Thread: Hilbert's 6th Problem Solved:

One of the greatest problems in mathematics is solved and tested on binary star systems proving they are entangled just as quantum structures. A proof for this solution is provided in the link below:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24011639/T...h-Problem-Book

The project will move towards publication during the summer of 2010.

Originally Posted by Unification123

One of the greatest problems in mathematics is solved and tested on binary star systems proving they are entangled just as quantum structures. A proof for this solution is provided in the link below:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24011639/T...h-Problem-Book

The project will move towards publication during the summer of 2010.

You have not solved Hilbert's 6th Problem and the linked "book" is rubbish.

Just for starts you have but two axioms:

'Axiom 1: Physics is applied mathematics.

Axiom 2: Space coupled harmonic systems exhibit optimized and synchronized motion.

Neither of these so-called axioms are of any content or use. All that you have demonstrated is complete ignorance of what an axiomitization is.

You are delusional. Professional help is recommended.

Your comments are proof you did not even read the text or know what Hilbert's 6th Problem is with respect to a real system. In fact, take the list of binary stars I described to any astronomer and they will tell you what has been done. In fact, take the list to any mathematical physicist and make sure you ask them to make some predictions with respect to some simple stars and I bet you end up in a real dilusional state (Multiverse or 11 dimensions) they are the one's who need professional help. In fact you don't even deserve a response.

Originally Posted by Unification123

Your comments are proof you did not even read the text or know what Hilbert's 6th Problem is with respect to a real system. In fact, take the list of binary stars I described to any astronomer and they will tell you what has been done. In fact, take the list to any mathematical physicist and make sure you ask them to make some predictions with respect to some simple stars and I bet you end up in a real dilusional state (Multiverse or 11 dimensions) they are the one's who need professional help. In fact you don't even deserve a response.

No my post is proof that I do understand what Hilbert's 6th problem is -- it is the axiomatization of those parts of physics that are sufficient maturity to potentially be amenable to axiomatization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_sixth_problem

Hilbert specifically noted probability and mechanics. At the time at which the list was presented to the mathematical community, mechanics meant what is tody called classical mechanics. Quantum theory and relativity would be added to the mix to include physics as it is known today.

Probability was axiomatized by Kolmogorov and now stands and a sub-discipline of measure theory.

The remainder of the problem remains open.

Your bit of nonsense does not even come close. Hilbert's sixth problem has little to do with binary star systems, except insofar as they are treated by the methods of classical mechanics.

Why in the world would I take a list of the Hilbert problems to a mathematical physicist? The Hilbert problems are really problems in pure mathematics.

It is quite clear that you don't know what you are talking about, and your "treatise" is just another delusion published on the internet.

For those interested the American Mathematical Society has a two volume publication discussing the Hilbert Problems and the status as of the publication in 1974. Since that time the Poincare conjecture has been solved by Pereleman. http://www.ams.org/bookstore?fn=20&a...&ikey=PSPUM-28

You obviously know nothing about physics and mathematical physicist obviously know nothing about reality.

Hilbert's 6th Problem cannot be solved without a test.

I tested my theory and if my work is rubbish then String Theory and any other so called solution to Hilbert's 6th problem is less than rubbish.

Hilbert was at least working on Boltzmann's equations when he made his statement.

Originally Posted by Unification123

You obviously know nothing about physics and mathematical physicist obviously know nothing about reality.

Hilbert's 6th Problem cannot be solved without a test.

I tested my theory and if my work is rubbish then String Theory and any other so called solution to Hilbert's 6th problem is less than rubbish.

Hilbert was at least working on Boltzmann's equations when he made his statement.

1. I actually do quite a bit about physics.

2. Yes your theory is rubbish.

3. String theory has notihg whatever to do with Hilbert's 6th problem. If you think it purports to be a solution then that is dlear evidence that you are completely ignorant of both string theory and Hilbert's 6th problem.

4. Hilbert made lots of statements. But his sixth problem is not a statement at all but rather a challenge to the mathematical community of 1900 to axiomatize physics as it was understood at that time.

5. I presume that by "Boltzmann's equations" you mean the Boltzmann transport equation. That has no bearing on Hilbert's 6th problem and why you think it might is a mystery. Apparently this is just more evidence that you have no idea what you are talking about.

6. Hilbert's 6th problem is not a single simple problem and a "test" makes no sense. The objective is to produce an axiomatic formulation that results in known classical physics. The objective is not to solve any particular problem of mechanics.


Guitarist : This is not mathematics. Neither is it physics. I suggest that it belongs in Pseudoscience.

1. Wavefunctions are considered mathematical tools that are purely statistical according to quantum physicst.

2. Binary star systems are purely mechanical systems which are suppose to be described by General Relativity.

3. Hilbert proposed the 6th Problem saying in first rank the relationship between statistics and mechanics. I know everything your saying about the history because it's in the introduction to the book. Which is proof you did not read it.

4. Proving that binary star systems are controlled by wavefunctions show the relationship between what is considered a purely statistical form and a mechanical system. i.e. Hibert's 6th Problem.

I tested my equations on this list of binary star systems and they worked.

PSR B1913+16
PSR B1534 +12
PSR B2127+11C
PSR J1756-2251
PSR J0737-3039A
PSR J1518+4904
B2303+46
V541 Cygni
DI Herculies
AS Camelopardalis

General Relativity precession perdictions do not work for the last 7. I find no precession predictions for the first 3 they just talk about Gravitational Waves. When it came to challenging Newton and Mercury they did not talk about GW. It was all about precession.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24011639/T...h-Problem-Book

Anyone is free to study my results for logic, mechanics, mathematical form and experimenatial confirmation. Psedoscience is what people call your work when they don't want to deal with the facts. Give the same list to Ed Witten let him apply String Theory and hold him to the same standard you used to call my work rubbish. Avoiding the fact is the main reason science is in decline.

Originally Posted by DrRocket

Guitarist : This is not mathematics. Neither is it physics. I suggest that it belongs in Pseudoscience.

OK, I have now read this entire thread, and offer a coupla thoughts:

First I fail to understand why so much unnecessary heat has been generated.

Second, this is a DISCUSSION forum. Members should not be expected to click on links and then give their thoughts; if you have something to say, come right out and say it, then it can be discussed.

By "links" I mean those to your own work or to that of others. In fact, personally I would NEVER click on a link to an object not fully in the public domain.

Finally, linking to your own forthcoming book could be construed as self-promotion, which very seriously frowned upon here.

Rather than move to Pseudo, I am simply locking it.

PS Be aware that re-posting a locked thread in ANY form could result in banning