AP's_251st book of science // UNLEARNING NEGATIVE NUMBERS//math-psychology-social sciences
15 views
Skip to first unread message
Subscribe

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Jul 21, 2023, 4:06:54 PM (4 days ago)



to

UNLEARNING NEGATIVE NUMBERS

251st book of science for AP

AP started this book years back but never had the time to embellish it and or, other books were more important to get out the door; had higher priority. But now I see many math fools and degenerates of math talking about absolute value in July 2023, so
thought it extremely important to publish this as my 251st book of science.

And I categorize this book as belonging more to the realms of mind psychology, sociology than in pure science, because of a degenerate longing for the human psyche to believe in say ghosts when young, which is the analog of negative numbers in math.
Believe in witches, tooth fairies, monsters, dragons all are "negative reality" meaning they exist only in the mind but no physical reality.

And because math professors psychology-- they want fame and fortune above a paycheck and above their "teaching duties" so they grasp and grapple with the most kookish and lamebrain idea to fetch fame and fortune. And this is of course how Negative
Numbers were borne-- some punk math professor in past history wanted more than a paycheck and teaching duties and found something new---- negative numbers --- like a childish kid who never matured that there were no ghosts, or witches and there are no
negative numbers.

Absolute Value cockamamie idea.

So I devote this entire book to helping human society wean itself off of Negative Numbers for they really are nasty and treacherous for the truth of science. They were invented and spread over the world not because they exist, but because math professors
lack a logical brain and seek fame and fortune more than they seek truth and reality.

Now in this story of how wicked and evil are negative numbers, will have to go back to a time in Algebra history to Tartaglia and Cardano et al fighting over the Quintic algebra polynomial. The world was dazzled by the Quadratic formula and its solution
and forced school kids to memorize-- - b + or - square-root (b^2 -4ac) all over 2a. I was one of those unfortunate students forced to memorize this quadratic formula for the solution of equation ax^2 +bx + c = 0.

And no doubt every good High School across the globe forces their High School students to memorize the formula.

Did you know, probably not, that when Descartes invented analytic geometry in his invention of the Cartesian coordinate system, that the graphs he produced had only 1st Quadrant Only??? Did you know that?? That the first graphs and functions were all
about positive numbers--- no negatives need apply. In the history of math, they needed no 4 quadrants 3 of which had our evil negative numbers.

Anyway, back to Tartaglia and his Cardan and Cardano fight to find a quintic formula. This moment in math history really sets the stage for the Devil of math in negative numbers to enter the scene.

For notice that in Algebra history, they have this really obnoxious and absurd desire to put a polynomial on one side of the equation equal sign and to their tiny pea brain mind put zero 0 all by itself on the other side of the equation.

No different than our 3 or 4 year old youngster in bed and when the lights go out, scared the witch monster is hiding under the bed or in the closet. So the bed and furniture in her room is real and positive numbers, but her ghosts and dragons and
monsters are 0 or negative numbers, that she screams is attacking her.

So why on Earth could not Tartaglia and Cardano et al, simply say-- No Legitimate math polynomial exists if it has a 0 or a negative number all alone on the right side of a equation??

Same as our 4 year old screaming youngster with lights out, if she wrote math equations that she has monsters on the right side of the equation all alone, or even Puff the Magic Dragon and the song on the right side of the equation all alone. When what
she really needs is something Real and tangible on the right side of the equation such as the bed or pillow or blanket.

Yes, math professors who teach negative numbers are just great big babies who never grew up that you need reality of positive number all alone on the right side of the equation at all times in a math equation of a polynomial. Yes, these math professors
are just screaming 4 year olds fearful of a Puff the Magic Dragon biting them.

Math never needed negative numbers. Math does fine, and even better without negative numbers. For these are simply hallucinations.

If today, all of mathematics were to rid itself completely of negative numbers and those 3 quadrants of negative numbers, for you need only 1st quadrant to do all of mathematics. That math would be better off.

Now some will complain what about temperature the minus degrees or what about floor elevator the minus 1st or 2nd floor underground. Or what about the bank statement of you owe money, a minus dollar figure.

And here, well, I offer the simple solution, that this is a direction and would solve it by saying, subtract temperature, or subtract 2 floors, or subtract x dollars. To avoid the delusion of a negative temperature, a negative floor on elevator or a
negative dollar bill.

Subtraction, subtraction is a valid and existing concept of mathematics. But Negative numbers are invalid and nonexisting and fictional.

Negative Numbers screw up and cause harm to the real world of science especially physics, and we need to get rid of them.

AP's_251st book of science // UNLEARNING NEGATIVE NUMBERS//math-psychology-social sciences

AP, King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Jul 22, 2023, 2:04:05 AM (3 days ago)



to
So now, where in math history, of algebra, would the best moment in time to introduce a Axiom of Algebra. An axiom I referred to earlier. The axiom that says a Valid Equation of math never has a zero, 0, or negative number all alone by itself on the
right side of the Equation, at all times.

Where would that axiom be appropriately introduced? Would it be in Ancient Greek times? Or would it be more recent, just before Tartaglia (1500-1557), Ferro (1465-1526), Cardano (1501-1576), Ferrari (1522-1565), hope I did not forget anyone in this feat
of algebra solving polynomial equations.

So we need to logical ask the question, can you have a viable equation of math when one side is zero, which in physics or any hard core science that 0 or zero means "nothing" or empty space. Then to think and expect the other side can have some solid
meaning when the one side is nothing.

So the Axiom that dispels the existence of negative numbers is this axiom that denies a equation is valid if that equation does not have a positive number all by itself on the right side of the algebra equation at all times.

This not only throws all negative numbers on the trash pile in shame, but this axiom would also have made the quest for the quintic as a silly stupid moron quest. For every polynomial equation, no matter what order of exponent is easily solvable. And
that the quadratic formula solution, the cubic, the quartic, and insolvable quintic, all are simple and easy once you apply the axiom.

It is like physics, modern physics putting on the right side of the equation empty space vacuum and expecting the left side of the equation to have anything other than empty space vacuum. Or like asking biology to put a negative zebra on the right side
of the equation or even a zero zebra, and expect the left side of the equation to be a bunch of animals.

So really, it is amazing how math professors seem to never do logic, ask logical questions and their heads screwed on backwards and stripped.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Jul 23, 2023, 12:56:43 AM (2 days ago)



to
Alright, it has been established in this book that negative numbers do not exist and cannot exist due to an axiom that is desperately needed in Algebra-- the axiom that says a polynomial equation always must have a positive number all alone on the
rightside of the equal sign-- and at all times. No more of this goofy goofball math of something on the leftside equals zero or nothing on the rightside. May as well have the rightside be the Goths, Visigoths and OstraGoths kitchen sink.

But apparently even if we throw out all negative numbers, we seem to have some longing for them, some pining for them in situations. Such as the elevator going to the -2 floor, the 2nd floor underground. Or the physics call for a negative charge particle
and a positive charge particle. Or the thermometer of negative ten degrees. Or the bank statement of negative cash-- meaning you owe money.

So, what can be done to avoid all those needs and still throw out the negative numbers.

I like to think of it as a horse, going in one direction and calling it a negative horse, and if it galloped in the opposite direction a positive horse.

So that all negative means is a "direction concept".

We could just as easily say a up horse versus a down horse.

Or a negative physics particle we can easily call a north particle and the opposite a south particle.

So negative is a feature of a number, not a actual number itself.

And this is where Old Math has more phony baloney on negative numbers with the cockamamie Absolute Value function. When we throw out negative numbers altogether, there exists no Absolute Value for everything is "positive" nothing is negative.

This shows us that a bifurcation of numbers into positive and negative is all meant to show some direction for the particle.

So if the graph axis is going from left to right we can say right 2 with 3 being next or we can say left 2 with 1 being next. Not that there is an independent existence of a right 2 from a left 2.

Same as our horse galloping north or south and not that there exists two independent horses a north horse and a south horse, but one horse with a direction.

So, somewhere in the history of mathematics, we had some kooks and goonclods that gave independent existence to a -1, a -2 as compared to a +1 or +2, when in reality we have just 1 and 2, and no bifurcation into different types of 1 or 2.

Negative compared to positive is a direction, not a existence. North compared to South is a direction, not a existence. Up compared to down is a direction, not a existence.

Little by little we throw out negative numbers as -- misunderstood concepts. They are directional characteristic traits. Forward versus backward is directional, and does not mean two different independent cars exist, one doing forward, other backward.

Math must rid itself of the nuisance and nonsense that is negative numbers. But physics has an equally challenging prospect of ridding itself of the nuisance of negative number when all it does is tell "direction".

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
2:30 PM (3 hours ago)



to
Alright, I should be able to get this book published in the next few days, certainly before August 1.

What is holding me back, is the first or second Axiom missed by Old Math. Old Math missed two critical algebra axioms.

1) The axiom that says, subtraction is limited to that in which you cannot remove more than what is available to remove. For example, you cannot subract 3 from 2. You cannot remove 10 people if there are only 6 available.

2) The axiom already discussed of that of which a equation in math is a valid equation only if the rightside has a positive Decimal Grid Number all alone, by itself, and at all times. The leftside of the equation can have all sorts of variables and
algebra, but the rightside must be a positive grid number in isolation.

These two vital axioms were missed by Old Math and allowed Old Math to build up mountains of erroneous mistakes and subject matter that is flat wrong and a waste of time and deletorious for education of the young.

Now I need to go to Physics, to see if Physics also has electromagnetic EM laws that further espouse you cannot remove more than what is available, although that is purely "commonsense", but to see if EM theory may have more to say about either one of
these two axioms of math algebra.

In one of my earlier books I mention the idea that perhaps the name through history, the name of "subtraction" is a total impediment to understanding the operation. And I commented that if math history from the outset named this operator "Remove", then
the nightmarish concept of negative number would never have sprouted and flourished. When you have a name of "subtraction" then all sorts of crazied ideas can enter and cause error. When you name this operator as Remove, it eliminates the riff-raff
desire to fantasize negative numbers.

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 5:33:58 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

Now I need to go to Physics, to see if Physics also has electromagnetic EM laws that further espouse you cannot remove more than what is available, although that is purely "commonsense", but to see if EM theory may have more to say about either one of

these two axioms of math algebra.

In one of my earlier books I mention the idea that perhaps the name through history, the name of "subtraction" is a total impediment to understanding the operation. And I commented that if math history from the outset named this operator "Remove", then

the nightmarish concept of negative number would never have sprouted and flourished. When you have a name of "subtraction" then all sorts of crazied ideas can enter and cause error. When you name this operator as Remove, it eliminates the riff-raff
desire to fantasize negative numbers.


yes, the Lenz law in Physics, electromagnetic theory is the embodiment of Axioms 1 and 2 listed above. You cannot have negative numbers in mathematics, or else the entire subject of math falls and tumbles to pieces.

Lenz law is such that it comes out and opposes the thrust of the bar magnet in Faraday's law. Lenz's law gives EM theory the Conservation of Energy, for without it, we would fetch unlimited energy from "out of nowhere". And this is what Old Math had
instilled into Old Math as a subject. It had no conservation principle and unlimited energy by making negative numbers be a "similar reality as positive numbers".

Old Math never had the idea that Subtraction is Remove, and how can you remove more than what is available.

Leave it to fools and kooks of Old Math to keep on teaching failed mathematics.

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)