Hi Luigi,
You wrote:
>First, if you are interested in a new theory, then your theory should
>permit some advance respect to the actual status, or it would be
>useless.
>Is the importance of your theory related to its philosophical design,
>as you told us regarding your studies about subatomic physics
>permit some advance respect to the actual status, or it would be
>useless.
>Is the importance of your theory related to its philosophical design,
>as you told us regarding your studies about subatomic physics
My work was indeed inspired from physics.
Symetries in physics are fondamental. for instance it
is possible only by symetries principles to say if an
equation is correct or not. More, by playing with these
principle of symetries it is possible to BUILD new theory.
One of the famous exemple is the Dirac equations:
the Schrodinger equation in quantum mecanics is not correct
in regard of relativity theory of Einstein, because the
time derivative is of the first order, and the spatials
derivatives are of the second. Dirac, essentially by
using principle of symetrie (in these case called "covariance")
has build what we called the Dirac equations, which is the
correct version of the Schrodinger equation in regard of relativity
theory.
One other famous exemple is (it's better to say will be) the
"Theory of Everything" that the aim is to make a unification
of all of the fondamental forces of nature (gravity, strong and
electroweak). Everyone accord to the fact that this theory
will be <<supersymetric>>.
All the great theories in physics are full of symetries.
One other famous exemple is (it's better to say will be) the
"Theory of Everything" that the aim is to make a unification
of all of the fondamental forces of nature (gravity, strong and
electroweak). Everyone accord to the fact that this theory
will be <<supersymetric>>.
All the great theories in physics are full of symetries.
Now to say if my new theory has interest:
-For a theoretical point of view: yes, the implications are HUGE.
-For an informatic point of view: the answer is not easy, for
many reasons:
1) I dond't have investigate really this domain.
2) My theory is full of symetries (all a variant of a basic one)
and there is many relations for everything (factorization,
test of primality, link with 2^p+1, ...), all of that is a strong
-For a theoretical point of view: yes, the implications are HUGE.
-For an informatic point of view: the answer is not easy, for
many reasons:
1) I dond't have investigate really this domain.
2) My theory is full of symetries (all a variant of a basic one)
and there is many relations for everything (factorization,
test of primality, link with 2^p+1, ...), all of that is a strong
sign of unification. Usely in physics when there is many
symetries, richness of solutions explode, which in our case
of prime number become interesting, because if a way is
difficult to solve numerically (for instance, because it take
too many time) it's maybe possible to overcome the problem
by using an other.
>Second: quantum computer algorithms are ready, while quantum computers
>are not, and won't be for a decade; has your theory anything to do with
>it?
>are not, and won't be for a decade; has your theory anything to do with
>it?
My work has nothing to do with computer algorithms.
Regards,
Olivier
Cr�ez gratuitement votre Yahoo! Mail avec 100 Mo de stockage !
Cr�ez votre Yahoo! Mail
Le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger est arriv� ! D�couvrez toutes les nouveaut�s pour dialoguer instantan�ment avec vos amis. T�l�chargez GRATUITEMENT ici !
_______________________________________________ Prime mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hogranch.com/mailman/listinfo/prime
