Trurl

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Trurl

  • Rank
    Quark

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.constructorscorner.net

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    applied mathematics

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks guys. There is some good advice here. I do like the permutation of a and b as a stating point. Usually it given the abc then find ab ac and so on. I have a reoccurring problem on my trucks speedometer. I am at 71000. But I was thinking when do numbers repeat. For example 71071 or 71171. This is considering how large the odometer is that the numbers occur linearly. So my hunch on the abc Sensei mentioned is a modulus problem and I would treat it as if it were an odometer. I know I problem misworded this idea but it is just an intuitive idea I have not done any work but it would be very applicable to computer computation. The reason for me to ask this question is that I was stuck on a problem. The problem led to other problems but essential part of the larger problem I was stuck on. But I continued to work on it because it was "my problem". I like the idea of the abc problem because if each letter is given it's own spot across the odometer if it spins linearly all letters will result. But putting that into an equation is a different story.
  2. Trurl

    Anyone read "Darwin's Black Box" ?

    The book does not contain religion. I post here to see if anyone has or wants to read the book. Something of the sort "I'm a scientist but scientific evidence points to a creator as much as it doesn't." "God doesn't play dice" I want to see if anyone is familiar with the book and follow scientific evidence that supports a creator may exist. I haven't read the book, but it might be an intersting read.
  3. Well I thought this would be:What is the best way for an amateur to find math problems? Math and drawing take less resources compared to other sciences. But the amateur still wants meaningful problems. Obviously ideas can come from anywhere, but it would be nice to be working on the most current needs. For example BitCoin is valuable, then it is not. Twitter following can tell you what is popular, but reaseach takes time and still how do I know the problem is worth the effort? Journals list abstracts but the amateur doesn't really have access to them. I know ideas are found everywhere. I am just looking to grow as an amateur. Am I looking in the right areas?
  4. I checked at reviews for this book. A science explanation for intelligent design. No religion. But I thought it would be a good read for the scientist looking at science for answers. Darwin's books are now public license. I don't care to study them but I have read excerpts that I consider bad science. I think that is what the author of the book while argue that the is much more that needs to be explained. The reviews also mention how DNA and evolution relate.
  5. What are your methods to find that great math problem to invest your time to work on? Or any other project. I have my own methods but I want to hear others before I share my own.
  6. I never studied optics in physics, but can you guys tell me if a lense would go linear? It sounds like chr2019 is working on a video game. I have a vr headset and distances don't focus in distance to reading writing on the viewpoint. This is why a standard viewpoint using trig and an angle would work for a rifle simulator and eye chart but what do you do if you want to emulate a person's viewpoint? i realize you could always have a linear viewpoint calculated for different perspectives. But I am not skilled enough as a programmer to do this. It seems too memory and computational anyway. There are already Unity and other tools libraries. Isn't this a major problem in optics. My eye doctor said if I could invent glasses that focus near and far I'd be a millionaire.
  7. We can argue back and forth in all good fun. Your believe in some sort of Creator. I guess you just had an experience, maybe science that made you think otherwise. There are Christian scientist. And a lot of scientist believe in creation designed. Depeding on your beliefs, they determine how you interpret the Bible. You can apply pure science, but that won't always lead to answers. But to me the answers are found by study and research. Reading the Words in red, I see things that apply to family and relationships with other people. I my opinion if I follow the given examples I will live a more meaningful life. I say a guy interviewed on YouTube that had nothing to do with religion. He had a 160 iq and was living modestly on a farm. The reporters ask him why he wasn't a millionaire and he replied that he lived the way that made him happy. I don't think we were born evil. But obviously we are imperfect. This thread is just my opinion. But I don't see the Bible's purpose to convert everyone to Christianity. The goal is to present the Word and let the reader decide what it means to them. Obviosly not everything in the Bible makes sense to me. But neither does every theory in science. But just because I do not understand something make it invalid.
  8. The original post does refer to Pastor Doug's description of slave. This is simply meaning only the Jewish people should participate. Even the slave can eat. Simple enough. This is not a new question. Anyone who reads the Bible will probably ask this. IMHO anything can be ask but there is no easy way to settle the debate. We don't have a way to know why things are the way they are other than history, the Bible, and science. To me it would be like blaming the leader of a country for everything that is wrong in the country. It would also mean we have no choice in our actions which is a whole other debate. But I think what is looked over how important the present is. It isn't like this stuff is just in the past, we are living it.
  9. No Pastor Doug is correct. He is referring to Hebrew slaves. It is my explanation that is wrong. Christains don't deny bad things happen in the Bible. We are not blindly following the Bible. Nor with good Pastors we are not being lied to. The Old Testament is difficult to understand. The Old Testiment was Hebrew law. But the question is unanswerable. And no Christian can answer it. But one unanswered question does discredit the Bible. In my own opinion, the question is not why God allows slavery, but why does Man allow slavery. Why is God or how is God responsible?
  10. As was explained to me by Pastor Doug, slavery in the Bible is not like slavery that led to civil rights in the U.S. A person could become a slave to pay a debt or support themselves financially. They wouldn't be treated like the slaves of the United State's South. But slavery relates to service. It is important to serve. That would be the meaning in the New Testament. But I admit is does sound confusing in certain verses. I cannot interpret them for you. There would be a reason for the wording, but you would have study it verse by verse. But don't think because it says slavery it means the way we know it. The Bible is difficult to understand without a knowledgeable person to help put it into context. Often you have to know the history.
  11. Solve for x. I don't have the math background to solve for x. But if you put in N and p, you will see this simplified equation. I plugged it into Wolfram Alpha, but solving for x is still a challenge. x^2 + (2 x^5)/N^2 alternate form (x^2 * (N^2 + 2 * x^3) / N^2 Plug in the known value N. Still impossible to solve. But if you plug in both x and N it proves true. Do you believe me now?
  12. Trurl

    Adding Time to 2D PFHM

    Don’t let me distract you on your original idea. I know how important it is to pursue your vision. I like how your matrices did not have to rely on the previous matrices. I don’t understand the patterns you are using or what your method is. Maybe you could explain in a book format. What interests me now is if you can take my equation and find a pattern between Prime numbers. N^2 = ((((p^2 * N^4 + 2 * N^2 * p^5) + p^8 / N^4) – ((1 – p^2 / (2 * N)))) * ((N^2 / p^2))) I have other less complex equations that will prove p is Prime knowing q and N. The equation is cumbersome, but it will show if 2 numbers are Prime knowing all values. If you are interested in perhaps using any of these equations, I will email you a full set of equations. I don’t mean to distract you from your work, I am just informing you of a pattern you might not otherwise test. My email address is snyder97_bob@hotmail.com Email me if you are interested in working together. And if you don’t want to team up, I will still send you a copy of my work, because the matrices are your work and I know how it is hard to change one’s ideas when you have a lot of effort put into a project. If you take these equations and prove something it only validates my work. And if you win the Fields Metal in math, I want part of the prize. But I encourage you to write and Amazon Kindle book of how to program these matrices once they are perfected. I want to ask you what is your goal in solving Prime numbers? I will share mine after you share yours. But I am just wondering why we work on such an impossible problem. We probably share a like view. Maybe, Maybe not. Also why do you use Excel instead of other more powerful programs? I admit the Excel computation is impressive. But you did mention it runs out of memory then crashes. Anyway, carry on with your idea and don’t let my equations distract you, but if you ever want to test patterns in semi-Primes as they apply to Primality testing, I am willing to share my work.
  13. Trurl

    Adding Time to 2D PFHM

    I enjoy the idea of applying physics to Prime numbers. There should be a wave that shows a pattern in Prime numbers. I once posted the idea of having a logarithmic spiral to show a pattern in Prime numbers. I couldn’t get it to work but relating geometry to patterns does things computation can’t. I think the entire problem of finding a pattern in Prime numbers is starting at zero. That is how we count but finding a series is near impossible. Have you ever thought of starting at a starting point other than zero? It may be impossible not to. But I do like your computation and charts. I also like your idea of relating them to physics. I will close with this idea. What if you stop looking at a pattern in Prime numbers and look for patterns in the way they interact with other numbers. For example, I have been trying to solve semi-Primes. If you could prove a number is a semi-Prime, its factors are Prime numbers. So if you take one known Prime number and multiply it by another number if you could prove the resulting number is a semi-Prime, the unknown number is Prime. So what I am saying is that if your charts tested for Primality based on one known Prime and a test value forming a semi-Prime, you would have a pattern. I know this is no easy task. But looking at Prime numbers for awhile now I don’t think a pattern will be formed without somehow placing Prime numbers into a known function, and then find a pattern in that function. Which I think is what you are trying to do with physics, harmonics, and time. I am just suggesting using semi-Primes to see what you can come up with. Also you’ve got to teach me how to create these matrices. And how you are getting those graphics of the patterns. That is just awesome. But I would like you to find patterns where semi-Primes occur in similar charts. You could start with any Prime number. I think it would be less computational. Just an idea. May work, may not.
  14. Did the previous explanation explain this impossible triangle? I might be able to solve the triangle knowing only N because of the geometric constructions of the angles surrounding N. I don’t know if they still teach using tools like a straight edge and compass. But along with the constructions, I have equations that given p and q in terms of N. I know it isn’t very believable. I’m not claiming this will give a correct solution. But I do think relating my previous posts equations to a geometric figure will help to simplify it. I can see it, but I don’t think others are interested. That is ok. But if I am going to prove my equations useful, I need them to work and be simplified. I like your description of the one-way-function. That’s how I’d define it. I believe that one-way-functions exist for us. My concern is RSA and cryptography. For example, if my triangle worked, we’d have to rethink one-way-functions and RSA cryptography. With the Prime factorization problem, many have tried, so we all believe it is impossible to solve with patterns. I would like to see it solved by similar triangles or vectors. I will get laughed at in the process, but I realize the impossibility of the problem. It may not be humanly possible to solve patterns of semi-Primes, but I thought I came up with a good model. I know my equations are too complex to solve for p, but the equation does show a pattern in semi-Primes. I just need to get others to see the potential of the problem. So if what I am explaining does not make sense or is not explained enough let me know. If something is plain wrong or breaks rules let me know. I am seriously trying as hard as I can to break the Prime factorization problem. No I’m not aware of the ambiguity of the Law of Sines. It has been 20 years since I had a trig class. The rules and Laws are “imbedded” in my mind. By that I mean that I know trig, I just don’t remember how I learnt it. I’m usually good after reviewing a Law or identity. I thought the ambiguity was the tangent of angles above 180; a difference in the direction of the vector.
  15. Ok, so I know nobody likes my hypothesis. But don’t let it discourage you, I think there is a relevant problem here in this triangle. The only thing I am trying to do is relate a one-way-function, where N is the product of two Prime numbers p and q. The triangle shows my thought of coming up with equations. I posted earlier about finding p knowing only N. Imatfaal agreed there was a pattern but deemed it useless. I argue that only the polynomial was too complex to solve for p, it still showed a relationship between N and p, giving the distance a test p was from N. It would be good for a computer loop. Like the equations or not, they show patterns. Patterns never before used. So, if I say I have a pattern and that pattern is ugly, what should such a pattern look like? Simply put, the job of this triangle is to simplify my Prime patterns. Does it do that? I don’t know. But I designed it to do so. In my previous post of “Prime Products One More Time”, look on page 3, posted Nov. 6, 2017. CE is equal to p. N mod p = 0. We don’t know CE; only N. We get a new length N – CE. N – CE has an unknown length FE. FE is the remainder when subtracting q from N-CE. As an added challenge, we do not know the value of FE or q. CE is sliding along AC’. It increases from the perpendicular CD to CE until it is displaced along a length FE from E. AF equals q. Now to the part you are not going to like. Using vector edition: AC = N [Absolute value [ AC – AE – (AC-CE) – CE]] = FE I know this is mostly likely wrong, but it helped me imagine 2 vectors of p and q added together at an unknown angle with a side opposite that angle equal to N. Also, I don’t think CE = CF in all cases. I would solve for FC then solve CE. __________________________________________________________________- So why did I give the new hypothesis? I believe that if you take any triangle that has N as its largest side, the sum of those sides are factors fall on an angle that forms N. Yes, I know the term factors is not correct, because these are decimal values. That is until p and q fall along those segments of the triangle. Yes, I know this isn’t vector addition. I am not adding p and q at different angles to get N. I am only using a triangle with longest length N and stating a similar triangle with lengths p and q exist on that similar triangle. So, these are two different approaches; one vector addition; one similar triangles. This is what my triangle is supposed to solve. Does it do it? The odds are against it. After all, it is a one -way-function. But know that I just didn’t throw this thing together with willy-nilly lines. I know in the development the logic in the formation can not be explained why I chose it. I mean, why did I develop a triangle in this way to solve an impossible function? Well, I know the teacher says: “show your work.” But I cannot show my reasoning; only if something works or doesn’t work.