Study Q from 0 to 1, then study induction and repetition and u conquer whole number theory, the natural line I mean.
The problem is that u will have to make a proyection into current proofs or statements into Q and then work again, I mean u have to redefine and so but It might be easier than working with infinity to work with infinitesimal, that is the key, there are probably more keys but thats the main key.
I am making all this up, I have no clue about this, its just common sense, it comes from Newton and Barrow and Leibtniz u now, they created the infinitesimal, that was amazing, but infinity is very difficult, u go with infinitesimal and u are fine.
Thats the whole idea.
@Puzzletraining @catharaxie @tpr etc Do you know any programs which could show the Xth prime. I've used Scratch 'cause is it simple. I also know python but I want it to be strong. Up to 100 trillion nth prime. By comparison scratch takes 6 secs to work out the first million. Thanks in advancr
first clue, prime numbers do not exist, thats just bad nomenclature they are excluded sets or special sets,
since u usually know prime numbers as the ones that are not compositives and not viceversa.
second clue, numbers go through squares, the plus one addition of natural numbers is misleading, it does not teach about the rate of the growth about of the feel of the numbers
third clue if u are able to create a property that is explained as an accumulation of past properties u ll probably win
But u have to see the numbers never as a line, never, because if u do u are in the mindtrap of natural numbers and u dont understand their developmetn which is quite fast.
U need to feel the rate, its the only way but thats a necessary condition, its not sufficient, its only necessary
if u feel the rate of the numbers very well then u can create new definitions and so or functions or whatever but u need to sense the growth and the growth is not arbitrary, its a repercusion a redundancy or something like that, always like that, maybe superposition later can help but its difficult right I mean I dont know, It may depend what theorem or conjecture u are trying to prove but the whole concept of arithmetic is what creates the problem because when u are adding a number u are multiplying its inner elements and thats just like eh, double function in one, very bad constructed I dont know, there is always like that fraction of a multiplication in the plus sign
Its easier to understand this
2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256
than this
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
Because the plus one is almost arbitray even if its a "constant"
but its very natural from a number to double itself because it comes from inside, so its an envolving property whereas the second looks more like an analytical judgement of kant or something like that
U know what I mean the plus one, is like a rule that has been enforced into the numbers, a timing, a constant timing but that already creates contradictions with its inner frecuencies, because u are mixing frequencies with some monotonus tone addition, which is in fact a bad frequency
When u go from one to two, u are doubling but when u go from 2 to 3 u make a plus half, when u got to 3 to 4 u make a plus one third, so uve got this idea of one one one but in fact is not one
thats why u can define one as a set of very multiple weird things
because Mathematics works as the ilussion, or the ilusion that the concept of unity can travel from one place to another
and why is it an ilusion?
Because unity is one, when u work with a number say 1008
any number does not matter, its almost like if u were unifying it
If u can always add the number one, it means that more or less all numbers are the same, I dont know how to explain it its eh
Its not the problem of adding one, its the problem that u call one at different places of the line, where different frequencies are coexisiting, so if u see one as a frequencies or for instance
as the difference between the product of primes, then u have a problem there.
In other words u can see primes as the "weird" thing because u have that monotonal concept of one or u could think that the problem is in the number one which contains all the frequencies and it should not imo but thats how they define mathematics they create their properties and so
They are creating a rhythm when they are adding is a very simple rhythm but It does not have memory, when u add plus one u lose the memory because its independent and it should not be independent or if it wanted to have harmony with frequencies as it is, it seems that prime numbers are like the logical continuation of composite numbers which are the logical continuation of the plus one element, but u can think of a domain of space different than the line of natural numbers
such as the one previously mentioned, 2, 4, 8, and there define a new type of prime u see
So what makes the prime number?
The number one, as simple as that, its the number one that contains all the frequencies, thats why I told u to look into Q, and not into N.
Because natural numbers dont exist, u dont have a choice there
u just cant isolate N from Q, as soon as u say that a natural number exists u are creating a rational number because a number is always relative to something is a question of measuring even the number 25 can be expressed as 1/5 of 625
so any number has like a quantum property of visualization
u see?
Its just very idealistic to say that there are natural numbers
because if they were natural numbers u could not operate with them, as soon as u operate with them u are somehow making them relative or u have 25, 250, 2500 it is the fraction its inside
there is no option, u just cant choose there, u just cant say i am going to use natural numbers and I am not going to use rational numbers because I am sure that in some operation there is going to be a quotient or relation, they are the same thing basically it does not make sense to divide them,
its just a question of timing, what u define first or where do u look, but they are the same thing in reality thats why u should go Q or R I guess, It should not be prime number theorem it should be prime rational theorem It should be expressed in fractions, any fraction can be expressed by fractions and thats it, fundamental theorem of mathematic I mean
u can transform any natural number into one, with just a little abstraction and inside that create all the frequencies but u dont even need that, because u can just have frequencies by frequencies and gives u frequencies, and this is much better because its more harmonic and the number one may feel more out of place.
If u create frequencies
such as 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 1/5
then u are not adding one, what u are doing its u are substracting a product, and u start to feel weird there
So u have a problem there, u have a problem, because those frequencies are going to work as compoundds or atoms
or the prime ones
lets say 1/2 1/3 1/5 1/7 1/11 those are helpful frequencies
or the other ones it does not matter but in any case,
u are missing the +1 element because it was ridiculous I guess,
it was only imaginary, It did not exist really, it only worked due to the concept of infinity, or a similar instance such as induction
but u dont have that problem when u work with frequencies
u may get other problems (getting tired) but they will usually be much better because they will sum up to some value
so It does not make sense to work with natural numbers if u work with Q, thats my opinion, I have no practise but theoretically I mean, u have everything on q, why go elsewhere,
just move the theorems there, or the conjectures if u think they are worth ur time, u have to define the prime numbers in Q basically, try to move that legendre conjecture there, Im tired i need to sleep so it may be my imagination.
I'm just going to come out and say it:
@Puzzletraining , you are the biggest, most awesome, most annoying, most undeniably hilariously original troll I have ever seen.
It's not for explaining, it's music. Not in sounds, but in imagery. No technology will come of it and no formally solidified proofs. It's just beautiful, should one happen to like it, such as me.
no im just a man who has listened to a lot of music in a very short span of time and since I have good memory it has taken me a while to forget it and then I tried to make sense of it by moving some equations or playing with numbers and so, its like if I wanted to sense how the geometry of electromagnetism was related to space and so, by the way I am writting a book or I finished a book, its more or less done, but I might polish some pictures but I think I am gonna sell it and not give it for free, because money is always good and took much effort, tried to put the music with pictures since I had no instrument tried to put the music with pictures, so maybe January or so I can give the book since I am relaxing now, It was a book also, It could have been a book about algorithms but that was too much work so I just made the pictures, if u like the book then I might create another one, but first I gotta sell or finish this one with no hurry so that it maintains quality and so.