Primenumbers

Lillen · May 13, 2012

23 Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24 And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. 25 But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. 26 The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ 27 Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt.
28 “But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ 29 So his fellow servant fell down at his feet[d] and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’[e] 30 And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. 31 So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done. 32 Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. 33 Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’ 34 And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him.
35 “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”[

Lillen · May 13, 2012

I am not only off my medications and all what you may accuse me of, i am also eating my own vomit inorder not to starve and doing all kinds of wierd things such as allowing a woman to give me a make up...

Lillen · May 13, 2012

Write "The Word" on a sheet and deposit it into a bank - thats legal unlikly from writing "all" or "everything".

What would you say if I said I am on my medications and happy. It makes me giggle all day long and feel funny for free, on taxpayers money (in sweden I pay 200 dollars or 1800 sek a year for medications, the rest is covered by taxpayers). Wouldn't that bother you the least a bit?

And yes I am giggling through my nose, and with a frequency of 7 BPS.

To prove it, give me a reasonable prime and i will devide it with other things that one and itself!!!

Lillen · May 13, 2012

Ok no challangers. I pick one from my head:

"Emo"

Emo:Nit?Mose

"Emo" is a prime, and "Nit" is a prime giving us the outcome "Mose".
The ":" is equivalent with the devision sign but is named "questioning" and "?" is equivalent with the equal sign but is named "answering":

Emo question Nit answering Mose is true because Emo times Mose answering Nit is true.

'per definition'

Simply stating, my numbers can be devided with other values then one and itself, And the equvivalents of those numbers represent each and every prime of the standard numerical system. And I proved it using logical attributes on the operative sentence i wrote -If Emo question Nit answering Mose is true, then Emo times Mose answering Nit is true. Once again, 'per definition'.

Lets look at another one:

Oskaroskarson:Isai?Karl

Oskaroskarson is a prime and so is Isai, and the above operative sentence is true because Oskaroskarson times Karl answering Isai is true...

Remeber numbers are defined from day one in school to the dispute for a Ph.D in mathematics. But it nevertheless defined by someone, by whom we simply don't know, who could've said something diffrent. Did Lucy do math? Someone must have developed the numerical system we are taught in school, he must have defined the values to a certain amount, he must have determined the way we should operate when doing math. And if it is determined and defined he could always change his mind and determined and defined it otherwise. Determined it to fit into another pattern!

Lets assume you are right, that primes couldn't be devided with other numbers then one and itself. Then it would be impossible to devide 11 apples on five people. Using the standard numerical system we could always summarise 3+3+3+1+1 making two of the five people getting less then the others. With my numerical system it doesn't get uneven. Simply because it is defined not to make it uneven. Son:Karl?Isak. Isak is defined as a even number. To see from another perspective, Lets assume the five people has apples of a certain amount, a certain weight. since the weight of apples are relative, all you need to do is find apples with a total weight that fits into the five people desire. Since Five people share 11 kilo apples, all you need to do is find smaller ones to share it even for 10 kilos. Remeber it is the same value of the apples in both cases...

The challange is still there, give me any prime and I will prove I can question it with another whole number...

Volokh · May 14, 2012

Lillen said:
Ok no challangers. I pick one from my head:

"Emo"

Emo:Nit?Mose

"Emo" is a prime, and "Nit" is a prime giving us the outcome "Mose".
The ":" is equivalent with the devision sign but is named "questioning" and "?" is equivalent with the equal sign but is named "answering":

Emo question Nit answering Mose is true because Emo times Mose answering Nit is true.

'per definition'

Simply stating, my numbers can be devided with other values then one and itself, And the equvivalents of those numbers represent each and every prime of the standard numerical system. And I proved it using logical attributes on the operative sentence i wrote -If Emo question Nit answering Mose is true, then Emo times Mose answering Nit is true. Once again, 'per definition'.

Lets look at another one:

Oskaroskarson:Isai?Karl

Oskaroskarson is a prime and so is Isai, and the above operative sentence is true because Oskaroskarson times Karl answering Isai is true...

Remeber numbers are defined from day one in school to the dispute for a Ph.D in mathematics. But it nevertheless defined by someone, by whom we simply don't know, who could've said something diffrent. Did Lucy do math? Someone must have developed the numerical system we are taught in school, he must have defined the values to a certain amount, he must have determined the way we should operate when doing math. And if it is determined and defined he could always change his mind and determined and defined it otherwise. Determined it to fit into another pattern!

Lets assume you are right, that primes couldn't be devided with other numbers then one and itself. Then it would be impossible to devide 11 apples on five people. Using the standard numerical system we could always summarise 3+3+3+1+1 making two of the five people getting less then the others. With my numerical system it doesn't get uneven. Simply because it is defined not to make it uneven. Son:Karl?Isak. Isak is defined as a even number. To see from another perspective, Lets assume the five people has apples of a certain amount, a certain weight. since the weight of apples are relative, all you need to do is find apples with a total weight that fits into the five people desire. Since Five people share 11 kilo apples, all you need to do is find smaller ones to share it even for 10 kilos. Remeber it is the same value of the apples in both cases...

The challange is still there, give me any prime and I will prove I can question it with another whole number...

1

Elendur · May 15, 2012

Volokh said:
1

One isn't a prime

AnotherAtheist · May 15, 2012

Wiccan_Child · May 15, 2012

Elendur · May 15, 2012

(2^43112609)-1

AnotherAtheist · May 15, 2012

Elendur said:
(2^43112609)-1

You should be careful what you reveal on the internet. Everyone knows that people with really big prime numbers are compensating for something.

Elendur · May 15, 2012

AnotherAtheist said:
You should be careful what you reveal on the internet. Everyone knows that people with really big prime numbers are compensating for something.

Best comment ever!

Lillen · May 15, 2012

Ok WC (i really hate that i cannot call you by name) 2 is an exception and that high number is to high for me to grab.. 2 is unfair because of the obious reason, a reason i have trubble to embrace and phrase in english. 2 only have 2 possible numbers to devide with even using my method. But i could supposingly use another method, such as using oskarmose:ulf?lillen. Both "oskarmose" and "ulf" is a prime in my numerical system per definition...

What i have done is redefined primes rather then division. -That is possible! how about redefining limh->0 f(x+h)-f(x) / h were h goes for 0 to limh->1

Pick a digit which is easy to count which order of primes it comes from. otherwise i need a prime calculator.

AnotherAtheist · May 15, 2012

17 then.

And if you "redefine primes", doesn't that mean that you're not talking about primes but about some other group of numbers?

Lillen · May 15, 2012

Haggai:lillen=karllillen%Isak

Haggai is defined as a prime, and so is lillen in my numerical system. when the order of the prime also is prime i use the sign % to have a even number inbetween something.

No.

Lillen · May 15, 2012

Sting - Englishman In New York - YouTube

Numeral
As a numeral it Alaph/Olaf stands for the number one. With a dot below, it is the number 1,000, with a line above it, Alaph/Olaf will represent 1,000,000. with a line below it is 10,000 and with two dots below it is 10,000,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph

Thats hebrew...

And this is mine:

Haggai represent 17 (the keyboard doesn't handle my sign for haggai) and haggai can be devided with several other representatives in my numerical system. Each and every prime has equvialent in my numerical system, Per definition. and it can be devided with other numbers then 1 and itself. The numerical system is however in development.

Radagast · May 15, 2012

Lillen said:
...Then it would be impossible to devide 11 apples on five people. Using the standard numerical system we could always summarise 3+3+3+1+1 making two of the five people getting less then the others. With my numerical system it doesn't get uneven...

With your scheme, you still can't divide 11 apples evenly among 5 people.

AnotherAtheist · May 15, 2012

Lillen said:
Haggai represent 17 (the keyboard doesn't handle my sign for haggai) and haggai can be devided with several other representatives in my numerical system. Each and every prime has equvialent in my numerical system, Per definition. and it can be devided with other numbers then 1 and itself. The numerical system is however in development.

Can you name a number that can divide 17?

I can easily come up with a new set of numbers. Here are my numbers along with their decimal equivalent

a, 0
b, 0.5
c, 1.0
d, 1.5
e, 2
f, 2.5
g, 3
h, 3.5
i, 4
j, 4.5
k, 5
l, 5.5
m, 6
n, 6.5
o, 7
p, 7.5
q, 8
r, 8.5
s, 9
t, 9.5
u, 10
v, 10.5
w, 11
x, 11.5
y, 12
z, 12.5
aa, 13
ab, 13.5
ac, 14
ad, 14.5
ae, 15
af, 15.5
ag, 16
ah, 16.5
ai, 17
aj, 17.5
ak, 18

and so on. Given my new definition of the numbers, then arithmetic can be done in base 20, and we can convert back into standard base 10 arabic numerals.

And in my notation:

ai / e = r (no remainder)

But this does not make 17 any less prime in standard base 10 than it used to be.

So, how does your system make 17 not a prime?

razeontherock · May 17, 2012

At 17, I was not in my prime

Lillen · May 28, 2012

Every defintion in math can be redefined. primes too!

Wiccan_Child · May 28, 2012

Lillen said:
Every defintion in math can be redefined. primes too!

Sure, but you can't then equate it to the STANDARD definition. You can redefine your terms and do whatever you want, but you can't then equate it to the usual definitions and get something like 13/5=3 (per standard definitions). And once you realise that, you'll realise why your funky new definitions are... pointless.

What use is there in redefining things this way? Yes, you can do it, but so what?

Primenumbers

Lillen

Guest

Lillen

Guest

Lillen

Guest

Lillen

Guest

hiding

Gamer and mathematician

Gimmie dat ol' time physical evidence

Contributor

Gamer and mathematician

Gimmie dat ol' time physical evidence

Gamer and mathematician

Lillen

Guest

Gimmie dat ol' time physical evidence

Lillen

Guest

Lillen

Guest

comes and goes

Gimmie dat ol' time physical evidence

Well-Known Member

Lillen

Guest

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency