My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > College Math Forum > Number Theory

Number Theory Number Theory Math Forum


Thanks Tree5Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
June 30th, 2017, 02:29 AM   #1
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Dec 2012

Posts: 1,028
Thanks: 24

A Number is a Value or a Measure ?

I hope was already proven and clear that is necessary to define a Number as a measure (and this time is not qustion of the sex of the angels...),

because often, for example on a Cartesian plane X,Y, the ScaleX we choose for x and the ScaleY we choose for y, must be:

$ScaleX / ScaleY =1$

or we make a mistake or we change the result (f.ex. the possibility to pass from a Sum to the Integral etc...).

I'm starting to see some "result" of my Complicate Modulus work (out of y=X^n derivates)....

Last edited by complicatemodulus; June 30th, 2017 at 02:32 AM.
complicatemodulus is offline  
 
June 30th, 2017, 05:43 AM   #2
Math Team
 
Joined: Jan 2015
From: Alabama

Posts: 2,829
Thanks: 753

I have no idea what you are talking about!
Country Boy is offline  
June 30th, 2017, 06:06 AM   #3
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Dec 2012

Posts: 1,028
Thanks: 24

It's a very long story, clear if you're get in contact with alexander grothendieck's work...
complicatemodulus is offline  
June 30th, 2017, 06:39 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: USA

Posts: 315
Thanks: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by complicatemodulus View Post
I hope was already proven and clear that is necessary to define a Number as a measure (and this time is not qustion of the sex of the angels...),

Can you explain the reference to the sex of angels? Did you mean 'angles' (I wasn't aware angles had a sex, but I don't know everything...), or are you starting to go bat-**** crazy over this stuff?

Quote:
Originally Posted by complicatemodulus View Post
...or we make a mistake or we change the result (f.ex. the possibility to pass from a Sum to the Integral etc...)
From what little I know of your seemingly unhealthy obsession with step-sums, I don't see how you're going to come up with a meaningful result in Calculus. That is, you're talking about the scale of X and Y as though they are different when we take, for example, an integral like $\int^2_0 2x dx = 4$. I can see you saying that the scale of the Y axis is stretched to twice that of the X axis. The function $f = 2x$ is a bijection though between (0,1] and (0,2], so any mysterious and philosophical stretching of the scale of Y is done on an infinitesimal level.

If the standard order of the reals was a well-order, then $f = 2x$ couldn't possibly be bijective. The first element of (0,1] would map to the second element of (0,2], the second to the fourth, the third to the sixth, and so on. That's the clearest picture I can give. The standard order is not a well order though, as mind boggling as that is.

...just don't drive yourself insane. I've heard you mention at one point that you're risking your marriage to work on your step-sum results. She must be a good one if she puts up with being second to your number theory.
Thanks from topsquark and SenatorArmstrong

Last edited by AplanisTophet; June 30th, 2017 at 06:44 AM.
AplanisTophet is offline  
June 30th, 2017, 07:12 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2014
From: Glasgow

Posts: 2,077
Thanks: 698

Math Focus: Physics, mathematical modelling, numerical and computational solutions
Quote:
Originally Posted by AplanisTophet View Post
Can you explain the reference to the sex of angels? Did you mean 'angles' (I wasn't aware angles had a sex, but I don't know everything...), or are you starting to go bat-**** crazy over this stuff?
It's probably an idiom that doesn't translate well over the language barrier.
Benit13 is offline  
June 30th, 2017, 08:25 AM   #6
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Dec 2012

Posts: 1,028
Thanks: 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by AplanisTophet View Post
Can you explain the reference to the sex of angels? Did you mean 'angles' (I wasn't aware angles had a sex, but I don't know everything...), or are you starting to go bat-**** crazy over this stuff?
Don't care is a motto like "I know my chicken..." probably in english it means nothing... Yes, you can change in sex of angles and the same we can debate forever without an answer for that question



Quote:
Originally Posted by AplanisTophet View Post
From what little I know of your seemingly unhealthy obsession with step-sums, I don't see how you're going to come up with a meaningful result in Calculus. That is, you're talking about the scale of X and Y as though they are different when we take, for example, an integral like $\int^2_0 2x dx = 4$. I can see you saying that the scale of the Y axis is stretched to twice that of the X axis. The function $f = 2x$ is a bijection though between (0,1] and (0,2], so any mysterious and philosophical stretching of the scale of Y is done on an infinitesimal level.

If the standard order of the reals was a well-order, then $f = 2x$ couldn't possibly be bijective. The first element of (0,1] would map to the second element of (0,2], the second to the fourth, the third to the sixth, and so on. That's the clearest picture I can give. The standard order is not a well order though, as mind boggling as that is.

...just don't drive yourself insane. I've heard you mention at one point that you're risking your marriage to work on your step-sum results. She must be a good one if she puts up with being second to your number theory.
As told, I take my wife as far as I can from here...

All is born considering the telescoping sum property for $Y=X^n$ derivate...

In that case it don't care if you strech the scale of x, it means how far is $1$ from $0$ in the $x$, respect to how far is $1$ form $0$ in $y$.

So if you move step 1 or step 1/K, so you can make the variable exchange to $x= X/K$, than... what you know for $K\to\infty$ to the integral

The result of the Sum of the Gnomons (from $1$ to $A$), don't care how wide are gnomons, that square the curve ($Y=X^n$ derivates) is always equal to the defined integral from $0$ to $A$.

While if you try to make the same process to the $Y=1/X$ curve, respect to the gnomons given by $Y=1/\lfloor x\rfloor$, you can see that Gmonon's Area is bigger than the one bellow the $Y=1/X$ curve.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%...eroni_constant

If you try to make here the process I use to pass from Sum to Integral, so you will change $x=X/K$ in the Sum (adjusting the limit as shown in my trick), you will see that the area bellow your Gnomons decreases rising $K$, till you've at the limit for $K\to\infty$ exactly the area bellow $Y=1/X$ curve.

So in other terms $Y=X^n$ derivates are characterized by $\gamma_{*} =0$

Where $\gamma_{*}$ is a new more general value (and not just Eulero's constant)

Several concernig will follows... but no time now ... I'm still working on...

More clear now ?

Last edited by complicatemodulus; June 30th, 2017 at 08:33 AM.
complicatemodulus is offline  
June 30th, 2017, 11:00 AM   #7
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Dec 2012

Posts: 1,028
Thanks: 24

... sorry some edit was still necessary but no time for couple of days...
complicatemodulus is offline  
June 30th, 2017, 11:12 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2012

Posts: 1,641
Thanks: 415

Quote:
Originally Posted by complicatemodulus View Post
It's a very long story, clear if you're get in contact with alexander grothendieck's work...
Can you explain what you mean by this? Do you know categorical algebraic geometry? That was his field. Anyway, Je ne parle pas fran├žais.
Thanks from topsquark

Last edited by Maschke; June 30th, 2017 at 11:18 AM.
Maschke is online now  
June 30th, 2017, 11:34 AM   #9
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Dec 2012

Posts: 1,028
Thanks: 24

Here the picture. I'm for sure miles away from A.G. mind's level, but I very agree with him on this point since I have in the hands my own simple example:



Rising $K$ the area of the Gnomons go closer and closer to the one of $y=1/x$. In the example K=1 (the difference between the areas correspond to the known $\gamma$) and K=3 (that produce a new $\gamma_{*}$ or $\gamma_{*K}$), and for $K\to\infty$ the two areas are equal and $\gamma_{\infty}=0$).

So $\gamma_{*}$ is a new toy...

Once again we can chose Upper Gnomons (as in the example), and Lower Gnomons and see that at the limit for $K\to\infty$ are both equal...

Last edited by complicatemodulus; June 30th, 2017 at 11:39 AM.
complicatemodulus is offline  
June 30th, 2017, 11:37 AM   #10
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Dec 2012

Posts: 1,028
Thanks: 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maschke View Post
Can you explain what you mean by this? Do you know categorical algebraic geometry? That was his field. Anyway, Je ne parle pas fran├žais.
..and unfortunately I'm not able to read his handy hieroglyph french.... so I've just to read what is already "translated"...
complicatemodulus is offline  
Reply

  My Math Forum > College Math Forum > Number Theory

Tags
measure, mesaure, number



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
natural number multiple of another number if its digit sum equal to that number Shen Elementary Math 2 June 5th, 2014 08:50 AM
Zero-infinity number arrangement based on number size. Omnispark Number Theory 25 November 28th, 2013 08:01 PM
Number system - proving 9 digit number not divisible by 5 sachinrajsharma Number Theory 7 April 29th, 2013 06:49 AM
Number of Necklace/Bracelets With Fixed Number of Beads UnreasonableSin Number Theory 2 June 13th, 2010 01:03 AM
find unique n number combination in total n number jsonliu Algebra 3 May 18th, 2010 06:01 PM





Copyright © 2017 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.