logical logic

[AntonioLao]

The logic of mathematics demands that absolute truth can be represented by the whole cardinal number zero. However, its operations with other numbers by addition and multiplication, respectively, give no numerical change and the same product value of zero: 1+0=0+1=1 and 1x0=0x1=0. However, in the operations of subtraction and division, the first give -1 since 0-1=-1 but 1-0=1 while the second gives 0¸1=0 but 1¸0=?? The latter is undefined in any system of logical mathematics of this century or any previous century.

The first common property of addition and multiplication is called the commutative property while that of subtraction and division violated this defined logical property. Furthermore, both addition and multiplication are associative while in general subtraction and division are not. Similarly, in the mathematics of Hadamard matrices only the operations of addition and multiplication can be defined. Although subtraction can be defined by additive inverses addition operation, the same for division is not defined. These indicate that both commutative and associative property of addition and multiplication can be applied for Hadamard matrices, some advantages over the non-commutative complex imaginary matrices (Pauli’s and Dirac’s) of quantum mechanics, giving Hadamard matrices with doubly logical logic.

[mkirkpatrick]

It just IS,that is logical my friend,even the number 1 has no "real" meaning in the absolute ISness of all.



regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

But still the logic of zero is more logical than the logic of 1? Since 1 can be infinitely divided into infinite numbers of rational fractions: 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, 1/6, 1/7, 1/8...

[mkirkpatrick]

But still the logic of zero is more logical than the logic of 1? Since 1 can be infinitely divided into infinite numbers of rational fractions: 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, 1/6, 1/7, 1/8...

Yes I agree,zero is a reflection of the One?



regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

This reflection could be asymmetrical as the reflection facing a concave mirror with 1 being at the focus of the concavity and infinity on the side of virtual reality. Mathematically 0=1/¥.

[AntonioLao]

However, it is true in mathematics that any number less than infinity divided by infinity is zero, e.g., 5/¥or 10000/¥, so on and so forth. So a surface with topological genus=1 is the same as 0=(¥-1)/¥, that is to say that zero is equal to infinity minus 1 divided by infinity. The logical problem would be the definition of ¥/¥ ???? Since ¥/¥ - 1/¥ = 1 if and only if ¥/¥=1 and 1/¥=0.

[mkirkpatrick]

This reflection could be asymmetrical as the reflection facing a concave mirror with 1 being at the focus of the concavity and infinity on the side of virtual reality. Mathematically 0=1/¥.

Well that does sound logical does it not!


regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

But clearly logically asymmetrical as in the state of spontaneous broken symmetry.

[Tina]

while the second gives 0¸1=0 but 1¸0=?? The latter is undefined in any system of logical mathematics of this century or any previous century.
[/FONT]

Between 0 and 1 there are 10 (ten) point ones (.1)

.1 * 10 = 1

In the answer e.g. 1.33333 the .333333 also tells us something about the numerical distance relationship between 0 and 1. But where do these .1's begin at O or 1?

My calculations put .1 at zero.
If I am correct it (.1) begins at 0 therefore 0 is defined as 0.1 ????

[AntonioLao]

Tina,

Thanks for providing the attention back to the existence of rational numbers and the alternative reality of fractions. Actually .33333... is a repeating nonterminating decimal for the fraction 1/3 and .111111... is the repeating nonterminating decimal for the fraction 1/9 and .222222.... is the repeating nonterminating decimal for the fraction 2/9, etc. The logical logic of this thread is to restrict numbers to positive integers and the whole numbers hopefully without the number 1.