AP's 251st book-- Unlearning Negative Numbers--Math History, like never before-- A Logical History-- by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<
plutonium....@gmail.com>
Jul 25, 2023, 2:31:22 PM (yesterday)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Alright, I should be able to get this book published in the next few days, certainly before August 1.
What is holding me back, is the first or second Axiom missed by Old Math. Old Math missed two critical algebra axioms.
1) The axiom that says, subtraction is limited to that in which you cannot remove more than what is available to remove. For example, you cannot subract 3 from 2. You cannot remove 10 people if there are only 6 available.
2) The axiom already discussed of that of which a equation in math is a valid equation only if the rightside has a positive Decimal Grid Number all alone, by itself, and at all times. The leftside of the equation can have all sorts of variables and
algebra, but the rightside must be a positive grid number in isolation.
These two vital axioms were missed by Old Math and allowed Old Math to build up mountains of erroneous mistakes and subject matter that is flat wrong and a waste of time and deletorious for education of the young.
Now I need to go to Physics, to see if Physics also has electromagnetic EM laws that further espouse you cannot remove more than what is available, although that is purely "commonsense", but to see if EM theory may have more to say about either one of
these two axioms of math algebra.
In one of my earlier books I mention the idea that perhaps the name through history, the name of "subtraction" is a total impediment to understanding the operation. And I commented that if math history from the outset named this operator "Remove", then
the nightmarish concept of negative number would never have sprouted and flourished. When you have a name of "subtraction" then all sorts of crazied ideas can enter and cause error. When you name this operator as Remove, it eliminates the riff-raff
desire to fantasize negative numbers.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<
plutonium....@gmail.com>
Jul 25, 2023, 5:48:24 PM (yesterday)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 5:33:58 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote in sci.math, sci.physics, plutonium-atom-universe:
Now I need to go to Physics, to see if Physics also has electromagnetic EM laws that further espouse you cannot remove more than what is available, although that is purely "commonsense", but to see if EM theory may have more to say about either one of
these two axioms of math algebra.
In one of my earlier books I mention the idea that perhaps the name through history, the name of "subtraction" is a total impediment to understanding the operation. And I commented that if math history from the outset named this operator "Remove", then
the nightmarish concept of negative number would never have sprouted and flourished. When you have a name of "subtraction" then all sorts of crazied ideas can enter and cause error. When you name this operator as Remove, it eliminates the riff-raff
desire to fantasize negative numbers.
yes, the Lenz law in Physics, electromagnetic theory is the embodiment of Axioms 1 and 2 listed above. You cannot have negative numbers in mathematics, or else the entire subject of math falls and tumbles to pieces.
Lenz law is such that it comes out and opposes the thrust of the bar magnet in Faraday's law. Lenz's law gives EM theory the Conservation of Energy, for without it, we would fetch unlimited energy from "out of nowhere". And this is what Old Math had
instilled into Old Math as a subject. It had no conservation principle and unlimited energy by making negative numbers be a "similar reality as positive numbers".
Old Math never had the idea that Subtraction is Remove, and how can you remove more than what is available.
Leave it to fools and kooks of Old Math to keep on teaching failed mathematics.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<
plutonium....@gmail.com>
Jul 25, 2023, 11:38:01 PM (yesterday)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
This book is as much about the psychology and social forces as to why math is filled with fictional topics and ideas such as the negative number.
These two axioms of math algebra (1) Subtraction means remove, and you can never remove more than what is available (2) A valid equation of math must have a positive Decimal Grid Number on the rightside of equation at all times, and all alone. Those two
axioms can be found in several of my past books on math.
My 45th published book.
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.
Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.
This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every
other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.
It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text.
Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.
Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic &
transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.
My 52nd published book.
When does an equation of math, (or Logic), exist? AP's famous Axiom of Algebra// Math focus series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
When vacationing in Siracusa Sicily in 1999 and buying oranges from a roadside fruit stand and weighing the oranges makes one realize that you cannot have 0 all alone on one side of a equation and still be a math equation.
Then in 2000s, especially 2015 I was writing math textbooks and the issue arose where I was removing all negative numbers out of mathematics. And how that can be done for polynomials. In that removal process, I discovered the now famous Algebra Axiom,
that you cannot have a equation of mathematics if the rightside has only 0. Also, you have no math equation if the rightside is a negative number. Also, no equation exists if the rightside is a imaginary number.
The only time you have an equation in mathematics, is when the rightside has a positive, nonzero Decimal Grid Number, all alone by itself. Then you have a math equation that you can work with.
Makes sense in logic, makes sense in physics, that you need some true physical reality on one side of a equation, a balancing beam, and then measure that physical reality by weights or numbers of math on the other side of the equation.
This book is the history of my discovery of the famous Algebra Axiom of Equations of Math.
Cover Picture: an equation is the same as a balancing beam, and you have no equation if you have nothing on the rightside.
My 107th published book.
History of 4 Arithmetic-Algebra Axioms// History of why negative-numbers never exist// Math Focus series, book 5
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Last revision was 22Jun2021. This was AP's 107th published book on science.
Preface: This is somewhat a history book of math on the subject of arithmetic axioms for which Old Math failed miserably. And their failure cost math, centuries and even millennium of fake math in algebra. So costly was that failure that many minds in
mathematics wasted their entire career in mathematics. The peak of stupidity of mathematics in not recognizing these three axioms of Arithmetic-Algebra, that peak of silliness ends with the ever-unprovable Riemann Hypothesis and why that conjecture is a
failure of mathematics. I needed to write a entire whole book on just this topic for it affects both math and science in large part. To emphasize how critically important it is to have the primal axioms of arithmetic-algebra in logical order and
correctness.
Cover Picture: The 10 Decimal Grid Numbers Coordinate System, all in 1st Quadrant Only for math has no negative numbers. And Descartes started the Coordinate System in 1637, as 1st Quadrant Only, with only one axis, not even two axes.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<
plutonium....@gmail.com>
Jul 26, 2023, 12:04:11 AM (yesterday)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 11:37:29 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
This book is as much about the psychology and social forces as to why math is filled with fictional topics and ideas such as the negative number.
If we look at the history of math and negative numbers we see that physics from 1900 through 1930 was in a great period of advancement with Quantum Mechanics which is discrete in concept, yet we look at mathematics from 1900 through 1930 go in the exact
opposite direction of touting continuity and infinity. Physics, embellished with the Maxwell Equations 1900-1930 with its Lenz law in Faraday law allowing for Conservation principles and not allowing for perpetual motion; the Lenz law being a operator of
subraction by opposing the thrusting bar magnet in Faraday law. Yet in mathematics we have no limitations of subtraction and thus we have 3 of the 4 quadrants of graphing as negative numbers.
And by the closing of the 20th century we see Quantum Mechanics struggling in using the mathematics of Old Math. Struggling as Feynman complains of these infinities cropping up in Quantum Electrodynamics, QED and where Feynman and others use a technique
of "Renormalization" to get rid of the infinities. Not because QED had any blemishes, no, not because of that but because Old Math was so tattered in error and mistakes that physicists had to steer their way around the almost useless mathematics of Old
Math.
Physics had Lenz law in QED to tell them that Conservation Laws exist in physics and that negative numbers are no physical reality. But mathematics never had the 2 axioms that limits math to commonsense reality-- you cannot subtract (remove) more than
available to remove, and you need a positive number on the rightside of equation for it to be a valid equation, and no 0 or negative number or imaginary number will do.
So it was a social and psychological phenomenon that starting in 1900, mathematics becomes more kook and kookish and not a science, and was decaying to the point that Feynman needs to invent Renormalization to get rid of negative numbers and infinity.
For mathematics by 1900 to AP's books 2019, was preaching that Reals were the numbers of mathematics as continuous numbers and between any two given Reals is always to be found an infinity of more Reals. Whereas the truth of the world and which Quantum
Mechanics found out in 1900-1930, that between any two Decimal Grid Numbers, you can narrow them down to where there exists no new number, such as between 1.0 and 1.1 in 10 Grid has only empty space and no new number.
The folly of negative numbers was never discussed by math professors, for they are a bunch of people who never have to take formal logic-- on how to think straight, think clearly in their college training, and thus, when they come into the education
system themselves, they keep teaching bunkum, fake math.
No math professor who had no logical training, is going to discuss that subtraction means remove, and sees no problem in saying 2 people subtract 10 people is a negative 8 people. And this is why Feynman and the QED physicists had to invent
Renormalization in the 1900s, because the mathematics of Old Math had become so crippled, so deleterious to work with, and was going to go obsolete unless math was straightened out.
AP, King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
8:50 AM (1 minute ago)
to
That is a good title:
UNLEARNING NEGATIVE NUMBERS--Math History like never before-- a logical history //math-psychology-social sciences by Archimedes Plutonium
I have started the write up of this book. It is not that long, perhaps 50 pages.
And as I started, I questioned why in math history were these two axioms so vital, so critical, so important not been discovered or invented before? With all that dazzling genius of the Ancient Greeks, their Pythagorean theorem, their deductive science
in Euclid's geometry, why were these two axioms missed?
And then I have to question the history of the science of Logic itself. For we can say the history of Logic as a science begins in the late 1800s with Boole & Jevons, but theirs is so messed up and botched. That the history of Logic begins with AP of the
early 1990s having corrected Boole & Jevons of mistakes in all 4 of their simple connectors-- Equal & Not, AND, OR, IF->Then.
History of any science, not just math is usually conducted by people who take a topic and go back to old written literature on that topic.
But now, and here, I do a different history of logic analysis. I ask when in time a chain of events could have happened in a specific logical order. And here is that order.
(1) When could someone have said you cannot remove (subtract) more than what is available to remove? This is Axiom 1 of why no negative numbers exist.
(2) When could someone have said a equation of math is a balancing beam in which the rightside has some positive reality and the left side be a entangled algebra of variables? This is axiom 2 of why no negative numbers exist.
(3) When is the earliest that the Decimal Grid Numbers be discovered, all those numbers based on Mathematical Induction? Of course that assumes the discovery of Mathematical Induction first.
(4) When were polynomials in general form first discovered, a_n(x^n) + a_n-1(x^n-1) + . . . + a_1x + a_0 = 0 and when could they have obeyed axiom 2? So that we have a_n(x^n) + a_n-1(x^n-1) + . . . + a_1x = a_0 where a_0 is a positive decimal grid number.
(4) When was the Function concept discovered so that we can then look at the function of a straigth line as mx + b --> Y ???
(5) Notice that when writing a equation of math, you include a equal sign but never have an equal sign when writing a function, for there you include a --> as to say "goes into" or "becomes" or "yields". When people write a function as mx+b --> Y, they
are sloppy and illogical.
(6) Should axiom 1 precede axiom 2 or were/should they be discovered at the same time?
(7) Why could not the Ancient Greeks discover axioms 1 and 2? Easy answer, they had no algebra to speak of, and they sure did not have a Decimal Number System.
(8) Descartes discovered the coordinate system to graph numbers as geometry and analytic geometry begins with Descartes 1596-1650. Descartes had 1st Quadrant Only, so here is not a question of who and when discovered 1st Quadrant Only but a question of
who and when was that corrupted into fakery of 4 quadrants, 3 of which were negative numbers.
The Logical Order of Teaching No Negative Numbers.
--1-- Teach the two axioms-- cannot remove subtract more than what is available, and a equation is a balancing beam with a positive Decimal Grid Number on rightside of equation at all times.
--2-- The 1st Quadrant Only with Decimal Grid Number Systems
--3-- The function definition and the most easiest of functions x --> Y, no problems here.
--4-- The function definition of line mx + b --> Y where "m" is positive decimal grid numbers and so is "b".
--5-- The function definition of line where we allow for "m" to have some downward direction slope such as -1x +10 --> Y. Notice that I did not call "-1" a negative number but a downward slope. Remember this is all going on in 1st Quadrant Only.
--6-- A nexus or link up of Straightline mx+b --> Y with Polynomial theory of the only valid equations in all of math are polynomials and the line function is itself a polynomial.
--7-- Calculus is a series of cells with the derivative crossing through each cell and from the midpoint of derivative forms the integral rectangle within that cell. Some cells have the derivative with a "downward direction slope".
--8-- The only time mathematics or physics has to deal with a "negative signage" is for the purpose of direction. In physics, negative signage appears in the Lenz law of electrodynamics in the Faraday law. The Lenz law is in fact the operator of
Subtraction in mathematics. And the Lenz law can never be greater than the Faraday law which produces the Lenz law.
So, the Logical History of No Negative Numbers exist cannot have been discovered in math history until after AP discovered the true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Numbers coupled with a geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
Calculus cannot exist with negative numbers running around. For the sheer hypocrisy of a curve in 2nd, 3rd, 4th quadrant, some in 1st Quadrant and to subtract area under function graph, or to even know what is "negative area" from "positive area" in
integral. Area has no signage.
No one in the history of mathematics could have realized these axioms that no negative numbers exist, without knowing the true numbers of mathematics and able to do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
AP, King of Science
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)