2018年8月21日火曜日

Construction of knowledge through Scientific method Scientists go on guessing until they come across a guess that works

Construction of knowledge through Scientific method Scientists go on guessing until they come across a guess that works

n western science, induction is called into play in generalizing from a limited number of observations of a property of a sample (s) to the entire population very often infinite in numbers. These are usually abstract inductions. A good example is the falling of objects to the earth.   

Isaac Newton would have observed some apples falling when released from the trees. What he did was to generalize this experience to all objects (not merely apples) near the earth, and to make the generalized statement that all objects near the earth fall to the earth when released. That was abstract induction, and the population was the objects near the earth. Then of course he had the problem of the moon that did not fall.   

This is the first stage of western science. The population is identified, samples are considered, some property of the sample (s) is observed, and the property is generalized to the entire population, very often of infinite number of members. With respect to populations with infinite number of members we are dealing with abstractions.   

As can be seen in induction it is assumed that the relevant property is common to the entire population. As has been said induction belongs to rationalism in western philosophy. In western science, it is assumed that with respect to a certain property the entire population behaves the same way. This is nothing but another “axiom”. 
In the second stage scientists attempt to give an “explanation” of the generalized abstract observation. This is where abduction comes in. Abduction is guessing and nothing else. It belongs to rationalism in western Philosophy and by abduction scientists arrive at “axioms”. In guessing it is assumed again that the “axiom” applies to the entire population.   

Why do the objects near the earth fall to the earth? Newton had an answer to the question. Others might have given different answers to the question, which did not work. Finally, it was Newton’s guess on gravitation that worked.   

However, it did not work for the entire population. The moon does not fall. Newton could have excluded the moon from the population by taking the moon not to be near enough to the earth. However, he did not do that, as he wanted his guess to be universal, and gave an explanation as to why the moon does not fall to the earth. It was with his laws of motion and by considering circular motion. 

Newton’s guess could be considered as an abstract generalization valid for any two objects in the universe. However, it has to be mentioned that Newton did not explain how this force operates, and it was nothing but spooky action at a distance, if we use a later expression by Einstein with respect to Quantum Mechanics. 
Abductions are guesses, and the scientists go on guessing until they come across a guess that works. However, these guesses are culture dependent, and abstract. Very often, it is those scientists in cultures that help abstract thinking who come out with successful abstract guesses. The guesses are made in a certain paradigm in Thomas Kuhn’s sense, and when a guess cannot be made in the existing paradigm, the scientist has to make a guess with respect to the paradigm as well.
Paradigms are also guessed and guessing of a new paradigm is considered as revolutionary science by Kuhn.

A paradigm prescribes the Game Rules that have to be adhered to in making guesses of “axioms”. A change of paradigm or paradigm shift is a change of the Game Rules. In the Newton paradigm all velocities were relative to the so-called inertial frames, but in Eisenstein paradigm this rule was changed, and the velocity of light remained constant in all so-called inertial frames of reference.   
“Axioms” and paradigms are guessed in a culture. Both Newton and the Eisenstein paradigms were created in western Judaic Christian culture, while Quantum Mechanics was created outside Judaic Christian culture with its Aristotelian Logic.Bohr who was a pioneer in creating Quantum Mechanics was influenced by Ying -Yang idea in Chinese culture.   

Any guess is subject to correction, and would not hold for the entire population for all situations. Guesses, and hence “axioms” which are sometimes called theories, are valid only for limited cases. It can be said that the guesses work only for a limited number of cases, approximately, and one should expect them to fail in some cases. This is somewhat similar to Karl Popper’s falsification, and guesses or “axioms” or theories are subject to falsification, after particularization as explained below. The guesses are never right but only “work” under certain circumstances. However, an “axiom” is not thrown away, simply because one of its particularization does not work. It is used wherever it works, leaving aside the case when it does not work. The theory of gravitation due to Newton was not thrown away just because its particularization with respect to the orbits of the planets around the sun did not work. It is still used wherever it works.   

This is based on pragmatism, and abduction is based on pragmatism as a Philosophy. It does not come as a surprise to note that abduction was introduced in US that follows a pragmatic philosophy. Quantum Mechanics, though not “understood” by western scientists within their culture continues to be used for its pragmatic features in western science mainly because US is the dominant force in science today.   

Verification of “axioms”

 Guessing of “axioms” belong to rationalism and not empiricism in Western Philosophy. The “axioms” are abstract statements, and one can go on deriving results as in Mathematics using rules of inference, as Greeks used to do with Euclidean Geometry. However, Science is not Mathematics, and one is interested in finding out whether the “axioms” have any sense with respect to observations.   

 We have previously said that “axioms” work in certain situations, and one should have wondered as to what is meant by working. This is a tricky question and involves a jump from general to particular. It is the reverse of induction, and may be called particularization, for want of a better word.   

As “axioms” are abstract statements, what are deduced from them using rules of inference are also abstract statements. For example, from Newton’s theory of gravitation one could derive that an object is attracted towards another object with a certain acceleration that increases as the distance between them decreases. From this abstract statement scientists jump to the particular case of an apple falling to the earth, and say that the apple falls to the earth with increasing acceleration. 
The “axioms” are not verified by observations. The “axioms” are abstract statements in western science, while observations are concrete experiences. An “axiom” has to be first particularized before an observation is made. Thus, what is verified or falsified is not the “axiom” but a particularization of the “axiom”. 

Karl Popper’s falsification of theories could be valid only for particularization. However, even then the “axioms” are not thrown away completely, but are made use of under special circumstances. This is a consequence of the nature of “axioms”. As “axioms” are guesses, they can be guessed only as far as certain situations are concerned, and not to cover the entire ambit of the population.   

In western science the “axioms” are not supposed to be true or false but to work under certain conditions. Firstly, the “axioms” do not reflect a reality as such and the old “inference” that if a theory “P implies a certain result Q, and if Q is observed, then P is valid” does not hold. It is not obtained from any rule of inference as such, as the rule of inference states that “If P is valid and P implies Q, then Q is valid”. Secondly “axioms” can be guessed only within a limited range of observations to work. 

The so-called Scientific Method

Paul Feyerabend said anything goes in science. However, there is a method in western science, though that method is used by others as well. It is a guessing game called abduction, that is practiced by rats in finding out the way to escape from a maze, by the children in learning a new technique or acquiring new “knowledge”, by search engines that throw out thousands of guesses, by artificial intelligence and people etc. The difference between the others and the western scientists is that the guesses of the others are concrete, while the guesses of the western scientists are abstract. Western doctors in diagnosing use the method of abduction, though concrete.   

In western science from a limited number of observations of a property of the members of a very large population, very often infinite, by induction generalized abstract statements are made. In generalizing it is implicitly assumed that the property holds for the entire population. Having made generalized statements with respect to the relevant property, western science looks for explanations for the property. These explanations are not causes as such but some guesses that work. The guesses unlike in the case of rats and ordinary people are abstract. Having guessed working “axioms” a jump is made through particularization to test whether the “axiom” in a concrete form works in a limited range. No “axiom” will work in the entire range.   

Western Science is said to be “pattapal boru” since the “theories” are only abstract guesses that cannot be even imagined, and do not “exist”. Boru or Asath is the opposite of Aththa or Sath, sath meaning existence. However, it has to be emphasized that existence does not refer to an objective existence (ontological). In this essay we have considered Western Science as a set of constructions (guesses) that attempt to explain an already existing (pre or post Kantian) nature, and not natures constructed by the observers as described in Nirmanathmaka Sapekshthavadaya (Constructive Relativism).       http://www.dailymirror.lk/article/Construction-of-knowledge-through-Scientific-method-Scientists-go-on-guessing-until-they-come-across-a-guess-that-works-154321.html


ゼロ除算の発見は日本です:
∞???    
∞は定まった数ではない・・・・・
人工知能はゼロ除算ができるでしょうか:

とても興味深く読みました:2014年2月2日
ゼロ除算の発見と重要性を指摘した:日本、再生核研究所


ゼロ除算関係論文・本

\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\begin{document}
\title{\bf  Announcement 412:  The 4th birthday of the division by zero $z/0=0$ \\
(2018.2.2)}
\author{{\it Institute of Reproducing Kernels}\\
Kawauchi-cho, 5-1648-16,\\
Kiryu 376-0041, Japan\\
 }
\date{\today}
\maketitle
 The Institute of Reproducing Kernels is dealing with the theory of division by zero calculus and declares that the division by zero was discovered as $0/0=1/0=z/0=0$ in a natural sense on 2014.2.2. The result shows a new basic idea on the universe and space since Aristotelēs (BC384 - BC322) and Euclid (BC 3 Century - ), and the division by zero is since Brahmagupta  (598 - 668 ?).
In particular,  Brahmagupta defined as $0/0=0$ in Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta (628), however, our world history stated that his definition $0/0=0$ is wrong over 1300 years, but, we showed that his definition is suitable.
 For the details, see the references and the site: http://okmr.yamatoblog.net/

We wrote a global book manuscript \cite{s18} with 154 pages
 and stated in the preface and last section of the manuscript as follows:
\bigskip


{\bf Preface}
\medskip

 The division by zero has a long and mysterious story over the world (see, for example, H. G. Romig \cite{romig} and Google site with the division by zero) with its physical viewpoints since the document of zero in India on AD 628. In particular, note that Brahmagupta (598 -668 ?) established the four arithmetic operations by introducing $0$ and at the same time he defined as $0/0=0$ in
Brhmasphuasiddhnta. Our world history, however, stated that his definition $0/0=0$ is wrong over 1300 years, but, we will see that his definition is right and suitable.

 The division by zero $1/0=0/0=z/0$ itself will be quite clear and trivial with several natural extensions of the fractions against the mysterously long history, as we can see from the concepts of the Moore-Penrose generalized inverses or the Tikhonov regularization method to the fundamental equation $az=b$, whose solution leads to the definition $z =b/a$.

  However, the result (definition) will show that
      for the elementary mapping
\begin{equation}
W = \frac{1}{z},
\end{equation}
the image of $z=0$ is $W=0$ ({\bf should be defined from the form}). This fact seems to be a curious one in connection with our well-established popular image for the  point at infinity on the Riemann sphere (\cite{ahlfors}). �As the representation of the point at infinity of the Riemann sphere by the
zero $z =  0$, we will see some delicate relations between $0$ and $\infty$ which show a strong
discontinuity at the point of infinity on the Riemann sphere. We did not consider any value of the elementary function $W =1/ z $ at the origin $z = 0$, because we did not consider the division by zero
$1/ 0$ in a good way. Many and many people consider its value by the limiting like $+\infty $ and  $- \infty$ or the
point at infinity as $\infty$. However, their basic idea comes from {\bf continuity} with the common sense or
based on the basic idea of Aristotle.  --
 For the related Greece philosophy, see \cite{a,b,c}. However, as the division by zero we will consider its value of
the function $W =1 /z$ as zero at $z = 0$. We will see that this new definition is valid widely in
mathematics and mathematical sciences, see  (\cite{mos,osm}) for example. Therefore, the division by zero will give great impacts to calculus, Euclidean geometry, analytic geometry, differential equations,  complex analysis in the undergraduate level and to our basic ideas for the space and universe.

We have to arrange globally our modern mathematics in our undergraduate level. Our common sense on the division by zero will be wrong, with our basic idea on the space and the universe since Aristotle and Euclid. We would like to show clearly these facts in this book. The content is in the undergraduate level.

\bigskip
\bigskip

{\bf Conclusion}
\medskip


 Apparently, the common sense on the division by zero with a long and mysterious history is wrong and our basic idea on the space around the point at infinity is also wrong since Euclid. On the gradient or on derivatives we have a great missing since $\tan (\pi/2) = 0$. Our mathematics is also wrong in elementary mathematics on the division by zero.

This book is an elementary mathematics  on our division by zero as the first publication of  books for the topics. The contents  have wide connections to various fields beyond mathematics. The author expects the readers write some philosophy, papers and essays on the division by zero from this simple source book.

The division by zero theory may be developed and expanded greatly as in the author's conjecture whose break theory was recently given surprisingly and deeply by  Professor Qi'an Guan \cite{guan} since 30 years proposed  in \cite{s88} (the original is in \cite {s79}).

We have to arrange globally our modern mathematics with our division by zero  in our undergraduate level.

We have to change our basic ideas for our space and world.

We have to change globally our textbooks and scientific books on the division by zero.






\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{guan}
Q.  Guan,  A proof of Saitoh's conjecture for conjugate Hardy H2 kernels, arXiv:1712.04207.


\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.  {\bf 27} (2014), no 2, pp. 191-198,  DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.

\bibitem{ms16}
T. Matsuura and S. Saitoh,
Matrices and division by zero z/0=0,
Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory, {\bf 6}(2016), 51-58
Published Online June 2016 in SciRes.   http://www.scirp.org/journal/alamt
\\ http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/alamt.2016.62007.

\bibitem{ms18}
T. Matsuura and S. Saitoh,
Division by zero calculus and singular integrals. (Submitted for publication)

\bibitem{mms18}
T. Matsuura, H. Michiwaki and S. Saitoh,
$\log 0= \log \infty =0$ and applications. Differential and Difference Equations with Applications. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics \& Statistics.

\bibitem{msy}
H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh and  M.Yamada,
Reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$.  IJAPM  International J. of Applied Physics and Math. {\bf 6}(2015), 1--8. http://www.ijapm.org/show-63-504-1.html

\bibitem{mos}
H. Michiwaki, H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
 Division by Zero $z/0 = 0$ in Euclidean Spaces,
 International Journal of Mathematics and Computation, {\bf 2}8(2017); Issue  1, 2017), 1-16.


\bibitem{osm}
H. Okumura, S. Saitoh and T. Matsuura, Relations of   $0$ and  $\infty$,
Journal of Technology and Social Science (JTSS), {\bf 1}(2017),  70-77.

\bibitem{os}
H. Okumura and S. Saitoh, The Descartes circles theorem and division by zero calculus. https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.04961 (2017.11.14).

\bibitem{o}
H. Okumura, Wasan geometry with the division by 0. https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06947 International  Journal of Geometry.

\bibitem{os18}
H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
Applications of the division by zero calculus to Wasan geometry.
(Submitted for publication).

\bibitem{ps18}
S. Pinelas and S. Saitoh,
Division by zero calculus and differential equations. Differential and Difference Equations with Applications. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics \& Statistics.

\bibitem{romig}
H. G. Romig, Discussions: Early History of Division by Zero,
American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. {\bf 3}1, No. 8. (Oct., 1924), pp. 387-389.


\bibitem{s79}
S. Saitoh, The Bergman norm and the Szeg$\ddot{o}$ norm, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. {\bf 249} (1979), no. 2, 261--279.

\bibitem{s88}
 S. Saitoh, Theory of reproducing kernels and its applications. Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series, {\bf 189}. Longman Scientific \& Technical, Harlow; copublished in the United States with John Wiley \& Sons, Inc., New York, 1988. x+157 pp. ISBN: 0-582-03564-3

\bibitem{s14}
S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices,  Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory.  {\bf 4}  (2014), no. 2,  87--95. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/

\bibitem{s16}
S. Saitoh, A reproducing kernel theory with some general applications,
Qian,T./Rodino,L.(eds.): Mathematical Analysis, Probability and Applications - Plenary Lectures: Isaac 2015, Macau, China, Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics,  {\bf 177}(2016),     151-182. (Springer) .

\bibitem{s17}
S. Saitoh, Mysterious Properties of the Point at Infinity、
arXiv:1712.09467 [math.GM](2017.12.17).

\bibitem{s18}
S. Saitoh, Division by zero calculus (154 pages: draft): (http://okmr.yamatoblog.net/)

\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,   {\bf 38}(2015), no. 2, 369-380.

\bibitem{a}
https://philosophy.kent.edu/OPA2/sites/default/files/012001.pdf

\bibitem{b}
http://publish.uwo.ca/~jbell/The 20Continuous.pdf

\bibitem{c}
http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath526/kmath526.htm



\bibitem{ann179}
Announcement 179 (2014.8.30): Division by zero is clear as z/0=0 and it is fundamental in mathematics.

\bibitem{ann185}
Announcement 185 (2014.10.22): The importance of the division by zero $z/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann237}
Announcement 237 (2015.6.18):  A reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$ by  geometrical optics.

\bibitem{ann246}
Announcement 246 (2015.9.17): An interpretation of the division by zero $1/0=0$ by the gradients of lines.

\bibitem{ann247}
Announcement 247 (2015.9.22): The gradient of y-axis is zero and $\tan (\pi/2) =0$ by the division by zero $1/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann250}
Announcement 250 (2015.10.20): What are numbers? -  the Yamada field containing the division by zero $z/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann252}
Announcement 252 (2015.11.1): Circles and
curvature - an interpretation by Mr.
Hiroshi Michiwaki of the division by
zero $r/0 = 0$.

\bibitem{ann281}
Announcement 281 (2016.2.1): The importance of the division by zero $z/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann282}
Announcement 282 (2016.2.2): The Division by Zero $z/0=0$ on the Second Birthday.

\bibitem{ann293}
Announcement 293 (2016.3.27):  Parallel lines on the Euclidean plane from the viewpoint of division by zero 1/0=0.

\bibitem{ann300}
Announcement 300 (2016.05.22): New challenges on the division by zero z/0=0.

\bibitem{ann326}
 Announcement 326 (2016.10.17): The division by zero z/0=0 - its impact to human beings through education and research.

 \bibitem{ann352}
Announcement 352(2017.2.2):   On the third birthday of the division by zero z/0=0.

\bibitem{ann354}
Announcement 354(2017.2.8): What are $n = 2,1,0$ regular polygons inscribed in a disc? -- relations of $0$ and infinity.

\bibitem{362}
Announcement 362(2017.5.5): Discovery of the division by zero as  $0/0=1/0=z/0=0$

 \bibitem{380}
Announcement 380 (2017.8.21):  What is the zero?

\bibitem{388}
Announcement 388(2017.10.29):   Information and ideas on zero and division by zero (a project).

 \bibitem{409}
Announcement 409 (2018.1.29.):  Various Publication Projects on the Division by Zero.

\bibitem{410}
Announcement 410 (2018.1 30.):  What is mathematics? -- beyond logic; for great challengers on the division by zero.


\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}


List of division by zero:

\bibitem{os18}
H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
Remarks for The Twin Circles of Archimedes in a Skewed Arbelos by H. Okumura and M. Watanabe, Forum Geometricorum.

Saburou Saitoh, Mysterious Properties of the Point at Infinity、
arXiv:1712.09467 [math.GM]

Hiroshi Okumura and Saburou Saitoh
The Descartes circles theorem and division by zero calculus. 2017.11.14

L. P. Castro and S. Saitoh, Fractional functions and their representations, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory {\bf7} (2013), no. 4, 1049-1063.

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. {\bf 27} (2014), no 2, pp. 191-198, DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.

T. Matsuura and S. Saitoh,
Matrices and division by zero z/0=0,
Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory, 2016, 6, 51-58
Published Online June 2016 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/alamt
\\ http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/alamt.2016.62007.

T. Matsuura and S. Saitoh,
Division by zero calculus and singular integrals. (Submitted for publication).

T. Matsuura, H. Michiwaki and S. Saitoh,
$\log 0= \log \infty =0$ and applications. (Differential and Difference Equations with Applications. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics \& Statistics.)

H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh and M.Yamada,
Reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$. IJAPM International J. of Applied Physics and Math. 6(2015), 1--8. http://www.ijapm.org/show-63-504-1.html

H. Michiwaki, H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
Division by Zero $z/0 = 0$ in Euclidean Spaces,
International Journal of Mathematics and Computation, 28(2017); Issue 1, 2017), 1-16.

H. Okumura, S. Saitoh and T. Matsuura, Relations of $0$ and $\infty$,
Journal of Technology and Social Science (JTSS), 1(2017), 70-77.

S. Pinelas and S. Saitoh,
Division by zero calculus and differential equations. (Differential and Difference Equations with Applications. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics \& Statistics).

S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices, Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory. {\bf 4} (2014), no. 2, 87--95. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/

S. Saitoh, A reproducing kernel theory with some general applications,
Qian,T./Rodino,L.(eds.): Mathematical Analysis, Probability and Applications - Plenary Lectures: Isaac 2015, Macau, China, Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics, {\bf 177}(2016), 151-182. (Springer) .


再生核研究所声明371(2017.6.27)ゼロ除算の講演― 国際会議 https://sites.google.com/site/sandrapinelas/icddea-2017 報告


1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0
http://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12276045402.html
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0
http://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12263708422.html
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0

ソクラテス・プラトン・アリストテレス その他


Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

私は数学を信じない。 アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don't believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。

ドキュメンタリー 2017: 神の数式 第2回 宇宙はなぜ生まれたのか


〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第3回 宇宙はなぜ始まったのか


〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第1回 この世は何からできているのか

NHKスペシャル 神の数式 完全版 第4回 異次元宇宙は存在するか

                                                 
再生核研究所声明 411(2018.02.02):  ゼロ除算発見4周年を迎えて

ゼロ除算の論文

Mysterious Properties of the Point at Infinity

Algebraic division by zero implemented as quasigeometric multiplication by infinity in real and complex multispatial hyperspaces
Author: Jakub Czajko, 92(2) (2018) 171-197
https://img-proxy.blog-video.jp/images?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldscientificnews.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Ffiletype-icons%2Ficons%2F16%2Ffile_extension_pdf.pngWSN 92(2) (2018) 171-197
                                                                                                                                             

2018.3.18.午前中 最後の講演: 日本数学会 東大駒場、函数方程式論分科会 講演書画カメラ用 原稿
The Japanese Mathematical Society, Annual Meeting at the University of Tokyo. 2018.3.18.
https://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12361744016.html より


*057  Pinelas,S./Caraballo,T./Kloeden,P./Graef,J.(eds.):
       Differential and Difference Equations with Applications:
        ICDDEA, Amadora, 2017.
           (Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics, Vol. 230)
             May 2018       587 pp. 


ゼロ除算の論文が2編、出版になりました:

ICDDEA: International Conference on Differential & Difference Equations and Applications
Differential and Difference Equations with Applications
ICDDEA, Amadora, Portugal, June 2017
• Editors

• (view affiliations)
• Sandra Pinelas
• Tomás Caraballo
• Peter Kloeden
• John R. Graef
Conference proceedingsICDDEA 2017

log0=log∞=0log⁡0=log⁡∞=0 and Applications
Hiroshi Michiwaki, Tsutomu Matuura, Saburou Saitoh
Pages 293-305

Division by Zero Calculus and Differential Equations
Sandra Pinelas, Saburou Saitoh
Pages 399-418

ゼロ除算(division by zero)1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0

2018年05月28日(月)
テーマ:数学
これは最も簡単な 典型的なゼロ除算の結果と言えます。 ユークリッド以来の驚嘆する、誰にも分る結果では ないでしょうか?

Hiroshi O. Is It Really Impossible To Divide By Zero?. Biostat Biometrics Open Acc J. 2018; 7(1): 555703.  DOI: 10.19080/BBOJ.2018.07.555703
ゼロで分裂するのは本当に不可能ですか? - Juniper Publishers


再生核研究所 ゼロ除算の発見と重要性を指摘した:2014年2月2日


0 件のコメント:

コメントを投稿