Is this real maths or somebody winding me up?

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by amber, Feb 4, 2018.

  1. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    If u = <3,-2> and v = <4,5> then u · v = (3)(4) + (-2)(5) = 12 - 10 = 2. (b) If u = 2i + j and v = 5i - 6j then u · v = (2)(5) + (1)(-6) = 10 - 6=4. Proof: We prove only the last property. Let u = <a, b> . Then u · u = <a, b>·<a, b> = a · a + b · b = a2 + b2 = (/a2 + b2)2 except when quantified by any 7point artimace exemplified by stasus elements found in field mortification parameters.
    Let u, v and w be three vectors in R3 and let λ be a scalar. (1) v × w = − w × v. (2) u × ( v + w) = u × v + u × w. (3) ( u + v) × w = u × w + v × w. (4) λ( v × w)=(λ v) × w = v × (λ w). We then end up in obvious paradoxity instigated by v x y intigers elevated beyond tartus secondary aspects.



    Can anyone ''read'' that?
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,217
    These are not things.
    Someone's having someone on.


    BTW, simply Goggling a few of those terms would clear up the mystery.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,925
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,713
    It looks like badly translated Russian, or perhaps Greek. Maybe Latvian.

    That said, some of the equations look ok except for some of the notation and the lack of superscripts, i.e. exponents.
     
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,217
    Yea, the ideas behind convincing gibberish is to make it look plausibly real.

    Hadn't thought of that.
    But I assume any auto-translator would leave words alone it didn't understand, so we still shouldn't be seeing nonsense words.
    And if it were a human translator, we're back to the same problem.

    Actually, I guess that's the same thing. I see no way for gibberish words to get into a translated text - automatically or manually - unless it's deliberate.
     
  9. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,227
    YES

    It's the upgrade Time Travel expodent oscillation modified frequency generator calculations formula giving new extra power to the TARTUS (TARDIS Mk 2) while being more eco friendly

    Release date to be announced

    TARTUS
    Time And Relative Dimension Under Space

    which is the next generation of the

    TARDIS
    Time And Relative Dimension In Space

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,713
    Let's untranslate some of it:

    Looks like the dot product of two vectors, u and v. But, <u,v> (the inner product) is another way to write the dot product (usually restricted to 2 or 3 dimensional vectors). Hence it should be: If u = (2, -2) and v = (4,5) . . ., otherwise it looks ok.
    This uses the i,j,k unit vector notation, looks pretty standard for 2 dimensions.
    ok so far, but the rest goes off the rails more than a little.
    Yep. The cross product is antisymmetric. There seems to be no problem with the rest of it, including the scalar multiplication. I have no idea what the "paradoxicity" is. Perhaps it means you shouldn't take any without food or a parachute (or something).
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2018
    amber likes this.
  11. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    HUh, all the other people said is gibberish?

    I am not surprised it is difficult to learn on the net when some people are teaching false information.
     
  12. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    Any mathematicians on who fancy a challenge?

    Can any mathematician explain a 0*0 matrice that is in continuous expansion from 0 to infinitely?


    matrice Au []

    matrice Bu []

    I want to explain that both these matrices expand on manifestation and vanish . (gone in a puff a smoke )

    A and B are just tags, u is internal energy
     
  13. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    Come on guys somebody must know how to explain

    Δ0=Δ1u/t=1u/k where k is space
     
  14. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    I have just learnt it is called an empty matrice, I simply want to expand this matrice at the speed of c proportional to the inverse then it is back to an empty matrice.

    So far I have my abstraction as
    Δ0=(+1u/t)/k how do I put at the speed of c to the end of this?

    The visual looks like this


    []<<[..........1u...........]>>[]

    or simply 010

    or simply 0→1u→0/t
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2018
  15. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    0u+1u-1u=0u?


    so can I express?


    []+[1u]-[1u]=[]??
     
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,217
    The rest of us are examining the words.
    Arfa brane is taking a stab at the math, to see if it is as ... gibberish-ish.
     
    amber likes this.
  17. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    Let u = <a> and v = <b>. Then u · v = <a>·<b> = a · b?

    Would the above be meaningful in anyway? I am trying to learn this .
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,217
    I'm not sure what the < and > are for (matrix?), but assuming it doesn't destroy commutativity, then yes:
    If u=a, and v=b then
    u·v = a·b
     
  19. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    Thank you, much appreciated, I am trying to learn and practice this subject. I am not sure what the <> meant myself , I presumed it was to represent the force direction and showed a and b was in a state of expansion. Now I am at a loss for what it meant if you do not know yourself.
    How would I explain that (a) manifests then inversely proportionally disperses at the speed of light c?

    Coordinates a=0,0,0

    I want to try and explain 0 point energy.
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,217
    I am not sure what that means. Particularly, use of the word 'disperse'.

    If c is inversely proportional to a, then its simply c ~1/a.
     
  21. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,217
  22. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323
    How would I describe at?

    example : Δu=(+1)-(+1) at c ~1/a
     
  23. amber Registered Member

    Messages:
    323

Share This Page