
Re: Which naturals better?
Posted:
Feb 7, 2013 9:00 PM


On Monday, February 4, 2013 12:15:23 AM UTC6, JT wrote: > Building new natural numbers without zero using NyaN, in any base, this will have affects upon computational theory? The NyaN principle is general work for all bases. (Base 3) (NyaN) base 3 Standard naturals base 3 1 = 1 01 2 = 2 02 3 = 3 10 4 = 11 =3+1 11 5 = 12 =3+2 12 6 = 13 =3+3 20 7 = 21 =6+1 21 8 = 22 =6+2 22 9 = 23 =6+3 100 10 = 31 =9+1 101 11 = 32 =9+2 102 12 = 33 =9+3 110 13 = 111 =9+3+1 111 14 = 112 =9+3+2 112 15 = 113 =9+3+3 120 16 = 121 =9+6+1 121 17 = 122 =9+6+2 122 18 = 123 =9+6+3 200 19 = 131 =9+9+1 201 20 = 132 =9+9+2 202 21 =133 =9+9+3 210
You guys are not rational,you wanna see natural mathematics from a paper tombbe published
ID: Polarity and Composite of 19 19*3=57 5+7=12* 19*6=114 11+4=15 19*9=171 17+1=18* Gap of 3018=12 and 3012=18 , 18+12=30 19*12=228 22+8=30* 19*15=285 28+5=33 19*18=342 34+2=36* Gap of 4830=18 and 4836=12, 18+12=30 19*21=399 39+9=48* 19*24=456 45+6=51 19*27=513 51+3=54 19*30=570 57+0=57 Note the correction of mathematics at 57 19*33=627 62+7=69 19*36=684 68+4=72 19*39=741 74+1=75 Gap of 8775=12 8769=12 , 12+18=30 19*42=798 79+8=87

