Mathematical Physics - Quantum-Relativity (qr)

The Gaussian-School of Higher-Arithmetic (1831, updated 2022); tutorial #1.

The daftest misunderstanding ever in the long history of all laughable human hubris.

Author's notes:

When Gauss was still a child of 12, he said that anyone who did not see the correctness of the Euler Identity at first glance was never going to be a (great) mathematician. As nobody else could see the correctness of this at all, let alone at first glance, this remark did not endear him to people who were being in effect told that they were not mathematicians. What Gauss was dreaming of as a child is hard for me to fathom because the Euler Identity he referred to was in effect nonsense. I could give Gauss credit for perhaps seeing that there was a missing zero magnitude term in the exponent of Euler's expression. However, this would leave me irritated with Gauss, if it was so easy for him then why did he not just explain the missing zero magnitude term? My best guess is that Gauss remained confused about this matter for his entire life but redeemed himself by leaving me with a vital legacy remark made at the end of a letter to the Royal Society in 1831.

Any so-called "mathematician" who could not see beyond the omission of the zero exponential magnitude in the Euler Identity (that is everybody except perhaps for JCF Gauss) was not even a useful arithmetician, let alone a colleague of Laplace or Fourier. Think about this another way, whatever we do in life, even if one is a mathematician oneself, for about the last 290-years we have all been accidentally hypnotised or indoctrinated into learning a lot of puerile childish arithmetical claptrap from poor deluded "teachers and professors" who had never even been taught how to count inverse numbers properly. Zero take away one or "minus-one", is a mathematically invalid operation and therefore the term "minus-one" is invalid nonsense, "minus-one" (subtract one from nothing) is not even a valid number at all.

Language notice: The ambiguous and absurdly highfalutin terms logarithmic and exponential both refer to the same pathetically simple concept of ratio-metric proportionality, that is the ratio-metric proportionality of numerical scale in the so-called logarithmic (but also so-called exponential) counting domain. As our so-called mathematicians have spent the last 400 years failing to notice that logarithmic and exponential mean the same thing, we must discard the teaching of such innumerate and illiterate numerical zombies and instead start actually thinking for ourselves.

Caution Notice: The exponential polar manifold is merely a useful transitional device empowering the partial interpretation of the mind-numbing natural exponential number plane into flat (finger-counting) numbers. The mathematic of nature is exponential and is not the happy over simplistic bean-counting neo-Pythagorean claptrap taught in our so-called "mathematics" schools.