This axiom implies the existence of an infinite set such that a set with more elements than any fixed integer can be put into a one to one correspondence with a proper subset of itself.
This axiom implies the existence of an infinite set such that a set with more elements than any fixed integer can be put into a one to one correspondence with a proper subset of itself.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
mkirkpatrick (07-20-2011), PoPpAScience (08-09-2011)
Thanks for the post Antonio,tell me would consciousness fit within this axiom?
regards michael.
Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
Obviously, consciousness precedes the axiom because without consciousness no axiom can be formulated or understood. I'm working on a book which hopes of defining infinity as a number in order to provide a proof for the Twin Prime Conjecture.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
mkirkpatrick (07-21-2011)
AntonioLao (07-21-2011), theunify (07-21-2011)
Thanks. Maybe you were thinking about the infinite levels of consciousness? The highest level being absolute consciousness or omniscience.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
mkirkpatrick (07-21-2011)
Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
For the work of my book, I'm trying to tune into absolute consciousness using the sieve of Diophantus to prove the eternal existence of twin primes as well as proving the simple statement of the Goldbach Conjecture of number theory. I also use a working model of infinitely many Pythagorean triples. My work in progress also discovered the group tessellation of matrix groups of 3 by 2 matrices but the inverses of 2 by 2 matrices contain symmetric Hadamard matrices. These tessellations can be used to prove a universe devoid of a center but without compromising both matter and energy principle. In other words, it can become a more plausible quantum theory of space-time.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
mkirkpatrick (07-22-2011), PoPpAScience (08-09-2011)
AntonioLao (07-22-2011)
Incidentally, this axiom is demanded because of Russell Paradox of set theory. Nevertheless, it does not resolve the foundation problem of mathematics.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
You may rediscover infinity in the simplicity of everyday life and when all illusions are taken away, life may become simpler.
AntonioLao (07-27-2011)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)