| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Math - Symbolic Forum » New Energy Formula
Page 2 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| jacob navia |
 Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:53 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mehran Basti wrote:
Quote: This is a joke, right???
Dear Newsgroup:
No joke at all. Not what so ever.
The Riccati equation is the fountain of the mathematical activity as diagram shows.
It means the universe in its heart mathematically communicating with Riccati, (which stands
out above all other formulas and equations) as its mathematical entity.
Quote:
This is the result of my over 25 years of research.
Dr.Mehran Basti
Hi Basti
It means the universe in its heart mathematically communicating with
Riccati, (which stands out above all other formulas and equations) as
its mathematical entity.
OK.
The universe has a heart. This means that somewhere within the universe
there is a ping ping ping of a beating heart. The Universe's heart.
THEN:
This heart "communicates" with "Ricatti".
Jacopo Francesco Riccati (28 May 1676 - 15 April 1754) was an Italian
mathematician, born in Venice. He is now remembered for the Riccati
equation. He died in Treviso in 1754.
This means surely that Riccati's soul is there (near the heart of the
universe)and hears the bing bing bing of the Universe.
OK.
Q.E.D.
------------------------------------------------
I remember writing you on March 31 2004, in this group:
"M. Basti" <Mbasti21@aol.com> a ÃÂécrit dans le message de
news://657b3eec.0403061822.2a64320f@posting.google.com...
Quote: Dear newsgroup:
If happens that I do not get my papers published, I have to write my
own lecture notes and disseminate it.
arXiv.org is not the answer.
They cannot have these results unless they purchase my notes.
Sincerely
Dr.Mehran Basti
Well this is ridiculous. Publish your refused papers
and do something Basti. This group is as good
as a journal. Send the paper here, and Caesar Garcia
will surely analyze them. And many other people
too.
I feel nostalgic. I remember that wondeful time
before the "Internet wave" started, last century.
This group had this Basti guy that was
seeking "an investor" with his Ricatti equations for
sale.
Have you done a full circle again?
Please, try to advance a bit, it is boring at the end.
That was in 1998, we are 2004, a full six years
circle Basti.
Do something.
-------------------------------------------------------
That was 2004 we are now 2008. Full TEN YEARS Basti...
Your "new" stuff is just no more freak maths, it is just nonsense.
The loneliness is degrading your mind. Try to get back to
reality Basti.
--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Nasser Abbasi |
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:39 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"pnachtwey" <pnachtwey@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5bc594e2-0c65-405a-9fce-60ca6ee6827f@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 23, 5:09 am, filipovic81 <gr...@geometrie.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
Quote: This is a joke, right???
Quote: Shame on all of you that responded to this nonsense without pinning Dr
Basti down on the units of his equation.
Peter Nachtwey
Hi Peter;
It is quite possible that Dr Basti has his own units of energy which
mathematically synchronizes with his Riccati equations usage.
He is saying all along that his new equations govern the universe in a
mathematically new and novel way. So I am not sure we can use the same
energy units we currently have in his Mathematical universe?
But since I am no expert on his new science, may be Dr Basti should address
your concern and in a better way than any one of us can.
regards,
Nasser |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 8:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Newsgroup:
Any math people have views on My New Math; they have a mediocre viewpoint on the topic (despite the fact that they are at MIT, Harvard, etc.).
My viewpoints are like those of the masters (like Newton and Euler).
Sorry it is hard to absorb, but unfortunately it is reality.
They are very disappointed (or paranoid) of My New Energy Formula, but it cannot be changed, it is part of the structure of the universe.
Once my lecture notes are ready, then the only way to challenge me is at least 5 years of international research on this topic, which will give you enough experience, to be able to understand the complexity of the mathematical environment I am researching these days.
With words or simple criticism or silence, you cannot challenge the issue (even blocking jobs like silly attitudes at Harvard, MIT and Princeton).
From my BS.c. to Ph.D. degree took 6 years.
I have been on this topic for over a quarter of the century.
So, there is a big difference between conventional mathematicians and those of Masters (you see me once every 150 years!).
It is sad that top schools in America think inside a small box.
The government of the U.S.A. should carefully study this anti-science behavior of the top universities.
Dr.Mehran Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:41 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
"Mehran Basti" <Basti05b@aol.com> wrote in message
news:14133955.1208981099987.JavaMail.jakarta@nitrogen.
mathforum.org...
Dear news group:
I have already answered the question in
sci.relativity.
There is no such use group. You have had your chance
to provide the units
for X and g(t) and you didn't. You failed.
Peter Nachtwey
That was sci. physics. Relativity newsgroup.
The formula is a Riccati differential equation in its normalized form:
dx/dt+x^2=g(t)
We have for example a partial differential equation of Heat, or wave, then in the process of solving it we need to use Riccati.
The equation itself not representing model of energy (the corresponding PDE will).
But the sole mathematical activities of the universe rest on Riccati.
X=x(t) (or any other variable ,or g(t)) could be anything else. A variety of them, or infinitely many of them.
After all, I have the formula not according to your specification, but what represents in the universe.
Well, one needs to see my lecture notes and in seminars to better able to see the picture, not with words.
In short if you ask me by viewing the entire universe which we all imagine, what is the sole math behind it? I say the above formula.
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Peter Nachtwey |
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Mehran Basti" <Basti05b@aol.com> wrote in message
news:14133955.1208981099987.JavaMail.jakarta@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
Quote: Dear news group:
I have already answered the question in sci.relativity.
There is no such use group. You have had your chance to provide the units
for X and g(t) and you didn't. You failed.
Peter Nachtwey |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jim |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:41:55 -0400, Mehran Basti:
Quote:
The formula is a Riccati differential equation in its normalized form:
dx/dt+x^2=g(t)
Isn't that disturbing that x(t) explodes in a finite time when g=0? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 1:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:41:55 -0400, Mehran Basti:
The formula is a Riccati differential equation in
its normalized form:
dx/dt+x^2=g(t)
Isn't that disturbing that x(t) explodes in a finite
time when g=0?
Well, I do not know what you mean, but the development of the entire new math depends on Riccati structures.
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 2:52 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Actually x (t) is not energy (it is an abstract formula), energy equation is represented in variety of PDE of the corresponding energy formula.
What I am saying, is that the sole solving of any mathematical structure within the universe, is related to these equations constantly.
The reason I have selected this formula particularly with energy related issues, is that, all of the classical equations we need to solve in relation with energy formula, are solved through Riccati.
Well, we need to recalculate them one by one again in my new math.
In another words, there is no escape from Riccati equations from mathematical point of view.
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Newsgroup
I can say the universe has an abstract formula as Riccati, which constantly communicating with this formula in variety of forms, in order to keep its structure going.
In particular, I have myself ample materials in energy related computations, for my future demonstrations.
When I had presented a polynomial of degree 110 in Riccati, means a new life of scientific activities will be initiated in this domain.
Nowhere, from solving Algebraic equations to differential equations and integrations, we are allowed to depart from that center of communication, which the universe is conducting.
Otherwise we are not aiming the heart of the activities!
You will see on my entire lecture notes this centrality of the mathematical operation of the universe in Riccati.
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:50 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Newsgroup
In another newsgroup I had to answer the following question:
“
Show us how to obtain the generator of the Lorentz group from the Riccati equation. Lorentz symmetry is the cornerstone of modern physics _ one would think you'd be able to find it if what you say is
true.
My anwer:
Generally algebraic methods will be diminished and modern Riccati Methods will substitute it.
Galois theory also Lorentz groups will be of no need in the future(they will be out of order anyway).
This is because more powerful other methods rooted in Riccati will substitute them.
Thus I consider group theory, Galois theory, Lie Algebras will be outdated (they are not powerful anyway with respect to the world of differential equations).
And algebraic fields will be mainly out of
business, or substantially reduced.
During early 1970 years in Canada, I remember we had to punch holes in paper cards and feed them to computers. Those days are far away now.
Still people need time to get to know this new world of universe of computations that is why I have given them 5 years time of research.
Nasser Abbasi brought a sort of philosophical question of interpreting energy formaula in Riccati to issues of big bang time and law conservation of energy.
It is an interesting debate.
If assume that my theory of Riccati being the sole abstract mathematical item behind the physical domain, is correct, then one wonders about better understanding of the nature of the universe (i.e., why is so). I wonder myself.
Anyway, as I had stated on my statement of research, it was the universals of Aristotle, which started the true solving of my methods.
Once you see my lecture notes, you will be locked up in Riccati!
I would be interested to see issues as Abbasi explained more elaborately.
Issues might expand to the Einstein E = m c^2 and Riccati (as mathematical structure in universe).
Dr.Mehran Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Newsgroup
Energy is one of the nature’s universal entities.
E = m c^2 is one formula which represent its physical relationship.
dx/dt +x^2 =g (t)
is my abstract sole mathematical formula of the universe (in particular energy).
It is appropriate we compare these two equations, particularly some of my computations rests on mathematical models of variety of energies.
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Nasser Abbasi |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:18 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Mehran Basti" <Basti05b@aol.com> wrote in message
news:25040105.1209166340102.JavaMail.jakarta@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
Quote: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:41:55 -0400, Mehran Basti:
The formula is a Riccati differential equation in
its normalized form:
dx/dt+x^2=g(t)
Isn't that disturbing that x(t) explodes in a finite
time when g=0?
Well, I do not know what you mean, but the development of the entire new
math depends on Riccati structures.
Dr.M.Basti
Actually x(t) does not explode?
The solution for dx/dt+x(t)^2=g(t) when g(t)=0 is simply
x(t) = k/(1+k t)
Where I assumed x(0)=k is some constant. (i.e. this is the energy in the
universe at big-bang time?).
So as time goes on, we see that the energy in the universe represented by
x(t), according to Dr Basti's formulation seems to go to _zero_ for any
constant k. (if we wait long enough).
So according to Basti energy equation, the universe is leaking energy
somehow when g(t)=0. But since I thought the energy is the universe is
constant. (Law of conservation of energy) therefore, g(t) _could not_ be
zero in the Basti energy equation.
But again, I am no expert on the Basti energy equation, I just thought to
point this out.
May be Dr Basti could let us know what kind of initial conditions one should
assign to x(0) to obtain reasonable solution to x(t).
I am assuming all the along that x(t) represents the energy in the universe
at time t (using Basti own units of energy).
Now, since energy in the universe is supposed to be constant, right? then
x(t) is simply a constant.
Then why do we even need a differential equation for x(t)?
Did Dr Basti discover that the total energy in the universe is _NOT_
constant somehow? If so, I would really like to learn more about this.
Nasser |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jim |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:01 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Sat, 26 Apr 2008 00:18:14 +0000, Nasser Abbasi:
Quote:
The formula is a Riccati differential equation in
its normalized form:
dx/dt+x^2=g(t)
Isn't that disturbing that x(t) explodes in a finite time when g=0?
Well, I do not know what you mean, but the development of the entire
new math depends on Riccati structures.
Dr.M.Basti
Actually x(t) does not explode?
The solution for dx/dt+x(t)^2=g(t) when g(t)=0 is simply
x(t) = k/(1+k t)
Where I assumed x(0)=k is some constant.
Who told you k is positive? Who told you there is no t < 0?
t= -1/k makes x divergent.
x'=x^2 is the classical example of an ODE which solution is not
defined on whole R.
Having x'=v(x), with the v function with compact support ensures that
x(t) is defined for all t in R. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jim |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:14:52 -0400, Mehran Basti:
Quote: Dear Newsgroup
Energy is one of the nature’s universal entities.
E = m c^2 is one formula which ...
.... which is total nonsense.
Write down the correct relation then come back here. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jim wrote:
`
...which is total nonsense.
Write down the correct relation then come back here.`
First of all why you write your postings in separate threads, continue in the same thread using reply button, not the other one.
The statement is completely clear (read my postings on this thread, also at sci.physics.relativity).
E = m c^2 is one of the well-known formulas relating energy with mass. But this is completely in physics domain since we have m and c.
dx/dt +x^2 = g(t)
I have declared to be an abstract mathematical formula of the universe in particular energy (in the way I had explained before via PDE).
I suppose we cannot debate here with words unless my lecture notes manifests itself.
You need to see that, constantly the convergence of all mathematical activities on Riccati will occur naturally.
Dr.Mehran Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 2 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:27 am
|
|
