Re: JSH: A devastating error
- From: marcus_bruckner@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:58:17 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 21, 1:39 pm, JSH <jst...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It has taken me years to work through the full mathematical
explanation of the bizarre error that took hold in number theory over
a hundred years ago, but it's going to take years more for the
mathematical and scientific communities to come to grips with the
devastation it has wreaked--which can only start when they accept that
it exists.
I think, for instance, you can safely toss "string theory" entire. As
in, forget about it.
But losing Galois Theory might bite a bit harder especially when you
figure out how you lose it, as it's not exactly wrong.
To understand why considering some rational examples, don't focus on
doing what comes natural:
x^2 + 4x + 3 = 0, solves with the quadratic formula as x = (-4 +/- sqrt
(4))/2
and you're probably wondering why I don't simplify the square root,
but bear with me, as consider
x^2 + 5x + 6 = 0, solves with the quadratic formula as x = (-5 +/- sqrt
(1))/2
and if you do not resolve the square roots you can employ Galois
Theory on those results and do the class number thing and everything
else and convince yourself that you're doing something mathematically
important, when you are not.
Notice that Galois Theory cannot tell you something as simple as: both
cases have 3 itself as a factor!!!
Both cases have -3 as a root. Neither has 3 itself as a factor.
I don't see the relevance to Galois theory at all. Galois theory
is
not primarily a method for solving equations. You could equally well
say that Special Relativity theory does not tell you that -3 is a root
of
either equation. So what?
A lot of mathematical tools are built around not being able to resolve
the square roots where mathematicians were in error, as it's like
needing to fly with your instruments.
Examples?
Unable to physically SEE the roots like with rationals, you can still
logically determine things about them using analytical tools, which
I've done and demonstrated with a simple quadratic construction.
Oh sure. Factorization by inspection is all you know on earth
and all you need to know. Gospel according to Harris.
And notice the arguments in that thread!!!
Don't notice them too close though. You might stumble on
counterexamples to the Harristotelian pronouncements.
The math community has a LOT invested with the flawed math, but the
physics community in certain areas got dragged into the mess as well,
which will be most devastating for theoretical physicists but may
affect you all in terms of, entire experimental directions that have
no worth.
Resolutions to long standing physics problems that may be extremely
simple, but destroy the value of years of efforts in certain areas.
I don't want to hint as I'm not certain in every respect, but the very
way we look at our physical world will probably shift as a result of
correcting the flaw.
"Not certain in every respect"??? There is virtually nothing you
have said which is not disprovable by simple examples.
The good news is that a lot of mathematics in physics will actually
get easier! My work simplifies HUGE areas of mathematics.
True. Wrong is simple. A wrong premise implies any
conclusion. That ***would*** make things a lot easier. Galois theory
is wrong, therefore the Higgs particle exists and lives with its
mother in Shreveport, Louisiana, where it works part-time
as an elephant trainer.
But there is more bad news.
Oh no.
Increasingly I'm concerned about a "lost generation" of physicists who
are so thoroughly trained in a certain way of thinking and so along in
their careers that they will find it difficult to impossible to start
over, as yes, in many areas, the impact of the error will be, starting
over.
Those poor babies. They will be so grateful that you have come
to their aid.
For those of you with the juice left in you for it, it should be
exciting though.
You have an opportunity to learn some of the greatest secrets of our
physical world which were so close before in a way, but impossible to
SEE with flawed mathematical tools.
Factoring by inspection will set you free. Strange that this break-
through has not been noticed before.
In some ways it may be the beginning of modern physics as far as the
future is concerned.
When humanity finally grew up in its understanding of mathematics.
Raving moron.
Marcus.
James Harris
.
- References:
- JSH: A devastating error
- From: JSH
- JSH: A devastating error
- Prev by Date: Re: If it ain't broke...
- Next by Date: Your tax dollars at work...
- Previous by thread: JSH: A devastating error
- Next by thread: Re: Winter Solstice, 2008 - Sea Ice at historic extent
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
