Mathematics - a new basis

[TrueTears]

awwwwww yiss!!

call me maybe?

[ms.srki]

Love your work! I'll give these a go, although my understanding is somewhat rudimentary

1. 4/.3/2/.9/2s. = {4/.3/2/.9/2, 0/.4/3/.2/9/.2}
2. 50s. = 0/.50/0 = {0/.5/0, 5}

1. 4/.3/2/.9/2s. = {4/.3/2/.9/2, 0/.4/3/.2/9/.2/0}it's a mistake
2. 50s. = 0/.50/0 = {0/.5/0, 5} , shall 50s.={50 , 0/.50/0}

1. 5+[3]7 = 10

this is true
s. (opposite number 2.8 ) - has more than one number for each number should have to count
----------------------
method used in the picture, on four different aid
er.png

[nacho]

call me maybe?

I knew this whole thread was just a way of you trying to passively give me your number.

sorry it took so long to notice this thread, i've been preoccupied with stalking your fb pictures and mathematics (one in the same)

i hope that's your real # cause i miscalled it

[TrueTears]

its almost as real as the mathematics presented in this thread

[Mao]

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+[3]7 = 10

Wait. This is the first thing I've understood in this whole damn thread.

Are you seriously telling me that ?

If so, what is the damn point.

[kamil9876]

Hey ms.srki, using my superior reputation, I have successfully published this work as my own. I'm sorry but your basis is belong to me.

[nacho]

its almost as real as the mathematics presented in this thread

rate my sext /10 ?

[pi]

Wait. This is the first thing I've understood in this whole damn thread.

I'll be honest, but that's the only thing I "understood" too and hence got the answer of 10 haha

I don't really know why this is at all useful though...

[availn]

Wait. This is the first thing I've understood in this whole damn thread.

Are you seriously telling me that ?

If so, what is the damn point.

I don't get it, b+c is not less than a in any of those examples, how did you derive the top part of the equation?

[alondouek]

I don't get it, b+c is not less than a in any of those examples, how did you derive the top part of the equation?

Well, based on Mao's comment:

[availn]

Well, based on Mao's comment:

(Image removed from quote.)

Yeah, what I'm asking is how he reached the conclusion that: a + [b ]c = a, b + c < a    because b + c was not less than a in any of the given examples.

And I'm loving the effort going into this. I think we may actually get somewhere with this 

EDIT: Why doesn't noparse work on these forums 

[MJRomeo81]

All your base are belong to us.

[Mao]

I don't get it, b+c is not less than a in any of those examples, how did you derive the top part of the equation?

It's an intuition based on that picture. But I could be completely wrong.

Anyone who can actually understand any of these should go work for SETI. Deciphering this will more than qualify someone to communicate with aliens.

[pi]

5+[3]7 = 10

What  interpreted that as is that you have a line (or an "along") of length 5 and you have a line (or an "along") of length 7. There is an overlap of 2 if those lines are to be placed on each other (as 5-3=2) so hence the total length of the line is (5-2)+2+(7-2)=10. Which I think is the same as 5+[.2]7 = 10

Having said that, I have no idea how that is useful or even remotely mathematical.

And yes, I do have wayyyyyyyyyy to much free time

[Mao]

What  interpreted that as is that you have a line (or an "along") of length 5

Lost my shit.