|
|
|
|
|
|
Welling Mathematics “First, I must admit that I am at a loss
as to why this was sent to me in particular. Can you provide an answer for
that?” I can absolutely provide a valid reason
for me to send this to you. I wanted to create a hello letter to a wide swath
of fellow brothers; but I did not want to just say hello. So I came up with a list of related
material to ask question of. One it would give you an idea of who I am based
on what I think about. Two I would give you something to think about. Three if
through the process of thinking about it, you had some ideas or communicated
my ideas and the ideas you had to others (stimulating conversation on
different areas is a healthy thing), four if you or anyone had any advice
please do not hesitate to communicate those pieces of advice. Thank you Brother. “however, a single number line is a
precise measurement for distance as distance is,” I apologize if I come off wrong, but one
point I am attempting to make is the subject of this observation. A single
number line can only be used to accurately judge distance inside our
magnetosphere from the surface up to 50 miles or less. After that the magnetosphere
curvature starts to become too big an effect; nullifying any readings. Part
of this phenomenon can be seen in any lazar measurements outside the before
mentioned 50 miles. “by definition,
measured upon a single plane and can be marked on a single number line.” Again I apologize if I come off badly(cocky, arrogant, mr know
it all, etc.) but the single plane as you and academics points out is only an
accurate parameters to measure to and from within extremely specific
boundaries which both science and a single number line are ill-equipped to
measure from. Those other variables of magnetospheres, the different push
pull of gravity, and other variables few if any are
acknowledge or accounted for. Again nullifying the results. “Many ancient cultures did have plural
number lines because they realized that we live in a world that has more than
one dimension and, therefore, needed more than a single linear measurement
method.” Proving that has been a lifelong pursuit.
“Modern quantitative analysis attempts to
compensate by allowing multi-dimensional work through derivatives, etc.” This is absolutely true. But has a fatal
flaw. All directions in electro-magnetics have a hierarchy;
without a hierarchy magnetic north would not work. Cartesian quardinants are equal and balanced, not hierarchal. I am trying to put a think tank together for
the express purpose of properly studying how exactly to put a plural number line
together. Create a translation system between the established equations of a
single number line into a plural one. And start to rebuild all the theories and
hypothesis of the last several hundred years adjusting the ideas to the plural
number line. I am guessing a million products are possible if a plural number
line is used that are 100% impossible with the use of a single number line. Ask any question, I will do my best to
answer. ·
Progressing into
the next leap in technology requires a number line and measurement tools
capable of measuring into that realm. ·
Math depends on
fixed points. Ok why does the single number line have no fixed points. A single number line can be applied to anything as
long as that equation does not move outside of extremely specific and limited
parameters. A number line has to be invented/found
which measures from accurate and real fixed points. The closest thing to a fixed
point is the 0 and it is only a fixed point in direct comparison to the
number line itself; nothing else. Which is great for upper
end math. ·
What the modern
world is then left with is a measurement tool which justifies itself by way
of exclusivity of measuring itself. A metaphoric example, the single number
line is like a computer virus. Some computer virus’
tell anti-ware “no; no viruses in here. Not a problem. We are all good” that
is the same with math. It hides its flaws within its structure. Cannot
question the structure, so the built in flaws become something wrong with
what is being measured not the measuring device
itself. ·
The Single number
line, put simply, cannot measure inside its own limited parameters very well.
Outside of its own parameters, the single number line is almost a complete waist of time. ·
The long list of
errors and good tools made to look like pseudo-science. Many can be traced
not to the field of academics and science in which has been labeled pseudo
but to the internal and external limitations of the single number line. ·
The single number
line limitations o
First problem
academics § The single number line is a philosophy science has been
bound to since the Vatican started to allow education in Europe again. Almost
every single theory math and science produced from the point the Vatican
started to allow reading, by more than just priests again, till the mid-1900s
are based within the parameters of a single number line. o
Second set of
problems; internal limitations § The single number line for starters cannot measure the
following major categories. ·
·
super-hot, super cold, small, fast, distance, etc. Just to name a few. o super-hot, o super cold, o small, o fast, o Distance o Electro-magnetics o
Third set of
problems § § Heisenberg uncertainty principle ·
During
his day and age oppie had to accept this concept as
fact because he knew all the measurement tools he had access to where almost
completely insufficient, but that is all he had to work with. So he accepted
the limitations he was forced to work within; measurement tool wise. ·
However
this is no longer 1935, almost every household in America has a pc beyond
fictional belief at the time of the most powerful computer the wildest Sci-Fi
writer could not have imagined. So since almost all the variables have change
from oppies time to now; we are no longer straddled
with the yoke of working with a bad and highly inaccurate number line. The
number line which all mathematics comes from; modern math and science no
longer has to use it as the one and only measurement
and math tool. The uncertainty principle is only a laughable
excuse for not working with an accurate enough tool.
o
Forth set of
problems o
§ Errors in modern hypothesis and theories fixed when the
limitations of the single number line are removed ·
Time is measured by
way of a solid hard pure joke. The same exact critical failure flaw is built
into the design of every single atomic clock. but
the flaw is an unaccounted for and not understood variable. So instead of
redundancy fixing the flaw the redundancy only multiplies the effects of the
flaw. ·
a single number line cannot measure electricity. It can guess
as to what electricity is doing. It can measure voltage and amps. Voltage and
amps are both secondary cast offs; they are not measuring the thing itself.
It is easy to measure the bow waves from a ship. Harder to measure a ship in
motion. ·
A single number line
cannot measure sub molecular. we have guesses and
theories which are based on statistics, but no real actual measurements. ·
Some of the most
difficult aspects to the Darwin Evolution debate is not the theory is wrong,
but the theory is shoved into a philosophical format of the single number
line. ·
HIV AIDS; the
cocktail. The treatment for this disease required going outside the single
number line system in order to create the what to do
at what time. o Science achieved the goal by way of carefully studying the
rhythms of the human biochemical system. Since biological systems do not
operate based on a single number line; the drug cocktail was easier to
develop. ·
·
·
Fixing the errors o
The only real way
to fix the errors is to have a thorough examination of what the errors are.
Then find solutions for each and every one. o
A process which is
made both easier and harder based on the facts of buried within the framework
of the single number line are some of the rules and regulations of the
original or at least my hypothesis of the plural number line. ·
·
·
Cartesian number
line xyz ·
The reason xyz is
wrong, will always be wrong, and can never be fixed. Each and every single
equation x is equal to y is equal to z. ·
X is a number line ·
Y is a number line ·
Z is a number line ·
But each are an
equal plane to each other ·
Concept of greater
than is not an appropriate translation over the concept to the xyz. · The whole concept of equal and opposite has to be examined when it comes to the Cartesian method. Everything is not equal and opposite. o If everything was 100% pure equal and opposite there would be 0 graydations. Everything would be either first or last. Since we know this is not true, we have to reassess how the equal and opposite are examined. We have to examine that format by removing it from the framework of a single number line. o A hierarchy of actions is the natural result of equal and opposite. For example electro-magnetics, chaos theory, and newton’s third law state that if you have more than one thing, to have true equal and opposite the things themselves have to form into an internal hierarchal structure. For something to be strong, something else has to be week. For something to be first something else has to be last. If you have a large group, equal and opposite means something has to be first, second, third, fourth, fifth, etc.. The rules of math themselves cancel the parameters of a single number line. |
|
|
|
|
|