Srdanova Math

[msbiljanica]

Presupposition-In terms a×(s.c)b , multiplication

Process:

P1 4×(s.0)4=16

P2 4×(s.1)4=13 image

P3 4×(s.2)4=10

P4 4×(s.3)4=7

P5 4×(s.4)4=4

 

P1 ¤1(2)1¤×(s.0)4=¤1(2)2(2)2(2)2(2)1¤

P2 ¤1(2)1¤×(s.1)4=¤1(2)1(2)1(2)1(2)1¤ image

P3 ¤1(2)1¤×(s.2)4=¤1(1)6(1)1¤

P4 ¤1(2)1¤×(s.3)4=7

P5 ¤1(2)1¤×(s.4)4=¤1(2)1¤

General form

a×(s.0)b=c

a×(s.1)b=c

...

a×(c.d)b=c

 

[s32b]-multiplication

CM-[s32b]-know a×(s.0)b other do not know , forms withuut any gaps numbers not known

[msbiljanica]

PDF - http://www.mediafire.com/?ffy4ravu1gw4xkd

___________________________________________

Presupposition-The numbers are multiplication , where a contact is deleted

Process:

P1 4 × (s.0)4=¤4(0)4(0)4(0)4¤

P2 4 × (s.1)4=¤3(1)2(1)2(1)3¤ image

P3 4 × (s.2)4=¤2(6)2¤

P4 4 × (s.3)4=¤1(5)1¤

P5 4 × (s.4)4=0

General form

a × (s.0)b=c

a × (s.1)b=c

...

a × (c.d)b=c

 

[s29]-multiplication subtraction

CM-[s29]-does no know

×You will see a sign in the PDF

[msbiljanica]

Presupposition-The numbers are multiplication , contact remains the rest is deleted

Process:

P1 4 × (s.0)4=0

P2 4 × (s.1)4=¤1(2)1(2)1¤ image

P3 4 × (s.2)4=6

P4 4 × (s.3)4=5

P5 4 × (s.4)4=4

General form

a × (s.0)b=c

a ×(s.1)b=c

...

a × (s.d)b=c

 

[s30]-multiplication opposite subtraction

CM-[s30]-does no know

[msbiljanica]

Presupposition-Three (more) merger (multiplication )

Process:

P1 5×(s.3ß3)5=¤1(1)1¤ - image

P2 5×(s.4ß3)5=¤1(3)1¤ - image

5×(s.4ß4)5=¤1(1)1¤ -image

5×(s.4ß5)5=1- image

P3 5×(s.5ß5)=5

General form

a#(s.1ß3)b=c

a#(s.2ßd)b=c

...

a#(s.eßf)b=c , #- calculation operations (×,...)

 

[s31]-srki

CM-[s31]-does no know

[Turtle]

your work is completely indecipherable to me. judging by the responses you have [not] received, i'd say i'm not alone. how about starting with baby steps and explain what you are doing and to what end. use as simple english and common mathematic symbols as you can muster if you please. thanks.

[msbiljanica]

your work is completely indecipherable to me. judging by the responses you have [not] received, i'd say i'm not alone. how about starting with baby steps and explain what you are doing and to what end. use as simple english and common mathematic symbols as you can muster if you please. thanks.

the beginning of this post

1.Z÷(10^n)=?

a={0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9} , b={1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}

za n=1 , Z÷10={...,(-2÷10),(-1÷10),(0÷10),(1÷10),(2÷10),...}={...,-0.2,-0.1,0,0.1,0.2,...}={Z,Z.b}

za n=2 , Z÷100={Z,Z.b,Z.ab}

za n=3 , Z÷1000={Z,Z.b,Zab,Zaab}

za n=4 , Z÷10000={Z,Z.b,Z.ab,Zaab,Zaaab}

...

Z÷(10^n)=R

look at this evidence and ask yourself whether the current math sinful

_______________________________________________________

3.how to solve this current knowledge of mathematics:

along a (20m) ,deleted between 10 m and 15 m (b=5m) , wet get c

20m-(.5m)=¤10m(5m)5m¤ , -runway to solve this with the knowledge of the current mathematics ?

__________________________________________________________-

2.another thing you need to know, so I'll show you the solution

_______________________________________________________

of all sciences, mathematics has only a new basis (not audited by the historical heritage), I realized that all mathematics is in fact the geometry, the ratio of two (more) geometrical object along the number (plane, n-space, ...)and is connected (not that it sets the axiom of thing)

[msbiljanica]

Presupposition-Three (more) gap merger (multiplication )

Process:

P1 ¤1(4)1¤×(s.5¤ß3)5=¤1(2)1¤ - image

¤1(4)1¤×(s.5¤ß4)5=2-image

P2 ¤1(4)1¤×(s.6¤ß4)5=4

General form

a#(s.1¤ß3)b=c

a#(s.2¤ßd)b=c

...

a#(s.e¤ßf)b=c , #- calculation operations (×,...)

 

[s32]-gap srki

CM-[s32]-does no know

[Turtle]

the beginning of this post

1.Z÷(10^n)=?

a={0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9} , b={1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}

za n=1 , Z÷10={...,(-2÷10),(-1÷10),(0÷10),(1÷10),(2÷10),...}={...,-0.2,-0.1,0,1,2,...}={Z,Z.b}

...

look at this evidence and ask yourself whether the current math sinful

 

 

first, wrtitng "za" implies [in standard notation] z*a. but you then show division. second, you do not declare values for z as you do for a & b. then, 1÷10 is not equal to 1; it is equal to .1 and 2÷10 is not equal to 2 it is equal to .2. [1÷10=.1; 2÷10=.2]

 

sinful is not an english word a mathemetician would apply to "incorrect", but if that is your meaning then your third line is "sinful". that is, it is wrong.

 

i honestly don't understand you folks who get the idea you have some great new insight to math and everyone else through history is an idiot. what a complete waste of time this has been.

[msbiljanica]

first, wrtitng "za" implies [in standard notation] z*a. but you then show division. second, you do not declare values for z as you do for a & b. then, 1÷10 is not equal to 1; it is equal to .1 and 2÷10 is not equal to 2 it is equal to .2. [1÷10=.1; 2÷10=.2]

 

sinful is not an english word a mathemetician would apply to "incorrect", but if that is your meaning then your third line is "sinful". that is, it is wrong.

 

i honestly don't understand you folks who get the idea you have some great new insight to math and everyone else through history is an idiot. what a complete waste of time this has been.

Z - integers , Z={...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...}

[Turtle]

Z - integers , Z={...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...}

 

ok;fine. but then writing "za" you use lower case "z" which is confusing if not wrong because it still implies multiplication and multiplication of a set by a variable which is incorrect. if you mean "a" is a restrictor on Z then it should appear as a subscript, Z_a. if that is what you mean, then writing "a={...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...}" is wrong because the ellipsis marks indicate "a" extends infinitely in either direction, which is to say all integers and no restriction on Z.

 

then as i pointed out, while you appear to have it correct that -2÷10=-0.2, -1÷10=-0.1, and 0÷10=0, you have 1÷10=1 and 2÷10=2 which are not correct.

[msbiljanica]

Presupposition-Srki and gap srki merger (multiplication )

Process:

P1 ¤1(7)1¤=¤1(1)1(1)1(1)1¤×(s.5¤|ß3)6=¤1(1)1(1)1(1)1¤

¤1(1)1(1)1¤=¤1(1)1(1)1(1)¤×(s.5¤|ß4)6=0

P2 4=¤1(1)1(1)1(1)1¤×(s.6¤|ß3)6=2 image

P3 ¤1(1)1(1)1(1)1¤=¤1(1)1(1)1(1)1¤×(s.7¤|ß6)6=¤1(1)1(1)1¤

General form

w=a#(s.1¤|ß3)b=c

w=a#(s.2¤|ßd)b=c

...

w=a#(s.e¤|ßf)b=c , #- calculation operations (×,...)

 

[s33]-two srki

CM-[s33]-does no know

Note - this is a two-way calculation, and therefore has two equals signs left(srki) right(gap srki)

[Turtle]

Presupposition-Srki and gap srki merger (multiplication )

snip...

 

please do not ignore my questions. this is a discussion board and if you fail to discuss questions in good faith then your posts amount to little more than spam on our board.

[Qfwfq]

Marjanovic, mathematics is all a matter of defining and constructing. However, it is no use unless it is intelligible and makes at least some kind of sense.

 

Nobody here can follow what you are doing. It seems to be meant as proposing your very own number theory but you might as well be posting Chinese ideograms, Egyptian hieroglyphs or whatever else, we would hardly understand less than how well we understand what you are doing in this thread. You see, if you propose your own thing you can't expect others to understand it unless it is crystal clear and as easy as possible for someone to follow.

 

Don't expect people to make a greater effort than they are, so far. If you want somebody to take an interest in it, you have to make sure it is worth the effort. This may be either by making it worth enough or by making the effort not excessive, preferably both.

[msbiljanica]

Marjanovic, mathematics is all a matter of defining and constructing. However, it is no use unless it is intelligible and makes at least some kind of sense.

 

Nobody here can follow what you are doing. It seems to be meant as proposing your very own number theory but you might as well be posting Chinese ideograms, Egyptian hieroglyphs or whatever else, we would hardly understand less than how well we understand what you are doing in this thread. You see, if you propose your own thing you can't expect others to understand it unless it is crystal clear and as easy as possible for someone to follow.

 

Don't expect people to make a greater effort than they are, so far. If you want somebody to take an interest in it, you have to make sure it is worth the effort. This may be either by making it worth enough or by making the effort not excessive, preferably both.

seems to me you do not understand, if you look at the present it has a lot of math axiom (line, plane, functions, addition, subtraction, ...), this fact limits the assignment of new things in math.

Example 1 - if we look along a, it can be described by real numbers, if removed along part of this new condition (b ) we can describe the number of ,so I ask you what number to describe the new state, to present the mathematics there is no response ?

Example 2 - the current math addition and subtraction is set axiom, in my math is adding geometric relationship between the two long (natural base), thus you miss out on new forms of adding

subtraction is the current axiom of mathematics, if you look at the previous picture (a2) and apply it clear where the longer you will have contact subtract (b2), or the revocation of the term derived from the adding,with current mathematics deprived you of new forms of subtract

Example 3 - Z ÷ (10 ^ n) = R, a simple proof that the same numbers two times defined, that is a fraction unfinished calculations divisions, that the previous mathematicians knew about the destruction of the unit (about when we get to the real mathematics) does not introduced to fractions

_______________________-

numbers, formulas, the calculation is actually a ratio of two (more) geometrical object written signs. so it is actually my math geometry, and watch as the ratio of two (more) geometrical object, to each new geometric object obtained from the observed relations between the two (more) geometrical object, written signs (calculation)

My first is a geometric object (natural along), and if I defined what is the point and the basic rule to connect the two (more) along natural , everything else from that start, I hope that you understand the essence

[msbiljanica]

Presupposition-Subtraction form a-(s.0/s.0)b=0,a-(s.0/s.0)b-(s.0/s.0)b=0 , ...,a-(s.0/s.0)b-

...-(s.0/s.0)b=0 can be written differently counting the subtraction

Process:

P1 12-(..0)4=12 (..c) -counting the subtraction

12-(..1)4=8

12-(..2)4=4

12-(..3)4=0

12:4=3

General form

a-(..0)b=a

a-(..1)b=c

...

a-(..d)b=0

a:b=d

 

[s34]-counting the subtraction

[s35]-divide

CM-[s34]-does no know ,[s35]-know, axiom

[Turtle]

seems to me you do not understand, if you look at the present it has a lot of math axiom (line, plane, functions, addition, subtraction, ...), this fact limits the assignment of new things in math.

Example 1 - if we look along a, it can be described by real numbers, if removed along part of this new condition (b ) we can describe the number of ,so I ask you what number to describe the new state, to present the mathematics there is no response ?

...

 

thanks for getting in line. i will start with your line that you asked me about. here is how i described it.

 

first, i saved the png file and then opened it in paint. i turned on the rulers in units of pixels and putting the cursor on the end points of your solid line and divided line i took their measures in units of pixels. i then added marks at all end-points. below each line at the marks i added the count of pixels starting from 0 (zero) at the left. above each line segment, and the gap in line b, i wrote the length of the segment.

 

so, your first line is 445 units (pixels) long and your second line is 445 units long with an 85 unit segment missing between 145 units and 230 units leaving a gap 85 units long.

 

so, please discuss my description of your lines. i also want to ask you, how is the location of your gap of any difference from other possible gap locations or lengths?

[Qfwfq]

seems to me you do not understand,

Indeed nobody here understands what you expound. The reason is that you do absolutely nothing to make it understandable for anyone except those able to read your mind. Since I so far have never observed telepathy, nor do I know of any reliable witness to such phenomena, I rest of the opinion that it's up to you to make yourself understood, or otherwise give up all hope of receiving any whatsoever interest.

 

if you look at the present it has a lot of math axiom (line, plane, functions, addition, subtraction, ...), this fact limits the assignment of new things in math.

Indeed, any axiom or definition places a slight limitation on further ones being added to the same topic (or, in technical terms, to the same formal system). As I said, math is all a matter of defining and constructing and it seems you did not understand that I said this.

 

The limitation can be put very simply: Any further ones must not lead to contradictions with the others. You may choose your own definitions and axioms as you please, if you don't make it an existing formal system, as long as your own ones are consistent with each other.

 

It remains that, if you do so, or if you add your own ones to existing formal systems, even if they are altogether perfectly self consistent, you can't expect to receive the slightest bit of interest if you don't clearly lay out what you mean by the terms and symbols that you use, whenever they aren't according to well known, established convention. People can't read your mind you see. Only at that point you can expect that somebody might make the effort to follow you and judge your work.

 

so I ask you what number to describe the new state, to present the mathematics there is no response ?

How many angels can stand on the point of a needle?

 

Without a definition of angel that determines the answer, it could be any number. Perhaps even an imaginary or complex number. Only if a suitable definition of angel is given that is useful to the purpose of determining the answer to such a question. You haven't supplied definitions sufficient for me to even attempt to determine an answer to the red question that you posed.