ms.srki Posted February 5, 2013 #1 Share Posted February 5, 2013 See a picture that represents the relations of the two triangles https://docs.google....motdThHV0E/edit what is a "?" 3?3=3 3?3=4 3?3=5 3?3=6 3?3=7 3?3=8 3?3=9 3?3=10 3?3=12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rlyeh Posted February 5, 2013 #2 Share Posted February 5, 2013 The picture doesn't load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daughter of the Nine Moons Posted February 5, 2013 #3 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Here you go Ryleh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithisco Posted February 6, 2013 #4 Share Posted February 6, 2013 See a picture that represents the relations of the two triangles https://docs.google....motdThHV0E/edit what is a "?" 3?3=3 3?3=4 3?3=5 3?3=6 3?3=7 3?3=8 3?3=9 3?3=10 3?3=12 What are the Boundary Conditions for "?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms.srki Posted February 6, 2013 Author #5 Share Posted February 6, 2013 What are the Boundary Conditions for "?" there is no solution in the current mathematics : 1.3+[0]3=3 2.3+[1]3=4 3.3+[2]3=5 4. 3+[3]3=6 or 3+3=6 5.33Rd1(6)d2(7)+3=7 6.33Rd1(6)d2(8 )+3=8 7.33Rd1(6)d2(9)+3=9 8.33Rd1(6)d2(10)+3=10 9.33Rd1(6)d2(12)+3=12 (1,2,3,4) - there are several types of addition in the set N (5,6,7,8,9) - that there are dynamic numbers, where this can add Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Posted February 6, 2013 #6 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Your link worked fine for me. But how do you come up with that sequence for the triangles in that order? And is there meant to be a significance to '9' being Star of Davidish? I don't understand what you're trying to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepulchrave Posted February 6, 2013 #7 Share Posted February 6, 2013 there is no solution in the current mathematics : 1.3+[0]3=3 2.3+[1]3=4 3.3+[2]3=5 4. 3+[3]3=6 or 3+3=6 5.33Rd1(6)d2(7)+3=7 6.33Rd1(6)d2(8 )+3=8 7.33Rd1(6)d2(9)+3=9 8.33Rd1(6)d2(10)+3=10 9.33Rd1(6)d2(12)+3=12 (1,2,3,4) - there are several types of addition in the set N (5,6,7,8,9) - that there are dynamic numbers, where this can add Sure there is. You are just defining a two-variable function f(x,y) = x(y + 1). Except instead of using sensible, numeric expressions for "y", you are are using a somewhat childish (and inconsistent) pictorial expression. And to what end? I wasn't aware that making sequences of integers was a problem for mathematics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms.srki Posted February 7, 2013 Author #8 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Sure there is. You are just defining a two-variable function f(x,y) = x(y + 1). Except instead of using sensible, numeric expressions for "y", you are are using a somewhat childish (and inconsistent) pictorial expression. And to what end? I wasn't aware that making sequences of integers was a problem for mathematics. What is 3 (first triangle) and 3 (second triangle), what is the solution of their relationship (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12) ,in your function , or the general form a?b=c , what (a,?,b,c) in your function , --------------------- 1 Mathematics Space We'll tell mathematical space with two initial geometric object that can not prove. 1.Natural geometric object - natural along . 2.Real geometric objects - real alongs . 1.1 Natural along In the picture there is a natural geometric object along (AB), it has a beginning (A) and end (B ) - this property natural long'll call point. 1.2 The basic rule Two (more) natural longer are connected only with points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepulchrave Posted February 7, 2013 #9 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I see. Is this thread just a rehash of something previously discussed (and dismissed!) in these forums? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badeskov Posted February 8, 2013 #10 Share Posted February 8, 2013 I see. Is this thread just a rehash of something previously discussed (and dismissed!) in these forums? Pretty much, Sepu, pretty much. Cheers, Badeskov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Weapon Posted February 8, 2013 #11 Share Posted February 8, 2013 NyI HaTe Math!!!! NYAAYAYAAAH!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms.srki Posted February 8, 2013 Author #12 Share Posted February 8, 2013 I see. Is this thread just a rehash of something previously discussed (and dismissed!) in these forums? NO - Do you know the answer or not -------------- 2 Natural Mathematics 2.1,along , one-way infinite along the (semi-line) "1" "1"-from any previous evidence (axioms), a new proof Theorem-Two (more) natural longer merge points in the direction of the first AB longer natural. EVIDENCE - Natural long (AB, BC) are connected - we get along AC. Natural long (AB, BC, CD) are connected - we get along AD. Natural long (AB, BC, CD, DE) are connected - we get along AE. ... Natural long (AB, BC, CD, DE, ...) are connected - getting the sim- measurement along the infinite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted February 8, 2013 #13 Share Posted February 8, 2013 What is the actual point of this? Is it not possible for you to provide an abstract, an executive summary (or any sort of summary), preferably done by someone with a good grasp of English? Pushing this stuff through Google translate is giving us nothing but gibberish, and to be honest, it looks as though you just keep doing this, over and over and over, at forums across the web, eg: here and here... Your earlier thread here was CLOSED because you refused to make any attempt to properly discuss your incomprehensible 'set theory' or whatever the heck it is.. As was pointed out there, this isn't your blog - it's a discussion forum. I'm guessing you are trying to say that current mathematics does not express something in the way that you wish it to. What is the 'something'? Why is it deficient? What is better about your system? How do you address the fact that you are using nomenclature that is used in mathematics for different purposes - on the other thread you refused to even acknowledge that your method was incompatible with other accepted mathematical conventions - if you cannot address that, it is worthless. And to be specific about this thread... Q 1. Why the triangles? Why triangles in different colours? Why different shaped triangles? Why use a question mark - is that supposed to be a single constant, an expression, a variable, or is it something else entirely? Q 2. In other words, is there a 'legend'? Please post it with your proper summary. In your second posting: Q 3. What do the square brackets [] designate - is that a numeric set/matrix of some kind, a function? Q 4. Why does item 4 have an 'or'? Q 5. Why have you used subscript, and what does it specify? Q 6. What is Rd, what is d? Q 7. What do the round brackets () specifiy? I'm almost embarrassed to have to ask that last question, but the way that symbols are being used seemingly randomly, I have no faith in what I am looking at. If you are planning to revolutionise something, or even just criticise it or offer a supposedly shorter methodology, you need to at least learn the proper existing nomenclature, and then address any conflicts you introduce (eg using symbols or terminology that is used for something different in current maths). I'm afraid all I see up there is close to incomprehensible. And if you don't clearly state your case.. well, you get this (and the other) thread.. By the way, please do not answer with your usual reams of incomprehensible 'maths' or the frequent: please calculated {sic} Z÷(10^n)=? ,and then we'll continue to talk I know exactly what that means, and it doesn't help your case. But you are making that case, so the onus is on you to make it comprehensible and also answer the questions. BTW, I think we can cut this short - the answer is 42. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms.srki Posted February 8, 2013 Author #14 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Q 1. Why the triangles? Why triangles in different colours? Why different shaped triangles? Why use a question mark - is that supposed to be a single constant, an expression, a variable, or is it something else entirely? can be any polygon , place to see the connection (color) , Can I ask what it is (?) If you know the answer Q 4. Why does item 4 have an 'or'? 3 + [3] 3 = 3, 3 +3 = 3, can be both, first by my math, the other is at the present mathematics, and both are true else when the time comes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted February 8, 2013 #15 Share Posted February 8, 2013 can be any polygon , place to see the connection (color) , Can I ask what it is (?) If you know the answer 3 + [3] 3 = 3, 3 +3 = 3, can be both, first by my math, the other is at the present mathematics, and both are true else when the time comes That's it? That's your response to all my (quite reasonable) questions? You ignore most of them, ask a question rather than simply answer, and then give a WRONG example? Good Grief. The "3+[3] 3 = 3" business is particularly ridiculous and WRONG - First up, even though this was supposed to be a clarification, YOU GOT IT WRONG, despite it being your own example. Look at it again - don't you mean "3+[3] 3 = 6 "..????? Because that's what you told us earlier - it equals SIX, not three. AND you use a non-standard nomenclature with NO good reason, it is much longer and completely unjustified. So I think we'll just stick to the good ole 3+3=6. 3+[3] 3 = 3 just doesn't work for me. Let me point out that I tried to help you - I asked simple questions, and also requested you give a proper summary and stop simply repeating the same stuff over and over (clearly without even checking what you write or how it got translated). You didn't do any of that, so it is clear that you are not interested in helping anyone understand what you are trying to do - you just want to post this incomprehensible, ill-thought out, ill-conceived, un-checked and error-laden dreck as widely as you can. You are no mathematician, and you are no teacher. You may be quite surprised to know that I'm pretty sure I know where you were heading with this (by looking at clues you have given out at other forums), but your presentation of it is so hideously awful, you will never get anywhere. Get help from a decent mathematician. I'll let others comment further - I won't bother reporting you for what is essentially spam, as I think you will ensure that yourself by anything further you post. I won't be back. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepulchrave Posted February 9, 2013 #16 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I won't be back. I don't blame you for not wanting to return to this thread, but thanks for your rebuttals! (Of all the branches of mathematics, finite maths really seems to attracts the crazies, eh?) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted February 9, 2013 #17 Share Posted February 9, 2013 (edited) I don't blame you for not wanting to return to this thread, but thanks for your rebuttals! (Of all the branches of mathematics, finite maths really seems to attracts the crazies, eh?) Haha! I had to come back just for that response - thanks Sepulchrave - but you should get the credit as you were one of the first to spot where he was trying to go, I think.. BTW, I've seen quite a few of your posts scattered around - impressive! I'm very glad folks like you are here, to help pretenders like me.. :D Edited February 9, 2013 by Chrlzs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms.srki Posted February 9, 2013 Author #18 Share Posted February 9, 2013 AND you use a non-standard nomenclature with NO good reason, it is much longer and completely unjustified. for terms that exist in the current math I introduced a notation ..... 2.2 Numeral along, numeric point "2.1" Theorem-character mark points on the one-way infinite long (A, B, C, ...), replace the labels {(0), (0.1), ..., (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 ), ...} which are set circular and positionally. Proof - is obtained by numerical along which the numerical point of {(0,00,000, 0000, ...), (0,1,10,11,100,101, ...), ..., (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, 12, ...), ...}. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms.srki Posted February 10, 2013 Author #19 Share Posted February 10, 2013 You are no mathematician, TEST to see if you are creative or reproduced mathematician -plane geometry what you know -the sum of the interior angles of a triangle is 180° question -in any triangle the sum of the interior angles greater than 180° ? all of you will say this is impossible, in my next appearance will see that it is possible ----------------------- 2.3 Natural numbers "2.2" Theorem - There is a relationship (length) between Point in numeric (0) and all points along the numerical. Proof - Value (length) numeric point (0) and numerical point (0) the number 0 Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (1) the number o1 Ratio (required) numeric point (0) and numeric item (2) is the number 2 Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (3) is the number 3 Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (4) is the number 4 ... Set - all the possibilities given theorem. The set of natural numbers N = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12, ...}. __________ Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics) Set - Axiom Natural numbers -Axiom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted February 10, 2013 #20 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This would be better suited to a blog, mathematical notes alone are not enough to constitute a viable discussion. Closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts