I was reading some very old manuscripts that recently became available on the internet and I discovered a new formula. It was something well out of the time that it should have been known. The strange thing is that I had read that before and translated it. The reason it became obvious is that I knew what they were talking about because I had discovered it myself. What it means is that without the knowledge and understanding of the subject, you can translate to your hearts desire and never see what is said. There are many things hidden in the cracks of history.

Ut pendet continuum flexile, sic stabit contiguum rigidum inversum

I have been following some interesting lectures at Gresham College in England and they have many good historical accounts of mathematical foundations. The best historical account of the origin of e^{i*π} I have seen yet. Stanford has the best open courseware on the application of it and its relationship to Fourier and use in quantum mechanics.

e^x-\bigg( \lim_{n \to \dot \infty} \big [ \big (1+\frac{1}{n}\big )^n\big ]^x \bigg )

So I get it. And this is the problem. I have spoken about the number -0 before in he context of using the upper bit of a word as sign. What happens is that when that number is 0 and you change the sign, you have a new number which is -0. It is undefined in operation and subtracts like 0 or adds like 0. The problem with math in general is the human tendency to enjoy mysticism, whether in the form of organized religion, state, or science. People are far more interested in something that comes from a magical incantation or seems to have no origin, than that which is complete and as a result very dull. To me the math is very dull and is simply something that describes things in the same way as language.

The problem originates in one dimension and gets twisted into n-dimensional space by process. I saw an example of this magical science thinking the other day. A wave in water is characterized by a sine wave. This is not how I think of it or for that matter current either. There is never any negative water or negative electrons. When I say there is a negative current of electrons, what do I mean? I am removing electrons from something. There have to be electrons present for me to remove them. The negative is a logical negative. Anyway, someone suggested that you could use interfering gravity waves to create anti-gravity. Good luck with that. It reminds me of the fact that two waves interacting at right angles have a wave front that travels at √2 v and if that is c then it travels faster than c. This is something that Tesla thought about later in life when he was not in top form. The effect does travel faster than c, but it is another of those logical illusions that are so easy to become involved with, if you have a tendency to magic. Shadows can move at c+ also, but there is a difference between logical and real.

I suppose that I could go into the limit of -(α/α) as α approached zero, but I will stop now. The structure and use of calculus is its own worst enemy. In order for it to progress the code has to be rewritten as there have been too many hands playing in the source and it has some memory leaks. Some code is well structured and easily extensible, math is not. It can't be extended until the SIGSEGVs are removed.

## 0 comments:

Post a Comment