Two theories on finite systems which converge

The Schramm-Loewner evolution is something I am plowing through at the moment.  It fundamental point is making Ito's calculus optimum for both the driving function and the random curve. Ito's calculus converges the differentials in the probabilistic sense, making sure the differentials meet the probability conditions.  Hence the probability curves converge slightly faster than multiply gains precision and the theory actually results in the definition of multiply as a graph traversal.

The opposite approach is to start with group theory, and the theory of primes.  Here the goal is to make the Lebesque integral accurate by finding the path traversal in which sums are minimally redundant. This approach generate the maximum efficiency of a finite number line by matching 'primes' to the group theory.

Both theories converge, in the Hyperbolic equation, is my conjecture. They both result in a finite gap between angles that solve the equation. The Schramm-Loewner solution defines the global function that directs the path traversal as a minimization problem, equivalent to finding the polynomial of the entropy function.  The group theory approach generates the finite mixed prime log network that directs the path traversal, equivalent to finding the generalized Shannon encoding for a finite polynomial entropy function.

The group theory assumes two dual finite log networks, one inside the curvature of convergence, and one outside.  They have to log add out to almost zero, meeting the differential condition. The Schramm version generate the cumulative probability function about the curvature of divergence, it has to sum to almost one, meeting the integral condition. One maximizes the probability function the other minimizes the redundancy function.  When they meet we have the theory of everything.

In the hyperbolic form, the entropy function appears as a polynomial function on the angle, and its second derivative determines the motion of the sphere needed to maintain Lebesque.

I mostly jug blog about events.

My readers can tell that I have fun with the edges of the theory, but almost every thing I do is s cutnpaste from the work of the great mathematicians we have working the problem.  My job is pattern matching, I know the convergence issues across thoeries, but none of the theories are my own.