Quadruple primes at infinity

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Quadrupled primes at infinity is roots,
here with twin primes and for example 3, 5,
and 7, or 2, 3, 5, triple primes.

This is "the point at infinity" is or has
a twin prime, and a triple prime, and a
squadruple prime, four factors that is outside
the additive ring of 6 in primes, at infinity.

This is "at infinity", where otherwise any or
each integer, is not a "quadruple prime".

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Then, effectively having a triple prime "at infinity"
("after 3") is a similar notion as the prime at infinity.
(Or, for example, composite.)

(I.e., one of the the prime factors of a product of a triple
prime is 1 mod 3.)
"

[bassam king karzeddin]

@Ross, there is no such thing as "Infinity" you do believe in, so your thoughts and useless stories trying to make are only useless mind games, NO matter if you can make a huge volume of very bad mathematics that seems consistent by a prior and advanced decision, please get educated
FOR SURE
BKK

[Mathedman]

Nonsense! There ia no place, thing or number
"at infinity"

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Mitch quotes the Wiki on "Primitive root modulo n":

"Gauss proved that for any prime number p (with the
sole exception of p = 3), the product of its primitive
roots is congruent to 1 modulo p. "

[Ross A. Finlayson]

If it's not "there's a point, at infinity", there's
"there are many kinds of "points at infinity",
at infinity".

I.e., besides that there are not "points at
infinity from this to the next except through
them all", i.e., the point at infinity is where
things are no longer to scale for everything
else in the numbers (infinity).

So, absolutely in your theory you can have
"there is no "point at infinity"", in fact as above
that's regular and has all the numbers to scale.

Then, also these "points at infinity" do, too,
scale to all the numbers (and they're regular).

[Ross A. Finlayson]

On Wednesday, October 17, 2018 at 8:14:49 PM UTC-7, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:

Quadruple primes!

Small constants.

Small constants here is gradient and factor solver
rotating the primes.

Principal component analysis and gradient descent is
linear, right.

"Linear."

[Ross A. Finlayson]

What it just seems
"convergence guarantees"
meet "quasi invariance."

[Ross A. Finlayson]

"Dodgson was not concerned with the foundations of the calculus and
the attendant controversy over limits vs. infinitesimals. His interest
was in the rˆole of infinitesimals in geometry and he needed a method to
construct them. His belief in the necessity of their existence is rooted
in the two ways he interprets continuity. The first is the continuity
implicit in the Archimedean axiom; the second is the continuum of
numerical values as one moves from infinite values through finite values
through infinitesimal values to zero"

-- https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.rml/1081173768

[Ross A. Finlayson]

"To construct different orders of infinitesimals of smaller size, he first
cuts off a one inch piece from the infinite strip whose area he believes
is one square inch, claiming its area must be a first order infinitesimal
since no multiple of the area of this short strip can equal the one
inch area of the infinitely long strip. Now he seeks the value of the
width of the short strip (whose length is infinite) and concludes it must
be a smaller infinitesimal than the width of the infinite strip because
otherwise the short strip would have a finite area. Continuing in this
way yields smaller and smaller infinitesimals of the third, fourth,
etc
.
orders."

[Ross A. Finlayson]

"Leibnizian is Archimedean."

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Quadruple primes at infinity
really is about doubling the space
and calling one side infinity.

Clearly here that automatically
introduces the terms.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Quadruple primes, in the additive,
or higher roots in primes, this is
with having the extra terms for the
extra terms, or not, as various systems
of roots illustrate.

Many theorems in complete arithmetic are
different in systems under roots about
the introduction of un-decideability,
of the otherwise factual theorems about
a fixed point, here "at infinity",
some effective infinity (in terms for
example of being a limit point and fixed
point in the arithmetic, under roots,
and the differential).

Some modern systems with conjectures in number
theory like the modular are themselves
introductions of expectations or lack thereof,
much like the usual centralizing and dispersive,
in a modern probability theory.

That they usually establish of course one-way limits
or bounds in direct algebras for representation is
of course, convenient, and not contrived, but systems
of decide-ability results here for example "quadruple primes"
at "the point at infinity", must remain constructive.
(And must be repletely consistent, i.e., with all
constructive criticism included.)