Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Number theory and hyper operators
#8
Yea, you're a genius! Now I understand what you tried to do. But I don't know if it will be really fruitfull, but at least sound interesting.

Tell me if I got it right:

You was right about the bijection (only if you first statements hold).
Anyways we have that the sets and are really differents but they have interesting links.

Lets re-start with a new version of your definitons: let

Ia) for fixed

IIa) for fixed

second step:

Ib)

IIb)

First:

maps on a subset of the naturals that now we call and like with the primes there are naturals numbers cutted off.
We want to be injective (that is your condition )
but is not invertible because is restricted to : in fact is bijective.

Your idea is to extend to make it invertible adding more elements in the domain, in other words extending it to (but you want do it adding real numbers)

Finally we have a bijection, in fact holds!

[Image: slr81c.jpg]

for example using for the addition we have:


then we build inverting the naturals using



maps the naturals only if the domain is then in our set we have numbers that are not naturals



To be honest I don't know if the extension of the naturals to is a subset of the reals (as you defined)
but if we have that preserves the order we can find this result



in our example this lead us to this so the rank is not a natural number.

My question is: is it rational, irrational? Maybe it is trascendental, but this is beyond my limits.

Second:
About the relations with now the differencese are clear.

We have that



because



in other words the function IIb) is multivalued, and the set is the set of all possibles solution, in symbols:

that is equivalent to

MathStackExchange account:MphLee
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Number theory and hyper operators - by JmsNxn - 08/30/2012, 02:49 AM
RE: Number theory and hyper operators - by JmsNxn - 08/30/2012, 05:24 PM
RE: Number theory and hyper operators - by MphLee - 05/27/2013, 01:18 PM
RE: Number theory and hyper operators - by MphLee - 05/25/2013, 10:15 PM
RE: Number theory and hyper operators - by JmsNxn - 05/27/2013, 11:33 PM
RE: Number theory and hyper operators - by MphLee - 05/28/2013, 10:40 AM
RE: Number theory and hyper operators - by MphLee - 05/29/2013, 09:24 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Thoughts on hyper-operations of rational but non-integer orders? VSO 2 149 09/09/2019, 10:38 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Hyper-volume by integration Xorter 0 1,221 04/08/2017, 01:52 PM
Last Post: Xorter
  Hyper operators in computability theory JmsNxn 5 3,445 02/15/2017, 10:07 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  Recursive formula generating bounded hyper-operators JmsNxn 0 1,332 01/17/2017, 05:10 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Rational operators (a {t} b); a,b > e solved JmsNxn 30 35,362 09/02/2016, 02:11 AM
Last Post: tommy1729
  holomorphic binary operators over naturals; generalized hyper operators JmsNxn 15 15,295 08/22/2016, 12:19 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Cellular auto : rule 30 number ? tommy1729 0 1,158 08/03/2016, 08:31 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  The bounded analytic semiHyper-operators JmsNxn 2 3,268 05/27/2016, 04:03 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Set theory debate : cantor 1st / Virgil argument. tommy1729 1 1,770 12/08/2015, 11:14 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  on constructing hyper operations for bases > eta JmsNxn 1 2,442 04/08/2015, 09:18 PM
Last Post: marraco



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)