Science : Periodic Table

[Dimi95]

I watched a reel of Joe Rogan and it took my attention.

The guy is called Terrance Howard.

This is from 5 days ago.

Straight Lines are an Illusion
"Howard claims that straight lines are an illusion and that, when viewed from the correct perspective, they are not straight. This idea suggests that our perception of geometry is limited and that true forms differ from what we observe.

Background: This concept might be inspired by non-Euclidean geometry, which explores curved spaces and shapes that defy traditional straight-line definitions. Additionally, at the quantum level, particles exhibit wave-like behavior, suggesting that straight lines might be an illusion when you zoom in far enough. Howard’s assertion encourages rethinking basic geometric principles. For instance, in the theory of general relativity, the presence of mass can curve spacetime, making straight lines appear curved when viewed in the context of the universe."


Challenging Multiplication: Howard’s Hypothesis
"Both on the JRE and in his Oxford Union address, Howard challenges a fundamental principle of mathematics: multiplication. Specifically, he questions the accepted result of 1 x 1 = 1. Howard argues that this equation is incorrect, suggesting instead that the product of one times one should be two. Think of it as combining two unique ingredients to create something new, rather than just one thing. Howard’s hypothesis encourages rethinking basic arithmetic principles and their implications on understanding reality.

Background: Howard’s challenge to multiplication is rooted in his exploration of geometric and wave patterns. This idea reflects his broader quest to rethink and redefine basic mathematical principles to better align with his views on the interconnectedness of reality."

Terrence Howard’s Theories Simplified: Understanding His Unique Perspective - Brad Hook

Updated on 01 July 2024 If you're here, you probably watched the Joe Rogan Experience podcast episodes #2152 and/or #2171, which featured Terrence Howard. In the second appearance, Joe brings in Eric Weinstein to discuss some of Terrence's ideas from an academic perspective.

bradleyhook.com

Is 1x1=1 really correct ?

This is what i think
One drop of water x One drop of water = One drop of water²
One drop of water² x One drop of water² = One drop of water² ∞x

It is the same drop , just the volume is doubled.It steels means 1 but multiplies the state of matter.

In the case of orange also.
One orange x One orange = One orange , but twice the state of matter.
1x1=1²
1 orange² x 1 orange² = 1 orange² ∞
For how long can you try to multiply the number if you would seek to know how far it goes ? To infinite maybe?

So that means:

1x1=1²∞x

I don't think that i agree with this guy on his way of understanding Reality , but he speaks about certain things that were of my interest so i thought why not share it here.

Is 1x1=1²∞x probable ?
I mean is the concept of proof amenable to study?

 

[Pogo]

I watched a reel of Joe Rogan and it took my attention.

The guy is called Terrance Howard.

This is from 5 days ago.

Straight Lines are an Illusion
"Howard claims that straight lines are an illusion and that, when viewed from the correct perspective, they are not straight. This idea suggests that our perception of geometry is limited and that true forms differ from what we observe.

Background: This concept might be inspired by non-Euclidean geometry, which explores curved spaces and shapes that defy traditional straight-line definitions. Additionally, at the quantum level, particles exhibit wave-like behavior, suggesting that straight lines might be an illusion when you zoom in far enough. Howard’s assertion encourages rethinking basic geometric principles. For instance, in the theory of general relativity, the presence of mass can curve spacetime, making straight lines appear curved when viewed in the context of the universe."


Challenging Multiplication: Howard’s Hypothesis
"Both on the JRE and in his Oxford Union address, Howard challenges a fundamental principle of mathematics: multiplication. Specifically, he questions the accepted result of 1 x 1 = 1. Howard argues that this equation is incorrect, suggesting instead that the product of one times one should be two. Think of it as combining two unique ingredients to create something new, rather than just one thing. Howard’s hypothesis encourages rethinking basic arithmetic principles and their implications on understanding reality.

Background: Howard’s challenge to multiplication is rooted in his exploration of geometric and wave patterns. This idea reflects his broader quest to rethink and redefine basic mathematical principles to better align with his views on the interconnectedness of reality."

Terrence Howard’s Theories Simplified: Understanding His Unique Perspective - Brad Hook

Updated on 01 July 2024 If you're here, you probably watched the Joe Rogan Experience podcast episodes #2152 and/or #2171, which featured Terrence Howard. In the second appearance, Joe brings in Eric Weinstein to discuss some of Terrence's ideas from an academic perspective.

bradleyhook.com

Is 1x1=1 really correct ?

This is what i think
One drop of water x One drop of water = One drop of water²
One drop of water² x One drop of water² = One drop of water² ∞x

It is the same drop , just the volume is doubled.It steels means 1 but multiplies the state of matter.

In the case of orange also.
One orange x One orange = One orange , but twice the state of matter.
1x1=1²
1 orange² x 1 orange² = 1 orange² ∞
For how long can you try to multiply the number if you would seek to know how far it goes ? To infinite maybe?

So that means:

1x1=1²∞x

I don't think that i agree with this guy on his way of understanding Reality , but he speaks about certain things that were of my interest so i thought why not share it here.

Is 1x1=1²∞x probable ?
I mean is the concept of proof amenable to study?

Mathematics are systems of logic based on mutually agreed upon rules, they can be any consistent set so long as they don't generate internal contradictions.

That we find a correspondence with reality is convenience.
It this guy wants to propose an alternate axiom set, he is free to and the venue is already established, go present your paper to a math department, not you tube.

teryology?

 

[Dimi95]

Mathematics are systems of logic based on mutually agreed upon rules, they can be any consistent set so long as they don't generate internal contradictions.

That we find a correspondence with reality is convenience.
It this guy wants to propose an alternate axiom set, he is free to and the venue is already established, go present your paper to a math department, not you tube.

teryology?

This is what i have found from him

 

[Pogo]

This is what i have found from him

View attachment 92167View attachment 92168View attachment 92169View attachment 92170

Meanwhile back in the mathematics that we use, multiplication gives us the area of a square/rectangle with unit sides of the multiplicands (?).
Take a rectangle of kiddy blocks two blocks tall and 3 blocks wide. 2 by 3 or 2x3, how many individual blocks do you have? Six since you have been playing on the floor and if you had A block you would find that it is 1 high and 1 wide or 1 by 1 or 1x1 which is an area of 1.
You know what a square is, So when you take that area of nine blocks of whatever shape and cut it up into pieces so that you can fit them into a square shape. The same area of paper, just in little pieces. When you measure the sides of this square you will find that it is 3 of whatever unit.You have just geometrically determined squares and square roots, 3x3 or 3^2 or 3 squared equals 9 and the square root of 9, the size of a side of a square of area 9 is 3.
so now you know where those words come from, not numbers but geometry.
He has done a strange job of redefining multiplication as addition or something.
This was all figured out by Greeks who later stole Arab numbers to describe their lines so we can read it instead of looking at it as a bunch of circles and lines all before Christ was ever heard of.

I didn't actually read beyond where he invoked common sense. At that point I had already figured out his mistake and realized he is not a critical thinker at all because common sense is not. It brings us flat Earth's with the sun going around them.
Oh, the Greeks also figured out that the earth wasn't flat but round and even fairly, accurately how big just using this geometry stuff and shadows. woo.

As for the rest of the word salad and the video I only glanced at it, but it is just word salad with sciency sounding bits sprinkled on it, flush it out of your brain with copious adult beverages.

Unfortunately, this geometric approach to understanding multiplication is if taught at all not reinforced to the point that it is rare for a non-mathematician to know it and would probably flabbergast your average grade school teacher who went into grade school teaching because they were poor in math. And no, I am not a teacher or a mathematician, I'm not even a college graduate.


That is all I am going to say about this except that I saw the post and got distracted by it's absurdity and missed my bus to town so I will have to go shopping tomorrow. Oh well. Thanks for letting me get that rant about stupid stuff on you tube and Ted talks etc out of my system for another day.

 

[wellwisher]

The 1 times 1 is both a noun and an action verb, with the verb multiplying the noun x=1 number of times. Conceptually, if we start with one and multiply it once, we do get 2; original plus the one duplicate. The more common answer =1, appears to assume we are only counting the duplicates that stems from the action verb. The original is kept in a vault and can be duplicated when more are needed. The duplicates are manufactured and may have defects, but the original was hand made to perfection, making a distinction in terms of two separate, by similar nouns.

My favorite is division by fractions. If have 1 gallon of gasoline and divide by 1/2 we get two gallons. This violates energy conservation. The miracle where Jesus feeds thousands with just a few fish and loaves of bread is mathematically possible, if Jesus simply divided the fish and bread by 1/1000. Division by a fraction is like a multiplier while being called a divider.

If I have 1 divided by 2, we get 1/2. We get 2 halves of the original, with each half being 1/2 of the original. In this case we are concerned with the final size pieces of the original. Since multiplication reverses this; 1/2 times 2 =1, I guess we is more concerned with just the manufactured 1/2 and not the original standard. It is slicing bread, holding the original, so we can cut off the half loaf slice we will count.

It can get confusing when just memorized and not reasoned through so it makes sense.

In this topic, the mathematician is making no distinction between the original and duplicates. He adds the original to the count. This is valid to life experience and is similar to butchering your own livestock, compared to bringing it to a butcher who charges you a meat fee, so you end up with less. Both can work. It depends on the convention chosen. Most people hire out specialty tasks like butchery, so the lower number applies to more people, and was chosen as the commerce standard. It assumes a cost that lowers the amount.

 

[PureX]

Math is a logic language.

The "x" calls for some number of designated units to be repeated by some numerical factor and then added together.

A pair of units '2' replicated by a factor of '3' (2, 2, 2) and then summarized leaves us with 6 units.

2 x 3 = 6

If we change the meaning of the symbols, we change the meaning of the "sentence".

 

[Mock Turtle]

From the Wiki article on him:

https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2019/09/26/what_the_heck_is_terrence_howard_talking_about.html

Terrence Howard Lies about having a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering on Jimmy Kimmel Live

Celebrities Impersonating Engineers: Academy Award-nominated Terrence Howard falsely claims on national television he earned a doctorate in Chemical Engineering Terrence Howard may be respected as a...

web.archive.org

Not sure what the addition of 1 and 1 and the multiplication of 1 and 1 being the same will help at all.

 

[Dimi95]

Meanwhile back in the mathematics that we use, multiplication gives us the area of a square/rectangle with unit sides of the multiplicands (?).
Take a rectangle of kiddy blocks two blocks tall and 3 blocks wide. 2 by 3 or 2x3, how many individual blocks do you have? Six since you have been playing on the floor and if you had A block you would find that it is 1 high and 1 wide or 1 by 1 or 1x1 which is an area of 1.
You know what a square is, So when you take that area of nine blocks of whatever shape and cut it up into pieces so that you can fit them into a square shape. The same area of paper, just in little pieces. When you measure the sides of this square you will find that it is 3 of whatever unit.You have just geometrically determined squares and square roots, 3x3 or 3^2 or 3 squared equals 9 and the square root of 9, the size of a side of a square of area 9 is 3.
so now you know where those words come from, not numbers but geometry.
He has done a strange job of redefining multiplication as addition or something.
This was all figured out by Greeks who later stole Arab numbers to describe their lines so we can read it instead of looking at it as a bunch of circles and lines all before Christ was ever heard of.

I didn't actually read beyond where he invoked common sense. At that point I had already figured out his mistake and realized he is not a critical thinker at all because common sense is not. It brings us flat Earth's with the sun going around them.
Oh, the Greeks also figured out that the earth wasn't flat but round and even fairly, accurately how big just using this geometry stuff and shadows. woo.

As for the rest of the word salad and the video I only glanced at it, but it is just word salad with sciency sounding bits sprinkled on it, flush it out of your brain with copious adult beverages.

Unfortunately, this geometric approach to understanding multiplication is if taught at all not reinforced to the point that it is rare for a non-mathematician to know it and would probably flabbergast your average grade school teacher who went into grade school teaching because they were poor in math. And no, I am not a teacher or a mathematician, I'm not even a college graduate.


That is all I am going to say about this except that I saw the post and got distracted by it's absurdity and missed my bus to town so I will have to go shopping tomorrow. Oh well. Thanks for letting me get that rant about stupid stuff on you tube and Ted talks etc out of my system for another day.

What is n , what is n² and what is n³ ?
Let's see what the numbers say

We know that N(Natural Numbers)={1,2,3,4,5...}
We know that W(Whole numbers)={0,1,3,4,5...}
We know that Z(Integers)={...-2,-1,0,1,2..}
We know that Q(Rational Numbers)={1/2, 3/4, 7/2, ⁻4/3, 4/1}
We know that R(Real Numbers)={0.5, 0.75, 2.35, -0.073, 0.3333, 2.142857 + the irrational numbers π and √2}

So let us see first what n is
n+n=2n
n×n=n²

So what is the difference between 2n and n²?

Let's say that n = 1
1+1=2x1
1×1=1²

So my question is why 1² = 1?

Multiplication is a mathematical operation that indicates how many times a number is added to itself.
To multiply means to increase or cause to increase greatly in number or quantity.

Let's see how it goes with adding.
If you add one drop of water on another drop of water what do you get?
The same drop of water but twice the matter or twice the same drop of water?
Is 1+1=2 or 1+1=1²?

His math only makes a difference in state of matter.

Let's see how it goes with basic rules.
1+1=2
1x1=1

2+2=4
2x2=4
4=4

That means that 2+2=2×2

So if we know that 1+1=2 then we can replace the '2' with '1+1'
1+1+1+1=1+1x1+1
Is this correct with the rules that we use? NO

if 1×1=1 then 1+1+1=3

So that means:
1+1+1+1≠1+1+1 as 4≠3
So 2+2≠2x2

I mean it can be true if we use Parentheses , but in his math he doesn't need them.

Let's see how he says it:
1+1=2 and 1x1=2
2+2=4 and 2x2=4

1+1+1+1=1+1×1+1=4
4=1+2+1=4
4=4=4

I don't know , maybe i am wrong and somebody can answer where i might be wrong in my calculations.

 

[Dimi95]

Oh well. Thanks for letting me get that rant about stupid stuff on you tube and Ted talks etc out of my system for another day.

I am sorry

 

[Pogo]

Multiplication is a mathematical operation that indicates how many times a number is added to itself.
To multiply means to increase or cause to increase greatly in number or quantity.

Though that is the way it is taught, that is not actually the logic behind it.
It comes from the geometrical concept that a square with sides of length one is defined as an area of 1 and a rectangle of length 1 on one side and length 2 on the other has an area of 2 and so on.
That the rules of addition on a number line allow you get the same numerical answer by multiple additions is not really the same concept.

We need an actual math person here, maybe @Banach-Tarski Paradox will show up, I think he might be able to help.

 

[Revoltingest]

Terrence Howard - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Excerpted....
In a 2015 interview with Rolling Stone, Howard explained that he had formulated his own language of logic, which he called "Terryology", and which he was keeping secret until he had patented it. This logic language, he claimed, would be used to prove the statement "1 × 1 = 2".[39]
:
In 2017, Howard published his "proof" of the claim that "1 × 1 = 2" on his Twitter account.[40] Some concerns were raised on the logical consistency of Howard's thinking.[41]

 

[Pogo]

Terrence Howard - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Excerpted....
In a 2015 interview with Rolling Stone, Howard explained that he had formulated his own language of logic, which he called "Terryology", and which he was keeping secret until he had patented it. This logic language, he claimed, would be used to prove the statement "1 × 1 = 2".[39]
:
In 2017, Howard published his "proof" of the claim that "1 × 1 = 2" on his Twitter account.[40] Some concerns were raised on the logical consistency of Howard's thinking.[41]

Yes, he is a crackpot who makes a basic mistake and then in a self-indulgent haze goes on from there, but he has money and an audience of people who know no more about any of what he is talking about than he does.
It is another version of genius stability I fear.
Money and pieces of paper on the wall don't make one right.

He takes multiplication as multiple serial addition such as 2x3 =add 2 three times or 2+2+2 that's ok, but with 1x1 which should be add 1 one time he comes up with 1+1 instead of 1+ nothing because you only add it one time which is something most figured out when we came back to reality.

argh and

We are doomed unless we all get .50 calibers and shoot all the stupid people to solve the population problem. /s

 

[Dimi95]

Yes, he is a crackpot who makes a basic mistake and then in a self-indulgent haze goes on from there, but he has money and an audience of people who know no more about any of what he is talking about than he does.
It is another version of genius stability I fear.
Money and pieces of paper on the wall don't make one right.

He takes multiplication as multiple serial addition such as 2x3 =add 2 three times or 2+2+2 that's ok, but with 1x1 which should be add 1 one time he comes up with 1+1 instead of 1+ nothing because you only add it one time which is something most figured out when we came back to reality.

argh and

We are doomed unless we all get .50 calibers and shoot all the stupid people to solve the population problem. /s

It is also weird to me , regardless of what i answered.
I don't know , it will take time before i study all of this.

You say you add nothing , but you add it on the previous 1.

If you don't culculate it like that , then 1=0
We know that 1≠0

What he does is this
1×18=18+1 and that is how he gets this 19
He adds the value of 1 to the solution , hence he has 1 orange and he wants 18 times more of what he has.So instead of the 18 , he wants also the one that he already has to the equation.He thinks that the solution is what he has + the multiplied number.
But if you go with his logic then 18x1 will be 36 and not 18.That means that 18×1=18+18

2×3 would be 2+6 and that means 8

I don't know , this is too weird.

We will wait for someone who knows more.

 

[Pogo]

It is also weird to me , regardless of what i answered.
I don't know , it will take time before i study all of this.

You say you add nothing , but you add it on the previous 1.

If you don't culculate it like that , then 1=0
We know that 1≠0

What he does is this
1×18=18+1 and that is how he gets this 19
He adds the value of 1 to the solution , hence he has 1 orange and he wants 18 times more of what he has.So instead of the 18 , he wants also the one that he already has to the equation.He thinks that the solution is what he has + the multiplied number.
But if you go with his logic then 18x1 will be 36 and not 18.That means that 18×1=18+18

2×3 would be 2+6 and that means 8

I don't know , this is too weird.

We will wait for someone who knows more.

he screws up at the first point 1x1 is not 1+1 it is add +1 once=1 1x2 is then add +1 twice or +1+1=2
2x3 is add 2 three times or +2+2+2 = 6
Stop there, everything beyond that is logical garbage and only there to snow you and apparently him

 

[Dimi95]

Can someone close this thread because i cannot delete it.

At the begining , i thought i would take this to geometry and the periodic table , but as it seems 1x1 can be 2 , but it is technically plausible that it is only 1,because without that 1 you cannot replicate anything.
So technically,we have it.
Multiplication starts with the sum of 'the one that is there' and the 'the one that is the replicator'.
Terrence believes that the one he got for free is not enough for him.

The replicator has to be different then 1 for multiplication to work.
Any number except 1.
If one was to be multiplied the same , then reality would be only a series of big bang event.
And Evolution does not work.
If that is so then , Evolution is also false.

I have done my research and concluded that 1x1=1

Other teaching then that , it is heresy.
Nobody can change this.
Not even Terrence Howard.

However , this was a lesson for me in some way.

I don't want these things to be discussed since they are false , so closing the thread would be much appriciated.

 

[Madsaac]

2×3 would be 2+6 and that means 8

They are different

Two groups of three equals six

Two and six equals eight