R
Resistense
Guest
---Hello, Sir,
Is i' actually a number set, noted as a (defined?) variable, with potentially infinite values? And are "gravity waves" more like Faraday's lines of force, replacing "magnetic waves", and graphed on hyperbolic (either saddle conformer or Poincare (sic) disk) geometric space? Since Euclid's postulate about parallel lines meeting is addressed. "Collinear" line of force, electrogravitational waveform is not moving as orthogonal graphed 2-D propragation, but, say,more like positive and negative charge a la rotor/stator? circle dot? w/disconinuity bounded by circular asymptote driving constant curvature in motion? what do you think of expansion/contraction?
Is "computational math" actually a different branch of mathematics? Can you generate a random number from a machine, or must it be designed (preconditioned) by the syntax involved in programming operons (i need help with wave mechanics, too)?
Plz help with translation, write back if you please.
Thank you,
...
---Apologies,
*orthogonal graphed on 3-d axis to describe propagation,
Can we "re-square the circle", this way? 1:1:(rad)2 triangle, but not on a 2-d graph.
does acoustic/sound vibration need some special attention? or does that graph on polar graph outward, while EG wave is boring?
---Maybe settle one of Maxwell's pesky formulations on the other branch.---
---I do not mean first derivative of i, but that is also interesting. 1/2i^(-1/2) lol
I would be interested to hear about the sort of work you're doing, or if there are any insoluble problems you're stuck upon. May try and answer that with a search but would appreciate direction. i kind of assumed you don't actually like special relativity.
---The i noperable or i rreducible numbers, as the new multiplier, e=iv
---e=i'v
---and so what's inside those "+C" 's that appear like magic
---So the saddle conformer has that "equilateral" triangle in the center, with the moving, opposite polar charge going around the outside.
Like the enneagram in motion, tracing that arc 142857..., if you were to graph in flat.
if there were a "circular", unbounded(or ungraphable?) region, what I think of as the asymptote in the hyperbolic disk (a la the Fellow, Janos Bolyai, I think, described, in his geometry), that could be the, "dwelling of the primes", causing a conformation that is hard to map?
On Euler's integrated polar graph, we have the Poincare' disk layout with asymptotic region, as though it we took a derivative slice of the saddle conformer to measure. Integrating slices of Euler graphs could generate sections of saddle conformed regions.
As soon as you map an extension in Euler's graph, the conformational space takes on shape, and begins tracing arcs if you were to take integral summations.
---Also E. Beltrami.
---Dear Mr. Jadcyzyk,
I beg you to reply, at least to acknowledge receipt.
Thank you,
...
---Oh also I've found some of your publishing online.
Thank you.
---perhaps i' is the first derivative of infinity, from which we derive the (infinite?) set of sq.rts. of primes, which form the overarching number set, with the "real" numbers "quantized" in between sequential n*i'?
Any critiques or ideas (or formalization of notation) would be welcome.
Is i' actually a number set, noted as a (defined?) variable, with potentially infinite values? And are "gravity waves" more like Faraday's lines of force, replacing "magnetic waves", and graphed on hyperbolic (either saddle conformer or Poincare (sic) disk) geometric space? Since Euclid's postulate about parallel lines meeting is addressed. "Collinear" line of force, electrogravitational waveform is not moving as orthogonal graphed 2-D propragation, but, say,more like positive and negative charge a la rotor/stator? circle dot? w/disconinuity bounded by circular asymptote driving constant curvature in motion? what do you think of expansion/contraction?
Is "computational math" actually a different branch of mathematics? Can you generate a random number from a machine, or must it be designed (preconditioned) by the syntax involved in programming operons (i need help with wave mechanics, too)?
Plz help with translation, write back if you please.
Thank you,
...
---Apologies,
*orthogonal graphed on 3-d axis to describe propagation,
Can we "re-square the circle", this way? 1:1:(rad)2 triangle, but not on a 2-d graph.
does acoustic/sound vibration need some special attention? or does that graph on polar graph outward, while EG wave is boring?
---Maybe settle one of Maxwell's pesky formulations on the other branch.---
---I do not mean first derivative of i, but that is also interesting. 1/2i^(-1/2) lol
I would be interested to hear about the sort of work you're doing, or if there are any insoluble problems you're stuck upon. May try and answer that with a search but would appreciate direction. i kind of assumed you don't actually like special relativity.
---The i noperable or i rreducible numbers, as the new multiplier, e=iv
---e=i'v
---and so what's inside those "+C" 's that appear like magic
---So the saddle conformer has that "equilateral" triangle in the center, with the moving, opposite polar charge going around the outside.
Like the enneagram in motion, tracing that arc 142857..., if you were to graph in flat.
if there were a "circular", unbounded(or ungraphable?) region, what I think of as the asymptote in the hyperbolic disk (a la the Fellow, Janos Bolyai, I think, described, in his geometry), that could be the, "dwelling of the primes", causing a conformation that is hard to map?
On Euler's integrated polar graph, we have the Poincare' disk layout with asymptotic region, as though it we took a derivative slice of the saddle conformer to measure. Integrating slices of Euler graphs could generate sections of saddle conformed regions.
As soon as you map an extension in Euler's graph, the conformational space takes on shape, and begins tracing arcs if you were to take integral summations.
---Also E. Beltrami.
---Dear Mr. Jadcyzyk,
I beg you to reply, at least to acknowledge receipt.
Thank you,
...
---Oh also I've found some of your publishing online.
Thank you.
---perhaps i' is the first derivative of infinity, from which we derive the (infinite?) set of sq.rts. of primes, which form the overarching number set, with the "real" numbers "quantized" in between sequential n*i'?
Any critiques or ideas (or formalization of notation) would be welcome.