**Elementary Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem**

**and Physical vs Logical Quasic Living Space Atmospheres (Continued...)**

*L. Edgar Otto*20 October, 2012

We already see, as in
the global but suspected nonlocality of computing circuits, that quanta
contained as q-bits may be observed across variable scales without a threshold
of disturbing the state of the bit and within their boundaries may be
transfered between container spaces.
The question then is the finer and finer definition of the mirrors in
the microwave probe that contains them.

But in this
generalization if we are to insist on a generalization for the sake of approach
from a different view in computation, those who take a more continuous group
stance (the quasinfiite) in applying ideas of complex numbers, might have a
direction to develop with worthwhile effects discovered including more rapid
specific computations than existing methods that are already streamlined in the
design of patterns to speed up computation as quasic methods alone.

The next frontier of
such explorations requires a better understanding of some of the foundations of
number theory to the point these are in a sense a reliable ground as if a
theory of everything insofar as it relavant to our current human science
concerns.

For number itself,
from the complex factoring no longer unique in the generalization that makes
four space as complex numbers more complicated than the usual idea that some
principles and laws are simpler in such space, in particular the first of these
is 37. But in the quasic system as it
applies to the gene code in four and eight complex properties of the algebraic
system we have this as a symmetric across the quasic main diagonal as the
terminator codon whereas Fermat's initiator is 25 all of which begins beyond
the space 24 invariant cells. Note this
difference while seeming balanced evokes across the symmetry of numbers ancient
property ideas of the division of values by binary halving, that is the
viriality in its physical interpretations as Rowlands points out.

In these higher
reaches of space with the idea of the physics as concrete living in the top
half of the graph that involves zero and absolute values we can now raise the
issues of such binary values with the addition of one or the subtraction of
one in the superscript of higher powers such that we can know from the ends of
a large number some properties without computing those in between.

But, as Singh pointed
out these are almost perfect or less than perfect numbers with the overall
problem in this general and more or less hyperbolic space of which it is hard
to make a picture beyond shadow polytopes at the Euclidean flat and neutral
balance (this I intuit in creative object space as intrinsically a grounding of
quasifinite momentum balanced but with natural asymmetry.

Existentially,
and QED, it is clear the scope of the developmental or evolving quasic grid acts at the level of the strength of chemical
bonds within each of the four paired bases heretofore controversial concepts as
imagined generally or globally for such spaces.
Let us also note the designs in a grid or in decoding that allow us to
make the solutions one way easy the other way difficult. This is built into the reading of natures
evolved organisms.

What do we mean then
by numbers that are in the difference of powers excessively near and cannot
seem to find them...? This is likely beyond the logic at the frontier of this
natural difference of hidden mass and asymmetry for example the role of the
idea of a monopole or magnetism in general as the last piece of the puzzle
assumed as to how black holes eat the momentum of objects falling into them.

What are we to
rationally make of the logical design of objects on this level if not wider
levels of logic itself? In terms of mere
linguistics rather than emphasis on the finite view of building up errors and
math despite the noise all existing proofs, while compelling when understood of
the idea of metalanguage are based on this trivial idea of uniqueness of prime
factoring thus we need to analyze the primes more so if we are to correctly
interpret such proofs, if we are to wade through the noise as if a quasi-chaos
to achieve what we have underestimated as the goal and difficulty of
unification of our current designs of physics.

I find it gratifying
and reassuring many of these principles in my own studies I understood as
important and intuitively correct found along the way naturally of which I find
so many with these concerns as a new breakthrough in the pointing out of the
significance of focus upon them. Into
some new areas on the frontiers of speculation it is a natural result that new
territory will be found. It is also
quite likely few can write a paper in the lesser generalization no matter how
complicated this is really not original and fundamental more than privious
explorers save perhaps to the experience and learning as if new for an
individual or for an age, or that age recurring in the scheme of things.

For it is quite at
the flatness of which Riemann assumed reached the Pythagorean level and no
further or that higher group dimensions were not relevant into the next few
dimensions- understandable considering the vast new world of insights
concerning zeta spaces and non-Euclidean relations of powers as our usual ideas
of natural dimensions. But this is the
reborn flatness that seems to be involved when in fact we logically unify such
geometries that stand or fall together as a description of realty- but the next
level of spaces, not the mere enumeration of say the view of butterfly cusps
as in Rene Thom in four space manifolds, that requires in the unification a
deeper understand of the logic of what we mean stands or fall together. But it is just the flatland of which Fermat
had the insight to stand on as a logically, inductively, and intuitively sound
basis.

Numbers in the
counting may seem magical at first that they fit so well together... so too the
patterns they form seems all the more magical or surprising in our time. It is not a coincidence or artifact of
counting that the patterns of numbers, even the algebra of the equations of the
pictures, would sum squares of 3 and 4
thus 5 as the ground and that 9 and 4 make 13, obviously in the symmetry breaking of the 26
in that cosmic string theory...and in the named as magic supposed stability of
such numbers in the nucleus of presumed subshells (their naturally in pairs as
all issues where it is not explicit or clear what logical method of parity of
coloring relations black and white co-exist in higher dimensional lattices.)

In the idea
concerning time, tachyonic or even paradoxical aspects, it is natural that at
the 25 sandwiched power flatland foundation these arise as a consideration to
be explored and refined or resolved until vanishing for a more general
theory. In the flat Euclidean and Pythagorean triple it is clear that excesses in the power lattices that could
involve a proof inductively or in infinite decent of the inequality that at the
heart of the 4 unit side the deeper algebraic formula (and even in the
computation of the perimeter we fly into the four-space to come back down to our
familiar space again as if this computation done in some space not real or at least
unseen) we have the power of two ie 2mn with m^2-n^2 summed to the ancient
pre-Euclid m^2 + n^2. Structurally we
quite image a slice of this hyperbolic space scale condensed with the illusion
of different areas, as in a pseudo-sphere or Escher disk, that at least 2 lines
can be drawn parallel to a third at a point- but 2 is involved here in the
sense at the simplest impossible equations by zero division two is in a sense
equal to zero uniquely for is this not the difference in the sum of subcells in orthogons,
2 in odd dimensions and 0 in even dimensions... but odd and evenness is not the
only thing that distinguishes integers on a defined foundational level.

* * * *

*(Part IV Some Footnotes):*
The abstract
boundaries in 4D super space, complex or not, at 24, I call

*Fermat's razor*.
The source of light
as a concept, physically or in a sense metaphorically subjective, needs not be
dependent on the stage or frame of light, this a statement of non-necessity.

The psychological
model of Carl Jung, essentially a thermodynamic model, suggests these subtle differences in the stereonomic geometrical and arithmetical structures along the
lines of logical balances is an intimate connection to our ideas of thermodynamics
including a breath of extended grounding for synchronicity over some interval
of time much as observed in such mysteries of quantum principles. This of course begins with the description of
heat flow in relation to complex number spaces over idealized planes that
synthetically amounts to a division in an equation of the real and imaginary
parts.

From this view the
steps and the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem as worked out in its multi-page
effort covering a wide variety of mathematics and the parallels of some of the
mirrors of methods, for example the elliptic questions- all of which on the
more general level are in the fifth operation in arithmetic at the raw
structures involved at grounding and unifying or resolution of consistencies,
these a higher order dialectic as if thought too can be so described
thermodynamically along these lines- so reduced then and quite less general
than the nature of space quasically envisioned... reduced then these mirrored
real or virtual forms that naturally begin with subtle differences, the take or
put as active and the lose or find as passive as the logical possibilities
refined then to the intellect and intuition to which the science, more
certainty in grounding or not as a working mathematics and symbol system
balances with sensation and feeling. All
such models may be limited in application and computation of the states of mind
thus debatable as to further complication of such dualities and dimensions and
the presumed higher reaches of the idea of symmetry or color.

What I have imagined
as a dynamic process I call teleoscoping intuitively a physics principle and
arising from consideration of organic DNA code patterns is also the mathematical
aspect felt needed for that more rigorous grounding as logical certainty of
laws presumed. But I realize as I translate and compare it to existing concepts
so applied in the invention or discovery, the noise and count, information and
meaning, the time and temperature of our ideas of entropy and energy is a
property of arithmetic itself to so be resolved into the still unexplored,
evidently symmetries as applied to say replicate tiling as in quasi-crystals
in the steps dealing with the effort of recovering memory or laying it down as
a steppingstone in the proofs with mathematical induction not in the
endlessness of the infinite but in what Singh in the book calls the compromise
of clock time in the heat from computations, the spectrum also reduced of
irrationals into a circle...

In string theories it
is the partitions that also limit the defaulting themes in a stereonomic
dimensional structure I maintain as the grounding choice available in all the
landscape (and in the book the mere exchange of such strict symmetry of two of
the 10^87 said numbers of particles in the universe I presume is the logical
possibilities along the lines of Eddington's vision, the matrix as the physical
description of the observable universe and its mirror shadow in the continuum depending on the axiom of the velocity limit of light.

The focusing of these
non-linear possible structures that we ground the particle zoo is in a sense a
physical quasi reduction of similar counts, an intermediate teleoscoping so to
speak which philosophically does raise the metaphor of teleos or purpose with a
directionality or even continuum with irreversibility where that stands out and
seems to apply that is grounded more generally into the stratosphere of our
dark matter metaphors. The definition of
numbers, such as the nature of division and subtraction, its idea of fractions
is after all a sort of space or landscape of such clock looping and precipitating
teleoscoping of which we can imagine the idea that in the physical processes at
least for organic systems the idea of sentience as well as life physical structures
given the thermodynamic space will inevitably everywhere at least potentially
arise.

But we cannot just
assume a limit to these emergent processes so implied as participated cycles
isolated and independent of the simple idea of multiverse and many world
totalities resolved in consistencies or not- we can try to understand it but in
general, and even as a physics of statistics of chance, the emptiness if every
a true vacuum in the stratosphere tends to participated around the material
atmosphere as the deep parallel logic of all such groundings.

A little distant in
contemplations on numbers it appears that although immersed in the seemingly
obvious this pattern of numbers is as amazing and deep in concept that
challenges us and drives our light of enquiry as we can more easily from that
breath and safety of the repeatable and real if we are strong enough to look
into it at that unknown vague sense we may feel about an absolute nothingness
as if it a certain ground. The idea of
sensation in this breath of contemplation as if a spacious surface, a skin over
the bare structure of branes and black holes suggests our ideas of sensations
go even deeper into the freedom and emptiness of space than mere mechanical and
imaginative methods of perception have considered heretofore, thus beyond the
now familiar idea of the strange logic of quantum and other elaborate and
advanced theories.

* * * * * * *

## No comments:

## Post a Comment