Prev: $$$ I WISH SOMEONE WOULD HAVE SHOWED ME THIS SOONER! LOVE IT! $$$
Next: PLEASE HELP!
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 9 Jul 2010 13:58
Of course I used 10^500 because of its well rounded off. But perhaps
the largest number
in physics is closer to 10^631 or maybe in the opposite direction of
10^498. The number
of Coulomb interactions inside an atom of plutonium is approaching
that of 10^400. The number Coulomb interactions inside of Element 109
is approximately 10^500. I think we
are near to manufacturing element 114 and whose Coulomb Interactions
would be larger
than 10^500. But this is an assignment for the Physicists to work out
as to their largest
number, and to their smallest number. Whatever their largest number
is, we can take the
inverse as the smallest number in physics.

And of course, talk like this, where Physics dominates over
mathematics, where physics
actually takes over the control of the subject of mathematics is a
first time occurrence in
the history of both subjects. Before, math dominated over physics. But
with the Atom Totality theory, we have a recognition that all of
mathematical thought and math proof arises out of
what atoms are and what atoms do. Atoms have shape and size and thus
gives rise to the
math subject of geometry. And atoms are numerous and have quantity of
them, and thus giving rise to algebra and number theory.

The idea of infinity in mathematics, before the Atom Totality, was
very philosophical and overly idealistic. Thinking that a concept of
infinity meant "endlessness". With the Atom Totality,
the concept of Infinity means merely an "end of Physics". So whenever
mathematicians
end a sentence with "out to infinity." What they really mean is "out
to where there can be no
more physics counting or measuring or experimentation."

So what does anyone care about a number larger than 10^500 when no
possible physics nor
biology could ever do or use that number as size or quantity? What
good is it to talk about
or ruminate about 10^-700, when no physical act can even deal with
10^-70? Jokingly, one can
say that as the mathematicians developed math from Pythagoras to the
year 1990, they seemed to have lost most of their commonsense along
the way.

It was recognized with the advent of Quantum Mechanics in the 1900 to
1930s that Newtonian's absolute time and absolute space was never
more. But the mathematicians
have never undergone such a cleaning out revolution. They still think
that "endless or forever"
have this Newtonian absolutist quality. They cannot seem to understand
that endless, ends
where Physics ends. If Physics cannot go beyond a large number, then
math cannot go beyond there either. And if Physics cannot reach a tiny
number, then mathematics is also
detoured.

The logic for both math and physics is not just one logic of Aristotle
of linear straight line
logic. The logic that pervades physics is duality logic which is
nonlinear. So that Physics
has both linear logic and nonlinear logic, but math never recognized
this. Math somewhat
saw duality and symmetry in things such as the 5 regular polyhedra or
the duality of
calculus integral with calculus derivative, but math never saw that
their entire subject is
a duality where geometry is dual to algebra.

So it is about time for mathematics to have wholescale sweeping
changes. For mathematics
to undergo a revolution to clean out its old decayed house. And there
is no better place to
start the cleaning out, then to get back to math's fundamental job.
The Fundamental Job
of mathematics is precision defining and we need a precision
definition of finite-number
versus infinite-number.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
From: David R Tribble on 10 Jul 2010 15:48
Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Of course I used 10^500 because of its well rounded off. But perhaps
> the largest number
> in physics is closer to 10^631 or maybe in the opposite direction of
> 10^498. The number
> of Coulomb interactions inside an atom of plutonium is approaching
> that of 10^400. The number Coulomb interactions inside of Element 109
> is approximately 10^500. I think we
> are near to manufacturing element 114 and whose Coulomb Interactions
> would be larger
> than 10^500. But this is an assignment for the Physicists to work out
> as to their largest
> number, and to their smallest number. Whatever their largest number
> is, we can take the
> inverse as the smallest number in physics.

Given as few as 500 elementary particles (or molecules,
or asteroids), there are 500! total interactions among them
(gravitational, electromagnetic, whatever, take your pick).

And 500! = 1.220x10^1134, which well exceeds 10^500.

For 1,000 particles or bodies, it's 1000! = 4.023x10^2567.

Now imagine the celestial bodies in the Oort cloud, which number
in the millions, and all of which have a gravitational influence on
one another.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: $$$ I WISH SOMEONE WOULD HAVE SHOWED ME THIS SOONER! LOVE IT! $$$
Next: PLEASE HELP!