When we talk about mathematics, first and foremost, we accept that mathematics is a language. Language that may explain phenomena, a language in which to explain phenomena, a language with which to enter the depths available of creation to learn some of the knowledge in the world, we share our knowledge available of the famous mathematicians, and explanations of their symptoms, sacred buildings, building materials, the structure of DNA, the structure of the galaxy available and theories of a unified field of consciousness.
Until what point I could be deceived and made you think we're going to talk about math? I'm guessing that in "the depths of creation" lifted up her back and wondered about the style recommended in the "where we share our knowledge renowned mathematicians" has been started to worry, and when I got to the "sacred buildings," it was clear I had lost it completely. Change occurred probably in the last row, and when I got to the "unified field of consciousness" understood that I was just kidding.
I was stuck in Genesis and foremost we accept that mathematics is a language. " Before delving available into the depths, I would like to say a few words about this concept - of mathematics as a language - a concept that I think is wrong, but very common among the general public (and I guess even among quite a few people were familiar with mathematics).
Mathematics reference language as "not entirely baseless; math has countless all sorts of concepts that can be used to describe realistic effects (described, not explained). The most familiar concept is that of a number which we use all the time, anywhere, and one example of the most useful concept deserves more advanced mathematics is derived, which enables us to accurately describe the motion of objects (instantaneous velocity "of the moving object is derived by the time of function that describes his place, that is actually - rate of change of place).
I think that so many people relate to math language as "modern fashion available because we are engaged in mathematics including the use of marks and Settings notable that seem meaningless to those who do not know them, like Chinese writing seems incomprehensible to those who does not know him. It was not always so; previously available described math very literally, and in my opinion because it was actually much less understood. Mathematical notations are simply a way to describe the mathematics more clearly and easier to digest, it still does not make the mathematics of language. "
Usually, the mathematical concepts available come from the abstraction of existing concepts of our everyday lives and exploration of their features is simplified after abstraction. For example, the common In The Two balls "and In The Two Children" is the number 2, which is an abstraction of these two situations. Equation 1 +1 = 2 is a simplified way to say "ball and another ball gives us two bullets" and "child and another available child gives us two children" without having to talk about irrelevant details of whether we have two balls, or two children instead. That is, feature 2 = 1 +1 is something that always exists when writers together two objects are the same.
Why am I telling you in a nutshell what I think Yes Math? Because I want to talk to you here about what mathematics is really not by examining the extreme case, and hopefully help you to distinguish between mathematics and other things completely, even less extreme situations.
I want to convince you that the article deals with the fact in numerology, that is, in pseudo - science that deals with the attribution of features numbers and attempt to reach conclusions that reality. That this field is not related at all to reality I'm ready to forgive; What bothers me is that the sector insists on pretending mathematics.
The article states, "the authors of these lines does not purport to be mathematicians or understand than average. Nevertheless, we relate available mathematics is relatively simple and geometric points and natural structures it can be understood with a little openness and common sense." So come on, let's find out openness and sense and see where the article will lead us. The article presents talk about one's ideas, Marko Rodin, I have no idea who he is but I've announced that I do not like him.
Good article actually opened, presenting an interesting mathematical phenomenon. Indeed, ahead of a few statements angles available like "We try to concentrate available on simple math, math Fitgori" (I have no idea what "account Fitgori") and "You have to remember that there are only nine real numbers, the number 0 invented man as a guard anywhere. Every complex world numbers only 9 digits "reveals a fundamental misunderstanding regarding the fact that our current counting method, available which has 10 digits, is something completely arbitrary, and in various places in the past used other counting available methods. available Babylonians used 60 digits, the Mayans used 20; Greeks and Romans - and the Jews - counting methods available used are completely different in nature from ours today, and so forth, a fascinating topic of discussion itself.
But never mind. Now paper presents a phenomenon: he looks at the powers of 2, ie the numbers 1,2,4,8,16,32 and so on (one is 2 to the power 0, so it appears here). All strong, taking the spelling available of her and connectors decimal digits until the number. If the resulting number is a single digit, stop here; different authors over the literature and so on. For example, for 2 to the power 12 get the 4096. We add the digits and get 19 = 4 +0 +9 +6. We consider again the numbers we get 10 = 1 +9. We consider again the numbers and get one. However, for 2 to the power 13 we get 8192, and after writing the book we get two. This paper presents a horrifying catalog (more than required) of these holdings and values are obtained by summing the literature, and we notice that the cyclical pattern emerged: ... 1,2,4,8,7,5,1,2,4,8,7,5 , 1,2,4,8,7,5 and so on.
That's when mathematician and numerologist separated. Mathematician staring at a series of numbers and trying to figure out - what's going on here? Where is the logic? Where the periodicity available comes? Why 3,6,9 do not appear in the series? Is there a simple way to describe the action "we connect again and again until we get from literature
No comments:
Post a Comment