Jump to content

FUN WITH QUANTUM THEORY! MAGICAL SQUARE!


The Architekt
 Share

Recommended Posts

0 14 13 3

 

11 5 6 8

 

7 9 10 4

 

12 2 1 15

 

 

 

Note: need help with creating a "latex" grid for the numbers....

 

If numbers are true forms for generalizing something used by science, can magical squares also generalize the idea of zero?

In my opinion, I think they can really help the science world to discover more areas of research!

 

I have notice that in some magical squares 0 can be used as a number. Why I do not know as of yet, and what does 0 generalize I also do nor know as of yet...

 

 

Infact this one here shows that 0 " appears" to have some value.

 

Of coarse adding the numbers across or diagonally = 30 including the zero.

 

I am wondering what the science world can gain, if these magical squares can be of help..

 

Hope you enjoy this!

Edited by The Architekt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

REALLY?

 

THE MAGIC SQUARES AND ---->BELL'S THEOREM

 

http://users.wpi.edu...ns/MSQUARE5.pdf

 

Looks like you may be wrong Sir....I think it is best, to let the Staff Decide, if this should be moved to Speculations, provided that I have links here that support this. However, if this does get moved to Speculations, then so should Bell's Theorem...

 

Thanks for your concern...

 

 

 

 

phenomenon in quantum game theory

http://en.wikipedia....seudo-telepathy

 

 

 

Magic, Mystery, and

Matrix

http://www.sns.ias.e.../papers/mmm.pdf

 

 

 

 

Centre for Quantum Technologies

 

 

http://www.quantumla...symposium09.php

 

 

 

 

Magic Numbers in Market Research | Newsletters | Versta Research

 

http://www.verstares...t-research.html

 

 

 

 

Centered Square Number

 

http://mathworld.wol...uareNumber.html

 

This has nothing to due with quantum theory, and should be in speculations.

Edited by The Architekt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have notice that in some magical squares 0 can be used as a number. Why I do not know as of yet, and what does 0 generalize I also do nor know as of yet...

 

Nothing special here. If you want to get rid of the zero, add 1 to every value and the "magic" remains.

 

I am wondering what the science world can gain, if these magical squares can be of help..

 

In fact, there's nothing magical at all about this arrangements of numbers. I don't know the proper terminology to explain this correctly, but perhaps I can get my point across this way.

The arrangement is meant to have 180o symmetry.

00 + 15 = 01 + 14 = 02 + 13 = 03 + 12=

04 + 11 = 05 + 10 = 06 + 09 = 07 + 08

 

The red arrows represent the first of each pair above, and the blue arrows represent the second. I think, and someone should be able to prove mathematically, but it is beyond my ability to do so, that as long as the red and blue arrows are 1800 rotations, any particular arrow patterns will work to make a "magic square". Note that I made two groups of arrows where one would have sufficed in order to make my point more clear.

 

MagicSquare.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for your reply, NICE MODEL!

 

The issue is what does this 1 represent and what is it relative to????

 

 

I have read much about Bells Theorem, But am still very scratchy on the technical side of science "formulas."

 

 

Now, looking at your model, (which is better than mine) I am noticing that the 'lines" seems to refer to something like an inverse square law, do you agree?

 

I see this on the image to the left hand side. The symmetry you speak of is what I am referring to as this inverse square law in relation to seconds / seconds, like a squaring of time in where 2 is constant as in a "squared number." This is my guess only here.

 

 

This is only an idea that I have about how squared numbers when placed in a magical squares makes zero = 1. just as you stated...

 

Again, you stated this "if you want to get rid of the zero, add 1 to every value and the "magic" remains."

The issue is what does this 1 represent and what is it relative to???? And mostly what is the magic?

 

I have no idea.....

 

 

But here is an idea about the 2 of which stays constant:

 

 

 

12+13+14+15 = 54

 

 

1+2+3 = 6

 

 

54/6 = 9

 

 

 

6^2 = 36

 

 

9^2 = 81

 

 

36/81 = 0.44444444444444

 

1/0.44444444444444 = 2.25000000000002

 

1/2.25000000000002 = 0.44444444444444

 

 

 

0.44444444444444^2 = 0.19753086419753

 

 

1/0.19753086419753 = 5.06250000000002

 

But here I see much jumping in and out in increments of 2, but then they change after the numerator 4.

My guess is because the 2 stays constant. Could this be how quantum mechanical issues get resolved?

 

 

 

1/0.4444444444444 = 2.25000000000023

 

 

2/0.4444444444444 = 4.50000000000045

 

 

3/0.4444444444444 = 6.75000000000068

 

 

4/0.4444444444444 = 9.0000000000009

 

 

 

5/0.4444444444444 = 11.25000000000111

 

 

6/0.4444444444444 = 13.50000000000135

 

 

7/0.4444444444444 = 15.75000000000157

 

 

8/0.4444444444444 = 18.0000000000018

 

 

9/0.4444444444444 = 20.25000000000203

 

 

10/0.4444444444444 = 22.50000000000225

 

Nothing special here. If you want to get rid of the zero, add 1 to every value and the "magic" remains.

 

 

 

In fact, there's nothing magical at all about this arrangements of numbers. I don't know the proper terminology to explain this correctly, but perhaps I can get my point across this way.

The arrangement is meant to have 180o symmetry.

00 + 15 = 01 + 14 = 02 + 13 = 03 + 12=

04 + 11 = 05 + 10 = 06 + 09 = 07 + 08

 

The red arrows represent the first of each pair above, and the blue arrows represent the second. I think, and someone should be able to prove mathematically, but it is beyond my ability to do so, that as long as the red and blue arrows are 1800 rotations, any particular arrow patterns will work to make a "magic square". Note that I made two groups of arrows where one would have sufficed in order to make my point more clear.

 

MagicSquare.jpg

Edited by The Architekt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Architekt- I don't understand the connection between some of the links you posted and the magic square. Would you care to elaborate? Also, a lot of the links are to downloadable pdfs. Is there any way you could host them on a free image hosting service like photobucket and then include the image in your post rather than requiring readers to download a file?

 

I cannot comment on Bell's theorem as I don't feel like I understand it or how you feel it is connected to magic squares.

 

I don't think in this case that 1 represents anything, it could just as easily have been 2, 497, or any other integer.

 

The lines are just the order in which the table is filled. The inverse square law is a physical law describing certain phenomenon, such as gravity, where the measured property is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. It is not applicable to a table of numbers.

 

EDIT: You edited your post as I was responding. I honestly don't see what significance you are placing in this arrangement of numbers, but I'm not one for numerology either, so perhaps it's best if I bow out now.

Edited by JMJones0424
Link to comment
Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

The Arkitect

OK - This is a new idea that is not mainstream/accepted and will be moved to the Speculations Forum. Note: being moved to Speculations is not a judgment on the worth of a hypothesis merely on whether it is a new idea or part of the accepted corpus of knowledge; this idea is not presently taught physics. Please take a moment to read the rules of the Speculations Forum. The Speculations Forum exists to allow the development an testing of ideas without the constraints that must be put in place in the main fora

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument here is keeping the entire magical square "here" intact. Meaning that another square should be used to disprove the one here in my OP....

 

 

 

This will stop comments such as numerology and etc.....These are excuses, not proofs....

I am looking forward for numerology to be the basis of this topic, when in fact it is not even close.....

 

I assure you....

 

 

You did a great job already, its a shame you feel you need to bow out.

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

Architekt- I don't understand the connection between some of the links you posted and the magic square. Would you care to elaborate? Also, a lot of the links are to downloadable pdfs. Is there any way you could host them on a free image hosting service like photobucket and then include the image in your post rather than requiring readers to download a file?

 

I cannot comment on Bell's theorem as I don't feel like I understand it or how you feel it is connected to magic squares.

 

I don't think in this case that 1 represents anything, it could just as easily have been 2, 497, or any other integer.

 

The lines are just the order in which the table is filled. The inverse square law is a physical law describing certain phenomenon, such as gravity, where the measured property is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. It is not applicable to a table of numbers.

 

EDIT: You edited your post as I was responding. I honestly don't see what significance you are placing in this arrangement of numbers, but I'm not one for numerology either, so perhaps it's best if I bow out now.

Edited by The Architekt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

REALLY?

 

Yes, really. Googling for magic square quantum (or similar) to find sites that have those words is not sufficient. Your link to Bell's theorem ignores the fact that the "magic square" in that paper is a product, not a sum, and has actual QM significance. The link to the marketing page just has "magic of numbers" in it as matching text, and nothing to do with magic squares or QM.

 

I will also note that you posted these links after the fact. Your OP makes no connection whatsoever to QM,so an observation to that effect is not inappropriate. While a more fleshed-out, constructive criticism might have been better, you really need to stop complaining about being criticized and do a better job of making your point clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual here, when one replies someone else answers, I have complained about this, but obviously no one here listens.

 

 

Talk is talk, walk your walk.... Please disprove this in some type of math, and or "MAGICAL SQUARE" representation while keeping 0= 1

I am not impressed with the you this you that anymore excuses excuses.

 

 

The point that I am trying to make here is the "why" behind, 2 being a constant, and 0.5*c = 1/2 c.

This is basically the point, that point is that 0=1 the center of mass E=mc squared.

 

What is so hard to understand about this???

You are all smarter then me, I think I may be teaching people things in the background....

 

 

 

Well, disprove this in some type of math " whom ever you are" , using a "MAGICAL SQUARE" representation while keeping 0= 1

 

CAN YOU DO THIS?????

 

 

Yes, really. Googling for magic square quantum (or similar) to find sites that have those words is not sufficient. Your link to Bell's theorem ignores the fact that the "magic square" in that paper is a product, not a sum, and has actual QM significance. The link to the marketing page just has "magic of numbers" in it as matching text, and nothing to do with magic squares or QM.

 

I will also note that you posted these links after the fact. Your OP makes no connection whatsoever to QM,so an observation to that effect is not inappropriate. While a more fleshed-out, constructive criticism might have been better, you really need to stop complaining about being criticized and do a better job of making your point clear.

 

A person who can solve x2 − 92y2 = 1 in less than a year is a mathematician.

 

 

 

Brahmagupta

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Brahmagupta

 

 

 

 

So I guess 1 = the quantum of action???????

 

The "newly" discovered quantum of action?????????????????????? WOW!

 

 

This has nothing to due with quantum theory, and should be in speculations.

Edited by The Architekt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual here, when one replies someone else answers, I have complained about this, but obviously no one here listens.

 

On the contrary. Several have listened, only to conclude that your complaints are without merit.

 

Talk is talk, walk your walk.... Please disprove this in some type of math, and or "MAGICAL SQUARE" representation while keeping 0= 1

I am not impressed with the you this you that anymore excuses excuses.

 

The Bell Paper you linked to clearly states that the product of the columns is I or -I (the identity operator).

Figure 4 shows nine observables for a pair of qubits arranged in the form of a 3 x 3 array, with the observables in each row or column forming a mutually commuting set. Each observable has only the eigenvalues ±1 and, further, the product of the observables in any row or column is +I, with

the exception of the last column for which the product is −I ( I being the identity operator).

 

You are adding numbers — numbers, not QM operators — in your example. The connection is tenuous at best. These aren't the magic squares you are looking for.

 

The point that I am trying to make here is the "why" behind, 2 being a constant, and 0.5*c = 1/2 c.

This is basically the point, that point is that 0=1 the center of mass E=mc squared.

 

I see. We're back to center of mass and E=mc^2. I still don't see a connection.

 

What is so hard to understand about this???

 

It's nonsense. That kinda puts a damper on understanding it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual here, when one replies someone else answers, I have complained about this, but obviously no one here listens.

I think you may be looking for the science dialogue forum two doors down from us. This is the science discussion forum, and often (read as "practically always") involves multiple members who are ALWAYS welcome to chime in on any topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question, and I'll put it in it's most generalized form.

 

Does any of this have anything to do with anything?

 

 

Of course it does, but in generalizing you left out the word "meaningful" and that changes everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You state that The connection is tenuous at best. This here proves that magical squares can be further researched.

 

About QM operators:

 

http://hyperphysics....tum/qmoper.html

 

This states QM operators are in relation to waves.

I am sure when I say that waves also have in them, circles, sin, cos, and tangents. Also vectors are no different, they create straight lines for their construction. Waves then are used to research topology and etc.

 

 

In this example I have given on magical squares, the arrangement is meant to have 180 degree symmetry. It has already been stated by another member. This has position in space time, and forms a square, 'general idea' like an identity.

 

 

The Wave Function a "good example here"" CREATES A SQUARING TOO" in where the "probability" to find the particle is greater in the square.

 

 

Weather this is true or not about the wave function whom knows, the point is further speaking about this to the science community and stretching our minds to find better methods and approaches to number theory....

 

I believe in theory that 2 is constant because an exponent can also be represented as a 2x2 matrix,3x3 matrix and etc.

Magical squares are just that, they exist in the "squaring of empty space" Remember numbers are a concept not to be taken literally.They give an idea and or relation. In this case a matching sequence....

 

 

 

 

 

I can "try to create one using

 

On the contrary. Several have listened, only to conclude that your complaints are without merit.

 

 

 

The Bell Paper you linked to clearly states that the product of the columns is I or -I (the identity operator).

 

 

You are adding numbers — numbers, not QM operators — in your example. The connection is tenuous at best. These aren't the magic squares you are looking for.

 

 

 

I see. We're back to center of mass and E=mc^2. I still don't see a connection.

 

 

 

It's nonsense. That kinda puts a damper on understanding it.

 

 

 

 

Perhaps you can share that to the Moderator whom place My Post here.... wink.gif

I think you may be looking for the science dialogue forum two doors down from us. This is the science discussion forum, and often (read as "practically always") involves multiple members who are ALWAYS welcome to chime in on any topic.

 

HERE IS THE PROOF OF MY MAGICAL SQUARE.

 

 

 

The reason why "my" square here works is because of this:

 

 

[sum of all numbers in the squares spaces = 30] / [squares spaces 16] = 1.875= 0.005208333 revolution

 

 

If the total mass of the electrons in an object is about 1/2000 of the mass of the object, as per other member's have stated, then my finding in my magical square is = to 1/2000 0.005208333 revolution

 

Then the precession are bases of ten:

 

 

1/2000 = 0.0005

 

 

0.005208333/0.0005 = 10.416666

 

 

 

I was wondering how to do this with a simple rock experiment, but obviously I was misunderstood.

 

As you can see, no one realized this about "my" magical square. This is why to me talk is cheap, I am providing mathematical proofs, concepts and ideas, = I am doing all the work, while others are doing all the "speculation."

 

I can do this with anything science has a name for by the way, this is only 1 example of the billions I know.

 

Now that it is confirmed here that their is a relation to mass, electrons, and 0 as the "center of mass" maybe this can be used as a positioning system far more advanced than the wave function is capable of, I am hoping to see some examples that use values and or numbers in the them by other members whom have commented on this Post.

 

I will wait for now.

 

 

I have a question, and I'll put it in it's most generalized form.

 

Does any of this have anything to do with anything?

 

 

Edited by The Architekt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps you can share that to the Moderator whom place My Post here....

What does moving a speculative thread to the Speculations section have to do with people other than the person you quoted responding to your posts? It doesn't make sense.

 

If this is the way you communicate when you have time to be thoughtful, I can't imagine what a verbal conversation with you is like. I don't really mean to make this personal, but when so many people are telling you that you're not making sense, it seems pretty obvious where the fault lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this is why you do not understand things:

 

 

 

Hidden variable theory

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory

 

Particle Wave... Science still has no idea why this is.

 

 

I think the relevant thing is this:

 

Science has no idea what the EFE are relative to, So, they have no idea about the size color and or shape of anything on this planet.

 

Communication is a design intended for those whom study the "trend."

 

Everyone can have sex without communication, it is universal, music to is universal, art is universal.

 

I think it is obvious that the 'speculations" are do to the fact that people seldom want to admit they may be wrong about the things they know of.

 

Max Plank was scrutinized for his work in math models:

http://milesmathis.com/planck.html

 

Envy, Envy, Envy, wow!

 

 

It is interesting how the same biasses towards numbers is not applicable to money and monetary systems when infact that to is a number theory in itself that even I will never understand....

 

Nothing personal as long as I know I am wrong I will always search for the correct way.

What does moving a speculative thread to the Speculations section have to do with people other than the person you quoted responding to your posts? It doesn't make sense.

 

If this is the way you communicate when you have time to be thoughtful, I can't imagine what a verbal conversation with you is like. I don't really mean to make this personal, but when so many people are telling you that you're not making sense, it seems pretty obvious where the fault lies.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the relevant thing is this:

 

Science has no idea what the EFE are relative to, So, they have no idea about the size color and or shape of anything on this planet.

 

Communication is a design intended for those whom study the "trend."

 

Everyone can have sex without communication, it is universal, music to is universal, art is universal.

 

Not only are these lines not relevant to anything in this thread (that I can determine), they're not even relevant to each other.

 

Are you being deliberately obscure in the hopes you'll "win" when we all give up and go do something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was it not you that created that wonderful "decipher" of my magical square???

 

With vector "lines" that showed a type of measure????

 

 

Interesting, however, this is a topic on number theory, magical squares and etc, why all the fuss about numerology???

 

 

 

 

 

It's numerology, plain and simple. Take totally unrelated things, do arbitrary mathematics on them until you get an answer that is close enough to your desired outcome and voila! Proof!!!!1!!11

 

Gee I don't know, you have done a great job to insult all my posts, you tell me.....

This is complete gibberish.

 

Are you writing in English?

 

With all do respect, none have forced anyone on these topics, if they are unclear, you are more than welcome to proceed to something that is...

 

This may help you in the mean time:

 

Motion is always relative to something and you get to pick whatever that something is when you are solving a problem or doing a calculation.

 

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Motion_is_relative_to_what

 

 

 

Not only are these lines not relevant to anything in this thread (that I can determine), they're not even relevant to each other.

 

Are you being deliberately obscure in the hopes you'll "win" when we all give up and go do something else?

Edited by The Architekt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this is why you do not understand things:

 

 

 

Hidden variable theory

 

http://en.wikipedia....variable_theory

 

Particle Wave... Science still has no idea why this is.

 

 

I think the relevant thing is this:

 

Science has no idea what the EFE are relative to, So, they have no idea about the size color and or shape of anything on this planet.

 

Communication is a design intended for those whom study the "trend."

 

Everyone can have sex without communication, it is universal, music to is universal, art is universal.

 

I think it is obvious that the 'speculations" are do to the fact that people seldom want to admit they may be wrong about the things they know of.

 

Max Plank was scrutinized for his work in math models:

http://milesmathis.com/planck.html

 

Envy, Envy, Envy, wow!

 

 

It is interesting how the same biasses towards numbers is not applicable to money and monetary systems when infact that to is a number theory in itself that even I will never understand....

 

Nothing personal as long as I know I am wrong I will always search for the correct way.

Wow. It's easier to hit the bullseye if you throw the darts one at a time. Throwing them all at once like that is dangerous to the people sitting near the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was it not you that created that wonderful "decipher" of my magical square???

 

With vector "lines" that showed a type of measure????

No, what I did was show that zero has no particular significance in a magic square, and in fact, there is no magic at all involved. It's the same as the shortcut for adding 0+1+2+3...+13+14+15 arranged in a 4 by 4 grid. The lines were just to show the order that the table is filled, and that as long as the order of ascending numbers is a 180o rotation of the descending numbers, you end up with a magic square.

Interesting, however, this is a topic on number theory, magical squares and etc, why all the fuss about numerology???

Because you are arbitrarily assigning meaning to the meaningless.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.