AP's 188th book of science// Practice in turning statements of language into formulas and equations of math and logic & Default Units of Calculus 5m views Subscribe

My expected 241st book of science// Practice in turning statements of language into formulas and equations of math and logic& Default Units of Calculus
5m views
Subscribe

Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
Apr 29, 2022, 1:59:55 AM (yesterday)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
My expected 241st book of science// Practice in turning statements of language into formulas and equations of math and logic

241st book of science for AP

My expected 240th book is how Parametric Equations are thrown out of math, because simply the only valid function is a polynomial function, so there is no need for parametric equations. In the course of that conversation in sci.math, a Hugh popped up to put a hate-filled stalker in place. And looking at Hugh's put down of Jan Burse, I was wondering of a correct translation into a math formula of the language statement. I had done this type of work in logic classes when I attended college in early 1970s and found it fun to do these translations. So I think the subject of Logic is deserving of having a book, workbook that translates ordinary language statements into quantified logic or math formulas or equations.

Really, a scientist can never really get enough logic and logic practice in their lifetime career in science.

Practice on how to turn statements of language into formulas and equations of math and logic.

by Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

Apr 28, 2022, 1:01:01 AM

to sci.math

On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 3:01:04 PM UTC-5, Hugh Itoh wrote:

> Mostowski Collapse wrote:

> AP forget twice as much mathematics you think you can do.

>

In my college training of Logic, formal logic, two years of logic. We had lessons in which we take sentences and transcribe them into mathematical logical quantity formulas.

So let me see if I can transcribe Hugh's sentence which was meant to be:

AP forgot twice as much mathematics, that Jan Burse will ever do in his entire lifetime.

So if I can remember back to 1970, over 50 years ago. Interesting and let us give it a try. And by the way, the DC Dan Christensen poop crap certainly cannot do anything remotely like this-- quantify a sentence of a language into math.

Let me denote these:

AP_t.k. = AP's total knowledge

AP_f.k. = forgotten AP knowledge

JB_t.k. = Jan Burse's total knowledge

Do I need a forgotten knowledge of Jan Burse? I do not think so, at this moment anyway.

So we have AP_t.k. = Summation of every piece of knowledge for 72 years subtract AP_f.k.

For Jan Burse we have JB_t.k. = 1/2 (AP_f.k.)

Now I should be able to make this more detailed.

So in every year that AP gains knowledge we have 72(AP_t.k.)

And let us say that AP forgot in those 72 years, let us say he forgot 2 years worth of logic.

So we have 72(AP_t.k.) - (2)

That would leave the total knowledge accessible for the brain of Jan Burse would be 1/2(-2).

In other words, the brains of Jan Burse, Swiss Zurich ETH, are brains that can accummulate in his lifetime of the knowledge that AP picked up in 1 year time.

So the brains of AP would be a graph of Y = 72x while the brains of Jan Burse would be a graph of Y= 1

AP brains graphed would look like this:

knowledge gained

| /

|/

|/__________

While Jan Burse brains graphed for 72 years would look like this:

|

|

|--------------------_________________knowledge gained

No, definitely the DC Dan Christensen nutjob proof machine could never give pictures or formulas

Archimedes Plutonium

Apr 28, 2022, 10:30:25 AM

to sci.math

Calling on failure of Logic Dan Christensen with his failed machine of DC proof. Yoo, Dan, you logic failure, how do you translate the below, with or without your failed DC proof. I am sure I made errors, for the below was my first take on "AP forgot more math than twice the amount of math Jan Burse will ever learn in his entire lifetime".

DC how do you quantify that into logic, you ignorant waif with your AND truth table of TFFF when it is actually TTTF.

I tease Dan because he believes Boole is correct with AND truth table being TFFF which leads to the absurdity of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction. Of course the real truth table of AND connector is TTTF, for we never want to throw out the baby in the bathwater. All it takes for AND to be true is for one of many statements to be true, hence all of them together must be true, even if all the rest of the collective statements is false.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
Apr 29, 2022, 12:38:05 PM (yesterday)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
This is going to be one of my most important books of science. And it is a nexus of Logic and Mathematics. Not only practice in turning sentences of language into logic and math formulas or equations but in a units calibration of all of physical science.

Calculus involves Functions and functions are all polynomials. Functions are a subset of Equations. For equations embody far more than just polynomials.

Formulas are incomplete equations. We can look at formulas the same way we look at Rational numbers are fractions. The only true numbers that exist are Decimal Grid Numbers, so a number such as 1.3 exists, 1.33 exists, 1.333 exists etc. But 4/3 is a rational number which is an incomplete division. It is "not a number at all". For 4/3 is not divided out to be a specific 1.3, 1.33, 1.333, 1.3333, 1.33333, .... in this sequence of Decimal Grid numbers. So a representation of a number is 4/3 but not a true number as is, until divided out and given a assigned Decimal Grid Number. In the same scheme, a formula is a equation but not specific enough.

For example, Y = x^2 is a polynomial and also a equation and also a function. And AP_t.k. = x^2 is a formula and is a equation but it is not a polynomial for we do not know what AP_t.k. represents for it certainly does not represent the graphing coordinate system of x and y axes.

Now, I need to get to a Units Calibration of all Physical Sciences.

Since the only true functions are polynomials and all the rest need to be transformed over an interval if not a polynomial and thus converted into a polynomial to be used in calculus. We need a Units Calibration.

The Power Rules are two of them. For derivative of polynomial x^2 it is 2x^1 where the rule is --- throw the exponent to be a coefficient and subtract 1 from existing exponent. That language translation becomes -- take the 2 and place in front of x, now subtract 1 from 2 leaving us 1, so our final answer is 2x. Reader, try it out on x^3 and x^4. For x^3 we throw 3 in front of the x to be 3x, and for the final exponent we subtract 1 from 3 to give us 2, leaving us with 3x^2 for derivative of x^3.

The Power Rule for Integral is easy as well, and a reversal. So for example x^2 we take the exponent and add 1 and divide it into 1, thus we have 1/3 and for the final exponent we add 1 to given exponent, leaving us with 1/3x^3.

Now notice, that the Integral is the reverse of derivative for if we take the derivative of 1/3x^3 we end up with our original polynomial function of x^2.

In fact, we can say that the proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is as simple as the explanation of the two Power Rules, one for derivative and one for integral. That one is the reverse of the other.

But let me get down to business of this post. I want Units Calibration for All Physical Sciences.

So, if I start with the polynomial of straight line as I worked out in the Sentence: The total brains of Jan Burse is 1/2 the brains of all that AP has forgotten knowledge. Where my first attempt of translating that language statement into math or logic formula was a straight line formula of 72AP_t.k. - 2.

One can easily see that if all of science were confined to Area as x^2, and function as Y= mx+b, then the derivative is a constant function Y = k.

This limits me too much. This limits and bounds all science too narrowly and too strictly.

So what I need to do is expand the boundary of All Physical Science so that the Integral is at least x^3, making the function be x^2 and thus the derivative be a straight line of Y = mx+b.

Before, in Old Math, they limited themselves to integral being x^2, then function was x and finally their derivative was a constant k. That is far far too narrow minded and restrictive.

And so, we need to up the ante in all of physical science. We need for the Calculus integral to be volume of Y= x^3 at a minimum. That gives us the function as x^2 and the derivative as Y = mx+b, a straightline function.

This calibration upwards of at least Y = x^3 for science is necessary.

And we can easily see that Geometry requires this Upward Calibration for we have a square x^2 as starting polynomial function. Say our square is of side 2, then area is 4, the integral would be x^3 be 8, the derivative would be x or 1, (note: I ignore coefficients in power rules). Say our starting square is 3, then area is 9, the integral is volume and is 27, the derivative is x or 3.

If I did what Old Math does as that of integral as area, then the function is a straightline Y = mx+b, and the derivative is always a constant. This is too impoverished of math for physical science, and what it requires is a recalibration upwards so as to include "volume in geometry" not just area.. This allows for the derivative to be more than a constant k, for every function. It allows the derivative to be one of the infinite choices of Y = mx+b.

It is highly likely the more important question of Default Units, is the upper bound not the lower bound. The Lower Bound is for a function to be x^2 then its derivative is Y= mx+b, the standard straightline, and thus the default integral is x^3.

But the upper bound is the more important question. Is there a upper bound for Physics. A problem I have been wrestling with for 3 decades. The largest exponents I see in physics are in electricity&magnetism and thermodynamics of x^5. So is x^5 the upper bound in physics. The lower bound is Y= mx+b.

AP

STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 6:09:10 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium (AP) wrote:
> AP's 188th book ...

When will you learn, Archie Poo???

AP is a malicious internet troll who wants only to mislead and confuse you. He may not be all there, but his fake math and science can only be meant to promote failure in schools. One can only guess at his motives.

In AP's OWN WORDS here:

“Primes do not exist, because the set they were borne from has no division.”
--June 29, 2020

“The last and largest finite number is 10^604.”
--June 3, 2015

“0 appears to be the last and largest finite number”
--June 9, 2015

“0/0 must be equal to 1.”
-- June 9, 2015

“0 is an infinite irrational number.”
--June 28, 2015

“No negative numbers exist.”
--December 22, 2018

“Rationals are not numbers.”
--May 18, 2019

According to AP's “chess board math,” an equilateral triangle is a right-triangle.
--December 11, 2019

Which could explain...

“The value of sin(45 degrees) = 1.”
--May 31, 2019

AP deliberately and repeatedly presented the truth table for OR as the truth table for AND:

“New Logic
AND
T & T = T
T & F = T
F & T = T
F & F = F”
--November 9, 2019

AP seeks aid of Russian agents to promote failure in schools:

"Please--Asking for help from Russia-- russian robots-- to create a new, true mathematics [sic]. What I like for the robots to do, is list every day, about 4 Colleges ( of the West) math dept, and ask why that math department is teaching false and fake math, and if unable to change to the correct true math, well, simply fire that math department until they can find professors who recognize truth in math from fakery...."
--November 9, 2017

And if that wasn't weird enough...

“The totality, everything that there is [the universe], is only 1 atom of plutonium [Pu]. There is nothing outside or beyond this one atom of plutonium.”
--April 4, 1994

“The Universe itself is one gigantic big atom.”
--November 14, 2019

AP's sinister Atom God Cult of Failure???

“Since God-Pu is marching on.
Glory! Glory! Atom Plutonium!
Its truth is marching on.
It has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
It is sifting out the hearts of people before its judgment seat;
Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer it; be jubilant, my feet!
Our God-Pu is marching on.”
--December 15, 2018 (Note: Pu is the atomic symbol for plutonium)

Dan

Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

Now the first one of these statements we translate from language into a formula or equation of logic or math was this.
(1) 1/2 of what AP forgot in mathematics is the total amount of math knowledge that Swiss Jan Burse (ETH) will ever learn and acquire in his entire lifetime.
So, well, let us try a new statement to translate.
(2) The amount of error filled and fake science knowledge that Dan Christensen accepts and believes-in, is 90% greater than the amount of true science knowledge that Dan Christensen accepts.
(3) Now here is a statement that appears in my 104th book of science:
How Gigantic insects, plants evolved in Devonian, Dragonflies // evolution series, book 3
by Archimedes Plutonium
And now let us see if we can translate this language into a single clean formula or equation.
4) In Devonian, Earth was 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/8 the mass it is today.
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 12:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The Devonian geological age was 400 million years ago. Approximately
3 time intervals of Doubling was the Devonian from today. That meant the
Earth was 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/8 the mass it is today. Our Moon is roughly
1/100 the mass of Earth
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium...@gmail.com>
The Devonian geological age was 400 million years ago. Approximately 3 time intervals of Doubling was the Devonian from today. That meant the Earth was 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/8 the mass it is today. Our Moon is roughly 1/100 the mass of Earth.
So, let us do this so that all students can learn the math behind this. Much of it is calculus and using formulas, but then we lose a lot of people in biology with math that they do not use on a daily basis. It is important to recognize that if you do not use math on a daily basis, you easily get lost with the math. And that is exactly what we want to avoid in science. Math is a tool, not a wrecking ball.
So, I have the situation where Earth is 4,500,000,000 years old plus the fact that the Devonian geological age is where gigantic dragonfly start to appear and other gigantic animals and plants (giant ferns, giant horsetails, Carboniferous). The age of the Devonian was 400,000,000 years ago.
The Faraday Law inside of each atom is a doubling over time of that same atom of hydrogen. So at t_0 we have one atom of hydrogen and at t_1 we have 2 atoms of hydrogen, and at the same interval of time t_2 we doubled the 2 to be 4 now. So a doubling in physics. So we write out a chart.
Number of Hydrogen atoms                      Doubling time interval             Math form
1                                                                              t_0                                         2^0
2                                                                             t_1                                          2^1
4                                                                             t_2                                         2^2
8                                                                             t_3                                         2^3
16                                                                           t_4                                         2^4
32                                                                          t_5                                          2^5
.                                                                                .                                              .
.                                                                                .                                              .
1,073,741,824                                                       t_30                                       2^30
2,147,483,648                                                      t_31                                       2^31
4,294,967,296                                                      t_32                                      2^32
Now I stop there because it is nearby to the total time covered of 4,500,000,000
And here is where I divide that time of Earth existence by the number 32 in order to get what the doubling time interval is all about.
4,500,000,000/ 32 = approx 140,000,000
So my time interval in Nature for a hydrogen atom to double itself by Faraday law electricity going on inside the hydrogen atom is approx 140 million years of a time interval. Every hydrogen atom in Nature, in the Universe doubles itself in 140 million years.

Doesn't make any sense to prove existence of add/3 with 762 proof lines.

Dan Christensen schrieb am Samstag, 30. April 2022 um 22:39:44 UTC+2:
> This is how it is done: https://dcproof.com/ConstructAddFunction.htm

And where is a proof of EXIST(n):Peano(n) ? You don't have a powerful
set theory, like ZFC would be, that could prove that. In ZFC you
could do such a construction, by means of the Axiom of Infinity (AOI).

You are just a crank. You don't understand that mathematics works:

- definition
- lemma
- theorem

This building block is hardly used:

- axiom

Now you have axioms for Peano, and don't prove EXIST(n):Peano(n).

Dan Christensen schrieb am Sonntag, 1. Mai 2022 um 05:52:27 UTC+2:
> STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science