PDA

View Full Version : Mathematics

SubtleEnergies
09-30-2005, 04:47 PM
I was reading in the Wu Tang manual RZA's explanation of 9=Born. It got me thinking about something I was thinking about a while ago.

Pure mathematics deals with the actual qualities of numbers. But are these qualities the same depending on the base used.

For example 9*9 = 81 then 8+1 = 9. This is why it is born. But if we used base 2 (binary) or 3....would this work? No.

So do all the numbers loose their qualities? Like prime numbers. Would they still be primes in base 2?

I can't get my head around this. I can count in binary but that's it. Can anyone explain this and how to add and multiply etc?

ALSO why can't I even add two simple numbers mentally in binary? What's the deal? Is my mind so conditioned to base 10 I can't think in any other?

Prolifical ENG
09-30-2005, 04:53 PM
to add in binary, 1 + 1 = 10 .....you can add this the same way as you learned in elementary school.

TeknicelStylez
09-30-2005, 07:06 PM
binary is crazy shit, I learned alot about it in programming, than forgot it all....

SubtleEnergies
09-30-2005, 08:12 PM
"to add in binary, 1 + 1 = 10 .....you can add this the same way as you learned in elementary school."

^^ I know but my head wont do it...I have to convert to base ten and back...

Also do the numbers lose their qualities is my mine point?

Prolifical ENG
09-30-2005, 08:29 PM
The calculator on your computer you can caluculate some things in binary, hexadecimal, or whatever. I tries some properties, and some of them held....some others I tried, and the numbers on the pad were phased out when you convert to binary. But that doesnt necessarily mean that those properties wont hold....its hard to imagine that physically.

LHX
09-30-2005, 08:34 PM
hmm

interesting

numerology is heavily based around creativity
which is why it falls apart when you switch to binary numbers

one of the best ways to learn about how numerology works is to look into something called
'the law of fives'

it is a good beginners course to how numerology really works

do a yahoo search
you should find something

PEACE

SubtleEnergies
09-30-2005, 09:31 PM
"numerology is heavily based around creativity
which is why it falls apart when you switch to binary numbers"

This is what I mean. And like Eng said I can't imagine the shit physically. Numbers and quantitiies define so much of my thinking and they don't even seem to hold. Like the 9=born thing is out the window...numerology too.

Here's another thing that makes me feel uncofortable:

1/3 = 0.333333333.......

If we take 1/3 as x then 10x = 3.33333333...
therefore 9x = 3
so this shows that 1/3 does equal 0.3333333.... right but then

3*1/3 = 1
3*0.3333333.... = 0.99999....

I don't like it...

Prolifical ENG
09-30-2005, 09:35 PM
^^^^^

hahaha but 0.99999... = 1

and then the proofs go.........

http://www.math.fau.edu/Richman/HTML/999.htm

and then we go on this popular loop again.

SubtleEnergies
09-30-2005, 09:41 PM
But 0.99999 does NOT equal one. Maths should be EXACT.

If you mutliply that by a big enough number it will eventually make a significant difference.

SubtleEnergies
09-30-2005, 09:44 PM
Another thing that spins me out is that shit about self referencing.....I will post it up when I can be bothered.

Os3y3ris
09-30-2005, 09:54 PM
Here's another thing that makes me feel uncofortable:

1/3 = 0.333333333.......Decimals are not exact numbers. When the exact number is needed a decimal is NEVER used. Past Algebra 2, that shit just wont fly. Also note that in higher level math that they stop using the "=" sign for many decimals.

SubtleEnergies
10-01-2005, 03:42 AM
Yeah I know. That's what freaks me out. The fact that there is an "amount" at the point but that the measurement of that amount requires an infinite amount of decimals? Know what I mean?

I will try and explain the self referencing thing...

SubtleEnergies
10-01-2005, 04:09 AM
OK basically Bertrand Russell discovered a contradiction that would cause immense damage "to the dream of a mathematical system free from doubt, inconsistency and paradox."

They use this paradox of a librarian (which I don't think is the clearest way to explain it) to explain it.

"One day while wandering between the shelves, the librarian discovers a collection of catalogues. There are seperate catalogues for novels, reference, poetry, and so on. The librarian notices that some catalogues list themselves, while others do not.

In order to simplify the system the librarian makes two more catalogues, one of which lists all the catalogues which do list themselves, and more interestingly, one which lists all the catalogues which do not list themselves. Upon completing the task the librarian has a problem: should the catalogue which lists all the catalogues which do not list themselves, be listed in itself? If it is listed then by definition it should not be listed. However, if it is not listed, then by definition it should be listed. The librarian is in a no win situation."

This is similar to the sets or classes of numbers used to define numbers and so causes problems in the supposedly logical structure of mathematics.

Basically, he is saying its hard to use numbers to actually class anything. For a similar reason to my point about decimals. Drawing the line in marginal cases, I guess the line gets infinitely thin. So basically if there is not TWO of "something" there can't really be a two.

This was a big deal in mathematics. It meant that the number system may at some point (as I have shown small examples of) be inconsistent. Then this guy came along called Godel. And this guy upset all the maths dudes by saying that creating a complete and consistent mathematical system was an impossible task.

He put forth two statements summarizing this:
If axiomatic set theory is consistent, there exist theorems which can neither be proved or disproved (that is totally fucked up for a mathematician).

There is no constructive procedure which will prove axiomatic theory to be consistent

Another issue also with the completeness of mathematics is the use of computers nowadays to prove theories. Alot of mathematicians (I am inclined to agree) say that using a computer hasn't necessarily solved anything. If we don't know how the computer did it ( Which in most cases involving computers we can't) it hasn't truly been solved. If a computer spits out numbers we don't understand we have no real proof that these numbers are correct.

These are just a couple of things that bug me out about maths....

SubtleEnergies
10-01-2005, 04:10 AM
I wouldn't mind going deeper on some stuff...can anyone build on eliptic equations and modular forms? (taniyama - shimura stuff).

TeknicelStylez
10-01-2005, 04:19 AM
I found a gem at the book store not too long ago, "The Joy of Mathematics: Discovering Math All Around You" It's a good book, look for it.

It tells you about different theories, how artists use math in their art, basically like the title says just math all around you. It takes stuff in every day life and applies math to it.

SubtleEnergies
10-01-2005, 04:20 AM

I really like this shit. I am planning to finish my maths degree after I finish my current degree just out of interest.

Os3y3ris
10-01-2005, 04:38 AM
Yeah I know. That's what freaks me out. The fact that there is an "amount" at the point but that the measurement of that amount requires an infinite amount of decimals? Know what I mean?
It is odd. Decimals are simply imperfect I guess. Fractions work much better and math acknowledges this. Still strange.

SubtleEnergies
10-01-2005, 04:41 AM
Yeah thats what my posts were on the inconsistency of the most consistent measuring system we have.

I guess it freaks me out coz "something" is kinda the basis of concious perception and to know we can't even define quantities....maybe this is an argument for the non-dualists. Everything really is everything?

Os3y3ris
10-01-2005, 04:52 AM
I look at immesurable quanities as ranges. Say I wanted to measure the present moment as discussed in the other thread. I'll simply say 0 < X <1 with the unit being seconds or something. Doesn't give me the exact number, but I know what its not. A few times similar functions are seen ion proper math, such as asemtopes and shit. You dont have the precise numbrs, but you leap up to what its definitely not. Or some shit like that. Math is my least favorite subject. Precal kicked my ass for several years.

SubtleEnergies
10-01-2005, 05:05 AM
You see them as like discontinuous functions.

Yeah maybe that's what we have to settle for :|

LHX
10-01-2005, 07:51 AM
the newtonion mind is flawed

decimal math has gaping holes in it

although it would make some men more comfortable
the universe can not bend to be fit into mathematical equations

quantum physics has demonstrated everything that is problematic with this line of thinking

it really cannot be taken much more seriously than a hobby
like porn

Os3y3ris
10-01-2005, 02:01 PM
I woudn't say GAPING holes. And the holes that are there can be worked around by switching to other formats. You can go way beyond the practical before you run into REAL problems.

LHX
10-01-2005, 03:03 PM
no way dude

there are gaping holes

HUGE

math only works under very specific constraints

like i said - its a hobby
at best

Os3y3ris
10-01-2005, 03:17 PM
Not gonna argue. Prove it.

brahma
10-01-2005, 03:38 PM
vedic sanskrit

1 - 5 = the senses
6 = the ghost
7 = intelligence
8 = the individual soul
9 = god

LHX
10-01-2005, 09:08 PM
Not gonna argue. Prove it.
the fact that the entire field of 'complex numbers' (the square root of -1) cannot really be defined is the first pointer

the fact that pi trails off is another tip

the fact that theta trails off is another tip

plus quantum physics seems to blow all that shit way out of the water

i think the only reason we still use numbers is because we still have money around and we want to keep track of it

Prolifical ENG
10-01-2005, 09:27 PM
I dont know why decimals are seen that complecated. It is easier to think of real numbers as a line....the reality is its constraint.

But it is true about the "holes". Thats why in physics, significant figures is important with the decimals. You're only as accurate as your measuring instrument is. The measurement errors are important in complex calculations as they add up.

the fact that the entire field of 'complex numbers' (the square root of -1) cannot really be defined is the first pointer

Under normal means, it cannot be defined as its outside of the real number system. However, complex numbers are still used practially.

You are right about numbers and how they are used. I was going to start a thread before on why we always need to give something a number.

Os3y3ris
10-01-2005, 09:52 PM
the fact that the entire field of 'complex numbers' (the square root of -1) cannot really be defined is the first pointer

the fact that pi trails off is another tip

the fact that theta trails off is another tip
However, the shit WORKS. Thats all I'm saying. I couldn't tell you how to save my life, but when all is said and done, these devices work. While holes may be plugged with rather odd means, they are plugged.

SubtleEnergies
10-02-2005, 03:32 AM
Actually the shit does NOT work. That's what my post was about and that's what mathematicians admit.

Os3y3ris
10-02-2005, 04:26 AM
Then can we see some equations and shit? I mean, demonstrate, MATHEMATICALLY, glitches that can not be solved or worked around in a form of practical mathematics.

SubtleEnergies
10-02-2005, 05:36 AM
FUCK.

WHAT WERE MY POSTS ON?

They had Godel's shit on the inconsistency of mathematics. He proved that there were some EQUATIONS THAT COULD NEITHER BE SOLVED NOR NOT SOLVED. That were just.....in between. You could never come to a comprehensive conclusion.

If you want Godel's theory on that...it works on the axioms of mathematics and how they are could be inconsistent and there is NO WAY OF PROVING THEY ARE NOT INCONSISTENT.

ANYWAY the concept is just that. Axioms could be inconsistent and there's no way of proving they are not. THIS in itself makes mathematics inconsistent as MATHS can NOT prove MATHS.

Now if you will THINK about this this mean USING EQUATIONS TO PROVE THIS WOULD DISPROVE IT.

SubtleEnergies
10-02-2005, 05:39 AM
Then can we see some equations and shit? I mean, demonstrate, MATHEMATICALLY, glitches that can not be solved or worked around in a form of practical mathematics

LOL this is funny. Use maths to prove maths is inconsistent. I will add this to you experiment of proving time isn't beyond the mind by choking some one else (lol this doesn't demonstrate a thing about your own mind as that person could be a figment of it) and perceiving it with the mind.

SubtleEnergies
10-02-2005, 05:41 AM
If what you meant was an actual theory which can't be proven or disproven I know they did find some shortly after Godel and I can probably get one from an appendix?

Although I don't see a point since for one thing we probably won't understand it. And secondly us attempting to prove or disprove it is kinda futile...

Os3y3ris
10-02-2005, 05:51 AM
We seem to be having two different convos. I'm not talking about the higher, abstract math. In terms of APPLIED math, on a practical level, topping out around precal when things are still useful, I'd say there aren't too many holes. Once you get to that crazy shit on a universal level and what not, Im sure there are planty of unresolved issue. However, on a practical level, the math that most people know and use is just fine and can be proven so.

I will add this to you experiment of proving time isn't beyond the mind by choking some one else (lol this doesn't demonstrate a thing about your own mind as that person could be a figment of it) and perceiving it with the mind.
I never said it would prove time is beyon MY mind. I said it would prove that its not a process of YOURS.

SubtleEnergies
10-02-2005, 06:09 AM
Well if you mean for day-to-day shit it works coz that's what we based it on.

Also as far as the time tihng goes. The reason I find it inconclusive is because it may prove that to YOU that its not part of MY mind. However, ym point was that no idividual can ever prove that time is beyond THEIR own mind.

nut_end
10-03-2005, 05:04 AM
question is the equation two plus two four or five? being that the two groups together comprise four yet a new entity was created which would make five -> from the aspect of the whole or sum in relation to parts.

[QUOTE]
ym point was that no idividual can ever prove that time is beyond THEIR own mind. ---- SubtleEnergies

wouldn't that be the ven diagram of consciousness with sphere of influence where beyond is the sphere of influence being that outside the control of their conscious and all they could do is try to expand conscious where it merges completely with the outlying sphere to cancel time out of their mind.

SubtleEnergies
10-03-2005, 08:19 AM
You assume that time is external though. People are so conditioned they think this constantly.

When you have a dream ...you can sleep an hour and live out days etc....and it feels like that much time has passed. This is all internal. Why is everyone so sure this world is any different?

Os3y3ris
10-03-2005, 11:55 AM
question is the equation two plus two four or five? being that the two groups together comprise four yet a new entity was created which would make five -> from the aspect of the whole or sum in relation to parts.]

What new entity? Take two dollar bills. Add two more dollar bills to the pile. You now have four dollar bills.

Os3y3ris
10-03-2005, 12:42 PM
When you have a dream ...you can sleep an hour and live out days etc....and it feels like that much time has passed. This is all internal. Why is everyone so sure this world is any different?
If you're talking about our perception of time, its not really. That however, is irrelevant as it still moves at the same speed regardless of what we percieve. However, if you mean a control of the time flow, thats impossible, given something came before me and will certainly come after me.

nut_end
10-03-2005, 01:15 PM
must be an abstraction like one male with one female does make a couple also they produce a third enity called child.

Os3y3ris
10-03-2005, 01:31 PM

king david
10-03-2005, 01:48 PM
Yall should peep out a movie Called "Pi"
thru numerology the main charicture Finds the mathmatical number of God
And it like eats away at his mind "Krazy shit"
For those of you On here who Are Jedi Mind Triks Fans it will Be familar soon as it starts!
"Once when i was A boy i stared into the sun"
LOL

nut_end
10-04-2005, 05:27 AM
ok in regular straight everyday math 2+2=4, but in abstract math where not everything is all cracked up, their are irrational and imaginary numbers where the number line becomes more than two dimensional with poistives and negatives.

yeah i saw that flick had the numerical string of numbers made up god's name in the toarh and was able to work the market had these kabbalist and brokers after him, playing with spirals and golden rectangles.

Triple B
10-04-2005, 06:02 AM
But 0.99999 does NOT equal one. Maths should be EXACT.

If you mutliply that by a big enough number it will eventually make a significant difference.
it's the infinite amount of 3's in 0.3333.. that make the result 0.9999... with infinite amount f 9's.. normally the calculatin would be 1 but our mind/calculators are limited to a definite amount of numbers behind the comma. The fault is in the tool, not the system.

SubtleEnergies
10-04-2005, 05:48 PM
No. The tools follow the system.

What you just said is ridiculous. You can't just say "normally the calculation would be one" you can NOT in mathematics just say "near enough is good enough." Geez I really hope some of these people aren't future mathematicians.

SubtleEnergies
10-04-2005, 05:53 PM
And O, you're constantly upsetting me with some idiotic shit.

TIME MOVES AT A CONSTANT NO MATTER HOW WE PERCEIVE IT?

That is ......ok I won't insult you but please think before you say things.

Physics has proven that time is only how it is "perceived" or affects individual objects in a frame of reference. You know that time moves differently for bodies at rest and in motion right? As you approach C time slows down.

They have actually flown around the world in jets and managed to slow time down (by like 3 minutes or something (measured by a clock in the jet which is the frame of reference). If we could travel consistently at even high speeds than this the personally travelling may experience 10 years of time and aging while everyone on earth experiences say 12 or 15 or whatever. So how the fuck can time be moving at the same right?

Its the same reason why no two events happen simultaeously...

SubtleEnergies
10-04-2005, 05:55 PM
And once again what you're saying is irrelevant anyway because you are using your mind to confirm it.

redemption
10-04-2005, 09:23 PM
But 0.99999 does NOT equal one. Maths should be EXACT.

If you mutliply that by a big enough number it will eventually make a significant difference.
under fundamental rules of Mathematics 0.99999 does not equal 1.
But 0.99999.... DOES = 1

SubtleEnergies
10-04-2005, 11:52 PM
No that's the point it DOESN't!

Maybe 0-9 representing words is as far as a mathematical discussion can go on this forum.

Os3y3ris
10-05-2005, 12:38 AM
You can't just say "normally the calculation would be one" you can NOT in mathematics just say "near enough is good enough."
Um, yeh, you kinda can and there are numerous symbols used to display that. Also consider that math is to be applied. I can't tell you exactly where these keys are that I'm using, but my brain does the math, tells me that im close enough and allows me to hit them. Lets say I want to use physics to hit a target. What law is there that says that I have to be exact in my calculations. Math is a tool, not a doctrine.

And O, you're constantly upsetting me with some idiotic shit.

TIME MOVES AT A CONSTANT NO MATTER HOW WE PERCEIVE IT?

That is ......ok I won't insult you but please think before you say things.

Physics has proven that time is only how it is "perceived" or affects individual objects in a frame of reference. You know that time moves differently for bodies at rest and in motion right? As you approach C time slows down.

They have actually flown around the world in jets and managed to slow time down (by like 3 minutes or something (measured by a clock in the jet which is the frame of reference). If we could travel consistently at even high speeds than this the personally travelling may experience 10 years of time and aging while everyone on earth experiences say 12 or 15 or whatever. So how the fuck can time be moving at the same right?
You're fucking up. Perception in terms of what your brain is telling you, which is what we were discussing, is a completely different issue from various frames of reference, which has NOTHING to do with the human mind. Perception is dependent on something being able to percieve. Relativity is not. Stop mixing issues as respond to the subject at hand.

Shemsu Elohim
10-08-2005, 11:34 PM
one of the best ways to learn about how numerology works is to look into something called 'the law of fives'

it is a good beginners course to how numerology really works

do a yahoo search
you should find somethingThis is what I found: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Law_of_Fives

lol!

But I'm guessing that you're referring to this in the context of Taoist teaching?

It is interesting to note, that Ra Un Nefer Amen points out that when you add up the numbers of the Tree of Life like so:

http://www.aasorlando.org/littletree.gif

0(Amen/Ain Soph) + 10(Geb/Malkuth) = 10

1(Ausar/Kether) + 9(Auset/Yesod) = 10

2(Tehuti/Chokmah) + 8(Sebek/Hod) = 10

3(Seker/Binah) + 7(Hetheru/Netzach) = 10

4(Maat/Gedulah) + 6(Heru/Tiphereth) = 10

But wait, where's Five?

It stands on its own as Herukhuti/Geburah the Consciousness, and is related to the Archangel Samael, the Logos of Mars; as Herukhuti is a Warrior(because we have to have an active Consciousness in order to Self-Realize).

http://www.thenilepa.com/images/hruktipostersmall2.jpg

Though sometimes Geburah the Divine-Soul(5), is symbolized as the maiden who has to be rescued by the Human-Soul/Heru/Tiphereth(6); because Heru, the Human-Soul(6), is also a Warrior, who does battle against the ego in order to unite with the Consciousness or Divine-Soul(Geburah(5)).

She(the Consciousness(5)) sleeps, so it takes the efforts of the Essence(Tiphereth or Superior-Manas(6)) to awaken Her.

http://www.web-marketing.co.uk/arthurian-legends/images/al14.JPG

In fact, it is taught that the Warrior Arjuna of the Bhagavad Gita, is specifically symbolic of the very Human-Soul(6) who fights to awaken Consciousness as to unite with the Divine-Soul(5).

http://www.alanlittle.org/yoga/Pictures/KrishnaArjuna.jpg

This is very interesting, because it shows Arjuna(the Human-Soul, Sphere 6) riding the Mercabah(The Chariot, which is the Solar Bodies created through Alchemy) in control of the Four-Devils(the four bodies which constitute the personality, related to Spheres 10-7) and being guided by the Christ(Krishna, Sphere 2, Chokmah).

This illustrates the effort needed for the awakening of the Consciousness(5)-by the effort of the Human-Soul(6), with the help of Christ(the Superior Spheres)-from the hideous multiplicities of the ego.

PEACE

SubtleEnergies
10-09-2005, 03:08 AM
Math is not all meant ot be applied. Maybe that's the problem here....your down with like Stats....that's not the level I am worrying about O.

7EL7
10-09-2005, 03:27 AM
Brahma - did you take my advise and get some help ?

Shemsu Elohim
10-09-2005, 03:44 AM
Regarding my last post; perhaps some images of the Tree of Life to use as a reference, will make it easier to understand:

http://www.gnosis-usa.com/images/stories/kabbalah/tree-named2.gif

http://www.gnosis-usa.com/images/stories/kabbalah/essence.gif

Though my main intention for posting in this thread(after reading LHX' post) was to show the significance of 5 Power/Refinement(Geburah).

diggy
10-21-2009, 04:19 AM
There are no such thing as negative numbers.

-10 for example does not exist.

How could you have -10 of something?

Shogah
10-21-2009, 07:20 PM
you can have -10 something. But not in defining shape, it is for defining intensity of something.

There can be -10 degrees and such.

But yeah, still it is man that made scale, so i get what you are saying...

Shogah
10-21-2009, 07:21 PM
I love maths cause sometimes it is more of a philosophy, and it is very abstract science, yet its fundamental for our everyday life...

The Void
10-25-2009, 02:32 AM
vedic sanskrit

1 - 5 = the senses
6 = the ghost
7 = intelligence
8 = the individual soul
9 = god

Word to Shiva.