Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Quantum Gravity 283.0: Remarkable Result Regarding The Number 10 of     the Fundamental Set

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
OsherD - 24 Jul 2008 00:46 GMT
From Osher Doctorow

Although the Fundamental Set of Probable Causation/Influence (PI):

1) {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 26}

contains the numbers 10 and 11 from Superstring and Supersymmetry and
related physics, the number 10 doesn't show up as much as 0, 1, 2, 3,
4, 5 or even 7 as fundamental in papers outside those physics topics,
but Bakir Farhi of U. du Maine Le Mans France, in "A curious result
related to Kempner's series," arXiv: 0807.3518 v1 [math.NT] 22 Jul
2008, proves the remarkable results:

2) lim (sum 1/k) = 10 log 10 where sum is over k = 1 to infinity
provided that positive integer k contains digit 9 in decimal
representation exactly r times, and limit is taken as r --> infinity.

If this seems strange, then look at this:

3) lim (sum 1/k) = 10 log 10 for the same scenario as above (2) except
9 is replaced by any one digit in the set {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,
9}.

Farhi has 8 papers in arXiv.

The series sum 1/k without restrictions beyond to positive integers k
is of considerable importance throughout mathematics and physics, so
the result is not as esoteric as it may seem.  Also, although it is
true that the unlimited sum 1/k for k positive integers is divergent,
it was proven in A. J. Kempner's work that it is convergent when
restricted to positive integers k whose decimal representations do not
contain any digit 9, and this was extended to series where the decimal
rperesentation contains only a limited number of a particular nonempty
set of digits by Irwin and others.

If nothing else, this result makes 10 "fundamental" in mathematics or
at least number theory in the set {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10}
beyond its usual function of being a base for the decimal system.

Osher Doctorow
Dudly - 31 Jul 2008 02:24 GMT
> From Osher Doctorow
>
> Although the Fundamental Set of Probable Causation/Influence (PI):
>
> 1) {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 26}

notice that

{0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10,...}
These are the locations of the increasingly larger peaks of the absolute
value of the Riemann zeta function along the critical line. Equivalently,
the locations of the increasingly large peaks of the absolute value of the Z
function for increasing real t. If Z'(s)=0 is a positive zero of the
derivative of Z, then |Z(s)| is the peak value. We renormalize s by r =
ln(2) s /2 pi, and round to the nearest integer to get the terms of the
sequence. The fractional parts of these values are not randomly distributed;
r shows a very strong tendency to be near an integer.

http://www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/
or google for
The On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.