Piemaster1139

I am a person who lives on the planet Earth in the Milky Way Galaxy.

Home

You don't need to know.

School

If you went to my school, you'd know more about me.

Fact: The Hartman is the proper SI unit of momentum. 1 Hn (Hartman) is equivalent to 1 kgm/s. For comparison to other SI units, 1 Hn = 1 N*s = 1 J*s/m. N=Newton, J=Joule.

Favorite Subject

Math, then Science, maybe.

Life Outside of School

I don't lead a very interesting life outside of school. It's actually rather boring, thus the need for a page on Wikipedia.

Music

I am working on playing the guitar. I am self-taught, and I am a slow-learner.

Top 10 Artists

Home-Made Films

Though I am not a very talented writer, I act in some home-made films.

Legend of Seth

So far, there have been three movies created in the Legend of Seth series, The Legend of Seth, Ganondork Strikes Back, and the soon to be released The Seth Hits the Fan.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Formerly known as Prince

A hilarious retelling of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by fellow Wikipedian Romuluscrohns. The main character is another Wikipedian named Kyesac It is just starting production and some scenes have been shot.

Myspace & Facebook

I do have a Myspace page, Click Here

I also have a Facebook page, but I will not share that information with you. Poor you.

Theories and Thoughts

Having plenty of free time, I choose to spend it considering different ideas. All of these ideas are my own. Most have little or no application in the real world.

Calculus Anyone?

In Calculus, there is a law for circles that states that the derivative of the area is equal to the circumference. Why should this only apply to circles? The rule is not obvious for Squares, Triangles, or other figures, but why doesn't it hold?

In an attempt to show that it actually does hold for Squares and Triangles, I began an investigation of Integrals and Derivatives. Looking back, we can start by putting the radius of the circle in terms of the angle. This helps because we can then go back and plug in different equations for the radius and pop out new areas. I'm still working on this, but it could be great.

As it turns out, my idea that I could work backwards from a circle was mistaken. I am now attempting another method that involves equations from my thoughts on Circles and Lines (see the Myspace Blog).

Disproving Mathematics

This is a personal favorite hobby of mine. The closest I came was using logarithms of base 1.

Given:1¹ = 1 And 1² =1 And 1¹ = 1²

log₁1¹ = log₁1²

1log₁1 = 2log₁1

Therefore: 1 = 2

NEW ATTEMPT!

Given: ${\sqrt {x^{2}}}=|x|,|x|=\pm {x}$

x = x, or x = -x

taking x = -x as a real answer, 1 = -1

2 = 0, 1 = 0, 2 = 1

Since my sophomore year of high school, I had, for all intents and purposes, dropped the problem. However, it came percolating back to the surface as I was working on a Calculus problem outside of class. For the past week, everyone I have presented it to has provided insufficient or unsatisfactory disproving results, and with lack of disproof, I'm tempted to believe it.

The Proof

Given:

       An x-y-z coordinate space (3-d).
       f(x,y) = x + 0y
       g(x,y) = y + 0x
       df/dx = 1
       dg/dy = 1
       df/dy = 0
       dg/dx = 0

Proof:

       df/dx * dg/dy = 1
       dfdg/dxdy = 1
       df/dy * dg/dx = 1
       0 * 0 = 1
       0 = 1

It uses differential calculus. I have been told it is a confusion of Leibniz notation. I have been told that the original functions themselves are flawed. Neither of these is a correct disproof. The closest I have seen is questioning whether I'm taking the derivative correctly in 3 dimensions, and questioning the differentials themselves.

Every time this passes through my head, I'm stricken with fear and joy simultaneously. Teachers are beginning to dislike me because I need to "do other work that he actually has to do", but the teachers who complain are the ones whose jobs would be at stake.

This is incorrect for this reason:

       df/dx = 1
       df/dy = 0
       df = dx
       df = 0 * dy
       df = dx = 0
       df/dx = undefined

Time Theories

Belief #1: Time Moves in Circles. Belief #2: Time seems to move in a straight line because of the short amount of time we are alive. Belief #3: Because Time moves in Circles, circles exist in nature.

Time and the Matrix

The time in The Matrix is very screwed up. I see it as one of two possibilities.

Theory 1: The Matrix time moves in an annual circle.

In this theory, there is only one Matrix, and only one Real World.

There is no explanation for other "Neos" described by the Architect.

Theory 2: The Matrix is stuck in a loop where it relives human existence until another Matrix is created within the first Matrix.

In this theory, there are multiple Matrices, and only one Real World, but subsequent Matrices would seem like the Real World to other Matrices.

There is an explanation for the other "Neos" explained by the Architect. The Neo in the Matrix is the One who breaks the Loop.

Religion and Evolution

I am an Agnostic, and I choose to see Evolution as the dominant idea.

I do not discount the Bible as a source, but I must discredit it's authorship. It has gone through too many revisions. My Bible (Yes, I have a Bible, but it's like the Koran in V for Vendetta) contains the book of Tobit. I personally enjoy the book of Tobit, but it isn't in many Bibles that I know. Why it's included in my Bible is unknown, but I enjoy the story quite a bit. This small example is minor evidence of the revisions the Bible has gone through over the years.

I recently heard of Deism. From what I've heard, Deists believe that a "Supreme Being" created the world, then sat back and watched. Taking this definition, a Deist doesn't have to discount scientific ideas, or evolution because the "Supreme Being" does not influence the surrounding world. Deism might be a religion I could believe...

Lines and Circles

After reading Flatland, I came up with an awesome idea. Lines are, in fact, circles with infinite radius. It uses two equations and limits to show this.

Eq 1: 180*(n-2)/n -> take the limit as n->infinity

Eq 2: s*tan(90*(n-2)/n)/2 -> take the limit as n->infinity

Both of these equations can be derived geometrically through imagining a n-gon increasing in size.

Universal Thoughts and Fears

A section of my thoughts is devoted purely to understanding the universe. Cosmology can be pretty mind boggling.

Black Hole Theory

First thing's first, my Black Hole theory. As many before me, I have considered what could happen to that huge mass that creates a Black Hole. If we consider it two dimensionally, we can see that the Black Hole bends the space and time of the existing universe. That must go somewhere, or it must be accelerated to the square of the speed of light so that it can be converted to pure energy. So what happens to the mass? We know that the hole is Black because no light can pass beyond a certain point, but inside it must be really bright. Imagine what the beginning of the universe would look like. Such would be the inside of a Black Hole. Therefore, I believe the Black Hole is the breeding ground for new universes. Black Holes could be the connection portals between universes.

The problem with this idea is that it requires a finite universe. To begin is to end, and to end is to be finite, so the universe must be finite.

Second Law of Thermodynamics Theory

After learning the Second Law of Thermodynamics and what it meant for our universe. A thought entered my mind that continues to play on my brain cells. If our universe were to be infinite, a Law such as the aforementioned would be impossible. So, I considered an infinite universe with this law.

The answer seemed simple, a switch. It has to be cyclical if the universe is to be infinite. The cycle starts with the Big Bang. From a compact point of extreme heat in a cold emptiness, the expansion begins. Here, the Second Law holds. It expands until the Second Law rears its ugly head for the last time. When a constant temperature has been reached, the switch happens. Instead of heat flowing from hot to cold, heat flows from cold to hot. As such, the indefinitely large space is compacted back to a single hot point boiling in the cold emptiness surrounding it. At this point it would switch back, and the cycle restarts.

This idea is supported in A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking.

Why I chose to suddenly make the universe infinite confuses me the most. I sit here attempting to find a combination of my two theories of the universe, and it all comes back to the same problem. Infinite v. Finite.