Hello...
More precision of my philosophy of what is beauty and more..
I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
Here is more precision of my definition of what is beauty, read it again:
I think i am smart, and i think i can define beauty with my fluid
intelligence as the following:
Beauty comes from both order and harmony, and i think that beauty is
"order" that is pleasant to the human senses, but this order that is
pleasant of beauty is an arrangement or disposition according to a
particular sequence, pattern, or method, and i think an order that is
pleasant is an arrangement or disposition according to a particular
sequence, pattern, or method that is more perfect or much more perfect
or perfect, so when you have disorder that is unpleasant for the human
senses, so it is not beautiful, so when you look at a circle it is an
order that is pleasant to look at, this is why a circle is beautiful.
More of my philosophy about universal Love and beauty..
I think i am smart, and i think i am a wise type of person,
Now i can ask the following philosophical questions:
Does Love is subjective ?
Does Beauty is subjective ?
Here is my answer:
I think i am smart, and i will say that you have to know how to measure
it, so you have to know how to "prioritize" by weights of importance,
i mean that that so that to know about beauty, there is two ways of
doing it, first there is the inferior way of doing it by looking at
beauty superficially , and it becomes an a not exact appearance and a
not so good measure, and there is the second way that is like scientific
and it is to measure beauty with our smartness, by prioritizing and say
that the smartests and wise persons among us have to measure
beauty and Love and know if we can calling them beauty and Love and if
we can accept them as beauty and Love, so then by measuring it this way
with smartness and wisdom we can then say that Love and beauty don't
become subjective, and as you have just noticed yesterday i said that
Love looks like artificial intelligence, since it needs an action that
merits a reward (as Love), and you can know more about it by reading my following new proverb:
Here is my new proverb:
"We can ask of from where comes the attachment of Love between
a mother and her son ? so i think i am smart and i will say
that it comes from the fact that it is like a reward, that the son
is loving or is being the son and the mother is giving a good reward
like giving him more security or giving him food to eat, so as you are
noticing that this rule can be applied to consumerism, since
you can use the same rule with your consumers in a smart
way, for example by giving the impression to your consumers that
you take care of there security by learning them with easy or the like,
and then the consumers will love you much more and will be attracted by
you."
So then we can say much more precisely that Love needs an action and
its reward (as Love), but there is individual love that is like a
process of local optimization and there is universal Love that is a
process of global optimization in a society that also can comes with a
"margin" that makes us also be a level of tolerance on this or that
action. And notice with me that it looks like the optimization of
particle swarm optimization (PSO) in artificial intelligence, since the
local optimization of PSO is like the process of individual Love, and
the global optimization of PSO is like the process of the global Love in
a society, and of course particle swarm optimization (PSO) in artificial intelligence is like Reinforcement Learning in AI(artificial
intelligence), since in PSO in artificial intelligence we have the
actions of the members of the population of PSO that searches for the
optimal value that are found that are then rewarded by making them the
values that optimizes further and further towards the global optimum.
And here is my thoughts about artificial intelligence:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/P9OTDTiCZ44
And speaking about beauty, here is my beautiful poems of Love, read them
all carefully:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/D4qlWWW-o1s
More of my philosophy about scalability and Gödel's incompleteness
theorem and more..
Gödel's incompleteness theorem in mathematics only applies to
sufficiently strong systems. It is not applicable to systems like
Presburger arithmetic and first-order logic.
But FOL(First-order logic) in mathematics is not all-powerful by any
means, and it has
the following disadvantages:
1- It has no concept of time
2- hard to do arithmetic
3- Can't do beliefs --"If he believes this then surely he must believe
that" is often wrong in everyday life; also surprising mathematical
results.
4- Can't have variables with set values: "All functions are boring"
turns out to be a 2nd-order, not 1st-order statement.
So first-order logic is not scalable, so i think we can not avoid the
problem of Gödel's incompleteness theorem in mathematics, but notice
that the Gödel's incompleteness theorem in mathematics says the following:
"For any such consistent formal system, there will always be statements
about natural numbers that are true, but that are unprovable within the
system. The second incompleteness theorem, an extension of the first,
shows that the system cannot demonstrate its own consistency."
So notice carefully that it says that there will always exist in those
systems statements that are "true" that we can not prove, so then
we can not demonstrate the consistency of those systems, but
i think that those systems remain "really" "useful" for us.
More of my philosophy about civilization and specialization of our today world..
Here is my new proverb:
"I think what is happening in the West and other parts of the world,
it is that individuals are becoming too stupid, since it is the way of specialization that is required, since the individuals are specialized
in there jobs so that to enhance much more the efficiency and
productivity as a society or as group, but this specialization is a
weakness that is making individuals too stupid, but we can become smart
working as a group or as a society using the tools of internet etc."
I think i am smart and here is my new proverb:
"The most important disadvantage of education today, it is that we are
learning the students, but we are neglecting to efficiently learn to
students how to learn."
This is one of the basis of my philosophy below, and read about it
in my following thoughts:
I think i am smart, and i think you can be more confident with me, since
i think i am not too specialized(Since you have to read my below proverb
about it), since here is what i have done:
1- I have gotten my university level Diploma in Microelectronics and
informatics.
2- I have studied 1 year of applied mathematics at university of
Montreal Canada and i have succeeded it.
3- I have also studied operational research
4- I have also studied network administration and i have worked
as a network administrator
5- I am also an inventor of many scalable algorithms and algorithms
and i have invented some powerful software tools for parallelism.
6- I have studied more web software development with Perl, Javascript
and CGI and FCGI and ODBC using SQL etc. and i have worked in the
past as a web software developer.
7- I have worked as a software developer consultant
etc. etc.
You can read more about my education and my way of doing here:
And here is more proof of the fact that i have invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/V9Go8fbF10k
I invite you to look at the following beautiful photo Gunnersbury
Writing Desk in a beautiful wood:
https://www.wayfair.ca/furniture/pdp/astoria-grand-gunnersbury-writing-desk-astg6385.html
So i think i am smart, and when i look at the above photo of this
beautiful Gunnersbury Writing Desk made of beautiful wood, it is
like an efficient philosophy for me, since i am seeing the pattern with
my fluid intelligence, since having this Gunnersbury Writing Desk in a beautiful wood, it is like living near the beautiful of the mother
nature, and it is like an abstraction or it is like an efficient simple language, since it is like we are bringing the beautiful of mother
nature like a beautiful tree made of beautiful wood into our house, so
it makes our house really beautiful and it makes us more happy, here is
some photos of them:
https://www.thecoolist.com/most-beautiful-trees/
So this kind of philosophy is like using smartly a "lever" to move a
heavy or firmly fixed load, since as you notice that when you have this beautiful Gunnersbury Writing Desk made of beautiful wood, you are not
bringing all a beautiful forest of beautiful trees made of wood or all a beautiful tree made of wood of mother into your house, so it permits you
to like easily lift your problems and solve them and be much more happy,
and i think it is the right philosophy, since so that to be much more
happy you have to know how to efficiently find those kind of simple
levers that permits you to be much more happy and use them smartly, and
here is another lever that can be made simple that you can use smartly,
read about it in my following proverb:
"Resourcefulness is one of the most important things, and it is a skill,
and the good news is: this skill can be learned and mastered, and resourcefulness is attained only when we combine the resourceful mindset
and skills, so we have to filter out some of the most useful resources
that help us, and resourcefulness is also to know who/what to look for
and what to ask, and when ressourcefulness is attained this becomes an
engine that permits you to have hope and to be energetic and to be
positive in doing what you are doing, since resourcefulness also permits
to easy the jobs for you."
So i think when you understand this smart philosophy you will understand
that using an efficient simple language is also very efficient.
More of my philosophy about technology and mother nature..
I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and i think that i am also an
smart artist, and i invite you to look and listen at the following video
of a music of Jean-Michel Jarre:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSIMVnPA994
So i think i am a smart artist, and i am noticing a smart pattern with
my fluid intelligence in the above music and video of Jean-Michel Jarre,
so the pattern is that the above music of Jean-Michel Jarre is not
complete detachment from the beauty of mother nature, since he is using
a mixture of the beautiful of mother nature(like the wind or the water
as electronic sounds) and the beautiful of electronic music that is
detached from the mother nature, and i think that humans needs and
require the two, the beautifulness of mother nature and the
beautifulness of electronic music or digital photos and such that are
detached from the beautiful of mother nature, so the beautiful of mother
nature is essential for humans, i will give you a quick example so that
to notice it:
I invite you to listen at the following beautiful arab song from Algeria:
Ch'hal aâyit mesbar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS6KG2ybOB0&list=RDzS6KG2ybOB0&start_radio=1
And notice how in this beautiful arab music they are using old
music instruments that give beautiful sounds and music that comes from
the beautiful of mother nature or that are much nearer from the mother
nature than electronic music sounds, so then i think that this arab
music and song is like the beautiful of mother nature. And as
i have just said that the beautiful of mother nature is essential for
humans, so i think that there is a difference between my following poems
of Love and mathematics, since mathematics is like far away from the
beautiful of mother nature, it is like robots, but my poems of Love are
like the beautiful of mother nature, here they are, read them all carefully:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/D4qlWWW-o1s
And about extremist ideologies like white supremacism, i invite you to
read my following thoughts about them:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/mjE_2AG1TKQ
More of philosophy about Democracy and the Evolutionary Design methodology..
I will make a logical analogy between software projects and Democracy,
first i will say that because of the today big complexity of software
projects, so the "requirements" of those complex software projects are
not clear and a lot could change in them, so this is
why we are using an Evolutionary Design methodology with different tools
such as Unit Testing, Test Driven Development, Design Patterns,
Continuous Integration, Domain Driven Design, but we have to notice
carefully that an important thing in Evolutionary Design methodology is
that when those complex software projects grow, we have first to
normalize there growth by ensuring that the complex software projects
grow "nicely" and "balanced" by using standards, and second we have to
optimize growth of the complex software projects by balancing between
the criteria of the easy to change the complex software projects and the performance of the complex software projects, and third you have to
maximize the growth of the complex software projects by making the most
out of each optimization, and i think that by logical analogy we can
notice that in Democracy we have also to normalize the growth by not
allowing "extremism" or extremist ideologies that hurt Democracy, and we
have also to optimize Democracy by for example well balancing between "performance" of the society and in the Democracy and the "reliability"
of helping others like the weakest members of the society among the
people that of course respect the laws, and so that to understand more
my thoughts of my philosophy about Democracy, i invite you to read them
here:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/vlDWhmf-MIM
And about extremist ideologies like white supremacism, i invite you to
read my following thoughts about them:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/mjE_2AG1TKQ
More of my philosophy about entropy and about how morality is universal..
I think i am smart, and i am explaining below why morality is universal,
but as you have just noticed i have just said that so that to say
that morality is universal, it requires from us to know about the
requirements such as why to be a global world etc., so there must be a
level of consciousness, other than that i will make you feel and see
much more that morality is universal since i am seeing it:
So take for example the human imperfections or world imperfections,
i say that it is because we have those imperfections that also we have morality, and those imperfections causes entropy(A state of disorder and disorganization), this is why we have to be more and more perfection so
that to maintain order and so that to attain perfection of being much
more perfect or perfect, for example humans are working in there
everyday life so that to also maintain order or so that to become
perfection or much more perfection, and maintaining order is also that
we are perfectioning so that to not to become disorder.
More of my philosophy about why morality is universal..
I think i am a smart philosopher, and i will now explain why
morality is universal:
So take a look at the thing that we call "time", so you can naively look
at our everyday life and say that time is not relative, but
you can like Einstein analyse it and prove that time is relative,
and morality is the same, so when you naively look at it you will
think that morality is relative, since you can notice that for example
there is many countries with many laws and rules, but when you analyse
it you will notice that the goal of morality that we become perfect or
much more perfect pushes us forward towards more and more perfection
since we have to solve our problems such as our many imperfections, it
is also why morality is "progressive", so then the essence of morality
become that morality is progressing towards the goal that is that we
become perfect or much more perfect, so then the other details of
morality are abstracted, so then those acts of humans perfectioning or perfecting towards a much more perfect world or perfect world and that
are also codified as morality become that morality is universal, since
also we can take this essence of morality as the most important thing.
More of my philosophy about the superhuman of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche..
I think i am smart philosopher, and i will be more precise in my logical
proof of why the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche believed, like the
philosopher Spinoza, that morality is not universal, so notice carefully
how the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche has wanted to construct a new
type of man that is a superhuman in his view and this superhuman in the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche is a superhuman that has mastery over
his emotions and it is a superhuman who takes joy in simply existing, so
as you are noticing that the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is an
inferior philosopher since he wanted to apply the morality of the strong
to the morality of the weak in not wise manner, also you can
notice it more by him saying the following and recognizing that
there is different types of morals, and here is his saying:
"It is the will to power that must be expressed, not the morals of the
slaves or the weak."
That means in french:
"C'est la volonté de puissance qui doit s'exprimer, non
pas la morale des esclaves ou des faibles.",
So the above saying of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is a proof
that he recognized that there is different kinds of morals like the
morals of the slaves or the weak and morals of the strong humans or the
strong. Read more my following thoughts about it and about Stoicism and existentialism and about how i am explaining that the essence of
morality is universal:
More of my philosophy about the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and more..
I have just looked at the following video about:
NIETZSCHE - L'exaltation de la vie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeVVtxlg_oE
I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and i think that the
philosophy of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is not good, since
he says that: "C'est la volonté de puissance qui doit s'exprimer, non
pas la morale des esclaves ou des faibles.", that means in english: "It
is the will to power that must be expressed, not the morals of the
slaves or the weak.", and he said that it needs to construct a new man
that we call the superhuman, but I think that i am a philosopher that is
smart and i am understanding the philosophy of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, and i think that it is an inferior philosophy, because it
seeks to construct the superhumans from humans and this superhuman in
the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche is a superhuman that has mastery
over his emotions and it is a superhuman who takes joy in simply
existing, so as you are noticing that it is an inferior philosophy,
because how can you be able to take joy in simply existing ? so as you
are noticing it is illogical and it is as illogical as Stoicism(read my
below thoughts about Stoicism) and i think that it is a violent
philosophy as Stoicism, this is why the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsch
is a failure as Stoicism, and here is what i said about Stoicism:
More of my philosophy about my philosophy and about Stoicism and Existentialism..
I invite you to read this very interesting article about philosophy:
Why philosophers could be the ones to transform your 2020
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20200114-why-philosophers-could-be-the-ones-to-transform-your-2020
And notice that it says the following:
“The Stoics suggest that what’s most important in order to lead a good
life is internal rather than external. It’s about developing the right character, the right state of mind,”
I think i am a philosopher that is "smart", so i make you notice the
logical bug in the above saying about Stoicism, and it is that
developing the right character and the right state of the mind in
Stoicism needs the cultural side that also comes from the external
reality and hence from the "purpose" and the "meaning of life", and we
can notice that Stoicism is not so smart, because how can we develop self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions
and such without the necessary requirements that have to give enough
hope or a meaning of life that gives the necessary self-control and
fortitude? so this is why i think that Stoicism as a philosophy is a
failure, so what's about existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre ? Jean-Paul Sartre said that: "Existence precedes essence" or in
french: "L'existence précède l'essence", and it is the central claim of existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, but i think that
this claim is not so logical, since it is like a debate that asks the
question of: Wich is more important, the genetical side or cultural
side?, and we have to notice that the essence or nature of a human is
"not" enough and it needs for example a meaning of human life and a
purpose etc. so then notice that existentialism of Jean-Paul Sartre, and
like in absurdism of the philosopher Albert Camus, says that human life
is absurd, but here again my new philosophy says that human life is not
absurd, and read it below.
My philosophy about the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre and more..
I invite you to look at the following video about philosophy:
SARTRE - Le regard des autres
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJIM41TnDHI
I have just noticed by looking at the above video, that it is lacking,
since first you have to understand the following:
Jean-Paul Sartre said that: "Existence precedes essence" or in french: "L'existence précède l'essence", and it is the central claim of existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre.
But i think people are not understanding the philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre, since the functionality of our essence is also our genetics that predetermines to a certain level what is our existence, so the essence
that is our genetics is also important, but since the philosopher
Jean-Paul Sartre was a communist, he has wanted to give much more "hope"
by saying: "Existence precedes essence", and i think this also means that humans are by essence free, and this also means that the human nurture
is much more important than the human nature, but it is not truth, so i
think that Jean-Paul Sartre has made a big error by saying so. And
Jean-Paul Sartre has also accepted the views of the philosopher Albert
Camus about the absurdism of existence, but i am a philosopher and here
again i am not in accordance with it, since i say that human existence
is not absurd, and read my below thoughts to understand my philosophy:
How can you effectively "measure" how to appreciate human life ?
I think the most important thing is to know that we can measure it
relatively or absolutely, so wich one of the absolute or relative
measure is the right way of measuring ? so now you have to know that
i think that the meaning of human life can not be measured like
absolutely like was doing the philosopher Albert Camus since you will
start to say by measuring like absolutely that human life is "absurd",
and this is not good at all, so now you have to understand the very
basis of philosophy, that philosophy has to give you the will to survive
or the will to live, so then you logically notice that we can say that a
human is smart if he is smart relatively to the distribution of
smartness of humans or such, but if you start to measure it like
absolutely by saying that the smart human is not smart when you look at
all or measuring it by all the difficulties and constraints of our world
or of our universe, i think it is not the right way to do in philosophy,
since you have to give the will to people so that they survive and so
that they live, also you have to give a meaning to human life as
i am doing it in my philosophy(read about it below), so now i
can finally say that you are understanding the how to answer the
above philosophical question since you have to measure how
to appreciate human life "relatively" and "not" like absolutely by
looking at how our past humanity was much less advanced than our today
humanity etc. and so the other important thing is to also understand the
basis of my philosophy by reading it below:
I think that my philosophy is more smart, since in my philosophy
i am also explaining that the day permits to understand the night and
human life is like the alternance of the day and night that brings
beauty, since human life is difficulties and suffering that also permit
us to appreciate much more human life or that permits us to appreciate
much more our kind of civilization and i say in my philosophy that it
also gives more intensity to pleasures of life, so my philosophy doesn't
look like the other philosophies, so i invite you to holistically
understand my philosophy by carefully reading it here:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YZSYxV41-qI
And read my other thoughts of my philosophy here:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/8jzgRGMOEHs
More of my philosophy about the ideas of the philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche and the philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer and more..
I invite you to read the following article about the philosopher
Friedrich Nietzsche and the philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer:
The Ideas Of Friedrich Nietzsche
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ideas-friedrich-nietzsche-dr-marcel-pflug-mba
I think i am a smart philosopher, and i am noticing that the
philosophers Friedrich Nietzsche and Arthur Schopenhauer are inferior philosophers, and i will explain as following:
Notice in the above article the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche has a
problem with morality, and he thought, like the philosopher Spinoza,
that morality is not universal and he also thought that since for
example for the strong human the good becomes the brave, powerful, rich,
and strong, so he thought that the strong human will have the tendency
to discriminate the weak people, so then the philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche thought that morality was not working, but i think that the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was an inferior philosopher since i
think i am a philosopher that is smart and i am explaining that the
essence of morality is universal and progressive, read my thoughts below
about it to understand, and also i am saying that we have not to be
pessimistic as the philosophers Friedrich Nietzsche and Arthur
Schopenhauer, since i have just spoken about the value of specialization
that gives a self-esteem to the individuals of a society and i am
explaining in my below thoughts of my new philosophy how we have to be optimistic about human life, and i invite you to read my below thoughts
so that to understand:
More of my philosophy about universal Love and beauty..
I think i am smart, and i think i am a wise type of person,
Now i can ask the following philosophical questions:
Does Love is subjective ?
Does Beauty is subjective ?
Here is my answer:
I think i am smart, and i will say that you have to know how to measure
it, so you have to know how to "prioritize" by weights of importance,
i mean that that so that to know about beauty, there is two ways of
doing it, first there is the inferior way of doing it by looking at
beauty superficially , and it becomes an a not exact appearance and a
not so good measure, and there is the second way that is like scientific
and it is to measure beauty with our smartness, by prioritizing and say
that the smartests and wise persons among us have to measure
beauty and Love and know if we can calling them beauty and Love and if
we can accept them as beauty and Love, so then by measuring it this way
with smartness and wisdom we can then say that Love and beauty don't
become subjective, and as you have just noticed yesterday i said that
Love looks like artificial intelligence, since it needs an action that
merits a reward (as Love), and you can know more about it by reading my following new proverb:
Here is my new proverb:
"We can ask of from where comes the attachment of Love between
a mother and her son ? so i think i am smart and i will say
that it comes from the fact that it is like a reward, that the son
is loving or is being the son and the mother is giving a good reward
like giving him more security or giving him food to eat, so as you are
noticing that this rule can be applied to consumerism, since
you can use the same rule with your consumers in a smart
way, for example by giving the impression to your consumers that
you take care of there security by learning them with easy or the like,
and then the consumers will love you much more and will be attracted by
you."
So then we can say much more precisely that Love needs an action and
its reward (as Love), but there is individual love that is like a
process of local optimization and there is universal Love that is a
process of global optimization in a society that also can comes with a
"margin" that makes us also be a level of tolerance on this or that
action. And notice with me that it looks like the optimization of
particle swarm optimization (PSO) in artificial intelligence, since the
local optimization of PSO is like the process of individual Love, and
the global optimization of PSO is like the process of the global Love in
a society, and of course particle swarm optimization (PSO) in artificial intelligence is like Reinforcement Learning in AI(artificial
intelligence), since in PSO in artificial intelligence we have the
actions of the members of the population of PSO that searches for the
optimal value that are found that are then rewarded by making them the
values that optimizes further and further towards the global optimum.
And here is my thoughts about artificial intelligence:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/P9OTDTiCZ44
More of my philosophy about the too much individualism of the West..
I invite you to look at the following known psychologist that
is talking about self-esteem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f3qyNNtpQk
So i am smart and i am not in accordance with the psychologist in the
above video since he is saying that self-esteem comes from comparing
your value with the others in a society, but i think it is a too much individualistic definition, since the value of an individual of a
society comes also from the fact that the society also gives a certain
level of importance to its parts that are the individuals that
constitutes the society and that are specialized in this or that job,
and this "specialization" is also important for the society and it has a
value in a society, so then the individual has a value and importance in
a society that gives him a self-esteem.
More of my philosophy about beauty..
I will ask a philosophical question:
Is a beautiful women beautiful ?
So it depends on if you are a wise man type of person or not..
Since i think that you have not to rush in like a fool and think that
that the women that is beautiful is beautiful, since the wise man
says that it first needs "wisdom" so that to also appreciate beauty or
so that to appreciate pleasures of human life, so i think that the wise
man type of person is like the way, so read my following thoughts
so that to understand much more clearly:
Here is my other just new proverb:
"I think i am a wise type of person and i say that happiness comes from
an efficient way of thinking or from imagination, and not from reality
and not from pleasures of reality or pleasures of life, since reality
when you look at it from the more and more details, it comes with too
much imperfections, so the efficient way of thinking or of imagination
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)