On The Principles of Mathematical Linguistics

By,
Miguel A. Sanchez-Rey
Abstract
The aim of the article is complete revision of the methods and usage of the
mathematics in linguistic theory. Revision that takes into principle strict and
precise adherence to mathematical formalism and empiricism. Such formalism
means more novelty than the conventional use of standard methods in linguistics
that has been persistent in the last half-century. Stressing formal and Boolean
logic, number theory, p.d.e.'s, geometric, and topological applications in
dynamical systems to the structure and nature of the language acquisition device,
internal and external merge, the unraveling of the neural cellular rules that lead to
language acquisition, and the resolution of D.A.R.P.A.'s first grand mathematical
challenge stating a formulaic expression, as an experimental conjecture, of the
human cognitive organ.
The resolution of D.A.R.P.A's problem implies three natural laws that are a result
of this biological system, and as a consequence to breaking symmetry. It's
resolution, as will be explained, solves the five fundamental problems of Bio-
linguistics and an unraveling of the Minimalist Program.
July 15th, 2010
Keywords: Minimalism, Bio-linguistics, Bio-Physics, Cognitive Science, Neuroscience, Bare Phrase Structure,
Interfaces, I-language, Lexicon, Faculty of Language, Language of Thought, Language Acquisition Device,
Universal Grammar, Mind/Brain, Module, Computational Device, Cognitive Organ, Architecture, Internal
Merge, External Merge, Numeration, Recursion, Headedness, Externalization, Inclusiveness Condition, Last
Resort, Reductionism, Neural System, Binary Switches, Parametric Settings, Genotype, Phenotype,
Epigenetics, Developmental Constraints, Natural Selection, Symmetry Breaking, Natural Law, Differential
Topology, Algebraic Topology, Differential Geometry, Dynamical Systems, Non-Linear Dynamics, Number
Theory, Homology, Julia set, Fatou set, Mandelbrot set, Fractals, Simplexes, Observables, Lagrangian, Line
Integral, Action Integral, Measure Space, Banach Space, Hilbert Space, Lie Groups, Boolean Algebra
1
Contents
1. Introduction: Background and Overview
2. Theoretical Structures
3. Experimental Considerations
4. Appendix: Mathematical Structures
5. Conclusion
6. References
2
1. Introduction: Background and Overview
The goal of Bio-linguistics, established in the mid-1970's, set out to define five major problems for
future research. They known today as Plato's, Rene Descartes, Wilhelm Von Humboldt, Charles Darwin's, and
Broca's problem which meant, respectively: how do we acquire language so quickly without immediate exter-
nal stimulation (poverty of the stimulus)? How is this knowledge put to use? What constitutes knowledge of
language? How did it evolve? What is the brain mechanisms that led to the development of language (Jenkins,
2000)?
The program of Bio-linguistics was a reaction to the accomplishments of unification of the natural
sciences; especially, between chemistry and physics. What is important to the Bio-linguistics framework is that
language is treated as a biological organ called an I (internal)-language instantiated by a language acquisition
devise (LAD) or module that maturates into a diverse reservoir of communication expressions by manipulation
of internal switches (parametric settings) like German, Portuguese, Hebrew, and Japanese (Chomsky, 2000).
The evolution of linguistics, since the early 1960's, has been noticeable unique, since it's primary goal
was to learn about the parametric settings set off by the genotype of Universal Grammar (UG), though when
treated as biological entity it was clear that FL (Faculty of Language) is not entirely rule base. The original
goal to determine phrase structure principles was no longer viable: language had to be treated as a formal
system with irregularities, or developmental constraints, cause by environmental influences (Chomsky, 2006).
With the accomplishments of information theory, with Claude Shannon's publication of, The Mathematical
Theory of Communication the way future research would proceed in the field of Bio-linguistics changed. It
was discerned that language is a biological organ that is universal across the entire spectrum of the human
population regardless of cultural influence. Language no longer meant just the ability to communicate internal
thoughts, but that it defined the very idea of having private thoughts in the first place; understood today as the
strong minimalist theses that in the mid-1990's modified X'-theory and Government and Binding [GB]
(Suaerland, 2007).
One of the most decisive problems that has languished linguistics into different camps is syntax and
semantics: whether or not the meaning of words and their constructions into sentences is necessarily distin-
guishable from syntax? One of the proponents against the dominance of syntax is Ray Jackendoff whom has
argued over the past three decades for the intermediate level theory of consciousness (1990). Others, within
constructionist linguistics, have been divided over the problem of whether or not a child develops language
through internal modification or by distinguishing the logic behind the usages of certain lexical features
(Goldberg, 1995). For example a very like grab can be put together with a noun creating a noun phrase with
the determiner phrase modifying the noun at the end of the sentence:
(1) Susan grabbed the knob.
In a past tense formulation giving the functional category: agent, patient, goal. This was the controversial
nuisance of c (categorical) - selection and s (semantic) - selection, which Noam Chomsky set out to define as
the problem of epistemological priority (Lasnik, 2005). Many proponents of the view of s-selection argued that
a child can, by it's own efforts, take in data and determine it's logical construction. Though other linguists
argued that a child is not capable of harnessing the immensity of data being taking in cognitively, while it's
interacting with the world, and so there must be an initial state for the language learner to organize and make
sense of it: an internal syntactical device mediated by the perceptual/auditory organs.
In other words there must exist a sensorimotor interface, along side an innate semantic interface, that
achieves the capacity to communicate, and to generate internal thoughts, through the phonological organ and
mind/brain. In the last fifty years the ideas surrounding what levels constitute the creation of sound and mean-
ing have change from determining the degree of complexity or hierarchy in phrase structure in transformation
grammar, to linear dependency of X'-theory, and to case and theta roles in GB, and to what is now the Minimal-
ist Program, which in the present seeks to eliminate unnecessary procedures and to simplify the mathematical
operations that describe language development and usage. It is a program and not a theory, in terms, that it's
primary motivation is to converge toward simplification of the general technical apparatus, and to bring
together a variety of ideas into a coherent structural framework in comprehending the evolution and develop-
ment of language as a biological system consistent with Principles and Parameters (Chomsky, 1995).
3
In other words there must exist a sensorimotor interface, along side an innate semantic interface, that
achieves the capacity to communicate, and to generate internal thoughts, through the phonological organ and
mind/brain. In the last fifty years the ideas surrounding what levels constitute the creation of sound and mean-
ing have change from determining the degree of complexity or hierarchy in phrase structure in transformation
grammar, to linear dependency of X'-theory, and to case and theta roles in GB, and to what is now the Minimal-
ist Program, which in the present seeks to eliminate unnecessary procedures and to simplify the mathematical
operations that describe language development and usage. It is a program and not a theory, in terms, that it's
primary motivation is to converge toward simplification of the general technical apparatus, and to bring
together a variety of ideas into a coherent structural framework in comprehending the evolution and develop-
ment of language as a biological system consistent with Principles and Parameters (Chomsky, 1995).
The stipulation from a minimalist standpoint, of the non-differences between the semantic and syntacti-
cal components, and whether or not semantic intensionality is viable, is not dubious to realize, since for exam-
ple one has:
(2). Colorful green maples ran outside.
The syntax is fine, but the semantics is vacuous. In other words one can construct sentences which are
syntactically viable but are semantically pointless. Suppose one says:
(3). Colorful crayons are on the table outside.
By modifying the sentence the syntax is fine and the semantics is a lot clearer, and so there is a level in
which meaning is dependent on syntax and at the other that syntax can be correct; but, inherently the semantic
form is meaningless. Thus, the syntax must coincide in one-to-one correspondence with the semantic form;
and vice versa. The procedure involves a mapping form the sensorimotor interface that inputs the lexical atoms
of the sentence, through select, that then sets off the semantic interface through recursion (usually stated exter-
nal and internal merge, respectively), which attempts to proceed from the top-down to bottom up concurrently,
rather than just the bottom up (2007).
In the mid-1950's, Noam Chomsky established transformation grammar as an alternative to Markov
chains that was strongly considered at the time, as a way to use information systems to built sentences
(Chomsky, 1957). The problem that arose with Markov chains is the looping qualities and probability weights
that tend to generate unstable sentence structures; for example:
(4) i. Jason in the house the house the house, but where, where, where?
ii. Henry is going and going and going, but gone.
Notice how in example (4) he sentences are syntactically sound, but the problem with Markov chains is
that one has to constantly establish boundary value conditions to know when to keep the chain from repeating
itself endlessly (Hofstadter, 1979). What is fascinating about this issue, is that language tends to have self-
referential qualities, but it tends to be unstable and paradoxical (Grim, 1998). It's instability was noticeable,
but no solution was establish to move beyond that, though essentially language tends to be very self-referential
in nature. Notice as well that the semantics is completely intact; thus, it is mediated by some external property
that sustains the meaning of the sentence though no language, in the biological world, can reasonably produce
such a pathology without it be being null. It was decided that to move around this that linguistics be descrip-
tive in it's approach, and that it's goal is to understand how language processing and expression emerges
(Chomsky, 1997). This meant that in the 1960's linguistics would not yield a discovery model, but move on to
understand the mechanics that underlie that development of natural languages in the natural system. This new
approach set off a rigorous debate amongst linguistics, but it became acceptable well into the late 1980's, and
yet it became apparent that words and sentences did not rise because of an externalist paradigm rather it is
genotypical; such that, lexical sets, that constitute morphological properties of FL, are not environmentally
determined. They are internal properties that are conserved (known as the inclusiveness condition) meaning
that no lexical sets are lost throughout the computation of a syntactical expression.
4
Notice how in example (4) he sentences are syntactically sound, but the problem with Markov chains is
that one has to constantly establish boundary value conditions to know when to keep the chain from repeating
itself endlessly (Hofstadter, 1979). What is fascinating about this issue, is that language tends to have self-
referential qualities, but it tends to be unstable and paradoxical (Grim, 1998). It's instability was noticeable,
but no solution was establish to move beyond that, though essentially language tends to be very self-referential
in nature. Notice as well that the semantics is completely intact; thus, it is mediated by some external property
that sustains the meaning of the sentence though no language, in the biological world, can reasonably produce
such a pathology without it be being null. It was decided that to move around this that linguistics be descrip-
tive in it's approach, and that it's goal is to understand how language processing and expression emerges
(Chomsky, 1997). This meant that in the 1960's linguistics would not yield a discovery model, but move on to
understand the mechanics that underlie that development of natural languages in the natural system. This new
approach set off a rigorous debate amongst linguistics, but it became acceptable well into the late 1980's, and
yet it became apparent that words and sentences did not rise because of an externalist paradigm rather it is
genotypical; such that, lexical sets, that constitute morphological properties of FL, are not environmentally
determined. They are internal properties that are conserved (known as the inclusiveness condition) meaning
that no lexical sets are lost throughout the computation of a syntactical expression.
The most important aspect of the generative grammar, and modern approaches to the Minimalist Pro-
gram, is it's adherence to the bio-physical sciences; such that, it desires to import concepts of symmetry, local-
ity, and conservation to principles of linguistic analysis, meaning; respectively, all X'-diagrams are invariant,
the no tampering condition that implies that lexical categories are set off by other categories, and as the inclu-
siveness condition. These restrictions reign dominant within the natural world, and it can be implied, quite
strongly, that they are important to the Bio-linguistics framework.
Yet with Markov processes and self-referential paradoxes, and the problem of generating a discovery
model, can yield only so little about how language is generated, put to use, and adapted within the biological
system of FL, but in order to have any relevance they must garner overwhelming systemic analysis. Not being
able to do that, in the first place, resulted in generative grammar transversing a different path, while at the same
time garnering tremendous criticisms from skeptics in philosophy and cognitive science that believe, quite
strongly, that the processes of acquisition are far more abstruse than originally proposed. What is missing is
understanding why and not just how.
Lexical sets are internal properties that are conserved, but vary in richness and texture throughout an open
population. It is accepted by many linguists that morphological properties are internal to FL, but yet they are
shared in such a way that children can develop the capacity to build a biological theory of language by utilizing
their internal capacity to create precise syntactical sentences to communicate with. In many ways, others have
speculated what role imitation plays in the development of language, as whether or not humans utilize an
external property that is environmentally transferred to infants? Though imitation of words and their sounds
can be construed as the bases of epistemological priority these linguistic artifacts have to be generated inter-
nally and shared, in such a way, that their features dictate the way they built their semantic content and expres-
sion. In many ways lexical features are implicational in the way the logic of any semantic expression is given,
but on the other hand to be so it must have syntactical uniformity; such that the transition from the features to
the sentence the data is not lost, in that, they are not put arbitrarily anywhere or taking out. The main idea is
that a child is presented with data and it must sort it out by choosing which sentences are syntactically correct
called a parameters game, in which he/she chooses which parametric settings to accept and not (Baker, 2001).
Often one calls the device that stores the lexical features the numeration N with specific numerical
instructions of how often the features are selected called a coordinate; such that:
N = {the
1
, store
1
, was
1
, open
1
}
Meaning:
(6) The store was open.
and not the following:
5
and not the following:
(7) i. The store was was open
ii. The store the store was open.
Often times one models such phrases in their logical form through binary branching; such that, one has:
DP
/ \
The NP
/ \
store AUXP
/ \
was [-tense] open
To then take the wh-phrase as the following lexical construction by way of external merge:
The store was open, when?
By move of internal merge:
When was the store was open, open?
By copy of (was) to the left of the quantifier by internal merge; such that:
When was the store was open, when?
Deletion of both the moved and copied element such that:
When was the store open?
Which is semantically correct. The process of external and internal merge--is that, external merge codes the
argumentative, v*P, and etc., components tapping into the lexical; that, then, sets off the semantic interface
(Radford, 2004). One merges X and Y; such that, X is either X is external or a part of Y, where the latter is
understood as move (Chomsky, 2009).
Within modern minimalism recursion is the basic building block of Merge through bare phrase struc-
ture, and then it heads to sensorimotor output. One level of the procedure is for thought specific properties for
internal grasp and other is secondary, which is to yield the communication expression of FL. Giving the
original Extended Standard Theory (EST) and GB the process change to exclude logical form and to make it
instead the recursive module, while by transfer the phonological form would become the sensorimotor inter-
face, which is now explained the strong minimalist theses:
Language = Interfaces + Recursion.
To approach the study of language from top-down to bottom up: the defining goals of the minimalist program
is the formalization of semantics and to inhibit the external apparatus that same way a child acquires language
by eliminating unnecessary grammatical rules by excluding redundant choices, which is the capacity to take the
sensorimotor interface, and quantify the external properties of the features that code and formalize the thought
specific parameters called syntax as an epigenetic effect that imposes developmental constraints (Chomsky,
2008).
Though Noam Chomsky's theory of the mind is implicational through the strong minimalist theses,
many, however, remain, into the present, adamant about the adequacy of this theory. In particular, they are
considered to be formidable thinkers within this very sensitive area, though their differences are apparent,
specifically, the role the perceptual world plays in early development of the mind, and whether or not the brain
is definitive in it's operations or it takes a much more unified approach (Croft, 2004). Daniel Dennett and V.S.
Ramachandran have argued that the brain is an instantiation of a computer hardware that locally activates a
software that should not be construed as actual consciousness (Dennett, 1992 and Dennett, 1988). Though
V.S. Ramachandran takes a less radical position arguing that qualia may never be resolved, but that the brain is
ascertainable as a neural organ (1998). Patricia Churchland, as well, has done extensive work elaborating that
the best way toward an adequate theory of the mind is by studying it's neurophysiology and that the brain
should not be singled out as physical device that follows basic cellular rules (2002). Siding with this Steven
Pinker has argued over the years that language primary evolution is communication, and that the mechanisms
of acquisition are devised by conditioning and natural selection (1994).
6
Though Noam Chomsky's theory of the mind is implicational through the strong minimalist theses,
many, however, remain, into the present, adamant about the adequacy of this theory. In particular, they are
considered to be formidable thinkers within this very sensitive area, though their differences are apparent,
specifically, the role the perceptual world plays in early development of the mind, and whether or not the brain
is definitive in it's operations or it takes a much more unified approach (Croft, 2004). Daniel Dennett and V.S.
Ramachandran have argued that the brain is an instantiation of a computer hardware that locally activates a
software that should not be construed as actual consciousness (Dennett, 1992 and Dennett, 1988). Though
V.S. Ramachandran takes a less radical position arguing that qualia may never be resolved, but that the brain is
ascertainable as a neural organ (1998). Patricia Churchland, as well, has done extensive work elaborating that
the best way toward an adequate theory of the mind is by studying it's neurophysiology and that the brain
should not be singled out as physical device that follows basic cellular rules (2002). Siding with this Steven
Pinker has argued over the years that language primary evolution is communication, and that the mechanisms
of acquisition are devised by conditioning and natural selection (1994).
The late Francis Crick postulated that consciousness and the binding problem can be resolved by
thinking about the possibility that awareness is cause by simultaneous neural firing, which allows patients, as
well, to be able to perceive an infinite amount of external data, and yet remain consciously aware (1994).
What the reductionist position calls for is to treat the brain as a naturalistic organ, which is not controver-
sial to any scientific pursuit of the mind. Yet the explanations must resolve very deep philosophical problems
understood as the enigma's of the Bio-linguistics program, which are now understood as the five laws of con-
sciousness. Their resolution implies a deeper and clearer understanding of how the mind works and adapts,
and how knowledge of the interface could yield an adequate and decisive theory of the mind--that is, the
primary aim of Bio-linguistics.
7
2. Theoretical Structures
Philosophers have been, into the present, baffled by the evolution of language. Enabling, only this
century, tremendous advancements, in many areas, of cognitive science and linguistics. What one has is the
genotypical component, as LAD, that gives humans the potential to generate an internal theory of Universal
Grammar (UG) that maturates into different communication expressions by internal modification of binary
switches. What cognitive scientist have continued to learn from infants and young children is that they are
experts in expressing syntactically rich sentences, which gives credence to poverty of the stimulus. The goal of
the minimalist program is to conclude with a theory that is parsimonious, elegant, and simplistic; that is, con-
ducive toward a classification of the technical apparatus. One defines such a system by the non-linear equation
as:
U*(UG) = SO
33
(A

) U
nn
(A

) [see also: Milnor, 2009].

Definition 3.1:
One extrapolates the Context Free Numeration as the topological quantitative sum of all distinct and
unique morphological sets, which each sum the order, or degree, of partial differential equations by Definition
1.19 found in the Appendix; such that:
N
ij

o f

.
o f

So that one states the following

o f

: and o f

: .
By extending the real value of the degree of partial differential equation to the complex value i by commuta-
tion; such that, the cardinality of the numeration Definition 1.5 as:
N
ij

= {E
i =1
n

i
,...,E
j=1
m

j

}
So that by the Definition 1.16, in the Appendix, the context free numeration is diffeomorphic and smooth
(infinitely differentiable). It is diffeomorphic, because each lexical set is exclusive to itself before selection
and eventual computation, or one-to-one, onto since every individual partial differential expression has a
unique numerical signature, and continuous, or infinitely smooth, because of the nature of the unending morpho-
logical expression in any generated, and unstable, sentence structure.
Example 3.11:
Consider the self-referential sentence:
(1) The the the store store store is closing...closing.
The value of the quantitative numeration can yield both infinite and finite numerical quantities in complex and
real form by empirical stipulation.
One begins to construct a Banach space, by Definition 1.9 of the Appendix, by going through Theorem
3.2, 3.3, and 3.4, and then applying it to Theorem 3.5. Assume, in violation of groups, that
the following value of the direct product of two Lie groups is neutralized and that the operation goes from left
to right consistent with the unitary group being a sub-group of the standard orthogonal group.
Theorem 3.2:
!N
ij

U*(UG) = SO
33
(A

) U
nn
(A

) U*(UG) = 0
Proof by Cases:
8
Proof by Cases:
Given Definition 1.6 and 1.21 one proceeds by Case 1.
Case 1:
For SO
33
(A

) one states by direct proof the following conditions for p-forms through binary self-reference
giving any functional category, which one chooses to be:
<agent, patient, goal>
. . .

Through the rules of p-forms one has the operation for a context-free functional category:
^ = 0
=
=
Lemma 3.21:
One proves an equivalence class giving the definition found in the appendix for a smooth manifold; such
that:
Reflexive: R R.
Symmetric: R R, since = and R.
Transitive: R and R R, since = and = .
.
One defines this as the following A

given the matrix with sub-manifold dimension of three:

^ (, , )
SO
33
(A

) =

0 . .
. 0 .
. . 0
.
Case 2:
By direct proof one gives U(n), as the following combinatorial diagram for any phrase structure, in
particular:
A
/ \
B C
/ \
D E
/ \
F G
For example giving this particular phrase structure:
XP
9
XP
/ \
(Spec) X'
/ \
(Adj) X'
/ \
X (Comp)
The following rule as statement for p-forms by self-reference:
A ^ A = 0
A = (B + C) ^ (C + D)
B = (C + D) ^ (E + F)
C = (D + E) ^ (F + G)
...
Which allows for commutation; such that:
XP ^ XP = 0
XP = (Spec + X') ^ (X' + Adj)
Spec = (X' + Adj) ^ (X + Comp)
Lemma 3.22
By Definition 1.20 for a smooth manifold one proves an equivalence class:
Reflexive: ARA ARA
Symmetric: Giving ARA; then, (B + C) ^ (C + D)R (B + C) ^ (C + D) (C + D) ^ (B + C) R (B + C) ^ (C
+D);
Such that one substitutes the values encoded by the rule onto infinite phrase expressions yielding symmetry.
Transitive: ARA ARB and BRC ARC by substitution onto infinity.

^ (u
1
, .............., u
n
)
U
nn
(A

) =
u
1
.
.
.
.
u
n
0 . . . . .
. 0 . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . 0
This becomes a matrix with diag = {0, 0, 0, ...0) repelling onto infinity, with sub-manifold dimension to
infinity.
.
Therefore one substantiates that SO
33
(A

) U
n
|A

C]= 0 for all N

ij

; thus, U*(UG) = 0 is provable.

.
Theorem 3.3: External Merge is analog of the Fatou set.
!N
ij

[ SO
33
(A

)] F/Julia
10
!N
ij

[ SO
33
(A

)] F/Julia
By Direct Proof:
Given any sentence structure; such as:
(1) Henry went home.
One has the combinatorial design:
Henry > went > home
Where the tree-structure upward toward the noun; so that, by Definition 3.1 N
ij

= {1, 1, 1}; then, one substanti-

ates the context free numerical coordinates:
1 > 1 > 1
Such that one has the following design:
Henry
/ \
went went
\
home
Given Definition 1.13, one takes the neighborhood N

; such as greater than one, two, three, or more; then, by

Definition 1.32 the basin attraction for successive sequence of numerical coordinates converges to unity or one.
Given Definition 3.1, by commutation of the numerical coordinates degree of partial differential expres-
sions of holomorphic function and Theorem 3.2; then, through Definition 1.32 by self-reference, external
merge as the Fatou set is provable.
Thus one substantiates that:
!N
ij

[ SO
33
(A

)] F/Julia
.
Example 3.31:
This should be a basis for a theorem, but the matter is empirical as well. Structures by Theorem 3.2; for
example: Alexander the Great conquered the East, yields the quantitative numeration as N
ij

= {1, 2, 1, 1, 1}
creating the following:
{Alexander the Great}
{Conquered the East}
Yielding the following combinatorial design:
{1 > 2 > 1}
{1 > 2 >1}
Giving an infinite sequence the attractor is still converging to one, which is an example of the stabilizing
effects of SO
33
(A

) when it computes after selecting lexical atoms from the numeration. It is the nature of
external merge to do so, as a way to control the flow of thought and speech, while by later proving Theorem
3.4, and by example of Theorem 3.1, one shows that the generation of phrases U
nn
(A

) is unstable; because, it
is repelling zero values to infinity; thus, it must be mediated by some component that keeps the development of
I-language from being deviant. Yet in this context one has an explanation of how headedness is generated as
one of the stabilizing features of external merge, and yet somewhat trivial to the computational device because
of the context free numeration for eventual selection and parameter setting.
11
Giving an infinite sequence the attractor is still converging to one, which is an example of the stabilizing
effects of SO
33
(A

) when it computes after selecting lexical atoms from the numeration. It is the nature of
external merge to do so, as a way to control the flow of thought and speech, while by later proving Theorem
3.4, and by example of Theorem 3.1, one shows that the generation of phrases U
nn
(A

) is unstable; because, it
is repelling zero values to infinity; thus, it must be mediated by some component that keeps the development of
I-language from being deviant. Yet in this context one has an explanation of how headedness is generated as
one of the stabilizing features of external merge, and yet somewhat trivial to the computational device because
of the context free numeration for eventual selection and parameter setting.
Theorem 3.4: The Language of Thought (LAD) is Irreducible.
Proof by Contradiction: Assume reducible; then, it is derivable.
Sub-Theorem 3.41: Internal Merge is not computable.
Proof by Contradiction: Assume it is computable by the Church-Turing Parameter for Univer-
sal Computation.
!N
ij

[ SO
33
(A

)] ; , [ U
nn
(A

)] !M
Direct Proof:
By Theorem 3.2 one take the construction of any sentence by it's bare phrase structure;
such that, given Definition 3.1, and the creation of the sentence by the external merger component
of Theorem 3.3 to set off the semantic form; then, the following decision procedure is tantamount:
1. Every verbal projection is null.
2. Every syntactical atom is given ^ by Theorem 3.2.
3. Start with the first node and move downward by instantiating external merge.
4. Switch individual atoms, or sets, into their numerical counterpart by Definition 3.1.
The Strong Endocentricity Theses states that grammatical relations to a head X can only be established
under projections of X when giving complementation, Spec-head, and modification. One also takes into
consideration the concept of last Resort and try, as much as possible, to limit any superfluous steps in the
computation of the phrase structure; therefore, suppose one has the sentence: Alice saw the Cheshire cat on the
tree. Giving the numeration by stipulation of it's coordinate; then:
N = {Alice
1
, saw
1
, the
2
, Cheshire
1
, cat
1
, on
1
, tree
1
}
Such that by the quantitative numeration one has a commutation; so that, one formulate the external operation
by Theorem 3.3:
N
ij

= {1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1}
Thus one has the following binary branching:
Alice
/ \
Alice saw
/ \
saw the
/ \
Cheshire cat
12
Cheshire cat
/ \
cat on
/ \
the tree
Which gives the following structure:
{Alice saw} by Spec-head or external argument.
{the Cheshire cat} by internal argument.
{on the tree} by v*P or prepositional phrase.
Which expresses by Theorem 3.2 the following combinatorial design for external merge by direct
access to the lexical features and the quantitative numeration:
[1 > 1]
[2 > 1 > 1]
[1 > 2 > 1]
Thereby, giving Theorem 3.2, the component sequence is attracting periodically; thus, one proceeds by
Theorem 3.3 and the decision procedure.
By Definition 3.1 one extends N
ij

to the complex value; such that:

N
ij

= {1i , 1i ,2i ,1i , 1i ,1i ,1i}

Given Definition 1.37 found in the Appendix one calculates internal merge way of external merge:
{0} where: (the + tree) ^ (the + tree) = 0
(2i + 1i )^ (2i + 1i )= 0
" The phrase structure component to begin merge must start with two elements
complementation.
the = tree
Merge
{{the {tree}}}
{0 { 0 + c}} where: (on + the) ^ (on + the) = 0
(2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )^ (2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )=0
Then add c and reiterate onto itself with z = 0 stationary, while with merge the values are increasing.
tree = the
Merge
{on { the { tree}}}
{O{0{0 + c { 0 + c
2
}}}} where (cat + on) ^ (cat + on) = 0
(2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )+ (1i + 1i )^ (2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )+ (1i + 1i )= 0
" Projects under modification.
cat = on
Merge
13
Merge
{cat {cat {on {the { tree}}}}}
{O{O{0{0 + c { 0 + c
2
{ 0 + c
2
+ c}}}}}} where (Cheshire + cat) ^ (Cheshire + cat) = 0
(2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )+ (1i + 1i )+ (1i + 1i )^ (2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )+ (1i + 1i )+ (1i +
1i )= 0
" Complementation
Cheshire = cat
Merge
{cat {Cheshire { cat { on { the { tree}}}}}}
{O{O{0{0 + c { 0 + c
2
{ 0 + c
2
+ c { ( 0 + c
2
+ c)
2
+ c }}}}}}} where (the + Cheshire ) ^ (the + Cheshire) = 0
(2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )+ (1i + 1i )+ (1i + 1i )+ (2i + 1i )^ (2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )+ (1i + 1i )+ (1i + 1i )+ (2i + 1i )
= 0
" Complementation
the = Cheshire
Merge
{cat {the { Cheshire { cat {on {the {tree}}}}}}}
{O{O{0{0 + c { 0 + c
2
{ 0 + c
2
+ c { ( 0 + c
2
+ c)
2
+ c { ( 0 + c
2
+ c)
2
+ c
2
) + c
2
}}}}}}}} where (saw + the
) ^ (saw + the) = 0
(2i + 1i ) + (1i + 2i ) + (1i + 1i ) + (1i + 1i ) + (2i + 1i ) + (1i + 2i ) ^ (2i + 1i ) + (1i + 2i ) + (1i + 1i ) + (1i +
1i )+ (2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i ) = 0
" Projects under complementation
the = saw
Merge
{saw {cat {saw{ the { Cheshire {cat { on { the { tree}}}}}}}}}
{O{O{0{0 + c { 0 + c
2
{ 0 + c
2
+ c { ( 0 + c
2
+ c)
2
+ c { ( 0 + c
2
+ c)
2
+ c
2
) + c
2
{ ((( 0 + c
2
+ c)
2
+ c
2
) +
c
2
) + c)
2
}}}}}}}} where (Alice + saw) ^ (Alice + saw) = 0
(2i + 1i ) + (1i + 2i ) + (1i + 1i ) + (1i + 1i ) + (2i + 1i ) + (1i + 2i ) + (1i + 1i ) ^ (2i + 1i ) + (1i + 2i ) + (1i +
1i )+ (1i + 1i )+ (2i + 1i )+ (1i + 2i )+ (1i + 1i ) = 0
" Projects under Spec-head
Alice = saw
Merge
{Alice {saw {cat {Alice {saw {the {Cheshire { cat {on { the {tree}}}}}}}}}}}
Thus internal merge is an analog of a unique Mandelbrot set, given the properties of external merger, is prov-
able; therefore:
!N
ij

[ SO
33
(A

)] ; , [ U
nn
(A

)] !M
.
Grammatical recursion postulates infinite phrase expressions within sentences; thus, by Definition 1.37 of the
Church-Turing Parameter for universal computation found in the Appendix, as Theorem 1.53, it is not com-
putable, because it is not applicable to a Universal Turing Machine. Therefore it is indeterminate.
14
Grammatical recursion postulates infinite phrase expressions within sentences; thus, by Definition 1.37 of the
Church-Turing Parameter for universal computation found in the Appendix, as Theorem 1.53, it is not com-
putable, because it is not applicable to a Universal Turing Machine. Therefore it is indeterminate.
.
Since one can't derive the phrases from the zero and complex value sets; then, the language of thought is not
reducible. Therefore it is irreducible (see also: Milnor, 2002).
.
Notice how one starts by merging (Alice saw) and proceeded downward the diagram, as in left-leaning lan-
guages like Somali and Hebrew; then, the binary operation would have still been commutative. As though the
entire context free equivalent to the very upward node is the entire calculation yielded at the end of the proof of
Sub-Theorem 3.42; thus, by bringing in Theorem 3.2 one yields symmetry. Implying the null set parametrizes
the binary branching by execution of SO
33
(A

) with UG. As well one is able to utilize the copy procedure

to yield the projection of the lexical atoms, which enables one to go through the external merger component to
yield an internal semantic expression by moving the lexical sets very much similar to wh-movement (another
stipulation of merger) . This may explain why left-leaning languages originated, as being inherently more cost
effective than right leaning languages in the module for internal thought. The questions one asks, that's impor-
tant to raise, is why the Mandelbrot set and not just any filled in Julia set? The point to the Mandelbrot set is to
get at a specific model of the relationship between internal language faculty and externalization. By keeping z
= 0 in the set one shows a resolution of how UG works and it's apparent universality, even with the parametriza-
tion of the internal binary switches in the genotype, since any magnification of the fractal gives way to self-
similarity, and to even have this resolution the price to pay is the eventual irreducibility of the language of
thought.
Theorem 3.5: Proving the Boundary Value Condition By Intuitive Base Structure Using Homological Topologi-
cal Observables as a Lagrangian.
!N
ij

( SO
33
(A

) ^ U
nn
(A

)) I
n
( A

, t) I
n
( A

, t) 0, as to and n 0.
Direct Proof:
Since U
nn
(A

) is a sub-group of SO
33
(A

), by the definition of Lie Groups (found in the Appendix);

then, by Definition 1.46 one has the following topological mapping through the forgetful functors by transfer:
Select Select Select

I
n+1
( A

, t
1
)
o
I
n
(I
n+1
( A

, t
2
))
o
I
n1
(I
n
(I
n+1
( A

, t
3
)))
o
...
. Transfer . Transfer . Transfer
I
n+1
( A

, t
1
)
o
I
n
(I
n+1
( A

, t
2
))
o
I
n1
(I
n
(I
n+1
( A

, t
3
)))
o
...

Copy- Move Copy-Move Copy-Move

Then the measure of the limit of n-simplex, as it decreases by interminably increasing time, given the following
action integral:
lim
n 0 ]
Amin =0
Amax =t
o
[ oI
n
( A

, t) oI
n
( A

, t)] ot
15
lim
n 0 ]
Amin =0
Amax =t
o
[ oI
n
( A

, t) oI
n
( A

, t)] ot
By Theorem 1.42 in the Appendix for commuting simplexes in the line integral; such that, the quantitative
numeration, yield by Definition 3.1. through parameter settings, commute by its partial differential equiva-
lence, and the Inclusiveness Condition; then:
}
oA
= lim
n 0 ]
Amin =0
Amax =t
o
[o
2 j
I
n
] ot = 0
Proving the boundary value condition and breaking symmetry by Theorem 3.2, using Definition 1.50, in viola-
tion of Theorem 1.7 of groups (found in the Appendix), restricting the system to being non-abelian. Thus one
constructs a Banach space, in which one ascertains the quality of the Symplectic sub-manifold of U*(UG) by
taking into consideration the tangent bundle T*(M); such that, one has the following diagram:
T*(M)
oA
n,...,2
oA
n+1
oA
1
(Figure 21)
.
Culminating with the following conjecture.
Conjecture 3.6:
Giving the boundary value condition for U*(UG) one is able to derive the organization and boundary
value conditions for all other modules, by empirical stipulation, of the following architectural design of the
human brain, giving the Boolean form expressed in the Appendix by Definition 1.52, as an information system:
R (m) + I (m) + U*(UG) + A
t
(m) + M (m) = 0
where:
R (m) is the representational module.
I (m) is the imitation module.
U*(UG) is the language module.
A
t
(m) is the art module.
M (m) is the motor module.
16
M (m) is the motor module.
Through localization studies of the brain the arithmetic, poetry, music , and abductive module are situated
within the same region and by co-evolution, respectively; such that:
U*(UG) = A (m) = P (m) = M
u
(m) = S (m)
Then the following boundary value conditions for all modules are apparent:
R (m) = 1
I (m) = -1
U*(UG) = 0
A
t
(m) = -1
M (m) =1
Through Definition 1.51 one gives the Boolean gates for the architecture of the modules by determining that it
is logically consistent between input and output:
1
0
1
0
R
I U

UG A
t M
Posterior Cortical Area
Mirror Neurons
Broca's and Wernickes Area
Anterior Cortical Area
Master Face Cells
(Figure 22)
{see also: (Ramachandran, 2004), (Martin, 1999), and (Posner, 1989)}
.
By experimental analysis the following conjecture is stated.
17
18
3. Experimental Considerations
Fractals in natural languages tells one two things :
1. The genotype that codes Universal Grammar is fix universally and biologically.
2. Phenotypical changes developmentally will yield communication differences base on parametric settings.
This was established by Theorem 3.4, which helps to explain the differences between a variation of human
communication expressions by symmetry. As well, differences between left and right leaning languages is a
result of optimality in the computational module for natural languages. The binary switches that code internal
thought expression, or I - language, are decided by external input that allows one to yield parameter settings
that gives way to a particular communication output, but UG remains, across the human species, constant.
This consequence now yields three natural laws for this particular biological system by Definition 1.38
based on the results of Theorem 3.5 :
Natural Law 1 : There can be no consciousness without an I - language (topological transitivity).

Natural Law 2 : Language before and after does not tell one about language in the future (the principle of
linguistic freedom or by sensitive dependence on initial conditions).

Natural Law 3 : Language is asymmetrical globally and locally invariant (periodic orbits are dense).
These laws explain quite well why natural languages behave a lot like fractals, because as fractals there is a
conservation requirement that yields optimality within I - language. Such a process allows one to master
language without the need for external conditioning as a means, since infants acquire the gene that eventually
precipitates abstract cognitive development and organization of data, and eventually communication.
Yet with the context free numeration the evolution of language by natural selection alone faces severe
limitations, since communication holds no bijective coherence; thus, the role that language plays is to acquire
the capacity to generate internal thoughts and not just for external symbolic expression or output.
Communication by Definition 3.1 holds no selective advantages, such that it may not have served any purpose
at all in the earlier stages of human evolution when the defective mutation, that re - wired the human brain,
emerged in the first place. Rather it' s understood that FL primary evolutionary role was to facilitate internal
thought, and as the genotype continued to spread, by a rapid speciation in early humans, vocal communication
began as a secondary phenotypical process of the genome component of UG as a byproduct of the mutation
(see also: Gould, 1979 and Gould, 2007).
By neutralizing the lexical features it becomes easier to see how the evolution from the arithmetic module to
the language module, by recursion, came about without instantiating the dominance of an external factor and it
also allows one to understand how the parameter game takes place. Thus, with side languages, as in American
Side Language (ASL), it' s been demonstrated that children whom are deaf by birth, and developing in normal
conditions, will acquire side language without any prior training : an initial syntactical component, and even
with both the visual and auditory organs as null there is still a maturation to side language when the correct
triggering effects are applied by allowing the child to take in data and to determine, by abductive reasoning,
how to produce an I-language, and to eventually use such data to communicate as a secondary process.
Bringing into fruition a distinctly human language from the babbling stage into full maturity (as in deaf
children being raised in normal English, or any language, speaking family). This empirical fact can be shown
to be conclusive by the very process that allows one to use the context free features, while also showing that
consciousnesses is not possible without the existence of an I - language by Natural Law 1.
The existence of consciousness in primates and other mammals is not possible without an organ for
thought, and even then by the conjecture the illusion becomes pronounce : one observes imitation, but that
does not imply having disembodied consciousness. Even the creation of new side languages must imply an
internal component for thought initiated by UG, however the syntactical rules could be different but as
expressed by Natural Law 3 they are invariant biologically across the human population. By being able to
simplify how the process began; then, it is tantamount that language is not entirely representational but must be
derivational in scope. Studies conducted at Hofstra University suggest that gestures are the primitive ancestor
to language, because it is situated in the same brain region in humans (Braun, 2009). However since
communication holds no selective advantage, and vocal communication emerged as a byproduct ; then, human
gestures were the immediate instrument used to communicate after the genetic mutation gave way to human I -
language leading to the lexical revolution. This primitive brain region is unique only to humans, since the
gestural system is non - bijective while in primates, or other animals, it is.
Since external merge is able to stabilize the flow of the lexical atoms, and internal merge, as a repelling
periodic orbit, is mitigated by the attracting period orbit of external merge; then, formalization of semantics is
realized and externalization is extenuated. Implying the realization of the minimalist program by approaching
the process from the top - down and bottom up.
19
These laws explain quite well why natural languages behave a lot like fractals, because as fractals there is a
conservation requirement that yields optimality within I - language. Such a process allows one to master
language without the need for external conditioning as a means, since infants acquire the gene that eventually
precipitates abstract cognitive development and organization of data, and eventually communication.
Yet with the context free numeration the evolution of language by natural selection alone faces severe
limitations, since communication holds no bijective coherence; thus, the role that language plays is to acquire
the capacity to generate internal thoughts and not just for external symbolic expression or output.
Communication by Definition 3.1 holds no selective advantages, such that it may not have served any purpose
at all in the earlier stages of human evolution when the defective mutation, that re - wired the human brain,
emerged in the first place. Rather it' s understood that FL primary evolutionary role was to facilitate internal
thought, and as the genotype continued to spread, by a rapid speciation in early humans, vocal communication
began as a secondary phenotypical process of the genome component of UG as a byproduct of the mutation
(see also: Gould, 1979 and Gould, 2007).
By neutralizing the lexical features it becomes easier to see how the evolution from the arithmetic module to
the language module, by recursion, came about without instantiating the dominance of an external factor and it
also allows one to understand how the parameter game takes place. Thus, with side languages, as in American
Side Language (ASL), it' s been demonstrated that children whom are deaf by birth, and developing in normal
conditions, will acquire side language without any prior training : an initial syntactical component, and even
with both the visual and auditory organs as null there is still a maturation to side language when the correct
triggering effects are applied by allowing the child to take in data and to determine, by abductive reasoning,
how to produce an I-language, and to eventually use such data to communicate as a secondary process.
Bringing into fruition a distinctly human language from the babbling stage into full maturity (as in deaf
children being raised in normal English, or any language, speaking family). This empirical fact can be shown
to be conclusive by the very process that allows one to use the context free features, while also showing that
consciousnesses is not possible without the existence of an I - language by Natural Law 1.
The existence of consciousness in primates and other mammals is not possible without an organ for
thought, and even then by the conjecture the illusion becomes pronounce : one observes imitation, but that
does not imply having disembodied consciousness. Even the creation of new side languages must imply an
internal component for thought initiated by UG, however the syntactical rules could be different but as
expressed by Natural Law 3 they are invariant biologically across the human population. By being able to
simplify how the process began; then, it is tantamount that language is not entirely representational but must be
derivational in scope. Studies conducted at Hofstra University suggest that gestures are the primitive ancestor
to language, because it is situated in the same brain region in humans (Braun, 2009). However since
communication holds no selective advantage, and vocal communication emerged as a byproduct ; then, human
gestures were the immediate instrument used to communicate after the genetic mutation gave way to human I -
language leading to the lexical revolution. This primitive brain region is unique only to humans, since the
gestural system is non - bijective while in primates, or other animals, it is.
Since external merge is able to stabilize the flow of the lexical atoms, and internal merge, as a repelling
periodic orbit, is mitigated by the attracting period orbit of external merge; then, formalization of semantics is
realized and externalization is extenuated. Implying the realization of the minimalist program by approaching
the process from the top - down and bottom up.
20
3. Appendix: Mathematical Structures
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
21
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
22
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
23
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
24
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
25
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
26
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
27
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
28
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
29
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
30
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
31
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
32
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
33
Linguistic theory, especially generative grammar, traditionally follows and adheres to formal systems. The
mathematical axioms and theorems that will be addressed in the Appendix are incredibly important for the
foundation of the theory that has been presented. Nevertheless, most people will have little background in the
technical apparatus of the mathematics that has been used; therefore, it is important to give a concise and
general outline of the mathematics, even though, some may be able to follow the article without any difficulty.
One keeps the outline in the same format as mathematical physics, since that will be the goal one takes from
the natural sciences: clarity, conciseness, and efficiency, in such a way that the reader will be able to unders-
tand the ideas.
Definition 1.1: Tree Diagrams
Any logical statement can be condensed into it's logical form giving the following rules for
rendering:
1. If P and Q are symbolic sentences; then so is P Q.
2. If P is a symbolic sentence; then so is P.
3. Sentence letters are symbolic.
Example 1.1:
( ( P Q) R)
/ \
( P Q) R
|
P Q
/ \
P Q
|
P
(Figure 1)
Any consistent statement is called a wff, or well-formed formula, which can be broken up into it's
logical form (Mar, 1980). Sentences which cannot are not considered well-formed.
Definition 1.2:
A set is a collection of group objects or elements (Lay, Analysis with an Introduction).
Definition 1.3:
A null set is a set without elements denoted as O (Russell, 1996).
Definition 1.4:
Union, intersection, and disjoints sets following the rules:
1. If x A and x B; then x A B.
2. If x A or x B; then, x A _ B.
3. If x A and x } B; then, x A\B (Kemke, 1950).
Definition 1.5: The Cardinality of a set is the amount of elements within the set, which can be finite,
null, or infinite.
Example 1.50:
The cardinality of all rational numbers is infinite
Example 1.51:
The null set has a cardinality of zero
Example 1.52:
The set consisting of the finite Fibonacci sequence {0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5} has a cardinality of
six.
Definition 1.6:
The algebraic conditions define a Boolean logic under the condition that 1 means yes and 0
means no by the following rules (Boole 835-977):

1. Associativity: a \ ( b \ c) = (a \ b) \ c a ^ ( b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ c
2. Commutativity: a \ b = b \ a a ^ b = b ^ a
3. Absorption: a \ ( a ^ b) = a a ^ ( a \ b) = a
4. Complement: a \ a = 1 a ^ a = 0
5. Idempotency: a ^ a = a a \ a = a
6. Boundedness: a \ 0 = a a \ 1 = a
7. Distributivity: a ( b c) = ( a \ b) ^ ( a \ c) a ^ (b \ c ) = ( a ^ b) \ ( a ^ c)
8. a \ 1 = 1 a ^ 0 = 0
9. 0 = 1 1 = 0 (Both 0 and 1 are complements).
10. De Morgan's Laws: ( a \ b) = a ^ b (a ^ b) = a \ b
11. Involution: a = a
Theorem 1.7:
A set is a group g if it obeys associativity, identity, and inverse; such that:
1. If ! a, b e G; then a b e G
2. g e = g
3. g g
1
= e
4. g ( h t) = ( g h) t
Proof can be found in (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.71: The set of natural numbers under addition is not a group, since there is
no identity.
Example 1.72: The set under subtraction is not a group, since it is not associative.
Definition 1.8:
Any mapping consist of a morphism ; such that, one has two objects and with the following condi-
tions:
1. One has identity i; such that: i
d
=
2. It is associative; such that: ( h) t = (h t)
3. It is commutative if the products from the set commute (Geroch, 1985).
Example 1.81:
Consider the following mapping:
A

B
.
C D
x
(Figure 2)
Which is commutative, since the composition ends at D

Definition 1.9:
1. Linear Spaces: Linear operations that define addition and multiplication of elements by numbers.
2. Metric Spaces: Linear spaces that express distance or passage of a limit between sets.
3. Normed Linear Spaces or Banach spaces: Linear and Metric Spaces are definable.
4. Hilbert Spaces: The axiomatizing of a scalar product allowing one to deal with vectors and angles.
5. Normed algebras: Previous definitions are applied by multiplying one element with another.

Definition 1.10:
A stronger definition of direct products can be demonstrated as the following which leads to a weaker
definition, though valuable, because it defines the kind of mapping expressed earlier in the article:
Suppose one has two linear spaces, X and Y; such that, one forms the direct product P (X, Y), which is
the set of ordered pairs (x, y) where x X and y Y (Shilov, 1974). Linear operations are constituted as direct
products by applying them into different parts of ordered pairs; such that:

1
( x
1
, y
1
) +
2
( x
2
, y
2
) = (a
1
x
1
+ a
2
x
2
, a
1
y
1
+ a
2
y
2
)
The weaker theorem states that given a set X,, and a morphisms to A and a morphism to B, and
morphisms ' and ' ; then, ! , such that the mapping commutes to A B.
Theorem 1.11:

X
.
A A B B
(Figure 3)

The proof for direct products can be located in (Geroch, 1985). The important element is that
the mapping is unique whenever one has a Cartesian product between two sets A and B.
Definition 1.12:
The span in which one will address linear algebra will be limited. However linear algebra is
important to the article, because it allows one to manipulate Banach spaces within geometric and topological
systems. A matrix is a set of elements with i rows and j columns with dimension < i j>, given the following
examples:

A =
2 3
3 4

A is a < 2 2 > matrix with 4 elements. The diagonal of the matrix are the elements 2 and 4,
with the determinant equal to -1.
Matrix multiplication cannot be considered a group rather a non-abelian group, because of the
following rule:
A
ij
B
ij
= B
ij
A
ij
.
Though a matrix can have an identity by inverting the original matrix; such that I = { 1, 1, 1, ... ,
1)
depending on the dimension of the matrix:
A
ij
A
ij
1
= I.
Furthermore one has the following rule for addition of matrices:
A
ij
+ B
ij
= B
ij
+ A
ij
And scalar multiplication by a fixed value c with a:
cA
ij
= c* (A
ij
)
Such that the transposition turns rows into columns and columns into rows, thereby A
ij
T
= A
ji
.
The following two matrices are extremely important to the article: the Jacobian and Hebbesian
matrices for differential linear mappings (the kind of mappings one is dealing with) which describes the follow-
ing f:
n
:
H ( f ) = [ o
x, y
f]
Which tells one about the behavior of the function locally through it's growth. One has the Jacobian f:

m
:
J (f) = [ o f
i
/o f
j
], 1 s i s m; 1 s j s n
If n > m and J attains it's maximum value at m; then, f is locally invertible (Turnbull, 1928).

There are many variations of topology, including differential topology, algebraic topology, and Symplec-
tic topology, which are important to classical and quantum mechanics by analyzing the physical attributes of
complex systems through Lagrangians and Hamiltonians that often describe the changes of particular dynami-
cal phenomenons; for example pendulums, rotation of stars and planets, many particle interactions that are a
purview of Fock vector spaces, and information processes; such as, cellular automata, protein synthesis, and
satellite communication. To use dynamical systems one has to be acquainted with topology, but the overview
will be very limited and only a select few of definitions and theorems will be stated. Topology is the immedi-
ate mathematical language that is important to the article, since in topology the idea of numbers, which encode
the degree of partial differential equations, becoming evident through p-forms, replaces these equations with
their complex and real numerical counterparts. Allowing one to solve the value of the non-linear equation
expressed above, and to prove it as well, using thermodynamic conditions within an open information
paradigm. However topology is restrictive, in that it does not include all numbers just 0 and 1, but in the article
above the method was used in a rather novel formality that allowed the system to be manipulated by the con-
text-free numeration and the nature of the Fatou set as external merge.
One defines concepts of differential topology leading to neighborhoods and metric spaces. Subse-
quently moving into manifolds, p-forms, and Lie groups with mappings between different functional operators
in Banach spaces.
Definition 1.13:
One defines the open neighborhood of N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | < } within a given radius . A
closed neighborhood, or atlas, implies that N
a
( x ) = { x
n
: | x - a | s } within a given as well.
Definition 1.14: A topological space is a set C with a collection of unique subsets (Munkres, 1975).
The open sets must satisfy three of the following criteria:
1. C and the empty set are open
2. If U and V are open sets; then, so are their intersection
3. The union of any collection of open sets is also open.
The open subsets define the topology of C.
Definition 1.15:
One defines an open set if given set S ; then, ! x S, > 0; such that, all points lie within the
open interval x - < t < x + (Munkres, 1975).
Example 1.151: The set of all points X
n
is open, since X O is open, and given Y
n
is an open set; then X Y is open, and any union of open sets within X _O is also open that includes also the
null set.
Definition 1.16:
There are a specific kind of mappings that consist of open sets within a diffeomorphism that is
invariant. The key is to understand the diffeomorphism: it is a C
r
homeomorphism which the inverse is also
C
r
. Homeomorphisms imply that giving a function from two sets, domain X to target Y, f: XY is both
onto, one-to-one, and continuous, and f
1
(x) is also continuous. Note that C
r
means that the function is
differentiable at degree r. C
o
if it is infinitely differentiable or what's called smooth (Milnor, 1965).
Example 1.161:
tanx is a C
o
diffeomorphism (-/2, /2) to , while f (x) = x
3
is a homeomorphism but
not , since f
1
(x) = x
1f3
and f
1
(x)' (0) cannot exist.
Definition 1.17: Given subset T
k
is called a smooth manifold of dimension t, if every x T con-
tains the neighborhood O T that is diffeomorphic to an open subset U of the Euclidean space
m
. Another
way to understand this is too see a manifold as locally Euclidean.
Definition 1.18: A Riemann manifold is a topology induced with a metric giving the following condi-
tions:
1. d < x, y > + d <y, z > d <x, z> called the Triangle inequality.
2. d <x, y> = 0; iff x = y
3. d <x, y > = d <y, x> called symmetry.
4. d <x, y> 0
The following definitions allows one to deal with differentiable operators within a manifold along a
tangent space T on a smooth manifold (Darling 1994).
Definition 1.19:
To define a derivative on a smooth manifold, given an infinitely differentiable mapping f: M N,
one relates each x M
k
a linear subspace TM
x
R
k
with dimension m called the tangent space of M at x.
Therefore d f
x
is the linear mapping from TM
x
TN
y
, such that y = f (x). The elements that are a part of TM
x
one calls the tangent vectors to M at x.
Mappings between open sets is given by any open set U
k
one gives the tangent space TU, defined
to be the whole vector space
k
; thus, for any smooth map f: U V the derivative becomes d f
x
:
k

t
;
such that one defines the derivative:
d f
x
(h) = lim
to
(f(x + h) - f (x) )/t
where x U and h
k
.
One has the conditions of the operations for derivatives:
1. The Chain Rule:
If f: U V and k: V W are smooth mappings; such that, f (x) = y; then, d (g f)
x
= dg
x

df
x
.
One has the commutative triangle:
V
f g
U W
g f
(Figure 5)
Where one has smooth maps between open set
k
,
t
,
m
which then relates a commutative trian-
gle of linear maps:

t
df dg

k

m
d (g f )

2. There exists an identity I; such that given dI
x
map of
k
; then if, U U' are open sets; so that i : U
U'.
3. If given the linear mapping L:
k

t
; then, dL
x
= L (Milnor, 1965).
Definition 1.20:
A smooth atlas is a family of coordinate charts, for which any two must be compatible domains which
all cover M. Two atlases are equivalent, if and only if their domain cover all of M, and for this one establishes
that this is an equivalence class of atlases commonly called a smooth differentiable structure on M, and as
defined in 1.19, if set M has a smooth differentiable structure; then, it is called a smooth differentiable mani-
fold (Darling, 1994).
Given the differentiable structures of a Banach space one is now able to define the properties of p-
forms, which by far is the most important part of the article and the Appendix. What one takes into considera-
tion is that p-forms behave like differentiable structures, which encode numerical signatures that are then
mapped onto the algebraic topology.
Definition 1.21:
The second exterior power is defined as: Given an n-dimensional vector space ; such that, the
elements of V denoted as u, w, w, u
i
, v
j
, etc., and the real numbers defined as, a, b, c, d, etc. For p = 0, 1, ..., n,
the Path exterior power of V, which is denoted as A
p
(V), is a real vector space, whose elements are called p-
vectors For p = 0 and 1 the definition state that A
o
V = and A
1
V = V; such that, A
2
contains the formal sum:
Ea
i
( u
i
^ v
j
)
Where the wedge product must satisfy the following:
(au + w ) ^ v = a (u ^ v) + w^v
u ^ (bv + w) = b (u ^v) + u ^w
u ^ u = 0
such that, given the basis for V = { v
1
, v
2
, ...} implies { v
i
^ v
j
: 1 s i < j n} is a basis for
A
2
(Darling, 1994).

Notice how one has to extend with differential topology first, because it wouldn't make any
sense to present exterior forms as valid to the article, but by fundamentally stating the rules for Boolean logic
and exterior forms, giving the Banach space; then, it's possible to see how exterior forms are useful: they
encode linear transformation between the differentiable functions from one particular vector to the other, and
because their use is critical to any plausible physical theory.
The exterior or wedge product (often called a Grassmann product) is defined as:
^ : A
p
E* A
q
E* A
p+q
E*.
Example 1.21: The 3-form for spherical coordinates <r, , >; such that,

df =
o f
or
dr +
o f
o
d +
o f
o
d
So that integration over the boundary of gives the volume of the surface of the geometry:

]
df
f ( r, , ) d d
o f
or
^ d
o f
o
+ d
o f
o
=
]
o f

Over a complex 3-dimensional space.
Definition 1.22:
Given the differential topology one places the components into a group matrices with particular transfor-
mation properties over a real and complex vector space. Primarily the once that will be taking into considera-
tion are two Lie groups: a standard orthogonal group and a complex linear group of a real and complex vector
space, respectively (Penrose, 2004).
SO (n) = { A
nn
: |A| = 1, A
T
A = I} of dimension n (n-1)/2 and sub-manifold of
nn
.
and also it's sub-group:
U (n) = {A
nn
: A A
T
= I} of dimension n
2
and a sub-manifold of
nn
;
nn
.
There is a substantial amount of physical systems that behave like periodic objects: pendulums, the heart,
and even particles, yet the importance of these systems is to know how these objects operate in an incremental
amount of time. Systems like quadratic equations that tell a lot about the present and future state of these
objects. Dynamical systems power is the ability to understand future population growth of yeast, for example,
by examining the functions that describe it by bifurcation; amounting to taking the function apart and analyzing
it one piece at a time. At the beginning of the second section that is essentially what one is doing: assuming
the function; and then, breaking it apart.
The next few definitions deal with holomorphic functions and conformal isomorphism (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.23:
Given V ; such that, it is an open set of complex numbers f: V is called a holomorphic
function, if the derivative f ' (z) = lim
h 0
(f (z + h) f (z) ) / h is continuous and is defined as a function from V
to .
Such a function is understood to be conformal if the derivative never vanishes and it is univa-
lent if it is conformal and one-to-one.
Definition 1.24:
One calls a Riemann surface S a connected complex analytic manifold of complex dimension
one.
Definition 1.25:
Two Riemann surfaces S and S' are conformally isomorphic if and only if there exist a homeo-
morphism S onto S'. Keep in that, if S = S'; then, the conformal isomorphism S S' is acknowledged to be a
conformal automorphism S.
Theorem 1.26: "Weierstrass Uniform Convergence Theorem"
If there exists a sequence of holomorphic functions; such that f
n
: U , that con-
verges uniformly to the limit f; then, that implies that f is also holomorphic. And thus, the sequence of deriva-
tives f
n
' uniformly converges on any compact subset U, to the derivatives f '.
Proof:
Given a sequence of first derivatives f
n
restricted to a compact subset K U
converges uniformly. Therefore one has uniform convergence { f
n
} restricted to K within some limit of g,
which is continuous. Thus the integral of f
n
, along any path in U, converges to the integral g along that path,
and therefore: f = lim f
n
can be observed to be an indefinite integral of g. Implying that g is the deriva-
tive of f, and f is a complex first derivative and holomorphic function.
.
The next few definition don't have to deal with holomorphic functions, but their relevance is
self-evident in section 2 of the article.
Definition 1.27:
A forward orbit of x is the set of points, f(x), f
2
(x), ... denoted as O
+
(x). If f is realized
to be a homeomorphism; then, one defines the orbits of x, O (x), as the set of points f
n
(x) for all n . One
then defines the backward orbit O

(x), which are the set of points: f

1
(x), f
2
(x),...
Definition 1.28:
There exists a point x that is called a critical point of f, if f ' (x) = 0. The critical points
are non-degenerate if f ' (x) = 0, otherwise the critical point is degenerate if f ''( 0 ) = 0.
Example 1.281:
Suppose one has the function f (x) = x
2
; then, one has a non-degenerate critical point at 0, but if
one is given f (x) = x
n
for n 2, then, it has a generate point at 0.
Definition 1.29:
Allow p to be a periodic point of prime period n. The point p is hyperbolic if | ( f
n
)' (p) | = 1. ( f
n
') (p)
is the multiplier that is the periodic orbit.
Definition 1.30:
There exists a p which is a hyperbolic periodic point of period n; such that, | ( f
n
') (p)| < 1; such
that, p is an attracting periodic point.
Attracting periodic points of period n contains a neighborhood, which maps onto themselves by
f
n
.
Definition 1.31:
There exist x fixed point p; such that | ( f
n
') (p)| > 1 called a repelling periodic fixed point or
source. The neighborhood is the local unstable set.
Definition 1.32:
There is a stronger definition of attractors, in terms, of periodic orbits, in which one is given O
as attracting periodic orbit, of period m, one defines the "basin of attraction" as the open set A S, which
consist of points of z S, so that successive iterates f
m
(z), f
2 m
(z), ..., converges towards some point within O.
Definition 1.33:
One calls a normal family an infinite sequence of functions f
n
F a collection of holomorphic
functions containing an inner subsequence that converges uniformly within the limit of g: S T given all the
continuous maps from range of S to target T.
To understand repelling periodic orbits one has to know the dynamics of iteration of holomophic maps,
which goes into the Julia and Fatou set (Milnor, 2000).
Definition 1.34: The Fatou set.
Allow S to be a compact Riemann surface; such that one has f: S S a non-constant
holomorphic mapping and allow f
n
: S S to be the n-th iterate of the function. Thus there is a domain of
normality for all collection of interates { f
n
} called the Fatou set; therefore:
Definition 1.35: The Julia set is the complement S\Fatou (f).
Bringing into play the fundamental lemma.
Lemma 1.351:
All attracting periodic orbits are contained within the Fatou set of f and
all repelling periodic orbits are contained in the Julia set.
Proof: (see also: Milnor, 2000).
This allows one to define the Mandelbrot set for Q
c
(z) = z
2
+ as:
Definition 1.36: The Filled in Julia set.
K
c
= { z | Q
c
n
(z) o }
Whereby one defines the Mandelbrot set as:
Definition 1.37:
The subset of the c-plane; such that:
M' = { c | Q
c
n
(c) o }
(Devaney, 2003).
Example 1.371:
A typical Mandelbrot set with z z
2
+ c expresses the geometric
property of a fractal as:


(Figure 7)

Example 1.372:
Suppose one has the Mandelbrot set of the following architecture:

M' = ( 6 ( (6 +c) ( ((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
) (((6 + c)
2
( (6 + c)
2
+ (6 + c))
2
+
c)
2
)))))))))
Then one has the topological construction that still yields the same structure by the self-
similarity of the Mandelbrot set:

(Figure 8)
Any magnification or pre-image of the set allows one to return to the same set yet again; being a powerful
indication of regularity (all periodic points are dense: the complements of the subset of the entire set is equal to
the whole set), however the fractal cannot be decomposed because of topological transitivity. Thus, the chaotic
essence of the Mandelbrot set, in which point points that go beyond the set diverge to infinity.
The topological characteristic of a dynamical system is best defined as: if one has an observable which
a assigns a real number to any system; such that: I

, so that I is Hausdorff, only since the intersection of

sets yield the null set or there are distinct points that are not shared within each set. Thus one combines two
states I
1
and I
2
as the Cartesian product: I
1
I
2
, though the evolution produce space, in order know what the
state will be in t time will be understood as I

. Where the dynamics of any system under a topology

is described by the continuous mapping of topological spaces.
The dynamics of a changing topology, as shown in second section, is important in aiming to prove the
boundary value condition even though at the beginning it is assumed to be so even though one can't defined the
Lie groups to be null, and in fact what is produced is that by proving the boundary solution one breaks symme-
try, and thereby, outputs a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.38:
A chaotic system is characterized by three conditions:
1. Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
2. Periodic orbits are Dense
3. Topological transitivity (Devaney, 2003).
Homology is the main mathematical system that was applied by the end of Section 2, and their impor-
tant in dealing with the kind of abstract properties that facilitates one to prove the boundary value condition
and to use p-forms to explain the physical principles by dealing with symmetry conditions of partial differential
equation using Lagrangians under a measure space: allowing one to apply Noether's theorem at the end by
constructing and analyzing the geometric conditions of simplexes pasting together a mapping of a one-dimen-
sional space, and manipulating it to construct higher dimensional surfaces through algebraic topology.
Definition 1.39:
A Euclidean p-simplex at
p
is a convex set A
p

p
built by p + 1 points; such that: P
0
=
(0,...,0), P
1
= (1,...,0), ..., P
p
= (0,...,0,1)
Example 1.391:

P
0
(Figure 9)
P
0
P
1
u
1
(Figure 10)
P
0
P
1
P
3
u
1
u
2
(Figure 11)
One outputs the following with A
P
= (P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) :
P
1
u
1
P
2
u
2
P
3
u
3
(Figure 12)
In which a singular p-simplex is a differential map in an n-manifold M
n
; such that:

P
: A
P
M
n
The singular simplex is a unique case of what termed a natural object one, which one, integrates p-
forms of M through the pull back *:
]

P
:=
]
A

P
Keep in mind that there is no restriction in the degree of the mapping of
P
.
Example 1.41:
An image of A
P
can be a single point of M expressed as
P
. The k-th face, or the side that is
opposite the vertex P
k
is not a Euclidean simplex, rather a singular simplex in
P
, which denotes a specific
mapping f
P
: A
P1
A
P
into
P
so that the face is the image.
Definition 1.42:
The boundary oA
P
of the simplex, for all p > 0, is the formal sum of singular simplexes oA
P
= o
(P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) : = _
k
(1)
k
( P
0
, ..., P

K
, ..., P
P
)
When the simplex is zero one equates it with oV
0
= 0.
Example 1.421:
o |P
0
, P
1
, P
2
] = |P
1
, P
2
] |P
0
, P
2
] + |P
0
, P
1
]

2
P
0
, P
1
, P
2
is known as an ordered simplex with specific coordinate orientation
by the given vertices; such that e
1
= P
1
- P
0
and e
2
= P
2
-P
0
.
Example 1.422:
o
P
0
P
2
P
1
=

(Figure 13)
Example 1.423:
Take Stokes theorem, which was partially alluded to in Example 1.21 and Example
1.371 with p-forms, which can now be extended in it's 1-form
1
; such that: A = A
2
,
]
oA

1
=
] ]
A
d
1
where oA
P
is not a simplex rather it is an (p-1) chain.
Definition 1.43:
One defines a singular p-chain M
P
, giving a coefficient contained within a group G to
be a finite formal sum: c
P
= g
1

P
1
+....+g
r

P
r
of singular simplexes given Example 3.71 as
P
: A
P
M
n
; such
that, g
s
G where: G is an abelian group satisfying
P
= /p, the group of integers modulo p. One adds two
p-chains by the following procedure:
(c
p
+ c
P
')(
P
) c
p
(
P
)+ c
P
'(
P
)
Thus the collection of every singular p-chains of M, giving coefficients in G, can be
written C
P
(M
n
; G).
Definition 1.44:
If
P
: A
P
M
n
is acknowledged as a singular p-simplex; then, o is the integer m
(p-1) chain expressed as o: =
-
(oA) = E
k
(1)
k

-
(A
p1
k
).
Given group G one defines the boundary: oE
r
g
r

p
r
:= E
r
g
r
o
P
r
With the boundary homomorphism:
o: C
P
(M; G) C
P1
(M; G)
Such that with F: M
n
V
r
and c
P
= Eg
r

P
r
one has the ind-
uced chains F
-
c on V; Henceforth:
Definition 1.46: o F
-
= F
-
o

Containing the following commutative diagram:
C
P
(M; G)
F-
C
P
(V; G)
o o
C
P1
(M; G)
F-
C
P1
(V; G)
(Figure 14)
Which expresses ! c C
P
(M ; G), in that, one has the following: F
-
oc
P
= oF
-
(c
P
).

The next theorem is the main apparatus that one used to prove the boundary value for
a closed action line integral, since that is what necessarily one has been doing with
34
Example 1.41:
An image of A
P
can be a single point of M expressed as
P
. The k-th face, or the side that is
opposite the vertex P
k
is not a Euclidean simplex, rather a singular simplex in
P
, which denotes a specific
mapping f
P
: A
P1
A
P
into
P
so that the face is the image.
Definition 1.42:
The boundary oA
P
of the simplex, for all p > 0, is the formal sum of singular simplexes oA
P
= o
(P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) : = _
k
(1)
k
( P
0
, ..., P

K
, ..., P
P
)
When the simplex is zero one equates it with oV
0
= 0.
Example 1.421:
o |P
0
, P
1
, P
2
] = |P
1
, P
2
] |P
0
, P
2
] + |P
0
, P
1
]

2
P
0
, P
1
, P
2
is known as an ordered simplex with specific coordinate orientation
by the given vertices; such that e
1
= P
1
- P
0
and e
2
= P
2
-P
0
.
Example 1.422:
o
P
0
P
2
P
1
=

(Figure 13)
Example 1.423:
Take Stokes theorem, which was partially alluded to in Example 1.21 and Example
1.371 with p-forms, which can now be extended in it's 1-form
1
; such that: A = A
2
,
]
oA

1
=
] ]
A
d
1
where oA
P
is not a simplex rather it is an (p-1) chain.
Definition 1.43:
One defines a singular p-chain M
P
, giving a coefficient contained within a group G to
be a finite formal sum: c
P
= g
1

P
1
+....+g
r

P
r
of singular simplexes given Example 3.71 as
P
: A
P
M
n
; such
that, g
s
G where: G is an abelian group satisfying
P
= /p, the group of integers modulo p. One adds two
p-chains by the following procedure:
(c
p
+ c
P
')(
P
) c
p
(
P
)+ c
P
'(
P
)
Thus the collection of every singular p-chains of M, giving coefficients in G, can be
written C
P
(M
n
; G).
Definition 1.44:
If
P
: A
P
M
n
is acknowledged as a singular p-simplex; then, o is the integer m
(p-1) chain expressed as o: =
-
(oA) = E
k
(1)
k

-
(A
p1
k
).
Given group G one defines the boundary: oE
r
g
r

p
r
:= E
r
g
r
o
P
r
With the boundary homomorphism:
o: C
P
(M; G) C
P1
(M; G)
Such that with F: M
n
V
r
and c
P
= Eg
r

P
r
one has the ind-
uced chains F
-
c on V; Henceforth:
Definition 1.46: o F
-
= F
-
o

Containing the following commutative diagram:
C
P
(M; G)
F-
C
P
(V; G)
o o
C
P1
(M; G)
F-
C
P1
(V; G)
(Figure 14)
Which expresses ! c C
P
(M ; G), in that, one has the following: F
-
oc
P
= oF
-
(c
P
).

The next theorem is the main apparatus that one used to prove the boundary value for
a closed action line integral, since that is what necessarily one has been doing with
35
Example 1.41:
An image of A
P
can be a single point of M expressed as
P
. The k-th face, or the side that is
opposite the vertex P
k
is not a Euclidean simplex, rather a singular simplex in
P
, which denotes a specific
mapping f
P
: A
P1
A
P
into
P
so that the face is the image.
Definition 1.42:
The boundary oA
P
of the simplex, for all p > 0, is the formal sum of singular simplexes oA
P
= o
(P
0
, P
1
, ..., P
P
) : = _
k
(1)
k
( P
0
, ..., P

K
, ..., P
P
)
When the simplex is zero one equates it with oV
0
= 0.
Example 1.421:
o |P
0
, P
1
, P
2
] = |P
1
, P
2
] |P
0
, P
2
] + |P
0
, P
1
]

2
P
0
, P
1
, P
2
is known as an ordered simplex with specific coordinate orientation
by the given vertices; such that e
1
= P
1
- P
0
and e
2
= P
2
-P
0
.
Example 1.422:
o
P
0
P
2
P
1
=

(Figure 13)
Example 1.423:
Take Stokes theorem, which was partially alluded to in Example 1.21 and Example
1.371 with p-forms, which can now be extended in it's 1-form
1
; such that: A = A
2
,
]
oA

1
=
] ]
A
d
1
where oA
P
is not a simplex rather it is an (p-1) chain.
Definition 1.43:
One defines a singular p-chain M
P
, giving a coefficient contained within a group G to
be a finite formal sum: c
P
= g
1

P
1
+....+g
r

P
r
of singular simplexes given Example 3.71 as
P
: A
P
M
n
; such
that, g
s
G where: G is an abelian group satisfying
P
= /p, the group of integers modulo p. One adds two
p-chains by the following procedure:
(c
p
+ c
P
')(
P
) c
p
(
P
)+ c
P
'(
P
)
Thus the collection of every singular p-chains of M, giving coefficients in G, can be
written C
P
(M
n
; G).
Definition 1.44:
If
P
: A
P
M
n
is acknowledged as a singular p-simplex; then, o is the integer m
(p-1) chain expressed as o: =
-
(oA) = E
k
(1)
k

-
(A
p1
k
).
Given group G one defines the boundary: oE
r
g
r

p
r
:= E
r
g
r
o
P
r
With the boundary homomorphism:
o: C
P
(M; G) C
P1
(M; G)
Such that with F: M
n
V
r
and c
P
= Eg
r

P
r
one has the ind-
uced chains F
-
c on V; Henceforth:
Definition 1.46: o F
-
= F
-
o

Containing the following commutative diagram:
C
P
(M; G)
F-
C
P
(V; G)
o o
C
P1
(M; G)
F-
C
P1
(V; G)
(Figure 14)
Which expresses ! c C
P
(M ; G), in that, one has the following: F
-
oc
P
= oF
-
(c
P
).

The next theorem is the main apparatus that one used to prove the boundary value for
a closed action line integral, since that is what necessarily one has been doing with
the topological construction for a dynamical system with time displacement.
Theorem 1.47: o
2
= o o = 0
Proof:
ooA
P
= _
k
(1)
k
oP
0
, ..., P

k
, ... P
P

= _
k
(1)
k
_
j
(1)
j
oP
0
, ... P

j
, ..., P

k
, ... P
P

= + _
k
(1)
k
_
jk
(1)
j1
oP
0
, ... P

k
, ..., P

j
, ... P
P
= 0
For a singular simplex o ( o) = o (
-
(oA)) =
-
(0) = 0 (refer to: Hatcher, 2002 and
Frankel, 1997 for the same outline that was expressed in the Appendix for algebraic topology).
.
Notice that the boundary homomorphism, with commutative diagram, is a category
from the manifold M to the vector space V; which is that one is dealing with a covariant forgetful functor:
a category of topological spaces to the category of abelian groups. This forgetful functor in the last part of
Section 2 allows one to yield a transformation from a Lie-group to it's sub-group, and eventually use simplexes
and Theorem 1.47 to yield the contradiction and prove the boundary value condition as a non-abelian group.
Definition 1.48: A covariant functor associates with each object of the first category
with a second object category, and with each morphism the first category a morphism of the second.
Such that the identity and composition of the morphisms are intact:


A

(A)
O = |O]
A '
'
(A ')
(Figure 15)

Definition 1.49:
Let X

Y be a continuous mapping between topological spaces. One finds a

group homomorphism H
n
(X)
F ()
H
n
(Y). If one has n-simplex in X; such that, K
n

X; then, K
n

Y
36
Such that the identity and composition of the morphisms are intact:


A

(A)
O = |O]
A '
'
(A ')
(Figure 15)

Definition 1.49:
Let X

Y be a continuous mapping between topological spaces. One finds a

group homomorphism H
n
(X)
F ()
H
n
(Y). If one has n-simplex in X; such that, K
n

X; then, K
n

Y
is continuous: is an n-simplex contained in Y. Given a = 3 - 7' + ' one associates an element C
n
(X)

C
n
(Y) given = 3 - 7 ' + ' , which is a homomorphism of abelian groups (Geroch, 1995).

C
n+1
(X)
o
C
n
(X)
o
C
n1
(X)

C
n+1
(Y)
o
C
n
(Y)
o
C
n1
(Y)
(Figure 16)
Example 1.491:
Take the shape of a two dimensional polygon; such that:
Q
1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Q
0

+
+

Q
0
Q
1
Q
2
Q
2
Q
1
Q
3
Q
3
Q
4
Q
2
(Figure 17)

oC = (Q
0
, Q
1
, Q
2
) - (Q
1
, Q
2
, Q
3
) - (Q
2
, Q
3
, Q
4
)
oC = Q
0
Q
2
- Q
2
Q
1
+ Q
1
Q
3
+ Q
3
Q
2
-Q
2
Q
1
+ Q
3
Q
4
+ Q
4
Q
2
-Q
2
Q
3
= Q
0
Q
2
+ Q
1
Q
0
+ Q
1
Q
3
- Q
2
Q
1
+Q
3
Q
4
+ Q
4
Q
2

Definition 1.50:
All information processes within an open system must contain the following
parameters:
1. Receiver
2. Sender
3. Decoder
4. Noise
5. Encoder
In the earlier sections the ideas in generative linguistics, including Principles and Param-
eters, weighs heavily on information system between input, communication, and acquisition. This
37
is continuous: is an n-simplex contained in Y. Given a = 3 - 7' + ' one associates an element C
n
(X)

C
n
(Y) given = 3 - 7 ' + ' , which is a homomorphism of abelian groups (Geroch, 1995).

C
n+1
(X)
o
C
n
(X)
o
C
n1
(X)

C
n+1
(Y)
o
C
n
(Y)
o
C
n1
(Y)
(Figure 16)
Example 1.491:
Take the shape of a two dimensional polygon; such that:
Q
1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Q
0

+
+

Q
0
Q
1
Q
2
Q
2
Q
1
Q
3
Q
3
Q
4
Q
2
(Figure 17)

oC = (Q
0
, Q
1
, Q
2
) - (Q
1
, Q
2
, Q
3
) - (Q
2
, Q
3
, Q
4
)
oC = Q
0
Q
2
- Q
2
Q
1
+ Q
1
Q
3
+ Q
3
Q
2
-Q
2
Q
1
+ Q
3
Q
4
+ Q
4
Q
2
-Q
2
Q
3
= Q
0
Q
2
+ Q
1
Q
0
+ Q
1
Q
3
- Q
2
Q
1
+Q
3
Q
4
+ Q
4
Q
2

Definition 1.50:
All information processes within an open system must contain the following
parameters:
1. Receiver
2. Sender
3. Decoder
4. Noise
5. Encoder
In the earlier sections the ideas in generative linguistics, including Principles and Param-
eters, weighs heavily on information system between input, communication, and acquisition. This
same methodology is explained in Claude Shannon's, The Mathematical Theory of Communication though
there has been discrepancies about whether or not thermodynamics play a key role in information theory?
Primarily information systems utilizes the principles of entropy, where entropy is defined as the disorder within
an open environment, though that is not how Claude Shannon defines it, rather it is condition that the entropic
principle is regulated upon the efficiency of any communication device (hindered by noise): an external device
that inevitable slows down the capacity of the information process in decoding the message. To understand
this one allows the receiver to fill in the missing information, but that such information (within a computational
device) is governed by zero and ones as binary numbers termed bits, which encodes the information in small
sizes and then decoding it to be read by the receiver (see also: Peirce, 1969).
Example 1.501:
A simple idealization of an information system, with increasing entropy; such
that, the state of the system within itself and it's surroundings is computed as the following:
dS = d
e
S + d
i
S
Where dS is the change of the device around it's surrounding environment; such that d
i
S
must always be greater than zero. This quantization reaches equilibrium or the steady state, in that entropy
increases without violating the second law of thermodynamics (see also: Brooks, 1986).
Definition 1.51:
A Lagrangian, as a smooth function on a tangent bundle T ( ) of a configuration space,
defines the tangent bundle as the set of all disjoint union of all spaces within a differentiable manifold [the set
of all tangent vectors] (Penrose, 2004). The Lagrangians is written as:
= ( q
1
, ..., q
2
, q

1
, ...,q

n
)
Example 1.511:
A physical interpretation of the Lagrangian = K - C (the kinetic energy K and
the potential energy V); such that the equations of motion for a classical system can be stated as the Euler-
Lagrangeequation:

d
dt


q
r


q
r
In practical terms one states an important theorem that is given the following definition
Definition 1.52:
If any simple Lagrangian contains a continuous smooth symmetry; then, there is
a conservation property inherent within the physical system (see also: Siegal, Fields)
The Lagrangian and Definition 1.52 in Section 2 accords one to reveal symmetry violation and
ultimately in Section 3 three natural laws that are a part of the biological system that is being constructed. In
physics, if the Lagrangian is invariant coordinate wise; then, there is conservation of momentum. If it is invari-
ant under time translation; then, energy is conserved, and if it is invariant under angular momentum under a
given axis; then, there is conservation of angular momentum (see also: Marsden, 1998).
The next definitions allows one in Section 2 to state the conjecture for the organization and
composition of the modules in the brain. The following rules are Boolean for computers.
Definition 1.53:
The Boolean values for the electrical circuits are the following:
0 + 0 = 0
0 + 1 = 1
1 + 0 = 1
1 + 1 = 0 in addition a carrier
Such that one is giving the addition properties for a random selection of binary expres-
sions:
A B S C
0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
Given the following values for the Boolean gates:
(Figure 18)
One states the exchange and fan out operations when constructing a Boolean computational device:
(Figure 19: Fan Out) (Figure 20: Exchange)

Theorem 1.54:

Any effective procedure is computable, if it adheres to the Church-Turing Parameter for Univer-
sal Computation.
Proof: If any algorithm, by way of a Turing Machine, does not complete itself; then, the effec-
tive procedure is not applicable to a Universal Turing Machine or it is not computable (Kleene, 1967).
38
same methodology is explained in Claude Shannon's, The Mathematical Theory of Communication though
there has been discrepancies about whether or not thermodynamics play a key role in information theory?
Primarily information systems utilizes the principles of entropy, where entropy is defined as the disorder within
an open environment, though that is not how Claude Shannon defines it, rather it is condition that the entropic
principle is regulated upon the efficiency of any communication device (hindered by noise): an external device
that inevitable slows down the capacity of the information process in decoding the message. To understand
this one allows the receiver to fill in the missing information, but that such information (within a computational
device) is governed by zero and ones as binary numbers termed bits, which encodes the information in small
sizes and then decoding it to be read by the receiver (see also: Peirce, 1969).
Example 1.501:
A simple idealization of an information system, with increasing entropy; such
that, the state of the system within itself and it's surroundings is computed as the following:
dS = d
e
S + d
i
S
Where dS is the change of the device around it's surrounding environment; such that d
i
S
must always be greater than zero. This quantization reaches equilibrium or the steady state, in that entropy
increases without violating the second law of thermodynamics (see also: Brooks, 1986).
Definition 1.51:
A Lagrangian, as a smooth function on a tangent bundle T ( ) of a configuration space,
defines the tangent bundle as the set of all disjoint union of all spaces within a differentiable manifold [the set
of all tangent vectors] (Penrose, 2004). The Lagrangians is written as:
= ( q
1
, ..., q
2
, q

1
, ...,q

n
)
Example 1.511:
A physical interpretation of the Lagrangian = K - C (the kinetic energy K and
the potential energy V); such that the equations of motion for a classical system can be stated as the Euler-
Lagrangeequation:

d
dt


q
r


q
r
In practical terms one states an important theorem that is given the following definition
Definition 1.52:
If any simple Lagrangian contains a continuous smooth symmetry; then, there is
a conservation property inherent within the physical system (see also: Siegal, Fields)
The Lagrangian and Definition 1.52 in Section 2 accords one to reveal symmetry violation and
ultimately in Section 3 three natural laws that are a part of the biological system that is being constructed. In
physics, if the Lagrangian is invariant coordinate wise; then, there is conservation of momentum. If it is invari-
ant under time translation; then, energy is conserved, and if it is invariant under angular momentum under a
given axis; then, there is conservation of angular momentum (see also: Marsden, 1998).
The next definitions allows one in Section 2 to state the conjecture for the organization and
composition of the modules in the brain. The following rules are Boolean for computers.
Definition 1.53:
The Boolean values for the electrical circuits are the following:
0 + 0 = 0
0 + 1 = 1
1 + 0 = 1
1 + 1 = 0 in addition a carrier
Such that one is giving the addition properties for a random selection of binary expres-
sions:
A B S C
0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
Given the following values for the Boolean gates:
(Figure 18)
One states the exchange and fan out operations when constructing a Boolean computational device:
(Figure 19: Fan Out) (Figure 20: Exchange)

Theorem 1.54:

Any effective procedure is computable, if it adheres to the Church-Turing Parameter for Univer-
sal Computation.
Proof: If any algorithm, by way of a Turing Machine, does not complete itself; then, the effec-
tive procedure is not applicable to a Universal Turing Machine or it is not computable (Kleene, 1967).
39
same methodology is explained in Claude Shannon's, The Mathematical Theory of Communication though
there has been discrepancies about whether or not thermodynamics play a key role in information theory?
Primarily information systems utilizes the principles of entropy, where entropy is defined as the disorder within
an open environment, though that is not how Claude Shannon defines it, rather it is condition that the entropic
principle is regulated upon the efficiency of any communication device (hindered by noise): an external device
that inevitable slows down the capacity of the information process in decoding the message. To understand
this one allows the receiver to fill in the missing information, but that such information (within a computational
device) is governed by zero and ones as binary numbers termed bits, which encodes the information in small
sizes and then decoding it to be read by the receiver (see also: Peirce, 1969).
Example 1.501:
A simple idealization of an information system, with increasing entropy; such
that, the state of the system within itself and it's surroundings is computed as the following:
dS = d
e
S + d
i
S
Where dS is the change of the device around it's surrounding environment; such that d
i
S
must always be greater than zero. This quantization reaches equilibrium or the steady state, in that entropy
increases without violating the second law of thermodynamics (see also: Brooks, 1986).
Definition 1.51:
A Lagrangian, as a smooth function on a tangent bundle T ( ) of a configuration space,
defines the tangent bundle as the set of all disjoint union of all spaces within a differentiable manifold [the set
of all tangent vectors] (Penrose, 2004). The Lagrangians is written as:
= ( q
1
, ..., q
2
, q

1
, ...,q

n
)
Example 1.511:
A physical interpretation of the Lagrangian = K - C (the kinetic energy K and
the potential energy V); such that the equations of motion for a classical system can be stated as the Euler-
Lagrangeequation:

d
dt


q
r


q
r
In practical terms one states an important theorem that is given the following definition
Definition 1.52:
If any simple Lagrangian contains a continuous smooth symmetry; then, there is
a conservation property inherent within the physical system (see also: Siegal, Fields)
The Lagrangian and Definition 1.52 in Section 2 accords one to reveal symmetry violation and
ultimately in Section 3 three natural laws that are a part of the biological system that is being constructed. In
physics, if the Lagrangian is invariant coordinate wise; then, there is conservation of momentum. If it is invari-
ant under time translation; then, energy is conserved, and if it is invariant under angular momentum under a
given axis; then, there is conservation of angular momentum (see also: Marsden, 1998).
The next definitions allows one in Section 2 to state the conjecture for the organization and
composition of the modules in the brain. The following rules are Boolean for computers.
Definition 1.53:
The Boolean values for the electrical circuits are the following:
0 + 0 = 0
0 + 1 = 1
1 + 0 = 1
1 + 1 = 0 in addition a carrier
Such that one is giving the addition properties for a random selection of binary expres-
sions:
A B S C
0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
Given the following values for the Boolean gates:
(Figure 18)
One states the exchange and fan out operations when constructing a Boolean computational device:
(Figure 19: Fan Out) (Figure 20: Exchange)

Theorem 1.54:

Any effective procedure is computable, if it adheres to the Church-Turing Parameter for Univer-
sal Computation.
Proof: If any algorithm, by way of a Turing Machine, does not complete itself; then, the effec-
tive procedure is not applicable to a Universal Turing Machine or it is not computable (Kleene, 1967).
40
same methodology is explained in Claude Shannon's, The Mathematical Theory of Communication though
there has been discrepancies about whether or not thermodynamics play a key role in information theory?
Primarily information systems utilizes the principles of entropy, where entropy is defined as the disorder within
an open environment, though that is not how Claude Shannon defines it, rather it is condition that the entropic
principle is regulated upon the efficiency of any communication device (hindered by noise): an external device
that inevitable slows down the capacity of the information process in decoding the message. To understand
this one allows the receiver to fill in the missing information, but that such information (within a computational
device) is governed by zero and ones as binary numbers termed bits, which encodes the information in small
sizes and then decoding it to be read by the receiver (see also: Peirce, 1969).
Example 1.501:
A simple idealization of an information system, with increasing entropy; such
that, the state of the system within itself and it's surroundings is computed as the following:
dS = d
e
S + d
i
S
Where dS is the change of the device around it's surrounding environment; such that d
i
S
must always be greater than zero. This quantization reaches equilibrium or the steady state, in that entropy
increases without violating the second law of thermodynamics (see also: Brooks, 1986).
Definition 1.51:
A Lagrangian, as a smooth function on a tangent bundle T ( ) of a configuration space,
defines the tangent bundle as the set of all disjoint union of all spaces within a differentiable manifold [the set
of all tangent vectors] (Penrose, 2004). The Lagrangians is written as:
= ( q
1
, ..., q
2
, q

1
, ...,q

n
)
Example 1.511:
A physical interpretation of the Lagrangian = K - C (the kinetic energy K and
the potential energy V); such that the equations of motion for a classical system can be stated as the Euler-
Lagrangeequation:

d
dt


q
r


q
r
In practical terms one states an important theorem that is given the following definition
Definition 1.52:
If any simple Lagrangian contains a continuous smooth symmetry; then, there is
a conservation property inherent within the physical system (see also: Siegal, Fields)
The Lagrangian and Definition 1.52 in Section 2 accords one to reveal symmetry violation and
ultimately in Section 3 three natural laws that are a part of the biological system that is being constructed. In
physics, if the Lagrangian is invariant coordinate wise; then, there is conservation of momentum. If it is invari-
ant under time translation; then, energy is conserved, and if it is invariant under angular momentum under a
given axis; then, there is conservation of angular momentum (see also: Marsden, 1998).
The next definitions allows one in Section 2 to state the conjecture for the organization and
composition of the modules in the brain. The following rules are Boolean for computers.
Definition 1.53:
The Boolean values for the electrical circuits are the following:
0 + 0 = 0
0 + 1 = 1
1 + 0 = 1
1 + 1 = 0 in addition a carrier
Such that one is giving the addition properties for a random selection of binary expres-
sions:
A B S C
0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
Given the following values for the Boolean gates:
(Figure 18)
One states the exchange and fan out operations when constructing a Boolean computational device:
(Figure 19: Fan Out) (Figure 20: Exchange)

Theorem 1.54:

Any effective procedure is computable, if it adheres to the Church-Turing Parameter for Univer-
sal Computation.
Proof: If any algorithm, by way of a Turing Machine, does not complete itself; then, the effec-
tive procedure is not applicable to a Universal Turing Machine or it is not computable (Kleene, 1967).
41
same methodology is explained in Claude Shannon's, The Mathematical Theory of Communication though
there has been discrepancies about whether or not thermodynamics play a key role in information theory?
Primarily information systems utilizes the principles of entropy, where entropy is defined as the disorder within
an open environment, though that is not how Claude Shannon defines it, rather it is condition that the entropic
principle is regulated upon the efficiency of any communication device (hindered by noise): an external device
that inevitable slows down the capacity of the information process in decoding the message. To understand
this one allows the receiver to fill in the missing information, but that such information (within a computational
device) is governed by zero and ones as binary numbers termed bits, which encodes the information in small
sizes and then decoding it to be read by the receiver (see also: Peirce, 1969).
Example 1.501:
A simple idealization of an information system, with increasing entropy; such
that, the state of the system within itself and it's surroundings is computed as the following:
dS = d
e
S + d
i
S
Where dS is the change of the device around it's surrounding environment; such that d
i
S
must always be greater than zero. This quantization reaches equilibrium or the steady state, in that entropy
increases without violating the second law of thermodynamics (see also: Brooks, 1986).
Definition 1.51:
A Lagrangian, as a smooth function on a tangent bundle T ( ) of a configuration space,
defines the tangent bundle as the set of all disjoint union of all spaces within a differentiable manifold [the set
of all tangent vectors] (Penrose, 2004). The Lagrangians is written as:
= ( q
1
, ..., q
2
, q

1
, ...,q

n
)
Example 1.511:
A physical interpretation of the Lagrangian = K - C (the kinetic energy K and
the potential energy V); such that the equations of motion for a classical system can be stated as the Euler-
Lagrangeequation:

d
dt


q
r


q
r
In practical terms one states an important theorem that is given the following definition
Definition 1.52:
If any simple Lagrangian contains a continuous smooth symmetry; then, there is
a conservation property inherent within the physical system (see also: Siegal, Fields)
The Lagrangian and Definition 1.52 in Section 2 accords one to reveal symmetry violation and
ultimately in Section 3 three natural laws that are a part of the biological system that is being constructed. In
physics, if the Lagrangian is invariant coordinate wise; then, there is conservation of momentum. If it is invari-
ant under time translation; then, energy is conserved, and if it is invariant under angular momentum under a
given axis; then, there is conservation of angular momentum (see also: Marsden, 1998).
The next definitions allows one in Section 2 to state the conjecture for the organization and
composition of the modules in the brain. The following rules are Boolean for computers.
Definition 1.53:
The Boolean values for the electrical circuits are the following:
0 + 0 = 0
0 + 1 = 1
1 + 0 = 1
1 + 1 = 0 in addition a carrier
Such that one is giving the addition properties for a random selection of binary expres-
sions:
A B S C
0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
Given the following values for the Boolean gates:
(Figure 18)
One states the exchange and fan out operations when constructing a Boolean computational device:
(Figure 19: Fan Out) (Figure 20: Exchange)

Theorem 1.54:

Any effective procedure is computable, if it adheres to the Church-Turing Parameter for Univer-
sal Computation.
Proof: If any algorithm, by way of a Turing Machine, does not complete itself; then, the effec-
tive procedure is not applicable to a Universal Turing Machine or it is not computable (Kleene, 1967).
.
Theorem 1.54 obliges in the second section the ability to show the irreducibility and indeterminacy of the
language of thought, as a consequence to it's fractal design, but doing so allows one to state the conjecture.
42
4. Conclusion
In order to fully formulate p - forms, onto merge, it is important to use the Boolean method, and to isolate
the lexical features away from the axioms one neutralizes it by switching them into complex and real numerical
parts, and thus use a form of self - reference onto the p - forms : duplicating the way Kurt Gdel was able to
prove the incompleteness theorems-- it is linguistic in nature, but with mathematical implication.
Modification of the standard mathematical machinery does not alter the traditional scientific point of view
of how natural language evolved though it does more clearly demonstrate how it is put to use, the neural
cellular rules that govern acquisition, explanatory adequacy, or how the organization of acquisition and
expression arises without the tenuous need to consider the infinite possibilities of the sense-data that is used
for parameter setting, and eventually communication. Headedness, as well, is recognized as a feature of the
Fatou set, and indeed because non-linearity is apparent one understands, quite clearly, that headedness holds no
restrictive course but a consequence of what is claimed to be the stabilizing effects of the set, which eventually
propitiates the computational device.
It is acknowledged that the five problems of Bio-linguistics are resolved as the laws of consciousness, and
that one moves toward unification and not reductionism (Chomsky, 2008). By resolving the five laws of
consciousness; then, one accepts the irreducibility and indeterminacy of FL. By accepting it's irreducibility and
indeterminacy, computationally; then, one finally realizes the goals of the minimalist program as parsimony,
elegance, and simplicity, and subjecting linguistics as a Bio-physical system through geometrization. The hope
is to demonstrate the merit of mathematical linguistics, and how using mathematics in novel ways allows one
to see more clearly the explanatory and descriptive aspects that involve the strong minimalist theses.
Future research must adequately yield a newer theory of the mind that is consistent with the Bio-physical
sciences and naturalistic in extent. Representational and symbolic systems are limited, but they may serve a
role by extrapolating a clearer understanding of the neurophysics of the mind/brain, and eventually the reverse
engineering of the brain by way of the rules governed by Conjecture 3.6. If the linguistic system is a Banach
space with a non-abelian group structure; then, one knows that it meets the criterion of a Hilbert space which
may lead one toward a deeper unraveling of the molecular dynamics surrounding the electrical and chemical
activity of the brain, in such a way, that one unlocks how such a process generates feeling and awareness with
the rest of neural system. A better understanding of the cognitive organ has been achieved, but one needs to go
further toward deciphering the interface of the nervous and sensory component with the mind/brain, and
ultimately full integration.
43
44
5. References
Boole, George. "An Investigation of the Laws of Thought." God Created the Integers. Ed. Stephen Hawking.
London: Running Press, 2007. 835 - 977.
Baker, Mark C. The Atoms of Language. New York: Basic Books, 2001.
Braun, Allen R. and Xu, Jiang. "Symbolic Gestures and Spoken Language Are Processed by a Common Neural
System." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009.
Brooks, Daniel R. and Wiley, E. O. Evolution as Entropy: Toward A Unified Theory of Biology. Chicago and
London: Chicago University Press, 1986.
Chomsky, Noam. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in Rationalist Thought. New Zealand: Cybereditions,
2002.
---, "Language and the Brain." The Essential Chomsky. Ed. Anthony Arnove. New York: The New Press,
2008.
---, Language and Mind. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
---, New Horizons in the Study of Language. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
---, Of Minds and Language. United States of America: Oxford University Press, 2009.
---, On Language. New York: The New Press, 1977.
---, Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.
---, Syntactic Structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1957.
---, Some Simple Evo-Devo Thesis: How True Might They Be For Language. MIT, 2008.
---, The Minimalist Program. United States: MIT Press, 1995.
Churchland, Patricia. Brain-Wise. United States of America: MIT Press, 2002.
Crick, Francis. The Astonishing Hypothesis. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994.
Croft, William and Cruse, Alan D. Cognitive Linguistics. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press,
2004.
Darling, R.W.R. Differential Forms and Connections. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Dennett, Daniel. Consciousness Explained. United States of America: A Bay Back Book, 1991.
---. Darwin's Dangerous Idea. United States of America: Touchstone, 1995.
---. "Quining Qulia." 1988.
Devaney, Robert L. An Introduction to Chaotic Dynamical Systems 2nd Edition. United States of America:
Westview Press, 2003.
Feynman, Richard. Feynman Lectures on Computation. Oxford: Westview Press, 1996.
Frankel, Theodore. The Geometry of Physics: An Introduction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press, 1997.
Goldberg, Adele E. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago and London: The
University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Geroch, Robert. Mathematical Physics. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 1985.
Gould, Stephen Jay. Punctuated Equilibrium. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, 2007.
--- and Lewontin, Richard. "The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the
Adaptanionist Programme." Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1979.
Grim, Patrick Mar, Gary, and Paul St. Denis. The Philosophical Computer. United States of America: MIT
Press, 1998.
Hatcher, Allan. Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Hofstadter, Douglas, Gdel, Escher, Bach. New York: Basic Books, 1999.
Hornstein, Norbert, Nunes, Jairo, and Grohmann, Kleanthes K. Understanding Minimalism. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press, 2005
Jackendoff, Ray S., Consciousness and the Computational Mind. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1987.
Jenkins, Lyle, Biolinguistics: Exploring the Biology of Language. United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press, 2000.
Kemke, E. Theory of Sets. New York: Dover Publications, 1950.
Kleene, Stephen Cole. Mathematical Logic. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, 1967.
Lay, Steven R. Analysis With an Introduction. New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Lasnik, Howard, Uriagereka, Juan, and Boeckx, Cedric, A Course in Minimalist Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing, 2005.
Mar, Gary. Logic: Techniques of Formal Reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980.
Marsden, Jerrold E. and Ratiu, Tudor S. Introduction to Mechanics and Symmetry. A Basic Exposition of
Classical Mechanical Systems. 1998.
Martin, Benjamin and Rumelhart, David E. eds. Cognitive Science. New York: Academic Press, 1989.
Milnor, John. "A Problem: Is Entropy Effectively Computable?" 2002.
---. Dynamics in One Complex Variable: Introductory Lectures 2nd Edition. Germany: View Eg, 2000.
---. Growth and Form. Geneva and Detroit, 2010.
---. Topology from the Differentiable Viewpoint. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965.
Munkres, James R. Topology 2nd Edition. London: Prentice-Hall: 1975.
Peirce, John R. An Introduction to Information Theory: Symbols, Signals, Noise. Mineola, New York: Dover
Publications, 1961.
Penrose, Roger. The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. New York: Vintage
Books, 2004.
Pinker, Steven. The Language Instinct.United States of America: Perennial, 1994.
Posner, Michael I., eds. Foundations of Cognitive Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1989.
Premack, David and Premack, Ann. Original Intelligence: Unlocking the Mystery of Who We Are. University
of Michigan: McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Radford, Andrew. Minimalist Syntax. United States: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Ramachandran, V.S. A Brief Tour of Human Consciousness. New York: Pi Press, 2003.
---. "Mirror neurons and imitation as the driving force behind 'the great leap forward' in human evolution."
Edge: The third culture, 2007.
---. Phantoms in the Brain. New York: Harper Perennial, 1998.
Russell, Bertrand. The Principles of Mathematics. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1996.
Saulerland, Uli and Gartner, Hans-Martin. Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Holland: Mouton de
Gruyter, 2007.
Shannon, Claude E. The Mathematical Theory of Information. Urbana and Chicago: Chicago University Press,
1949.
Shilov, Georgi E. Elementary Functional Analysis. New York: Dover Publications, 1974.
Siegal, Warren. Fields. C.N. Yang Institute for Theoretical Physics.
Tapscott, Bangs L. Elementary Applied Symbolic Logic. Carson, California: Mozena Publishing, 1935.
Turnbull, H. W. The Theory of Determinants, Matrices, and Invariants 2nd Edition. London and Glasgow:
Blackie and Son Limited, 1928.
45
Boole, George. "An Investigation of the Laws of Thought." God Created the Integers. Ed. Stephen Hawking.
London: Running Press, 2007. 835 - 977.
Baker, Mark C. The Atoms of Language. New York: Basic Books, 2001.
Braun, Allen R. and Xu, Jiang. "Symbolic Gestures and Spoken Language Are Processed by a Common Neural
System." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009.
Brooks, Daniel R. and Wiley, E. O. Evolution as Entropy: Toward A Unified Theory of Biology. Chicago and
London: Chicago University Press, 1986.
Chomsky, Noam. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in Rationalist Thought. New Zealand: Cybereditions,
2002.
---, "Language and the Brain." The Essential Chomsky. Ed. Anthony Arnove. New York: The New Press,
2008.
---, Language and Mind. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
---, New Horizons in the Study of Language. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
---, Of Minds and Language. United States of America: Oxford University Press, 2009.
---, On Language. New York: The New Press, 1977.
---, Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.
---, Syntactic Structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1957.
---, Some Simple Evo-Devo Thesis: How True Might They Be For Language. MIT, 2008.
---, The Minimalist Program. United States: MIT Press, 1995.
Churchland, Patricia. Brain-Wise. United States of America: MIT Press, 2002.
Crick, Francis. The Astonishing Hypothesis. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994.
Croft, William and Cruse, Alan D. Cognitive Linguistics. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press,
2004.
Darling, R.W.R. Differential Forms and Connections. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Dennett, Daniel. Consciousness Explained. United States of America: A Bay Back Book, 1991.
---. Darwin's Dangerous Idea. United States of America: Touchstone, 1995.
---. "Quining Qulia." 1988.
Devaney, Robert L. An Introduction to Chaotic Dynamical Systems 2nd Edition. United States of America:
Westview Press, 2003.
Feynman, Richard. Feynman Lectures on Computation. Oxford: Westview Press, 1996.
Frankel, Theodore. The Geometry of Physics: An Introduction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press, 1997.
Goldberg, Adele E. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago and London: The
University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Geroch, Robert. Mathematical Physics. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 1985.
Gould, Stephen Jay. Punctuated Equilibrium. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, 2007.
--- and Lewontin, Richard. "The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the
Adaptanionist Programme." Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1979.
Grim, Patrick Mar, Gary, and Paul St. Denis. The Philosophical Computer. United States of America: MIT
Press, 1998.
Hatcher, Allan. Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Hofstadter, Douglas, Gdel, Escher, Bach. New York: Basic Books, 1999.
Hornstein, Norbert, Nunes, Jairo, and Grohmann, Kleanthes K. Understanding Minimalism. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press, 2005
Jackendoff, Ray S., Consciousness and the Computational Mind. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1987.
Jenkins, Lyle, Biolinguistics: Exploring the Biology of Language. United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press, 2000.
Kemke, E. Theory of Sets. New York: Dover Publications, 1950.
Kleene, Stephen Cole. Mathematical Logic. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, 1967.
Lay, Steven R. Analysis With an Introduction. New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Lasnik, Howard, Uriagereka, Juan, and Boeckx, Cedric, A Course in Minimalist Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing, 2005.
Mar, Gary. Logic: Techniques of Formal Reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980.
Marsden, Jerrold E. and Ratiu, Tudor S. Introduction to Mechanics and Symmetry. A Basic Exposition of
Classical Mechanical Systems. 1998.
Martin, Benjamin and Rumelhart, David E. eds. Cognitive Science. New York: Academic Press, 1989.
Milnor, John. "A Problem: Is Entropy Effectively Computable?" 2002.
---. Dynamics in One Complex Variable: Introductory Lectures 2nd Edition. Germany: View Eg, 2000.
---. Growth and Form. Geneva and Detroit, 2010.
---. Topology from the Differentiable Viewpoint. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965.
Munkres, James R. Topology 2nd Edition. London: Prentice-Hall: 1975.
Peirce, John R. An Introduction to Information Theory: Symbols, Signals, Noise. Mineola, New York: Dover
Publications, 1961.
Penrose, Roger. The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. New York: Vintage
Books, 2004.
Pinker, Steven. The Language Instinct.United States of America: Perennial, 1994.
Posner, Michael I., eds. Foundations of Cognitive Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1989.
Premack, David and Premack, Ann. Original Intelligence: Unlocking the Mystery of Who We Are. University
of Michigan: McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Radford, Andrew. Minimalist Syntax. United States: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Ramachandran, V.S. A Brief Tour of Human Consciousness. New York: Pi Press, 2003.
---. "Mirror neurons and imitation as the driving force behind 'the great leap forward' in human evolution."
Edge: The third culture, 2007.
---. Phantoms in the Brain. New York: Harper Perennial, 1998.
Russell, Bertrand. The Principles of Mathematics. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1996.
Saulerland, Uli and Gartner, Hans-Martin. Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Holland: Mouton de
Gruyter, 2007.
Shannon, Claude E. The Mathematical Theory of Information. Urbana and Chicago: Chicago University Press,
1949.
Shilov, Georgi E. Elementary Functional Analysis. New York: Dover Publications, 1974.
Siegal, Warren. Fields. C.N. Yang Institute for Theoretical Physics.
Tapscott, Bangs L. Elementary Applied Symbolic Logic. Carson, California: Mozena Publishing, 1935.
Turnbull, H. W. The Theory of Determinants, Matrices, and Invariants 2nd Edition. London and Glasgow:
Blackie and Son Limited, 1928.
46
Boole, George. "An Investigation of the Laws of Thought." God Created the Integers. Ed. Stephen Hawking.
London: Running Press, 2007. 835 - 977.
Baker, Mark C. The Atoms of Language. New York: Basic Books, 2001.
Braun, Allen R. and Xu, Jiang. "Symbolic Gestures and Spoken Language Are Processed by a Common Neural
System." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009.
Brooks, Daniel R. and Wiley, E. O. Evolution as Entropy: Toward A Unified Theory of Biology. Chicago and
London: Chicago University Press, 1986.
Chomsky, Noam. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in Rationalist Thought. New Zealand: Cybereditions,
2002.
---, "Language and the Brain." The Essential Chomsky. Ed. Anthony Arnove. New York: The New Press,
2008.
---, Language and Mind. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
---, New Horizons in the Study of Language. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
---, Of Minds and Language. United States of America: Oxford University Press, 2009.
---, On Language. New York: The New Press, 1977.
---, Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.
---, Syntactic Structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1957.
---, Some Simple Evo-Devo Thesis: How True Might They Be For Language. MIT, 2008.
---, The Minimalist Program. United States: MIT Press, 1995.
Churchland, Patricia. Brain-Wise. United States of America: MIT Press, 2002.
Crick, Francis. The Astonishing Hypothesis. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994.
Croft, William and Cruse, Alan D. Cognitive Linguistics. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press,
2004.
Darling, R.W.R. Differential Forms and Connections. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Dennett, Daniel. Consciousness Explained. United States of America: A Bay Back Book, 1991.
---. Darwin's Dangerous Idea. United States of America: Touchstone, 1995.
---. "Quining Qulia." 1988.
Devaney, Robert L. An Introduction to Chaotic Dynamical Systems 2nd Edition. United States of America:
Westview Press, 2003.
Feynman, Richard. Feynman Lectures on Computation. Oxford: Westview Press, 1996.
Frankel, Theodore. The Geometry of Physics: An Introduction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press, 1997.
Goldberg, Adele E. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago and London: The
University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Geroch, Robert. Mathematical Physics. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 1985.
Gould, Stephen Jay. Punctuated Equilibrium. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, 2007.
--- and Lewontin, Richard. "The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the
Adaptanionist Programme." Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1979.
Grim, Patrick Mar, Gary, and Paul St. Denis. The Philosophical Computer. United States of America: MIT
Press, 1998.
Hatcher, Allan. Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Hofstadter, Douglas, Gdel, Escher, Bach. New York: Basic Books, 1999.
Hornstein, Norbert, Nunes, Jairo, and Grohmann, Kleanthes K. Understanding Minimalism. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press, 2005
Jackendoff, Ray S., Consciousness and the Computational Mind. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1987.
Jenkins, Lyle, Biolinguistics: Exploring the Biology of Language. United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press, 2000.
Kemke, E. Theory of Sets. New York: Dover Publications, 1950.
Kleene, Stephen Cole. Mathematical Logic. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, 1967.
Lay, Steven R. Analysis With an Introduction. New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Lasnik, Howard, Uriagereka, Juan, and Boeckx, Cedric, A Course in Minimalist Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing, 2005.
Mar, Gary. Logic: Techniques of Formal Reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980.
Marsden, Jerrold E. and Ratiu, Tudor S. Introduction to Mechanics and Symmetry. A Basic Exposition of
Classical Mechanical Systems. 1998.
Martin, Benjamin and Rumelhart, David E. eds. Cognitive Science. New York: Academic Press, 1989.
Milnor, John. "A Problem: Is Entropy Effectively Computable?" 2002.
---. Dynamics in One Complex Variable: Introductory Lectures 2nd Edition. Germany: View Eg, 2000.
---. Growth and Form. Geneva and Detroit, 2010.
---. Topology from the Differentiable Viewpoint. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965.
Munkres, James R. Topology 2nd Edition. London: Prentice-Hall: 1975.
Peirce, John R. An Introduction to Information Theory: Symbols, Signals, Noise. Mineola, New York: Dover
Publications, 1961.
Penrose, Roger. The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. New York: Vintage
Books, 2004.
Pinker, Steven. The Language Instinct.United States of America: Perennial, 1994.
Posner, Michael I., eds. Foundations of Cognitive Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1989.
Premack, David and Premack, Ann. Original Intelligence: Unlocking the Mystery of Who We Are. University
of Michigan: McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Radford, Andrew. Minimalist Syntax. United States: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Ramachandran, V.S. A Brief Tour of Human Consciousness. New York: Pi Press, 2003.
---. "Mirror neurons and imitation as the driving force behind 'the great leap forward' in human evolution."
Edge: The third culture, 2007.
---. Phantoms in the Brain. New York: Harper Perennial, 1998.
Russell, Bertrand. The Principles of Mathematics. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1996.
Saulerland, Uli and Gartner, Hans-Martin. Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Holland: Mouton de
Gruyter, 2007.
Shannon, Claude E. The Mathematical Theory of Information. Urbana and Chicago: Chicago University Press,
1949.
Shilov, Georgi E. Elementary Functional Analysis. New York: Dover Publications, 1974.
Siegal, Warren. Fields. C.N. Yang Institute for Theoretical Physics.
Tapscott, Bangs L. Elementary Applied Symbolic Logic. Carson, California: Mozena Publishing, 1935.
Turnbull, H. W. The Theory of Determinants, Matrices, and Invariants 2nd Edition. London and Glasgow:
Blackie and Son Limited, 1928.
47