as for the critic’s criticisms I can’t really address them directly because I am not familiar with logic and philosophy enough to ascertain how subjective or objective this system of logic is,
Raiek
You have to check in one Hours you will be able to understand
Ali
and I don’t understand the critiques of the semantics, like ‘seem’ or common sense. Perhaps with some reading and research I may be able to analyze it more.
Raiek
This it was simply big pretends because what is “seemed” is a point of view , its value hear is common sense expire blockage
Ali
But I do think there is a lot of value in this logic and I hope to work on it more with you in time.
Raiek:
First immediate value is to put you in research level with very big name in same level
إعجابإعجاب
Dear Roulette
you said :
I believe you fail to separate your own views and values from the underlying representational system you seek to promulgate.
Raiek response :
The question though is : what and where is your proof?
Roulette said:
your notions of form, being, static, kinetic, containment, relative, absolute, probabilistic, determinate, life, freedom, and entropy. My experiences and views differ from yours
Raiek response :
This is not personal view , If that is the case , then pleas proof that they are false!
Roulette said:
on all of these matters, and there are no requirements that our experiences and views must coincide.
Raiek response :
That could be truth in3 sense
1- either you you have evident or
2- you have very dieppe problem for not knowing that we are no more in Aristotle logic.
3- the third one is you do not know any thing about Set of all Set in which the Hayawic unilogic is proved , please see: 4. Hayawic UniLogic Algebra Formal Set Approach.
النقر للوصول إلى HayawicAlgebra.pdf
I believed that you read it from least year so pleas read it and try to repeat what you said below :
Roulette said:
There is nothing universal about the representation schema and/or any underlying logic. And, there certainly are no universal “axiomatic” foundations insofar as axioms, by definition, refer to logical / mathematical “truths” / “truisms”.
Thank you very much for your attention
Raiek
إعجابإعجاب