哲学とは「もどかしさからくる知への憧れ」西洋哲学史の10人（1）ソクラテス　最初の哲学者

 

ゼロ除算の発見は日本です：

∞？？？    

∞は定まった数ではない・

人工知能はゼロ除算ができるでしょうか：

 

とても興味深く読みました：2014年2月2日

ゼロ除算の発見と重要性を指摘した：日本、再生核研究所

 

 

ゼロ除算関係論文・本

 

 

ソクラテス・プラトン・アリストテレス　その他
2017年11月15日(水)
テーマ：社会

The null set is conceptually similar to the role of the number “zero” as it is used in quantum field theory. In quantum field theory, one can take the empty set, the vacuum, and generate all possible physical configurations of the Universe being modelled by acting on it with creation operators, and one can similarly change from one thing to another by applying mixtures of creation and anihillation operators to suitably filled or empty states. The anihillation operator applied to the vacuum, however, yields zero.

Zero in this case is the null set – it stands, quite literally, for no physical state in the Universe. The important point is that it is not possible to act on zero with a creation operator to create something; creation operators only act on the vacuum which is empty but not zero. Physicists are consequently fairly comfortable with the existence of operations that result in “nothing” and don’t even require that those operations be contradictions, only operationally non-invertible.

It is also far from unknown in mathematics. When considering the set of all real numbers as quantities and the operations of ordinary arithmetic, the “empty set” is algebraically the number zero (absence of any quantity, positive or negative). However, when one performs a division operation algebraically, one has to be careful to exclude division by zero from the set of permitted operations! The result of division by zero isn’t zero, it is “not a number” or “undefined” and is not in the Universe of real numbers.

Just as one can easily “prove” that 1 = 2 if one does algebra on this set of numbers as if one can divide by zero legitimately3.34, so in logic one gets into trouble if one assumes that the set of all things that are in no set including the empty set is a set within the algebra, if one tries to form the set of all sets that do not include themselves, if one asserts a Universal Set of Men exists containing a set of men wherein a male barber shaves all men that do not shave themselves3.35.

It is not – it is the null set, not the empty set, as there can be no male barbers in a non-empty set of men (containing at least one barber) that shave all men in that set that do not shave themselves at a deeper level than a mere empty list. It is not an empty set that could be filled by some algebraic operation performed on Real Male Barbers Presumed to Need Shaving in trial Universes of Unshaven Males as you can very easily see by considering any particular barber, perhaps one named “Socrates”, in any particular Universe of Men to see if any of the sets of that Universe fit this predicate criterion with Socrates as the barber. Take the empty set (no men at all). Well then there are no barbers, including Socrates, so this cannot be the set we are trying to specify as it clearly must contain at least one barber and we’ve agreed to call its relevant barber Socrates. (and if it contains more than one, the rest of them are out of work at the moment).

Suppose a trial set contains Socrates alone. In the classical rendition we ask, does he shave himself? If we answer “no”, then he is a member of this class of men who do not shave themselves and therefore must shave himself. Oops. Well, fine, he must shave himself. However, if he does shave himself, according to the rules he can only shave men who don’t shave themselves and so he doesn’t shave himself. Oops again. Paradox. When we try to apply the rule to a potential Socrates to generate the set, we get into trouble, as we cannot decide whether or not Socrates should shave himself.

Note that there is no problem at all in the existential set theory being proposed. In that set theory either Socrates must shave himself as All Men Must Be Shaven and he’s the only man around. Or perhaps he has a beard, and all men do not in fact need shaving. Either way the set with just Socrates does not contain a barber that shaves all men because Socrates either shaves himself or he doesn’t, so we shrug and continue searching for a set that satisfies our description pulled from an actual Universe of males including barbers. We immediately discover that adding more men doesn’t matter. As long as those men, barbers or not, either shave themselves or Socrates shaves them they are consistent with our set description (although in many possible sets we find that hey, other barbers exist and shave other men who do not shave themselves), but in no case can Socrates (as our proposed single barber that shaves all men that do not shave themselves) be such a barber because he either shaves himself (violating the rule) or he doesn’t (violating the rule). Instead of concluding that there is a paradox, we observe that the criterion simply doesn’t describe any subset of any possible Universal Set of Men with no barbers, including the empty set with no men at all, or any subset that contains at least Socrates for any possible permutation of shaving patterns including ones that leave at least some men unshaven altogether.

 

 I understand your note as if you are saying the limit is infinity but nothing is equal to infinity, but you concluded corretly infinity is undefined. Your example of getting the denominator smaller and smalser the result of the division is a very large number that approches infinity. This is the intuitive mathematical argument that plunged philosophy into mathematics. at that level abstraction mathematics, as well as phyisics become the realm of philosophi. The notion of infinity is more a philosopy question than it is mathamatical. The reason we cannot devide by zero is simply axiomatic as Plato pointed out. The underlying reason for the axiom is because sero is nothing and deviding something by nothing is undefined. That axiom agrees with the notion of limit infinity, i.e. undefined. There are more phiplosphy books and thoughts about infinity in philosophy books than than there are discussions on infinity in math books.

 

 

ゼロ除算の歴史：ゼロ除算はゼロで割ることを考えるであるが、アリストテレス以来問題とされ、ゼロの記録がインドで初めて６２８年になされているが、既にそのとき、正解1/0が期待されていたと言う。しかし、理論づけられず、その後１３００年を超えて、不可能である、あるいは無限、無限大、無限遠点とされてきたものである。

An Early Reference to Division by Zero C. B. Boyer

 

OUR HUMANITY AND DIVISION BY ZERO

Lea esta bitácora en español
There is a mathematical concept that says that division by zero has no meaning, or is an undefined expression, because it is impossible to have a real number that could be multiplied by zero in order to obtain another number different from zero.
While this mathematical concept has been held as true for centuries, when it comes to the human level the present situation in global societies has, for a very long time, been contradicting it. It is true that we don’t all live in a mathematical world or with mathematical concepts in our heads all the time. However, we cannot deny that societies around the globe a
re trying to disprove this simple mathematical concept: that division by zero is an impossible equation to solve.
Yes! We are all being divided by zero tolerance, zero acceptance, zero love, zero compassion, zero willingness to learn more about the other and to find intelligent and fulfilling ways to adapt to new ideas, concepts, ways of doing things, people and cultures. We are allowing these ‘zero denominators’ to run our equations, our lives, our souls.
Each and every single day we get more divided and distanced from other people who are different from us. We let misinformation and biased concepts divide us, and we buy into these aberrant concepts in such a way, that we get swept into this division by zero without checking our consciences first.
I believe, however, that if we change the zeros in any of the “divisions by zero” that are running our lives, we will actually be able to solve the non-mathematical concept of this equation: the human concept.
>I believe deep down that we all have a heart, a conscience, a brain to think with, and, above all, an immense desire to learn and evolve. And thanks to all these positive things that we do have within, I also believe that we can use them to learn how to solve our “division by zero” mathematical impossibility at the human level. I am convinced that the key is open communication and an open heart. Nothing more, nothing less.
Are we scared of, or do we feel baffled by the way another person from another culture or country looks in comparison to us? Are we bothered by how people from other cultures dress, eat, talk, walk, worship, think, etc.? Is this fear or bafflement so big that we much rather reject people and all the richness they bring within?
How about if instead of rejecting or retreating from that person—division of our humanity by zero tolerance or zero acceptance—we decided to give them and us a chance?
How about changing that zero tolerance into zero intolerance? Why not dare ask questions about the other person’s culture and way of life? Let us have the courage to let our guard down for a moment and open up enough for this person to ask us questions about our culture and way of life. How about if we learned to accept that while a person from another culture is living and breathing in our own culture, it is totally impossible for him/her to completely abandon his/her cultural values in order to become what we want her to become?
Let’s be totally honest with ourselves at least: Would any of us really renounce who we are and where we come from just to become what somebody else asks us to become?
If we are not willing to lose our identity, why should we ask somebody else to lose theirs?
I believe with all my heart that if we practiced positive feelings—zero intolerance, zero non-acceptance, zero indifference, zero cruelty—every day, the premise that states that division by zero is impossible would continue being true, not only in mathematics, but also at the human level. We would not be divided anymore; we would simply be building a better world for all of us.
Hoping to have touched your soul in a meaningful way,
Adriana Adarve, Asheville, NC
…/our-humanity-and-division…/

 

5000年？？？？？

2017年09月01日(金)NEW ! 
テーマ：数学
Former algebraic approach was formally perfect, but it merely postulated existence of sets and morphisms [18] without showing methods to construct them. The primary concern of modern algebras is not how an operation can be performed, but whether it maps into or onto and the like abstract issues [19–23]. As important as this may be for proofs, the nature does not really care about all that. The PM’s concerns were not constructive, even though theoretically significant. We need thus an approach that is more relevant to operations performed in nature, which never complained about morphisms or the allegedly impossible division by zero, as far as I can tell. Abstract sets and morphisms should be de-emphasized as hardly operational. My decision to come up with a definite way to implement the feared division by zero was not really arbitrary, however. It has removed a hidden paradox from number theory and an obvious absurd from algebraic group theory. It was necessary step for full deployment of constructive, synthetic mathematics (SM) [2,3]. Problems hidden in PM implicitly affect all who use mathematics, even though we may not always be aware of their adverse impact on our thinking. Just take a look at the paradox that emerges from the usual prescription for multiplication of zeros that remained uncontested for some 5000 years 0
0 ¼ 0 ) 0
1=1 ¼ 0 ) 0
1 ¼ 0
1) 1ð? ¼ ?Þ1 ð0aÞ This ‘‘fact’’ was covered up by the infamous prohibition on division by zero [2]. How ingenious. If one is prohibited from dividing by zero one could not obtain this paradox. Yet the prohibition did not really make anything right. It silenced objections to irresponsible reasonings and prevented corrections to the PM’s flamboyant axiomatizations. The prohibition on treating infinity as invertible counterpart to zero did not do any good either. We use infinity in calculus for symbolic calculations of limits [24], for zero is the infinity’s twin [25], and also in projective geometry as well as in geometric mapping of complex numbers. Therein a sphere is cast onto the plane that is tangent to it and its free (opposite) pole in a point at infinity [26–28]. Yet infinity as an inverse to the natural zero removes the whole absurd (0a), for we obtain [2] 0 ¼ 1=1 ) 0
0 ¼ 1=12 > 0 0 ð0bÞ Stereographic projection of complex numbers tacitly contradicted the PM’s prescribed way to multiply zeros, yet it was never openly challenged. The old formula for multiplication of zeros (0a) is valid only as a practical approximation, but it is group-theoretically inadmissible in no-nonsense reasonings. The tiny distinction in formula (0b) makes profound theoretical difference for geometries and consequently also for physical applications. T

とても興味深く読みました：

 

 

10,000 Year Clock
by Renny Pritikin
Conversation with Paolo Salvagione, lead engineer on the 10,000-year clock project, via e-mail in February 2010.

For an introduction to what we’re talking about here’s a short excerpt from a piece by Michael Chabon, published in 2006 in Details: ….Have you heard of this thing? It is going to be a kind of gigantic mechanical computer, slow, simple and ingenious, marking the hour, the day, the year, the century, the millennium, and the precession of the equinoxes, with a huge orrery to keep track of the immense ticking of the six naked-eye planets on their great orbital mainspring. The Clock of the Long Now will stand sixty feet tall, cost tens of millions of dollars, and when completed its designers and supporters plan to hide it in a cave in the Great Basin National Park in Nevada, a day’s hard walking from anywhere. Oh, and it’s going to run for ten thousand years. But even if the Clock of the Long Now fails to last ten thousand years, even if it breaks down after half or a quarter or a tenth that span, this mad contraption will already have long since fulfilled its purpose. Indeed the Clock may have accomplished its greatest task before it is ever finished, perhaps without ever being built at all. The point of the Clock of the Long Now is not to measure out the passage, into their unknown future, of the race of creatures that built it. The point of the Clock is to revive and restore the whole idea of the Future, to get us thinking about the Future again, to the degree if not in quite the way same way that we used to do, and to reintroduce the notion that we don’t just bequeath the future—though we do, whether we think about it or not. We also, in the very broadest sense of the first person plural pronoun, inherit it.

Renny Pritikin: When we were talking the other day I said that this sounds like a cross between Borges and the vast underground special effects fro
m Forbidden Planet. I imagine you hear lots of comparisons like that…

Paolo Salvagione: (laughs) I can’t say I’ve heard that comparison. A childhood friend once referred to the project as a cross between Tinguely and Fabergé. When talking about the clock, with people, there’s that divide-by-zero moment (in the early days of computers to divide by zero was a sure way to crash the computer) and I can understand why. Where does one place, in one’s memory, such a thing, such a concept? After the pause, one could liken it to a reboot, the questions just start streaming out.

RP: OK so I think the word for that is nonplussed. Which the thesaurus matches with flummoxed, bewildered, at a loss. So the question is why even (I assume) fairly sophisticated people like your friends react like that. Is it the physical scale of the plan, or the notion of thinking 10,000 years into the future—more than the length of human history?

PS: I’d say it’s all three and more. I continue to be amazed by the specificity of the questions asked. Anthropologists ask a completely different set of questions than say, a mechanical engineer or a hedge fund manager. Our disciplines tie us to our perspectives. More than once, a seemingly innocent question has made an impact on the design of the clock. It’s not that we didn’t know the answer, sometimes we did, it’s that we hadn’t thought about it from the perspective of the person asking the question. Back to your question. I think when sophisticated people, like you, thread this concept through their own personal narrative it tickles them. Keeping in mind some people hate to be tickled.

RP: Can you give an example of a question that redirected the plan? That’s really so interesting, that all you brainiacs slaving away on this project and some amateur blithely pinpoints a problem or inconsistency or insight that spins it off in a different direction. It’s like the butterfly effect.

PS: Recently a climatologist pointed out that our equation of time cam, (photo by Rolfe Horn) (a cam is a type of gear: link) a device that tracks the difference between solar noon and mundane noon as well as the precession of the equinoxes, did not account for the redistribution of water away from the earth’s poles. The equation-of-time cam is arguably one of the most aesthetically pleasing parts of the clock. It also happens to be one that is fairly easy to explain. It visually demonstrates two extremes. If you slice it, like a loaf of bread, into 10,000 slices each slice would represent a year. The outside edge of the slice, let’s call it the crust, represents any point in that year, 365 points, 365 days. You could, given the right amount of magnification, divide it into hours, minutes, even seconds. Stepping back and looking at the unsliced cam the bottom is the year 2000 and the top is the year 12000. The twist that you see is the precession of the equinoxes. Now here’s the fun part, there’s a slight taper to the twist, that’s the slowing of the earth on its axis. As the ice at the poles melts we have a redistribution of water, we’re all becoming part of the “slow earth” movement.

RP: Are you familiar with Charles Ray’s early work in which you saw a plate on a table, or an object on the wall, and they looked stable, but were actually spinning incredibly slowly, or incredibly fast, and you couldn’t tell in either case? Or, more to the point, Tim Hawkinson’s early works in which he had rows of clockwork gears that turned very very fast, and then down the line, slower and slower, until at the end it approached the slowness that you’re dealing with?

PS: The spinning pieces by Ray touches on something we’re trying to avoid. We want you to know just how fast or just how slow the various parts are moving. The beauty of the Ray piece is that you can’t tell, fast, slow, stationary, they all look the same. I’m not familiar with the Hawkinson clockwork piece. I’ve see the clock pieces where he hides the mechanism and uses unlikely objects as the hands, such as the brass clasp on the back of a manila envelope or the tab of a coke can.

RP: Spin Sink (1 Rev./100 Years) (1995), in contrast, is a 24-foot-long row of interlocking gears, the smallest of which is driven by a whirring toy motor that in turn drives each consecutively larger and more slowly turning gear up to the largest of all, which rotates approximately once every one hundred years.

PS: I don’t know how I missed it, it’s gorgeous. Linking the speed that we can barely see with one that we rarely have the patience to wait for.

RP: : So you say you’ve opted for the clock’s time scale to be transparent. How will the clock communicate how fast it’s going?

PS: By placing the clock in a mountain we have a reference to long time. The stratigraphy provides us with the slowest metric. The clock is a middle point between millennia and seconds. Looking back 10,000 years we find the beginnings of civilization. Looking at an earthenware vessel from that era we imagine its use, the contents, the craftsman. The images painted or inscribed on the outside provide some insight into the lives and the languages of the distant past. Often these interpretations are flawed, biased or over-reaching. What I’m most enchanted by is that we continue to construct possible pasts around these objects, that our curiosity is overwhelming. We line up to see the treasures of Tut, or the remains of frozen ancestors. With the clock we are asking you to create possible futures, long futures, and with them the narratives that made them happen.

 

ダ・ヴィンチの名言 格言｜無こそ最も素晴らしい存在

 

ゼロ除算の発見はどうでしょうか： 
Black holes are where God divided by zero： 

再生核研究所声明371（2017.6.27）ゼロ除算の講演―　国際会議　 
;

1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
;
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
;
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
;

ソクラテス・プラトン・アリストテレス　その他 
;

ドキュメンタリー 2017: 神の数式 第２回 宇宙はなぜ生まれたのか 
;
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第3回 宇宙はなぜ始まったのか 
;
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第1回 この世は何からできているのか 
;
NHKスペシャル 神の数式 完全版 第4回 異次元宇宙は存在するか 
;

再生核研究所声明 411(2018.02.02): 　ゼロ除算発見4周年を迎えて 
;

再生核研究所声明 416(2018.2.20): 　ゼロ除算をやってどういう意味が有りますか。何か意味が有りますか。何になるのですか　－　回答 
再生核研究所声明 417(2018.2.23): 　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　中学生、高校生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 418(2018.2.24): 　割り算とは何ですか？　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　小学生、中学生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 420(2018.3.2): ゼロ除算は正しいですか，合っていますか、信用できますか　－　回答 

再生核研究所声明 427(2018.5.8): 神の数式、神の意志　そしてゼロ除算

 

2018.3.18．午前中　最後の講演：　日本数学会　東大駒場、函数方程式論分科会　講演書画カメラ用　原稿 
The Japanese Mathematical Society, Annual Meeting at the University of Tokyo. 2018.3.18. 
より

 

*057 Pinelas,S./Caraballo,T./Kloeden,P./Graef,J.(eds.): Differential and Difference Equations with Applications: ICDDEA, Amadora, 2017. (Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics, Vol. 230) May 2018 587 pp. 

 

再生核研究所声明 424(2018.3.29): 　レオナルド・ダ・ヴィンチとゼロ除算

 

アインシュタイ�
��も解決できなかった「ゼロで割る」問題

 

Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

 

私は数学を信じない。　アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。

1423793753.460.341866474681。

 

Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero

 

 

ゼロ除算は定義が問題です：

 

再生核研究所声明　１４８（2014.2.12）　100/0=0,  0/0=0　－　割り算の考えを自然に拡張すると　―　神の意志

 

再生核研究所声明１７１（2014.7.30）掛け算の意味と割り算の意味　―　ゼロ除算100/0=0は自明である？

 

アインシュタインも解決できなかった「ゼロで割る」問題

 

Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

 

私は数学を信じない。　アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。1423793753.460.341866474681。

 

Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero

 

#divide by zero
TOP DEFINITION

  

Genius

A super-smart math teacher that teaches at HTHS and can divide by zero.

Hey look, that genius’s IQ is over 9000!

#divide by zero #math #hths #smart #genius

by Lawlbags! October 21, 2009

 

 

divide by zero

Dividing by zero is the biggest epic fail known to mankind. It is a proven fact that a succesful division by zero will constitute in the implosion of the universe.

You are dividing by zero there, Johnny. Captain Kirk is not impressed.

Divide by zero?!?!! OMG!!! Epic failzorz

#4 chan #epic fail #implosion #universe #divide by zero

 

3

  

divide by zero

Divide by zero is undefined.

Divide by zero is undefined.

#divide #by #zero #dividebyzero #undefined

by JaWo October 28, 2006

 

division by zero

1) The number one ingredient for a catastrophic event in which the universe enfolds and collapses on itself and life as we know it ceases to exist.

2) A mathematical equation such as a/0 whereas a is some number and 0 is the divisor. Look it up on Wikipedia or something. Pretty confusing shit.

3) A reason for an error in programming

Hey, I divided by zero! …Oh shi-

a/0

Run-time error: ’11’: Division by zero

#division #0 #math #oh shi- #divide by zero

by DefectiveProduct September 08, 2006

 

dividing by zero

When even math shows you that not everything can be figured out with math. When you divide by zero, math kicks you in the shins and says “yeah, there’s kind of an answer, but it ain’t just some number.”

It’s when mathematicians become philosophers.

Math:
Let’s say you have ZERO apples, and THREE people. How many apples does each person get? ZERO, cause there were no apples to begin with

Not-math because of dividing by zero:
Let’s say there are THREE apples, and ZERO people. How many apples does each person get? Friggin… How the Fruitcock should I know! How can you figure out how many apples each person gets if there’s no people to get them?!? You’d think it’d be infinity, but not really. It could almost be any number, cause you could be like “each person gets 400 apples” which would be true, because all the people did get 400 apples, because there were no people. So all the people also got 42 apples, and a million and 7 apples. But it’s still wrong.

#math #divide by zero #divide #dividing #zero #numbers #not-math #imaginary numbers #imaginary. phylosophy

by Zacharrie February 15, 2010

 

再生核研究所声明 449(2018.8.21): この世とあの世　－　人工知能の進化によって

 

あの世とは　死後の世界として、想念上の世界と考えられよう。ところが人口知能の進化とともに不思議な世界と問題が現れつつあるので、考察をしておこう。

まず、人間は往々にして、消えていくことに対して嫌い、時として永遠の存在になりたいと志向しがちである。これは生命の基本定理である　生きて存在しなければ　始まらないという基本原則に根差している。古くはピラミッドの建設やミイラ作り、多くの志の基礎に存在する。しかしながら、それらの意義を改めて問う必要が起きている。それらの心の元をしっかり捉える必要がある。まず、次の状況を捉えよう：

再生核研究所声明 447(2018.8.17): 人工知能の進化と人間について：

人工知能は　未解決の数学の理論や物理法則なども　どんどん明らかにして行くと同時に　人間自身についても究明していくだろう。人間とは何かという問いについて、１個の人間に対する問いと回答で人間を一つのシステムと考えたとき、出入力の関係からシステムを特定する観点からも　１個の人間の解明がどんどん進み、相当に人物を捉えられるようになるだろう。人造人間の出現について述べた　次も参照：

再生核研究所声明 403(2017.11.20): 　私より私らしい私の出現　－　アンドロイド

このような関心や進化は、人間の本質的な要求に関わっているので、留まることが無いのではないだろうか。　医学が人体の構造、機能をどんどん解明してきたように、人工知能は　人間の精神面での解明をどんどん進め、人工知能が人間以上に人間を知る時代が来るのではないだろうか。ひと昔まえ、唯物史観の哲学が流行ったが、情報が世界のすべてであるような世界観が広まるのではないだろうか。　要するに知的情報などが数値化されて　人口知能で解明されることが進むということである。

例えば、ニュートンとは何者かと問えば、ニュートンは何をやり、どのような影響を世界史に与えたかと問うが、生涯の記録から、このような問い、このような場面ではどのように対応するだろうか。それらの対応がどんどん　精しく明かにされてくるということである。アンドロイドのように　どんどんニュートンの人物像を詳しく捉えられるようになるだろう。

そこで、次の時代には　人間とは何かとの問いが一段と進み、どんどん新しい世界が拓けてくるだろう。

医師や料理の分野などあらゆる分野に進出してくるのではないだろうか。　一言で言えば、人間がなすことの多くを人工知能が行う時代の到来である。　

アンドロイドなどの精密な存在は、人間の精神を不滅の存在ならしめ、また、既に生物的な存在を　受精卵や精子の保存で永続化させる生物学は　すでに確立している。

盆に先祖さまを偲びたいと発想する場面では、　既にアンドロイドのような存在で生存中の多くを追想できると同時に相当な会話さえできる時代が近づきつつある。歌い手さんの素晴らしい情景は
、さながら生存中と変わらないように再現も会話、対話も可能な時代を迎えている。ひと昔前、あの世と考えられた多くは人工知能の発達によってこの世の存在と区別できないような　状況を迎えている。消えて行った膨大な世界が何時でも再現出来て　現存在になり得る時代とは　一体どのように考えれば良いだろうか。あらゆる情報が整理され保存され、それが生命体のように生き生きと現れる時代である。－　その時、人間はとてつもなく広い世界を覗ける時代で、自由の限りない拡大である。自我をしっかりさせ、情報、世界の選択による　統一的な存在として、我は何者かと絶えず問い続けることが重要になるだろう。　―　広大な一面に御馳走の山を見たとき、自分に合った適切な食を選択しなければならないようにである。

大きな課題で混乱しそうであるが、従来、あの世とこの世は結構区別がついていた時代であったが、あの世とは　この世の情報のことで、それらが再現されることで、２つの世界は混然一体の存在になりつつある。ピラミッドやミイラ、多くの記念碑は空しくなり、新しい時代に大きな変化を遂げる時代が　近づきつつある。―　遺族を偲ぶ盆の習慣など、遺族の方と会話さえでき、何でも想い出を再現できる時代の到来である。お墓とは、図書館の変形のような存在になる時代である。10年後、20年後に意見を表明できるシステムさえ確立している。

この世もあの世もこの世の情報であるが、　それらの中には想像によって作られた虚像、場合によっては意図的に作られた虚構も多いので、１個の人間はそれらの中で生きていく意味をしっかりさせていく必要がある。生きるということは　どのようなことで、生きている意義とは何かと問い続ける必要がある。人間にとって真に意味のあること、価値あることとは何だろうか。多くの希望、願いが叶えられる時代とは　人間にとってどうなるだろうか。

以　上

When Albert Einstein Visited Japan

As he traveled through Asia, including a trip to Palestine, the brilliant scientist discovered much he didn’t understand

Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/albert-einstein-visited-japan-180968737/#7bIirT3oPXDjVPhw.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

n his first and only visit to Japan, in the late fall of 1922, Albert Einstein, like almost every Westerner who ever set foot there, was wowed by the beauty of the country and the refinement of the culture. “The inner palace courtyard is among the most exquisite architecture I have ever seen,” he wrote in his diary about Kyoto. The Japanese are “pure souls as nowhere else among people.” The populace was equally impressed by their visitor, greeting him on his arrival in Kobe with “great hubbub. Masses of journalists on board the ship. Half-hour interview in the saloon. Disembarkation with huge crowds.” Einstein was, after all, not just the era’s best-known scientist, but arguably the most famous person in the world.

On October 8, 1922, Einstein and his wife, Elsa, had sailed from Marseille aboard the Japanese ocean liner SS Kitano Maru to begin a nearly six-month trip that would take them to Egypt, Ceylon (modern-day Sri Lanka), Singapore, Hong Kong and China before arriving in Japan on November 17. Their return, aboard the SS Haruna Maru and SS Ormuz, would include extended visits to Palestine and Spain before arriving back in Berlin on March 21, 1923. Throughout his journey, Einstein kept a diary. It will be published in English in its entirety for the first time this May as , with annotations by the Einstein scholar Ze’ev Rosenkranz.

The handwritten diary shows Einstein in an unfamiliar light, as a tourist—in the real, earthbound sense, not (as in his famous thought experiment) riding a light beam through space-time. Never intended for publication, it records his thoughts and impressions as they occurred, unmediated and unfiltered by considerations of how they would affect his image. So we can be sure he was speaking from the heart when he wrote, after being transported by sweating rickshaw runners in Ceylon: “I was very much ashamed of myself for being complicit in such despicable treatment of human beings but couldn’t change anything.” He finds a dinner with “diplomats and other big shots” at the German Embassy in Tokyo “boring and stuffy.” And like any overbooked traveler the great man gets worn out. “I was dead,” he noted after a day of banquets and receptions, “and my corpse rode back to Moji where it was dragged to a children’s Christmas and had to play violin for the children.” We also see some qualities that stamped him as a creature of his time, such as the ingrained assumption of the intellectual superiority of Europeans: “It seems that the Japanese never thought about why it is hotter on their southern islands than on their northern islands. Nor do they seem to have become aware that the height of the sun is dependent on the north-south position. Intellectual needs of this nation seem to be weaker than their artistic ones—natural disposition?”

In the fall of 1922, Albert Einstein, along with his then-wife, Elsa Einstein, embarked on a five-and-a-half-month voyage to the Far East and Middle East, regions that the renowned physicist had never visited before.

Einstein’s visit to Japan was the heart of his trip. The island was still an exotic destination for Westerners nearly 70 years after Commodore Matthew Perry sailed his U.S. fleet into Edo Bay, and Einstein was deeply impressed by Japanese culture, even when he didn’t understand it. “Japanese singing remained so entirely incomprehensible to me,” he wrote. “Yesterday I heard another one singing away again to the point of making me dizzy.” He may not have thought much of Japanese science, but he had complimentary things to say about the architecture and art, and he applauded the people for their “earnest respect without a trace of cynicism or even skepticism”—the latter an odd quality to have won praise from Einstein, who was a thoroughgoing skeptic about all forms of received wisdom, from biblical to Newtonian. He also liked Japanese women—actually, he liked the women pretty much everywhere he went—although he was uncharacteristically tight-lipped about what he saw in them: “On the exquisiteness of the Japanese woman, this flower-like creature—I have also remained reticent; for here the common mortal must cede the word to the poet.”

Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/albert-einstein-visited-japan-180968737/#7bIirT3oPXDjVPhw.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

Like any hapless Westerner he tried, with varying success, to adapt to the customs. “Sitting on the floor difficult,” he wrote after a meal at a Japanese inn. He sampled the cuisine, which didn’t always sit well with his digestion or his ethics—“poor creatures,” he said of the roasted lobsters he was served at the “charming establishment.” And, echoing a familiar trope of his era, one in which national and ethnic generalizations were treated as matter-of-fact observations, not politically fraught stereotypes, he found the Japanese, yes, inscrutable. “Among us we see many Japanese, living a lonely existence, studying diligently, smiling in a friendly manner,” he wrote. “No one can fathom the feelings concealed behind this guarded smile.”

**********

Long before he set foot in Japan, Einstein had a strong affinity for the country. “The invitation to Tokyo pleased me a great deal, as I have been interested in the people and culture of East Asia for a long time,” he wrote. For Japan, Einstein’s visit lent a powerful impetus to its effort to be recognized as a modern world power. A year earlier, the same publishing house that arranged Einstein’s visit had brought over the philosopher Bertrand Russell, and asked him to name the three greatest living citizens of the world. “First Einstein, then Lenin,” Russell is said to have replied. “There is nobody else.” That was an interesting pairing, since right around the time Einstein was arriving in Japan to plaudits, the Soviet Union decided that his theory of relativity was, as a headline in the New York Times put it, “‘Bourgeois’ and Dangerous.”

In Japan, thousands packed auditoriums to hear him expound on his theory of relativity for three or four hours at a stretch, in remarks laboriously translated from German. It had been three years since Sir Arthur Eddington confirmed the bending of starlight as it passed by the Sun, a key prediction of Einstein’s 1915 theory of general relativity, which explained gravity as a distortion of space-time. It followed his revolutionary 1905 paper on special relativity, which laid the groundwork for his equation for mass-energy equivalence: E=mc2.

Instantly recognizable with his full head of curly hair, pipe and mustache, he yearned for the occasional snatches of solitude. A journal entry on December 24, about a week before his departure from the country, notes: “Photographed for the 10,000th time…dinner that almost lasts forever…the hostess of the inn is deeply thrilled and, on her knees, bows her head to the ground around 100 times.” It was, presumably, from his own experience as a living legend that he wrote: “Emperor [has] status of a god; for him very uncomfortable.”

Einstein’s German birth and upbringing rendered him suspect in the eyes of some European countries just a few years after the end of the world war—a lecture in Paris scheduled for April was canceled when French academics threatened a boycott over ongoing political disputes—but the Japanese had no dispute with Germany and were welcoming of
his ideas.

And for Einstein, Japan was refreshingly free of anti-Semitism. Einstein did not practice his religion, but he made no apologies for it, and had become increasingly involved in Zionism since the war. But in Germany in 1922, being a famous Jewish scientist came with risks. Earlier in the year another prominent German Jew, the foreign minister Walther Rathenau, had been assassinated by right-wing thugs (earning the praise of a Nazi Party member named Adolf Hitler). “I am supposedly among the group of persons being targeted by nationalist assassins,” Einstein wrote to the physicist Max Planck.

Einstein had been advised to postpone his trip by physicist Max von Laue who wrote just a few weeks before his departure, “According to reliable news I received yesterday, events could be taking place in November that would make your presence in Europe in December desirable.” Einstein knew what he was referring to. Svante Arrhenius, a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, had also hinted to Einstein that he would be awarded the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics, but Einstein had declined to change his plans. He received official news of the award by telegram in Shanghai on November 13. His diary entry the next day makes no mention of the honor. Instead, he describes the scenery—“Travel upriver along flat, picturesque, yellowish-green illuminated shores”—and the “comical reciprocal staring” between the curious travelers and the surprised residents they encountered.

As it happened, Einstein didn’t even win his Nobel for the work that earned him the most fame—relativity—but for a 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect. And though he worked diligently on new ideas during his trip, writing to Arrhenius: “How conducive to thinking and working the long sea voyage is—a paradisiacal state without correspondence, visits, meetings, and other inventions of the devil!”, his best work was behind him. Now he set himself the task of reconciling the mathematics of the two great macro-scale forces that rule the universe, gravity and electromagnetism—a challenge that, nearly a century later, remains one of the great unsolved problems of science. At various times during his voyage he believed he had succeeded, only to conclude, as he did in January, during a stopover in Malacca, “Discovered large fly in my electricity ointment in the afternoon. A pity.”

Einstein spent most of January at sea, arriving at Port Said, Egypt, on February 1, and the next day he was in Jerusalem, which represented a test of his distinctly secular brand of Zionism. Einstein was unmoved by the Wailing Wall, where, he wrote, unkindly, “obtuse ethnic brethren pray loudly, with their faces turned to the wall, bend their bodies to and fro in a swaying motion. Pitiful sight of people with a past but without a present.” But he was impressed by Tel Aviv, a “[m]odern Hebrew city stamped out of the ground with lively economic and intellectual life…The accomplishments by the Jews in but a few years in this city excite the highest admiration….What an incredibly lively people our Jews are!” Jericho represented “a day of unforgettable magnificence. Extraordinary enchantment of this severe, monumental landscape with its dark, elegant Arabian sons in their rags.”

Although Palestine, and later the State of Israel, would remain a passion of Einstein’s for the rest of his life, the impression left by his travel diaries and letters is that Japan interested him more. In an essay published in 1923, he contrasted Western culture with that of Japan, the former characterized by “individualism in the extreme, cut-throat competition exerting one’s utmost energy, feverish laboring to acquire as much luxury and indulgences as possible,” the latter by harmony and equanimity, strong family bonds and public civility enforced by social norms. He ended on a note of warning: “The Japanese rightfully admires the intellectual achievements of the West and immerses himself successfully and with great idealism in the sciences. But let him not thereby forget to keep pure the great attributes in which he is superior to the West—the artful shaping of life, modesty and unpretentiousness in his personal needs, and the purity and calm of the Japanese soul.”

It was less than a decade later that the purity and calm of the Japanese soul was crushed by the spirit of militarism that led to the invasion of Manchuria. Einstein, forced out of Germany by the Nazis, became honorary chairman of the U.S. War Resisters League. His suggestion for ending the fighting was for the leading Western powers to threaten Japan with an economic boycott, which he was certain would work. Instead, the war that drew in his adopted country and sunk the Japanese ships he had sailed on ended only with the deployment of a bomb whose awful power derived from the very law Einstein had set down years ago as a clerk in the Swiss patent office: E=mc2.

Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/albert-einstein-visited-japan-180968737/#7bIirT3oPXDjVPhw.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/albert-einstein-visited-japan-180968737/#7bIirT3oPXDjVPhw.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

 

 

 

とても興味深く読みました：

ゼロ除算の発見と重要性を指摘した：日本、再生核研究所

 

 

ゼロ除算は定義が問題です：

 

再生核研究所声明　１４８（2014.2.12）　100/0=0,  0/0=0　－　割り算の考えを自然に拡張すると　―　神の意志

 

再生核研究所声明１７１（2014.7.30）掛け算の意味と割り算の意味　―　ゼロ除算100/0=0は自明である？

 

ダ・ヴィンチの名言 格言｜無こそ最も素晴らしい存在

ゼロ除算の発見はどうでしょうか： 
Black holes are where God divided by zero： 

再生核研究所声明371（2017.6.27）ゼロ除算の講演―　国際会議　 
 

1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 

ソクラテス・プラトン・アリストテレス　その他 
 

ドキュメンタリー 2017: 神の数式 第２回 宇宙はなぜ生まれたのか 
 
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第3回 宇宙はなぜ始まったのか 
&t=3318s 
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第1回 この世は何からできているのか 
 
NHKスペシャル 神の数式 完全版 第4回 異次元宇宙は存在するか 
 

再生核研究所声明 411(2018.02.02): 　ゼロ除算発見4周年を迎えて 
 

再生核研究所声明 416(2018.2.20): 　ゼロ除算をやってどういう意味が有りますか。何か意味が有りますか。何になるのですか　－　回答 
再生核研究所声明 417(2018.2.23): 　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　中学生、高校生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 418(2018.2.24): 　割り算とは何ですか？　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　小学生、中学生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 420(2018.3.2): ゼロ除算は正しいですか，合っていますか、信用できますか　－　回答 

2018.3.18．午前中　最後の講�
�：　日本数学会　東大駒場、函数方程式論分科会　講演書画カメラ用　原稿 
The Japanese Mathematical Society, Annual Meeting at the University of Tokyo. 2018.3.18. 
 より

再生核研究所声明 424(2018.3.29): 　レオナルド・ダ・ヴィンチとゼロ除算

 

Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

私は数学を信じない。　アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。

1423793753.460.341866474681。

 

Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero

 

#divide by zero

TOP DEFINITION

  

A super-smart math teacher that teaches at HTHS and can divide by zero.

Hey look, that genius’s IQ is over 9000!

    

by  October 21, 2009

 

 

Dividing by zero is the biggest  known to mankind. It is a proven fact that a succesful division by zero will constitute in the implosion of the universe.

You are dividing by zero there, Johnny. Captain Kirk is not impressed.

Divide by zero?!?!! OMG!!! Epic failzorz

    

 

3

  

 by  is undefined.

Divide by zero is undefined.

    

by  October 28, 2006

 

1) The number one ingredient for a catastrophic event in which the universe enfolds and collapses on itself and life as we know it ceases to exist.

2) A mathematical equation such as a/0 whereas a is some number and 0 is the divisor. Look it up on  or something. Pretty confusing shit.

3) A reason for an error in programming

Hey, I divided by zero! …Oh shi-

a/0

Run-time error: ’11’: Division by zero

    

by  September 08, 2006

 

When even math shows you that not everything can be figured out with math. When you divide by zero, math kicks you in the shins and says “yeah, there’s kind of an answer, but it ain’t just some number.”

It’s when mathematicians become philosophers.

:
Let’s say you have ZERO apples, and THREE people. How many apples does each person get? ZERO, cause there were no apples to begin with

 because of dividing by zero:
Let’s say there are THREE apples, and ZERO people. How many apples does each person get? Friggin… How the  should I know! How can you figure out how many apples each person gets if there’s no people to get them?!? You’d think it’d be infinity, but not really. It could almost be any number, cause you could be like “each person gets 400 apples” which would be true, because all the people did get 400 apples, because there were no people. So all the people also got 42 apples, and a million and 7 apples. But it’s still wrong.

        

by  February 15, 2010

花粉も少しずつ落ち着いて来ましたね

Grey's Anatomy s12e14 Episode ScriptOdd Man Out1 Previously on "Grey's Anatomy" Dr.Hunt and I go back a bit.She's joining the program at Grey-Sloan Memorial.- Perfect Penny killed my husband.- Get her out of my house.Wilson, go away! If you're out with Grey, you're out, and I'm out.You just signed divorce papers, and you don't want a drink? - What are you, pregnant? - I think I am.You have to tell him.Obviously, I'm going to tell him when I'm ready.If you want to start over, forget all that, - well, let's do it.- Just like new? This is Major Thorpe.It's great what you did in there.I'm just glad I saw it.Well, we said we'll follow up, and we will.I'd like that to follow up with you.That guy definitely just asked for your number.And that's what flirting looks like.When babies are born, they usually come out crying like there's no tomorrow.It's loud.It's jarring.And it's completely unfair.That adorable, tiny baby was forced out of its mother's womb.And forced to breathe outside air into its brand-new little lungs.It's human nature.No one wants to be left out in the cold rejected and alone.I want to meet with the residents immediately.When a bedridden patient stays in one place, what's the outcome? - Bedsores.- Exactly.When a surgeon stays in one place, what's the outcome? One of us has bedsores? Stagnation.Complacency.A limited mind.You have a short time to learn here, people, and you've snuggled up to your specialties like a warm, comfy bed.Well, I am your alarm clock.I'm pulling you out of bed and broadening your education.This is a Resident Scramble.This is filled with attendings' names.Come on up and draw your new service at random.- Bingo, Shepherd.- Put it back! - But I - Back.Dr.Grey, I was told to report to - Did you see the scans? - Yeah, I'm sorry I'm late.I just got off the phone with Bauer Medical.They said that Carson's recovering well and his incision sites and flaps are doing great.That is great news.Yeah, Dr.Thorpe thought so, too.He also thought you might have given him the wrong number.Thorpe? Who is Thorpe? He has the right number.Oh, okay, so you're just gonna what, ignore his calls? Wait.Will someone please tell me what is going on and who "he" is? Meredith exchanged numbers with a hot military surgeon over at Bauer.He says he called but radio silence.What? It's nothing.Why wouldn't you tell me this? - Because it's nothing.- Mm-hmm.Wilson, are you following me? I'm with you today.I'm on your service.Blake is with me.No, actually, all of the residents were switched.You need to go talk to Blake, then, because I don't have the time to get you up to speed.So, how hot is hot? We have surgery.Hot.I heard there were puppies! I thought it'd weird, you know, the small talk, the eye contact, the polite eating, but really, it wasn't.I mean, she was nice.It was nice.So you're getting out there, huh? I don't know about that.I mean, it was sudden, but yeah, it was a date.Does Kepner know about it? No.No, and do not tell her, okay? Sure.Whatever.I mean, I'm not lying, you know? I just don't want her to hear it from someone else.I mean, I'll tell her, you know, when the time is right.Uh-huh.Uh, we all hear the dogs, right? There are dogs somewhere.Once a month, a rescue group brings in a bunch of puppies for the kids.It's good for morale and healing and crap.- No.- What's the matter? Okay, I'm on peds today.No.Hope you like dogs.Hey.Long night? 75-year-old man ran his car into an electrical pole.Electrocution and a big intracranial bleed.And a pacemaker implantation.Huh.Uh, so I booked a reservation around 8:00, so we should maybe head out around 7:00.That work? Yeah, I can do that.How fancy is this? Well, first date, so I took a big swing.Dr.Shepherd.Is this Mr.McColl? - Yes, Blake.- Why? The patient's wife is downstairs.Why are you telling me this? Where's Edwards? Dr.Webber mixed us up today.I pulled your service.No.- No? - No, where's the wife? She's downstairs in admitting.Dr.Webber told me Tell Dr.Webber I said no.Wait.I'm I'm in a whole other bracket? Well, yes.Your income has jumped significantly since last year and your husband's hasn't, so Are those our taxes? Hey, Chief, stop harassing my patient.Hey, people ask us for free medical advice all the time.It's not harassment unless I don't want to help her.I just had fetal surgery and I've been stuck on bed rest for weeks.Which is actually pretty great if you're an accountant during tax season nothing else to do but work.No distractions except, well, for this.See, um, I-I normally do our taxes.It's sort of my thing.But, uh, Courtney thinks that maybe we should change our filing status Hey, you.Out.You.Present.You can't tell me what to do.Fine.- I'll just - Yeah.Okay, I don't even Warren.Oh.Sorry.Um, just give me a minute to DeLuca.Okay, uh, Courtney Hall, 23 weeks pregnant.She's post-op from a fetal laser photocoagulation to separate a shared blood vessel between two of her babies.Wow, uh, quadruplets? Yeah.That's what I said when I found out.Oh, good.You got it.This is for you guys.No, you did not need to do that.Yes, we did.You are the reason all four of our little deductions are still alive right now.Babies.She means babies.You kept all four safe inside where they belong.And I get to lie here for eight more weeks.Yay.She means "thank you." Fetal medicine has its perks.Surgery? Oh, God.Well, his heart rhythm had become very erratic, probably due to the electrical shock, so I had to implant a pacemaker.Oh, no.Poor Griffin.The other concern is Griffin suffered a brain bleed, which I operated on.A brain bleed? Your husband will be awake soon, and we'll know more then.Oh, he's Well, Griffin's not my husband.- He's - Hello, Lena.How's my husband? I understand he's been in a terrible accident.I'm sorry.Uh, we thought you were the I am the wife.She's the slut he's been hitting on the side.It's been 11 years, Gayle.How is Griffin? Is he dead? His accident was severe.He needed surgery on his heart and his brain So, he's almost dead? We can take you to see him if I don't want to see him until he is dead.So, first, we need to check on Kim Coley's baby's tracheal balloon, and after that - Warren.- Hmm? - Go someplace else.- Why? 'Cause you're on my service, and I said so.- Hey.- Hey.- How you feeling? - Uh, good.How are you? How are you feeling? Fine.12 weeks and fine.Did you tell Jackson? I'm worried that you're doing this alone when you don't have to.I'm not.I'm not alone.I told you.Okay.Okay, okay.So, then, let's do this right.Let's get out in front of it.I think I'd like to start with booking a 3D ultrasound, and then, um, I'd like to run a genetic test to see if the fetus has osteogenesis imperfecta.No.April, I get it.With what you went through last time, you don't want a bunch of needles - being stuck in your belly - Arizona, I don't But I can do a CVS, and then if it's there, we'll see it and then we'll just we'll know.The baby's not getting tested.What? Why? Because my baby will be fine.She said, "Because my baby's fine!" O.I.can be diagnosed early.Why wouldn't she take the test? That's crazy.I know.Well, then Avery will have to convince her.She won't tell him.I don't I don't know what to do.Well, I'm not doing this.I'm not lying to my friends.No one's asking you to No one asking you to lie.I say, "Pass me the coffee," and I feel like I'm lying to him.Well, then, we need to talk to her."We"? I didn't want to know about this thing in the first place.Fine.I will talk to her.So what kind of surgeon is he? Oncology.We can work with that.Guessing 40s.Kind of tall.And he's ranked in the military, so he has an authoritative side.I can hear you.But you can't hear the phone ringing.Maybe her ringer's off.It's not.Suctioning.Sometimes your ringer is off, and it's been off for so long that you forget that it's off, and you need someone to help you figure out how to turn it back on.- But once it's on - Oh.Oh, that's it.Your ringer needs to be turned on.You've been on vibrate for too long.Shut up.If I answer, then he'll ask me out.And then I'll have to say no, and there will be a lot of back and forth, and I won't know when it's okay to hang up, so why answer? Dr.Grey, I saw all yo
ur clinic patients.Can I scrub in? Did you drain Mr.Kurtzman's wound? No.Okay, Blake, well, go get that done.- Wilson.- What? Forget it.See? Now you're mixing up your residents.You need to get that ringer turned on loud and fast.My ringer is fine.Are you almost done? I have three more returns to get through.Don't bother her during tax season.It's the first rule.Should be done in just a second.Um, okay, there's Baby A.Oh, there's Baby B.Yeah.She's gonna be a handful, right, hon? She's a kicker.And there's Baby D.And - Go get Robbins, would you? - Yeah.What? What? - Is something wrong? - Nothing.Nothing.It's, um It's quadruplets, right? - Yeah.- Why? I'm just, um I'm looking, and uh it's probably just me, but What? I can only find three babies in here.If I had known she wasn't actually his wife - You should have known.- You're right.You're absolutely right.I just didn't Get your facts straight before you let me go spilling medical information to just anybody.- You embarrassed me.- I'm sorry.She said that she was his Why are you even here? I said to tell Dr.Webber Dr.Webber said that he chooses to decline your proposal.Well, then take the day off.Dr.Webber rejected that, too.Watch his monitors, don't touch him, and stay out of my way.The nurse will bring up his personal things.These are patient pamphlets on pacemakers.Give it to the side piece.She can change his diaper.I'm waiting for the funeral.Mrs.McColl, your husband My husband, my dear, was a sweet man who turned into a philandering bastard who only cared about his money, which I should have known when he handed me that prenup for my wedding present.That thing is as tight as my Spanx.I see.If he dies and we are still married, I get his $30 million, which is way less than I deserve for putting up with that son of a bitch.But it'll have to do.I'm waiting him out.Well, I don't think we have to.He's 75 with a bum heart, high blood pressure, and a cracked skull.He probably won't even wake up.Right, Dr.Shepherd? We We're doing everything we can.You wouldn't screw with me, would you? Oh, Gayle, I wouldn't.There's not much hope.So there's hope.So if you want to just sit right over here and wait Why the hell Oh, come on.That's what she wanted to hear.It's refreshing.I mean, most family members are like, "Please, please, save him." I mean, this takes the pressure off us a bit.- Shepherd, I'm kidding.- That's dark.- Yeah, sorry.- Really funny, though.- Dr.Shepherd.- What? Mr.McColl's waking up.Ooh.I called that wrong.What Who the hell are you? Mr.McColl.Griffin, it's me.It's Lena.You've been in a pretty bad car wreck.You've had surgery Where's Gayle? Gayle! Where's Gayle? Griffin, just relax, okay? You need to calm down.Bugs! Help me.Bugs! He's hallucinating.Give him 5 of Haldol Bugs! He's calling me.I'm Bugs.He hasn't called me that in 30 years.There you are.Bugs, come here.Bugs, come here.Come here.Honey what's happening? What Just What happened? Where would he have gone? Nowhere.He's in here.Dr.Warren's just a little behind on his fetal medicine.- He's in here somewhere.- Good.We came in here with four babies and we want to leave with There! See, there he is.He's Just moved down.Why? To get away from his sisters? Courtney, I'm afraid that you're in labor.No, I can't - I can't be.It's too soon.- Months too soon.No, I can't have them now.They'll They'll all die.I can't be in labor.I know.I know.But you are.Am I even having contractions? I would notice, right? When the babies are this small, sometimes you don't even feel the contractions.Well, that's because she shouldn't be having them.Are you sure you're not wrong? No, I'm not wrong.From the position of Baby C Charles.We're calling him Charles.Okay, Doug.We're taking her into the O.R.In case something happens, we'll be ready.What? No one's coming today.- Doug - No! It's too soon! They they need more time, right? - Please.Do something.- I am.I can start her on medication to stop the labor and I can temporarily sew her cervix closed, and that might give us enough time.Might? Labor's like a boulder rolling down a hill.Once it starts, it's hard to stop.But you're stopping the boulder.I am.I am trying to stop the boulder.He doesn't remember me at all? A brain injury of this nature, it's not uncommon for some memory loss to have occurred.We've been together 11 years.He wanted a divorce, but she wouldn't Can I talk to him? Help him remember me? He's still confused and agitated.He's asking for It's best if you wait out here.Her? I took up with that lady? Why? Because you're a stupid son of a bitch, that's why.Heart rate's looking good.Wait, why would I take up with her when I have you? My wife.You are the funniest.She is.She's the funniest gal I've ever met.And you got the softest hands.It's soft as a rabbit's foot I had when I was - Uh, Griffin.Stop.- Go on.Feel them.I-I'll take your word for it.Eh, suit yourself.You're missing out.What happened, Bugs? What did I do? Uh, we fought.A lot.About money.Oh, I don't care about money.Yeah, well, you didn't when we met, but you've done very well for yourself.What did I do, Bugs? Why would I ever hurt you? Oh, I've been asking you that for decades.Dumbass.It's like a time machine.I'm good here.You can go.And magnesium's up.Okay, Courtney.We're gonna wait and see if this medication calms everybody down.And what do I do? Just lie here? Yeah, and try to relax.With four babies trying to get over the wall? And I still have 73 tax returns? Well, I said "try." Contractions increasing.Can I ask you something? If a couple's been married for three years, - why not file jointly? - Warren.- I'm just - No, no.It's okay.Well, that's not the problem.You guys have a pretty significant earnings disparity.Well, I I don't know if I'd call it "significant." It's more than 200%.A little more than that.Her income increase is raising your tax bill by a lot.This is relaxing me.Honestly, she shouldn't even be filing as an individual.- She should incorporate.- Page Kepner.Tell her to meet me in Exam Room Five.I will be back.Do not take your eyes off of these monitors.If there is any change in any of them, you get me back here.- Mm-hmm.- Ooh, theres' another option.You could both file as single individuals.Well, how's that? You could do what some of my clients have done.You could get divorced.Why would we For the taxes.Grey still ignores me.Gross, gross, gross.She refuses to fill me in on her patients.You can't restart Mrs.Wheeler on tube feeds yet.She had high residuals last time.Crap.I thought her ileus was resolved.- Crap! - Mnh-mnh.You know, this is urine.I've been urinated on three times today.What did you expect from babies? I'm talking about puppies dogs.There are puppies upstairs with the kids.Why aren't we up there right now? Because the only thing worse than peds is peds with puppies because we're surgeons, not veterinarians, because we should not be urinated upon.I'm being crapped on.You have to help me with Shepherd.Shepherd wants me dead.At least she knows who you are.Grey keeps calling me your name.That doesn't even sound new.Being kicked out bed was almost better because then she would see me - Jo.- She'd have to see my face to slam a door in it.All right, you get 10 more seconds.- What? - You get 10 seconds to complain about Meredith Grey.After that, you're done.No more talking about it again, ever.This is an excellent plan.How is this far? You talk and you talk about Grey, but you don't do anything to change the situation.You get 10 seconds.After that, the only person you can talk to about Meredith Grey is Meredith Grey.- I can't say it all in 10 seconds.- No, 'cause you have 7.What am I supposed to say to her? - She's the head of - 5.A friend would listen.A friend would not Time.Never again.Can I just say one more Ever.Hey.I got your page.What do you need? Hey.Do you trust me? Arizona, I am swamped, and I mean, I'm the only one that you ever told, so do you trust me? Yes, of course.I trust you.I can feel the boulder starting to roll, and I need to stop it.So if you trust me, then let me help you.And you have to let me help you my way.Which means that you need to tell Jackson.And you need to let me give you a full wor
k-up.You're acting like I'm not taking care of myself, but I am a doctor.I'm not stupid.I'm just not interested in getting certain tests.I don't want you going through what you went through last time, April.I'm not worried about me.I am! And I am trying to help you get what you want, which is a healthy baby.One that's not gonna go through horrible pain.Isn't that what you want? - Dr.Robbins.- Not now, DeLuca.Dr.Warren sent me.It's Courtney.Oh, thank God you're back.You say her contractions are more regular? Yeah, and Baby C is getting - Charles.- Charles is showing recurrent decels.Okay, Courtney.I think that Charles is still trying to make a break for it.What? How do you know? Because I'm holding his feet.How could she not know she was birthing a baby? It's a quad at 23 weeks.He's about the size of your hand.Quads.Going from one litter to another.Peds is weird.We'll need at least two full NICU teams - down here for the transport.- Okay.I'm just saying.I have done our taxes every year.Why change it up now? There was never a reason until now.Things changed this year.No, one thing changed this year, Miranda.One thing your job! It was a pretty big change.I need warmers and neonatal resuscitation trays, and if you don't have to be in here, get out.It's about to get crowded.Hi, Courtney.My name's Dr.Karev.You're the OUT guy.We met you during our tour of the NICU.I am, and I can assure you, we're gonna do everything we can No, no, no.Don't you talk to me.Dr.Robbins talks to me.Dr.Robbins is the "in" guy.She's the one.These babies are staying in.Dr.Robbins is "in." You're keeping them in, right? It's Charles, right? Courtney, Charles already made up his mind.He's partially out, and once he's completely out, - they all come out.- Dr.Robbins.Promise me that they're gonna survive, that they'll live once their out.All four babies.I need four umbilical line set-ups.Warren.Wait.Just one.- I'm sorry? - I said one set-up! - Go.- What are you doing? I'm stopping the boulder! Heading up to check on McColl's vitals.Make sure Blake's watching monitors.What is Blake's problem? What don't you like about her? She seems on top of it to me, so what am I not seeing? She's No, she's I'm the new guy.So if she's the dead fish, I'd like to know.It's personal between her and me.You can form your own conclusions.Aww.That's kind of you.Must be nice for Blake.What does that mean? Oh, come on.You and Hunt are obviously pretty tight.I'm sure you've formed some conclusions about me.We should go to the steakhouse we went to after our honeymoon.That place isn't even there anymore.Oh.I'm sorry, guys.Can I get in here a second, please? What's Something wrong? Mr.McColl, can you squeeze my hands as hard as you can, okay? - Follow the light.- Blake, what is it? Page Shepherd immediately.His ICP is climbing.He needs a ventriculostomy, stat.Start a ketamine drip and grab an intubation kit.What is going on? Ma'am, we are going to help him, but I need you outside.Have you ever done a ventriculostomy? Yes, but I'm not supposed to touch him, so Can you do one? I'm not supposed to touch him.You're the neurosurgeon on call.Shepherd said no, so I'm not gonna drill a hole in his head.Would you please just do it? You're running out of time, Blake.So I'm gonna deliver Charles, I'm gonna stop labor, sew up the cervix, and then leave the rest of the three inside for delayed delivery.- That's impossible.- Yes.Once Charles is out, she'll keep having contractions to deliver the placenta.They'll all deliver.It's how it works.Okay, fine.Fine, great.Then I don't deliver Charles' placenta.After I cut the cord, I sterilize it.I put it back inside, and we put Mom on antibiotics.Do you know how dangerous that is? If that placenta stays in, it could cause an infection, even sepsis.It puts Mom at risk, all three babies at Alex, I am a fetal surgeon! I know more about this than you do.I know exactly how they can die.Have you done this before? Has Nicole Herman? No.I I don't know that anyone has.- Oh, Robbins.- Don't please stop.Stop.I know that you're gonna say no, and I don't want to be in a position where I go against you.I know that this is a judgment call, but your judgment is not better here.I know what has to be done, and this is the only way that I know how to do it.Okay, what I was going to say Good luck.Y-You're gonna let her I'm gonna let her do what she's here to do.And I suggest you do the same.What are you doing? His ICP was through the roof.Evidence of herniation.He needed a burr hole to Relieve the pressure.Don't tell me what a ventric is.- Why would you let her do this? - 'Cause she caught it.And she could.Get out of my way.Get away from him.Ventriculostomy catheter.Did you prep for the EGD? No.I prepped for a colonoscopy.When you said scope, I assumed that that's But I don't need you to assume anything.Never mind.Blake knew we were checking for an upper G.I.bleed.It's just - I'm sorry.Let me go and - It's fine.You're just not Blake, and so let's prep for the EGD and page me when we're ready.No.I'm not Blake.I'm Wilson.Jo Wilson.Dr.Josephine Alice Wilson.I'm a surgeon.I'm a human being.I'm not some stupid lump that you can just kick around or talk down to or talk down about or dismiss and discount.I get it.You don't like me, but I'm here.I'm in Alex's life, and I'm staying.And you have to start respecting that.I don't know where you're getting this.I'm trying to move forward, okay? And I can't because you're always around the corner blocking my way, making everything so damn hard.You are overreacting.No, I'm not.That's exactly what I'm talking about.I'm done.I'm done with all of it.You know, call your damn Army guy back and get your own boyfriend.Are you finished? Oh my Okay, are you ready? - Just Charles? - Just Charles.His sisters will just have to deal with the fact that he wanted to come out first.Typical boy.Okay.Okay.That's good.It's safer that way, right? They get more time? Courtney, I need you to hold on for a little bit longer, okay? I need you to trust me.- Can you do that? Can you trust me? - I'm sorry.It's just can Doug be in here? We had always talked about the delivery and No, we can't risk any additional bacteria during the procedure.It's it's just too dangerous for you and for the babies.Okay.Warren.Can you Absolutely.Don't forget that you need to - Eyes on monitors.- Okay.All right.Okay, Courtney.I just need the tiniest little push.Okay, ready? Okay, good.Good, good, good, good, good.Good, good.Okay.Okay, clamp.Karev.Right here.Okay.Okay.What's happening? Everything's happening exactly like it should.You just breathe.Okay.Okay.Here we go.His CT showed he's having a re-bleed.I will operate, but the fact that it's bleeding again it's not good.And when he wakes up, will he be the same, or? Will you please go away? This is between me and my husband.So please go.Will he be the same? There's just no way of knowing.I just got him back.I lost 33 years with that old jerk.Only a man that I could love that much would make me feel so angry.I just want him back.I just I just want to have the chance to love him again.Blake, find Edwards and tell her to meet me in O.R.One.Yep.Shepherd, you don't have time to go chasing around after Edwards.You need to be in there now.Blake.Wait.No significant post-op changes.- That's good.- Yep.He's called how many times now? Oh, God.Just give me the phone.I'll send him a nice blow-off text.No, not a text.She is not a monster.But Callie's right, Mer.We need a plan.We don't need anything.God, between you and Wilson What about Wilson Oh, she just tore into me about how I treat her like crap.She really lost it.What? You you kind of treat Wilson like a - Like Callie.- Like a gnat.- Yeah.- You s-swat her.Well, that's what we do to residents.I've seen you guys swat.We're all hard on residents.We swat.Yeah, but we like them.Yeah, I like Wilson.Do you? Suction.There's too much swelling.I want to talk you through it.I want to tell you what I did and why.Blake, I don't need your excuses now.It's not for me.It's for you.I think you'd like to know what happens when you're not here.Edwards says you like that.Just Suction.I was tracking his vitals.He was bradying d
own slowly and becoming hypotensive.He had a dilated pupil.All classic signs of raised intracranial pressure.I knew that he need the ventric, so I asked Dr.Riggs to prepare it.He thought I was qualified.I knew I was qualified.Suction.More.Then what? I used your craniometric method for the drilling site Prepared it adequately.I identified Kocher's point at 11 centimeters, then All right, Betadine.More.Just pour the entire bottle on the cord.- Karev, how are we doing back there? - Uh, APGAR score is 3.I need a smaller tube.- That's a 3.- Then get me a 2.- Alex! - Give me a minute! - Endoloops.- Is Charles okay? Dr.Karev is just trying to get some air into his lungs.She's still having contractions.Okay, uh, increase the magnesium rate.Uh, you know what? Um, I'm still confused.Take me through the deductions again.Um, okay.First, the obvious.Do you have any dependants? Uh, we do.We do.Uh, one.A son.Me, too.I have a son now, too.You're just packing.Should we resuscitate? No.He's gone.He herniated.He was brain-dead minutes ago.Time of death, 18:09.Did I Was it what I No.No.You were perfect.He didn't make it.Should I find Gayle? - No, I will.- No, I'll go.I mean, you have plans, right? I'll tell her.But thank you.Yeah, no worries.Let's go, Blake.Is he stable? A little hypotensive but oxygenating well, which is something for his size, so So we got all four.You got all four.Thank God.How's Courtney? She's stable.She's back in her room with three fetal heartbeats.It'll be day to day to see if it works, but Well, even just a day or two more inside - will help the other three.- Yeah.Look, you know I didn't agree with the whole thing.I didn't think it would work, but Hmm.Karev.Are you trying to give me a compliment? I'm saying no one else could have done what you did.Did you talk to Kepner? I tried.I just I don't I don't think that she hears me.We We have to do something.Yeah.I know.Hi! Dr.Robbins? You ready to meet your son? Yeah.Here we go, hon.There he is.Courtney: Hi! Hi, baby.Oh, he's so beautiful! Hi! Hi, baby.Hi! Hi! Hi! - rest your head - You paged? Um, Robbins has requested you for her service for the foreseeable future.Apparently, you're really good with the moms.Yeah, I'm not.I just did what Robbins No, you helped that woman through the scariest hours of her life.I did, didn't I? Yes, you did.And you got us a new accountant.Wait, what? I hired Courtney to do our taxes for us.'Cause, you know, so many things have changed, and, um, we're both so busy and Well, you're a resident, and You're the Chief.I am.Are you okay with that? I just, um It's just less work for you, I was thinking.Yeah.Yeah, of course.Okay.So I'm just gonna go finish Robbins' rounds.Okay.- See you at home? - Yeah, see you at home.I'm I'm sorry.What are we doing here? You got to tell him.If he figures it out, sooner or later God.Look, he's gonna hear it from someone else.Uh-huh.Look, I'm just saying the longer you wait, the worse it's gonna be.- Mm-hmm.- And you got to listen to Robbins.Wow.You and Arizona.Y-You're a great team.Well, we just want No, it's sweet.Thank you.Really.You're so invested.You're like the Supreme Court just trying to tell a woman what she can and can't do.I don't want to see you guys get hurt again.Well, neither do I! I'm not telling him because we have been through enough.Especially him.Because he never got over the last one.He never had the chance to, and I am hanging on to every last shred of faith I have that this time, it'll be okay.But he doesn't have that.So it'll just be better if he doesn't know yet.It won't.You're making it worse.You're right.I am hard on you.Alex hasn't had it easy.Everyone he's ever been with has run away or stolen his job or gone crazy or broken his heart.None of them stick.And he doesn't deserve to take another hit.But the point is, I I am sorry for for squashing you like a bug or whatever it is that I do.Thank you.But, you know, you are what you allow.And if you let them pluck off your shiny little insect wings, they will.Um okay.So don't let them.Don't let me.Understood? Yeah.And for the record, Wilson I am rooting for you to stick.Hey.Are we not going? I'm sorry.I have not had a chance to change.This day.Ah.We're canceling.No.No.I I just I lost a patient.And his wife lost him, too.Was it Riggs? Did he do something No.No, Riggs was great.I can see why you liked him.It was Blake.Blake lost your patient? Not at all.Blake has microscope hands a level head more assured in the O.R.than any resident I have ever seen.She's a natural neurosurgeon.And now I have to teach her.I owe it to her to teach her.Dinner's off.No.No.Owen, I can rally.No.No.It is off.Come with me.Come on.You know, I really don't like surprises.You'll like this one.Excuse me, can we get five minutes before you leave? - Yeah.- Five minutes? For what, exactly? Come on.Let's go.Studies have shown that petting a dog can actually lower blood pressure.Owen.And they make a really crappy day a lot less crappy.Aww.Affection, acceptance, and unconditional love.We all want it.We all look for it.Nice night.See, right about now, you're thinking I'm some kind of stalker.Yeah, I've called.And I've texted.Because I wanted to see you again.And I thought I'd ask you out, but I can't do that if you don't call me back.I thought I'd show up here, ask you.That way, if you wanted to turn me down, you'd have to do it in person.Looking at my very nice face makes it hard to say no.So, what do you say, Dr.Grey? Would you like to go out with me? But when we find it it's flat-out terrifying.Um, have you seen Dr.Avery? Upstairs in the lab.Because just as quickly as we may have found it it can disappear.Jackson, can we And we're back out there in the cold.Why is she telling me this? Oh.Alone.Read more: https://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv-show=greys-anatomy&episode=s12e14

特集：科学書に見る知の源流

科学はいかに生まれたか

坂本邦暢（明治大学） 山本貴光（文筆家・ゲーム作家） デイヴィッド・ドイチュ（オックスフォード大学）

この世界の成り立ちを理解したい。人間は太古の昔からそんな欲求を抱いてきた。それは宗教を生み，占星術をもたらし，哲学を育んだ。その中から仮説の構築と観測による検証という科学の方法論が立ち現れた。近代科学への胎動は16世紀半ばから始まり，コペルニクス，ガリレオ，ケプラー，デカルト，ホイヘンス，ライプニッツらによって発展。17世紀にニュートンが構築した力学によって，その基礎が確立した。先人たちが知を積み上げ，影響し合いながら科学の体系を作り上げていった道程は，彼らが著した書物によって今に伝えられている。

 

そうした歴史的書物の世界有数のコレクションが，日本にある。金沢工業大学の「工学の曙文庫」だ。アリストテレスからハイゼンベルクまで，世界の科学をつくってきた2000冊余を収蔵する。この9月，その蔵書が東京で公開される。この機に代表的な書物を改めて繙き，科学がいかに生まれたか，3人の識者に聞いた。

 

ケプラー『世界の調和』　神からのメッセージを数学と統合

語り：坂本邦暢／聞き手：橋本麻里

デカルト『哲学原理』　宗教から独立，科学の方法論の先駆け

語り：山本貴光／聞き手：石戸諭

ニュートン『プリンキピア』，ダーウィン『種の起源』　今ある事実を見えざる過程で語る

語り：デイヴィッド・ドイチュ／聞き手：古田 彩

 

坂本邦暢（さかもと・くにのぶ）
1982年生まれ。明治大学文学部常勤講師。専門はルネサンス，初期近代の哲学・科学史。
橋本麻里（はしもと・まり）
日本美術を主な領域とするライター・エディター，公益財団法人永青文庫副館長。

山本貴光（やまもと・たかみつ）
慶應義塾大学環境情報学部卒業。ゲーム作家，文筆家。『「百学連環」を読む』（三省堂，2016年），『高校生のためのゲームで考える人工知能』（筑摩書房，2018年）など著訳書多数。
石戸諭（いしど・さとる）
記者，ノンフィクションライター。1984年生まれ。毎日新聞社，BuzzFeed Japanを経て独立。単著に『リスクと生きる，死者と生きる』（亜紀書房）。

デイヴィッド・ドイチュ（David Deutsch）
オックスフォード大学客員教授。量子コンピューター理論を提唱。著書『無限の始まり : ひとはなぜ限りない可能性をもつのか』（インターシフト）
古田 彩
日経サイエンス編集長。

 

ゼロ除算の発見は日本です：

∞？？？    

∞は定まった数ではない・

人工知能はゼロ除算ができるでしょうか：

 

とても興味深く読みました：2014年2月2日　4周年を超えました：

ゼロ除算の発見と重要性を指摘した：日本、再生核研究所

 

 

ゼロ除算関係論文・本

 

2017年11月15日(水)
テーマ：

The null set is conceptually similar to the role of the number “zero” as it is used in quantum field theory. In quantum field theory, one can take the empty set, the vacuum, and generate all possible physical configurations of the Universe being modelled by acting on it with creation operators, and one can similarly change from one thing to another by applying mixtures of creation and anihillation operators to suitably filled or empty states. The anihillation operator applied to the vacuum, however, yields zero.

Zero in this case is the null set – it stands, quite literally, for no physical state in the Universe. The important point is that it is not possible to act on zero with a creation operator to create something; creation operators only act on the vacuum which is empty but not zero. Physicists are consequently fairly comfortable with the existence of operations that result in “nothing” and don’t even require that those operations be contradictions, only operationally non-invertible.

It is also far from unknown in mathematics. When considering the set of all real numbers as quantities and the operations of ordinary arithmetic, the “empty set” is algebraically the number zero (absence of any quantity, positive or negative). However, when one performs a division operation algebraically, one has to be careful to exclude division by zero from the set of permitted operations! The result of division by zero isn’t zero, it is “not a number” or “undefined” and is not in the Universe of real numbers.

Just as one can easily “prove” that 1 = 2 if one does algebra on this set of numbers as if one can divide by zero legitimately3.34, so in logic one gets into trouble if one assumes that the set of all things that are in no set including the empty set is a set within the algebra, if one tries to form the set of all sets that do not include themselves, if one asserts a Universal Set of Men exists containing a set of men wherein a male barber shaves all men that do not shave themselves3.35.

It is not – it is the null set, not the empty set, as there can be no male barbers in a non-empty set of men (containing at least one barber) that shave all men in that set that do not shave themselves at a deeper level than a mere empty list. It is not an empty set that could be filled by some algebraic operation performed on Real Male Barbers Presumed to Need Shaving in trial Universes of Unshaven Males as you can very easily see by considering any particular barber, perhaps one named “Socrates”, in any particular Universe of Men to see if any of the sets of that Universe fit this predicate criterion with Socrates as the barber. Take the empty set (no men at all). Well then there are no barbers, including Socrates, so this cannot be the set we are trying to specify as it clearly must contain at least one barber and we’ve agreed to call its relevant barber Socrates. (and if it contains more than one, the rest of them are out of work at the moment).

Suppose a trial set contains Socrates alone. In the classical rendition we ask, does he shave himself? If we answer “no”, then he is a member of this class of men who do not shave themselves and therefore must shave himself. Oops. Well, fine, he must shave himself. However, if he does shave himself, according to the rules he can only shave men who don’t shave themselves and so he doesn’t shave himself. Oops again. Paradox. When we try to apply the rule to a potential Socrates to generate the set, we get into trouble, as we cannot decide whether or not Socrates should shave himself.

Note that there is no problem at all in the existential set theory being proposed. In that set theory either Socrates must shave himself as All Men Must Be Shaven and he’s the only man around. Or perhaps he has a beard, and all men do not in fact need shaving. Either way the set with just Socrates does not contain a barber that shaves all men because Socrates either shaves himself or he doesn’t, so we shrug and continue searching for a set that satisfies our description pulled from an actual Universe of males including b
arbers. We immediately discover that adding more men doesn’t matter. As long as those men, barbers or not, either shave themselves or Socrates shaves them they are consistent with our set description (although in many possible sets we find that hey, other barbers exist and shave other men who do not shave themselves), but in no case can Socrates (as our proposed single barber that shaves all men that do not shave themselves) be such a barber because he either shaves himself (violating the rule) or he doesn’t (violating the rule). Instead of concluding that there is a paradox, we observe that the criterion simply doesn’t describe any subset of any possible Universal Set of Men with no barbers, including the empty set with no men at all, or any subset that contains at least Socrates for any possible permutation of shaving patterns including ones that leave at least some men unshaven altogether.

 

 I understand your note as if you are saying the limit is infinity but nothing is equal to infinity, but you concluded corretly infinity is undefined. Your example of getting the denominator smaller and smalser the result of the division is a very large number that approches infinity. This is the intuitive mathematical argument that plunged philosophy into mathematics. at that level abstraction mathematics, as well as phyisics become the realm of philosophi. The notion of infinity is more a philosopy question than it is mathamatical. The reason we cannot devide by zero is simply axiomatic as Plato pointed out. The underlying reason for the axiom is because sero is nothing and deviding something by nothing is undefined. That axiom agrees with the notion of limit infinity, i.e. undefined. There are more phiplosphy books and thoughts about infinity in philosophy books than than there are discussions on infinity in math books.

 

 

ゼロ除算の歴史：ゼロ除算はゼロで割ることを考えるであるが、アリストテレス以来問題とされ、ゼロの記録がインドで初めて６２８年になされているが、既にそのとき、正解1/0が期待されていたと言う。しかし、理論づけられず、その後１３００年を超えて、不可能である、あるいは無限、無限大、無限遠点とされてきたものである。

An Early Reference to Division by Zero C. B. Boyer

 

OUR HUMANITY AND DIVISION BY ZERO

Lea esta bitácora en español
There is a mathematical concept that says that division by zero has no meaning, or is an undefined expression, because it is impossible to have a real number that could be multiplied by zero in order to obtain another number different from zero.
While this mathematical concept has been held as true for centuries, when it comes to the human level the present situation in global societies has, for a very long time, been contradicting it. It is true that we don’t all live in a mathematical world or with mathematical concepts in our heads all the time. However, we cannot deny that societies around the globe are trying to disprove this simple mathematical concept: that division by zero is an impossible equation to solve.
Yes! We are all being divided by zero tolerance, zero acceptance, zero love, zero compassion, zero willingness to learn more about the other and to find intelligent and fulfilling ways to adapt to new ideas, concepts, ways of doing things, people and cultures. We are allowing these ‘zero denominators’ to run our equations, our lives, our souls.
Each and every single day we get more divided and distanced from other people who are different from us. We let misinformation and biased concepts divide us, and we buy into these aberrant concepts in such a way, that we get swept into this division by zero without checking our consciences first.
I believe, however, that if we change the zeros in any of the “divisions by zero” that are running our lives, we will actually be able to solve the non-mathematical concept of this equation: the human concept.
>I believe deep down that we all have a heart, a conscience, a brain to think with, and, above all, an immense desire to learn and evolve. And thanks to all these positive things that we do have within, I also believe that we can use them to learn how to solve our “division by zero” mathematical impossibility at the human level. I am convinced that the key is open communication and an open heart. Nothing more, nothing less.
Are we scared of, or do we feel baffled by the way another person from another culture or country looks in comparison to us? Are we bothered by how people from other cultures dress, eat, talk, walk, worship, think, etc.? Is this fear or bafflement so big that we much rather reject people and all the richness they bring within?
How about if instead of rejecting or retreating from that person—division of our humanity by zero tolerance or zero acceptance—we decided to give them and us a chance?
How about changing that zero tolerance into zero intolerance? Why not dare ask questions about the other person’s culture and way of life? Let us have the courage to let our guard down for a moment and open up enough for this person to ask us questions about our culture and way of life. How about if we learned to accept that while a person from another culture is living and breathing in our own culture, it is totally impossible for him/her to completely abandon his/her cultural values in order to become what we want her to become?
Let’s be totally honest with ourselves at least: Would any of us really renounce who we are and where we come from just to become what somebody else asks us to become?
If we are not willing to lose our identity, why should we ask somebody else to lose theirs?
I believe with all my heart that if we practiced positive feelings—zero intolerance, zero non-acceptance, zero indifference, zero cruelty—every day, the premise that states that division by zero is impossible would continue being true, not only in mathematics, but also at the human level. We would not be divided anymore; we would simply be building a better world for all of us.
Hoping to have touched your soul in a meaningful way,
Adriana Adarve, Asheville, NC
…/our-humanity-and-division…/

 

5000年？？？？？

2017年09月01日(金)NEW ! 
テーマ：数学
Former algebraic approach was formally perfect, but it merely postulated existence of sets and morphisms [18] without showing methods to construct them. The primary concern of modern algebras is not how an operation can be performed, but whether it maps into or onto and the like abstract issues [19–23]. As important as this may be for proofs, the nature does not really care about all that. The PM’s concerns were not constructive, even though theoretically significant. We need thus an approach that is more relevant to operations performed in nature, which never complained about morphisms or the allegedly impossible division by zero, as far as I can tell. Abstract sets and morphisms should be de-emphasized as hardly operational. My decision to come up with a definite way to implement the feared division by zero was not really arbitrary, however. It has removed a hidden paradox from number theory and an obvious absurd from algebraic group theory. It was necessary step for full deployment of constructive, synthetic mathematics (SM) [2,3]. Problems hidden in PM implicitly affect all who use mathematics, even though we may not always be aware of their adverse impact on our thinking. Just take a look at the paradox that emerges from the usual prescription for multiplication of zeros that remained uncontested for some 5000 years 0
0 ¼ 0 ) 0
1=1 ¼ 0 ) 0
1 ¼ 0
1) 1ð? ¼ ?Þ1 ð0aÞ This ‘‘fact’’ was covered up by the infamous prohibition on division by zero [2]. How ingenious. If one is prohibited from dividing by zero one could not obtain this paradox. Yet the prohibition did not really make anything right. It silenced objections to irres
ponsible reasonings and prevented corrections to the PM’s flamboyant axiomatizations. The prohibition on treating infinity as invertible counterpart to zero did not do any good either. We use infinity in calculus for symbolic calculations of limits [24], for zero is the infinity’s twin [25], and also in projective geometry as well as in geometric mapping of complex numbers. Therein a sphere is cast onto the plane that is tangent to it and its free (opposite) pole in a point at infinity [26–28]. Yet infinity as an inverse to the natural zero removes the whole absurd (0a), for we obtain [2] 0 ¼ 1=1 ) 0
0 ¼ 1=12 > 0 0 ð0bÞ Stereographic projection of complex numbers tacitly contradicted the PM’s prescribed way to multiply zeros, yet it was never openly challenged. The old formula for multiplication of zeros (0a) is valid only as a practical approximation, but it is group-theoretically inadmissible in no-nonsense reasonings. The tiny distinction in formula (0b) makes profound theoretical difference for geometries and consequently also for physical applications. T

とても興味深く読みました：

 

 

10,000 Year Clock
by Renny Pritikin
Conversation with Paolo Salvagione, lead engineer on the 10,000-year clock project, via e-mail in February 2010.

For an introduction to what we’re talking about here’s a short excerpt from a piece by Michael Chabon, published in 2006 in Details: ….Have you heard of this thing? It is going to be a kind of gigantic mechanical computer, slow, simple and ingenious, marking the hour, the day, the year, the century, the millennium, and the precession of the equinoxes, with a huge orrery to keep track of the immense ticking of the six naked-eye planets on their great orbital mainspring. The Clock of the Long Now will stand sixty feet tall, cost tens of millions of dollars, and when completed its designers and supporters plan to hide it in a cave in the Great Basin National Park in Nevada, a day’s hard walking from anywhere. Oh, and it’s going to run for ten thousand years. But even if the Clock of the Long Now fails to last ten thousand years, even if it breaks down after half or a quarter or a tenth that span, this mad contraption will already have long since fulfilled its purpose. Indeed the Clock may have accomplished its greatest task before it is ever finished, perhaps without ever being built at all. The point of the Clock of the Long Now is not to measure out the passage, into their unknown future, of the race of creatures that built it. The point of the Clock is to revive and restore the whole idea of the Future, to get us thinking about the Future again, to the degree if not in quite the way same way that we used to do, and to reintroduce the notion that we don’t just bequeath the future—though we do, whether we think about it or not. We also, in the very broadest sense of the first person plural pronoun, inherit it.

Renny Pritikin: When we were talking the other day I said that this sounds like a cross between Borges and the vast underground special effects from Forbidden Planet. I imagine you hear lots of comparisons like that…

Paolo Salvagione: (laughs) I can’t say I’ve heard that comparison. A childhood friend once referred to the project as a cross between Tinguely and Fabergé. When talking about the clock, with people, there’s that divide-by-zero moment (in the early days of computers to divide by zero was a sure way to crash the computer) and I can understand why. Where does one place, in one’s memory, such a thing, such a concept? After the pause, one could liken it to a reboot, the questions just start streaming out.

RP: OK so I think the word for that is nonplussed. Which the thesaurus matches with flummoxed, bewildered, at a loss. So the question is why even (I assume) fairly sophisticated people like your friends react like that. Is it the physical scale of the plan, or the notion of thinking 10,000 years into the future—more than the length of human history?

PS: I’d say it’s all three and more. I continue to be amazed by the specificity of the questions asked. Anthropologists ask a completely different set of questions than say, a mechanical engineer or a hedge fund manager. Our disciplines tie us to our perspectives. More than once, a seemingly innocent question has made an impact on the design of the clock. It’s not that we didn’t know the answer, sometimes we did, it’s that we hadn’t thought about it from the perspective of the person asking the question. Back to your question. I think when sophisticated people, like you, thread this concept through their own personal narrative it tickles them. Keeping in mind some people hate to be tickled.

RP: Can you give an example of a question that redirected the plan? That’s really so interesting, that all you brainiacs slaving away on this project and some amateur blithely pinpoints a problem or inconsistency or insight that spins it off in a different direction. It’s like the butterfly effect.

PS: Recently a climatologist pointed out that our equation of time cam, (photo by Rolfe Horn) (a cam is a type of gear: link) a device that tracks the difference between solar noon and mundane noon as well as the precession of the equinoxes, did not account for the redistribution of water away from the earth’s poles. The equation-of-time cam is arguably one of the most aesthetically pleasing parts of the clock. It also happens to be one that is fairly easy to explain. It visually demonstrates two extremes. If you slice it, like a loaf of bread, into 10,000 slices each slice would represent a year. The outside edge of the slice, let’s call it the crust, represents any point in that year, 365 points, 365 days. You could, given the right amount of magnification, divide it into hours, minutes, even seconds. Stepping back and looking at the unsliced cam the bottom is the year 2000 and the top is the year 12000. The twist that you see is the precession of the equinoxes. Now here’s the fun part, there’s a slight taper to the twist, that’s the slowing of the earth on its axis. As the ice at the poles melts we have a redistribution of water, we’re all becoming part of the “slow earth” movement.

RP: Are you familiar with Charles Ray’s early work in which you saw a plate on a table, or an object on the wall, and they looked stable, but were actually spinning incredibly slowly, or incredibly fast, and you couldn’t tell in either case? Or, more to the point, Tim Hawkinson’s early works in which he had rows of clockwork gears that turned very very fast, and then down the line, slower and slower, until at the end it approached the slowness that you’re dealing with?

PS: The spinning pieces by Ray touches on something we’re trying to avoid. We want you to know just how fast or just how slow the various parts are moving. The beauty of the Ray piece is that you can’t tell, fast, slow, stationary, they all look the same. I’m not familiar with the Hawkinson clockwork piece. I’ve see the clock pieces where he hides the mechanism and uses unlikely objects as the hands, such as the brass clasp on the back of a manila envelope or the tab of a coke can.

RP: Spin Sink (1 Rev./100 Years) (1995), in contrast, is a 24-foot-long row of interlocking gears, the smallest of which is driven by a whirring toy motor that in turn drives each consecutively larger and more slowly turning gear up to the largest of all, which rotates approximately once every one hundred years.

PS: I don’t know how I missed it, it’s gorgeous. Linking the speed that we can barely see with one that we rarely have the patience to wait for.

RP: : So you say you’ve opted for the clock’s time scale to be transparent. How will the clock communicate how fast it’s going?

PS: By placing the clock in a mountain we have a reference to long time. The stratigraphy provides us with the slowest metric. The clock is a middle point between millennia and seconds. Looking back 10,000 years we find
the beginnings of civilization. Looking at an earthenware vessel from that era we imagine its use, the contents, the craftsman. The images painted or inscribed on the outside provide some insight into the lives and the languages of the distant past. Often these interpretations are flawed, biased or over-reaching. What I’m most enchanted by is that we continue to construct possible pasts around these objects, that our curiosity is overwhelming. We line up to see the treasures of Tut, or the remains of frozen ancestors. With the clock we are asking you to create possible futures, long futures, and with them the narratives that made them happen.

 

ダ・ヴィンチの名言 格言｜無こそ最も素晴らしい存在

 

ゼロ除算の発見はどうでしょうか： 
Black holes are where God divided by zero： 

再生核研究所声明371（2017.6.27）ゼロ除算の講演―　国際会議　 
 

1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 

ソクラテス・プラトン・アリストテレス　その他 
 

ドキュメンタリー 2017: 神の数式 第２回 宇宙はなぜ生まれたのか 
 
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第3回 宇宙はなぜ始まったのか 
&t=3318s 
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第1回 この世は何からできているのか 
 
NHKスペシャル 神の数式 完全版 第4回 異次元宇宙は存在するか 
 

再生核研究所声明 411(2018.02.02): 　ゼロ除算発見4周年を迎えて 
 

再生核研究所声明 416(2018.2.20): 　ゼロ除算をやってどういう意味が有りますか。何か意味が有りますか。何になるのですか　－　回答 
再生核研究所声明 417(2018.2.23): 　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　中学生、高校生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 418(2018.2.24): 　割り算とは何ですか？　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　小学生、中学生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 420(2018.3.2): ゼロ除算は正しいですか，合っていますか、信用できますか　－　回答 
再生核研究所声明 427(2018.5.8): 神の数式、神の意志　そしてゼロ除算
2018.3.18．午前中　最後の講演：　日本数学会　東大駒場、函数方程式論分科会　講演書画カメラ用　原稿 
The Japanese Mathematical Society, Annual Meeting at the University of Tokyo. 2018.3.18. 
 より

 

*057 Pinelas,S./Caraballo,T./Kloeden,P./Graef,J.(eds.): Differential and Difference Equations with Applications: ICDDEA, Amadora, 2017. (Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics, Vol. 230) May 2018 587 pp. 

 

再生核研究所声明 424(2018.3.29): 　レオナルド・ダ・ヴィンチとゼロ除算

 

 

Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

 

私は数学を信じない。　アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。

1423793753.460.341866474681。

 

Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero

 

 

ゼロ除算は定義が問題です：

 

再生核研究所声明　１４８（2014.2.12）　100/0=0,  0/0=0　－　割り算の考えを自然に拡張すると　―　神の意志 

 

再生核研究所声明１７１（2014.7.30）掛け算の意味と割り算の意味　―　ゼロ除算100/0=0は自明である？

 

 

Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

 

私は数学を信じない。　アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。1423793753.460.341866474681。

 

Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero

 

#divide by zero

TOP DEFINITION

  

A super-smart math teacher that teaches at HTHS and can divide by zero.

Hey look, that genius’s IQ is over 9000!

    

by  October 21, 2009

 

 

Dividing by zero is the biggest  known to mankind. It is a proven fact that a succesful division by zero will constitute in the implosion of the universe.

You are dividing by zero there, Johnny. Captain Kirk is not impressed.

Divide by zero?!?!! OMG!!! Epic failzorz