See a picture that represents the relations of the two triangles
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYVjFwZmotdThHV0E/edit
what is a “?”
3?3=3
3?3=4
3?3=5
3?3=6
3?3=7
3?3=8
3?3=9
3?3=10
3?3=12

mmm - 04 February 2013 09:09 AM

what is a “?”

What is a “?” or what are “?s” They can’t be the same thing in all nine equations, right?

Yeah, I’m with George.  If ‘?” is a variable, it varies from ‘-3+’ to ‘+6+’ so that:
3-3+3 = 3
3-2+3 = 4
3-1+3 = 5
...
3+6+3 = 12

The image with the triangles… hummmm… three sided black triangles converted to black and red triangles that change position to produce objects with more than three sides?

How is this a new basis for Mathematics?

jump_in_the_pit - 04 February 2013 02:29 PM

Yeah, I’m with George.  If ‘?” is a variable, it varies from ‘-3+’ to ‘+6+’ so that:
3-3+3 = 3
3-2+3 = 4
3-1+3 = 5
...
3+6+3 = 12

The image with the triangles… hummmm… three sided black triangles converted to black and red triangles that change position to produce objects with more than three sides?

How is this a new basis for Mathematics?

your form is a-d+b=c (a+d+b=c) ,I never said that there is a third number (d) and that there are two mathematical operations (addition and subtraction)
there is no solution in the current mathematics :
1.3+[0]3=3
2.3+[1]3=4
3.3+[2]3=5
4. 3+[3]3=6 or 3+3=6
5.33Rd1(6)d2(7)+3=7
6.33Rd1(6)d2(8 )+3=8
7.33Rd1(6)d2(9)+3=9
8.33Rd1(6)d2(10)+3=10
9.33Rd1(6)d2(12)+3=12
(1,2,3,4) - there are several types of addition in the set N
(5,6,7,8,9) - that there are dynamic numbers, where this can add

1 Mathematics Space
We’ll tell mathematical space with two initial geometric object that can not
prove.
1.Natural geometric object - natural along .
2.Real geometric objects - real alongs .
1.1 Natural along
In the picture there is a natural geometric object along (AB), it has a beginning (A)
and end (B) - this property natural long’ll call point.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYSERtWURNTmJkbEE/edit
W1.png

1.2 The basic rule
Two (more) natural longer are connected only with points.

Where’s the “new” come in ?

citizenschallenge.pm - 06 February 2013 11:42 PM

Where’s the “new” come in ?

to explain many things, so we’ll get to it
———-
2 Natural Mathematics
2.1,along , one-way infinite along the (semi-line) “1”
“1”-from any previous evidence (axioms), a new proof
Theorem-Two (more) natural longer merge points in the direction of the first AB
longer natural.

EVIDENCE - Natural long (AB, BC) are connected - we get along AC.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYd1V5b0Y5SjAwYjg/edit

Natural long (AB, BC, CD) are connected - we get along AD.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYM0lNVmhKUVVoUnM/edit

Natural long (AB, BC, CD, DE) are connected - we get along AE.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYME5adlJoZm1TSm8/edit
...

Natural long (AB, BC, CD, DE, ...) are connected - getting the sim-
measurement along the infinite.
www5.png

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYX2UtaUdaV1R5bUk/edit

2.2 Numeral along, numeric point “2.1”
Theorem-character mark points on the one-way infinite
long (A, B, C, ...), replace the labels {(0), (0.1), ..., (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 ), ...}
which are set circular and positionally.

Proof - is obtained by numerical along which the numerical point of {(0,00,000,
0000, ...), (​​0,1,10,11,100,101, ...), ..., (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, 12, ...), ...}.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYWnA5SVE0XzR2ekU/edit

2.3 Natural numbers “2.2”
Theorem - There is a relationship (length) between Point in numeric (0) and
all points along the numerical.

Proof - Value (length) numeric point (0) and numerical point (0)
the number 0

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYYnFySjNOSnBYcHc/edit

Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (1) the number o1

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYc244cWZkMC1TaVU/edit

Ratio (required) numeric point (0) and numeric item (2) is the number 2

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYcFRQWmM5cUtVUTQ/edit

Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (3) is the number 3

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYOEhGaFZ2NXdUTmc/edit

Ratio (length) numeric point (0) and the numerical point of (4) is the number 4

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYTUFvWnNUcXdUSkk/edit
...
Set - all the possibilities given theorem.
The set of natural numbers N = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12, ...}.

Why are you presenting this here instead of at a mathematics conference?

DarronS - 15 February 2013 07:24 AM

Why are you presenting this here instead of at a mathematics conference?

trained mathematicians (act like priests, any other interpretation is heresy), I sent a lot of papers in mathematical journals (did not want to release), here’s an example
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYVTZxVThoUkJlRWs/edit?usp=sharing

Presenting his knowledge where I want ...

mmm - 15 February 2013 08:38 AM

trained mathematicians (act like priests, any other interpretation is heresy)...

That’s what I suspected. Your ideas can’t pass peer review so you post them on Internet forums.

They can’t pass even the internet forums review. The question in his OP makes zero sense. And I am definitely not a trained mathematician, so if I say it I imagine it counts. 

2.4 Mobile Number “2.2,2.3”
Theorem-Natural numbers can be specified and other numerical
point other than the point numeric 0th
Proof - Value (length) numeric point (0) and numeric point (2)
the number 2

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYZ2NiS0VyUWNURUk/edit

Ratio (length) numerical point (1) and the numerical point of (3) is the number 2

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYemdsWURxSTRUQUE/edit

Ratio (length)  numerical point (2) and the numerical point of (4) is the number 2

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzkWG0xdRpPYMy1YMlRTSUZpeWM/edit
...
A set of mobile numbers Nn = {[n]N}

I think it is time for someone to break out the blue type.

Darron is right to suggest a warning here, mmm. This forum is not a personal blog, it’s a place for discussion and inquiry. Material not relevant to that aim is best pursued elsewhere. If you have something for discussion let us know, but I don’t think there are any trained mathematicians here, so if you want to get informed opinions about your work, you should send it to them. Thanks.