I am pretty sure my theory on how genius's are made is correct

Einstein excelled in math.

This is gibberish.

Everything I stated in that post regarding math is true.

1} Einstein was not that good with math,

ergo he got Riemann to help him with the complex trigonometric math.

2} Einsteins wife was probably better at math than him.

I made two differrent statements;

1} regarded scientific evidence, ergo truth and fact,

......that you do not accept the #1 is you lack of knowledge. Drop the ego and search for truth.

2} the other involved speculations by McKenna

That you address #2 not as not seperate consideration from #1 more evidence your ego-protection mode kicking in. Sad :--(

"metaphysica-1, mind/intellect/concepts"

This is gibberish. I discern no meaning or sense from it.

This is gibberish.

Einstein was very good with math. Arguably, he was better at math than science.

That would be an interesting feat since Riemann died over a decade before Einstein was born.

Maybe, since she also a mathematician, but there is no evidence to support this. Her contributions to Einstein's own work is disputed and she doesn't appear to have any of her own work that stands out.

I specifically an referring to statements like this: "metaphysica-1, mind/intellect/concepts" This is gibberish. I discern no meaning or sense from it.

Einstein was very good with math. Arguably, he was better at math than science.

Not relative to the math he needed done to help with his gravity concerns and again,

I said probably not as good as his wife.

That would be an interesting feat since Riemann died over a decade before Einstein was born.

That is the info I recall reading many years ago. I may have the name wrong.  took all of the info at face value when I read it. There were maths needed to complete his thoughts of gavity and curvature of spacetime that he did not have ability do. That is what I read then.  If I find time will try to find specific info for.

Maybe, since she also a mathematician, but there is no evidence to support this. Her contributions to Einstein's own work is disputed and she doesn't appear to have any of her own work that stands out.

I dont know for sure one way or other. Again I would have to find time to research that specific.  What I recall was it was someone --if not Riemann--, that he had to get to assist or do the more complex trigonometic maths.

I specifically an referring to statements like this: "metaphysica-1, mind/intellect/concepts" This is gibberish. I discern no meaning or sense from it.

1} so  you are not disputing the facts of magic mushrooms inducing the creation of new brain cells in adults, as I stated,

2} you need to reference a dictionary for all four words and instead of taking a snob stance.

....2a} metaphysical is in dictionary and meta = beyond........that you cannot grasp beyond the physical is your refusal to play fair --i.e. playing  snobbish mind game sad :--(

....2b}  using any enumberation  method is common in dictionaries and a method for makng clear distinction between multiple definitions, ergo that you pretend any enumeration that you do not approve of, is more evidence of unfair, snobbish mind game on your part,

3} use a few dictionarys and learn what mind is and know that,  you will find defintions that place mind outside of aka beyond the physical,

4} intellect is obviously associated with mind, and again, your refusal to accept these truths is just snobbish protection of your ego,

5} concepts are in dictionary, and that you cannot associate concepts with intellect, mind, and metaphysical, is more ego based snob speaking to protect acknowleding that, you do to know exactly what I mean, and that my phrasing is valid, contrary to your egos defense of self as a unspoken 'I know better than you' type attitude.

You said Einstein was not good at math. That is false.

Which is either false or baseless. Your pick.

Okay, so then it's false.

So either false or baseless.

I neither accept nor reject the assertion.

Enumeration of definitions of an entry is common, yes.

Embedding references to specific enumerations in normal text isn't common.

Especially when you don't specific which dictionary you are referring to; different dictionaries order their entries differently.

I know what the individual words mean.

What I don't understand is what you mean when you jam them together with slashes and jam them into a sentence willy nilly.

It is meaningless and nonsensical.

I've gone round and round with you before. Adding numbers and joining words by slashes makes your statements nonsensical. Don't bother replying to me if you don't intend to speak clearly or explicitly define what you mean by this unique notation. Or you could just write like a normal person.

The Brain Trauma Foundation