scholarly journals Fundamental Theorems of Pure Mathematics & Absolute Geometry

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Besud Chu Erdeni ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  

The superunified field theory consists of a row of discoveries in the realm of pure mathematics. It is two centuries ago that Karl Gauss unified higher arithmetic (number theory), algebra and geometry into what is called pure mathematics. The latter, however, still remains without its fundamental theorem despite that arithmetic and algebra, or even analysis, have their own.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Besud Chu Erdeni ◽  

This is a briefest possible introduction to the absolute geometry of space, time and matter. Absolute geometry or the post-Euclidean geometry does automatically lead to the superunified theory of quantized fields and fundamental interactions. In general, we have eventually constructed the ultimate system of universal mathematical harmony observed by us as the physical Universe. No work in theoretical physics and pure mathematics directly precedes to this theory we propose. Instead, it accomplishes original Pythagorean (arithmetisation) znd Platonic (geometrization) concepts of natural philosophy integrated afterwards by Jiordano Bruno.


2016 ◽  
pp. 4422-4429
Author(s):  
C. Y. Lo

It is exciting that the gravitational wave has been confirmed, according to the announcement of LIGO. This would be the time to fix the Einstein equation for the gravitational wave and the nonexistence of the dynamic solution. As a first step, theorists should improve their pure mathematics on non-linear mathematics and related physical considerations beyond Einstein. Then, it is time to rectify the Einstein equation that has no gravitational wave solution which Einstein has recognized, and no dynamic solution that Einstein failed to see. A problem is that physicists in LIGO did not know their shortcomings. Also, in view of the far distance of the sources, it is very questionable that the physicists can determine they are from black holes. Moreover, since the repulsive gravitation can also generate a gravitational wave, the problem of gravitational wave is actually far more complicated than we have known. A useful feature of the gravitational wave based on repulsive gravitation is that it can be easily generated on earth. Thus this can be a new tool for communication because it can penetrate any medium.


Author(s):  
Lisa Shabel

The state of modern mathematical practice called for a modern philosopher of mathematics to answer two interrelated questions. Given that mathematical ontology includes quantifiable empirical objects, how to explain the paradigmatic features of pure mathematical reasoning: universality, certainty, necessity. And, without giving up the special status of pure mathematical reasoning, how to explain the ability of pure mathematics to come into contact with and describe the empirically accessible natural world. The first question comes to a demand for apriority: a viable philosophical account of early modern mathematics must explain the apriority of mathematical reasoning. The second question comes to a demand for applicability: a viable philosophical account of early modern mathematics must explain the applicability of mathematical reasoning. This article begins by providing a brief account of a relevant aspect of early modern mathematical practice, in order to situate philosophers in their historical and mathematical context.


2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 944-1005
Author(s):  
Guillermina Jasso

Inequality often appears in linked pairs of variables. Examples include schooling and income, income and consumption, and wealth and happiness. Consider the famous words of Veblen: “wealth confers honor.” Understanding inequality requires understanding input inequality, outcome inequality, and the relation between the two—in both inequality between persons and inequality between subgroups. This article contributes to the methodological toolkit for studying inequality by developing a framework that makes explicit both input inequality and outcome inequality and by addressing three main associated questions: (1) How do the mechanisms for generating and altering inequality differ across inputs and outcomes? (2) Which have more inequality—inputs or outcomes? (3) Under what conditions, and by what mechanisms, does input inequality affect outcome inequality? Results include the following: First, under specified conditions, distinctive mechanisms govern inequality in inputs and inequality in outcomes. Second, input inequality and outcome inequality can be the same or different; if different, whether inequality is greater among inputs or outcomes depends on the configuration of outcome function, types of inputs, distributional form of and inequality in cardinal inputs, and number of and associations among inputs. Third, the link between input inequality and outcome inequality is multiform; it can be nonexistent, linear, or nonlinear, and if nonlinear, it can be concave or convex. More deeply, this work signals the formidable empirical challenges in studying inequality, but also the fast growing toolbox. For example, even if the outcome distribution is difficult to derive, fundamental theorems on the variance make it possible to analyze the input–outcome inequality connection. Similarly, within specified distributions, the general inequality parameter makes it possible to express results in terms of both measures of overall inequality and measures of subgroup inequality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document