Drinking squeezed juice is a type of supply of nutrition from your diet plan. Many of you could drink juice with this way every day. However, researcher pointed that both vitamin C and soluble fiber in the juice is below raw vegatables and fruits. Vitamin C, also known as vit c, is central to the organic compound that assist to take care of human activities, increase the body’s immunity, strengthen cell tissue, and stop scurvy. You can eat better vegatables and fruits to prevent bleeding gums. There are a great deal of antioxidants in fruits and vegetables, however, these antioxidants like vitamins, flavonoids, and anthocyanins will reduce in the event you squeeze them directly. The high speed rotating blade of juicer will destroy every one of the cells in fruits and vegetables, that can destroy the vitamin C.
The prostatic fluid manufactured by the prostate is going to be released in the posterior urethra and douched out from the body with urine. If men drink less, urinate less, this will let you long urination interval, prostate fluid will probably be accumulated in posterior urethra, that is planning to cause irritation and infection for the urethra. Prostate fluid may even “escape” to external urethral orifice without urination, making urethral orifice red, swelling and so on.
The danger is men will come in in order to find they have got very advanced prostate cancer” given that they didn’t get tested early enough, he explained.The problem could be embarrassing in addition to harmful for patients. There are huge expenses associated with dealing with incontinence after radical prostatectomy, Nam told Reuters Health in the email.
In recent years, bacteria like e. coli have shown resistance to some antibiotics which medicines become ineffective during the treatment. More and more patients prefer to utilize a more natural and safe cure for the reproductive system diseases. And herbal prescription medication is one of several good treatments. Diuretic and Anti-inflammatory Pill, as a herbal medicine, has already cured many patients with low sperm counts that caused by the diseases mentioned.

Factors For Treated By Diuretic and Anti-inflammatory PillAn Analysis

The prostate can be a gland that surrounds the urinary passage at the end of the bladder of males. Typically small among babies, this gland grows as the child goes thru the operation of puberty being a reply to the production of more testosterone, a mans hormone. This said gland functions primarily to produce secretions that add up to the total amount of semen, promoting healthier sperm cells by protecting them through the acidic environment with the vagina. Additionally, the prostate gland also secretes an enzyme called prostatic specific antigen (PSA), where an elevation in the said enzyme might indicate some prostatic problems for example benign enlargement from the prostate and prostate type of cancer.
Prostate health is widely realized to become important for men 50 as well as over, but in recent times, the value of prostate health to men within their 30s and 40s has become more widely known. Prostatitis is not a life-threatening condition however it could be a very painful and debilitating disorder impacting heavily on the sufferers’ quality lifestyle. Prostatitis is really quite normal; between 1-2 men in 10 could have chronic prostatitis sooner or later during their life. Chronic prostatitis mostly affects men between the ages of 30-50, but men of any age might be affected.
Prostatitis is a disease that affects one’s prostate gland knowning that can result in pain during urination, significant groin discomfort, abdominal pain, back pain, discomfort inside perineum, and penile and testicular pain as well. Prostatitis can also be for this oncoming of an increased fever, gastrointestinal difficulties, and chills in some cases too. Prostatitis is actually difficult in order to identify and treat, and has an array of debilitating and troublesome side affects. Unlike cancer of prostate and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), prostatitis often affects the lives of young and middle-aged men.
There is one man I know of that’s 38 years and possesses been experiencing prostatitis for 4 years straight. He has seen all sorts of doctors and has taken a number of the popular prescription prostate drugs to aid, but nothing did out for him. He was screened for cancer of prostate and it came back negative, so he knows that is not the issue. But the pain has become so bad he’s needed to start sleeping which has a pillow between his legs.
Studies done at Case Western Reserve University School of Dental Medicine and University Hospitals Case Medical Center showed is a result of a tiny group that inflammation from periodontal disease and prostate problems could be linked. They discuss their new evidence in the Journal of Periodontology, the state run journal from the American Academy of Periodontology. The researchers compared two markers: the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) accustomed to measure inflammation levels in prostate disease, and clinical attachment level (CAL) from the gums and teeth, that may be indicative for periodontitis. The researchers compared two markers: the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) used to measure inflammation levels in prostate disease, and clinical attachment level (CAL) in the gums and teeth, which is often indicative for periodontitis.

Effective Methods In – Updated

There are other medicines you can try to help remedy prostatitis. You can require a patented herbal medicine called Diuretic and Anti-inflammatory Pill as it helped you have a full recovery. This medicine belongs to Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and is made out of greater than fifty forms of natural herbs. It can not only get rid of the symptoms but in addition cure the problem from the root causes. Herbal drugs are believed all natural.

The background and inspiration for today’s article came about after I read a great book called . In short, it’s about how the greatest people and companies that have achieved massive success always tend to be masters of one core process or thing; they perfect that thing and then keep repeating the process. They simply stick with the one thing they are good at and scale from there.

“The One Thing” is about reducing clutter and stress and achieving better results in less time. It teaches you how to build momentum toward your goal, whatever that may be. By mastering what matters to YOU, this book will help you increase your productivity and dial-down your stress. It’s a great book that is well worth a read or listen on audio book (perhaps on your next holiday) and it will help you significantly as a trader and person.

As traders, we should learn from this book and use the concepts it teaches by focusing on one thing at a time and mastering it. This means mastering and perfecting our trading strategy and everything that surrounds the execution and management of that strategy, effectively, the process of the trade and our trading plan.

I also encourage you to find the trading strategy that fits you the best or that you like the best (for me it would be ), and stick to that exclusively, until you’ve MASTERED IT and feel like you OWN IT.

Master Your ‘One Thing’ …

Here’s what I would do if I were in your shoes…

• I would master my trading strategy by becoming a master of the process. Everything from the trade signal to the entry, stop loss, target, money management and my mental state. This is the one thing you are mastering, collectively it is the process. You are mastering the process of trading the entry signal of your choice, essentially.
• Your aim is to focus on this ‘one thing’ without distractions and without the obsession of changing, adding variables and searching for that ‘next best thing’. That is the key. You need to believe in what you are doing, stick with it, rinse and repeat. Eventually it becomes a positively reinforced and the by-product or side-effect of it is trading success.
• Many traders get this mixed up. They think they will first make money trading and then becoming a habitual trader who does the right things. It doesn’t work that way. You must, essentially, have faith in the process and follow it ‘blindly’ BEFORE you start making money. That’s really one of the keys. Trust the strategy, trust the signal you’re committed to mastering and trust the process.
• Example: Franchises like McDonald’s are so successful because they develop and implement focused processes and then the execute them flawlessly over and over. They commit to a proven model and stay focused on it; they NARROW their focus rather than broadening it. Most traders do the opposite! There’s a reason McDonald’s doesn’t offer boxes of friend chicken like KFC and why KFC doesn’t try selling a Big Mac; they stick to what they are good at, to what they OWN and have MASTERED.
• Another example: Remember what happened when arguably the best basketball player ever, Michael Jordan tried to paly professional baseball? Yea, me either. Fact is, he wasn’t that great at it. He was / is the best basketball player ever because he focused so narrowly on that one sport, he literally dominated it and no one to this day has equaled his achievements or abilities. Fact is, you really cannot be super good at many different things, like the saying goes, “Jack of all trades, master of none”. Well, if you want to be a “jack of all trades” that’s great, but you won’t make much money, I promise you that.
• The people who make money in trading or any other profession all have one thing in common: They are specialists. They specialize in one narrow field or focus, and they own it as much as they possibly can. That specialization results in higher pay / more money because MOST people have not focused on that one thing as much, so they do not know how to do it as well, they aren’t as good at it. Same thing in trading; because most people don’t’ have the discipline, patience, focus and passion to commit ONE THING, one process and become a Yoda-level bad-ass Master of It.

So, ask yourself right now, before reading on – are you committed to do what it takes to become a master trader or are you going to keep wasting your time, energy and money by screwing around with all over your charts and a hundred different trading blog subscriptions all telling you something different?

Burn this into your mind, print it out, love it…

Here is the setup I would pick to master first: the . Here is what it looks like (print these images out and add them to your trading plan or post them on your office wall if you want to, it will help.):

1. Now you know what you’re looking for when you hit the real charts. You’re looking for only super obvious pin bar signals, bullish or bearish, with long protruding tails. The tails should be sticking out from the nearby price action. Practicing taking only the most obvious ones, this way you give yourself the best chance at a winning trade because the more obvious the pin bar, the better chance it has of working out.

2. You may choose to read some or go through some mental each day before you start scanning the charts. I know this may sound slightly funny, but trust me, it works. It’s all about getting yourself into the before you start looking for trades. Trading psychology is paramount to trading success, believe me on that.

3. I suggest you have a written-out trading plan with screen shots of your setup. You can even print out the diagrams above and the real charts below, so you have examples of what you’re looking for. But, remember, each setup is unique, and they will always be slightly different. But, the basic idea is there: a pin bar has a long, protruding tail and it should typically have either with a key level, the dominant trend, or both. Don’t over-complicate it!

4. Remember, we are looking mainly for 4 hour or daily chart pin bars here. 1-hour charts are OK, but I really don’t recommend them until you’ve mastered the higher time frames like 4 hours and daily. You will notice below these trades took some time to play out and hit the targets of 2R or 3 or 4R drawn in using the , BUT, the profits would have been massive. We are not looking to , because that is not sustainable. We are looking to become skilled, savvy chart technicians who swing trade or position trade the markets to hop on and trade in a relaxed .

Examples of real-life pin bars setups to model your trading plan after:

Below, we see two bullish pin bar buy signals that were about as ‘perfect’ as you will see. They had confluence with the previous underlying uptrend and also formed at a key level of support.

Notice the potential of 4R on the second pin bar if you entered using my “” which is a tweaked entry where you enter near the halfway point of the pin bar after a retrace down the pin’s tail. You will also notice it took some time, about a month for that 4R to get hit, but if you’re making 4 times your money on one trade, can’t you wait a month? I can. Discipline and patience are HOW you make money in this game, NOT .

Here is an example of a counter-trend pin bar sell signal. This one was also darn near ‘perfect’. It formed at a key resistance level and had a large protruding tail, which is what we need to see if taking a trade against the trend. There was even a nice a week and a half later for anyone who missed the first pin bar. Note: whilst I typically don’t recommend beginners try counter-trend trading, it can be done on the daily chart if a signal forms at a key level – if done right it can lead to huge moves and even entire trend changes…

Here is the potential risk reward had you entered a ‘standard’ entry at the pin bar low and a stop loss above the pin bar high; note that 4r or more was possible entering this way. Had you entered on a 50% retrace tweaked entry as discussed previously, you could have gotten 8R or more!

Important insights for you to remember:

• Building focus – too many signals, strategies, markets, news. – focusing on one signal creates focus you need to become a Master of It. To get good at anything you must focus on that and only that. Whether it’s writing an article like this one, reading a book, learning to paint, play a sport or ANYTHING – you will never get good at it by having scattered and broken focus. Similarly, focusing on one thing helps you get good at it faster, obvious, right? But most traders overlook this fact in their quest for fast-money. Laser like focus on ONE setup will help you to make money faster than if you try learning 20 different trade signals and strategies all at once, it sounds obvious, but it seems to be human nature to try and do and learn too much at once, resulting in exhaustion and giving up. Rather than really committing to one thing and OWNING IT.
• Bruce Lee was the master of his domain. Be the master of yours. Was Bruce Lee good at everything? No, but he was THE BEST at the martial arts he practiced because he was intensely focused on it. If you want to make money trading, you need to narrow your focus and become obsessed with the topic of that focus.
• Don’t doubt yourself or let anxiety ruin you – people often think themselves right out of success and they often make things much harder than they are. Often, the hardest part of success, be it in trading or business in general or even in getting fit, is just GETTING STARTED. Don’t sit there staring at the walls, thinking how hard XY or Z MIGHT BE, just start doing it and you might find you enjoy it more than you thought (and that it’s not as hard as you thought!)
• How do you become a master? Breaking things down into smaller piece s/ goals, don’t overwhelm yourself by trying to achieve the lofty goal first. You will get distracted and lose focus if you do that.
• An exercise in discipline. Focusing on one setup creates discipline. You need to execute with confidence when your setup forms and systemize this to some extent. This is done by creating a trading plan with screen shots of a ‘perfect’ example of your chosen setup and the way you will trade it: stop loss placement, exit strategy, risk reward, position size, money management, psychology – those are the main topics to cover in any trading plan.
• Specialists make the most money. Become a ‘pin bar specialist’ or a ‘fakey specialist’ or whatever setup you like the most, pick one, master it, rinse, repeat.

Here are some articles that will assist you in learning more and helping you understand today’s lesson more:

Conclusion

If you want to turn your trading around or just start on the right path, you really need to narrow your focus. Most of the time, traders just get inundated with the loads of trading information swirling around the internet. I am telling you, from 16+ years of trading experience, most of it is just rubbish and will hurt you if you let it.

You can really pick one of two paths: Get serious right now and start mastering one price action entry signal at a time, until you are literally a Bruce Lee – level owner of that signal, or keep doing whatever you’re currently doing. But if what you’ve been doing isn’t working, I strongly suggest you try what I have outlined in today’s lesson because this is basically how I trade and it is what I know works for me and has worked for many of my students.

I suggest you pick the you like the most, that you have the best grasp on and study it and commit to mastering it until you are dreaming about it in your sleep. If you need more help you can study my for more in-depth examples and explanations. But, whatever you do, if you’re serious about trading, I strongly suggest you start following what I have laid out here today to put some structure and consistency in your trading routine.

 

10 наиболее известных древнегреческих писателей и поэтесса

Источник: 

 

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

 

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 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 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, ou
r 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 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 plac
e, 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 

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 div
ided 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

    

 

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

 

A new publication clearly proving that Takayama Masayuki is the only journalist in the postwar world is a must read for Japanese citizens and people all over the world.

I am in a book review column of the 7/7 Sankei Shimbun, but in the content introduction there was a section of ‘Asahi Shimbun that attacks Toshiba as much as possible’.

For a moment, I could not understand why the Asahi Shimbun was attacking Toshiba so much.

Yesterday, at 7 o’clock news, in Fuchu, Hiroshima, despite being sunny, suddenly the river was flooded.

French satellite pictures were aired that there were many landslides that have not been confirmed yet.

I remembered even my anger.

Asahi Shimbun not only severely hurt Japan’s honor and　credibility in comfort women, Nanjing massacre, etc.

As a result, Japan provided the largest financial support for human history to China, and the Communist Party single-party dictatorship Not only is it helping to increase the economy and military capabilities of China and continuing violating acts against Japanese territory,

By switching the power generation of 30 million KW to fossil fuel by the absolute opposition movement against nuclear power plant, we reduced the national wealth of Japan by 15 trillion yen in just a few years.

Because of stopping all nuclear power plants and switching to fossil fuels,

Globally warming gases generated in the sky above Japan caused abnormal weather in the last few years and finally it has destroyed Japan’s land by catastrophe of concentrated torrential rain that covered this western Japan area It is from.

At that time, suddenly I understood.

The reason the Asahi Shimbun attacked Toshiba abnormally on the paper is that Toshiba is one of the companies with the world’s best nuclear technology.

Their movement against nuclear power plants that seems to be manipulation of China and the Korean Peninsula any longer,

In industrial power, military power greatly reduces Japan’s national strength …

Because it is a well-known fact that China and South Korea decide nuclear power plant expansion as the country opposite to Japan.

Anyway, to say Asahi Shimbun is an unusual company.

They attack violently their opponent who opposes their masochistic view of history, anti-Japanese thought, placebo moralism.

It is no longer a decent human group

Many citizens were in sync with their opinion survey on such a newspaper company ‘s opposition to nuclear reactivation movement.

So, the government was still unable to return nuclear power to its original state.

Meanwhile, it continued to burn oil, coal, LPG … fossil fuel emitting greenhouse gas.

In fact, Japan’s global warming since 2011 will be sharp.

Otherwise as in the past ghosts for the first time in 40 years Smog cannot cover Japan.

As I mentioned earlier, the amount of power generated by each nuclear power plant is extremely large.

Three people mentioned as having repeatedly stopped all 54 nuclear power plants that were in the best 3 in the world as well as the media such as the Asahi Shimbun and NHK which has been in tune with this and the opposition party politicians is there.

The decision to immediately stop the main power supply that had been generating power exceeding 30 million kW always was a stupidity less than kindergarten and not policy decisions of decent country.

It is no wonder that the world’s merchants have multiplied their stupidity.

Immediately, they called Japan premium, etc. for fossil fuels for Japan and sold it to Japan with a large profit added.

It would be so. Even if Japan does not buy no matter how expensive it is, the economy will collapse in an instant … because the supply of electricity, which is the minimum requirement for the civilized state, stops and it becomes a dark society.

The national wealth lost by Japan because of such foolishness as such a kindergarten child is 15 trillion yen in just a few years.

Correct the disparity the Asahi Shimbun and the opposition politicians talk about in government attacks and placebo moralism et. Can achieve 100%,

The huge amount of national wealth = taxes disappeared while generating a large amount of greenhouse gas.

I thought that the torrential rain that struck the western part of Japan, which is nothing more than this anomaly,

Three people who alone they are rogues no longer,

And Asahi Shimbun and NHK nuclear power plants promoted by media such as has been in sync with this re-work absolute opposition campaign,

I assert that it is the result they brought.

There is only one thing to argue, what people should be thinking about by unfortunate people suffering from abnormal weather.

If you really care about your hometown until you die, instantly restart the nuclear power plant at once, where you really live now, your living base! … LNG, Coal, Oil Warming Gas Decrease the use of fossil fuels as a source of gas instantly, greatly … to return to the state by 2011!

Besides that, you should know that there is no way for you to live in the present place.

If you abandon your hometown you love, there are a lot of unnecessary people, unusually high residential cost Tokyo … Tokyo where the media such as the Asahi Shimbun and NHK concentrate,

You do not love your hometown so much, you think that you can abandon anytime, like Tokyo … If you want to live in such a city, the story is different,

As it stands, even if nuclear power plants are not allowed to operate again, if we continue to burn greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuels that are over 30 million kilowatts, life in your hometown will no longer be possible.

Back in the mountains I knew as a child

Fish filled the rivers and rabbits ran wild

Memories, I carry these, wherever I may roam

I hear it calling me, my country home

Mother and Father, how I miss you now

How are my friends I lost touch with somehow?

When the rain falls or the wind blows

I feel so alone

I hear it calling me, my country home

I’ve got a dream and it keeps me away

When it comes true, I’ll go back there someday

Crystal waters, mighty mountains

Shining like an emerald stone

I hear it calling me, my country home,

As it can no longer be a mountain landslide, landslide mountain, flooding, overflow river,

You should notice things that you can only lose your homeland by continuing to agree with the magazine media such as the Asahi Newspaper and NHK and the political shoes of opposition parties and anti-Japanese thought, anti-moralism, zombie communism The time has arrived.

Zero Divided by Zero Equals One

 

Objective: Accumulating evidence indicates that zero divided by zero is equal to one. Still it is not clear what number theory or algebra is saying about this. Methods: To explore the relationship between the problem of the division of zero by zero and number theory, a systematic approach is used while analyzing the relationship between number theory and independence. Result: The theorems developed in this publication support the thesis that zero divided by zero is equal to one. Furthermore, it was possible to define the law of independence under conditions of number theory and algebra. Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that zero divided by zero equals one.

 

後で読みます：

 

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

 

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 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 leve
l 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 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 w
e 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 

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 Dif
ference 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？

 

#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