Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Topic: The shame and ridiculous 4 Color Mapping and the fake proof by Appel
& Haken #1471 Correcting Math

Replies: 4   Last Post: Jan 29, 2014 10:21 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com Posts: 16,613 Registered: 3/31/08
The shame and ridiculous 4 Color Mapping and the fake proof by Appel
& Haken #1471 Correcting Math

Posted: Jan 27, 2014 1:26 PM

The shame and ridiculous 4 Color Mapping and the fake proof by Appel & Haken #1471 Correcting Math

Alright, the Appel & Haken fakery of 4 Color Mapping is easily seen in my old post of 2011. That 2 Colors are necessary and sufficient to color all maps. The question arises, in logic, can you even have a country if it has no borders? Not only have we strayed from geography but strayed from mathematics of precision definition of objects. Suppose I wanted to prove something about triangles and rectangles and removed all its borders, could I even proceed? Undoubtedly not, because we no longer have triangles and rectangles once ignore their parts.

An interesting true math question does come from the 4 Color Mapping Problem once we agree Infinity borderline is 1*10^603, in that we have two countries adjacent and we draw a line for their borders. Which means that the borders cannot be any smaller than this picture illustrates:

.|.
.|.
.|.
.|.

Where I have drawn a line that is the empty space between two points, one point being in country A and the other in country B. I turned the 1*10^-603 empty space into making it a "line segment".

So, the question for Appel & Haken with their ignoring borderlines of countries, is how close do they propose their colors get to one another? Do they color to 10^-10045 on both sides? In other words, how utterly ridiculous is their view and understanding of 4 Color Mapping.

--- quoting two old 2011 post of mine ---
Newsgroups: sci.math, sci.physics, sci.logic
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archime...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 23:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sun, May 29 2011 1:22 am
Subject: Chapt6 The 4 Color Mapping solved #508 Correcting Math 3rd ed

Chapter 6: Correction of 4 Color Mapping with its convoluted logic,
borders counted or not counted.
In the long history of mathematics, its gravest weakness, or its ?Achilles tendon was borders. ?Why that is, I really do not know, for it likely involves psychology ?as to why mathematicians ?for the most part tremble at the knees and quake and shimmer in the ?mind whenever borders are involved in mathematics. Maybe borders are ?just a difficult subject for mathematics.
So the longest unsolved and ill-defined notion of mathematics was the ?controversy of what it ?means to be finite versus infinite. That ill defined notion caused a ?massive list of unsolvable problems in mathematics and a long list of ?bogus proofs.
Once mathematicians find a "natural border" within mathematics to ?pinpoint the beginning of infinity such as via the pseudosphere at ?10^603, then virtually every problem unsolved in math before is now ?easily solved.
Now I put the 4 Color Mapping near the front of this book, because the ?problems encountered in 4 Color Mapping are almost parallel to the ill- ?defined finite versus infinite definition.
The 4 Color Mapping originated in the 19th century, and what if there ?had been a real good ?logician around that time to put a halt to the nonsense that a country ?can exist without borderlines. Well, if there had been a real good ?logician in the 19th century telling those ?folks who dived into the 4 Color Mapping that it is impossible to have ?a conjecture of 4 Color Mapping if you simultaneously insist countries ?have no borders, because you cannot have a country in the first place ?unless a country has borderlines.
So if this Logician had been around in the 19th century when the first ?murmurs or whispers of a 4 Color Mapping took root or entered the ?arena of mathematics. Then this logician would have said. Alright, ?there is no conjecture of mathematics for countries without ?borderlines. With borderlines a 4 Color Mapping reduces to a 2 Color ?Mapping proof and thus 4 colors becomes trivial byproduct.
When we include borderlines the Jordan Curve theorem proves that only ?2 Colors are needed to color all maps. All we need is a white for ?interior and a black line for the border. ?If you want to be more fancy you can color some of the interiors red ?or green. But it takes only 2  colors to color all maps.
Now if you chose to prove the conjecture of 4 Color Mapping that you ?have the borderlines ?all black and then use four different colors for the interiors, then a ?different theorem in mathematics proves that to be true that 4 colors ?with black borderlines suffices. That theorem is the Moebius theorem ?is such a strong fact of 4 mutual adjacencies is the maximum in the ?plane that such a strong fact creates a short and fast proof of 4 ?Color Mapping when the fifth color is black for the borderlines.
So what we have here in summary of the 4 Color Mapping is a inability ?to well-define terms and terminology of a conjecture. Where we cannot ?even give a precision definition of a country and its borderlines and ?then plunge headlong into a conjecture filled with hypocritical ?notions. The 4 Color Mapping of Appell and Haken is no better than ?asking than asking mathematics prove that "Mud is dirtier than dirt" ?as a piece of mathematics.
What would be interesting for a psychologist to go back into the ?history of mathematics and to see how far the aversion to precision ?defining the border of infinity impacted the ?inability of mathematicians to correctly identify the 4 Color Mapping ?and to correctly prove the 4 Color Mapping.
What I am saying is that suppose Moebius had started the 4 Color ?Mapping and quickly realized it was only a conjecture of math if the ?borderlines were "never ignored" and so that ?Moebius would have proven 4 Color Mapping with his theorem. Then the ?question would have been, would the proof of 4 Color Mapping touched ?off a realization that Infinity needed to have its "natural borderline ?found?"
The more you learn and know mathematics, the true mathematics, the ?more you realize ?that mathematics is only as good as its precision definitions. And the ?reason that most proofs are unproven, is not because they are ?difficult, but rather, there are some vague notions and not precision ?definitions involved.
Afterall, Mathematics is just the science of precision.

Newsgroups: sci.math, sci.physics, sci.logic
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archime...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 13:16:39 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sun, May 29 2011 3:16 pm
Subject: Chapt6 MOVIE: Psychologists interview mathematicians over their crazy "ignoring of borders" #509 Correcting Math 3rd ed

4 Color Mapping MOVIE
The interview involves the leading mathematicians of the 20th century ?and interviewed by the ?psychologists of the 20th century wanting to know why mathematicians ?are so stubbornly ?ignorant that you cannot ignore borders and still have countries. ?Wanting to show that the ?4 Color Mapping of Kempe on through Appel and Haken is not mathematics ?but insanity.
Psychologist: We have assembled here a highly illustrious crowd of ?mathematicians all of which ?never said one bad word against the 4 Color Mapping. So how is it that ?you can ignore the ?borders of a country and yet still go about coloring it, not knowing ?if you crossed into ?the adjacent country?
Mathematician: Sort of like the dark, we remember where the furniture ?is before we turn out the lights ?and then make our way into bed.
Psychologist: Let me try a different angle. An airplane company that ?builds airplanes to fly, what ?if they started to ignore putting a left wing on their aircraft, would ?it no longer be an aircraft that ?flys? Or the bakery that bakes pies and for their cherry pies ignores ?including any cherries into their ?pie, could we not then insist it is no longer a cherry pie if you ?ignore all cherries?
Mathematician: No, it still flys, not very high, but can get off the ?ground by a few centimeters. Just as ?we can continue to color France an orange color and color Germany a ?green color without ever knowing where the ?borderline is or was or had been.
Different Mathematician: My colleague ignored your cherry pie ?question. Let me please fill in the answer to it. We color the ?noncherry pie a red color, that imitates the color of cherry and then ?we are justified in a ?proof by saying we can commercially sell that red colored pie as a ?cherry pie.
Psychologist calling for a time out.
Group of Psychologists: Why is that you mathematicians refuse to ?accept reality, that a country is not a country unless it has borders, ?and "this make believe stuff" that one instant it has and the next ?instant it has no border is a form of insanity. Our job, as ?psychologists is to understand why you have accepted and adopted ?insanity rather than science reality.
Leading Psychologists: We believe mathematics community has stubbornly ?stuck to "ignoring of borders" in ?4 Color Mapping because it means that mathematics not a universal ?subject but is a lessor subject. In the long history of mathematics, ?it had come to be such an "arrogant subject" and the belief it was so ?powerful that the Universe is a mathematical entity ?and so no chains and shackles of bounds were seen on math. And the 4 ?Color Mapping was a gross symptom of this ?over-reach of mathematics as a subject. Much like modern day dictators ?and despots of countries want absolute power and to hold on to power, ?regardless of the need of the people they rule. This insanity of ?mathematicians ?clinging on to a concept of "ignoring borders" is a clinging on to the ?psyche need to think that mathematics is all powerful and has no ?borders or limits to its power.
The psychologists passing out teddy-bears to the mathematicians and ?telling them these bears can soothe them ?during the nights of this convention.
End of act 1 of the MOVIE -- Psychologists interview of Mathematicians
Cheers and laughter....
--

Recently I re-opened the old newsgroup of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of mockers and hatemongers.

Archimedes Plutonium

Date Subject Author
1/27/14 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
1/27/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
1/28/14 Dale
1/28/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
1/29/14 Brian Q. Hutchings