ms mathematisc

[msbiljanica]

Are you actually going to engage with people asking you questions, or are you just going to continue to keep posting your... whatever it is... without engaging?

1 . 11 real length
2. 11 real gap
3.32132 real combinations
you didn't know the answer to my math advantage
the existence of gap combined and linear complex numbers
proof that there are no rational and irrational
that rights and plane are evidence and not axioms
arithmetic functions ( addition)
member addition with composite numbers
the existence of multiple real numbers, multiple linear complex numbers

I tried to explain it to you in a simple way, and whoever doesn't understand, it's not my fault.
this is just the beginning...

always ask a meaningful question, and on a problem that is not clear to you,

 

[Pinball1970]

Here's why you need my mathematics,

No we really don't.

I'll leave you to it.

 

[Sarkus]

I tried to explain it to you in a simple way, and whoever doesn't understand, it's not my fault.

See, anyone can talk bollocks and lay the blame for not understanding it at the other person. You, as yet, haven't shown anything other than a notation for the length of a gap. Well, so what? The actual maths you're doing is still the same maths as we've been using for donkeys years (e.g. addition) and it's really just your notation for gaps.
So, again, so what?

Either try and say something that is sensible and meaningful, or might I suggest that you go and find a website that's more willing to deal with your inability to engage. 'Cos either it is your inability to communicate that's the issue, or, more likely, that what you're saying is just nonsense. Either way, the issue is yours.

 

[DaveC426913]

tried to explain it to you in a simple way, and whoever doesn't understand, it's not my fault.

No it's definitely your fault. Maybe try being less simple. For example, using full sentences and defining your axioms well.

I know English is not your first language but that's not really the issue here. Clear communication of ideas transcends language barriers.

this is just the beginning...

There is zero point in going on until you have expressed your first ideas well.

 

[msbiljanica]

For example, using full sentences and defining your axioms we

take a ruler and a pencil
length 1cm
length 0.1cm
length 0.01cm
length 0.001 cm
length 0.0001 cm
......
length 0.00...01 cm ,
only the first two you can draw the others if not, so I wrote it as 0-1(0.1, 0.01, 0.001, ...) cm
it's the same with the gap, only we mark the points .
theorem 1
sweep the sticks, place the first stick, the second stick in the direction of the first, the third stick to the second stick in the direction of the first, four sticks to the third stick in the direction of the first, and do this infinitely, what do you get lengths and a half-line, now arrange the points instead of sticks you will get a gap and a gap half-line

 

[Sarkus]

take... ... ... half-line

I'm sorry, but this is unintelligble.
You're failing to answer the questions asked of you, and you're failing to write in a comprehensible manner.

 

[DaveC426913]

take a ruler and a pencil
length 1cm
length 0.1cm
length 0.01cm
length 0.001 cm
length 0.0001 cm
......
length 0.00...01 cm ,
only the first two you can draw the others if not, so I wrote it as 0-1(0.1, 0.01, 0.001, ...) cm
it's the same with the gap, only we mark the points .
theorem 1
sweep the sticks, place the first stick, the second stick in the direction of the first, the third stick to the second stick in the direction of the first, four sticks to the third stick in the direction of the first, and do this infinitely, what do you get lengths and a half-line, now arrange the points instead of sticks you will get a gap and a gap half-line

This in not mathematics. This is a measurement gimmick - a shortcut - what Youtube calls a "hack".

You could encapsulate this in a simple diagram.

 

[exchemist]

take a ruler and a pencil
length 1cm
length 0.1cm
length 0.01cm
length 0.001 cm
length 0.0001 cm
......
length 0.00...01 cm ,
only the first two you can draw the others if not, so I wrote it as 0-1(0.1, 0.01, 0.001, ...) cm
it's the same with the gap, only we mark the points .
theorem 1
sweep the sticks, place the first stick, the second stick in the direction of the first, the third stick to the second stick in the direction of the first, four sticks to the third stick in the direction of the first, and do this infinitely, what do you get lengths and a half-line, now arrange the points instead of sticks you will get a gap and a gap half-line

I tried to read this and burst out laughing. It’s like something out of Monty Python.

 

[James R]

The only thing I have managed to understand from msbiljanica so far is that he/she/they have invented a notation for a succession of line segments that possibly include "gaps".

As I understand it, a notation like "1323" is supposed to represent two line segments with a gap. For example, on an x axis, this would be:

• A line segment from x=0 to x=1 connected to:
• another line segment from x=1 to x=4
• then a gap from x=4 to x=6, followed by:
• a line segment from x=6 to x=9

For what it describes, I guess you could call this a compact sort of notation.

I'm puzzled about what applications this notation has. msbilijanica seems to be struggling to explain any.

Asserting that rational numbers don't exist seems like a dead end, for one thing.

 

[msbiljanica]

Колико сам разумео, ознака попут "13 2 3" би требало да представља два сегмента линије са размаком. На пример, на к оси, ово би било:.

Пре свега, тврдња да рационални бројеви не постоје изгледа као ћорсокак.

a little bit of intelligence , Look at the proof if it doesn't convince you that there are no rational or irrational numbers, for me there are no natural or integer numbers.

werto

werto

www.geogebra.org

geo gebra, proof of how to get a plane as a proof

moving the point F intersects the space, the point C changes the angle between the lines

 

[DaveC426913]

a little bit of intelligence , Look at the proof

It isn't a proof; it's half-formed, poorly-communicated snippets.

if it doesn't convince you that there are no rational or irrational numbers,

Except that there are.

for me there are no natural or integer numbers.

That should be cause for concern then, since they exist for everyone else.

 

[msbiljanica]

That should be cause for concern then, since they exist for everyone else.

From my proofs, the numbers mentioned do not exist, since in current mathematics, natural rational numbers are axioms.
since someone in the past marked (negative real numbers) with a subtraction sign, and as a result we have an imaginary unit, which I consider a mistake to mark numbers with a arithmetic operation (negative real numbers) incomplete division (rational numbers)

axiom , number sequences
it is a base like a gap , Is it clear to you?

 

[DaveC426913]

From my proofs, the numbers mentioned do not exist,

Again, that should be cause for concern, since in flies in the face of what we already know.

axiom , number sequences
it is a base like a gap , Is it clear to you?View attachment 6554

Again, this is not a proof, these are half-formed thoughts.

You seem to be expecting us to just look at the assortment of comma-separated words (eg. axoim, nnmber sequences) and one line of math notation and connect all the dots to arrive at the same conclusion you have.

No, if this is proof, you have to connect those dots for us, explicitly, one-by-one. To-wit: "Given A, it immediately follows that B."

Here's an example:

If A=B and B=C, then it immediately follows by the transitive property, that A=C.

 

[James R]

From my proofs, the numbers mentioned do not exist, since in current mathematics, natural rational numbers are axioms.

How are the intervals 1111 and 2222 related to one another? Are they the same length, or different lengths?

Is there a ratio of the two lengths? If so, what is the ratio of the length of the first interval to the second? And what is the ratio of the second interval to the first?

axiom , number sequences
it is a base like a gap , Is it clear to you?View attachment 6554

No. You haven't explained how your "gap" notation represents a number like 1.73 yet.

 

[msbiljanica]

each combined number has a length 1111 (4 ) and 2222 (8) , length 8 (26 , 323 , 143 , ... ) ,
the present numbers, gap, combined are equal in length , they differ in properties

current mathematics
-5 and 5 are equal in length, they differ in property (the place where they are on the number line)

1.73 does not exist in the axiom , it is between 1 and 2, I put an infinity sign, next to it is how much infinity is between adjacent numbers (0,1,2,3,4,...) , infinity={0.00,,,,01 , .... , 0,99...99}
Theorem
There is a relation between the point 0 and all points in on a semi line (gap semi line)

 

[Sarkus]

Make sense, or stop posting, please.

 

[DaveC426913]

1.73 does not exist in the axiom , it is between 1 and 2, I put an infinity sign, next to it is how much infinity is between adjacent numbers (0,1,2,3,4,...) , infinity={0.00,,,,01 , .... , 0,99...99}

OK. I measure a block of wood to be 1.73 inches on a side.
How does your mathematical notation describe that?

If I place two of those blocks of wood together, will your notation tell me they are cumulatively 3.46 inches wide, or something else?

What if I want two thinner blocks of wood from my single block? Will your notation help me arrive at it equivalent of 0.865 inches? Or no?

 

[James R]

msbiljanica:

Following DaveC's line of thought...

If I have a plank of wood that is 1 metre long and I cut it in half, can your maths be used to calculate the lengths of the two resulting pieces, in metres? If so, can you show me how that calculation goes?

 

[msbiljanica]

my mathematics is an extension of current mathematics with what I have discovered (Feb 17, 2025 read)I discovered the gap , the starting point of the axiom (the ancient Greeks viewed mathematics as geometry) , line and plane and addition are the axioms of current mathematics , Are there linear complex numbers (how would you write the distance -6 to 4 on a number line) ,addition expansion (first form of the function)

James R we did not reach the division operation​

examination
235+255 , 7+35 ,

 

[DaveC426913]

my mathematics is an extension of current mathematics with what I have discovered (Feb 17, 2025 read)I discovered the gap , the starting point of the axiom (the ancient Greeks viewed mathematics as geometry) , line and plane and addition are the axioms of current mathematics , Are there linear complex numbers (how would you write the distance -6 to 4 on a number line) ,addition expansion (first form of the function)

James R we did not reach the division operation​

examination
235+255 , 7+35 , View attachment 6568

What does any of this have to do with the questions asked by James and myself?

It really does not instil confidence in your faculties if, when asked direct questions, you go off on a tangent and simply repeat more of your numerology. Are you able to answer these direct questions?

Given that, above, you said: "1.73 does not exist in the axiom...", how do you respond to:

- I measure a block of wood to be 1.73 inches on a side. How does your mathematical notation describe that?
- I place two of those blocks of wood together, will your notation tell me they are cumulatively 3.46 inches wide, or something else?
- What if I want two thinner blocks of wood from my single block? Will your notation help me arrive at it equivalent of 0.865 inches? Or no?

- If I have a plank of wood that is 1 metre long and I cut it in half, can your maths be used to calculate the lengths of the two resulting pieces, in metres?
- If so, can you show me how that calculation goes?