My Math Forum Blog about Pure Logic

 Computer Science Computer Science Forum

 December 30th, 2014, 11:52 PM #21 Newbie   Joined: Dec 2014 From: New Delhi, India Posts: 22 Thanks: 0 ok , I am still working on the formal statement and proof, so do spare me some criticism there. Have myself found a few flaws in the proof and will work to correct them. It would be wonderful in the meanwhile if one here could read my work and understand it.
December 31st, 2014, 12:57 PM   #22
Global Moderator

Joined: Nov 2006
From: UTC -5

Posts: 16,046
Thanks: 938

Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms
Quote:
 Originally Posted by nemesis45 It would be wonderful in the meanwhile if one here could read my work and understand it.
Yes, if anyone does please post here.

December 31st, 2014, 08:18 PM   #23
Newbie

Joined: Dec 2014
From: New Delhi, India

Posts: 22
Thanks: 0

Quote:
 Originally Posted by CRGreathouse Yes, if anyone does please post here.
Please dont give up, just because it is hard.
Has anything worth learning ever been easy?

 January 1st, 2015, 08:27 PM #24 Newbie   Joined: Dec 2014 From: New Delhi, India Posts: 22 Thanks: 0 "According to Carnap's "Logicist Foundations of Mathematics", Russell wanted a theory that could plausibly be said to derive all of mathematics from purely logical axioms. However, Principia Mathematica required, in addition to the basic axioms of type theory, three further axioms that seemed to not be true as mere matters of logic, namely the axiom of infinity, the axiom of choice, and the axiom of reducibility. Since the first two were existential axioms, Russell phrased mathematical statements depending on them as conditionals." From wikipedia. Just for the record. But what about the truths in physics? Last edited by nemesis45; January 1st, 2015 at 08:54 PM.
 January 3rd, 2015, 02:28 AM #25 Math Team     Joined: Jul 2013 From: काठमाडौं, नेपाल Posts: 884 Thanks: 61 Math Focus: सामान्य गणित too long
 January 5th, 2015, 04:05 AM #26 Newbie   Joined: Dec 2014 From: New Delhi, India Posts: 22 Thanks: 0 Sorry , it is the way it is. Cant spoon feed.
 January 5th, 2015, 04:44 PM #27 Senior Member   Joined: Jul 2013 From: United Kingdom Posts: 471 Thanks: 40 @nemisis45, this is what I've observed... I think you need to go on a maths course. Period. You're trying to bring forward ideas that the mathematically gifted already presented to us a long while ago. Your ideas can easily be expressed in a concrete manner using probabilities, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, information theory and mathematical logic. Yes, we know that there is chaos (entropy) in the universe, and yes we do know that ideas can be expressed in terms of 0's and 1's including half integers etc. If you really want to do your work justice, start doing some real maths. Go to university. What and who you should look up on: *James Simons (Renaissance Technologies) *Seth Lloyd (Writer of programming the universe) *Leonard Susskind *Gerrard 't Hooft *Rafael Bousso *Claude E Shannon *The Scientific Method *Quantum Theory/Mechanics *Entropy *Thermodynamics *Information Theory *Reflexivity (Social Theory) *Game Theory *Dualism *Relativity *Gravity Last edited by perfect_world; January 5th, 2015 at 04:53 PM.
 January 5th, 2015, 04:48 PM #28 Senior Member   Joined: Jul 2013 From: United Kingdom Posts: 471 Thanks: 40 If you do your research on these guys, you'll notice that they have plenty to say about information, finance, chaos, binary systems, logic, fractals and computing. Mathematical discoveries about black holes and strings have been used by financial physicists. This is no secret. Quantum physicists have been working in banks and other financial institutions for years. It's no big deal. Difference is, they can express their complex ideas using robust mathematics that most of us probably won't be able to understand. If you want your mind blown, read this guy's papers (but I doubt anyone will be able to understand his theories): http://www.sns.ias.edu/witten Last edited by perfect_world; January 5th, 2015 at 04:56 PM.
 January 5th, 2015, 04:59 PM #29 Senior Member   Joined: Jul 2013 From: United Kingdom Posts: 471 Thanks: 40 I'm not trying to shatter you. I'm just saying that you need to express your ideas using concrete mathematics. It's what every good scientist and theorist does. I by no means am as gifted as the likes of @CRGreathouse. This is why I'm on this forum. I want to learn maths so that I can express my ideas. I've got a lot to learn. I'll just sit down and have some more humble pie, because I know f*** all about mathematics. I'm just here to learn. If you want your ego caressed, this is no place to be. You'll get found out pretty quickly. Maths is hard to master like every other skill in life. If it was that easy, everyone would be doing it. If you put in the hard work, the rewards you get will be thoroughly satisfying. Last edited by perfect_world; January 5th, 2015 at 05:10 PM.
January 7th, 2015, 03:13 AM   #30
Newbie

Joined: Dec 2014
From: New Delhi, India

Posts: 22
Thanks: 0

Quote:
 Originally Posted by perfect_world @nemisis45, this is what I've observed... I think you need to go on a maths course. Period. You're trying to bring forward ideas that the mathematically gifted already presented to us a long while ago. Your ideas can easily be expressed in a concrete manner using probabilities, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, information theory and mathematical logic. Yes, we know that there is chaos (entropy) in the universe, and yes we do know that ideas can be expressed in terms of 0's and 1's including half integers etc. If you really want to do your work justice, start doing some real maths. Go to university. What and who you should look up on: *James Simons (Renaissance Technologies) *Seth Lloyd (Writer of programming the universe) *Leonard Susskind *Gerrard 't Hooft *Rafael Bousso *Claude E Shannon *The Scientific Method *Quantum Theory/Mechanics *Entropy *Thermodynamics *Information Theory *Reflexivity (Social Theory) *Game Theory *Dualism *Relativity *Gravity
Thank you for reading the blog.
What I am saying is all of these theories have their roots in pure logic.
And how you can arrive at them, by taking more assumptions from my logic.

I wouldn't blame you for finding resonance in other theories about my idea, because I know it can be expressed in all these ways. Please also read the 10 page document I have prepared for a more coherent read, under FAQ.

I never talk about chaos(entropy) in my blog.
Your relating it to thermodynamics is an image/assumption in your mind . I only talk about divergence. It's not at all the same thing as entropy.

Last edited by nemesis45; January 7th, 2015 at 03:27 AM.

 Tags blog, logic, pure

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post guynamedluis Math Books 5 May 11th, 2013 03:40 PM mathsissmart Art 7 February 22nd, 2012 01:02 PM DLowry New Users 3 April 2nd, 2011 10:13 AM Francis410 Algebra 3 December 28th, 2010 06:31 PM mathsissmart New Users 2 December 31st, 1969 04:00 PM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top