News

**yeswecan**

Disturbed nli Wrote:

Pi Wrote:
AC488 Wrote:
What OP has suggested is not new by any means.

Well known and no secret.

Once infinity was conquered by mathematicians the same process was applied to Zero.

This theory is over 40 years old and well known.

First of all "Infinity" was never "conquered" by the mathematical society, it was learned how to "ignore", and zero?.. zero was and "still is" not used in any 2D capacity whatsoever, as it "too" is ignored as a value....

If you tear apart the basic structures of math itself, strip away all the layers of BS on top, you are left with a very flawed system of operations, that reaches to every corner of current mathematical process in the world..

BUT!..

When you "patch it" and compensate by adjusting the basic parameters, then all the other mathematical systems to date, have a much greater potential then they do now..

I actually make zero do "work" by itself (thus being Quantified) ,,'
and (once again) this is given to you freely..

This is by far, not my :first rodeo" when dealing with it's detractors.. but the percentage of them are dropping, as people are becoming more aware of the world around them..

So no worries ..

Take it or leave it.. "your choice"...

I am working on a video for this as well, since multimedia is the :thing" nowadays...

Look this is the third time you have tried to pull this story here on LOP, each time you failed.
You have not quantified Zero. By you own admission you have "patched it" that is not quantifying it.
What you have don is exactly the same process used by mathematicians to do operations involving infinity.
Nothing new.

What you have proposed has been long known. All of the enabling technologies it enables have been applied.

This is a classic case of someone who thinks they can BS dumb people finding the wrong group of "dumb" people and trying to BS them.

Why isn't your application of theory published in the latest mathematics journals and papers? Because they could not accept you plagiarizing someone else's theory's that is why.
You have Zero chance of BSing them [divide by that if you like]

000ch!

**Mr.Clean**

LoP Guest Wrote:

Nahh there are only two operations in mathematics addition and multiplication

there is only addition.

All other ,all operations can be done with addition-digital logic.

as far as using 0, no.

what is something divided b y nothing???

what is something multiplied by nothing???

Pi Infinity User ID: 3.14159265 04-23-2012 01:32 AM

Disturbed nli Wrote:

Look this is the third time you have tried to pull this story here on LOP, each time you failed.
You have not quantified Zero. By you own admission you have "patched it" that is not quantifying it.
What you have don is exactly the same process used by mathematicians to do operations involving infinity.
Nothing new.

What you have proposed has been long known. All of the enabling technologies it enables have been applied.

This is a classic case of someone who thinks they can BS dumb people finding the wrong group of "dumb" people and trying to BS them.

Why isn't your application of theory published in the latest mathematics journals and papers? Because they could not accept you plagiarizing someone else's theory's that is why.
You have Zero chance of BSing them [divide by that if you like]

Allow me to elaborate on the "patch".. it is with the operator "subtraction".. no the concept..

and "Yes" it is new., it is a completely different take on basic math.. it's not really my fault you are myopic, and only want to berate, tear down, abscond, and of course lambaste logical concepts that prove most of what you believe in to be "flawed"..

I posted for QI.. you were there to demand "proof"...

I give proof of the "happy accident" that happened when I quantified Infinity (QI).. called Quantified Zero (QZ) because it does work by itself..

Yet you are here again, to defend a pointless and archaic, self centered, maniacal and pointless set of operations, that are so flawed, so unworkable in reality beyond basic functions, that trillions of dollars are spent each year, to achieve "NOTHING"..

Even now, it is STILL not your fault, it is the fault of your training, the constant hounding of repeat, repeat, repeat, until you are well trained (like a dog) and receive a "pedigree"...

And defense of such pedigree(s) are very much an art of "religion" and dogma..

I have Quantified Zero "itself" or would you care to offer more then detraction and personal assaults?.. show me where in this vast sea of myopia called 2D linear mathematics, that zero can be added, divided, subtracted, and multiplied "by itself?"..

It has not been "published" in journals, because the culture is defensive of what "already is", and it would actually upset the order, to such a degree, that many would resign, or outright defend to the death, their viewpoint, to the point of sabotaging it (this is history I speak of)..

This has to be done by the "citizens" outside of academia, because academia no longer teaches, but defines the words "regurgitation" quite admirably these days..

THAT, is why will not go that route, as I believe the people are far smarter then anyone gives them credit for and I broke it down to simple physical and repeatable objects, and basic math operations, in other words it has "reality" to back it up, not just by virtual reality alone (which is all that math is)..

I feel sorry for you (really I do), because you are defending linearity, against something you cannot defend against, which is simply "change"... Heartflowers

**Michael Alan Keith**

Is this practical in any way?

**Disturbed nli** Not the real one! User ID: 1 04-23-2012 01:43 AM

Pi Wrote:

Disturbed nli Wrote:
Look this is the third time you have tried to pull this story here on LOP, each time you failed.
You have not quantified Zero. By you own admission you have "patched it" that is not quantifying it.
What you have don is exactly the same process used by mathematicians to do operations involving infinity.
Nothing new.

What you have proposed has been long known. All of the enabling technologies it enables have been applied.

This is a classic case of someone who thinks they can BS dumb people finding the wrong group of "dumb" people and trying to BS them.

Why isn't your application of theory published in the latest mathematics journals and papers? Because they could not accept you plagiarizing someone else's theory's that is why.
You have Zero chance of BSing them [divide by that if you like]

Allow me to elaborate on the "patch".. it is with the operator "subtraction".. no the concept..

and "Yes" it is new., it is a completely different take on basic math.. it's not really my fault you are myopic, and only want to berate, tear down, abscond, and of course lambaste logical concepts that prove most of what you believe in to be "flawed"..

I posted for QI.. you were there to demand "proof"...

I give proof of the "happy accident" that happened when I quantified Infinity (QI).. called Quantified Zero (QZ) because it does work by itself..

Yet you are here again, to defend a pointless and archaic, self centered, maniacal and pointless set of operations, that are so flawed, so unworkable in reality beyond basic functions, that trillions of dollars are spent each year, to achieve "NOTHING"..

Even now, it is STILL not your fault, it is the fault of your training, the constant hounding of repeat, repeat, repeat, until you are well trained (like a dog) and receive a "pedigree"...

And defense of such pedigree(s) are very much an art of "religion" and dogma..

I have Quantified Zero "itself" or would you care to offer more then detraction and personal assaults?.. show me where in this vast sea of myopia called 2D linear mathematics, that zero can be added, divided, subtracted, and multiplied "by itself?"..

It has not been "published" in journals, because the culture is defensive of what "already is", and it would actually upset the order, to such a degree, that many would resign, or outright defend to the death, their viewpoint, to the point of sabotaging it (this is history I speak of)..

This has to be done by the "citizens" outside of academia, because academia no longer teaches, but defines the words "regurgitation" quite admirably these days..

THAT, is why will not go that route, as I believe the people are far smarter then anyone gives them credit for and I broke it down to simple physical and repeatable objects, and basic math operations, in other words it has "reality" to back it up, not just by virtual reality alone (which is all that math is)..

I feel sorry for you (really I do), because you are defending linearity, against something you cannot defend against, which is simply "change"...

He he. I know nothing about maths.
And you know nothing about explaining things.
Looks like we are even, again.

Any theory that cannot be explained so anybody can understand it is doomed to be worthless and discarded.

My gentle prodding was to see if you can explain it but you can't......so doomed to die as an application.

You have also failed to explain how it would make any technology more effective [again]

As you would know if you frequented this site regularly you have been beaten to the mark by one of our members who has done what you claim, but they are BSing us about how good it might be they have applied the theory to optical computing.

Optical computing and digital storage using OTS parts freely available to the public. It has been tested and now the soft ware is being completed.
Son everyone will be able to have Quantum Optical computing in their house for hundreds of dollars instead of the billions that the military has paid for theirs. These computers will also operate at room temp.

Pi Infinity User ID: 3.14159265 04-23-2012 01:43 AM

Mr.Clean Wrote:

there is only addition.

All other ,all operations can be done with addition-digital logic.

as far as using 0, no.

what is something divided b y nothing???

what is something multiplied by nothing???

Actually there is "five" basic operators, the same operators you are taught as a young child (add, subtract, multiply, divide, and equal)..
Advanced concepts cause one to ignore most of the operators basic functions, expects you to make sacrifices in logic, to have it work, asks you to ignore, assume, and to "never question" the results as being anything else but a factual product of the Infix process "after" the "[Equal]izer" operator....

Again not anybodies fault, we "all" grew up with this, but the reality is, we are eventually taught to be so myopic, that we refuse to question the "origins" of basic math.. this is a huge problem.. because even the basic structure of simple math, has many flaws in it as a "logical process" of operations, when trying to translate to physical reality or 3D reality ..

Since you program (I can assume), what if, you could "account" for zero, as a part of the process?.. what if you could make that damn place mat, become a number?..

What would the limits then be on your applications?, on your predictive natures in A.I.?..

And what if you could get to "keep" the original definition, while still being bale to use it as a quantified operation? (QZ)..

Think about that for a minute or two (if you wish).. Cheer

**Disturbed nli** Not the real one! User ID: 1 04-23-2012 01:45 AM

Disturbed nli Wrote:

Pi Wrote:
Disturbed nli Wrote:
Look this is the third time you have tried to pull this story here on LOP, each time you failed.
You have not quantified Zero. By you own admission you have "patched it" that is not quantifying it.
What you have don is exactly the same process used by mathematicians to do operations involving infinity.
Nothing new.

What you have proposed has been long known. All of the enabling technologies it enables have been applied.

This is a classic case of someone who thinks they can BS dumb people finding the wrong group of "dumb" people and trying to BS them.

Why isn't your application of theory published in the latest mathematics journals and papers? Because they could not accept you plagiarizing someone else's theory's that is why.
You have Zero chance of BSing them [divide by that if you like]

Allow me to elaborate on the "patch".. it is with the operator "subtraction".. no the concept..

and "Yes" it is new., it is a completely different take on basic math.. it's not really my fault you are myopic, and only want to berate, tear down, abscond, and of course lambaste logical concepts that prove most of what you believe in to be "flawed"..

I posted for QI.. you were there to demand "proof"...

I give proof of the "happy accident" that happened when I quantified Infinity (QI).. called Quantified Zero (QZ) because it does work by itself..

Yet you are here again, to defend a pointless and archaic, self centered, maniacal and pointless set of operations, that are so flawed, so unworkable in reality beyond basic functions, that trillions of dollars are spent each year, to achieve "NOTHING"..

Even now, it is STILL not your fault, it is the fault of your training, the constant hounding of repeat, repeat, repeat, until you are well trained (like a dog) and receive a "pedigree"...

And defense of such pedigree(s) are very much an art of "religion" and dogma..

I have Quantified Zero "itself" or would you care to offer more then detraction and personal assaults?.. show me where in this vast sea of myopia called 2D linear mathematics, that zero can be added, divided, subtracted, and multiplied "by itself?"..

It has not been "published" in journals, because the culture is defensive of what "already is", and it would actually upset the order, to such a degree, that many would resign, or outright defend to the death, their viewpoint, to the point of sabotaging it (this is history I speak of)..

This has to be done by the "citizens" outside of academia, because academia no longer teaches, but defines the words "regurgitation" quite admirably these days..

THAT, is why will not go that route, as I believe the people are far smarter then anyone gives them credit for and I broke it down to simple physical and repeatable objects, and basic math operations, in other words it has "reality" to back it up, not just by virtual reality alone (which is all that math is)..

I feel sorry for you (really I do), because you are defending linearity, against something you cannot defend against, which is simply "change"...

He he. I know nothing about maths.
And you know nothing about explaining things.
Looks like we are even, again.

Any theory that cannot be explained so anybody can understand it is doomed to be worthless and discarded.

My gentle prodding was to see if you can explain it but you can't......so doomed to die as an application.

You have also failed to explain how it would make any technology more effective [again]

As you would know if you frequented this site regularly you have been beaten to the mark by one of our members who has done what you claim, but they are BSing us about how good it might be they have applied the theory to optical computing.

Optical computing and digital storage using OTS parts freely available to the public. It has been tested and now the soft ware is being completed.
Son everyone will be able to have Quantum Optical computing in their house for hundreds of dollars instead of the billions that the military has paid for theirs. These computers will also operate at room temp.

YOU GOT BEAT TO THE PUNCH.

HEAR THAT BELL RINGING, THAT WAS THE FIGHT BEING CALLED OFF BY TECHNICAL KNOCK OUT!

**ZeroToad**

Chawlee Wrote:

You give me to much credit.

I only gradgeated 6th grade.

LIAR!

Everybuddy kNows y0u only made it thru the 5th and never fimished the 6th. Sarcastic1

Ribbit

**Michael Alan Keith**

Since you program (I can assume), what if, you could "account" for zero, as a part of the process?.. what if you could make that damn place mat, become a number?.

When does 00000000 become any more or less useful than it already is?

Zero does have a clear value as it is managed inside a computer. All eight bits [or more] must be present to be zero.

Pi Infinity User ID: 3.14159265 04-23-2012 01:52 AM

Buster Wrote:

Is this practical in any way?

Yes it is..

For example..

The fact that it changes from a state of "entropy"...

To a state of "change", which for the process to have "predictability" in an unpredictable system..

Literal translation?.. Predictable programming, self guiding systems, self learning A.I.'s, security measures unmatched, and a "constant" from the basic operations, to the highest peak of mathematical operations in academia..

In other words a 6 year old would recognize the basic core structure of a complex series of super string equations, if they were taught this method..

The child would not have the adults experiences, but the child then can grasp "where" this came "from", and thus learn at an accelerated rate, because of the confidence one gets, when they can see "where" it heads to later in life..

Math then, becomes redundant, rather then tedious and sacrificial of ones own personal identity...

That is just a few examples..

Pi Infinity User ID: 3.14159265 04-23-2012 01:59 AM

Buster Wrote:

Since you program (I can assume), what if, you could "account" for zero, as a part of the process?.. what if you could make that damn place mat, become a number?.

When does 00000000 become any more or less useful than it already is?

Zero does have a clear value as it is managed inside a computer. All eight bits [or more] must be present to be zero.

The problem with computers, is they really never use zero, (infinite loop problem), in fact, they hate subtraction (2 - +2 = 4 instead of zero) ..

So what if you "leverage" the flaw in the computer itself?.. this allows a "back door" to be opened, to work QZ itself into a computer program (I should know, I have my own version)

YOU can give the computer what it needs to remain functional, yet also "account" for zero in the system, thus allowing for zero to do "work" as a number..

In it's simplest form?..

0= 32 ... Jptdknpa

Pi Infinity User ID: 3.14159265 04-23-2012 02:09 AM

Disturbed nli Wrote:

He he. I know nothing about maths.
And you know nothing about explaining things.
Looks like we are even, again.

Any theory that cannot be explained so anybody can understand it is doomed to be worthless and discarded.

My gentle prodding was to see if you can explain it but you can't......so doomed to die as an application.

You have also failed to explain how it would make any technology more effective [again]

As you would know if you frequented this site regularly you have been beaten to the mark by one of our members who has done what you claim, but they are BSing us about how good it might be they have applied the theory to optical computing.

Optical computing and digital storage using OTS parts freely available to the public. It has been tested and now the soft ware is being completed.
Son everyone will be able to have Quantum Optical computing in their house for hundreds of dollars instead of the billions that the military has paid for theirs. These computers will also operate at room temp.

Really?.... actually I am kinda glad to hear that from you.. it means you are capable of changing your state of reasoning far easier then a pedigreed individual..

The ability to "not" give detailed explanation on paper, on screen, and in video as a primary (until now that is), is because I wanted to further refine the logistics of the "mechanical device" in the .swf file itself.. so that one can physically build a prototype model, and examine it for themselves, see where it can be used, how can I "adjust" this to meet what I think it can do?.. and a host of other "what if's"..

People rarely learn by words alone, it has always been experience that determines ones confidence in any subject matter, and QZ?... QZ requires that you be able to see it, to feel it, to move it, and to play with the applications yourself, in order to better understand it..

Archaic mathematics as it stands today in the social world, is due for an overhaul, and this process is the means to allow that to happen.. but is cannot be done by one individual, it takes a sea of other people, not even of like mind, to challenge it's applications, it's worth, its structure, and then again, it takes even more to build useful applications for it, to update all the current mathematical principles, equations, and formulas to not "defeat them".. no.. to actually "enhance them" to a state, that could not have been achieved before...

In the end, QZ doe not "take away" form a mathematicians ability, it instead give them "more" then they ever thought possible..

**Watt4**

Pi Wrote:

Buster Wrote:
Is this practical in any way?

Yes it is..

For example..

The fact that it changes from a state of "entropy"...

To a state of "change", which for the process to have "predictability" in an unpredictable system..

Literal translation?.. Predictable programming, self guiding systems, self learning A.I.'s, security measures unmatched, and a "constant" from the basic operations, to the highest peak of mathematical operations in academia..

In other words a 6 year old would recognize the basic core structure of a complex series of super string equations, if they were taught this method..

The child would not have the adults experiences, but the child then can grasp "where" this came "from", and thus learn at an accelerated rate, because of the confidence one gets, when they can see "where" it heads to later in life..

Math then, becomes redundant, rather then tedious and sacrificial of ones own personal identity...

That is just a few examples..

Mercy.

Who are You?

Your example here, and now, is very eloquent and nurturing, but that isn't the way you started your thread.

Are your normal interactions usually controlling or supportive?

This thread seems odd and geeky, and out of place compared to the others on LOP.

I'm still not downloading the file. Well, maybe later, when no one is looking, I may decide to peek, but that will be a secret.

Pi Infinity User ID: 3.14159265 04-23-2012 03:07 AM

Watt4 Wrote:

Mercy.

Who are You?

Your example here, and now, is very eloquent and nurturing, but that isn't the way you started your thread.

Are your normal interactions usually controlling or supportive?

This thread seems odd and geeky, and out of place compared to the others on LOP.

I'm still not downloading the file. Well, maybe later, when no one is looking, I may decide to peek, but that will be a secret.

To be honest?..

I am an enigma... the same general form of enigma we all are "capable" of being...

I'm classified as an "Observer". neither of, or against another's personal POV, but of physical logic, being able to be replicated by more then ones own "self"...

I discovered some while back, an illogical complexity in the mathematical world, I traced it's origins to two main items, two items of which one causes a paradox (zero) and the other causes a "logic break", instead of completing the cycle as an application, it becomes ignored, rather then considered, and that would be the "subtraction" operator, form these little "side steps" of logic, comes all the worlds current form of flawed mathematical reasonings (again I said flawed, not wrong, just not whole)..

Then the subtleties of the actual logic itself in 2D linear mathematical thinking became apparent, as I split apart the basic mathematical principles we are first taught in school as a young pup...

Such as direction, versus computer logic (which is a postfix operation), we "assume direction", yet we do not "question" how or why I must choose "A" direction, rather then one of an infinite number to perform as an operation...

The direction assumed is a "prefix" or "before" direction of operation as a beginning point, leading to an "infix" operation for evaluations, thus arriving as what "should" have been a postfix operation, yet remained an ignored operation as a direction, but as a distant goal.. (A+B=C) thus canceling out both the post fix, and infix operations themselves.. it is a severe "logic break", as these are "assumed", rather then explored..

I started my thread as always, with a ring of the gong, to wake attention, and it leads wherever it may lead to, this differences are, that I acknowledge others POV, and I give "kind for kind" if I can (as you treat others who offer information, so shall you be treated in kind by that OP)..

I have beyond a shadow of a doubt. complete confidence in my product, and my solution for zero..

It's why I have no emotional vector in these explanations..

**Watt4**

Pi Wrote:

I am an enigma... the same general form of enigma we all are "capable" of being...

So what about zero-exponent rule? Simplifing expressions so that zero is equal to one?

I know, I know, you're going to tell me to download the file.... pfffft.