I switched on your recommendation--Dan

See a picture that represents the relations of the two triangles

http://mathhelpforum.com/attachments...-zagonetka.png

what is a "?"

3?3=3

3?3=4

3?3=5

3?3=6

3?3=7

3?3=8

3?3=9

3?3=10

3?3=12

Printable View

- Feb 11th 2013, 06:43 AMmsbiljanicaMathematics - a new basis
I switched on your recommendation--Dan

See a picture that represents the relations of the two triangles

http://mathhelpforum.com/attachments...-zagonetka.png

what is a "?"

3?3=3

3?3=4

3?3=5

3?3=6

3?3=7

3?3=8

3?3=9

3?3=10

3?3=12 - Feb 11th 2013, 06:44 AMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
When you look at the solution below will not be clear

1. 3 + [0] 3 = 3

2. 3 + [1] 3 = 4

3. 3 + [2] 3 = 5

4. 3 + [3] 3 = 6 or 3 +3 = 6

5.3_{3Rd1 (6) d2 (7)}+3 = 7

6.3_{3Rd1 (6) d2 (8)}+3 = 8

7.3_{3Rd1 (6) d2 (9)}+3 = 9

8.3_{3Rd1 (6) d2 (10)}+3 = 10

9.3_{3Rd1 (6) d2 (12)}+3 = 12

(1,2,3,4) - There are many forms of addition in the set N

(5,6,7,8,9) - numbers that are dynamic, where it is possible to add this - Feb 11th 2013, 11:31 PMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
1 Mathematics Space

We'll tell mathematical space with two initial geometric object that can not

prove.

1.Natural geometric object - natural straight line .

2.Real geometric objects - real straight lines .

1.1 Natural along

In the picture there is a natural geometric object straight line (AB), it has a beginning (A)

and end (B) - this property natural long'll call point.

Attachment 26970

1.2 The basic rule

Two (more) natural straight line are connected only with points. - Feb 11th 2013, 11:38 PMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
2 Natural Mathematics

2.1 straight line , semi-line "1"

"1"-from any previous evidence (axioms), a new proof

Theorem-Two (more) natural straight line merge points in the direction of the first AB

natural straight line .

EVIDENCE - natural straight lines (AB, BC) are connected - we get straight line AC.

Attachment 26971

Natural straight lines (AB, BC, CD) are connected - we get straight line AD.

Attachment 26972

Natural straight lines (AB, BC, CD, DE) are connected - we get straight line AE.

Attachment 26973

...

Natural straight lines (AB, BC, CD, DE, ...) are connected - getting semi-line.

Attachment 26974

-------------

Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics)

straight line - EVIDENCE ( line - Axiom)

semi-line - EVIDENCE (line -Axiom ) - Feb 12th 2013, 12:53 PMHallsofIvyRe: Mathematics - a new basis
I am confused as to what is "new" about this. It looks to me like basic Euclidean geometry but with vague and poorly stated definitions instead of the standard definitions.

- Feb 12th 2013, 10:38 PMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
Geometry but not the basis of the whole of mathematics, unlike Euclid I only have two axioms (natural straight line - with which you are familiar)

This is a different approach than the current math, the fewer rules (axiom)

Because these rules (axioms) to limit the the phenomena that exist in real life can be mathematically explained (I gave an example of the early post)

------------

2.2 Numeral semi-line, numeric point "2.1"

Theorem-character mark points on the one-way infinite

long (A, B, C, ...), replace the labels {(0), (0.1), ..., (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 ), ...}

which are set circular and positionally.

Attachment 26985

Proof - is obtained by numerical along which the numerical point of {(0,00,000,

0000, ...), (0,1,10,11,100,101, ...), ..., (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, 12, ...), ...}.

-------------

2.3 Natural numbers "2.2"

Theorem - There is a relationship (length) between Point in numeric (0) and

all points Numeral semi-line.

Proof - Value (length) numeric point (0) and numerical point (0)

the number 0

Attachment 26986

Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (1) the number o1

Attachment 26987

Ratio (required) numeric point (0) and numeric item (2) is the number 2

Attachment 26988

Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (3) is the number 3

Attachment 26989

Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (4) is the number 4

Attachment 26990

...

Set - all the possibilities given theorem.

The set of natural numbers N = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12, ...}.

--------

Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics)

numeral semi-line - axiom

numerical point - axiom

set - axiom

natural numbers -axion - Feb 14th 2013, 03:24 AMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
2.4 Mobile Number "2.2,2.3"

Theorem-Natural numbers can be specified and other numerical

point other than the point numeric 0th

Proof - Value (length) numeric point (0) and numeric point (2)

the number 2

Attachment 27008

Ratio (length) numeric point (1) and the numerical point of (3) is the number 2

Attachment 27009

Ratio (length) numerical point (2) and the numerical point of (4) is the number 2

Attachment 27010

...

A set of mobile numbers Nn = {[n]N}

-----------------

2.5 Gap numbers "2.2,2.3,2.4"

Theorem - Natural number and mobile number of no contact,

(natural number and mobile number no contact) and have no contact mobile number, ..., in numeric longer.

EVIDENCE - natural number 2 and mobile number 2 no contact, you get the number of gaps 2/.1/2.

Attachment 27011

natural number 2 and mobile number 2 no contact, you get the number of gaps 2/.2/2.

Attachment 27012

natural number 2 and mobile number 2 no contact, you get the number of gaps 2/.3/2.

Attachment 27013

...

(natural number 2 and mobile number 2 no contact) and mobile number 1 no contact , you get the number of gaps

2/.1/2/.1/1

Attachment 27014

...

Set gap number G_{N}={a|/.b_{n}/c_{n}|(a,b_{n},c_{n})$\displaystyle \in$$\displaystyle N$,b_{n}>0}

a/.b_{1}/c_{1}

a/.b_{1}/c_{1}/.b_{2}/c_{2}

a/.b_{1}/c_{1}/.b_{2}/c_{2}/.b_{3}/c_{3}

a/.b_{1}/c_{1}/.b_{2}/c_{2}/.b_{3}/c_{3}/.b_{4}/c_{4}

...

---------

Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics)

mobile number - no

gap number - no - Feb 14th 2013, 10:58 PMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
2.6. Mobile gap number "2.2,2.5"

Theorem-Gap numbers can be entered and the second numerical

point other than the point numeric 0th

EVIDENCE-ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (4) is

2/.1/1 number of gap.

Attachment 27023

ratio (length) numeric point (1) and the numerical point of (5) is

2/.1/1 number of gap.

Attachment 27024

ratio (length) numeric point (2) and the numerical point of (6) is

2/.1/1 number of gap.

Attachment 27025

...

A set of mobile numbers gap G_{Nn}={[n]G_{N}}

-------------

2.7. Points the number of "2.2,2.3,2.5"

Theorem - Number (N,G_{N}) has extended the numeric point, they

can write the opposite.

EVIDENCE - Number 5 has a point: [0], [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Opposite may

write: [.0], [.1], [.2], [.3], [.4], [.5].

Attachment 27026

Gaps has a number 2/.3/1 points: [0], [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. They can be

otherwise write: [.0], [.1], [.2], [.3], [.4], [.5), [.6].

Attachment 27027

--------------

Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics)

mobile gap number - no

point number - no - Feb 15th 2013, 05:01 AMzzephodRe: Mathematics - a new basis
- Feb 15th 2013, 11:22 PMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
is this a joke, or actually give the money

--------------

2.8. The opposite number "2.2,2.3,2.5,2.7"

Theorem - Numbers (N, G_{N}) that have the same number of points

number, length becomes gap and rotation.

EVIDENCE - 4 $\displaystyle \fbox{s}$ 0/.4/0 , 4s. = {4, 0/.4/0 } or 0/.4/0s.= {0/.4/0,4}.

Attachment 27035

1/.1/3 $\displaystyle \fbox{s}$ 0/.1/1/.3/0 , 1/.1/3s. = {1/.1/3, 0/.1/1/.3/0} or

0/.1/1/.3/0s. ={ 0/.1/1/.3/0, 1/.1/3}

Attachment 27036

The general form of a $\displaystyle \fbox{s}$ b. a_{s.}= {a, b} or b_{s.}= {b, a}.

A set of numbers opposing S. = {(a, b) $\displaystyle \in$(N, G_{N})}, S.n = {(a, b)$\displaystyle \in$ (Nn, G_{Nn})}

----------------

2.9 N comparability numbers "2.3"

Theorem - Two (more) numbers are comparable to

know who is higher (equal or smaller), which is the point of [.0] away

from the numerical point of 0th

EVIDENCE - Two numbers: 5> 3 (item number 5 [5] is far from the point

3 of [3] 5 is a number of third 4 = 4 (item number 4 [4] and the number of points

4 [4] are equidistant) 4 is equal to 4 .2 <6 (item number 6 [6] is

from the point of 2 [2] 2 less than sixth ). .(={>, =, <}.

The general form of a). .(b

Three numbers: a). .(b). .(c (general form, open, closed form (the

figure)).

Attachment 27037

...

---------------

Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics)

opposite number -no

N comparability numbers - axiom - Feb 17th 2013, 06:43 AMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
2:10 Adding "2.2,2.3,2.4,2.5,2.7,2.8"

Theorem - Number (N, G_{N}, S.) and number (Nn, G_{Nn}, Sn) have

contact, item number (Nn, G_{Nn}, Sn) [0 ] ranges counts the number of

(N, G_{N}, S.) and connect.

EVIDENCE - 3 + [0 ] 3 = 3 or 3 + [.3 ] 3 = 3.

Attachment 27087

3 + [1] 3 = 4 or 3 + [.2] 3 = 4

Attachment 27088

3+[2]3=5 or 3+[1]3=5

Attachment 27089

3+[3]3=6 or 3+[.0]3=6 or 3+3=6.

Attachment 27090

The general form of a + [q] = c or b + a [. q] b = c

The general form of the opposite numbers

Attachment 27091

This is the solution to start fasting

3+[0]3=3

3+[1]3=4

3+[2]3=5

3+[3]3=6

------------------------

2.11 comparability G_{N}number "2.10"

Theorem - Parts of gaps that are not /. a_{n}/ are added

actions in addition [.0] and compared as natural numbers.

EVIDENCE - 4/.5/3 , 4+[.0]3=7 , a/.b/c , a+[.0]c=d .

6/.5./2/.4/3 , 6+[.0]2+[.0]3=11 , a/.b/c/.d/e , a+[.0]c+[.0]e=f .

3/.3/5/.2/7/.3/4 , 3+[.0]5+[.0]7+[.0]4=19 , a/.b/c/.d/e/.f/g ,

a+[.0]c+[.0]e+[.0]g=h .

...

-----------------------

Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics)

adding - axiom (one form)

comparability G_{N}number - no - Feb 17th 2013, 06:53 AMHallsofIvyRe: Mathematics - a new basis
Perhaps it is a translation problem but nothing you are saying makes any sense to me. What does it mean for two numbers to "have contact"? What does it mean for numbers to "connect"? What are "gaps"? What do you mean by "fasting"?

- Feb 18th 2013, 07:03 AMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
two numbers to "have contact"

Attachment 27103

"gaps"

Attachment 27104

current mathematics $\displaystyle x\in(0,1)\cup(2,5)$ -1

$\displaystyle x\in(0,1)\cup(2,3)\cup(4,5)$-2

reason that if you write a formula for (1,2) to be less character,

1/.1/3+[3] 1/.1/1/.1/1=1/.1/4/.1/1 - a+[q]b=c

a=$\displaystyle x_1\in(0,1)\cup(2,5)$

b=$\displaystyle x_2\in(0,1)\cup(2,3)\cup(4,5)$

c=$\displaystyle x\in(0,1)\cup(2,6)\cup(7,8)$

+[q]-continues, you'll see that a lot needs to be written

"fasting" (look February 11th, 2013, 07:43 AM)

-------------

2.12 Subtraction "2.10"

Theorem - The addition of a long relationship where the angle

delete this relationship, the rest remains.

Evidence - 3-[0]3=0 or 3-[.3]3=0 or3-3=0

Attachment 27106

3-[1]3=1/.2/1 or 3-[.2]=1/.2/1

Attachment 27107

3-[2]3=2/.1/2or 3-[.1]3=2/.1/2

Attachment 27108

3-[3]3=6 or3-[.0]3=6

Attachment 27109

The general form a-[q]b=c ili a-[.q]b=c

The general form the opposite numbers

Attachment 27110

-----------

TEST - see what you've learned

(2.8 - what part of the question)

1. 4/.3/2/.9/2s.=?

2. 50s.=?

3. 0/.22/5/.6/0=?

(2.10)

1. 5+[3]7=?

2. 6s.+[.2]1/.4/5/.3/0=?

3. 4/.5/3s.+[6]6/.2/3s.=?

(2.11)

1. 4/.6/3?1/.2/2/.2/1

2. 5/.2/2/.3/1?1/.6/2

3. 4/.3/2s.?6

(2.12)

1.6-[.2]7=?

2.1/.6/2-[3]6s.=?

3.7s.-[4]8s.=? - Feb 18th 2013, 09:10 AMzzephodRe: Mathematics - a new basis
I am amazed at how polite many of the respondents to this thread have been to what is either nonsense or a complete failure on the part of the OP to communicate what he thinks s/he has to say effectively.

. - Feb 19th 2013, 04:47 AMmsbiljanicaRe: Mathematics - a new basis
2.13. Contrary subtract "2.10"

Theorem - The addition of a long relationship where the angle

this relationship remains, the rest of the care.

Evidence 3$\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [0]3=3 or 3$\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [.3]3=3

Attachment 27137

3 $\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [1]3=2 or 3 $\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [.2]3=2

Attachment 27138

3 $\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [2]3=1 or 3 $\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [.1]3=1

Attachment 27139

3 $\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [3]3=0 or 3 $\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [.0]3=0

Attachment 27140

The general form a$\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [q]b=c or a$\displaystyle \fbox{-}$ [.q]b=c

The general form in opposite numbers

Attachment 27141

Comparability of the two mathematics ( down what is given of the current mathematics)

subtraction - axiom (one form)

contrary subtract - no