7-- AP's 199th book A book of New Age, New Wave math conjectures

Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
Sep 9, 2021, 2:57:45 AM
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Making up a brand new conjecture is a lot easier than proving a conjecture, but here I think I am going to prove my below, after some modifications.

> So let me make this my 199th book of science, a new era of Math Conjectures since AP solved all the Old Math conjectures outstanding. We need a new era to wile away the time of math professors.
>
> Since the last conjecture I solved was Collatz, let me start with a New Era, New Wave of conjectures starting with a conjecture that looks like a Collatz type of problem.
> On Wednesday, September 8, 2021 at 1:56:49 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > Having Conquered Collatz conjecture by AP in 2016, thoroughly conquering and destroying Collatz with AP's famous 4 Consecutive Evens in a Row Proof. That AP is drafting a New Age type of Collatz conjecture to keep rumdummy math professors active for another 100 years in their "no logical brains to be in mathematics".
> >
> > Now AP is well known for making the most difficult math conjectures, unproven for 2,000 years look like a piece of cake in solving. AP is well known for that. Or in the case of Riemann Hypothesis and Twin Primes Infinitude, where AP offers not only a proof, but two alternative proofs, instead of 1, yet the rest of the math community pulling out there hair for just a beginning lead into a proof.
> >
> > AP's fearsome conquering of math conjectures that no math professor even has a hope of indulging is matched by AP's simplicity of proof. I mean, well, there you have a childish silly idiotic Wiles proof of Fermat's Last Theorem in 150 pages of mind numbing nonsense because Wiles proof is a scam, scam scam spam on par with John Gabriel scam spam that even street suckers, and loolipop suckers of Simon Singh and Kevin Hartnett soak in as if on a Bermuda vacation. Whereas AP's true proof of math of Fermat's Last Theorem is just a sentence long 2+2=2x2=4 yet no N+N+N= NxNxN = M allows for solutions to Pythagorean theorem but none for exp 3 and higher. And something that even crumby science reporters like Simon Singh or Kevin Hartnett can carry home and put bacon on the table for their households.
> >
> > So AP is more than a conqueror, more than Peter the Great or Ivan the Terrible or veni, vedi, vici, as Julius Caesar famously said crossing the Mississippi, et tu, Brute.
> >
> > So AP is assembling a New Wave, a New Age Conjecture to keep math pinheads occupied in their driverless cars to and from the university down the turnpike, or in train terminals.
> >
> > AP's conjecture
> >
> > We take Successive Evens 4 in a row and add and multiply.
> >
> > 2+4 = 6 4+6 = 10 6+8 = 14
> > 2x4 = 8 4x6 = 24 6x8 = 48
> >
> > then the next set of 4 consecutive evens
> >
> > 10+12 =22 14 +16=30 18+20=38
> > 10x12=120 14x16=224 18x20=360
> >
> > Now we do the same thing with odd numbers
> >
> > 1+3 = 4 5+7=12 9+11=20
> > 1x3= 3 5x7= 35 9x11=99
> >

So in this conjecture I wanted a flavor of Galois Algebra but also a flavor of Collatz. And if I make some modifications I believe I can prove this conjecture.

> Now AP threw out Galois Algebra as unnecessary crap, for the mistake of Galois was to be ignorant of a axiom of mathematics of algebra. All equations of mathematics must never have a zero all alone on the rightside of the equation, worse yet is to have negative numbers all alone on the rightside of the equation. Or, any number that is not a positive Decimal Grid Number all alone on the rightside of the equation is not a equation of mathematics.
>
> Call it the Axiom of Equation. All valid equations of math are ones in which there is a positive non zero Decimal Grid Number all alone on the rightside of the equation at all times. (If you are Chinese, then leftside.)
>
> So the mistake Galois made was he never knew or learned this essential axiom of mathematics, and thus, he wasted his life in mathematics on Galois algebras.
>
> The solution or proof of Collatz of 1937 is a one sentence proof that in all and any 4 consecutive Even numbers, one of them is a factor of 8 and will slide you down faster to 1 than ever landing on a even number. So all Counting Numbers have this backbone of 4 consecutive Evens in a row.
>
> So, can we make a modern day New Wave, New Era Collatz type of conjecture and bring in Galois also? Although Collatz is relatively recent in 1937 while Galois goes back to the 1800s.
>
> So yesterday I started making a algebra type matrix with that of consecutive evens and consecutive odds.
>
> 2+4 = 6, 4+6 = 10, 6+8 = 14
> 2x4 = 8, 4x6 = 24, 6x8 = 48
>
> 1+3 = 4, 3+5 =8, 5+7=12,
> 1x3= 3, 3x5=15, 5x7=35
>
> So, let us input Galois 4 by 4 matrix. And couple it with Collatz 4 consecutive Evens and 4 consecutive Odds in a row.
>
> Now we can only use addition and multiplication.
>
> Conjecture-- there exists a unique pattern that encompasses all the counting numbers starting with 3. In the above I can only obtain 3,4,5, 6, missing 7, missing 9, missing 11, etc. The pattern is not the default pattern of 2+2k for even and 1+2k for odd. Or, is the default pattern the only such that includes all the counting numbers starting with 3.
>

Let me modify that Conjecture considerably for I have the hankering that only the Default Pattern exists 2+2k for all evens and 1+2k for all odds. That is it, end of story.

However if I bring in the Concept of Infinity borderline 1*10^604, this conjecture takes on a brand new story line, and a surprizing story line at that.

The only thing we save from Collatz is the 3N+1 only we use the 3 in division for all odd numbers.
Of course we use 2 for all even numbers.

Now one beauty of the Decimal Grid System as the true numbers of mathematics, that I can predict what happens in 1*10^604 by pretending 10 is the infinity borderline and thus 100 as 10^2 is the algebraic completeness (Galois)..

So Old Math had only 2+2K and 1+2K for all evens and all odds.

But if we started at infinity (pretend 10) and start at the algebraic closure 100 and divide by 3 as we descend to 10 do we all the Odd numbers 1,3,5, 7,9 in 10 Grid. So as we descend from 100 we are dividing 3 into so called infinity numbers and as we reach 27 we get 9 and 21 we get 7 and 15 we get 5 and have to take 1 and 3 as givens. Now as we descend and divide by 2 starting at 20 we get 10 then at 16 we get 8 and at 12 we get 6. And we have to take 4 and 2 as given.

So here I shift the original conjecture to that of being this new one.

Modified Conjecture of Collatz and Galois: If we start at Infinity Borderline and divide by 3, we get all the odd numbers except for a few givens as we descend from the algebraic closure. And dividing by 2 we get all the evens except for a few givens. And a side question, in our descent we do not have to start at algebraic closure but can start far lower and what specifically is that lower number? For example in 10 Grid we could start at 20 instead of 100 for we pick up 9 from 18/2. But this is risky, for maybe in the 100 Grid with algebraic closure 10000, that we do not get 99 by division of 2.

So whereas Old Math had 2+2K and 1+2K, that New Math also has closure/3 = all odd and closure/2= all evens except for a few givens.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
Sep 9, 2021, 6:00:41 PM (2 days ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Since AP conquered most of Old Math conjectures, time for AP to assemble the new set of Conjectures to be proven for the future.

to Plutonium Atom Universe
Having Conquered Collatz conjecture by AP in 2016, thoroughly conquering and destroying Collatz with AP's famous 4 Consecutive Evens in a Row Proof. That AP is drafting a New Age type of Collatz conjecture to keep rumdummy math professors active for...

Archimedes Plutonium
Sep 8, 2021, 1:56:49 PM
to sci.math
Having Conquered Collatz conjecture by AP in 2016, thoroughly conquering and destroying Collatz with AP's famous 4 Consecutive Evens in a Row Proof. That AP is drafting a New Age type of Collatz conjecture to keep rumdummy math professors active for another 100 years in their "no logical brains to be in mathematics".

Now AP is well known for making the most difficult math conjectures, unproven for 2,000 years look like a piece of cake in solving. AP is well known for that. Or in the case of Riemann Hypothesis and Twin Primes Infinitude, where AP offers not only a proof, but two alternative proofs, instead of 1, yet the rest of the math community pulling out there hair for just a beginning lead into a proof.

AP's fearsome conquering of math conjectures that no math professor even has a hope of indulging is matched by AP's simplicity of proof. I mean, well, there you have a childish silly idiotic Wiles proof of Fermat's Last Theorem in 150 pages of mind numbing nonsense because Wiles proof is a scam, scam scam spam on par with John Gabriel scam spam that even street suckers, and loolipop suckers of Simon Singh and Kevin Hartnett soak in as if on a Bermuda vacation. Whereas AP's true proof of math of Fermat's Last Theorem is just a sentence long 2+2=2x2=4 yet no N+N+N= NxNxN = M allows for solutions to Pythagorean theorem but none for exp 3 and higher. And something that even crumby science reporters like Simon Singh or Kevin Hartnett can carry home and put bacon on the table for their households.

I believe I have gotten up to Conjecture #14.

So far I have not done any conjecture directly involving Calculus so I need to work on providing conjectures with Calculus. In my latest TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, however I have endeavored to get rid of entire Multivariable Calculus and will be making a conjecture on that shortly.

But I am fascinated immensely by a Arithmetic fact of life, one that has intrigued me ever since I learned it College. The idea that the square root of any number except 0 converges to 1. Whether a big number or a small number between 0 and 1. Taking successive square roots converges to 1.

CONJECTURE #14

Statement: Now square root of any given number is like a speed or velocity to converge to 1, and that speed and velocity should be symmetrical. So for instance starting with 100 or with 0.01 and the square root is 10 and 0.1 respectively. Alright, the symmetry is maintained. Again, this convergence is like a symmetrical speed or velocity. Next we have square root of 10 and 0.1 respectively. And that becomes 3.162277.... and 0.3162277... respectively, and symmetry maintained. Now the next square root is 1.7782... and 0.562.... and the symmetry thus disappears. Now, the intriguing part of this Conjecture is that I maintain the reason for the disappearance of symmetry, when they should be still symmetrical is because the true numbers of mathematics are not the Reals with their continuum garbage but rather, the true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid numbers and when we use strictly decimal Grid numbers we maintain symmetry throughout the speed or velocity of square root operator.

AP
King of Science, especially Physics

🦇 of Math and 🦨 of Physics Archimedes "Drag Queen of Science"
Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> blathered:
>
> Earlier today I wrote this conjecture on a missing regular polyhedron,
> to make 6 in total in existence.
>
>> CONJECTURE #12
>>
>> Statement: There are 6 regular polyhedron in all. Old Math missed a
>> regular polyhedra of 0 face and infinitude sides of a regular
polygon. We think of this object as a sphere, but it is a sphere-like
polyhedra. In some respects this Sphere-Polyhedra is the dual of the
Tetrahedron just as the Cube is the dual of the Octahedron, and just as
the Dodecahedron is the dual of the Icosahedron.

Silly Plutonium, the dual of the tetrahedron is the tetrahedron. So
what is the dual of your made-up 6th regular polyhedron? Do you even
know what the dual of a polyhedron even is? I didn't think so.

>> In true math, there are no curves at all but

WARNING TO STUDENTS, PARENTS and TEACHERS: Archimedes Plutonium is
offering to teach your children his broken physics and math. BEWARE! He
will corrupt the minds of your children! Mr. Plutonium is not content to
be a failure of math and physics all by himself. He wants everyone else
to fail as well! He teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as
atoms contain the unstable muon, the ellipse isn't a conic section, that
there
are no negative numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine wave isn't
sinusoidal but semicircles, cycloids or parabolas (depending on his
mood), plus many, many other instances of bad math and physics.

Plutonium has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books
on Usenet. That has failed until now, perhaps in part due to the fact
Usenet is an old, dying medium few modern students even know of, much
less use. However, Mr. Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing
his dangerous books for free on Kindle. This has greatly increased the
danger to our students!

One of his dangerous tricks is teach false Boolean logic such as 10 AND 2
= 12. His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a
false statement that nobody believes, such as 10 OR 2 = 12, say that it
is false (which it is), but then he'll try to replace it with another
similar false statement such as 10 AND 2 = 12, in order to really confuse
future computer scientists. Plutonium is taking advantage of the fact
that AND means different things in Boolean logic and elementary
arithmetic, as AND is an informal synonym for plus/addition. It is
important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by modern computers, 10 OR 2 = 10 and 10 AND 2 = 2. Of
course in pure Boolean logic the only possible values are true and false
(1 or 0), so in pure Boolean logic the statements "10 AND 2" and "10 OR
2" don't even make sense. Don't let evil Plutonium's bad logic confuse
you!

Additionally, Plutonium has started a Cult of Failure. He is trying to
convince students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god of
failure. This cult is anti-science and anti-mathematics. Its only goal is
to promote failure in math and science.

Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of our youth like this.
Perhaps he is envious of their potential success, which he never had
because he is a failure at math and science. Plutonium is not content to
be a failure at math and physics all by himself. He wants everyone to
fail as well. Some claim he is an agent of China, in order for them to
dominate the world economy. Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of North
Korea. Most likely he is an agent of Putin and Russia, because he has
previously attempted to summon Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new,
true mathematics" in an attempt to destroy mathematics. But the point is,
stay away, if he offers to give or sell you his dangerous books.
Especially now since they are available for free from otherwise
legitimate Amazon.
>
> AP
> King of Pretend Science, especially Pretend Physics

Cindy Marten "evil stalker shithead" Miguel Cardona, Dr. Panchanathan flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

Re: Cindy Marten "evil stalker shithead" NSF Dr. Panchanathan flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
On Monday, September 13, 2021 at 1:50:33 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🦇 of Math and 🦨 of Physics Cindy Marten "Drag Queen of Science"
> Philip J. Hanlon> blathered:

AP writes: AP no longer tolerates criminal stalking by Kibo Parry (Moroney) of 28 years nonstop attack. So AP shreds every one of Kibo Parry's attacks and spits them back out.