What is the Universe expanding into..

Do you think there was anything before the big bang?

  • I don't think there was anything before the Big Bang

    Votes: 56 12.5%
  • I think something existed before the Big Bang

    Votes: 200 44.7%
  • I don't think the big bang happened

    Votes: 54 12.1%
  • I think the universe is part of a mutiverse

    Votes: 201 45.0%

  • Total voters
    447
Status
Not open for further replies.
But have got it now. How big can you make these things and they still work? 😕
The existence of magic squares n x n has been proved for all n>2.

[SIZE=+1]
02.jpg

[/SIZE]
 
The existence of magic squares n x n has been proved for all n>2.

[SIZE=+1]
[/SIZE]
I see the 12 x 12 magic square in post #5421uses every number from 1 to 144.
Is this feature possible at any size ?

Once you have a magic square of a given size you can make many more by mean of:
Symmetries.
Adding a constant in each cell.
Multiplying each cell by a constant.
Adding two squares, cell by cell.

I presume the square filled with 1,2,3, ...n^2 is the canonical form of the n x n magic square; It is unique regardless of symmetries.
Can this be confirmed ?
 
Last edited:
Simple magic squares are constructed using consecutive integers from 1 to n^2 , where n is the number of integers on one side of the square.

So a 3 x 3 magic square uses the integers from 1 to 3^2, or 1 to 9, as below.

magic-square.gif


For an order 3 magic square, trial and error in positioning the digits does the job.

By multiplying all the digits by 4, we obtain my magic square:
nn-3x3ms.gif

The base 'magic number' is still 15 though.
 
As a Geometrical Mathematician, I keep my wits about me,

Intereresting discoveries about the World. 😀

What are the chances of this interesting Conjunction? 😕

To see one Suzuki 90 degree twin is rare. To see two is extraordinary. 😕
 

Attachments

  • Suzuki SV-650.jpg
    Suzuki SV-650.jpg
    216.7 KB · Views: 62
There is a lot of information about magic squares in Wikipedia.
Many more ways than I thought to built magic squares.
A magic square filled with 1,2,3, n^2 is called a normal magic square. ( not a "canonical form", like I wrote ).
There are much more normal squares than I thought.
 
Last edited:
Simple magic squares are constructed using consecutive integers from 1 to n^2 , where n is the number of integers on one side of the square.

So a 3 x 3 magic square uses the integers from 1 to 3^2, or 1 to 9, as below.

IMAGE 1.

For an order 3 magic square, trial and error in positioning the digits does the job.

By multiplying all the digits by 4, we obtain my magic square:

IMAGE 2.
My images appear to have gone AWOL so, for completeness, I will paste them here:

IMAGE 1
JVnHy.jpg


IMAGE 2
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
 
Where I have got to, thanks to Felix Klein is that circles, ellipses and hyperbolas are just the same thing.
Conic sections, like magic squares, have a long history.

Apollonius of Perga commented upon them in the 6th century.

His Treatise on Conic Sections is one of the most important mathematical works to have come down to us from the Ancient World, arguably second only to Euclid’s Elements.

The Conics of Apollonius of Perga — Steemit
 

Attachments

  • Apollonius Conics.png
    Apollonius Conics.png
    200.6 KB · Views: 101
Simple magic squares are constructed using consecutive integers from 1 to n^2 , where n is the number of integers on one side of the square.

So a 3 x 3 magic square uses the integers from 1 to 3^2, or 1 to 9, as below.



For an order 3 magic square, trial and error in positioning the digits does the job.

By multiplying all the digits by 4, we obtain my magic square:

The base 'magic number' is still 15 though.
I truly appreciate the encouragement Galu but I can't make head nor tail of this explanation. My math career is a no starter. 🙂
 
I wasn't expecting you to give, or understand, a mathematical explanation, Pete.

The 'magic' I challenged everyone to spot was that the numbers in my magic square summed to 60 when added in a vertical column, a horizontal column and even diagonally.

Nobody has given me that answer, so you are not alone! 😉
 

Attachments

  • Magic Square.gif
    Magic Square.gif
    1.6 KB · Views: 103
Lurking behind our thin, rational facade is an impulsive demon that takes control of us, acts without thinking, and serves its own purposes regardless of the impact to our ultimate well-being.

That demon is your id. 😱

Your id, your lizard-brain, your ‘animal’ impulses, that piece of you evolved in a context wildly different from the one in which you now live.

Why does that remind me of Altaira? 😉
 

Attachments

  • Altaira.jpg
    Altaira.jpg
    13.5 KB · Views: 92
The oldest known mathematical puzzle dates from Archimedes, more than two millennia ago.

The goal of Archimedes’ Stomachion is to determine in how many ways 14 pieces can be put together to make a square.

ostomachion_col_puzzle.gif


It has been shown that Archimedes’ puzzle has exactly 536 truly distinct solutions.
 
KaffiMann,

Math is by far not my strong suite, but if we have a long and hard look at everything in known existence I find the only number that is completely unrealistic is "0".

In this endeavour, mathematics is distractive and it constricts imaginative thinking. Yes, zero is nonsensical and so is infinity.

I guess it could be said that the medium itself is actually "faster" since the level of activity is higher.

"Slow and fast" are lousy terms. The space medium is the "fastest" medium by far. "Fast" means high particle velocity / vibration frequency due to low density / resistivity / mass / dispersion / pressure, entailing large amplitudes and short wavelengths, that is, high propagation speed and high energy levels.

Vibration frequencies within a certain range give rise to the much-talked-about light phenomenon. Phenomena merely have mental existence.

The formulation is correct, within the constraints of current science and understanding.

Atomic matter, clouds of interstellar dust, black holes... are the concentration of the miniscule particles of the space medium. Well, there is no proof, but the institutionalized tenet of voodoo science is much less convincing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.