GOD = RELATIVISTIC ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE

George Hammond wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2008 18:42:41 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

George Hammond wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2008 07:42:27 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

[Hammond]
FYI, the leadership of the world (which you don't belong
to) have known for thousands of years that poorly developed
people cannot "see" reality as well as highly developed
people, which is WHY highly developed people are in
leadership positions in the first place.
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
Therefore blind people are poorly developed?



[Hammond]
Cut the **** heckler, dwarfs, midgets, giants, amputees,
lobotomies and blind people are NOT the result of the
Secular Trend Growth Deficit which is UNIVERSAL in the human
race. Quit posting amateur trivia trolling harrassment.
Amateurs have spent years doing this to no avail, you're
just the latest punk heckler to come down the pike!
I am surprised by your inconsistent reply. Blind people
cannot see any motion, therefore by your definition, they
have a low perception of reality.



[Hammond]
Amateur level neocriminal heckling. You're a real piece
of yuppie scum.
The existence of God jfor any person depends ONLY on his
growthcurve deficit. Doesn't matter whether you're
blindfolded with duct tape or not. amateur jheckling piece
of filth.

[Hammond]
Today, the scientific explanation, measurement and PROOF
of this has been found, and it is most directly demonstrated
by the variation of PFF vs. growth.
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
This has nothing to do with any god.

[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION
You're supposed to be a PhD physicist, then surely you
know what a FOURIER FREQUENCY SPECTRUM is, and if so you
should realize that the PFF is a direct measure of the
FOURIER JSPECTRUM CUTOFF FREQUENCY of the Fourier
Transformed spectrum of VISUAL MOVEMENT in the human visual
field. If that cutoff frequency (PFF) is 50% less for one
person compared to another person, then that person sees
HALF THE MOTION of reality that the other person sees.

[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
This is not true. When you do the fourier transform of the
view of the real world, you get a spectrum of the motion.
With varying cutoff frequencies in this domain, the retransformed
image can be seen to have been affected.


[Hammond]
We're not talking about filtering out high frequencies
that nobody can see anyway, we're tallking about filtering
out 20% or more of the high frequencies they CAN see, in
THAT case the difference is very noticible, MAINLY the
difference in peoples' facial expression and personality
identity... these change drastically. An automoble driving
down the road doesn't look any different, but personality
"identity" is drastically changed if you cut mental
speed...,. this is why it easy to deceive a child... he has
only half the mental speed you have, your true identity is
INVISLBE to him.
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
However, the
amount of high frequency spectral content in the transform
for our normal world situations is very low. This is why
mpeg video compression works well. Most changes in our
views happen slowly. Thus someone who sees things 50%
slower may still see 99% of the scene contents or more.


[Hammond]
WRONG physics flunky. mpeg compression is NOT THE SAME
as a LO PASS FILTER. mpeg compression is virtually
lossless, and is effected by very sophisticated pixel
velocity prediction algorythms which are used to predict and
then reconstuct redundant motion and eliminate repetiitive
pixel transmission. There is NO COMPARISON between high
frequency filtering and video compression. Filtering is a
DIRECT LOSS of information, modern compression is vitually
lossless!

[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
Sorry but this is wrong as well. Mpeg is a lossy compression.
It has artifacts and the loss of detail is proportional to
the compression rate.


[Hammond]
So does static in a video signal, that has nothing to do
with high frequency attenuation.

You do not understand that what was
said was that you can remove a lot of motion and not change
the basic image very much.


[Hammond]
Not by cutting off the top 20% of the VISIBLE motion
spectrum which is what a hi frequency filter, or reduction
in PFF will do.

[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
Thus a 20% difference in fusion
frequency does not mean you see 20% less

[Hammond]
Yes it does asshole.

When you have to swear, it means you know you are wrong.

IQ in adults is directly
proportioanal to PFF since both are simply a measure of
mental speed in bits/sec.

So blind people are dumb? You cannot measure their fusion
rate and, since they have not been trained, it would not
be good. Or are you just saying they are more religious?

therefore a 20% reduction in PFF
is equivalent to a 20$ reduction in IQ, say from 100 to 80.
Besides mathematically having a 20% reduced information
processing capability, I think growth in children is OBVIOUS

"Obvious" is a word that you use when you know you have no
evidence and are hoping that no one will notice.

evidence that a 20% reduction in speed is equivfalent to a
20% reduction in visual perception, for instance, people
mature at 18, and 80% of 18 is 14.4, I think its commonly
observed that an 18 year old has 20% better vision
comprehension than a 14.4 year old.
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
. Not that it matters
since this has nothing to do with any god.


[Hammond]
Quit posting UNSUPPORTED ASSERTIONS

You have made this leap of faith with no evidence at all.
You assumed this meant a god and you assumed that god
was the christian god rather than one of the others.


[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
The picture of a rock on the ground is the same for
everyone.

[Hammond]
Even that isn't true. Almost every solid object in nature
shows telltale signs of motion, including wear on rocks,
wind and water erosion and movement, the wind swept profile
of trees etc.
Now George, I think that even your fusion frequency is high
enough to see the rate of erosion of a rock.

NO comment here George?

[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
The fusion frequency has developed through evolution to be
adequate for our world. Attaching any further significance
to it is pure speculation.


[Hammond]
You're full of it too. The Growth Deficit has nothing to
do with "Evolution" and it knocks 20% off the PFF for every
adult in the population, some far more than 20%, you don't
know what the hell you're talking about, and could care
less, and I could care less about you amateur opinions.
When you are losing the argument you snip and swear. This
means you are really losing the discussion and perhaps
are even realizing how wrong you are. Keep it up and
you will be on the road to getting better.


[hAMMOND]
I can kick kook ass all day long. Particularly enjoyable
is academic yuppie scum like you.

You claim you can kick ass, when are you going to start?
All of your arguments have been shown to be silly, unsupported
and or leaps of faith that would be embarrassing for a high
school student.

snip ignorant amateur aggravated atheistic trash
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

George Hammond wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2008 18:28:21 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

[Hammond]
Horse****..... the linear variation of the PFF with
childhood growth, just like IQ, has been common knowlege
known and documented for 75 years.
[Doug, alleged physicist, SPOG critic]
So? It still has nothing to do with a god.


[Hammond]
Stop playing dumb. Obviously the PFF is the Fourier
Cutoff frequency of the human detection of visual motion,
and it WELL KNOWN to vary linearly with Human Growth.
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
So what?

[Hammond]
So read the rest of the paragraph pinhead.
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
Ergo, since the Secular Trend in Human Growth shows that
the average person only reaches about 80% of full growth;
20% of REALITY is INVISIBLE to the average person!
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
No, this is not true. What is true that the rate of motion
where a person starts seeing blurring is a variable with
different people and ages.


[Hammond]
Congratulations, that wasn't too hard for you was it?
[Doug, bogus physicist and SPOG heckler]
Clearly this constitutes an INVISBLE WORLD which is
exactly what Religion has been claiming for thousands of
years.]
This is a completely unsupported assumption. There is no
evidence at all for this other than your fantasy.

[Hammond]
Nonsense, the full body of evidence PROVES THAT since it
explains in quatitative detail all 20 of the fundamental
claims of religion about the "invible world", "God" and
"Heaven". Sorry dip****, you can't argue against a theory
without actually reding it and knowing what it is about.

I have read it. It is a joke. There is nothing there except
meaningless babble. You cannot support your arguments so
you swear, bluster and threaten. That is pretty sad and I
do pity you for not being strong enough to admit you are
wrong.



You're all through punk, go find something else to do
that isn't too challenging for you. you'll get nothing but
your ignorance and aggravated counterproductiveness exposed
on this thread.

If you are going to do so, you can try at any time. So far
you have just highlighted your mistakes.


snip trash
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

On Thu, 08 May 2008 18:23:00 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:


[Hammond]
IQ in adults is directly
proportioanal to PFF since both are simply a measure of
mental speed in bits/sec.


[Doug, PhD heckler]
So blind people are dumb? You cannot measure their fusion
rate and, since they have not been trained, it would not
be good. Or are you just saying they are more religious?



[Hammond]
This is an example of why you are a fraudulent science
PhD claimant.
PFF is only ONE WAY to measure "mental speed" in humans,
which is known to be, btw, 16 bits/sec in normal average
adults. this happens to explain why early movies were shot
at 16 frames/second but is true irregardless of wether you
are blind or not as any COMPETENT high school graduate would
know.
You're an incompetent moron, but beyond that you're an
aggravated psychotic heckler which makes it a sheer delight
to bootf''''k you all over Usenet.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

On Thu, 08 May 2008 18:25:19 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

snip no content

On Thu, 08 May 2008 18:17:59 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

snip no content

George Hammond wrote:
On Thu, 08 May 2008 18:23:00 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

[Hammond]
IQ in adults is directly
proportioanal to PFF since both are simply a measure of
mental speed in bits/sec.

[Doug, PhD heckler]
So blind people are dumb? You cannot measure their fusion
rate and, since they have not been trained, it would not
be good. Or are you just saying they are more religious?



[Hammond]
This is an example of why you are a fraudulent science
PhD claimant.
PFF is only ONE WAY to measure "mental speed" in humans,
which is known to be, btw, 16 bits/sec in normal average
adults. this happens to explain why early movies were shot
at 16 frames/second but is true irregardless of wether you
are blind or not as any COMPETENT high school graduate would
know.
You're an incompetent moron, but beyond that you're an
aggravated psychotic heckler which makes it a sheer delight
to bootf''''k you all over Usenet.


So George has a theory that goes like this.

1. Different people are able to see motion at different rates.
Things will blur at different rates for different people.

2. Therefore this proves there is a god.

These two statements are not connected in any way. He is just
assuming that if something is blurry or unseen, it must be
his god.

His "theory" predicts that high speed cameras and all flash
cameras are capable of seeing his god since they can stop
motion at higher rates than a person can see. The cameras
do not so there is no evidence for his "theory".

This is why it shows up in only the vanity press and usenet.
If it were a real theory, it would show up in science.

=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

On Fri, 09 May 2008 05:53:49 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

George Hammond wrote:
On Thu, 08 May 2008 18:23:00 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

[Hammond]
IQ in adults is directly
proportioanal to PFF since both are simply a measure of
mental speed in bits/sec.

[Doug, PhD heckler]
So blind people are dumb? You cannot measure their fusion
rate and, since they have not been trained, it would not
be good. Or are you just saying they are more religious?



[Hammond]
This is an example of why you are a fraudulent science
PhD claimant.
PFF is only ONE WAY to measure "mental speed" in humans,
which is known to be, btw, 16 bits/sec in normal average
adults. this happens to explain why early movies were shot
at 16 frames/second but is true irregardless of wether you
are blind or not as any COMPETENT high school graduate would
know.
You're an incompetent moron, but beyond that you're an
aggravated psychotic heckler which makes it a sheer delight
to bootf''''k you all over Usenet.


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
So George has a theory that goes like this.

1. Different people are able to see motion at different rates.
Things will blur at different rates for different people.


[Hammond]
Crudely correct statement. Congratulations dimwit


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
2. Therefore this proves there is a god.


[Hammond]
Again correct statement. However you have left out the
evidence that proves WHY this effect proves "God",
apparently because you are too incompetent and disinterested
to actually read the theory, and because of the vast lacunae
in your general education.


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
These two statements are not connected in any way.


[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION
due to the fact that the heckler has not actually READ the
theory or is simply UNABLE to understand it because of
educational ignorance.


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
He is just assuming that if something is blurry or unseen, it must be
his god.


[Hammond]
BLATANT LIE.
In fact the published theory shows that ALL 20 CLAIMED
PHENOMENA of Religion are proven and explained by this and
other physics structure of the theory... all of which are
simply IGNORED by the heckler. The central achievement of
the SPOG is in fact to PROVE that this invisibility CAUSES
the phenomena of God.

One simply has to be aware that this poster is HIGHLY
IGNORANT, HIGHLY AGGRAVATED, AND HIGHLY INCOMPETENT.
AND IS A TYPICAL "PSYCHOTIC HECKLER".



[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
His "theory" predicts that high speed cameras and all flash
cameras are capable of seeing his god since they can stop
motion at higher rates than a person can see. The cameras
do not so there is no evidence for his "theory".



[Hammond]
This CANARD has been discussed a million times by Hammond
and thoroughly debunked.
"SLO-MO" and ZOOM LENS will not and CAN NOT reproduce the
effect on reality seen by a person with changed mental
speed. The fundamental reason for this is that our
identification of OTHER PEOPLE'S IDENTITY is based on our
own mental speed and our estimate (identification) of
others' mental speed (identity recognition). This means
that if your mental speed were to change then everybody
ELSE'S identity would suddenly change also. OTOH, filming a
person and then slo-mo-ing the film only makes it look like
the SAME PERSON is "moving slowly"...... there is a WORLD OF
DIFFERENCE between these two situations!
If it weren't for this crucial difference we would not
need artists like Rembrandt, or Da Vinci to paint the visual
phenomenon of God using their own "variable and
controllable" mental speed and we could simply replace them
with photographic cameras..... which is a WELL KNOWN AMATEUR
ERROR based on stultifying common IGNORANCE. The Mona Lisa
is worth $50,000,000 and the Sistine Chapel Ceiling is worth
a billion dollars... there is no "photograph" that is worth
50 million dollars and never will be! and for the SAME
REASON Hammond and Hammond's discovery of the SPOG is worth
another billion dollars! Stupid!


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
This is why it shows up in only the vanity press and Usenet.


[Hammond]
LIAR...LOL LOL LOL LIAR LOL LOL LOL
LIAR...LOL LOL LOL LIAR LOL LOL LOL
_New ideas In Psychology_ (Pergamon Press) is a
prestigious, thoroughly peer reviewed, premier academic
publication.
QUIT YOUR LYING HECKLER

and the Noetic Journal is also a peer reviewed Journal with
25 Professorial ranking members on it's editorial board.
YOU'RE THE ONE WHO IS A FAUD AND A LIAR
AND AN ANONYMOUS PSYCHOTIC HECKLER


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
If it were a real theory, it would show up in science.


[Hammond]
It already has, it's called the ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE and
has been front page news in Physics for 25 years. You're
an irresponsible scientifically incompetent anonymous
heckling retarded hyena and stooge.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

George Hammond wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2008 05:53:49 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

George Hammond wrote:
On Thu, 08 May 2008 18:23:00 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

[Hammond]
IQ in adults is directly
proportioanal to PFF since both are simply a measure of
mental speed in bits/sec.
[Doug, PhD heckler]
So blind people are dumb? You cannot measure their fusion
rate and, since they have not been trained, it would not
be good. Or are you just saying they are more religious?



[Hammond]
This is an example of why you are a fraudulent science
PhD claimant.
PFF is only ONE WAY to measure "mental speed" in humans,
which is known to be, btw, 16 bits/sec in normal average
adults. this happens to explain why early movies were shot
at 16 frames/second but is true irregardless of wether you
are blind or not as any COMPETENT high school graduate would
know.
You're an incompetent moron, but beyond that you're an
aggravated psychotic heckler which makes it a sheer delight
to bootf''''k you all over Usenet.

[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
So George has a theory that goes like this.

1. Different people are able to see motion at different rates.
Things will blur at different rates for different people.


[Hammond]
Crudely correct statement. Congratulations dimwit

[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
2. Therefore this proves there is a god.


[Hammond]
Again correct statement. However you have left out the
evidence that proves WHY this effect proves "God",
apparently because you are too incompetent and disinterested
to actually read the theory, and because of the vast lacunae
in your general education.

There was no proof to leave out. You just leaped to that
conclusion because you wanted to get to that conclusion
independent of the facts. That is not how science is done.



[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
These two statements are not connected in any way.


[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION
due to the fact that the heckler has not actually READ the
theory or is simply UNABLE to understand it because of
educational ignorance.

[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
He is just assuming that if something is blurry or unseen, it must be
his god.


[Hammond]
BLATANT LIE.
In fact the published theory shows that ALL 20 CLAIMED
PHENOMENA of Religion are proven and explained by this and
other physics structure of the theory... all of which are
simply IGNORED by the heckler. The central achievement of
the SPOG is in fact to PROVE that this invisibility CAUSES
the phenomena of God.

This statement totally ignores the facts. You have made this
wild speculation and just assumed you were right. Your spog
just shows that you have no connection with reality.



One simply has to be aware that this poster is HIGHLY
IGNORANT, HIGHLY AGGRAVATED, AND HIGHLY INCOMPETENT.
AND IS A TYPICAL "PSYCHOTIC HECKLER".

So pointing out your mistakes is not appreciated by you?
If you want to be a scientist, you should welcome this.
But, then again, you are not a scientist.


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
His "theory" predicts that high speed cameras and all flash
cameras are capable of seeing his god since they can stop
motion at higher rates than a person can see. The cameras
do not so there is no evidence for his "theory".



[Hammond]
This CANARD has been discussed a million times by Hammond
and thoroughly debunked.
"SLO-MO" and ZOOM LENS will not and CAN NOT reproduce the
effect on reality seen by a person with changed mental
speed. The fundamental reason for this is that our
identification of OTHER PEOPLE'S IDENTITY is based on our
own mental speed and our estimate (identification) of
others' mental speed (identity recognition). This means
that if your mental speed were to change then everybody
ELSE'S identity would suddenly change also. OTOH, filming a
person and then slo-mo-ing the film only makes it look like
the SAME PERSON is "moving slowly"...... there is a WORLD OF
DIFFERENCE between these two situations!

This is a really impressive word salad of meaningless assumptions
and unrelated speculation.


If it weren't for this crucial difference we would not
need artists like Rembrandt, or Da Vinci to paint the visual
phenomenon of God using their own "variable and
controllable" mental speed and we could simply replace them
with photographic cameras..... which is a WELL KNOWN AMATEUR
ERROR based on stultifying common IGNORANCE. The Mona Lisa
is worth $50,000,000

As far as I know, the Mona Lisa is not god. Or do you have
another one in mind of the either one, 12 (or 13) or billions
that you have claimed at different times?

and the Sistine Chapel Ceiling is worth
a billion dollars... there is no "photograph" that is worth
50 million dollars and never will be! and for the SAME
REASON Hammond and Hammond's discovery of the SPOG is worth
another billion dollars! Stupid!

How much has it earned you so far?


[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
This is why it shows up in only the vanity press and Usenet.


[Hammond]
LIAR...LOL LOL LOL LIAR LOL LOL LOL
LIAR...LOL LOL LOL LIAR LOL LOL LOL
_New ideas In Psychology_ (Pergamon Press) is a
prestigious, thoroughly peer reviewed, premier academic
publication.
QUIT YOUR LYING HECKLER

It is still a vanity press. You do not like that fact but
that is the way it is.



and the Noetic Journal is also a peer reviewed Journal with
25 Professorial ranking members on it's editorial board.
YOU'RE THE ONE WHO IS A FAUD AND A LIAR
AND AN ANONYMOUS PSYCHOTIC HECKLER

[Doug, incompetent scientist and heckler]
If it were a real theory, it would show up in science.


[Hammond]
It already has, it's called the ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE and
has been front page news in Physics for 25 years. You're
an irresponsible scientifically incompetent anonymous
heckling retarded hyena and stooge.

You have taken your own perverted interpretation of the
work of competent people. That does not mean that your
misunderstanding was what they said.


=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:36:21 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 15:14:08 -0700, Uncle Al
wrote:

Hindus have 36 crores of gods - 360 million deities. How is India
doing, Georgie boy?

Idiot.

[Hammond]
The SPOG explains and PROVES why there are 30 demigods in
Hindii; because there are 30 first order eigenvectors in
Psychometric correlation matricess, worldwide .

Can't you read? Uncle Al wrote that Hinduism has 360 million deities,
not just 30.


[Hammond]
His statement is manifestly absurd, there aren't 360
million names in the Human Language.
On the other hand there ARE 30 eigenvectors in every
comprehensive Psychometric correlation matrix, so there
CERTAINLY ARE 30 "DEMIGODS" in Religion; scientifically
speaking. Stop trying to pretend you're not an aggravated
halfwit heckler.

If I recall correctly, your Psychometric correlation matrix maps out a
"personality space" (and IIRC, it actually isn't your psychometric matrix,
it is Cattell's). The eigenvectors represent orthogonal "directions" within
that space and each would capture some distinct aspects of personality.
Now, as far as gods are concerned: gods can be seen as personality
archetypes. Of course I agree that personality archetypes would necessarily
fit into your "personality space" but it is not at all clear to me that gods
correspond to eigenvectors. So please demonstrate with at least a few
examples how specific gods equate with a specific eigenvectors.

(It's your thesis. You prove it.)

Secondly:
IIRC, your eigenvectors have "levels" or "order". The first order is
lowest, and you proceed level by level up to the highest order, in which
there is a single eigenvector and that, you say, is God who is depicted on
the Sistine Chapel. Now, IIRC you place the Greek gods at a higher order
than Hindu gods. But the Greek gods are personality archetypes of normal
everyday flawed human beings and the Hindu gods (at least in Tibetan
Hinduism) the gods represent aspects of human being who have achieved
enlightenment. Therefore, the Greek gods should be eigenvectors of a lower
order (perhaps the first), and Hindu gods should be a higher order (perhaps
the second).