RELATIVE THOUGHT BASED ON THE COMMUNICATIVE BASE OF CONGRUENT PERCEPTION PROCESSES
Written by Joseph Schell, unrevised

In two parts. Read this, and then the post immediately below this.


Based on the perceptional values (a) of the observation of ones relative postion (b) one can begin to build a general base of knowledge pertaining to ones external value (c), which is often, but not always, reflective of [a]. Thus, one can immediately assume that if a=b then c should equal [a], unless [a] is flawed due to a misperception of [b]. Due to this, we must add the variable [d], which refers to the probability of one having a misconception of [b]. [d] therefore equals d={a?%b}.

Now, in order to come to any conclusion about the validity of [a] (perceptional values concerning [b]), we must create a variable to which it must parallel. Thus, we institue the variable [e], which is the surrounding circumstances perception of [b]. Based on this, we can now conlude with some certainty that [a] must equal [e], and [b] must equal [e] in order for [b] to be correct. thus if (ea)+(eb)=2 (assuming that all values are in binary, either 1 or 0, one being correct and zero being incorrect) then ones percetion of his relative position must be accurate. however, we must remember that [d] still affects [a]'s perception of [b], so we will adjust the equation to include the variable for misconcpetion. So, we get (ea-d)+(eb-d)=f, with f being the value of your perception, which, if anything less than two, is wrong.

So, based on the above paragraphs, we can assume the following:

1. [a] must equal to [e] in order for [f] to be correct.
2. [a] is based on [b], but can be affected by [d]
3. [f] must equal two in order for [a] and [f] to be correct