# A*A+B*B=C*C

## Recommended Posts

Given that a, b, and c are positive natural numbers the solution is unitary and of a whole number meaning 3 * 3 + 4 * 4 = 5 * 5 exactly without irrationality or fractions there of in a, b or c.

I submit the following x * x * x + y *y * y + z * z * z = r * r * r where x and y and z are the value of the grid (x,y,z) mapped to the value of r. and that x, y, z, and r follow the same whole number values and solutions just "to the next level" x=3, y=4, z=5, r=6 exactly without irrationality or fractions there of in x, y, z, and r.

Edited by think
##### Share on other sites

I would blitz my ws linebacker x* and my weak side corner back y* separating the blood flow from the body and brain of the right handed QB which would equal z*z*z*z*z* a fumble and a td* for the defense

##### Share on other sites
Given that a, b, and c are positive natural numbers...

think,

I learned as a young child that a, b, and c are letters of the alphabet.

Sorry to be obvious, but I don't get it. Why do you call them numbers?

Michael

##### Share on other sites

i get things like this at most of the new forums that I start... LOL defense of what? as the goal of being is where?

right back to topic: If we are to say that negative realitiy/energy exists is this not real or a non rational concept?

what then does the meaning of mapping things directly to the location of time/space where they are becoming what is means what at this point in the equations?

##### Share on other sites
Given that a, b, and c are positive natural numbers...

think,

I learned as a young child that a, b, and c are letters of the alphabet.

Sorry to be obvious, but I don't get it. Why do you call them numbers?

Michael

I like that picture of you holding your chin it represents you doing what I believe is called thinking moreso that x is x and y is y and z is z x,y,z and r, have values beyond that pythagorian logic states that a squared plus b squared equals c squared thus the triangle with the distance a for one side with the line of length b perpendicular to the length a reaches left and forward the distance a and b respectively correct? then the distance between the end of a to the end of b is the length c such that it follows the squared rule given.,

I will wait till the science and Mathematic objectivists are awake for the realizations that can occur where x, y, z, and r are mapped as previously mentioned and explained.

*scratches head* yep really need to work on communicational skills more so then most of us here. Please keep me in check with what I am trying to explain it will really help me.

##### Share on other sites
*scratches head* yep really need to work on communicational skills more so then most of us here. Please keep me in check with what I am trying to explain it will really help me.

think,

OK. Here's what it looks like so far.

I see a bunch of gobbledygook that looks like it is served up to impress folks. I also scratch my head, but then wonder, "Is there an idea in there somewhere?"

I really would appreciate a simple explanation.

You must forgive my arrested sleepy mentality. I learned Objectivist concept formation, so I suffer from an intellectual handicap before such laser-targeted awakening as I see present in your pronouncement.

Michael

##### Share on other sites

thank you Michael,

It is just the idea that adding three different whole numbers together after cubing them, you know multiplying their value together three times has a whole number cube root value meaning after adding these cubes together the result is a new cubed value in a number system of whole values or a unit numbered system if you will

Pythagorean concepts explain that two numbers squared is equal to a third number that has a whole number square root value that is not similar to say the value of the square root of 2 or, say the cube root of three that can not have an "exact" value in the end.

Edited by think
##### Share on other sites
Pythagorean concepts explain that two numbers squared is equal to a third number that has a whole number square root value that is not similar to say the value of the square root of 2 or, say the cube root of three that can not have an "exact" value in the end.

Pythagorean Theorem is a theory about the relationship of the lengths of the sides of right triangles (ones that have a 90 degree angle). I have no idea what you are talking about here.

##### Share on other sites

While think's 2nd paragraph is true, I fail to see the point.

For an integer n >= 3, the equation a^n + b^n = c^n has no solutions in non-zero integers a, b, and c. This is Fermat's Last Theorem. Note 2 addends on the left, not 3.

##### Share on other sites
While think's 2nd paragraph is true, I fail to see the point.

For an integer n >= 3, the equation a^n + b^n = c^n has no solutions in non-zero integers a, b, and c. This is Fermat's Last Theorem. Note 2 addends on the left, not 3.

so yes x^3+y^3+z^3=r^3 is the first real relationship between what is x,y, and z and the distance r to the object from the origin (0,0,0) >> (x,y,z) in what would be considered relativistic spacial dimensions also since there is the solution to the equation where n=3 but there needs to be n unique values added and then they will equal the resultant value to the power n to solve the equation one just adds one to n and adds n elements added together then factors the results this become the "simple solution" to Fermat's last theorem and as well develops relativistic spacial definitions in the from of simpler mathematics. If I should have to change some words to explain this solution to the problem let me know?

thanks in advance for any input.

##### Share on other sites

I can't make head or tail of this.

##### Share on other sites

I think think is driving a gobbledygook express.

--Brant

##### Share on other sites
I can't make head or tail of this.

It's not about probability. It's about geometry, algebra or number theory.

##### Share on other sites
Given that a, b, and c are positive natural numbers the solution is unitary and of a whole number meaning 3 * 3 + 4 * 4 = 5 * 5 exactly without irrationality or fractions there of in a, b or c.

I submit the following x * x * x + y *y * y + z * z * z = r * r * r where x and y and z are the value of the grid (x,y,z) mapped to the value of r. and that x, y, z, and r follow the same whole number values and solutions just "to the next level" x=3, y=4, z=5, r=6 exactly without irrationality or fractions there of in x, y, z, and r.

And?

##### Share on other sites
• 1 month later...
Given that a, b, and c are positive natural numbers...

think,

I learned as a young child that a, b, and c are letters of the alphabet.

Sorry to be obvious, but I don't get it. Why do you call them numbers?

Michael

They stand for or are by convention the names of unspecified natural numbers. That is how algebra works. Letters (or strings of letters) are used as names for mathematical objects. There are times when being literal minded to the n-th degree interferes with understanding.

The string of letters = a..p..p..l..e is not a fruit but it is the name of something that you can bite into, peel or render into sauce. Without names we could not communicate with each other or even think.

Ba'al Chatzaf

##### Share on other sites

Bob,

I don't want to quibble, but "stand for" and "is" are vastly different when you are purporting to be precise.

If a delicate argument is being made, there is nothing at all wrong with clarity and precision.

Michael

##### Share on other sites
Bob,

I don't want to quibble, but "stand for" and "is" are vastly different when you are purporting to be precise.

If a delicate argument is being made, there is nothing at all wrong with clarity and precision.

Michael

Which I provided, you will note. The use of "is" for "stands for" is a facon de parler, a forgivable abuse of language which makes communication easier, provided the abuse is understood and condoned.

Ba'al Chatzaf

##### Share on other sites

Bob,

You were not the one arguing for mapping negative reality. My comments about precision were within that context.

(I am still trying to get my mind around the idea of negative reality, much less mapping it...)

Michael

##### Share on other sites
Bob,

I don't want to quibble, but "stand for" and "is" are vastly different when you are purporting to be precise.

If a delicate argument is being made, there is nothing at all wrong with clarity and precision.

Michael

When someone asks who you are do you say "I am Micheal" or do you say "Micheal stands for me" ? By your argument it is incorrect to say "I am Micheal".

##### Share on other sites

GS,

Wrong.

Your premise is that a word can only mean one thing.

There are two different meanings at play here.

Michael

##### Share on other sites
Bob,

You were not the one arguing for mapping negative reality. My comments about precision were within that context.

(I am still trying to get my mind around the idea of negative reality, much less mapping it...)

Think of Lindsay Perigo.

--Brant