Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Posts:
821
Registered:
9/1/10


Re: Where do math symbols originate?
Posted:
Apr 10, 2013 10:43 PM


On Sunday, August 29, 2004 10:33:12 PM UTC7, Ralph Frost wrote: > On Wed, 16 Oct 2002 20:16:26 0400, Bernard Massé wrote: > >THE reference, albeit a little old, on this subject is Cajori, > Florian, A > >History of Mathematical Notations which is still available from > Dover. > >Although I don't think Cajori wrote a "philosophical" book which > would > >immediately give a straight yes or no answer to your question, his > book > >might permit your two opposing teams to bring many examples and > >counterexamples in your discussions. > > > >Bernard Massé > > > > Thank you for the info. I haven't looked up such a thing yet but I do > hope to get down to Purdue and see if it or something like it might be > there. > > The squabble down in the "Lab" has quieted down in the last 2 years. > The abstract math fellows are in some type of deep catatonic state, > stunned into silence by something that, to them, seems "completely > unpossible". > > It turns out that as each and every cell in the body lives and > breathes it is running the general respiration reaction: > > organics + oxygen => water + carbon dioxide + ~energy (eq. 1) > > If you remember your biochemistry, that happens in processes like the > "Kreb's tricarboxylic acid cycle" and similar welloiled channels. > One point is, the water molecules are ~created in a regular sequence, > forged in concert with our energizing experience in the world, > extruded from each process in incremental units. > > Now, as you might also remember, the experimentalists locked in the > subbasement at the Lab have routinely been aligning rod magnets > along the "radii of a tetrahedron" and sticking two north poles to two > south poles. After grueling analysis or the resulting artifact, they > have discovered that since that thing has six edges, there are at > least six way such a thing can be oriented in some imposed field. This > leads to a 6tothenth type of math. This means that for a sequence > of, say, 16 units, there are 6^16 or 2.82x10^12 ways to arrange those > sixteen units in a stack or chain. Many of the fellows in the lab > have not had that many different experiences, so they are somewhat > excited. > > The logic goes, as best I can follow it, that this is some sort of > "smoking gun" model of consciousness. The analog math don't lie. > The water molecules are formed in distributed, parallel processing > channels and as the units are extruded, they are jiggled into one of > the six positions BY the subtle influences of the inbound (sensory) > "quantum gravitational" vibrations. Once the chain is truncated at > some length (perhap for some, a consistent length), it's like a > little resonant reflection of the ~current environmental experience. > If Mom was yelling, "HOT!", then 'hot!' it is. And so forth. > Interestingly, the chain one person maps to 'hot!' doesn't have to be > the say as someone else does. > > Now, the fact is, they really don't know whether to invoke or apply a > fancy call to "quantum gravitation", or whether to just refer to > influences of the surrounding, more unified field. The point is, > they have a nonlinearly expanding point. Water makes up something > like 80% of just about everything important in and near widgets of > consciousness. Water is FORMED and extruded in rational units, > sequentially, during respiration, in concert with the vibration of our > experience. Water does form in "ordered water" arrangements. > Socalled "bound water", water that gets knit together in organic > materials, is energetically very stable and persistance. Anharmonic > oscillators, matrix math, torsioninduced sine and cosine tables, even > "waveequations" appear to be quite naturally at home in such a > resonancebased computational/associative media. > > Plus, running such a waterbased internal analog math system still > allows for wild variations in the initializations and in the ways > linguistics, perceptions, beliefs, values, etc., can be formed and > held and changed. Com links to deeper levels of organizations and > comminication are not automatically excluded. As well, dream > imagery, prayer, imagination and, I suppose, even the creation of > abstract math symbols and models can all be created using the same > sort of media/relationhip  analog math symbols. > > This has come as a bit of a shock to the abstract math folks. Once > their denial shattered, they have just been sitting there, day after > peaceful day, watching their breath, trying to figure out if there is > anything "mathematical" that they can say. > > So far, they are still completely silent on the matter. > > > Thanks again for the reference toward a helpful book. I hope to get > to it. > > Best regards, > Ralph Frost > > Imagine consciousiness as a single internal analog language > made of ordered water, and its variants. > http://flep.refrost.com > > "...and love your neighbor as yourself" Matthew 19:19 > > > > > > >"Ralph E. Frost" <refrost@dcwi.com> a écrit dans le message de news: > >uqpg8nsacsr0c4@corp.supernews.com... > >> [Rated "RFTOR" in s.p.r.] > >> > >> > >> The normally wellmannered, docile fellows in the advanced > symbolics and > >> unification division here at the lab started a bad squabble the > other day > >> that perhaps someone in SPR can speak into and put an end to ...so > those > >> guys can shut up and get back to calculating  to doing real > work. > >> > >> One group, the experimentalists, came out with the idea that > since > >> abstract math symbols are linguistic artifacts, all abstract math > symbols > >> and thus all abstract mathematics arise from and thus are secondary > to a > >> very small number of very flexible physical structures and > relationships > >> down in the guts of human consciousness. > >> > >> This made sense to the experimentalists, because they couldn't > escape > >the > >> notion that their plans for improved experimental rigs, as best > they can > >> tell, flow up out of various rearrangements of the same flexible > physical > >> structures. > >> > >> However, as readers might well imagine, the abstract math > contingent will > >> have none of this troublesome talk and taunting, even though they > >> can only grunt and groan ineffable noises when confronted with the > >> observation that the unified thing itself does all it's math > flawlessly > >> using the socalled "analog math symbols". To complicate matters, > some of > >> abstract folks are becoming a bit intrigued by the idea that the > step up > >to > >> the emerging, more unified models in fact very might require the > >> introduction and shift to using more robust, more synchronous math > symbols > >> than folks use in the less unified models. At this moment, though, > none of > >> them can venture a guess on which analog math symbol might be the > absolute > >> best to be deployed or how such an awkward notion might be refined > and > >> developed. > >> > >> Anyway, I am asking for your help to resolve this squabble one > way or > >the > >> other. > >> > >> > >>  > >> Ralph Frost > >> Looking for a desktop model to help you ponder this topic? > >> <a href="http://flep.refrost.com">http://flep.refrost.com</a> >  now with secure online ordering > >> Use more robust symbols > >> Seek a thought worthy of speech. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>
Most from me (4) Whoever commitx xin also commitx lawlexxnexx, and six is lawlexxnexx. Sub x=ss=1



