Frequently bought together
It has to be a semiprime. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Throne is a social chat app designed specifically for large crowds. You seem like a reasonable person. I will wait for response …………….. My current employer has alloted me a different UAN No.
Sparse theories from natural classes
Reach out towards the territory and put down your map. When you learn to put down your map, you can find better ones. You can learn to jump back and forth between them. And you can learn the beauty and freedom of being mapless—at least for a little while. There are tools that can help you break your map.
The study of thought and metaphor. If you get enough practice, it becomes easier. And it makes you a happier and more effective person. A bet is an idea. A bet is also territory. The typing, out in the real world, is the map of what is in my mind. The real thing, the territory, is what is in my mind.
The reality of the bet is in the betting, not in the idea of the betting. Try pointing it at itself. If you manage to reach the present moment, to reach out to the thing itself and notice that the thing itself is the reaching, it eats itself up like an ouroboros and vanishes, leaving behind experience.
On the contrary, I do indeed hold the bet in my mind. Indeed, there is nowhere else for a bet to be, except in our minds. You just effectively made a divide by zero error. It is, in fact, essentially a divide-by-zero error, because the point is to short-circuit your thinking. I take it from this response that I have indeed convinced you that a bet held in the mind is indeed the territory, not the map, and thus your initial claim is false.
Suppose anodognosic does not believe that this bet was ever made. If we had telepathy anodognosic and I could make bets with each other without any map. I would say no. If you actually held yourself to, in this case, never making political predictions afterwards, then I would happily concede you have made a bet with yourself. Truly betting oneself or anyone else involves some real sense of obligation, and it is that obligation that I would consider to be the territory in the case of a bet.
The idea of the bet in this case would be another map a map of the obligations implied by the bet. The more complex answer is that even if the bet is spread across two minds, it still exists in the minds,. I think this is an untenable description of the situation. Instead, there are two separate entities: Perhaps, but suppose each of you have a different version of the bet in your head.
How can the different versions be reconciled? Almost inevitably with recourse to either a written or verbal agreement as evidenced by others. On the first, if I hold myself to my bet then we are agreed it is a bet. As it happens, I made a bet with myself of that type some years ago, lost it and have kept to the terms. But my understanding of court procedures is that those sort of evidence is regarded as clues to the reality of the contract, which exists in the minds.
Judges tend to talk about what is reasonable, what they think people intended, etc. But your internal awareness of your thoughts is not correlated 1: Imagine google maps on your phone had nearly infinite resolution, and you zoomed in down to your current location. Science is an attempt to understand how the map on your map corresponds with the territory by proxy of the outer map. Psychedelic mysticism is an attempt to get you to put down the fucking map.
Something stored may be accessible to awareness, but it is not held in awareness by virtue of being stored. Awareness is the key here. But the bet itself is not even stored in the mind. The bet itself, the territory, is an abstraction—the agreement and subsequent obligation.
You could theoretically deduce it from brain states or whatever, but it is not the brain states, or the resulting mental states. It exists between two parties in the fact of their agreement the existence here being perhaps a fiction, depending on your stance on the existence of abstractions. What exists in your mind is the idea of the bet, plus numerous other facts about it. You may think this is unnecessary hairsplitting, but understanding that awareness is separate from concept is the whole point.
How do you know? The whole point is to attempt to communicate something that is impossible to convey in words through metaphor. If the problem is the insufficiency of the metaphor, that I readily admit. No metaphor is up to this task. How did you determine that? By searching your memory? Why would you think that would work, if the whole point is to stop reasoning? You can dismiss it, no skin off my back. I disagree that the obligation is necessarily in the mind.
For instance, making political predictions or not doing so is something that happens in physical reality, not the mind. Right, so the judge is trying to reconstruct a sensible interpretation of the bet based on the testimony of the two parties involved. This entire line of argument between the two of you is an elaborate language game. Communicating things that it is impossible to convey in words is why we have mathematics. And, has it ever occurred to you that there may be things in human knowledge that your teachers simply never encountered?
That what was thought-stopping to them, and to you, might not be that way to everyone? And Wittgenstein, quite possibly deeply misunderstood.
Why do you think that your question would be able to stop reasoning? And that I may have encountered one of those teachers in the past, in, say, one of my high school maths classes? As for what the courts consider, a principle of regarding a paper contract as simply a contract would be rather useless when the contract is silent on the particular circumstances that occur.
They have to come up with something. Why should it dominate my mental landscape? You practice it with some regularity in a way that works for you and you learn to let go of the need for certainty. A tiger comes to mind. The twilight here Exalts the vast and busy Library And seems to set the bookshelves back in gloom; Innocent, ruthless, bloodstained, sleek It wanders through its forest and its day….
It strikes me now as evening fills my soul That the tiger addressed in my poem Is a shadowy beast, a tiger of symbols And scraps picked up at random out of books, A string of labored tropes that have no life, And not the fated tiger, the deadly jewel…. A new attempt is made to describe the real tiger, the one that is out there in the jungle right now , but it fails again, and Borges resigns himself to his fate:. But by the act of giving it a name, By trying to fix the limits of its world, It becomes a fiction not a living beast, Not a tiger out roaming the wilds of earth.
I know these things quite well, Yet nonetheless some force keeps driving me In this vague, unreasonable, and ancient quest, And I go on pursuing through the hours Another tiger, the beast not found in verse. And the signifieds butt heads with the signifiers And we all fall down slack-jawed to marvel at words While across the sky sheet the impossible birds In a steady, illiterate movement homewards.
The river, the one hand clapping — these show the map NOT being the territory. The map can do things the territory cannot. Therefore maps are not real.
Nonsense breaks the map. Through that crack, for the moment, a breath of fresh air. And of pure logic, that sees what and why. This is a non-sequitur.
Therefore an albatross is not real. If you succeed at all that, what are you gonna gain? We already have tons of scientists, whose day job is improving the map of the world, and the results of their actions are far beyond what any individual human can conceive.
So if you have an enriched mind, you have three options:. You become better or even the best at doing science i. Late here, but I suggest that maps are not necessarily wrong but they are always incomplete. So, a scientific theory can be entirely accurate and true for the narrow context for which it is defined, but the entirety of reality cannot be mapped in a continuous, complete and self-agreeing way.
I think utility is a much better measure of a map than truth, but that pivots the discussion into a whole new direction…. Much grief can come of being stuck in a map. Believing, for instance, that any bad thing that happens to you is punishment for some wrongdoing is a bad map to be stuck in.
Scrupulosity is a bad map. Fundamentalism is a bad map. Greed, vanity and self-righteousness are all bad maps. I think the nearest approach is something like this: To drive the car is to exercise a certain sort of mental modality. To exit the car is to exercise a different sort of mental modality. These are mutually antagonistic and the use of one precludes the use of the other.
Verbalizing and conceptualizing and building models and explaining stuff belongs to the former. It is closer to digestion than it is to thought. Its main characteristic is effortlessness. As in the way that your mind can effortlessly understand spoken and written speech or identify objects in the field of view. It is impossible to explain how to do this for the same reason that it is impossible to explain to blind people how to see.
Hence the more you are a person who enjoys thinking and explaining and understanding, the more you will feel the frustration in this post. So enter drugs and meditation. Thus the person inside the car is pushing for a sign that the person outside the car has some special knowledge. I do find there is this kind of arrogance in many mystics. Like they never consider the possibility that they might be the ones whose minds are the limited minds.
People like you who are sort of aggressively skeptical about mysticism are not in the intended demographic for this message. This is very obvious to me now, because I used to be thoroughly convinced that all of this was bullshit and had to do a complete after having a classical mystical experience on mushrooms. Generally speaking, mystics do not go around looking for converts, and in fact may actively push them away.
Typically, a student comes to a teacher already convinced that the teacher has some secret knowledge. Then often, the teacher tells the student to go away or to do something boring like read religious scriptures. Indeed, it is common for the teacher to flat out tell the student that he has nothing to teach. And this is sort of true. At that point, there is a shared ground of experience and it becomes much easier to communicate.
So if you are really curious, then follow this simple instruction: LSD, mescaline, psilocybin, until something interesting happens. I suppose in theory I could spend several hours compiling a bunch of respectable studies on the structural and functional effects of psychedelics and meditation on the brain, cross-referencing them with subjective reports of mystical experiences, explaining the ways in which the former support the veracity of the latter, and so on. Then you could spend many more hours reading and thinking about this and come away with the feeling that maybe there is something to it.
But both of us are too lazy to do this. Frankly, the drugs are a gift because they are pretty much guaranteed to work on everyone. Out of curiousity, what makes you think that I think this is all bullshit? They are not unreasonable objections, and I would have raised them myself, but they are indicative. It could not possibly be otherwise. There is an aspect of the experience that is simply formally inexpressible. The whole point is to break out of the closure of abstract concepts.
But there is an experience that I suspect you did not have, which imparts an appreciation of the formal limits of language and thought. Imagine that a few decades in the future we discover how to rewrire the brain for various things. You then tell me to go use the new nano-rewiring dust and rewire my brain so that I believe in homeopathy unconditionally.
Once I have done so, my lack of understanding will be ameliorated. How is that different from suggesting that people take brain-altering drugs to understand the truth of the things believed by people with altered brains? If the world was being conquered by Starro, who mind controls everyone by putting starfish on their heads, should I welcome having a starfish placed on my head because it will let me understand why Starro should rule the world?
My altered brain might even be unable to distinguish this from actual understanding. First, I understand the evidentiary problem. As I said, this problem is usually not a problem because the mystic does not go looking for students. So the special knowledge of the entities is not in doubt. Second, your analogy is rather poor.
I am not, after all, telling you to alter the state of your brain so that you believe in something. Why would you want to do that? Well, in my previous incarnation as debunker of all things airy-fairy, I was still a mostly curious and open-minded person.
If someone appeared before me back then and said to me the sort of things that I have said in these comments, I would think: He has offered me a protocol for creating an interesting experience that he claims may have important and beneficial effects. I ought to at least try it just as a matter of intellectual curiosity. This special knowledge is certainly in doubt. I might end up believing that it is outside my head.
The claim is that you can learn something interesting about the nature of your mind by tweaking variables that cannot normally be tweaked. I mean your thought process, emotions, perceptions, and etc. It stands to reason that by altering the state of the brain in certain ways, you can access thoughts, emotions and perceptions that are completely outside your normal range.
Is it really so much of a stretch that such a state might yield insights that are not normally available? This objection makes no sense to me whatsoever. The entire reason to ask the entities to do math is to find out whether or not they are outside his head. It depends on how it changes my mind. If it cannot provide evidence or reasoning, but it will make me come to a conclusion anyway, that means that it will make me come to a conclusion by rewiring my brain.
Jiro the inception of many, maybe most ideas is not achieved through reasoning. Einstein famously intuited his way to Relativity. Kekulé found the structure of benzene in a vision of an ouroboros during a daydream. But intuition let them make the leap to the answer. Mystical experiences and practice make it easier to make intuitive leaps, while constant reasoning can impede them.
Think of it as coming to a hypothesis. And in that, you would be in some very good company. Pretty much the same. Do you not ever give credence to insight and intuition? I also offered some illustrations of how insight and intuition are extremely important, and that mysticism thus has a similar value.
Does this seem wrong to you? The insights that I kept were only those that satisfied later rational inquiry. If you have some experience with rationality, you should emerge from a mystical experience with much the same beliefs as before although perhaps with some interesting hypotheses to consider in sobriety! It would be interesting to see Scott Alexander vs.
They were all speaking English, too. Depending on your level of charity, you could interpret this as a translation convention. For me, this is a sign of the non-external nature of the entities. More seriously, the arbitrariness of it is what bothers me. No reason why non-human beings would default to it. The car is a reality model. Useful for getting somewhere but not the best way to interact at all times.
It can trap you. The train was hard, so ive been on foot for a few years, and it was painful at first, but now I can get in my train whenever I need to.
Unless they got it by generating two large primes and multiplying them, in which case none of this proves anything because they knew the prime factors all along.
Someone else could have generated the numbers in secret and written them down before giving the protagonist the product. I mean, you can generate two large primes and multiply them without ever actually knowing what the primes are yourself.
Easier to check the answer mentally under the influence of powerful hallucinogens. It might as well be alien language and to help you get out of the car, they should have translated it into words you understood? An example of that would be illuminating. I am not sure what kinds of things you mean. And how would you shut down options to get it to happen? Roughly the set of things that your mind-body can do but feels outside your conscious locus of control.
Or in other words, anything you can be hypnotized to do. Subconscious finger twitches, forgetting your name, dropping an insecurity, wiggling your ear, etc. In the story above, the tripper had an opportunity to run away and chose to take it because he was less uncomfortable being without the transcendant joy message than he was facing what he had to face in order to get out of the car.
Feels super convincing too — I had it myself. The analogy with ear-wiggling is interesting, but it has three features that are absent from the story. But if it works for you: Sure, there may be evidence that, Yes, humans have the muscles to wiggle their ears, but people tend to think of themselves as exceptional. Despite the fact that these are known things humans can do, like ear wiggling, people will often characterize their inability to do them impossibility. A state of expanded or altered consciousness is a little less objective than wiggling your ears, but there are still physiological changes ranging from easily observed to requiring an mri or cat-scan.
As jimmy pointed out, in the story the tripper chooses to turn back instead of getting all the way out of the car, or instead of accepting that the outside of the car is always there, even without the drugs.
Is it possible that it is physically and mentally painful for them to attempt to do this thing? Eventually I did learn to play barre chords, sort-of. It only took 3 years. Do I understand that if Joan Jett, with her tiny hands can play barre chords, I can? Does that particularly help me to play a barre-chord right at the moment, no. Teaching tends to work better when the teacher is treated with some respect. Assurances from supernatural DMT creatures have, after all, no strict binding to the actual or possible.
The problem is that the protagonist wants evidence i. Suppose they do — and then what? Why should they be any different from the college student who takes the drug, visits the other plane, then goes back to the real world? Sure, we now have proof that this other plane is objectively existent whatever that may be taken to mean rather than a drug hallucination. But you still have to write that report. Even if we had proof that the other plane was real, unless we were going to change all our values in this world, it will make little difference to us.
All religions will say the same thing: There is no accommodation between the Truth and the way we go about our ordinary lives. And unless I can function as a normal productive citizen, how can I do all that? A good case up until you started on the religion stuff. Finally you understate the very real differences between the even the religions that oppose living in the world, who may have visions but fundamentally different ones at heart.
One of those things being the dangers of just dipping your toe in. I do not know, and would be curious to find out, if the wisdom provided by those traditions which rely on mind-altering substances differs from the others.
But the mystical traditions are not the same as the religion themselves. Reciting a digit number from memory is tough for a human…remembering the two digit factors would be even harder.
And a really convincing number would be several times as long. Just enough to prove that someone actually factored it. Even if you only remember the last ten digits of those fifty-digit numbers, that is still enough to show that they factored it. Have your computer generate and store the factors in advance but only output their product; memorise the product at leisure, practicing until you can recite it easily; have the DMT entities factor it; remember selected digits of the factors and check them against the ones stored on your computer.
It would be much better to factor a number no one knows how to factor like one of the larger RSA numbers ; then everyone will be interested. Also, one could memorize n-k digits, where k is an amount that can reasonable be handled by a computer. For instance, if your computer can test 1 million numbers per second, then you can memorize n digits, and then let your computer brute force the rest of the digits over 3 hours.
This was a problem I had with Conversations with God , and I thought about it then. You could ask it to recite some passage from a page: Or where in the world is the passport that you lost 5 years ago. Yes, hash breaking would probably work better. Ask the entity to give you an English-language rhyming couplet such that each line has the same SHA hash value.
Art under rigorous constraints is the original proof-of-work function. SHA takes arbitrary input and converts it into a bit value.
The actual shortest possible couplet is probably substantially shorter, though. Hmm…something like this could work. I think you end up with longer strings, but they are probably much easier for humans to remember. Think of the scandal a factor would be! Natural English text e. Wikipedia has an estimated entropy of a little more than 1 bits per character, including spaces and punctuation the Hutter Prize record is 1.
At least one of those is going to be grammatical at each point in a sentence. If someone told me that LSD let you contact superintelligent aliens, and presented this factorization as a proof, I would not be convinced: If you presented a factorization of RSA , I would take you much more seriously. As someone who spent 6 weeks in Peru last fall on an ayahuasca course, I really appreciate seeing this on a rationalist blog.
Reading your link, I think the Nichols quote is really privileging hypotheses. I can think of all sorts of things that a hypothetical drug might tell us. He probably should not have asked a wishing engine.
For every enlightened person, I would expect to see 10 people who tried getting out of the metaphorical car, but did not make it. Yet, there are none. Because to me, they look suspiciously like failed Enlightened beings.
In mysticism more than anywhere else, a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Alternatively, park safely, open a window a crack, sniff … retreat to normal. Again a little wider … retreat. Slowly work up to more and more exposure to reality. This is a possible opening move for a dialogue designed to shift terminal values; amused by its modularity. If you snip the humorous ending and translate the metaphor into something more actionable…actually, not sure the most effective way to go about it.
Character coded as impossibly wise vs. I think I might have a window on this. Both Eliezer and Scott are right about a lot of stuff now, but they had formative experiences of figuring out they had been wrong e. For similar reasons, the moment in this story where the bat suddenly snapped into lucidity, and a lucidity that semi-explained the meaning of its earlier opaque speech, was jolt-up-in-my-seat exciting to me. Being able to explain something in short words and basic concepts to young children and the ignorant is the mark of real understanding.
Transcendent culture, and they were the most polite beings imaginable- they answered the question that the protagonist should have asked, not the question that he did.
Intentionally creating ambiguity is not polite. Well, it might have something to do with serotonin, or it might not — and then to explain this you have to go into a heap of technical and scientific jargon to explain the complexity. Unless the ambiguity helps him actually do the most productive thing, rather than the thing he was trying to do. Yes jerky but sometimes needed or called for, particularly if you are seeking spiritual direction. Sometimes I think my spiritual directer is a major a-hole but he gets the job done.
This reminds me of an old Zen story: A monk was dissatisfied with his current teacher, so he found a new one. But every time he asked the new teacher a question, she hit him with a brick. Fed up, he went back to the old teacher and complained about her; the old teacher said that he only hoped the monk had properly thanked her for her grandmotherly kindness.
This is one of my favorite Zen stories ever. Clear feedback is terribly hard to get, but priceless. Gutei raised his finger whenever he was asked a question about Zen. A boy attendant began to imitate him in this way. When anyone asked the boy what his master had preached about, the boy would raise his finger.
He seized him and cut off his finger. The boy cried and ran away. Gutei called and stopped him. When the boy turned his head to Gutei, Gutei raised up his own finger. In that instant the boy was enlightened. What, besides the obvious, is confusing about that story? May I make this into a short film someday? This is like a Rationalist version of Jorge Luis Borges.
I thought of a similar idea in the context of the Thomas Covenant book series and how to prove that the Land was real. Do some sort of mathematical calculation that requires pencil and paper to solve but whose answer can be memorized.
Check the answer when you get back. For instance, you need a piece of paper to find digits of the square root of 2, but once you have those digits, you can memorize them. But the real reason you want it to do math is that doing math is hard to fake , and making you feel universal joy is easy to fake. And, Scott is using a false symmetry. But when you tell them to do math, they do know how to do math and are just refusing. Of course, Scott is in a dilemma here. If the entities can do math but refuse, this breaks symmetry to us in order to make the situation appear symmertrical to the Scott in the story.
Except that doing the math is demanding directions to the place where one can get out of the car. The very end of the story shows that the entities are capable of doing the math. They were just being jerks about it. Or like the culture they were acting according to a long standing standard operating procedure based on randomized controlled trials of interventions into developing civilizations. On the other hand refusing to provide proof-of-work while repeating messages of universal love and transcendent joy has been found to not increase self-genocide while reliably reducing the time to Eschaton by approximately years.
Yes, they could be being jerks. What is the visitor asking? Imagine a human trying to explain, using terms derived from musicology, a particular work by Mozart or Schoenberg or any composer of your choice to an intelligent dog. Insisting that this is really important and that it can only be explained one way comes across as scam-artistry.
Or… they were acting according to a long standing standard operating procedure based on randomized controlled trials of interventions into developing civilizations.
Scott is trying to write a story which is symmetrical: If neither side understands the other side, there will be nothing in the story which rules out the possibility that the protagonist is hallucinating. However, I called them jerks in the context of pointing out that they are acting differently than the protagonist.
That larger point still holds. Rationalism is always going to fail in detecting fakes if you postulate that the real thing is indistinguishable from a fake. Things can be indistinguishable-right-now but distinguishable-eventually. Allow me to point out the existence of child safety locks that prevent you from opening the doors from the inside to add to this metaphor.
Although those do only apply to passenger doors. Specific example of criticism In the vague hope of offering something remotely constructive: The sea was made of strontium, the beach was made of rye. A thousand stars of sertraline whirled round quetiapine moons, and the sand sizzled sharp like cooking oil that hissed and sang and threat ened to boil the octahedral dunes. Compare to Ancient Mariner:. Then like a pawing horse let go, She made a sudden bound: It flung the blood into my head, And I fell down in a swound.
The second line is iambic trimeter. The fourth line is seven syllables, but it still sticks to the trimeter by joining beats together. I love this, but I think your car analogy is missing the point. From the point of the entities, questions of existence or nonexistence, and especially questions of evidence, are car-talk — presumably outside the car those concepts are not fully meaningful.
And they flat out refuse to. Neither you, nor anyone else on here, has ever refused or neglected to answer a question because it is so ludicrously trivial, it has nothing to do with the topic?
Imagine someone meeting a fireman and being told the building is on fire and they need to follow the exits out, and refusing to listen until the fireman tells him which is better: Everyone knows vanilla is better! The story, on the other hand, is trying but failing to imply similar gaps of understanding on both sides. If the alternative is that the person ignores you and burns to death, then of course you answer the question.
Even better, if you can predict which flavor the person likes as the entities can probably predict what answer we want to the factoring question , just tell them what they want to hear.
There seems to be a lot of fighting the hypothetical here. As with the trolley problem, all of these objections or clever evasions can be dealt with by tweaking the scenario without really affecting the underlying question. I knew it was all false! They say that when you tell them the prprime-factorisation of a digit number? Are you ready to get started and make that change?
Then click below to buy now. These are strictly a part of this current offer. It surely helps those like myself in my financial state to work hard and diligently and not have to worry about the capital to keep building. I think that is really overlooked in marketing material such as creating wealth. Thank You for such a Great Package! We wish you all the success! Creative Real Estate Academy.
PS - Here's my suggestion, simply examine the program and let the material prove itself to you. If you're not completely delighted with the tools and resources we've given you, we'll gladly refund your investment. What could be more fair? If you miss this you will look back and kick yourself once the opportunity is gone. We'd love to provide you with some assistance. We look forward to helping you achieve your financial goals!
You will be able to download the eBooks and audios immediately upon ordering. The audios are in universal mp3 format.
The forms are in an editable word processor format so you can edit them as needed. Once your payment has cleared, you will be redirected to a secure place on our site where you will be able to access all your materials and bonuses immediately.
I'll be in touch and just maybe we'll get to meet face to face one day. I do feel that I recall the name from years past. As I have done some very extensive travel and research on who is who in the business world. Till then, May you Live Long and Prosper.
We do not see this in most Companys now days. Thank you so much. I truly appreciate your help and sharing of information. I am already thrilled, and i am only on the first chapter. I've spent thousands on courses over the years , and bought yours for the he of it, and it has the same info i've spent years learning from overpriced courses.
Your system has helped me generate a lot of income since I purchased it back in Extremely thorough, content-rich, and well-organized. Simpson, Oregon Does this happen every day? Are you tired of constantly hearing the stories of other investors raking in tens of thousands of dollars on every single deal? Additional free audios, materials and current new reports!
Order online safely and securely. How to become the expert in your area. The best insider secrets other experts "dance around" until you pay them thousands of dollars! These will propel your success in this business! How to structure every deal right so you make more on each deal and eliminate your risk! How and where to obtain quick financing so you don't have to use any of your own money or credit.
How to increase your investment resources and leverage by up to 5X in a matter of minutes. How and where to research properties effectively to save hundreds of hours in time. How to tell immediately if the property is a good deal so you can act fast with confidence!
Secrets for marketing your properties effectively so you can turn them quickly. This is the ONLY way you should do business! How to wipe out rejection. You'll actually want more people to say "no" than "yes"! How to find the best deals quicker than your competition. All applicable forms and agreements with filled out examples are included You Will Also Learn: How and where to find thousands of buyers without depending on local connections for wholesaling.
How to find the best wholesaling real estate deals so you can get them closed quickly. How to appeal to buyers so you will get referrals and repeat business that multiplies. How to create a property summary to get the largest profit for every flip and assignment you do. The critical questions to ask potential buyers that makes all the difference. What to include in the contracts and agreements to make sure the deal works every time How to eliminate wasting time with tire kickers to get the deals done How to structure the deals correctly from start to finish to generate quick cash without risk The tips and costly pitfalls to avoid when flipping houses, real estate wholesaling and doing assignments.
How to protect yourself using a Land Trust, plus additional options and how to structure yourself correctly. What NEEDS to be included in your contracts now to safely avoid issues that could cost you thousands! The quickest way to attract qualified, motivated sellers. The 3 different ways you can make money with Sandwich Lease Options and how set up the whole deal to make more profit with less money, no credit, and without owning the asset!
How create residual income through lease options without risk. The 4 steps to doing a lease option most effectively and safely. How to make more money with lease options regardless of market conditions!
Marketing secrets that produce proven results for each phase of the foreclosure process. These are also included How to build trust with these distressed owners quickly by asking the right questions scripts are provided.
What forms and agreements to use and have them at your free disposal How to profit from foreclosure auctions so you don't lose your shirt. How to protect yourself as a buyer so you never get stuck in a bad deal A systematic approach to creating maximum profits through each phase of the foreclosure process. The date stamps were not included in the subsequent movie versions of these series, and these dates have since been contradicted by works not written by Yoshiyuki Tomino.
For years, it was confusing to pinpoint exactly which A. In the Universal Century chronology, the last dated entry of the AD system was AD, leading to the common misconception that UC followed immediately afterwards.
A few early unofficial sources even listed UC as AD or even , using bad math , but current official materials indicate the presence of a gap of years between the AD and UC calendar systems.
Therefore, the first year of the Universal Century calendar is deduced on the official Gundam website in North America as being , , , , , or possibly later, meaning UC would correspond to , , , , , or later. This would also explain the single-year gap.
Since the mids, new official Universal Century chronologies have avoided the inclusion of AD dates before UC The following below are series of U. Sign In Don't have an account?