EricLux
Jedi
Hey folks :)
As I said last time, following Pierre's departure, as soon as I have a little time, I will post scientific questions to continue to advance science as Pierre was valiantly committed to. If certain questions speak to you, don't hesitate to ask them to our friends "the Cassiopaeans" during the sessions.
Of course, free choice! Merci à tous :)
Here we go :
- Where does Ramanujan's inspiration come from?
- Is Riemann's 1859 conjecture on prime numbers correct ? Has it been demonstrated?
- What happened to Ettore Majorana on March 26, 1938 ?
- Had Fermat really proved his great theorem? If so, was it in a way that is totally unknown to us, involving the 4th dimension ?
- Is Golbach's conjecture on prime numbers correct ? Has the Algerian mathematician proved it ?
- Does the fact that the surface area of a sphere is 4 times that of its shadow point to the fact that the sphere is 4D in essence ?
- Why are there no complex numbers in 3D (so the need to find the quaternions) ?
- Are the notions of Lie group and tensor useful for obtaining the mathematical structure of the unified field?
- You said there was something wrong with Lie groups. What's wrong with Lie groups and algebras ? Don't they integrate the 4th dimension of space ? How is Sophus Lie's approach not in line with reality ? Is it related to Hopf fibration ? Is the notion of variety useful as it stands, or does it also need to be reviewed in connection with our interpretation of the imaginary number i ?
- Quaternions and robotics: is what's missing from quaternions for correctly apprehending reality EM what makes the transition from robotics to life possible?
- Any rotation can be described as an action in quaternion space: what's missing from Maxwell's description of electromagnetism (which used quaternions) is what would allow us to describe any action in dimension 4?
- If quaternions are Hamilton's adequate mathematical tool for describing 3D, what is the adequate mathematical tool for describing 4D ?
- Is Hopf fibration THE key to understanding the nature of 4th-dimensional space ?
- Why isn't pi an integer ? Is the irrationality of pi, as we know it, due to the incommensurability of the circle's circumference and diameter ? If we realize that the diameter and circumference are of the same nature (that the diameter is, in fact, circular), will we obtain a new value for pi that could be an integer ? Does finding their common nature, their common origin (for diameter and circumference) mean positioning ourselves in 4D ?
- What is the nature of the 4th dimension of space? What prevents us from apprehending it in 3D ? The fact that, for 3D, it’s relatively infinite?
Affectionately and friendly, Eric
As I said last time, following Pierre's departure, as soon as I have a little time, I will post scientific questions to continue to advance science as Pierre was valiantly committed to. If certain questions speak to you, don't hesitate to ask them to our friends "the Cassiopaeans" during the sessions.
Of course, free choice! Merci à tous :)
Here we go :
- Where does Ramanujan's inspiration come from?
- Is Riemann's 1859 conjecture on prime numbers correct ? Has it been demonstrated?
- What happened to Ettore Majorana on March 26, 1938 ?
- Had Fermat really proved his great theorem? If so, was it in a way that is totally unknown to us, involving the 4th dimension ?
- Is Golbach's conjecture on prime numbers correct ? Has the Algerian mathematician proved it ?
- Does the fact that the surface area of a sphere is 4 times that of its shadow point to the fact that the sphere is 4D in essence ?
- Why are there no complex numbers in 3D (so the need to find the quaternions) ?
- Are the notions of Lie group and tensor useful for obtaining the mathematical structure of the unified field?
- You said there was something wrong with Lie groups. What's wrong with Lie groups and algebras ? Don't they integrate the 4th dimension of space ? How is Sophus Lie's approach not in line with reality ? Is it related to Hopf fibration ? Is the notion of variety useful as it stands, or does it also need to be reviewed in connection with our interpretation of the imaginary number i ?
- Quaternions and robotics: is what's missing from quaternions for correctly apprehending reality EM what makes the transition from robotics to life possible?
- Any rotation can be described as an action in quaternion space: what's missing from Maxwell's description of electromagnetism (which used quaternions) is what would allow us to describe any action in dimension 4?
- If quaternions are Hamilton's adequate mathematical tool for describing 3D, what is the adequate mathematical tool for describing 4D ?
- Is Hopf fibration THE key to understanding the nature of 4th-dimensional space ?
- Why isn't pi an integer ? Is the irrationality of pi, as we know it, due to the incommensurability of the circle's circumference and diameter ? If we realize that the diameter and circumference are of the same nature (that the diameter is, in fact, circular), will we obtain a new value for pi that could be an integer ? Does finding their common nature, their common origin (for diameter and circumference) mean positioning ourselves in 4D ?
- What is the nature of the 4th dimension of space? What prevents us from apprehending it in 3D ? The fact that, for 3D, it’s relatively infinite?
Affectionately and friendly, Eric
