221st book of science by AP New Geometry Calculus-- the factorial as a circuit motion This book is in conjunction with my Potential Energy book. I noticed that physics has a difficult time in having physical meaning of a number as large as
5k views

221st book of science by AP

New Geometry Calculus-- the factorial as a circuit motion

This book is in conjunction with my Potential Energy book.

I noticed that physics has a difficult time in having physical meaning of a number as large as 1*10^604 and as small as 1*10^-604.

There is nothing in Old Physics that reaches these numbers, except for factorial. And especially the factorial of nucleons position in say Element 118..

So here in Element 118 we can reach 296 nucleons and when we do a 296! we reach 10^604.

And there is a geometry meaning to factorial.

The easiest geometry is seating arrangements. So if you have 10 people to seat at a dinner table, what is the total number of possible arrangements? And the answer is 10!.

But notice also, that the factorial seems to be a go around phenomenon, a circuit like in physics electric current.

So, can we build the factorial multiplication as a new form of calculus?

A calculus that is geometrical but also quantitative. The quantity is simply the factorial arithmetic. The geometry is the total arrangements. And those total arrangements have a motion, a motion that is so crucial for calculus.

So when I publish this book on Potential Energy of Physics, I am going to simultaneously or concurrent or in conjunction publish this book on mathematics geometry of the missing geometry concept of factorial as a geometrical calculus of circuit motion.

So as we think of magnetic monopoles or dipoles of current in a electric circuit, we can also think of that current as a factorial. The current is in motion and the factorial geometry is all possible arrangements and those arrangements are begot from the motion of discrete particles.

So for example, we have a current of electricity of 3 monopoles of 0.5MeV each. In factorial that is 3! = 1x2x3 = 6. So we have a circuit of 6 waves going around.

Physics needs the factorial multiplication to reach infinity borderline. Math needs that factorial to complete multiplication for geometry.

The exponent is unable to reach 10^604 in physics concepts for volume is multiplication by 3 terms length, width, depth. But the factorial is not encumbered with 3 terms.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

Alright, let me enrich this geometry calculus. For volume is a static number begot from the multiplication of 3 parameters in 3rd dimension. While Factorial is a geometry of motion, as I said earlier, think of 10 people around a table to be seated and all the possible arrangements is exactly 10!. Quite amazing that all possible arrangements is a multiplication of that number.

But that is with counting numbers, so let us enrich this new geometry motion concept into that of Decimal Grid Systems, and make it a full bodied concept.

So in 10 Grid and all other grid systems we define the Factorial to be a multiplication of all the numbers in between an interval.

So in 10 Grid, what is the factorial for interval 1.0 to 1.3? This would be 1x1.1x1.2x1.3 = 1.716. And our answer is not a 10 Grid number but belongs in the 1000 Decimal Grid System. But that is no worry.

Now our interpretation of 1.716 is that it is a circuit of electricity go around as a current in that circuit. Just as our interpretation of 10! in Counting numbers is a table circuit and 10 people arranged in 10! possible ways.

So in Decimal Grid Systems we enrich the Geometry Calculus, the calculus of motion in a circuit by having factorial apply to all Decimal Grid Systems.

Now we ask for answer to a simple question.

1) If we allow for this definition of factorial placed on all Decimal Grid Systems, do we have a Completeness theorem? What I mean is whether every decimal Grid number comes from a factorial calculus? Are the factorials complete in Decimal Grid Numbers Systems. For example is there a factorial that achieves the number 1.9 ? or the number 237.877? Or are their holes and gaps of numbers that cannot be obtained from factorial?

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

Now the Factorial is a geometry operator and different from the Algebra operators of mathematics. As we easily can see that the back and forth movement of 10 people being seated in various arrangements around a dinner table. Which is 10!, and is a motion, wavelike motion of Geometry. It is the derivative wavelike motion of geometry, not algebra.

This then implies that Geometry has a integral calculus also. In Algebra we know the derivative and integral of Algebra from dy x dx is the integral of area under a graph in a particular interval and as dy/dx for the derivative.

In Geometry calculus, the factorial is derivative of motion in a wavelike manner, back and forth in different seating arrangements of 10 items (people, boxes, prisms, plants, trees).

In Geometry calculus we now need the integral of geometry, and since the factorial is derivative we can expect that some form of division is the integral of geometry calculus. A division that has say Universal Space is volume x times y times z. And divide a factorial from that Universal Space.

Completeness of Factorial

Now yesterday I discussed whether the factorial of Decimal Grid Systems is a complete algebra. Meaning: are all numbers in Decimal Grid System able to be produced from a particular factorial?

We know that in Counting Numbers we cannot access numbers like -- any odd number after 1. Not access 4, 8, 10, 12, .... and many others.

So having fractional decimal numbers, does that ease the list of ommissions? I would say somewhat because a number such as 0.7 in 10 Grid would be accepted as 0.72 in a higher Grid where we delete the 0.02 portion.

The question of Completeness will depend on the definition of a factorial. Do I define it as any consecutive string of numbers that is 2 or more numbers. So that a singlet number is not a factorial. So that 0.9 x 1.0 is a factorial but not 0.9 x 0.9. This raises the question of whether I must bring in exponential A^2, A^3 etc in order to well define factorial and whether it is a Completeness algebra.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

🐔 of Math and 🦃 of Physics Archimedes "barking fuckdog of illogic"
Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:

> Hoofington, is Kibo's "Cooking with *n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*" coming out before Xmas? And how does Kibo Parry M. gather up *n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*? A putty-knife?

I see ArchiePoo is listening to his lawyer, using his patented,
trademarked and copyrighted word, "*n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*" as much as
possible to reinforce his claim to the word, which ArchiePoo invented in
November 2017. The more ArchiePoo uses that word, the stronger his claim
that he invented and owns that word is. (I cannot write out his word
without ArchiePoo suing me for patent, trademark and copyright
infringement). I need to discuss with my own attorney whether I can
directly quote ArchiePoo when ArchiePoo himself uses his own word
"*n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*" or if I have to keep using asterisks.

The rumors I have been hearing is that ArchiePoo's favorite word,
"*n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*" is the password to gain entry to ArchiePoo's Cult
of Failure compound, rumored to lie just outside Gayville SD. Another
rumor is that "*n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*" is used at the end of every prayer to
the evil Plutonium Atom God of Failure, the way Christian prayers end
with "Amen".
>
> AP, Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
>