2015/06/27 10:03
蒲生遺跡で見つかった「かん水槽」＝香川県小豆島町蒲生
香川県が小豆島町の蒲生（かもう）遺跡で行っている発掘調査で、鎌倉時代から江戸時代に造られたとみられる製塩関連施設の跡が見つかった。塩田を構成する施設のうち、塩分濃度を高めた海水を釜にかけて煮詰めるまでに、一時的にためておく「かん水槽」で、県は「当時の塩作りの在り方を示す貴重な史料」としている。２８日に現地説明会が開かれる。
県内でかん水槽の跡が見つかるのは、瀬戸大橋の建設に伴う１９８０～８２年度の発掘調査で、平安時代から鎌倉時代のかん水槽が見つかった大浦浜遺跡（坂出市櫃石島）以来２例目。
蒲生遺跡が２０１７年春に開校予定の県立統合高校の建設地に隣接していることから、県埋蔵文化財センターが５月から７月末までの予定で発掘調査を進めている。
同センターによると、かん水槽は調査区域に少なくとも１１基あったと推定され、このうち完全な形で発掘できた２基は、深さ約９０センチの穴で、長径約４・５メートル、短径約３・５メートルの楕円（だえん）形。土の堆積状況などから、約８００年前の鎌倉時代以降のものだという。
海水が土の中に漏れ出すのを防ぐため、底面や壁面は厚さ１０センチ程度の粘土で覆われている。また、江戸時代の小豆島の文献に、一本柱にかやぶきの屋根が付いたかん水槽の絵図が描かれていることから、底面の中央部に置かれた石が柱の土台だったと考えられる。
現地説明会は２８日午後１～３時に開催。参加無料。駐車スペースが少ないため、公共交通機関の利用を呼び掛けている。問い合わせは同遺跡現場事務所〈０８７９（６１）３５２０〉。http://www.shikoku-np.co.jp/kagawa_news/culture/20150627000134
Announcement 213: An interpretation of the identity $ 0.999999...... =1$
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\begin{document}
\title{\bf Announcement 213: An interpretation of the identity $ 0.999999...... =1$
}
\author{{\it Institute of Reproducing Kernels}\\
\date{}
\maketitle
{\bf Abstract: } In this announcement, we shall give a very simple interpretation for the identity: $ 0.999999......=1$.
\bigskip
\section{ Introduction}
On January 8, 2008, Yuusuke Maede, 8 years old boy, asked the question, at Gunma University, that (Announcement 9(2007/9/1): Education for genius boys and girls):
What does it mean by the identity:
$$
0.999999......=1?
$$
at the same time, he said: I am most interesting in the structure of large prime numbers. Then, a teacher answered for the question by the popular reason based on the convergence of the series: $0.9, 0.99, 0.999,... $. Its answer seems to be not suitable for the 8 years old boy with his parents (not mathematicians). Our answer seems to have a general interest, and after then, such our answer has not been heard from many mathematicians, indeed.
This is why writting this announcement.
\medskip
\bigskip
\section{An interpretation}
\medskip
In order to see the essence, we shall consider the simplist case:
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2^2} + \frac{1}{2^3} + ... = 1.
\end{equation}
Imagine a tape of one meter length, we will give its half tape: that is,
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
Next, we will give its (the rest's half) half tape; that is, $\frac{1}{2}\cdot \frac{1}{2} = \frac{1}{2^2}$, then you have, altogether
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2^2} .
\end{equation}
Next, we will give the last one's half (the rest's half); that is, $\frac{1}{2}\cdot \frac{1}{2} \cdot \frac{1}{2}= \frac{1}{2^3}$,
then, you have, altogether
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2^2} + \frac{1}{2^3}.
\end{equation}
By this procedure, you will be able to obtain the small tapes endressly. Imagine all the sum as in the left hand side of (2.1). However, we will see that this sum is just the division of the one meter tape. Therefore, we will be able to confim the identity (2.1), clearly.
The question proposed by Y. Maede is just the small change the ratio $\frac{1}{2}$ by $\frac{9}{10}$.
\bigskip
\section{ Conclusion}
Y. Maede asked the true sense of the limit in the series:
$$
0.999999.....
$$
that is, this series is approaching to 1; however, is it equal or not ? The above interpretation means that the infinite series equals to one and it is just the infinite division of one. By this inverse approarch, the question will make clear.
\medskip
\bigskip
\section{Remarks}
Y. Maede stated a conjecture that for any prime number $p$ $( p \geqq 7)$, for $1$ of $ - 1$
\begin{equation}
11111111111
\end{equation}
may be divided by $p$ (2011.2.6.12:00 at University of Aveiro, by skype)
\medskip
(No.81, May 2012(pdf 432kb)
www.jams.or.jp/kaiho/kaiho-81.pdf).
\medskip
This conjecture was proved by Professors L. Castro and Y. Sawano,
independently. Y. Maede gave later an interesting interpretation for his conjecture.
\medskip
(2015.2.26)
\end{document}
Announcement 214: Surprising mathematical feelings of a 7 years old girl
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\begin{document}
\author{{\it Institute of Reproducing Kernels}\\
}
\date{}
\maketitle
{\bf Abstract: } In this announcement, we shall give the two surprising mathematical feelings of 7 years old girl Eko Michiwaki who stated the division by 3 of any angle and the division by zero $100/0=0$ as clear and trivial ones. As well-known, these famous problems are historical, and her results will be quite original.
\bigskip
\section{ Introduction}
We had met, 7 years old girl, Eko Michiwaki on November 23, 2014 at Tokyo Institute of Technology and August 23, 2014 at Kusatu Seminor House, with our colleagues. She, surprisingly enough, stated there repeatedly the division by 3 of any angle and the division by zero $100/0=0$ as clear and trivial ones. As well-known, these famous problems are historical and her results will be quite original.
\section{The division of any angle by 3}
\medskip
Eko Michiwaki said:
divide a given angle with 4 equal angles; this is simly done. Next, we divide one divided angle
with 4 equal angles similarly and the three angles add to other 3 angles. By continuing this procedure, we will be able to obtain the division by 3 of any angle. Her idea may be stated mathematically as follows:
$$
\frac{1}{4} + \frac{1}{4^2} + \frac{1}{4^3} + ... ...= \frac{1}{3}.
$$
However, her idea seems to be more clear than the above mathematical formula. For this sentence, see \cite{ann3} for the sense of the limit.
\bigskip
\section{The division by zero $100/0=0$}
\medskip
As we stated in \cite{ann1}, she stated that division by zero $100/0=0$ is clear and trivial for our recent results \cite{cs,kmsy,s,ttk}. The basic important viewpoint is that division and product are different concepts and the division by zero $100/0=0$ is clear and trivial from the own sense of the division, independently of product \cite{ann1}. From the viewpoint, our colleagues stated as follows:
\medskip
On July 11, 2014, Seiichi Koshiba and Masami Yamane said at
Gunma University:
The idea for the division of Hiroshi Michiwaki and Eko Michiwaki (6 years
old daughter) is that division and product are different concepts and they
were calculated independently for long old years, by repeated addition and
subtraction, respectively. Mathematicians made the serious mistake for very
long years that the division by zero is impossible by considering that division
is the inverse operation of product. The division by zero was, however, clear
and trivial, as z/0=0, from the own nature of division.
\medskip
On February 21, 2015, Seiichi Koshiba and Masami Yamane visited our Institute and we confirmed this meaning of these sentences and the basic idea on the division by zero.
\medskip
(2015.2.27)
\bigskip
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\begin{thebibliography}{10}
\bibitem{cs}
L. P. Castro and S.Saitoh, Fractional functions and their representations, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory {\bf7} (2013), no. 4, 1049-1063.
\bibitem{kmsy}
M. Kuroda, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Yamane,
New meanings of the division by zero and interpretations on $100/0=0$ and on $0/0=0$,
Int. J. Appl. Math. Vol. 27, No 2 (2014), pp. 191-198, DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.
\bibitem{s}
S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices, Advances inLinear Algebra \& Matrix Theory. Vol.4 No.2 (2014), 87-95.http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/
\bibitem{ttk}
S.-E. Takahasi, M. Tsukada and Y. Kobayashi, Classification of continuous fractional binary operations on the real and complex fields, Tokyo Journal of Mathematics (in press).
\bibitem{ann1}
Announcement 179: Division by zero is clear as z/0=0 and it is fundamental in mathematics,
Institute of Reproducing Kernels, 2014.10.22.
\bibitem{ann2}
Announcement 185: The importance of the division by zero $z/0=0$, Institute of Reproducing Kernels, 2014.11.28.
\bibitem{ann3}
Announcement 213: An interpretation of the identity $ 0.999999...... =1$, Institute of Reproducing Kernels, 2015.2.26.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\begin{document}
\title{\bf Announcement 237: A reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$ by geometrical optics}
\author{{\it Institute of Reproducing Kernels}\\
\date{\today}
\maketitle
{\bf Abstract: } In this announcement, we shall state a reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$ by the reflection (geometrical optics) and from this fact we will be able to understand that the division by zero $z/0=0$ is natural in both mathematics and our physical world.
\bigskip
\section{Introduction}
%\label{sect1}
By {\bf a natural extension of the fractions}
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{a}
\end{equation}
for any complex numbers $a$ and $b$, we, recently, found the surprising result, for any complex number $b$
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{0}=0,
\end{equation}
incidentally in \cite{s} by the Tikhonov regularization for the Hadamard product inversions for matrices, and we discussed their properties and gave several physical interpretations on the general fractions in \cite{kmsy} for the case of real numbers. The result is a very special case for general fractional functions in \cite{cs}.
The division by zero has a long and mysterious story over the world (see, for example, google site with division by zero) with its physical viewpoints since the document of zero in India on AD 628, however,
Sin-Ei, Takahasi (\cite{taka}) (see also \cite{kmsy}) established a simple and decisive interpretation (1.2) by analyzing some full extensions of fractions and by showing the complete characterization for the property (1.2). His result will show that {\bf our mathematics says} that the result (1.2) should be accepted as a natural one:
\bigskip
{\bf Proposition. }{\it Let F be a function from ${\bf C }\times {\bf C }$ to ${\bf C }$ such that
$$
F (b, a)F (c, d)= F (bc, ad)
$$
for all
$$
a, b, c, d \in {\bf C }
$$
and
$$
F (b, a) = \frac {b}{a }, \quad a, b \in {\bf C }, a \ne 0.
$$
Then, we obtain, for any $b \in {\bf C } $
$$
F (b, 0) = 0.
$$
}
\medskip
Furthermore, note that Hiroshi Michiwaki with his 6 year old daughter gave the important interpretation of the division by zero $z/0=0$ by the intuitive meaning of the division, {\bf independently of the concept of the product }(see \cite{ann}) . See \cite{ann} for the basic meanings of the division by zero.
We shall state a reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$ by the concept of reflection (geometrical optics). It seems that the common interpretations for the reflections for the center of a circle and the point at infinity are not suitable.
\section{Reflection points}
For simplicity, we shall consider the unit circle ${|z| = 1}$ on the complex $z = x +iy$ plane.
Then, we have the reflection formula
\begin{equation}
z^* = \frac{1}{\overline{z}}
\end{equation}
for any point $z$, as well-known (\cite{ahlfors}). For the reflection point $z^*$, there is no problem for the points
$z \neq 0, \infty$. As the classical result, the reflection of zero is the point at infinity and conversely, for the point at infinity we have the zero point. The reflection is a one to one and onto mapping between the inside and the outside of the unit circle.
However, we wonder the following common facts:
Are these correspondences suitable?
Does there exist the point at $\infty$, really?
Is the point at infinity corresponding to the zero point? Is the point at $\infty$ reasonable from the practical point of view?
Indeed, where can we find the point at infinity? Of course, we know plesantly the point at infinity
on the Riemann sphere, however on the complex $z$-plane it seems that we can not find the corresponding point. When we approach to the origin on a radial line, it seems that the correspondence reflection points approach to {\it the point at infinity} with the direction (on the radial line).
\section{Interpretation by the division by zero $z/0=0$}
On the concept of the division by zero, there is no the point at infinity $\infty$ as the numbers. For any point $z$ such that $|z| >1$, there exists the unique point $z^*$ by (2.1). Meanwhile, for any point $z$ such that $|z| < 1$ except $z=0$, there exits the unique point $z^*$ by (2.1).
Here, note that for $z=0$, by the division by zero, $z^*=0$. Furthermore, we can see that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{z \to 0}z^* =\infty,
\end{equation}
however, for $z=0$ itself, by the division by zero, we have $z^*=0$. This will mean a strong discontinuity of the function
\begin{equation}
W = \frac{1}{z}
\end{equation}
at the origin $z=0$; that is a typical property of the division by zero. This strong discontinuity may be looked in the above reflection property, physically.
\section{Conclusion}
{\Large \bf Should we exclude the point at infinity, from the numbers?} We were able to look the strong discontinuity of the division by zero in the reflection with respect to circles, physically ( geometrical optics ).
The division by zero gives a one to one and onto mapping of the reflection (2.1) from the whole complex plane onto the whole complex plane.
{\Large \bf The infinity $\infty$ may be considered as in (3.1) as the usual sense of limits,} however, the infinity $\infty$ is not a definite number.
\bigskip
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\begin{thebibliography}{10}
\bibitem{ahlfors}
L. V. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966.
\bibitem{cs}
L. P. Castro and S.Saitoh, Fractional functions and their representations, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory {\bf7} (2013), no. 4, 1049-1063.
\bibitem{kmsy}
S. Koshiba, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh and M. Yamane,
An interpretation of the division by zero z/0=0 without the concept of product
(note).
\bibitem{kmsy}
M. Kuroda, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Yamane,
New meanings of the division by zero and interpretations on $100/0=0$ and on $0/0=0$,
Int. J. Appl. Math. Vol. 27, No 2 (2014), pp. 191-198, DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.
\bibitem{mst}
H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Takagi,
A new concept for the point at infinity and the division by zero z/0=0
(note).
\bibitem{s}
S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices, Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory. Vol.4 No.2 (2014), 87-95. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/
\bibitem{taka}
S.-E. Takahasi,
{On the identities $100/0=0$ and $ 0/0=0$}
(note).
\bibitem{ttk}
S.-E. Takahasi, M. Tsukada and Y. Kobayashi, Classification of continuous fractional binary operators on the real and complex fields, Tokyo Journal of Mathematics (in press).
\bibitem{ann}
Announcement 185: Division by zero is clear as z/0=0 and it is fundamental in mathematics,
Institute of Reproducing Kernels, 2014.10.22.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿