Thursday, September 03, 2009
JSH: What puzzles me, discovery ignored
One of the more important discoveries from my research last year was a general solution to binary quadratic Diophantine equations. That is, a way of finding integer solutions to x and y with equations of the form:
c_1*x^2 + c_2*xy + c_3*y^2 = c_4 + c_5*x + c_6*y
For those who wonder what good is that to physics, well, in quantum mechanics wherever any discrete equations of that (remember a lot of the c's can be 0) form pop-up, my mathematical theory can be used to determine if integer solutions for x and y exist, and also tell you how to find them.
A general solution had never been given before. If you doubt me you can go to your local library, or do what most of people who live in the modern world do and go onto Google and do a search! (Of course some of you may know my research pops up highly.)
For reasons that escape me, some posters have gotten away with attacking the high ranking SOME of my research gets in Google with bizarre rationalizations. On sci.math newsgroups when I brought it up—some people attacked Google search results themselves! Others seem to think I post lots of links or something, when if you notice, I don't post links to my research—why should I? I can just refer
people to Google search strings.
IF you could do it. You would too. Why bother posting links?
Now then, for those results to come up highly there are people around the world DOING something, which causes that to occur, which would indicate use! But I don't know of any citations that refer back to my work. And I haven't seen any indication that the mathematical community has any desire to acknowledge my research, despite the ease of proving its value.
So I'm puzzled by a situation that before, years ago before I ran into how dedicated some academics apparently can be in the defense of what they may see as their area, as in they OWN it—human beings can be so recidivistically petty—I would have thought that a demonstrably useful mathematical result where there is no doubt of correctness would be cheered. Instead my research it would seem based on search results gets silently used, and I continue to get jeered.
That general solution to binary quadratic Diophantine equations is actually so dominating I find it depressing as I have other research it relates to, which I just think is more fun, because the general solution comes from my most powerful research idea—tautological spaces.
Tautological spaces allow you to encompass all prior human knowledge in a particular area of mathematics, and go beyond, to infinite levels of knowledge, and draw conclusion from infinity. So it's depressingly powerful.
You can put xy = T into the theorem. It doesn't care. You can put x^2 = a mod N into the theorem using x^2 = a + Nj, and it doesn't care. Damn thing will just solve it for you. Boringly easily.
Tautological spaces are way awesome in their power, so they are depressing in their reach as that whole encompassing all human knowledge in a particular area and also including infinite mathematical knowledge just is kind of overwhelming.
Tautological spaces can conceivably encompass all human knowledge entire. And keep going to handle all possible knowledge in a particular area. Infinite knowledge, in reach to pitiful little humans. Scary.
Their use is beyond anything that human beings have ever come close to having, and thankfully the human species except for me seems to be intent on ignoring them! I say thankfully as, have you looked around? Human beings seem to be best at hurting each other, destroying things, and creating lots and lots of garbage.
In any event, some people seem to be using the fruits of tautological spaces—as quietly as they can. With their footprints being revealed by Google.
So there is a general solution to binary quadratic Diophantine equations available. It allows a simple approach to solving all such equations of that type. It was derived using mathematical techniques beyond normal belief, which allow one to encompass all human knowledge in a mathematical area plus infinite knowledge in that area.
And the mathematical community is so far not acknowledging the research.
Did you know I defined mathematical proof? Don't believe me? Google it!!!
Google (has to be Google): define mathematical proof
c_1*x^2 + c_2*xy + c_3*y^2 = c_4 + c_5*x + c_6*y
For those who wonder what good is that to physics, well, in quantum mechanics wherever any discrete equations of that (remember a lot of the c's can be 0) form pop-up, my mathematical theory can be used to determine if integer solutions for x and y exist, and also tell you how to find them.
A general solution had never been given before. If you doubt me you can go to your local library, or do what most of people who live in the modern world do and go onto Google and do a search! (Of course some of you may know my research pops up highly.)
For reasons that escape me, some posters have gotten away with attacking the high ranking SOME of my research gets in Google with bizarre rationalizations. On sci.math newsgroups when I brought it up—some people attacked Google search results themselves! Others seem to think I post lots of links or something, when if you notice, I don't post links to my research—why should I? I can just refer
people to Google search strings.
IF you could do it. You would too. Why bother posting links?
Now then, for those results to come up highly there are people around the world DOING something, which causes that to occur, which would indicate use! But I don't know of any citations that refer back to my work. And I haven't seen any indication that the mathematical community has any desire to acknowledge my research, despite the ease of proving its value.
So I'm puzzled by a situation that before, years ago before I ran into how dedicated some academics apparently can be in the defense of what they may see as their area, as in they OWN it—human beings can be so recidivistically petty—I would have thought that a demonstrably useful mathematical result where there is no doubt of correctness would be cheered. Instead my research it would seem based on search results gets silently used, and I continue to get jeered.
That general solution to binary quadratic Diophantine equations is actually so dominating I find it depressing as I have other research it relates to, which I just think is more fun, because the general solution comes from my most powerful research idea—tautological spaces.
Tautological spaces allow you to encompass all prior human knowledge in a particular area of mathematics, and go beyond, to infinite levels of knowledge, and draw conclusion from infinity. So it's depressingly powerful.
You can put xy = T into the theorem. It doesn't care. You can put x^2 = a mod N into the theorem using x^2 = a + Nj, and it doesn't care. Damn thing will just solve it for you. Boringly easily.
Tautological spaces are way awesome in their power, so they are depressing in their reach as that whole encompassing all human knowledge in a particular area and also including infinite mathematical knowledge just is kind of overwhelming.
Tautological spaces can conceivably encompass all human knowledge entire. And keep going to handle all possible knowledge in a particular area. Infinite knowledge, in reach to pitiful little humans. Scary.
Their use is beyond anything that human beings have ever come close to having, and thankfully the human species except for me seems to be intent on ignoring them! I say thankfully as, have you looked around? Human beings seem to be best at hurting each other, destroying things, and creating lots and lots of garbage.
In any event, some people seem to be using the fruits of tautological spaces—as quietly as they can. With their footprints being revealed by Google.
So there is a general solution to binary quadratic Diophantine equations available. It allows a simple approach to solving all such equations of that type. It was derived using mathematical techniques beyond normal belief, which allow one to encompass all human knowledge in a mathematical area plus infinite knowledge in that area.
And the mathematical community is so far not acknowledging the research.
Did you know I defined mathematical proof? Don't believe me? Google it!!!
Google (has to be Google): define mathematical proof
# posted by James Harris @ 22:23 
