Communiqués for Ark, et alia ("and others"); unified theory

R

Resistense

Guest
---Hello, Sir,

Is i' actually a number set, noted as a (defined?) variable, with potentially infinite values? And are "gravity waves" more like Faraday's lines of force, replacing "magnetic waves", and graphed on hyperbolic (either saddle conformer or Poincare (sic) disk) geometric space? Since Euclid's postulate about parallel lines meeting is addressed. "Collinear" line of force, electrogravitational waveform is not moving as orthogonal graphed 2-D propragation, but, say,more like positive and negative charge a la rotor/stator? circle dot? w/disconinuity bounded by circular asymptote driving constant curvature in motion? what do you think of expansion/contraction?

Is "computational math" actually a different branch of mathematics? Can you generate a random number from a machine, or must it be designed (preconditioned) by the syntax involved in programming operons (i need help with wave mechanics, too)?

Plz help with translation, write back if you please.

Thank you,
...

---Apologies,

*orthogonal graphed on 3-d axis to describe propagation,

Can we "re-square the circle", this way? 1:1:(rad)2 triangle, but not on a 2-d graph.

does acoustic/sound vibration need some special attention? or does that graph on polar graph outward, while EG wave is boring?

---Maybe settle one of Maxwell's pesky formulations on the other branch.---

---I do not mean first derivative of i, but that is also interesting. 1/2i^(-1/2) lol

I would be interested to hear about the sort of work you're doing, or if there are any insoluble problems you're stuck upon. May try and answer that with a search but would appreciate direction. i kind of assumed you don't actually like special relativity.

---The i noperable or i rreducible numbers, as the new multiplier, e=iv

---e=i'v

---and so what's inside those "+C" 's that appear like magic

---So the saddle conformer has that "equilateral" triangle in the center, with the moving, opposite polar charge going around the outside.

Like the enneagram in motion, tracing that arc 142857..., if you were to graph in flat.

if there were a "circular", unbounded(or ungraphable?) region, what I think of as the asymptote in the hyperbolic disk (a la the Fellow, Janos Bolyai, I think, described, in his geometry), that could be the, "dwelling of the primes", causing a conformation that is hard to map?

On Euler's integrated polar graph, we have the Poincare' disk layout with asymptotic region, as though it we took a derivative slice of the saddle conformer to measure. Integrating slices of Euler graphs could generate sections of saddle conformed regions.

As soon as you map an extension in Euler's graph, the conformational space takes on shape, and begins tracing arcs if you were to take integral summations.

---Also E. Beltrami.

---Dear Mr. Jadcyzyk,

I beg you to reply, at least to acknowledge receipt.

Thank you,
...

---Oh also I've found some of your publishing online.

Thank you.

---perhaps i' is the first derivative of infinity, from which we derive the (infinite?) set of sq.rts. of primes, which form the overarching number set, with the "real" numbers "quantized" in between sequential n*i'?





Any critiques or ideas (or formalization of notation) would be welcome.
 
Well Ark's SO(4,2) conformal group gravity can be pictured in a Poincare disk kind of way. It's actually more a Cartesian product of a Poincare space hypersphere and a Poincare time disk. The Enneagram would be the SO(6) root lattice as in my avatar. 1, 4, 2 (or powers of two 1, 2, 4) to 8, 5, 7 (or powers of two 8, 7=1+6, 5=3+2) would be more an inward to outward thing for my avatar aka a Kaluza-Klein internal space standard model bosons to physical spacetime gravitons thing physics-wise.
 
Last edited:
Well Ark's SO(4,2) conformal group gravity can be pictured in a Poincare disk kind of way. It's actually more a Cartesian product of a Poincare space hypersphere and a Poincare time disk. The Enneagram would be the SO(6) root lattice as in my avatar. 1, 4, 2 (or powers of two 1, 2, 4) to 8, 5, 7 (or powers of two 8, 7=1+6, 5=3+2) would be more an inward to outward thing for my avatar aka a Kaluza-Klein internal space standard model bosons to physical spacetime gravitons thing physics-wise.
What if there are no straight lines?

I think your geometering that follows that depends on it.
 
John G.,
Thanks for the link you gave way back when -- it leads str8 to a related pictogram idea.

So you all,
Will that give you a number string for your computer?
 
Well Ark's SO(4,2) conformal group gravity can be pictured in a Poincare disk kind of way. It's actually more a Cartesian product of a Poincare space hypersphere and a Poincare time disk. The Enneagram would be the SO(6) root lattice as in my avatar. 1, 4, 2 (or powers of two 1, 2, 4) to 8, 5, 7 (or powers of two 8, 7=1+6, 5=3+2) would be more an inward to outward thing for my avatar aka a Kaluza-Klein internal space standard model bosons to physical spacetime gravitons thing physics-wise.
I'm sorry. I don't know as much about this as you and Ark. I don't know if what I've posted is anything.

I thought this could remove time dependency from calculus, and particles from physics. Could just be wishful thinking, probably shouldn't have posted here.
 
I'm sorry. I don't know as much about this as you and Ark. I don't know if what I've posted is anything.

I thought this could remove time dependency from calculus, and particles from physics. Could just be wishful thinking, probably shouldn't have posted here.
Poincare disk modeling is certainly good for making things less linear time-like and particles are kind of just bookkeeping for different state changes; ultimately it's all information. Nothing wrong with posting here. The discussion here won't get as complicated as on Ark's Polish blog but there are also less people here familiar with this type of discussion.

 
Poincare disk modeling is certainly good for making things less linear time-like and particles are kind of just bookkeeping for different state changes; ultimately it's all information. Nothing wrong with posting here. The discussion here won't get as complicated as on Ark's Polish blog but there are also less people here familiar with this type of discussion.


From the link you provided, I can't seem to access this introductory paper: Conformal Theories, Curved Phase Spaces Relativistic Wavelets and the Geometry of Complex Domains, by R. Coquereaux and A. Jadczyk, Reviews in Mathematical Physics, Volume 2, No 1 (1990) 1-44 , at the QuantumFuture.net link [and it may be worth looking into as to why this link is being blocked] as my computer just tells me it's not private. Quantumfuture.net opens up, so I will look read on there, too.

Also I think this forum thread is worth a read: Mark Rodin's Vortex Based Mathematics , but bring your discernment.

[Edit: Conformal Theories, Curved Phase Spaces, Relativistic Wavelets and the Geometry of Complex Domains , scroll down and read-- no need to download thru goole or fb]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What do you think of the saddle-conformer pattern on a basketball?
 
---Hello, Sir,

Is i' actually a number set, noted as a (defined?) variable, with potentially infinite values? And are "gravity waves" more like Faraday's lines of force, replacing "magnetic waves", and graphed on hyperbolic (either saddle conformer or Poincare (sic) disk) geometric space? Since Euclid's postulate about parallel lines meeting is addressed. "Collinear" line of force, electrogravitational waveform is not moving as orthogonal graphed 2-D propragation, but, say,more like positive and negative charge a la rotor/stator? circle dot? w/disconinuity bounded by circular asymptote driving constant curvature in motion? what do you think of expansion/contraction?

Is "computational math" actually a different branch of mathematics? Can you generate a random number from a machine, or must it be designed (preconditioned) by the syntax involved in programming operons (i need help with wave mechanics, too)?

Plz help with translation, write back if you please.

Thank you,
...

---Apologies,

*orthogonal graphed on 3-d axis to describe propagation,

Can we "re-square the circle", this way? 1:1:(rad)2 triangle, but not on a 2-d graph.

does acoustic/sound vibration need some special attention? or does that graph on polar graph outward, while EG wave is boring?

---Maybe settle one of Maxwell's pesky formulations on the other branch.---

---I do not mean first derivative of i, but that is also interesting. 1/2i^(-1/2) lol

I would be interested to hear about the sort of work you're doing, or if there are any insoluble problems you're stuck upon. May try and answer that with a search but would appreciate direction. i kind of assumed you don't actually like special relativity.

---The i noperable or i rreducible numbers, as the new multiplier, e=iv

---e=i'v

---and so what's inside those "+C" 's that appear like magic

---So the saddle conformer has that "equilateral" triangle in the center, with the moving, opposite polar charge going around the outside.

Like the enneagram in motion, tracing that arc 142857..., if you were to graph in flat.

if there were a "circular", unbounded(or ungraphable?) region, what I think of as the asymptote in the hyperbolic disk (a la the Fellow, Janos Bolyai, I think, described, in his geometry), that could be the, "dwelling of the primes", causing a conformation that is hard to map?

On Euler's integrated polar graph, we have the Poincare' disk layout with asymptotic region, as though it we took a derivative slice of the saddle conformer to measure. Integrating slices of Euler graphs could generate sections of saddle conformed regions.

As soon as you map an extension in Euler's graph, the conformational space takes on shape, and begins tracing arcs if you were to take integral summations.

---Also E. Beltrami.

---Dear Mr. Jadcyzyk,

I beg you to reply, at least to acknowledge receipt.

Thank you,
...

---Oh also I've found some of your publishing online.

Thank you.

---perhaps i' is the first derivative of infinity, from which we derive the (infinite?) set of sq.rts. of primes, which form the overarching number set, with the "real" numbers "quantized" in between sequential n*i'?





Any critiques or ideas (or formalization of notation) would be welcome.
"

I beg you to reply, at least to acknowledge receipt.

Thank you,
...

---Oh also I've found some of your publishing online."

I acknowledge. But I know very little. And when I know something, I publish it. You have found my papers online, so you know all I know.

My most recent paper is here:


Thanks for asking!
 
Can you generate a random number from a machine
This is in fact one of the trikiest jobs to do in computing.
An actual random number has some qualities that are impossible to emulate nowadays, and this numbers are needed in fields like cryptograpy.
In the analogic world, the ramdom signals generators where always based on quantum phenomena, like the tuneling of a diode for white noise generation. Even today the hardware random number generators are based on that phenomena.
Roger Penrose did a fantastic job stressing the limitations of the computational systems, a wrote a book about that "The Emperor new mind", among other issues.
It seems the living beings have no that limits, therefore, our mind is NOT like a computer at all, this is a complete debased guess, taken as a fixed true.
 
"

I beg you to reply, at least to acknowledge receipt.

Thank you,
...

---Oh also I've found some of your publishing online."

I acknowledge. But I know very little. And when I know something, I publish it. You have found my papers online, so you know all I know.

My most recent paper is here:


Thanks for asking!

This is in fact one of the trikiest jobs to do in computing.
An actual random number has some qualities that are impossible to emulate nowadays, and this numbers are needed in fields like cryptograpy.
In the analogic world, the ramdom signals generators where always based on quantum phenomena, like the tuneling of a diode for white noise generation. Even today the hardware random number generators are based on that phenomena.
Roger Penrose did a fantastic job stressing the limitations of the computational systems, a wrote a book about that "The Emperor new mind", among other issues.
It seems the living beings have no that limits, therefore, our mind is NOT like a computer at all, this is a complete debased guess, taken as a fixed true.
More material to study. Thank you both, respectively, for your work.

In the brachistochrone curve of fastest descent toward gravity, the shape sums the rt. triangles' two legs. If the hypotenuse were actually this same shape, that could explain the equivalency found in rt. triangles.
 
This is in fact one of the trikiest jobs to do in computing.
An actual random number has some qualities that are impossible to emulate nowadays, and this numbers are needed in fields like cryptograpy.
In the analogic world, the ramdom signals generators where always based on quantum phenomena, like the tuneling of a diode for white noise generation. Even today the hardware random number generators are based on that phenomena.
Roger Penrose did a fantastic job stressing the limitations of the computational systems, a wrote a book about that "The Emperor new mind", among other issues.
It seems the living beings have no that limits, therefore, our mind is NOT like a computer at all, this is a complete debased guess, taken as a fixed true.
@altomaltes I will take a look at read that book. Do you have some experience in applied math, with computers?

Forgive me, this is somewhat slap-dash thinking, but I'll put this here to add information and talk on topic of random numbers.

Distribution of primes Distribution of Primes. Retrieved 15:00, July 13, 2021
Prime number theory, asymptotic distribution of the primes:

The prime number theorem describes the asymptotic distribution of prime numbers. It gives us a general view of how primes are distributed amongst positive integers and also states that the primes become less common as they become larger. Informally, the theorem states that if any random positive integer is selected in the range of zero to a large number N, the probability that the selected integer is a prime is about 1/ln(N), where ln(N) is the natural logarithm of N.

One application of the theorem is that it gives a sense of how long it will take to find a prime of a certain size by a random search. Many cryptosystems (e.g. RSA) require primes p ~~=(approximation) 2^(512) ; the theorem says that the probability that a randomly chosen number of that size is prime is roughly
...
1/355, or 1/177 if the search is restricted to odd numbers. So the expectation is that roughly 177 numbers will have to be tested for primality, which can be computationally expensive.

...

More to read there, and here: The Asymptotic Distribution of Primes by I.S. Gal [.PDF]
and related and more difficult here: The Distribution of Prime Ideals of Imaginary Quadratic Fields by G. Harman, A. Kumchev, and P.A. Lewis [.PDF]
 
"

I beg you to reply, at least to acknowledge receipt.

Thank you,
...

---Oh also I've found some of your publishing online."

I acknowledge. But I know very little. And when I know something, I publish it. You have found my papers online, so you know all I know.

My most recent paper is here:


Thanks for asking!
This is in fact one of the trikiest jobs to do in computing.
An actual random number has some qualities that are impossible to emulate nowadays, and this numbers are needed in fields like cryptograpy.
In the analogic world, the ramdom signals generators where always based on quantum phenomena, like the tuneling of a diode for white noise generation. Even today the hardware random number generators are based on that phenomena.
Roger Penrose did a fantastic job stressing the limitations of the computational systems, a wrote a book about that "The Emperor new mind", among other issues.
It seems the living beings have no that limits, therefore, our mind is NOT like a computer at all, this is a complete debased guess, taken as a fixed true.

Applying this to chemistry, let's say the triangle (or is it a tetrahedron?) in the enneagram is the "center of gravity". With the 1 triangle version, we have Hydrogen (1), with one electron in orbit. Add in a second electron in orbit and we have Hydrogen with filled s(2 electron)-shell.
Add in a triangle, making either a crossed-hexagram, or two-tetrahedra oppositely oriented, and we have 2 centers of gravity, Helium (2). Basic has filled 2s-shell. Add 3rd center of gravity, Lithium (3), with filled 1s orbital, and 1 electron in 2s orbital (second s-shell). Add in ions?
4th center of gravity added, baseline filled 1s^2 2s^2 shells, Beryllium (4).
4 electrons in orbit in orbit within repulsion-dictated-shape and having (+/-)(1/2) spins angular momentum as a law, if I understand it correctly (iIuic), with probabilistic wave occupancy (tunneling) around now apparent 12-sided 4-"repulsion-yet-bonded", formerly nucleus, proton+neutron, center of gravity. Adding atomic weights for table: weight of proton + neutron ... + electron; I forget how it goes, hopefully this is still intelligible.
5th c.o.g., with 1st electron in p-orbital, 1s^2 2s^2 1p^1, Boron (5), not formed from nuclear fusion. Now bonding in orbitals takes on characteristics of electronic repulsion vs. lowest energy state, explicable in +/- charges, iIuic.

Furthermore, wave mechanics begin to produce quantized energy levels for excitation of electrons into "next-lowest-available-energy-position".
Redefining i^2 = (-1) , i = [sq.rt(-1)] ; we make i = [sq.rt(i')].
i' = number set +/- base n comprising prime numbers = {sq.rt[+/-](n)}. This set is theoretically the first derivative of infinity, as a set of all numbers upon which certain operations are impossible. This derived set cannot be operated on by normal commutative (multiplication or addition) operations or the present non-commutative (e.g. exponentiation, here (n)^(1/2)) operation, however we will derive again.
The second derivation brings down the ^(1/2) power to be a multiplier, and reduces the exponentiation by 1 to ^(-(1/2)). This negative exponentiation is re-written as a sq.rt. on the bottom of a ratio: i'' = [1/2]*[(sq.rt)(i')].
This set of second-derivatives could work in nicely as the naturally squared, in the known-equations, "inverse-square-laws", for example the distance between two centers of gravitational force.
Also, the quantized energy levels that electrons transit, which I think have a certain unequal distribution based on charge density and distance from the center of gravity, could perhaps be modeled on the naturally distributed set of sq. rt. of prime numbers, the "imaginary numbers", i = [sq.rt(-1)]. Different centralized c.o.g.'s in atoms with different attractions to filled shell and valence electrons -- extending out from s->p->d->f shell bonding, but I'm off speculating by a mile, now.

I'm trying to get a handle on prime number distribution, prime ideals, and cryptography applications, as well as conformal mapping geometry, @altomaltes and @ark , respectively. I will look to read into that book that was mentioned, too. Most interesting that an old, macro-scale, quantum effect of tunneling could be used with diode tunneling and white-noise machine... iIuic.
 
Back
Top Bottom