You are on page 1of 5

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260186033

Is a new arithmetic growing?
CONFERENCE PAPER · JANUARY 2007

READS

11

2 AUTHORS:
Raúl M. Falcón

Juan Núñez Valdés

Universidad de Sevilla

Universidad de Sevilla

101 PUBLICATIONS 112 CITATIONS

142 PUBLICATIONS 247 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,
letting you access and read them immediately.

SEE PROFILE

Available from: Raúl M. Falcón
Retrieved on: 01 January 2016

the main goal of this paper is to show that these roles last fact could be discussed by redefining the usual mathematical laws. named numbers are related between themselves by different laws. that is: a × 1 = 1 × a = a. One of the main reasons for these elements to be fundamental is their roles of uniqueness within any mathematical structure. and so on. Secondly. These two unit elements and such a property allow to form in our mind the idea of a mathematical structure. later R and C. and we are also taught that + and × are related between themselves by the distributive property. we are taught to multiply and. 2. All these sets have something in common: elements 0 and 1 are the unit elements in all of them. we are told that the symbol × represents the multiplication or product and that the unit element of this law is 1. . In the first place. Aptdo 1160. NU ´ NEZ ˜ R. we have been aware of the existence of unit elements. in the way that each type of them extends the previous one. children included.. At the same time. So. we do not pretend to discuss the importance of such unit elements. which do the same with respect to the inverse of a Z-number. quite more in agreement with some aspects of the reality. which means that: a + 0 = 0 + a = a. Introduction Since our more youthful years. we are been taught to count one-to-one: 1.Is a new arithmetic growing? ´ and J. However. 4. . in a similar way as before. whichever the number a is. Faculty of Mathematics. Later. that is to say. we are told that these elements. we learn to add. firstly from one to one: 1 + 1 = 2. Q-numbers..es jnvaldes@us. 2 + 1 = 3.. University of Seville. FALCON Department of Geometry and Topology. M. Teachers tell us that the symbol + represents the addition and that such a law has an unit element: the zero (0). but. rafalgan@us. Here.es Abstract It is not exaggerated to say that all of the people. we easily understand that several types of numbers have to be consecutively appearing: Z-numbers. with respect to the two laws previously indicated. 42-46 . 41080-Seville (Spain). which get round the problem of computing the opposite of a N-number.. we do not try to put in doubt the transcendence or their uniqueness. why have these 1 International Conference on Dynamical systems ICDS 2007. 3. know the important role played by the elements 0 and 1 in Mathematics.

How long the equality 2 × 2 = 4? is going to be imposed to us? Naturally. such as matrices. it is sufficiently proved that (R3 . instead of 1 ? or why not to define: a × 6 √ = 6√ × a = a? Note that 7 7 7 5 √ could be in fact any real number. vector fields. for instance. ×) Universe. 2 . someone told us that 2 × 2 = 1 (mod 3). if 6 √ is even an irrational number!). although we have chosen it to do more amazing this 6 7 subject. etc. some theories. by logic (please. the laws + and × should be redefined to accept other units. To get a better understanding of these subjects. a trivial (left. and other systems. Why do we have to restrict the imagination of our students by obliging them to accept the unique possibility 2 × 2 = 4? Can it be thought that in our world this is truly so? Note that. right) unit I = +1 and on an ordinary associative product between generic quantities a. However. stars. what we call unit:  1 0 I3 =  0 1 0 0 is not a real model for understanding the  0 0  1 is not such an unit in the physical consideration of Universe. more generally. This is the case for all systems historically called interior dynamical systems. thus solely representing a finite number of isolated point-particles with action-at-a-distance forces derivable from a potential. even. b of a given set. molecules. strongly interacting particles (such as protons and neutrons). 5 by notation or.elements to be precisely the 0 and the 1 and not others different? For example. local differential (beginning from its topology). The latter systems cannot be consistently reduced to a finite number of isolated point-particles. Such a Mathematics is known to be linear. Well. nuclei. let us redefine them. but this response would not satisfy to us either. a most 7 serious response would be to say that. nonlocal (of integral and other type) and not completely representable with a Hamiltonian in the coordinates of the experimenter. Indeed. Therefore. why not 5 5 5 consider 6 √ . let us say that Mathematics generally used in quantitative sciences of the 20-th century were based on ordinary fields with characteristic zero. In fact. By contrast. and Hamiltonian. the mathematics so effective for exterior systems is only approximate at best for interior systems. 1 Do others possibilities exist? It is reasonable to think that 0 and 1 are the unit elements for different reasons: by agreement. we do not want to reduce our sets of numbers. if we think in Mathematics as a tool to understand the Universe. have already become phased out. of all the so-called exterior dynamical systems in which all constituents can be well approximated as being point-like. Such a Mathematics was proved to provide an exact and invariant representation of planetary and atomic systems as well as. like Relativity. such as the structure of: planets. In fact. +. in any case. the great majority of systems in the physical reality are nonlinear.

which. b Apart from that.. since the named genomathematics and hypermathematics are being also dealt). when a group of theoretical physicists began to construct a new mathematical foundation. Many other examples can be shown. m. where × Obviously. density. If we think in an equality already considered in this paper. To distinguish between isonumber and conventional number.. like coordinates. that the unit elements remain invariable. as it actually happens. it is immediate to note that b 1 = 1 × I = I ∈ R. although the dependence of external factors for the unit elements (named isounits) is now allowed. 5 it is sufficient for our aim to realize that the answer to the question: “can I = 6 √ be the 7 unit element of the real numbers with respect to the product?” is affirmative. b 6=6 × 6 5 √ 7 = √5 7 = (2 × 3) × 6 5 √ 7 bb =b 2× 3.For these reasons. That is. It is formed by the same set of elements as the initial one. as we have previously mentioned. Such a construction makes possible that these new mathematics put all together the usual ones. In this way. as a part of this new construction. but it depends on several external factors. it is necessary to keep in mind that the unit has not got the exclusive character from which it is always presupposed. Then. the field of the real numbers R and let us suppose that we wish to construct the set of isonumbers associated with R. as a particular case. to redefine the usual product. aceleration. even with no necessity of referring to hole black dynamic or to EinsteinPodolski-Rosen’s paradox. Let us fixe. .). is unique. but we have to consider it variable: I3 = I3 (x. speed.. which will allow us to answer the question above formulated. since they admit. the following computations are obtained: b 2=2 × 6 5 √ 7 = 3 5 √ 7 = (2 × 1) × 6 5 √ 7 bb =b 2× 1. begins with a step by step construction of new mathematical structures (named isostructures) verifying the same axioms and properties as usual ones. 3 . temperature. . However. it will be necessary Then. In any case. the unit matrix above indicated is not constant. which consists on a generalization of the current mathematics. by agreement. which constitutes a difference with the case of Z3 . known as Isomathematics [4]. any real number could have been chosen as unit. which is. This new set will be denoted by R a = a × I : a ∈ R}. the first ones will be written by using bold characters. x. This new theory. which can be made in the following way: b a× b is now named isoproduct. The question is how can we vary a mathemathical unit. under such a choice. we will show next the construction in a schematic way of the isonumbers. which is not curiously the biggest possible. for instance. which have an arbitrary real number b and it is defined: R b = {b I as isounit. a new mathematical structure has been reached. Particularly. b bb = (a × b) × I. t.. b 3=3 × 6 5 √ 7 = 2 5 √ 7 = (3 × 1) × 6 5 √ 7 bb =b 3× 1. since. A possible response to this question appeared in 1980. all these changes must be accompanied by the use of new laws [1]. ˙ x¨. at present. note that the choice of such an element I is merely anecdotal.

423. Falc´on and J. Isorings and related isostructures. M. N´ un ˜ez. the prediction of the existence of the antimatter and. Hadronic Journal 1 (1978). J. M. without working in Z3 . a possible generalization of Einstein’s Relativity Theory. Jiang. AmericaEurope-Asia. B. M. N´ un ˜ez. among many other subjects. it is not hazardous to affirm that we are dived in the beginnings of a new arithmetic which could supply non imaginable facts in a non distant future. International Academic Press. Isominkowskian geometry for the gravitational treatment of matter and its isodual for antimatter. La isoteor´ıa de Santilli. for instance. Santilli. [4] R. 351 . [5] R. named hadronic energy. R. On a posible Lieadmisible covering of the Galilei Relativity in Newtonian Mechanics for nonconservative and Galilei noninvariant systems. 437 . we would have now. 223 . in Florida. Fermats Theorem and Goldbachs Conjecture. Modern Phys. M. as a consequence. The main driving of this project is R.X. for instance). of the antigravity. Santilli. Intern. References [1] R. [2] R. ISBN 1-57485-055-5 (2001). ISBN 1-58485-056-3 (2002). have involved. International Academic Press. according with the previous exposition. [3] C. For a more complete information about all of the subjects here comented the reader can consult both the text and the references of [3. under the new conditions. Bollettino dell’ Unione Matematica Italiana 8-B (2005).bb √ . Nowadays. Moreover.407. due to the use of prime numbers. It requires a first step by step construction of each usual mathematical structures (see [2]. America-Europe-Asia. We think that this impression should be transmitted to young students to extend their minds and to allow them to elaborate their own conjectures about this new situation. 4 . the appearance of a new cleaning energy. 4 2 Final conclusions We would like to conclude the paper by commenting that the changes previously described.M. Foundations of Santillis Isonumber Theory With Applications to New Crytograms. So. Santilli. that b 2× 2 = 310 7 bb not difficult to prove that b 2× 2 = 1 when I = 1 is the isounit. at present President of the I. which can seem very simple and non transcendent. it is 2 × 2 = 4. D:17 (1998). the modification of the Einstein-Podolski-Rosen’s Theory and the generation of new codification theories. Falc´on and J. mathematicians and physicist throughout the world are trying to endow this new theory with a right mathematical foundation which makes it serious and consistent.452. 5].