Abstract reductionism and simpler rules

Debate with myself often my responsibility in making certain things clear. This post is meant to help clarity while also showing the logical framework around my work, especially with regards to what I like to call abstract reductionism.

The most dramatic discovery I made was over 15 years ago, when realized could create a mathematical argument correct by the accepted rules of the mathematical community which nonetheless lead to an incorrect result. So I wrote a paper which was published demonstrating.

So yeah you have this HUGE result which brings into question mathematical consistency. Where the paper demonstrates inconsistency--so stands on its own regardless of anything else.

When the mathematical community did not behave as expected, I realized there was serious corruption as no real mathematicians would leave something like that undiscussed at very high levels and especially not, unresolved.

Which was an opportunity for me as have admitted as discovered problem was JUST with ring of algebraic integers, so a proper ring had to exist--for mathematical consistency. To be sure I also studied logic and concluded that mathematics is a subset of logic. That forced me to resolve the oxymoron of a "logical contradiction" and did that early on this blog.

From the logic axioms linked there established what I called: Three Valued Logic

That was HUGE for me and necessary for later when defined mathematical proof.

And I had mathematical consistency back. Had mathematics as a subset of logic. And had begun abstracting to simpler things, in a way I now call abstract reductionism. Where also focused modular often, and one of my most powerful tools had lead me to the problem with algebraic integers, when focused on x+y+vz = 0(mod x+y+vz). (And I don't use congruence symbol.)

So fifteen years ago, by this time knew that my paper could pass formal peer review and was published but things got weird after. And realized mathematicians as a community were corrupted. And began a distancing which has continued. As of course people with a title of mathematician who don't behave as mathematicians are useless to me.

But abstract reductionism is a logical tool. And importantly went on to use it to functionally define science, and also to functionally define entertainment. That latter was less than four years ago. And world is already in flux as global entertainment has changed rapidly with the US leading those changes with dramatic impact for example with movies with the US box office.

I think it is all SO COOL where have defined cool, of course. Not linking to too much here and trying to keep this post short. The gist of it for those interested in mathematics is to establish much is certain while the world is just taking its time to handle certain things.

To the human species, fifteen years is barely a blink.

While I'm enjoying the ride more and more.

So this post covered logic from axioms to actual Three Valued Logic. Established how mathematical inconsistency appeared with use of ring of algebraic integers, demonstrated with my pivotal paper. And talked abstract reductionism as a logical tool and process which handles mathematics--and beyond.


James Harris