Prev: Lwalk or Mr. Transfer P becoming the third human to do the only valid correct Indirect Euclid IP #4.10 Correcting Math
Next: most simple statement of Riemann Hypothesis and proofs #703 Correcting Math
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 23 Jul 2010 16:20


Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
> >
> > Here I am asking you a question Lwalk. Where is the factorial 1/2 the
> > value of the exponent?
> > Is it 249! equal to about 10^498 I think that 10^500 is closer to
> > 252!
> >
> > So that my choice of the Planck Unit of largest number as where the
> > StrongNuclear Force
> > no longer exists, has a side twist fascination. Why should the number
> > where the StrongNuclear Force ceases to exist, why should the
> > factorial be exactly 1/2 the value of
> > the exponent. This suggests that a mathematical law or rule underlines
> > the StrongNuclear
> > Force. And that we should thence inspect the Coulomb force as to
> > whether a rule of relationship of the factorial with the exponent
> > exists for Coulomb force.
> >
>
> Let me clarify my question. I curiously noted that it seems as though
> the picking of
> 10^500 as the largest significant number in physics as the Coulomb
> Interactions where
> there is no longer a Nuclear Strong Force of physics existing. And it
> is elements 98, 99
> and 100 where the nuclear-strong-force is nonexistent.
>
> So that is a significant benchmark and since physics ends at that
> number, so does mathematics which is a subset of physics.
>
> So the question becomes, that the value of 253 in 253! is about 1/2
> the value of
> the exponent 500 in 10^500. So curiously, and I am super curious about
> any science.
> I was wondering if there is some physical meaning to why 1/2. Perhaps
> a mathematical
> rule exists.
>
> Now I note also that the factorial is not going to give precisely 1/2,
> but we can find
> the "Smallest difference" or find what can be described as the closest
> approach to
> equalling 1/2. So in the vicinity of 10^500 we find that the closest
> approach is 254!
> = 10^502 and 253! = 10^500 where any others has a larger variance.
>
> Now we ask, can I delete some multipliers or append some multipliers
> to the factorial
> to have them equal exactly to the relationship of 1/2 factorial value
> equals the exponent
> value?

Really, bizarrely strange. There is a very famous and special number
throughout
physics called the fine structure constant. It shows up everywhere in
physics.

So can I delete or append the inverse fine structure constant of the
fine-structure constant,
either 137 or 1/137

And if I do that to say 253! or 254! then do I achieve this goal of
1/2 exponent value equal to
factorial value?

Well 254! = 5 x 10^502 and what I want is 10^508

So I would need a 137 x 137 x 137

That is not unreasonable since in the nuclear strong force we usually
cube rather than square with distance



>
> Can I say, multiply the factorial 253! by another 2 or 2x3, to make
> the exponent come out
> to be exactly or closer to 10^500.
>
> So I am curious over two items here. Why is the number 253! and 10^500
> the point in
> numbers where this relationship of 1/2 is there. And then I am curious
> as to whether physics has some force law or force rule of factorial
> versus exponent.
>
>

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Lwalk or Mr. Transfer P becoming the third human to do the only valid correct Indirect Euclid IP #4.10 Correcting Math
Next: most simple statement of Riemann Hypothesis and proofs #703 Correcting Math