Radical Illogics

 Radical Illogics.

Alright , Professor, I found my short notes, but I added a few examples to put these notions to use.First of all , some mathematical errors only surface within an environment of small numbers because exponential factors aren't great enough to hide them. It works out because the main question was where did Mathematicians derived their 2s? I won't be delving into problems and limitations for division operators because I did those in prior posts. I'm just going to violate certain equivalence and negative rules. Additional details on negative irrationality are located in prior posts. (1) shows that the radical does support negative powers and 1 negates any amplification. (2) The irrational value for radical 2 ,as 1.4142..., is an important percentile standard because it isn't quantitative. Other examples show how to manipulate these rules to equivocate what's not ordinarily equivalent in size or scale similar to what I did with negative integers. (3) includes the division method to show the percentile nature of these results which wouldn't otherwise be quantitatively balanced. For the final examples, Radicals within radical might be executed differently by the Professor, but I took the liberty of using it to show points of confusion.


(4) is where analytical fun begins because this is the basis for dimensional geometry, calculus, and trigonometric functions. An area(A) includes all 2D objects' properties. Therefore, widths, lengths, and hypotenuse must be surmised into a total area. The Area must always be greater than its parts. This notion was violated everywhere for both examples (a) and (b). Larger numbers don't solve this problem, it only allows the Area to accrue exponential values significant enough to seem larger than some of its parts, but never a total combination of its parts. That is called ill-reference manipulation. A form of mind control through deceptive instructional symbolic and psychological patterns. Here are additional reasons for how I personally haven't established a 2D framework that's accurate and not filled with ill-referenced symbolisms. It's a working progress. War With Statistician God

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Isaac Newton Defeated

Image
  Isaac Newton's Gravitational Formula.  First thing to acknowledge is that Isaac Newton does not use a quantitative measure even though mass(quantity of matter) is label as a variable in his equations. His methods are proportional, and I'll link to some statements that I made clarifying differences between quantitative and proportional operations. Once you've understood these instructions, you can easily manipulate symbolic mathematical fabrications to conform to prior results through proportional manipulation. These methods alone don't completely  reproduce reality's outcomes or difficulties managing quantitative operations. Quantitative instructions have limitations and do not easily induce disordered confusion through subtracting, or ill-mannered addition of variables through proportional manipulation. I further that limitation by abandoning use for negative numbers, which removes information. 0.98 acceleration ,for the greater mass, flies into Dialect's fac...
Read more

Almighty Darkness

Image
Darker Daimon's Logic. Darkness is a concept of the mind. It is pure abstraction in mental frameworks . In constructs of Darkness,  Logic  is materialize by consistent and predictable  instructions . Inconsistencies and randomness possess no bodies in the darkest of realms because they're attributes for those whom seek blinding light.   With careful curtail sensibility to reason, all entities deriving from dark abstractions should convert to physical or external  reality. These  interpretations  can only be found here and another place. All other names have no association with me or my developments.  Darker Daimon's Logic. General Contents
Read more

Compatibility: 0.5 Plus 1 Dimension

Image
  Magnetic Cycles and Artificial Gravity Modulus Function First things come first, you'll have to understand prior dimensional instructions to understand what lead me here. You can catch up here if you hadn't:  Compatibility: 0.5 Dimension  . Artificial Gravity's inception and methods were introduced here:  Distance(Remaining Time)  .Alright, I'll try to make it shorter than prior posts, but you can't take my word for it at this injunction. The major difference here is with the notion of 2D. Second dimension, according to me, does not possess an inherent directional structure that emerges from entities settling or balancing into a 2d environment. What's unique to 2D is spin or rotation. Because 1D requires ranges of dense threshold levels across traveled distances, the entirety of 1D objects, and dependencies on density, it lacks the potential to reorient itself , as a unified whole, even though it can traverse directionally. More conflicting constituencies decr...
Read more