Conjectures

EULERIAN
CALCULUS
Solving Mathematical Conjectures
Willie Johnson Jr.
First Edition First Print
August 9, 2017
ii
Contents
1 Conjectures 3
1.1 The Negation of Fermat's Last Theorem . . . . 3
1.2 The Counterexample of the Beal Conjecture . . 5
1.3 Armative Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture . 6
1.4 The Eulerian Proof of the Collatz Conjecture . 7
1.4.1 Innite Series Solution . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4.2 Fermat Extrema Solution . . . . . . . . 8
1.4.3 The Unit Circle Solution . . . . . . . . . 9
2 Solving the Riemann Hypothesis 13

2.1 A Fermatian Solution to the Riemann Hypoth-
esis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 An Eulerian Solution to the Riemann Hypothesis 16
3 Solution to the Navier Stokes Equation 23

3.1 Equating Euler's Equation To Newton's 2nd
Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.2 The Navier -Stokes Equation:Part I. . . . . . . 28
3.3 The Navier -Stokes Equation:Part II. . . . . . . 37
1
2 CONTENTS
Chapter 1
Conjectures
Given the quaternion equation
U q n = nU q (1.0.1)
several longstanding mathematical conjectures may be easily

solved.[2][3][4][5] Solving these equations has profound impli-
cations in the elds of physics, chemistry, and number theory.
1.1 The Negation of Fermat's Last Theorem

Prove, that given the positive unit quaternions, , , and ,
each having a positive integer value, that these integers satisfy
the equation n + n = n for all integer values of positive n
except zero.
Proof.
1. It is given that U q n = nU q.
2. It is given that , , and are unit quaternions, each
having positive integer values.
3. Therefore , , and may be substituted for U q, U p,

and Ur respectively, in equation the equation
(U q n + U pn ) = (nU q + nU p) = U rn = nU r.[4]
3
4 Conjectures
4. Therefore
(n + n ) = (n + n) = n = n. (1.1.1)
5. Therefore
n + n = n . (1.1.2)
6. Thus
23 + 33 = 53
(3 2) + (3 3) = (3 5)
6 + 9 = 15
7. Therefore is it proven, given the unit quaternions , , ,

and , each having a positive integer value, that these
integers satisfy the equation
n + n = n for all integer values of positive n except
zero.
Q.E.D.
Fermat's Last Theorem states that no three positive in-

tegers, a, b, and c can satisfy the equation an + bn = cn for
any positive integer value of n > 2. But since a, b, and c are
just general integer variables then they may be substituted
with the integer general variables of , , and , respectively.
Given equation (1.1.1) step 7 of the previous proof may be
restated.
Axiom 1 Given the positive unit quaternions, , , and ,

each having a positive integer value, and the power rule for
constants where U q n = nU q, it is proven that (a = ), (b =
), and (c = ) satisfy the equation n + n = n for all
integer values of positive n, except zero. This is the Negation
of Fermat's Last Theorem (NFLT).
1.2 The Counterexample of the Beal Conjecture 5
In general, given any positive rational numbers, , , and

where > > and the power rule for constants where
U q n = nU q, then , and satisfy the equation n n = n
for all values of positive n, except zero.
1.2 The Counterexample of the Beal Conjecture

The Beal conjecture states that if for positive integers
A, B, C, x, y, z and where (x, y, z) > 2 that if Ax + B y = C z
is true then A, B, C must have a common prime factor.
Prove that the Beal conjecture is false.
Proof.
1. Consider the equation Ax +B y = C z where A, B, C, x, y, z
are positive integers and (x, y, z) > 2.
2. We allow the integers A, B, C to represent the prime

integers 2, 3, 5, respectively and x, y, z to represent the
integers 14, 4, 8, respectively.
3. Therefore 214 + 34 = 58 .
4. Since a prime is only divisible by 1 and itself then a

prime is a unit quaternion where P = U q.
5. Therefore A, B, C = P = U q.
6. Given equation (1.0.1) where
U q n = nU q.
then (2 14) + (3 4) = (5 8).
7. Therefore 28 + 12 = 40.
8. Therefore the integers A, B, C as the prime integers

2, 3, 5, respectively, do not, and cannot have a common
prime factor.
6 Conjectures
9. Therefore the Beal conjecture is false.
Q.E.D.
1.3 Armative Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture

The Goldbach conjecture states that every integer > 2 can be
expressed as the sum of two primes.
Prove that every integer > 2 can be expressed as the sum of

two primes, where I > 2 = PA + PB .
Proof.
1. Given that P 2, where P is some prime then
I
= q = Sq + V q = nPS + nPV
= T qU q = T q(cos + P sin )
= (Pa Pb Pc ....Pn Ps ) + (Pv )n
= (Pa Pb Pc ....Pn Ps ) + (Pa + Pb + Pc + ....Pn + Pv )
where I is any integer 2. [2][3][4][5]
2. Since every integer is a unique summation of a series of

primes then it must be the case that at
2 radians
I = (Pa + Pb + Pc + ....Pn ) + Pv
3. Therefore
I = Psum + Pv
where Psum = (Pa + Pb + Pc + ....Pn ).

1.4 The Eulerian Proof of the Collatz Conjecture 7
4. Since every integer is a unique summation of a series of

primes then it must be the case that at
2 radians Psum
must equal some prime integer P A and Pv must equal
some prime integer PB .
5. Therefore I > 2 = (Psum + Pv ) = (PA + PB ).
6. Therefore is it proven that every integer > 2 can be

expressed as the sum of two primes where
I > 2 = PA + PB .
Q.E.D.
1.4 The Eulerian Proof of the Collatz Conjecture

The Collatz conjecture is described as follows:
Take any even natural number n, and divide it by 2 yielding

n/2. For odd n multiply it by 3 and add 1 yielding 3n + 1.
Repeat the process indenitely. The Collatz conjecture states
that no matter the initial n the process will always result in
a value of 1.
This conjecture may be proved by several methods. One

is via an innite series. Others are a Fermatian antiderivative
and an Eulerian derivation.
1.4.1 Innite Series Solution

Upon inspection it becomes immediately obvious that in the
Collatz process the 3n + 1 addition process merely assures
1
the successive production of even halves,
2n , is uninterrupted
thus allowing the fractions, as halves, to converge to 1. The
division by 2 process may be construed as a collection of halv-
ing operations where it is the operations themselves that are
8 Conjectures
being added, not so much the results of each operation. Ev-

ery division by 2, no matter its value as a quotient, is a half.
As the geometric series proves the summation of halves must
sum to a nal value of 1. Therefore the solution to the Collatz
conjecture is simply
1

1 1 1 1 1 X 1 n
2
+ + + + + ... = = =1 (1.4.1)
2 4 8 16 32 2 1
n=1 1
2
where n now equals the number of halving operations.
Q.E.D.
1.4.2 Fermat Extrema Solution

Consider the following problem:
Given line B divide line B into two parts such that the prod-
uct of the two parts yields a maximum result.
Fermat addressed this problem and found the maxima to

be 1/2 by employing his own unique method of dierentiation
to achieve this result. He began with length B and computed
the derivative to be B/2. Adding two such derivatives yielded
the whole, or B, or 1 again. That, by denition, is the integral
of B/2. Therefore employing the Fermatian approach to dif-
ferentiation it may be stated that the quantity 1/2, in what-
ever form it may take, may function as a derivative. And the
addition of a series of such halves constitutes an integral. It is
a Fermatian integral comprised of the summation of halves.
Thus the Collatz conjecture is no more than the geometric
series of

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 X 1 n
+ + + + + ... = + =
2 4 8 16 32 2 2 2
n=1
1
= 2 =1 (1.4.2)
1
1
2
where n now denes each individual derivative, each fractional
term denes a specic derivative, and 1 is the integral of two
halves or the Riemann sum of a series of halves. 1 may also
1
be considered as a derivative formed by rise over run where
2
is equal to both rise and run. At the ICR integral and deriva-
tive become indistinguishable.
Q.E.D.
1.4.3 The Unit Circle Solution
The operator i is an intermediary in the process of revers-

ing 1 to 1. Mean reversion is the process by which i rotates

1 2 radians or 1/2 of radians, then completes the process by
10 Conjectures

rotating i a nal
2 radians where counterclockwise, ii = 1.
Clockwise (ii) = 1. Thus

1/2 1 = i.

1/2 1 = i.
Since i is equivalent to a halving process then any and

every rotation of i, no matter the number of radians it or its
operand rotates, may be considered as a halving process. In
the unit circle since all radii are 1, then every application of i,
no matter the degree of rotation, will yield an absolute value
of 1. Thus no matter the the value of n any single rotation
of i must return an absolute value of 1 as it must since it
1
is a Fermatian limit of
2 . Any combination or summation of
rotations that sum to n must return an absolute value of 1.
Thus the solution to the Collatz conjecture becomes
X
1 1 1 1 1 1 n X
+ + + + + ... = = i)n
2 4 8 16 32 2
n=1 n=0
1
= eix = 2 =1
1
1
2
where n now denes any number of radians,
where x = n,
where

1 1 1 1 1
+ + + + ... = = i, (1.4.3)
4 8 16 32 2
where
1
1 1 2 i
+ (i + i) = (ii) = 1
2 2 1 i
1
2
where
1
2 i sin i sin
= = =1 (1.4.4)
1 isin cos
1
2
Q.E.D.
12 Conjectures
Chapter 2
Solving the Riemann

Hypothesis
Several methods lend themselves solving the Riemann hy-
pothesis (TRH). Some are listed in the following sections.
2.1 A Fermatian Solution to the Riemann Hypoth-

esis
The Riemann zeta function, (RZF) is a function where an in-
nite series of reciprocals are added, each denominator being
raised to the power s, where
1 1 1 1 1 1
(s) = s
+ s + s + s + s + s + ... (2.1.1)
1 2 3 4 5 6
The summation of the terms on the right hand side converge
to form a limit. Eulerian tenets nd a limit to be a derivative
or an antiderivative or a maxima or a minima or some exam-
ple of an extrema. The RZF simply sums the reciprocal of
integers, each integer raised to some power s. s may be any
number except 1 in order to obtain a convergent number.
TRH essentially asks, "What is the value of s when
(s) = 0?" It is found that s, as any even negative num-
ber, will yield a value of zero. Such derived zeros are called
13
14 Solving the Riemann Hypothesis
trivial zeros. Obtaining and proving the existence of these

trivial zeroes is trivial. However, there also exists as set of
nontrivial zeros. And so the Frenkel interpretation of the
Riemann hypothesis is, "What is the value of s when (s) =
non trivial 0?" Riemann conjectured that all non-trivial ze-
ros are found along a critical line at points ( 12 , iy). It still
remains to prove that all of the non-trivial zeroes are located
at this location. This is the essence of the Riemann hypoth-
esis.
Consider an xy Cartesian coordinate system where x rep-
resents the real numbers and y represents the complex real
numbers. Mathematicians have determined that non-trivial
zeros must occupy an area bounded by 1 and zero on the x
axis. This bounded area, is known as the critical strip. All
non-trivial zeros are thought to be located within this strip.
So far all of the computed non-trivial zeros have been found
to lie along a specic line that divides the strip in half ver-
tically, i.e., all of the non-trivial zeros, so far, lie along the
critical line ( 21 , iy). The working denition of the Riemann
hypothesis may now be stated in two parts:
1. The Riemann Hypothesis hypothesizes that all nontriv-

ial zeros of the RZF lie along the critical line, ( 12 , iy).
2. What is the value of s when (s) = nontrivial 0?
To prove TRH only two critical facts are required:
1
The quantity
2 , in whatever form it may obtain, will
and must always be a limit.
Any and every non-trivial zero, by denition, is a limit.
Fermatian Proof: Prove that only nontrivial zeros of the RZF

lie along the critical line, ( 12 , iy).
Proof
2.1 A Fermatian Solution to the Riemann Hypothesis 15
1. No matter what point is chosen within the critical strip

that point will and must lie along a horizontal line seg-
ment bounded by zero and 1.
2. This horizontal line segment is the cosine or positive x

axis with a y intercept of iy.
3. Any one and every one of these horizontal line segments

is exactly the horizontal line segment employed by Fer-
mat in his derivation of extrema. Not equivalently. Ex-
actly.
4. The critical strip is an innite vertical stacking (sum-

mation) of Fermat's line segments.
5. Following the convention of Fermat where he allowed his

1
derived value of
2 to represent a maxima, then all such
1
maxima of the critical strip must located at
2 along the
x axis.
6. By denition a maxima equals a derivative or limit with

a value of zero.
7. Thus non-trivial zeros, by denition, are limits or ex-

trema if located along the x axis bounded by zero and
1 at a location of ( 12 , iy).
8. Since the critical strip is an innite stacking of identical

Fermat's line segments then so too are their individual
non trivial zeros, stacked vertically such that they form
a centrode of nontrivial zeros.
9. This centrode of non trivial zeros is the critical line.
10. Thus all non-trivial zeros, as extrema or zero deriva-

tives, must be located along the critical line at ( 21 , iy).
Q.E.D.
The Fermatian proof concisely proves non trivial zeros

must lie along the critical line. It does not prove that all
non trivial zeros must lie along the critical line. Nor does it
address the value of s in the Zeta function when
(s) = 0nontrivial . These items require an Eulerian proof.
2.2 An Eulerian Solution to the Riemann Hypothe-

sis
Again, Fermat's task was, given a line, divide it into two parts
1
such that the product of the parts is maximum.
2 was found
to be the maximum either part could obtain. This Fermatian
dierentiation is exactly the process that occurs with the co-

sine and the versine along the unit radius of 1 at
4 radians. At
precisely one half of the cosine or at 45 degrees the sagitta and
cosine are equal. They are both simultaneously maxima and
minima and indistinguishable from one another. The union
of versine and cosine forms an ICR. They eectively cancel
at their point of intersection, ( 12 , iy), and become zero, in
this case, a nontrivial zero. Thus the formation of the critical
strip, which is simply a stacking of unit radii of 1. From the
critical strip follows the formation of the critical line, which is
an integral of Fermat's maxima. Finally, a centrode of ICR's
at x = 21 is created, which is formed by the critical line's
attendant non-trivial zeros. This interaction of cosine and
versine creating an ICR at ( 12 , i0), is also an illustration of
the following:
Let f be a real-valued function and let c be a real number.
Then
lim f (x)
xc
exists if and only if
lim f (x) lim f (x). (2.2.1)

(cosine=x)c (versine=x)c
Thus in equation 9a c may be considered as a nontrivial zero.
Prove that (0) = 0nontrivial .
Consider Figures 2.2.1 and 2.2.2..
1. The initial conditions are:

(a) In the unit circle, at
2 radians, the sec = 2i has
an absolute value of two.
(b) The cosine has an absolute value of 1, its value in-

creasing from left to right. It is zero at (1, i0) and
reaches a maximum absolute value of 1 at (0, i0).
(c) The versine has an absolute value of 1, its value

increasing from right to left. It is zero at (1, i0) and
reaches a maximum absolute value of 1 at (0, i0).
2. At the origin, (0, i0), a limit is created.
3. Several methods are enlisted in its formation.
(a) A Newtonian/Eulerian limit where f 0 (iy) = 0, is

created at the origin by the shrinking of the secant,
2i, to 0.
(b) A Fermatian limit where f 0 (x) = i, is created by

virtue of the midpoint of the secant, 2i, being lo-
cated at the origin.
(c) An Eulerian limit, f 0 (x) = 0, is created by the

ICR formed between the cosine and versine at the
origin.
(d) An Eulerian limit, f 0 (iy) = 1, is created where

given 1
iy = 2i = 2 1 2 then
1
f 0 (iy) = f 0 (2i) = (2(1)) = 1.
2
4. Therefore the origin is a derivative and may be ex-

pressed as such.
5. The x and y components that comprise the origin must

each themselves be a slope at the x and y intercepts.
Therefore the origin is composed of two slopes.
6. Therefore
f 0 (x) = f 0 (iy) = m = 0 = i = midpoint = ICR = 1 = L.

(2.2.2)

7. At precisely = 4 radians the cosine, the sagitta, and
both sides of the secant obtain exactly the same abso-
1
lute value of
2.

8. This duplicates the initial conditions when = 2 ra-
dians except the dimensions have now been scaled by
1
a factor of
2 , which in eect, creates a secondary unit
circle half the dimensions of the initial unit circle.
9. These two circles constitute the space and body cen-

trodes forming two ICR's at the two points where secant
2i goes to zero.
10. Therefore given equation (2.2.2), and the fact that the
secant i is now a Fermatian limit of the secant 2i, the
secant i, in its entirety, must and will go to zero.
11. The zeroes that comprise this tangent line = secant of

i are the non trivial zeroes.
12. The tangent line of i =secant is the critical line.
13. Given Figure 2.2.1 the slope created by the rst and
secondary unit circles is
i i 1 1
= 1 = = 2. (2.2.3)
.5 cos .5i 2
2
14. Therefore the location of the midpoint of i must be

( 21 , 0) or ( 21 , i).
15. By Eulerian dierentiation if iy = i then
1 1
f 0 (iy) = f 0 (i) = (1) = (2.2.4)
2 2
16. Therefore,
1
f 0 (x) = f 0 (iy) = m = 0 = i = midpoint = ICR = L = .
2
(2.2.5)
17. If such is the case then the origin must now be labeled
as the point (1, i), as given by equation (2.2.2).
18. The location of the points where the secant 2i goes to

zero, is therefore the origin at (1, i) and the circum-
ference at (1, i).
19. If non trivial zeroes are dened as i0 then given equation

(2.2.5),
1
(0) = = nontrivial zero (2.2.6)
2
20. Non trivial zeroes will therefore be located all along the
secant 2i, all along the critical line = secant i, and all
along the tangent lines as indicated by the dashed lines

in Figure 3 when = 4 radians.
21. Non trivial zeroes will not and cannot be formed on the
negative side of the x axis in the unit circle of diameter
2i. To do so would create a precessional rate (slope) of
1
positive
2 which is proscribed.
Q.E.D.
f ' (i ) = (0) =nontrivial zero

iy
ix
e =h
m
secant 2i
critical line
secant i
-1
-
4 cosine sagitta 1

-
4
ICR=NTZ
eix=h*
f ' (i) = [eix [ (0) ]e ix ]
Figure 2.2.1: The Euler's formula presentation of an ICR and

its equivalent nontrivial zero (NTZ) when (0) from a secant of i.
iy
secant 2i
critical line
secant i
-1 cosine sagitta 1
Figure 2.2.2: The dashed lines indicate the location of nontrivial

zeroes and the slopes they occupy when = 4 radians.
iy
Solving the Riemann Hypothesis
c
se
-e i cs
c

=
1
e
i
tan
ne
1
i
is
.. ..
+
r r
s
co
=
isine
i
..
e
x z
cos cot
versine
. . . 1
2r - r 2
-i
-e-i e
22
Figure 2.2.3: Trigonometric and gyrodynamic relationships within the unit circle.
Chapter 3
Solution to the Navier

Stokes Equation
The Navier -Stoke equations are a group of equations that
describe the motion of a uid, be it liquid or a gas, in space
through the application of Newton's second law, F = ma,
and the law of conservation of mass. The problem has been
divided into two parts:
1. Find solutions to the equation.
2. Prove whether or not the solutions can become singular

or grow without limit. An example of a singularity is
the point at which the attracting gravitational forces
appear to become innite within a black hole.
Physicists have struggled to understand the dynamics of tur-

bulence, one of the components described by the equations of
part 1. Mathematicians have struggled to solve part 2.
Denition 2 Turbulence is the time-dependent chaotic be-

havior exhibited in several varieties of uid ows.
23
24 Solution to the Navier Stokes Equation
3.1 Equating Euler's Equation To Newton's 2nd Law

Euler's formula is the basis of all physical phenomena. There
is nothing in the whole of physics that cannot be described by
some form of this equation including the Navier-Stokes equa-
tions. It follows that Newton's second law, F = ma, must also
be derivative of this equation. Euler's formula essentially pre-
cesses e about the circumference of a unit circle. It is given
that some object being rotated in a circle is acted upon by a
centripetal force which may be described mathematically as
F = ma, thus Euler's formula applies Newton's second law to
e, via i. This force may be either centripetal or centrifugal in
nature. Since i accelerates e around the circumference then
F = ma ie (3.1.1)
Since i, , and e may all be considered as quaternions then it

follows that
F = ma = am ie = (3.1.2)
Therefore F = is a force of precession, e mass, i is the

force per mass, and F, , a, m, i, and e are all quaternions.
Also from equation (3.1.2)
M
i G = a. (3.1.3)
r2
Therefore if
M
i G = a,
r2
then
i
e G = a. (3.1.4)
r2
Therefore
e
i G = a.
r2
3.1 Equating Euler's Equation To Newton's 2nd Law 25
Therefore when i mass, then e a. When e mass, then

i a.
F = am = ie = ei(0) (3.1.5)
e and i are therefore equivalent. Therefore e is the versine and

1 is the cosine. The interaction of cosine and versine imposes
the existence a type of precession that is coplanar with rota-
tion. This type of precession is seen in the spinning of a top
as the planar precession rotates counter to the rotation of the
top. Thus equation (3.1.5) applies. If rotation is considered
as being the result of a centripetal force then equation (3.1.5)
is centrifugal and positive.
Denition 3 Eulerian precession is dened as the rotation

of an object under the inuence of at least two forces acting
at right angles to one another.
Just as every particle must be dened by Euler's for-

mula, any and every particle must obey the gyrodynamic
precessional scheme of Figure ?? which is the gyrodynamic
manifestation of Euler's formula.[7] Figure ?? makes it ob-
vious that inertia is F = ma = m(r) and gravity is F =
ma = m(r2 ). Therefore Newton's 2nd law is axiomati-
cally included in Euler's formula. Since tovacian conjugates
are equivalent then as centrifugal acceleration, r, increases,
inertial mass, r also increases proportionally. As centripetal
acceleration, r2 , increases, gravitational mass, 2r, also
increases proportionally. This is classical relativistic mass di-
lation.
Eulerian precession accounts for precession out of the plane

when >0 radians. As e acts on the cosine the versine acts
on e laterally and i acts on e orthogonally. This constitutes
the precession of e being acted on simultaneously by both i
and the versine. Therefore e is not just rotated, but is pre-
cessed by a yank out of plane. Yank equals the change of
force with time or F/t or F . Therefore
F
= F = ie. (3.1.6)
t
Therefore i and e are not just acceleration but rather jerk
a
where jerk= .
t
Therefore when i = m then e= jerk . When e= m then
mass
i = jerk. It is also found that if i =
time then e= a. If
mass
e= i = a.
time then
From equation (3.1.6)
ie
F = = iet = ieP

where t = time = P = P eriod = . Therefore
F F 1 Y
i= = =
eP t e e
If P is a period of 1 second then F and Y will have the same
Y
quantitative values. Substituting for i into Euler's identity
e
yields
Y
ei = e e = eeY (3.1.7)
The general expression of Equation (3.1.7) is
ei = eeY (3.1.8)
Rearrangement of exponents yield
ei = eY e (3.1.9)
Given
Mm G
F = 2
G = ei 2 (3.1.10)
r r
and equation (3.1.3) where
M
i G = a. (3.1.11)
r2
3.1 Equating Euler's Equation To Newton's 2nd Law 27
then since i exerts a force upon e therefore
M F F
ei = 1 = e r2 Gx = e m = e e = eeF x , (3.1.12)
Rearranging exponents yields
eix = eF ex , (3.1.13)
However equation (3.1.9) was also previously derived where
eix = eY ex . (3.1.14)
Equation (3.1.9) applies to, , the precession or right angle

spin to , rotation. In situations where coplanar rotation is
present that equation (3.1.13) is applicable.
F
i=
e
and
F
e= (3.1.15)
i
Therefore
E F F
== = = =e (3.1.16)
ijk jk i
Thus e, as a quaternion, is a carrier and mediator of of en-
strophy as are all quaternions. Also
E
== = Energy (3.1.17)
ijk
F
== = pressure (3.1.18)
jk
Equation (3.1.9) may now be expressed in terms of enstrophy
where
eix = eF ex = e=x = e= (3.1.19)

Therefore
ei = Y ee
= Y [ee]
= Y [ (ee)] = Y
= 2
Y () = = = P ower = turbulence.
t t
(3.1.20)
Orthogonal i engenders precession. Rectilinear i, in the form

of the versine, engenders vorticity in the form of centrifugal
acceleration. Given equation (3.1.20) = turbulence.
3.2 The Navier -Stokes Equation:Part I.

The Navier-Stokes equations is given by
Dv
= p + T + f (3.2.1)
Dt
where
v = f low velocity
= f luid density
p = pressure
T = stress tensor
f orce
f=
volume
= operator
Therefore
v m r m r m r mr
= 3 2 = = = 2 = m(r2 ) = f.
t r t ijk t2 1 t2 t
(3.2.2)
and
f orce f orce
= = f (3.2.3)
volume ijk
3.2 The Navier -Stokes Equation:Part I. 29
Taking the derivative of F r2 yields
F r2 = 2F r3 = 2(F ) = 2F (3.2.4)
This refers to both the pressure, p and stress, T, terms. The

Navier Stokes equation in terms of f equals
f = 2fp + 2fT fN (3.2.5)
Factoring both sides by velocity, v, yields
f v = 2fp v + 2fT v fN v
!
= =T =p =N
= =2 2 + (3.2.6)
t t t t
Given = power and equation (3.1.20) then

!
= =T =p =N
= =2 2 +
t t t t
= power = mv[(r2 )]
h 2
i
m[(r) ]
= = turbulence. (3.2.7)
t
Equation (3.2.7) is the time dependent Navier Stokes equation
(TDNSE).
E E
== =
ijk 1
Therefore
s

r
E E Fr
== = = = vorticity = (3.2.8)
ijk 1 i
Therefore

F r = i(vorticity) = i (3.2.9)
Therefore
F r = ii( 2 ) (3.2.10)
Dimensionally r i. Therefore
ii 2
F = = i 2 (3.2.11)
i
Therefore
F F
== = = (vorticity)2 = 2 (3.2.12)
i jk
Force may be expressed as
rr 2
F = = r 2 (3.2.13)
r
Pressure, p, may be expressed as
F r 2 2
p= = = . (3.2.14)
rr rr r
Given
2F
derivative of F r2 = ,
rx ry rz
then
2F 2 F 2 2r
derivative of F r2 = = = .
(rx ry )rz rz rx ry rz rx ry
(3.2.15)
Since 2r = F and ijk = 1 then

!
2 r
2F = 2 (3.2.16)
rx ry rz 1
which may be rearranged as
" ! #
1 2 r
2F = 2 (3.2.17)
rz rx ry 1
Therefore
" ! # !
1 2 r 2 r
2F = 2 = 2 (3.2.18)
rz rx ry 1 rx ry rz 1
Therefore
" ! # !
1 2 r 2 r
F = = (3.2.19)
rz rx ry 1 rx ry rz 1
By denition a rotor is formed by the formation of
q(r)q 1 = q 1 (r)q (3.2.20)
Therefore, given Equation (3.2.20) a rotor is in fact formed

where
= derivative of F qx 2
" ! #
1 2 qx
= 2
qx qz ry 1
= 2F (3.2.21)
Therefore
T he rotor
= 2F
" ! #
1 2 qx
= 2
qx qz ry 1
" ! #
1 = qx
= 2 . (3.2.22)
qx qz ry 1
Therefore
Dv
= p + T + f
Dt
" ! # "" ! # #
2 r 2 r
f orce = 2 2 + f orce
qx qy qz 1 qx qy qz 1
p T
(3.2.23)
" ! # "" ! # #
= r = r
= f orce = 2 2 + f orce
qx qy qz 1 qx qy qz 1
p T
(3.2.24)
1
Since qx qy = qz , = and T = 2 = = then
qz
2f orce
" ! #
1 2 qz
=2
qz qx qy 1
p
" ! #
1 2 qz
=2
qz qz 1
p
" !#
1 2
2
qz 1
T
" !#
2
=2 (3.2.25)
qz
T
Therefore
Dv
Dt
= f = f orce
v m r 1 2 =
= = a = 2 = mr 2 = =
t ijk t t r r
= p + T + f
" ! # "" !# #
1 2 qz 2
f orce = 2 2 + f orce
qz qx qy 1 qz
p T
" ! # "" !# #
1 = qz =
= f orce = 2 2 + f orce
qz qx qy 1 qz
p T
(3.2.26)
Therefore
" ! # "" !# #
= 1 = qz =
= a = 2 2 + ma
r qz qx qy 1 qz
p T
(3.2.27)
The a of equation (3.2.27), though descriptive, is lacking

in terms of being descriptive of the broad characteristics of
a uid. To that end a ow rate term is included. To better
quantify this characteristic the quantity a is substituted with
3
m r
F = 3
x v (3.2.28)
r t
Therefore the time independent Navier Stokes equation (TINSE)

is given by
=
r
m r3
= x v
r3 t
" ! # "" !# #
1 = qz =
= F = a = 2 2 + ma
qz qx qy 1 qz
p T
(3.2.29)
and the TDNSE is given by
=
t 3
m r
= 3
x v2
r t
h 2
i
m[(r) ]
=
t !
=p =T =N
=2 2 +
t t t
= power = turbulence (3.2.30)
Equation (3.2.30) is equivalent to
= 2 2
= (3.2.31)
t t t
where = + =solvation parameter, equals the curvature

which is equivalent to pressure, p, and equals the torsion,
which is equivalent to the stress, T.
The Navier Stokes equation is also the direct result of

gure 2 where
=
= f r = mr( + 2r) = ij = k = versor
= rp = mr(r) = scalar
= r T = mr(r2 ) = k = versor. (3.2.32)
Therefore turbulance would be dened as
=
t
= Y r = mr( + 2r) = ij = k = versor

p
=r = mr(r) = scalar
t
T
=r = mr(r2 ) = k = versor. (3.2.33)
t
The counter current expression of the TDNSE is given by
eix = eF ex = e=x = e= = e
= ei = Y ee
= Y [ee]
= Y [ (ee)] = Y
= 2
Y () = =
P P
= P ower = turbulence.
The quantity [Y ()] implies a counter current and imposes

the quality of turbulence.
3.3 The Navier -Stokes Equation:Part II. 37
Turbulence is also generated by the quaternion rotor.
T he rotor
" ! #
1 2 qz
= 2
qz qx ry 1
" ! #
1 = qz
= 2
qz qx ry 1
= 2F
= T urbulence.
3.3 The Navier -Stokes Equation:Part II.

Prove whether or not the solutions to the Navier-Stokes equa-
tion can become singular, i.e., grow without limit.
Faraday's law informs us that precessing charge will in-

duce a magnetic eld. This magnetic eld is characterized by
a north and south pole which establishes a magnetic dipole.
The behavior of this magnetic dipole is identical to that of
a bar magnet. When situated within a magnetic eld the
magnetic dipole of an electron precesses. Turro states the
following:
According to classical physics, when a bar mag-

net is placed in a magnetic eld B0 , the torque
acting on the magnetic moment of the bar mag-
net is proportional to the product of the magni-
tude of the magnetic moment, , of the bar mag-
net, the magnitude of the magnetic eld, Bz , and
the angle between the vectors describing the
?
moments. [ ]
From Modern Molecular Photochemistry (MMP),

by N.J Turro.
Figure 3.3.1: The magnetic energy foundation of the inertial po-

tential.
Refer to Figure3.3.1. In the analysis of charged particle

spin it is useful to follow the magnetic moment because it
coincides with the angular momentum vector. Note that spin
and precession are synonymous. When the bar magnet is
subjected to such a magnetic eld it will assume a certain
magnetic energy. This magnetic energy is given by Equation
(3.3.1) where
Emagnetic = Bz cos (3.3.1)
It is proposed that the electron is composed of three quarks,

j and i. The j pair of quarks combine to form a magnetic
dipole called the up quark and iforms the down quark. If
the magnetic dipole of the electron functions as a bar magnet
and the down quark component is the source of a coupling
magnetic eld analogous to the magnetic eld Bz , then the
up quark component must also assume the magnetic energy
given by equation (3.3.1). Therefore the energy inherent in
the inertial potential is the magnetic energy assumed by the
up quark component of the electron as it precesses within the
magnetic eld supplied by the electron's down quark compo-

nent. This is dened mathematically as
Emagnetic Bz cos
Vinertial = = (3.3.2)

It is this magnetic energy that constitutes the fundamental
nature of inertia or the intrinsic quality of mass to resist grav-
itational attraction.
mmin
m1
m2
m3
1
2
3
90
mmax
acceleration
Figure 3.3.2: The precessional generation of mass.
Consider Figure 3.3.2. The electron is accelerated along

the q vector causing an increase in the magnitude of the q
vector and a concomitant increase in the B eld of the down
quark component. This creates an increase in the torque act-
ing on the bar magnet-like up quark, which increases the
normal force acting on the up quark, which is manifest as
gravitational attraction.
This increase in torque also causes an increase in the an-
gle . = 0 = 0 radians the magnetic energy is at its
At

maximum. At = 90 = /2 radians the magnetic energy is
at its minimum. An increase in the angle implies a decrease
in the magnetic energy, which implies a concomitant decrease
in the torque exerted on the up quark component which re-

sults in a decrease tendency of the up quark to be pulled by
the normal force of gravity. This is the essence of inertia.
Therefore all mass, be it gravitational or inertial, issues forth
from an electromagnetic interaction in general, and from the
magnetic eld specically. Such interactions are dened via
equation (3.3.2)
Depending upon the orientation of the applied magnetic

eld of the down quark component of the electron, the up
quark component is allowed to assume certain specic orien-
tations. We focus our attention on the state of mass when
theta assumes 0, 90, and 180 degrees. At 0 degrees the up
quark component of the electron is aligned parallel to the B
eld of the down quark component. Here, presumably the up
quark will have its most minimal gravitational mass and its
maximum tendency to precess or alternatively, to be attracted
by an attracting body such as the earth. As increases the up
quark's gravitational mass increases until it reaches a maxi-
mum at ninety degrees. At this juncture the maximum grav-
itational mass attainable by that particular particle has been
reached. Note however, that this also denotes its minimum
tendency to precess. Since a spinning top's precession is pred-
icated on the normal attracting force of gravity it may be
alternatively stated that this denotes its minimum tendency
to be attracted by an attracting body such as the earth's
gravitational eld.
In short, a particle, at = 90 = /2radians, will attain a

maximum mass whereupon it will then cease to be aected by
the magnetic potential energy eld as per (3.3.2). This mag-
netic potential energy eld exerts a Newtonian gravitational
force eld dened by Newton's gravitational force law. Such
conditions are found within a black hole. Since the dipole
is now at right angles to the the magnetic potential energy
eld then the mass has reached both its maximum mass and
maximum velocity. It cannot generate any more force from
the induced B eld it once generated while being accelerated.
Since its dipole is now at right angles it cannot be aected by

any other magnetic elds including gravity. Again, gravity is
the force component of a torque generated by the induced B
eld of an accelerated (precessing) charge. This torque is the
gyroscopic couple. The component of force of the back reac-
tion to the couple is inertia. Thus upon reaching a maximum
mass status it ceases to be attracted to any other gravita-
tional masses. However, just as this maximum mass particle
cannot be gravitationally attracted to any other mass, it in
turn cannot attract any other gravitational mass. To do so
would necessarily require it to evince some type of acceler-
ation in order to produce a net induced B eld. However
since it has acquired its maximum velocity and thus its maxi-
mum acceleration, it cannot exert any gravitational inuence,
i.e., an induced B eld, upon any other gravitational mass.
This would also impose a violation of Newton's 3rd law. Thus
growth ceases and the maximum mass particle becomes inert.
Gravity is a negative inverse square law force that may be
expressed as F. All of the forces contained within Navier-
Stokes equations may also be expressed as negative inverse
square law forces. They too may be expressed in their own in-
dividual forms as F. It is given that the solution to an equa-
tion is invariant to changes in measurement units. Therefore
whatever physical principles may apply to gravity, as F, may
be equivalently applied to any other negative inverse square
law force since they too may be expressed as F. Figures 9900
and 34554-demonstrate that any such negative force is cou-
pled to a complimentary positive force. They are inversely
proportional, thus when one reaches a maximum the other
reaches a minimum and thus both will obtain a limit. There-
fore via the principles of equation (3.3.2), the Navier-Stokes
equations' cannot grow without limit. The solutions cannot
become singular.
QED
Bibliography
[1] Arthur Latham Baker, Quaternions as the result of alge-
braic operations. New York, D.Van Nostrand Company,
1911.
[2] P.G. Tait, An Elementary Treatise on Quaternions.

Cambridge at the University Press., 3rd edition, (1890),
47.
[3] C.J. Joly, A Manual of Quaternions. Macmillan and

Company Limited, (1905), 3, 28.
[4] P. Kelland, P.G. Tait, An Introduction to Quaternions.

Macmillan and Company, 2nd edition, (1882), 46-47.
[5] A.S. Hardy, Elements of Quaternions. Ginn Heath and

Company, Boston, (1881), 62-63.
The Gyroscopic Force Theory Introduc-

[6] W.Johnson Jr.,
ing Tovacian Chemistry. Willie Johnson Jr. Publisher,
(2011)
[7] R. Arnold, L. Maunder, Gyrodynamics and its Engineer-

ing Applications. Academic Press Inc., New York, N.Y.,
(1961).
43

Conjectures

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Conjectures

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EULERIAN

Willie Johnson Jr.

First Edition First Print

2 Solving the Riemann Hypothesis 13

3 Solution to the Navier Stokes Equation 23

several longstanding mathematical conjectures may be easily

1.1 The Negation of Fermat's Last Theorem

3. Therefore , , and may be substituted for U q, U p,

7. Therefore is it proven, given the unit quaternions , , ,

Fermat's Last Theorem states that no three positive in-

Axiom 1 Given the positive unit quaternions, , , and ,

In general, given any positive rational numbers, , , and

1.2 The Counterexample of the Beal Conjecture

Prove that the Beal conjecture is false.

2. We allow the integers A, B, C to represent the prime

4. Since a prime is only divisible by 1 and itself then a

6. Given equation (1.0.1) where

then (2 14) + (3 4) = (5 8).

8. Therefore the integers A, B, C as the prime integers

9. Therefore the Beal conjecture is false.

1.3 Armative Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture

Prove that every integer > 2 can be expressed as the sum of

where I is any integer 2. [2][3][4][5]

2. Since every integer is a unique summation of a series of

where Psum = (Pa + Pb + Pc + ....Pn ).

4. Since every integer is a unique summation of a series of

5. Therefore I > 2 = (Psum + Pv ) = (PA + PB ).

6. Therefore is it proven that every integer > 2 can be

1.4 The Eulerian Proof of the Collatz Conjecture

Take any even natural number n, and divide it by 2 yielding

This conjecture may be proved by several methods. One

1.4.1 Innite Series Solution

being added, not so much the results of each operation. Ev-

where n now equals the number of halving operations.

1.4.2 Fermat Extrema Solution

Fermat addressed this problem and found the maxima to

1.4.3 The Unit Circle Solution

The operator i is an intermediary in the process of revers-

Since i is equivalent to a halving process then any and

Solving the Riemann

2.1 A Fermatian Solution to the Riemann Hypoth-

trivial zeros. Obtaining and proving the existence of these

1. The Riemann Hypothesis hypothesizes that all nontriv-

Any and every non-trivial zero, by denition, is a limit.

Fermatian Proof: Prove that only nontrivial zeros of the RZF

1. No matter what point is chosen within the critical strip

2. This horizontal line segment is the cosine or positive x

3. Any one and every one of these horizontal line segments

4. The critical strip is an innite vertical stacking (sum-

5. Following the convention of Fermat where he allowed his

6. By denition a maxima equals a derivative or limit with

7. Thus non-trivial zeros, by denition, are limits or ex-

8. Since the critical strip is an innite stacking of identical

9. This centrode of non trivial zeros is the critical line.

10. Thus all non-trivial zeros, as extrema or zero deriva-

The Fermatian proof concisely proves non trivial zeros

2.2 An Eulerian Solution to the Riemann Hypothe-

exists if and only if

lim f (x) lim f (x). (2.2.1)

Thus in equation 9a c may be considered as a nontrivial zero.

Prove that (0) = 0nontrivial .

Consider Figures 2.2.1 and 2.2.2..

1. The initial conditions are:

1.3 Armative Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture

1.4.1 Innite Series Solution

Any and every non-trivial zero, by denition, is a limit.

4. The critical strip is an innite vertical stacking (sum-

6. By denition a maxima equals a derivative or limit with

7. Thus non-trivial zeros, by denition, are limits or ex-

8. Since the critical strip is an innite stacking of identical

15. By Eulerian dierentiation if iy = i then

19. If non trivial zeroes are dened as i0 then given equation

Denition 2 Turbulence is the time-dependent chaotic be-

Denition 3 Eulerian precession is dened as the rotation

Just as every particle must be dened by Euler's for-

By denition a rotor is formed by the formation of

Therefore turbulance would be dened as

According to classical physics, when a bar mag-