you have for no reason decided that convergence and divergence is a property that a real number has and you have offered no mathematical explantion of what this means.
i don't recal saying, thinking or seeking anything about real numbers and divergence. I did for convergence, just because there was plenty of stuff already availible, and it fits with my biological stuff, which we had better not get into. I haven't offered an explanation of convergent matrix, because its been done by others and so exist to be taken when the time is right for that to happen. My present focus is primarily conceptual which is how to get a convergent matrix to invert in some kind of way to a real number like 5 which can produce an irrational divergent series.
you asserted that phi and log are examples of these. one of these is a real number, the other is a function. you asserted that you think they are the 'reverse of convergent matrices' without explaining what you think a convergent matrix is.
now you assert they ought to be the inverse of a (convergent) matrix. The inverse of a matrix is a matrix (when it exists).
I don't think they are inverses, reversals, or i believe now the correct term is reciprocal. I'm looking for likely candidates, and those two looked like promising beginnings. conceptually, I think a convergent matrix decreases itself to a binary systems. Correct me if I'm wrong. Also along those lines previously you stated
The inverse of a matrix (if one exits) is a matrix, not a real number (unless the matrix also happens to be a non-zero real number, ie 1x1),
so what is the inverse of this kind of binary matrix, you suggest its then real number. ?
Do you know what a matrix is? An mxn representation of a linear map on a vector space? Do you know what a non-singluar matrix is for these are the only ones that have inverses. If M is nonsingular do you udnerstand that the inverse, M^{-1} is the unique matrix satisfying MM^{-1}=M^{-1}M=Id? I doubt it. But you persist in the same vein without checking what other people are telling you.
Well i looked it all up. wasnt hard to grasp. Would i be correct in saying that's its basically a binary matrix ?
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/NonsingularMatrix.html
this in fact is perfect for what I'm trying to do in neurobiology. Its binary or digital matrix or matrices that keep appearing.
your posts are indistinguishable in many ways from those of the cranks who have posted here
i'm now considered a creative genius in my own context. I certainly feel just as annoyed to be called so, as i a crank or crackpot. However, since you want to use a derogatry extreme yet again, i'll just stick up for myself by informing you that such a reciprocal extreme is applied to me by well heeled people in a variety of scenarios. Personally all of these tems piss me off. genius, crank, crackpot..none of these words are good.
I was called a "crank" when i began in neuroscience, because i brought an original agenda of electomagnetic symmetry and a total lack of ability to converse properly. his then grew into something pretty amazing. Basically because i knew what my experience told me, and i had the latitude to do so.
Thats how creativity works, of you know much about creativty. Several years later my lastest book on brain structure and electromagnetism has astounded many professors. It took four years of creative incubation and several years of persistance to climb the ability hill,. where i could speak the language of genetics and neuroscience. And the friction here is similar to that time several years ago within that field. However the crank or what others may more positively call creative idea bit, is what this thread is all about, not proving my ability to converse at your level. Take that attitude if you like. I already came up with the goods in neuroscience and the results which arose are descriptions which seem to be mathematical. So for draft three this maths hill is the next self teaching stage. I know what I'm trying to do.
It hardly likely after coming through all i just described, and just beginning maths 8 weeks ago,while doing a day job, that i'll be up to speed. however regardless, i am steaming ahead anyway. Whats the point in calling me a crank ? or was it crackpot previously. What you mean is you don't understand me, my lack of ability is pissing you off, and you don't think I'm listening. However i know what I'm trying to do, and that's not going off track from a biological dipoles, and an academic support system that tells me I'm heading in the right direction.
Simply write here, in the forum, in your own words what you are taking the definitions of these things to be.
Its not possible, its coming from genetics and biology, and appearing as maths. My support system is prevented me from discussing the primary concepts online
A google link to pages which mention the words 'convergent matrix' (or is it supposed to be convergent matrice, I forget now) doesn't tell us anything.
it was just a reply to your insistence that the term itself was nonsense, as if it never existed and was made up.
If you don't know what the inverse of a matrix is then you really do need to go and look up these things. They aren't what you want to know,
Well i do now thanks to yourself, and it I'm right its binary, you can't know how exciting that is, because it was binary results that arose from the analysis of "areas" of brain structure which posess convergent networks that operate with a structure that is visually a "matrix".
The words convergent, divergent, irrational, matrix and inverse all have mathematical connotations. Connotations which make a reference to phi and log as divergent irrationals nonsense (something which makes no sense). And, no, concatentating words with mathematical meanings is not 'doing speculative mathematical research' anymore than picking words at random from a political textbook is making a speculative attempt to write a constitution for Iraq.
By analogy, what would you think if I wrote: I have this idea in your area: quasi-heriditary microtubules. They are the reverse of macroscopic symplices
...
cant argue with that. That just seem like what I'm trying to do. However my agenda is very deep, so thrashing out defintions is just a current process.
if you had seven years of reason to tell you that microtubles had qualities and results which resulted in mathematic terms, you are sure off, you might find yourself visting a biology forum, trying to grasp how mathematical terms translate to that discipline. This is all I'm trying to do.
i'm not ready to define either side of the equation, convergent or divergent, i originally proposed, as I'm still trying collect a whole load of stuff i can stick on either side, till i finally see which definitions do the trick. I am encouraged however by these non-singular matrixes your proposed.
Anyway if up to could you or yanyone else tell me if
1. a convergent matrix tends towards binaries.?
2. a non-singluar matrix i.e. the only ones that have inverses are binary. ?
Sprinkle
