/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12321342
>thinking I care about how would know
>mfw

>>12309842
>arch nemesis
post face

>>10977162
>the Lord's righteous sword.

>smiles at sisters being made into human centipedes with whoever is paying them to torment to me

>the company
I don't want to work for or with you though. I want to help your enemies kill you.

>>10780637
>R is a field whether we know what a field is or not.
Nice opinion you've got there. Try proving it.

In fact, I can completely disprove your stupid conjecture right now. R is a set of numbers. A field is a set and two operations.

B T F O
T
F
O

R E E E E
E
E
E
E

>>10754988
nice

Pic related basedboy: it's Chris Moriarty the son of the Director of the FBI

47 degree Scottish mason
100 degree Egyptian mason

>>10594181
>"the most fortunate, for we cannot find more than once a system of the world to establish."

>>10436859
>incomparably stronger technique.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tQmr_iYzBo

>>10176461
Yeah, but I am going to defile you and your loved ones. You entire family is going to suffer and then go extinct, and everyone that outlives you will hate you, and everything bad that ever happened to you and your ancestors is what the time travelers will do because they hate you as much as I do, if not more.

>tfw your work is unprecedented

>>10133920
>How accurate
this is highly accurate

>>10104645
thanks

>>9920899
>I don't see you saying that there is a problem
The powers of infinity are defined in hypercomplex analysis. When my paper refers to "sine" and "cosine" it is implicit that these are functions of a real variable. I continued to infinity and then beyond infinity where I learned something new about the behavior at infinity. Then I concluded that the limit of the behavior approaching infinity, the behavior relevant to real analysis, should be equal to the value at infinity which I derived in the extended analysis.

>>9898465
I'm not sure if I do have octonions or not. When I make a complex quaternion with eight elements, one them is {1} and one is {i}, and those are the elements of C while, I think, the octonions only include one element of C: the real identity {1}. For instance, if I used {1} and {i} in the quaternions then, by using {i} from C instead of the {i} from H, I would lose the property of H that

i j k = -1

because {i} from C doesn't do that. If this turns into an octonion thread then that's fine with me, I would like to know more about it.


>>9898654
>"My stupid model is so complex that it's nothing more than a simple quantum mechanical model"
It's not stupid, and it is more than a simple model. I have used a simple model to describe one aspect of my model in the non-relativistic limit. Also, it is good that my model is described with a prototypical quantum Hamiltonian. This is pretty much required because anything other than that would disagree with the rest of physics rather than *modify* it.

It would be bad if I really was the only one working on this stuff, but it would be almost as bad if everyone else doing it professionally didn't get all of this before the homeless guy who had a few hours to think when he got a place over the summer. However, I am about to lose this place and go back to homelessness, and that is not conducive, at all, to deep and peaceful thinking, and I think (((they))) will enjoy the depressing effect those economic conditions have on my creativity and productivity. Honestly, I would be glad if other researchers got ahead of me but it seems like the government would rather have everyone ignorant than to have them learn about something that was originally my idea. Because really, if the so-called "subject matter experts" didn't get all of this a long time ago then they have fooled some people regarding how smart they are.

>>9857268
>the only right interpretation is the ensemble interpretation.
the only right interpretation is for you to be afraid of me and act like it