Re: Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- From: "Tom Potter" <tdp1001@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:04:28 +0800
A Better Number System
The current defined number
systems, including naturals, integers, reals, complex,
surreals, etc, present distorted views of reality,
are inefficient, and express quantities with
too much uncertainty.
I assert that the fundamental atoms of reality are cycles,
and that all physical properties can be defined in terms
of simple cycles, and cycle ratios.
The number system that would best define this cyclical
reality would:
1. Have no zero, but would allow any point on a circle
to be used as a reference point, to which all other points
would be referenced.
2. Would have clockwise and counter-clockwise senses for
the purpose of defining greater or less than.
3. Would use a binary addressing scheme for defining points
about the circle.
As an example, let us assume that the universe
( Like lesser effects and epochs.) cycles, rather
than "big bangs". In order to define a time interval
on a universal scale, or for that matter, on any
sub-universal scale, ( Such as the rotation of the
Earth on its' axis, its' rotation about the Sun, etc.)
all we have to do is:
1. Define some starting point.
2. Perform binary searches to find other points of interest.
For example, let us assume that a point is at 90 degrees
plus the square root of 2 degrees. ( 91.414..... degrees.)
The point would be defined as:
+180 ( too high)
- 90 = 90 ( too low)
+ 45 = 135 ( too high)
- 22.5 = 112.5 ( too high)
- 11.25 = 101.25 ( too high)
- 5.625 = 95.625 ( too high)
- 2.8125 = 92.8125 ( too high)
- 1.40625 = 91.40625 ( too low)
+ 0.703125 = 92.109375 ( too high)
and so on to the accuracy we desire, or to the limit of
resolution of the equipment we use to determine or express
the points. Note that the uncertainty in our answer at any
step is always plus or minus one digit.
Note that the point defined above would be expressed as:
+-+-----+
( And that NO zero place holders are needed!) ( Read my Usenet articles on
zero.)
To Summarize:
1. Reality arises from events which are quanta (Integer).
2. Reality can be best expressed by using the
number system defined above.
3. Zero can be any starting point. ( On a circle)
4. Infinity does not exist. ( Not a point on a circle)
5. Real numbers can be approached to any degree
of accuracy with the greatest efficiency.
6. Integers are defined by subharmonic nulls
about a circle.
7. Zero place value holders ( Which are illogical,
as they tell us how much "nothing" is in the
set of interest.) are not needed.
7. Auto correlation and Fourier analysis, follows naturally from
an examination of point amplitude values located
harmonically about a circle.
For more details on this,
visit my web site.
--
Tom Potter
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- From: hanson
- Re: Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- References:
- Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- From: donaldsauter
- Re: Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- From: ABarlow
- Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- Prev by Date: Re: Wal-Mart Employees are nothing like me.
- Next by Date: Re: Actual Seperation of Gluons
- Previous by thread: Re: Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- Next by thread: Re: Proposal for an Improved Scientific Notation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|