Do Mormons Worship Jesus...Do You?

[zil]

28 minutes ago, Traveler said:

As an expert in artificial intelligence - I was evaluating you in relation to everything else.

Wait, this must imply that you know everything else¹.  Given this claim, exactly how much of everything else are you willing to reveal, because I think I can come up with some questions that will reveal at least some short-term useful answers....

¹This phrase almost appears to be an oxymoron, or at least interesting to ponder for a while.  I mean, if you know "everything else" what is the "else"?  And how do you know you don't know the "else" unless you also know the "else", in which case, you actually know "everything" and the "else" is superfluous at best, and kinda misleading, because at first, it makes it seem like you don't know "else", but as I clearly demonstrated, you must know "else" too.  [Excuse me while I look at my schedule....  Thank you for waiting.]  Yes, it appears I'll have time to ponder this further from noon to 1400ish, assuming nothing else² comes up.

2Unlike "everything else", . . . . . , nope, scratch that, "nothing else" also appears to be problematic.  In order to accurately know "nothing else", one would have to know "nothing" (in addition to "else"), but first of all, "nothing" doesn't exist, and thus can't be known; and secondly, in order to know there was "nothing else", one would have to know "everything" (and "else").  It appears I've gone in a circle.  I might need more than two hours to complete my pondering of everything, nothing, and else.  I may need to write a book.

[Traveler]

3 hours ago, zil said:

Wait, this must imply that you know everything else¹.  Given this claim, exactly how much of everything else are you willing to reveal, because I think I can come up with some questions that will reveal at least some short-term useful answers....

¹This phrase almost appears to be an oxymoron, or at least interesting to ponder for a while.  I mean, if you know "everything else" what is the "else"?  And how do you know you don't know the "else" unless you also know the "else", in which case, you actually know "everything" and the "else" is superfluous at best, and kinda misleading, because at first, it makes it seem like you don't know "else", but as I clearly demonstrated, you must know "else" too.  [Excuse me while I look at my schedule....  Thank you for waiting.]  Yes, it appears I'll have time to ponder this further from noon to 1400ish, assuming nothing else² comes up.

2Unlike "everything else", . . . . . , nope, scratch that, "nothing else" also appears to be problematic.  In order to accurately know "nothing else", one would have to know "nothing" (in addition to "else"), but first of all, "nothing" doesn't exist, and thus can't be known; and secondly, in order to know there was "nothing else", one would have to know "everything" (and "else").  It appears I've gone in a circle.  I might need more than two hours to complete my pondering of everything, nothing, and else.  I may need to write a book.

When you figure out whatever it is that your are figuring out - I will have figured out everything else or else it will not matter - the heinseberg principle wouldn't have passed time to have happened.

 

The Traveler