[AntonioLao]

Reference:

• Keith Devlin, “The Language of Mathematics,” Freeman, New York, 1998
• Morris Kline, “Mathematical Thought From Ancient to Modern Times,” 3 Volumes, Oxford University, New York, 1972
• R. Courant, H. Robbins, “What is Mathematics,” Oxford, New York, 1941

The modern definition of mathematics is that it is the science of patterns. Their properties are almost completely abstract than that of having the semblance of concreteness. There are many varieties of patterns found in nature. These can be numerical patterns, geometrical patterns, kinematical patterns, behavioral patterns, recreational patterns, electoral patterns, statistical patterns, and many others. The common purpose of mathematics for the studies of all these different patterns is to make the invisibly abstract concepts become visibly concrete objects. The number 1 has no meaning by itself until it is associated to a concrete object as 1 apple, 1 human being, 1 planet earth, 1 universe, 1 true God. But can the statement “1 space” be meaningfully posted? It makes sense to say that 1 apple and 1 apple is 2 apples because it is possible to see the separateness between them. But what is 1 space and 1 space? If distinction can be made then it is called quantized space. Quantized space is absolutely invisible! But if its oneness cannot be separated into, to which at the least, one two-ness then it is not quantizable. It remains as 1 continuum. If the continuum can be separated into two-nesses then quantization is possible. The ideal two-nesses are the antitheses found in nature: yin/yang, male/female, good/evil, matter/antimatter, apple/not-apple, particle/field, particle/wave, space/time, absolute rest/absolute motion, life/death.

The existence of one antithesis guarantees the existence of the other. But these existences do not necessarily need to be in equal proportions.



In a theory of quantized space, absolute acceleration can become the antithesis of distance in such a way that their inner product is square of light speed.

[Guille]

isn't it un-useful to theoretically invent or create a type of space that can't be proven empirically in any way, and has no sense for help in the uniderstanding of the universe, and that can't even be detected?


It hink it is as usefull in science as in believing in god.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE isn't it un-useful to theoretically invent or create a type of space that can't be proven empirically in any way, and has no sense for help in the uniderstanding of the universe, and that can't even be detected?

the main objective of quantized space theory is to find out the complete working mechanism of thermonuclear fusion.

[Guille]

Refering to the begining of your first post, I have been commenting in other forums about what math is and how to define it (which is actually a subject of philosophy) and I concluded by myself this definition:

Mathematics is the demostration that something eqauls something.

I fyou think about it, it eneters in all types of maths (atleast the ones I knwo about) and ansers it in an easy-to-understand-way, explanationarily and simplificationarily.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE Mathematics is the demostration that something eqauls something.

personally, i am thinking that in modern set theory, a branch of advanced mathematics, it is rarely found that two sets are identical or equal.

[Guille]

o. see, I've never come along it. but is it about demostrating that a set equals a set? or something similar?..... when we get to have a math forum I will ask you about the it and other math problems I ussualy have.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE but is it about demostrating that a set equals a set?

I think, I can say that all empty sets are equal regardless of their dimensionality.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao I think, I can say that all empty sets are equal regardless of their dimensionality.

Don't getvery far with this set theory thing, because it looks like chinese to me.

secondly, I think that the most basic caracteristics of a TOE should be, over any other thing, or explenation or unification,: the use of math and philosophy.

[AntonioLao]

vacuum is really an empty set. A set where there are no elements from matter and energy. But the complements of this set are the matter set (fermions) and the energy set (bosons). Furthermore, the intersections of these sets are the null sets of the true vacuum.

[Guille]

do you mean that when a boson react with a fermion it produces vacuum space? is your vacuum space nothingness, or space just vacuum?