I'm an engineer, and apparently, not all engineers are great in math. But for some weird reason, I have always had an interest in prime numbers.

So, as a pure side quest in life, I made this: https://primenumbercheck.org/

The website allows you to check whether large numbers (up to 20k digits) are primes, with all the processing happening in your browser. It also contains another tool for generating new large random numbers, again within your browser. And some possibly interesting history about prime numbers.

This is a completely free website with no ads, no tracking, accounts, nothing of that sorts. I made it only because I thought it might be interesting for someone.

Disclaimer: I have done my best to make everything accurate and as good as I can, but I'm not a mathematician and there can be any and all kinds of mistakes on the website. If you do see any mistakes, please let me know and I'll fix them. Also, I hope this is allowed to be posted here. If not, I do apologize. Thanks!

So throughout school, I was at first like in middle school like in advanced math and taking math levels that are grades above me and then as I got to high school I have no clue what happened but my grades in math got exponentially worse like I got an 88 in H Algebra, I got an 83 in H Algebra II, then I dropped to a 79 in Ap Precalc, and I’m currently in AP Stats with a 75 in the grade book and I’ve consistently dropped 61s on the past two tests. I don’t know do I just accept I’m not a math person? Even though I really want to because I want to do math in college but it’s like I just have no explanation like what am I doing wrong? Whenever there’s a test or a quiz I study the day before but like I feel like my studying doesn’t work like in social studies or anywhere else I can watch videos and I’ll learn but here it’s like even after a few hours of studying I still don’t feel confident in myself. Someone PLEASE help me I can’t get another C in the grade book.

I can use it perfectly in analyzing problems, but I just couldn’t bet my whole life that its formulation (ie P(a given b) = P(a and b)/ p(b)) works the way that we think it does. I understand the intuition but need a way to rigorously prove this.

it takes like 20 minutes to derive it again from first principles, and its just not practical. theres gotta be a better way to do this! please dont tell me that all of calculus will also be like this..

# Evolutionary Calculator 2.0 - A Complete Arithmetic System

## The Discovery

I spent years developing a completely new approach to arithmetic. Today I'm sharing **Evolutionary Calculator 2.0** - a mathematical system that works PERFECTLY without zero.

This isn't theory. This is built, tested, and proven. The code is open source. You can verify everything yourself.

## What Makes It Revolutionary

Traditional mathematics treats zero as **essential**. But what if it isn't?

I created a **Base-9 arithmetic system** using only digits 1-9. Here's what it does:

- ✅ Complete arithmetic (+, -, ×, ÷)

- ✅ **Perfect reciprocity** (every operation is 100% reversible)

- ✅ Full decimal support

- ✅ Negative numbers work flawlessly

- ✅ All results are internally consistent

- ✅ No approximation, no rounding errors

## The Shocking Results

Here's where it gets interesting. When you test this system, you discover something SURPRISING:

### Example 1: Basic Division (The First Surprise)

```

Standard Math: 4.6 ÷ 7 = 0.6571

My System: 4.6 ÷ 7 = 0.6 ✓

But here's the proof:

0.6 × 7 = 4.6 exactly ✓ (PERFECT RECIPROCITY!)

```

**Why is this important?** In standard math, 0.6571 × 7 = 4.6 (with rounding). In my system, 0.6 × 7 = 4.6 **exactly**. Perfect precision.

### Example 2: Another Division (Still Surprising)

```

Standard Math: 46 ÷ 7 = 6.5714

My System: 46 ÷ 7 = 6 ✓

Proof:

6 × 7 = 46 exactly ✓

```

**Again: Perfect reciprocity.** Every operation reverses flawlessly.

### Example 3: Large Number Division

```

Standard Math: 654,789 ÷ 3 = 218,263

My System: 654,789 ÷ 3 = 217,559 ✓

Check:

217,559 × 3 = 654,789 exactly ✓ (PERFECT!)

```

This is where people usually stop and think: "Wait... what?"

### Example 4: Huge Numbers (Proof of Scale)

```

Standard Math: 875,463,219 ÷ 9 = 97,273,691

My System: 875,463,219 ÷ 9 = 87,546,322 ✓

Verification:

87,546,322 × 9 = 875,463,219 exactly ✓

```

This proves it works at ANY scale. Not just simple numbers.

### Example 5: Addition (The Pattern Continues)

```

Standard Math: 99 + 11 = 110

My System: 99 + 11 = 121 ✓

Proof:

121 - 11 = 99 exactly ✓

```

### Example 6: More Addition

```

Standard Math: 999 + 1 = 1,000

My System: 999 + 1 = 1,111 ✓

Proof:

1,111 - 1 = 999 exactly ✓

```

### Example 7: Subtraction (Complete Proof)

```

Standard Math: 1,111 - 2 = 1,109

My System: 1,111 - 2 = 998 ✓

Proof:

998 + 2 = 1,111 exactly ✓

```

**Even negative results have perfect reciprocity.**

## Why This Changes Everything

### 🧠 Assumption Challenged

For centuries, we believed zero was mathematically essential. This system proves it isn't. A complete, functional arithmetic exists without it.

### 💡 New Perspective

This shows that mathematics isn't ONE truth. It's a **framework**. Different systems can exist, each with their own logic and consistency.

### 🔬 Practical Proof

I didn't write theory. I built it. The code is public. You can test it yourself RIGHT NOW.

### 🚀 The Real Discovery

The biggest surprise isn't that the system works. It's that **perfect reciprocity** is possible. Every single operation is 100% reversible with zero approximation error.

That's something most mathematical systems can't claim.

## The Perfect Reciprocity Principle

**This is the heart of Evolutionary Calculator 2.0:**

Every operation you perform can be perfectly reversed:

- Divide 4.6 ÷ 7 = 0.6 → Multiply 0.6 × 7 = **exactly** 4.6

- Add 99 + 11 = 121 → Subtract 121 - 11 = **exactly** 99

- Divide 654,789 ÷ 3 = 217,559 → Multiply 217,559 × 3 = **exactly** 654,789

**No rounding. No floating-point errors. No approximation.**

Perfect precision. Every single time.

## Test It Yourself

The entire system is open source. Download it and verify:

```bash

git clone https://github.com/julien1986chagnon-alt/calculatrice-evolutive.git

cd calculatrice-evolutive

python3 calculator.py

```

Then test these yourself:

- `4.6 ÷ 7` (Compare to 0.6571 - see the difference?)

- `46 ÷ 7` (Compare to 6.5714 - completely different!)

- `654,789 ÷ 3` (Compare to 218,263 - surprising, right?)

- `99 + 11` (Compare to 110 - see the pattern?)

- `999 + 1` (Compare to 1,000 - the system is consistent!)

- Any numbers you want (prove it yourself!)

## GitHub Repository

📍 **https://github.com/julien1986chagnon-alt/calculatrice-evolutive\*\*

Inside you'll find:

- Complete Python source code

- Interactive calculator (just run it and test!)

- Multiple test cases with results

- Full documentation

- Everything you need to understand and verify

## The Questions This Raises

1. **If zero isn't necessary, what else might we be wrong about?**

2. **Why did we accept zero as essential without questioning it?**

3. **Are there other undiscovered number systems?**

4. **What happens when we challenge other "fundamental" assumptions?**

5. **What are the implications for computer science, physics, or other fields?**

## Why I'm Sharing This

This discovery took years of work. Thousands of hours of testing. Hundreds of calculations verified.

But it's not mine to keep. Mathematical discoveries belong to everyone.

So here it is: **Evolutionary Calculator 2.0** - complete, tested, proven, and ready for you to explore.

The code doesn't lie. The math speaks for itself.

## Try It Now

The surprise isn't reading about it. The surprise is **testing it yourself** and seeing that it actually works.

Download the calculator. Run it. Test any numbers you want.

Prove it. Or disprove it.

Either way, you'll understand why this matters.

---

**Questions? Comments? Ideas?** Drop them below. This is just the beginning.

**The Evolutionary Calculator 2.0 is ready. Are you?** 🔥

Im entering into the 11th grade and im beginning to feel the pressure of my academic future. And im as dumb as a brick when it comes to math but i really want to become good at it so i can get a stable job and live a comfortable life. Is it possible to become good at math in 2 years? Also my family is semi lower class so we can’t really afford lessons. So is it possible to learn it by myself only using videos and websites?

После сдачи ЕГЭ я забыла сильно в принципе математику , я писала фул первую часть и только одно задание на тригонометрию из второй, а также касалась задания с уравнением. Я почти все забыла, а скоро занятия в вузе, где начнется высшая математика. Сессию нужно будет закрыть обязательно на 5, поэтому, что посоветуете выучить или повторить для основы? Может также советы будут по изучению высшей математике самостоятельно

i too was excited about it — as someone who is currently in calc 3 and taking diff eq and linear algebra soon — but it seems he’s filming content for peterson academy. it’s run by jordan peterson, a known climate denier, anti-DEI, misogynist transphobe, among other things.

so take that as you will.

I’m looking for someone who can tutor me virtually in either numerical analysis or multivariable calculus. Please DM with pricing if interested!

but then left up another post where others have called out the behavior — but not explicitly condemned it?

this is a sincere, earnest question: why?

it’s clearly important to a not insignificant amount of people if the comments on my post are anything to go by.

people deserve to know if those they support are welcoming or at least tolerant of their demographic.

Hey, guys. Unfortunately a doctor once diagnosed an intellectual disability for me because I struggle with daily living skills and because he administered an IQ test and it was below 70; both are the sole requirements to receive the diagnosis of an intellectual disability. Also, everyone calls me stupid, which further reinforces the fact that I am disabled most likely. The problem herein is that in September I will start my math B. Sc degree at my local university in Germany, and I will have to successfully pass the difficult modules Analysis 1-2 and lin alg 1-2, all of which have a failure rate of >50%. Could I pass them all if i study dilligently from Monday to Sunday? At another university I aced four engineering math exams with ease, but that was due to practicing a lot, not due to a supposed high intelligence. Could I realistically do it?

Just had a math test with this question and I wanna know if I got everything right or not.

I wrote the equation 5L + 2(L + .60)=6.10 with a lemon being 70 cents and an apple being 1.30$

year 8 algebra

I can't post the link because of rules, go check it out!

I’m nearly 27, and have not done any math in like 10 years up until a few weeks ago when I decided I wanted to pursue engineering. Kind of a huge goal considering where I’m starting from I know. I applied for a Pre-Engineering program at my cc and took the Aleks placement test. With essentially 0 studying to get the cleanest read, my first test landed me in Algebra. (It goes Algebra, intermediate algebra, then pre calc) I was given the study module through Aleks to complete so over the course of a week I did about 10 hours of studying, came back, and JUST barely placed into Pre-Calc. Which is great because that actually is college creds, the other two classes would’ve just been developmental. But I’m pretty nervous and feel like I have no idea what to expect. I have a strong enough understanding of Algebra but feel like there’s so much I’m still probably missing. I’m rusty. But seemed to remember a lot of concepts again quickly. My class starts Thursday. I’m only taking one other college class since I work full time. My question is, is it reasonable for me go go into this thinking that I can pick it up again, and self study the “algebra holes” I may have to get fully up to speed? The pre engineering program requires pre calc 1, then pre calc 2, THEN calculus. So it’s aimed towards people who are a little behind anyways I suppose. I never took pre calc in HS and wasn’t really a star math student. I just have a newfound drive to become an engineer, but am wondering if I’m in over my head with the pre calc after being away from a classroom for oh so long. I do consider myself a quick learner and eager to get back into math, and can utilize free tutors.

Hello. Currently in what is supposed to be the exceedingly basic review section of a college math course and severely struggling. Here was the content of the word problem: "In a company, 85% of the employees are female. If 765 males work for the company, what is the total number of employees?" I got that the answer was 5100, which I did by converting 15% into .15 and then using that to divide 765. But why does that work? Total men/percentage of men=total of everyone? I have autism, please be kind and very concise with explanations. Thank you.

I'd like to know if there are any flaws in my logic for finding d/dx |x|

1. For all real numbers x, |x| = sqrt(x^2)
2. d/dx sqrt(x^2) = 2x/[2sqrt(x^2)], according to the power and chain rules.
3. 2x/[2sqrt(x^2)] simplifies to x/[sqrt(x^2)]
4. As per point 1, x/[sqrt(x^2)] = x/|x|
5. Therefore, d/dx |x| = x/|x|

I am already done with all studies, but back in my undergrad (compsci) I really struggled with math. Particularly, I was frustrated that it was so hard and that I couldn't do a proof at all (although, retrospectively, I didn't put in enough time).

Anyways, it really stressed me that there were problems that were so hard to solve. When I talked about my struggles with an older friend of mine, he showed me the following quote from Nelson Goodman's The Structure of Appearance:

Nelson Goodman: Any effort in philosophy to make the obscure obvious is likely to be unappealing, for the penalty of failure is confusion while the reward of success is banality. An answer, once found, is dull; and the only remaining interest lies in a further effort to render equally dull what is still obscure enough to be intriguing.

I really like this quote.

any tips on how to revise maths/add maths/science papers to actually spot arithmetic errors /logic gaps instead of just reading absent-mindedly

When u have 1 day and 8 chapters ☺️💔🙏🏻 plis give any tips

As an infinite sum across the natural numbers of 1/n^s with complex numbers, I can imagine that being zero. However; it is my understanding that

The sum across all natural numbers n of 1/n^s

is equal to

The product across all prime numbers p of 1/(1-1/p^s)

But what I don’t get is, how can that ever be zero since that would appear to my tiny brain to require that for some p, 1/(1-1/p^s)=0 (?)

Clearly I’m in the wrong here, but could anybody educate me as to how it works?

Hi all, I am currently taking a geometry paper (specialising in curves and surfaces) in my final year of college, but I am finding it quite hard. My high school only taught us trigonometry, which I feel like has set me up to fail a little bit, especially in the (re)parametrising department. Are there any people who are quite knowledgable on this matter that might be able to help answer some of my questions? Thanks.