Negative Numbers and Electroweak Non-Parity

[Jacko]

Hi

http://sites.google.com/site/jackokring paper offset.pdf.

Remove the 0>=x>-1 section from the number line.

Use (1-x) as negation and logical inversion.

Half way between 1 and -1 is 0.5 as this is a consistent solution for
arithmetic.

Combine a few orthogonal axises of this new offset symmetric number
line taking truth that dp.dx >0.

And as -0.5 does not exist consistently, it becomes a matter at the
small scale that a non parity of quantization exists.

cheers jacko

p.s. ooooooh.

[Anti Vigilante]

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:49:52 -0700, Jacko wrote:

> Hi
>
> http://sites.google.com/site/jackokring paper offset.pdf.
>
> Remove the 0>=x>-1 section from the number line.

Do you know why?

> Use (1-x) as negation and logical inversion.
>
> Half way between 1 and -1 is 0.5 as this is a consistent solution for
> arithmetic.
>
> Combine a few orthogonal axises of this new offset symmetric number line
> taking truth that dp.dx >0.
>
> And as -0.5 does not exist consistently, it becomes a matter at the
> small scale that a non parity of quantization exists.
>
> cheers jacko
>
> p.s. ooooooh.

Why is it marked as an adult site? It's not.

Secondly, what you have is derivable from dimensional analysis. Check out
h, Planck's constant. The question is do you know why those units are
necessary?

--
Fuck the Enlightenment! Viva la Renaissance!

[Jacko]

On 18 Dec 2009, 03:03, Anti Vigilante <antivigila...@pyrabang.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:49:52 -0700, Jacko wrote:
> > Hi
>

> >http://sites.google.com/site/jackokringpaper offset.pdf.

>
> > Remove the 0>=x>-1 section from the number line.
>
> Do you know why?
>
> > Use (1-x) as negation and logical inversion.
>
> > Half way between 1 and -1 is 0.5 as this is a consistent solution for
> > arithmetic.
>
> > Combine a few orthogonal axises of this new offset symmetric number line
> > taking truth that dp.dx >0.
>
> > And as -0.5 does not exist consistently, it becomes a matter at the
> > small scale that a non parity of quantization exists.
>
> > cheers jacko
>
> > p.s. ooooooh.
>
> Why is it marked as an adult site? It's not.

Tis the default.

> Secondly, what you have is derivable from dimensional analysis. Check out
> h, Planck's constant. The question is do you know why those units are
> necessary?

Velocity being m per s ratio. Or mass manipulation or perhaps charge
squared being a m/s? If kg is not a fundamental unit then its derived
unit contains something about the nature of mass such as being a
reciprocal acceleration or lack there of...? Mass is a measure of
certainty and light is the means to transmit this uncertainty. An
event horizon is certain.