Essay Abstract

Demonstrating the fundamental relationship of Archimedes' constant (ПЂ), Euler's number (e), Pythagoras' constant (в€љ2), The imaginary unit (i), along with why we exist at 1,1,1,dt not 0,0,0,t

Author Bio

Richard is a retired logician with too much time on this hands

Download Essay PDF File

12 days later

Hi Richard, I'm not sure your piece really qualifies as an essay. I see that it is succinct and I expect you hope entirely self explanatory. However I would have liked just a little guidance on how to fully appreciate the presentation. I'm not sure in what way, or rather what it means that there is a relationship between the constants that can be put on a graph. You mention a set representation but that's not what you show, I like the, (probably paraphrasing) 'it's not where you are but how you came in that is important. As that seems to tie in with momentum, and things like wave motion.I can't help feeling that'simple teaching guide to maths and science' is not an accurate description -or I just don't get it, sorry, Georgina

    Apologies, I didn't complete my chain of thought. I'm not sure in what way the relationship between the constants that can be put on a graph is itself fundamental. Is an aggregate of fundamental constants itself fundamental or just an arrangement? In other words I don't understand the fundamental significance of there being a relationship between the constants that can be put on a graph. Kind regards, Georgina

    Hi Georgina,

    I a sorry that I have been les than clear and I do realise that I will need to expand what I have written. Much of the thought processes that got to where I am now need to be explained better so that others may follow the logic

    Oops, Pressed return my mistake

    The basic premise comes from the core root of all maths and science - 0 and 1 and what they actually mean and represent

    The number line created by adding together as a set the natural number and the harmonic numbers, that is 1,2,3.... and 1/2,1/3.... is determined by the x * y = 1

    of the equivalent x = f(x)

    This line does not, except by the exception rules around times and dived by 0 does not contain 0, only the diagonal line drawn by the add/subtract line goes though 0.

    So we have all multiply/divide numbers on the curve and can also represent all number but adding in the 0 as well of the add/subtract line.

    This is what the diagrams display. They also explain that because sign (i.e. direction) is a choice not a fact as singed numbers and magnitude and also sign, the two pieces need to be dealt with separately and, therefore, sqrt(-1) is not an illegal operation.

    This and much more comes from the above. I am certain that I can put it much better but I needed to get a marker/pace holder out there

    I am sorry if this has led to confusion

      As to the constants referred to, that then comes from looking at solely the space between 0 and 1. All equations can have an x and a 1/x alternative in display

      So all my work is done inside the 1/x space and that is inside the square/circle quadrant in the diagrams.

      I think that the rest then follows as detailed explanations from there.

      20 days later

      Hi Richard Linsley Hood

      You gave a really simple teaching guide to maths and science, Starting with sqrt(2), I request you please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

      Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :

      -No Isotropy

      -No Homogeneity

      -No Space-time continuum

      -Non-uniform density of matter, universe is lumpy

      -No singularities

      -No collisions between bodies

      -No blackholes

      -No warm holes

      -No Bigbang

      -No repulsion between distant Galaxies

      -Non-empty Universe

      -No imaginary or negative time axis

      -No imaginary X, Y, Z axes

      -No differential and Integral Equations mathematically

      -No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to GR on any condition

      -No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models

      -No many mini Bigbangs

      -No Missing Mass / Dark matter

      -No Dark energy

      -No Bigbang generated CMB detected

      -No Multi-verses

      Here:

      -Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies

      -Newton's Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way

      -All bodies dynamically moving

      -All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium

      -Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe

      -Single Universe no baby universes

      -Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only

      -Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..

      -UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass

      -Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step

      -Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering

      -21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet

      -Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy

      -Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.

      - Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true....Have a look at

      http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.html

      I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information........

      Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.

      In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from "http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ "

      I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied

      Best

      =snp

      5 days later

      Dear Richard Linsley Hood,

      Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

      All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

      Only the truth can set you free.

      Joe Fisher, Realist

      6 days later

      Richard,

      That was beautiful in it's simplicity, geometrical connectivity and indeed importance, as I'm certain there is more to find. How's your physics?

      Closely related; I found a direct link between Pythogoras' theorem and a classical derivation of QM (yes, 'impossible' I know). If you're interested see my essay last year. fqXi 2016

      And the resultant completed ontology for classic QM and unification with Special Relativity this year (I hope you find some value or connections and agree it's worth a max!) As a mathematician you may also like the matching code and plot in Declan Trail's essay.

      If you have any mathematicians observations on either they'd be welcome.

      Well done for yours. It may have got a max from me if you'd turned it into an 'essay' with some background, explanation and discussion on possible implications, yet I think it's far to important and elegant to languish near the bottom so I think a Len Goodman (seven) is in order. I think you should also try a short journal paper as unfortunately it'll just get buried and lost here.

      Well done and very best of luck.

      Peter

        p.s.

        I forgot to raise the space between 0 an 1. I've identified that the 'excluded middle' is the reason all logical systems end in paradox, and proposed a new 'Law of the REDUCING MIDDLE' which is a sine/cos curve or Gaussian / Bayesian distribution, equivalent to QM.

        Any thoughts?

        P

        Hi Peter,

        That was all thrown together in a bit of a rush really and it could well do with a much better presentation.

        The problems that it uncovers are much more basic - I have begun to describe them as 'unary maths'.

        The below 2 diagrams may make this clearer/more confusing.

        There is a range from 0 to Infinity in that diagram - just not in the way you would expect to see.

        The various set groupings are now ordered correctly I believe.

        That has significant ramifications as I am sure you will see.

        RichardAttachment #1: Number-systems.svg.pngAttachment #2: Number-systems_reordered.gif

        Dear Richard,

        You give very important ideas, eidosis and conclusion. Is the truth (the structure of the "beginning") to be drawn?

        Yours faithfully,

        Vladimir

        Thank you very much, Richard! My highest score is your ideas and conclusion.

        Yours faithfully,

        Vladimir

        6 days later

        Dear Mr. "retired logician", are you retired?

        Nice expression of what is obvious.

        The "obvious" is not worthy of any applause.

        For the originality of interpreting what is obvious, "chapeau!"

        Silviu