Post by b***@gmail.comHi,
L * L = L
L * R = L right?
R * L = L right?
R * R = R
L * L = R
L * R = L
R * L = L
R * R = R
Because otherwise the distributive law, doesn't work.
A*(B+C) = A*B+A*C
If you don't have the above usuabl table, it breaks,
namely take as an example A= -1, B=2, C=-3
-1 * (2 + -3) = -1 * -1 = -1 (in your logic)
-1 * 2 + -1 * -3 = -2 + -3 = -5 (in your logic,
it depends how you defin the two rows
L * R = and R * L = )
If you define the two rows L * R = and R * L =
differently I will be maybe able to give you yet
another counter example.
Before you can argue about square roots, you need
to have sound multiplication and addition. With your
definition L * L = L, this is not yet the case.
Nobody will take you seriously without sound
multiplication
and addition, where at least the following rules
Commutativity+: A+B = B+A
Associativity*: A+(B+C) = (A+B)+C
Commutativity*: A*B = B*A
Associativity*: A*(B*C) = (A*B)*C
Distributivity: A*(B+C) = A*B + A*C
Distributivity is one of the laws that connects
multiplication
and addition. You have to especially keep an eye on
this law,
if you modify multiplication, and don't do the
standard.
Distributivity is derived from finger and toe
counting. Just
imagine the lower level school explanation of
multiplication,
which is for a positive n and m integers aka natural
n*m = m + ... + m
--- n times ---
(p+q)*m = m + ... + m
--- p+q times ---
= m + ... + m + m + ... + m
--- p times --- --- q times ---
= p*m + q*m
But distributivity is found respectively desired in
much more domains. Including the reals, the complex
numbers,
matrices (they are not commutative though) etc..
Bye
Am Donnerstag, 13. April 2017 08:57:36 UTC+2 schrieb
On Thursday, April 13, 2017 at 9:41:43 AM UTC+3,
Post by b***@gmail.comYou could also use the marker L,
so what is 1L * 1L = ?
Very easy brain burr..
(1L)*(1L) = (1L), and more to it
(5L)*(7L) = (35L), but
(5R)*(7R) = (35R), for sure
Where (R) is the right direction of X-axis, and
(L) is the left direction of the X-axis from a start
point of space coordination (0, 0, 0)
Hence, no illegal double square root operation,
for sur
This is only the actual existing physical
coordination of space around your tiny head for sure
But still you won't accept it for sure
BK
Post by b***@gmail.comCan you answer this mister fish?
Am Donnerstag, 13. April 2017 08:38:14 UTC+2
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 11:36:04 PM
Post by b***@gmail.comHe cant count with negative numbers, this
BKK, as if he
(-10..-1) and
Post by b***@gmail.comSo, why don't you moron simply denote your
left toes as (10L, 1L), INSTEAD of (-10, -1)
Post by b***@gmail.comPost by b***@gmail.comright hand and right toes (0..9). Maybe he is
a fish.
Post by b***@gmail.comBK
Post by b***@gmail.comAm Mittwoch, 12. April 2017 21:00:05 UTC+2
vast majority
for teachers
Post by b***@gmail.comPost by b***@gmail.comPost by bassam king karzeddinPost by bassam king karzeddins for sure
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
12 th, April, 2017
The same similar question that can be asked
What is the least rational number that is
greater than (Pi)?
trivial to conclude that no rational number exists as
a solution,
found for (pi))?
(pi) that is less than (pi), but definitely not the
largest in question
exists in our minds only and clearly from its mere
definition, but it exists also between two non
existing numbers, beside being impossible
construction exactly, which implies directly its own
non existence and for sure
simplest logic for any constructible numbers, since
they are the only real existing numbers and exactly
located without that their endless rational
APPROXIMATIONS
that no real numbers exists with endless decimal
representation, or no real number exists with endless
terms
represented by (.) is not a magical tool that can
convert immediately any meaningless integer number
with endless sequence of digits to very meaningful
number once you place your point decimal (.) in a
proper place from the left side of that meaning less
endless integer with infinite sequence of digits
transcendental and algebraic numbers and the endless
decimal representations of any constructible numbers
unreal numbers for sure
See how expert you are in diverting the original issue to another bothering you issue about the fact of fectious and flowed complex numbers, but it does not matter
And do not think this new vision of mine is that easy you can conclude whatever you like
So, if we define (L*L = L), and (R*R = R), It needs to be more careful about (L*R = ?)
May be Tim Golden Band Tech.com can be reviewed carefully in this regard at this link:
I am also working independently to see what can be logically eventual in this issue
Note Here we do not need negative operation, but for Multiplication still more to it, or may be you or anyone interested can contribute to this new field
The whole issue is a matter of directions, with mainly two operations (addition and multiplications)