mersenneforum.org A tentative question
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2020-07-16, 15:01   #34
paulunderwood

Sep 2002
Database er0rr

67138 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by devarajkandadai Ok so I have been hasty.here is a summary of my contributions to number theory: Euler's generalization of Fermat's theorem- a further generalization (ISSN #1550 3747- Hawaii international conference on mathematics and statistics-2004) The theorem: let f(x) = a^x + c where a belongs N and is fixed, c belongs to Z and is fixed and x belongs to N. Then a^(x +k*f(x)) + c is congruent to 0 (mod f(x)). Here k belongs to N. Proof is based on Taylor's theorem.
What does Taylor's Theorem have to do with this? Please elaborate.

Last fiddled with by paulunderwood on 2020-07-16 at 15:02

2020-07-18, 09:04   #35

May 2004

4748 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by paulunderwood What does Taylor's Theorem have to do with this? Please elaborate.
Recall that Taylor's theorem can be stated as
f(x+h) =f(x) + hf'(x)..h^2/2!f''(x)......
Just replace h by f(x) and you get the required proof.

2020-07-18, 09:23   #36
paulunderwood

Sep 2002
Database er0rr

3·11·107 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by devarajkandadai Recall that Taylor's theorem can be stated as f(x+h) =f(x) + hf'(x)..h^2/2!f''(x)...... Just replace h by f(x) and you get the required proof.
I still don't see it. Taylor's Theorem is defined for real numbers. You state x is in N. What is the derivative of f(x)? Can you give the first three terms of f(x+h)?

2020-07-19, 00:01   #37
ewmayer
2ω=0

Sep 2002
República de California

2×5,791 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by kriesel I suggest that a moderator edit out the deliberate nastiness from the thread.
The crap-flinging should've been nipped in the bud - now it's way too much work to filter the small amount of useful content after post #3. But hey, any fellow mod looking for an Augean-stables-like challenge is welcome to it.

2020-07-21, 13:46   #38
R.D. Silverman

Nov 2003

1D2416 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by paulunderwood I still don't see it. Taylor's Theorem is defined for real numbers. You state x is in N. What is the derivative of f(x)? Can you give the first three terms of f(x+h)?

Of course the O.P. fails to respond to the question.
(about his function being nowhere differentiable).
He would have to acknowledge that his claimed theorem is false
and that the so-called proof is phony.

Noone here seems to think that the failure to respond is rude.

Based on the lack of responses it seems that it is OK to make a
false claim then run away and hide when asked a question about that
claim. Noone has commented on his lack of response.

Further, while I am reluctant to say the word 'plagiarism', I will
note that "paulunderwood" failed to give propper attribution
to the source of his comment/question (made above).
I suggested in a PM to him that the claimed use of Taylor's theorem
was erroneous prior to his public post. He failed to give attribution.

As for why the O.P. failed to respond I can only guess:

Derivatives do not exist so the claim of a proof by Taylor's theorem is phony.

Does anyone here have any academic integrity?

Trolls and cranks are OK. Failure to respond to polite questions is OK.
Plagiarism is OK. But if I criticize a troll you all shout "rude".
Some moderator with too much power will ban someone over the use
of 'STFU', but ignore repeated crank posts and trolling as well
as lack of any kind of technical integrity.
[Note: See below!!!!]

Finally, the O.P. asked in a misc math "Group Theory" thread why there was no
group theory discussion. This is a simple, innocent discussion.
Ernst, in a typical moderator hypocritical post then wrote:

"Why - you want to give yourself a chance to look like an idiot in an exciting new thread?
Seriously, dude, just shut up already. Here, I'll help you by giving you a nice 7-day timeout."

In the original thread, Ernst also said:
"crap-flinging should've been nipped in the bud".

But I suppose that since he is a moderator it is OK for him to call the OP an idiot.
It is OK for him to tell the OP to shut up. It is OK for him to call the original thread
"crap flinging".

And in this instance all the OP did was to ask an innocent question! And for that he got banned!???
He did not get banned for his repeated (over many years) trolling false claims in the math forum, but for simply
asking a question in misc. math.

Can you say "abuse of moderator power"?? Can you say "hypocrite"???
Can you say "screwed up priorities"??? Can you say "plagiarism"???

2020-07-21, 14:15   #39
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

100011111010112 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman Noone here seems to think that the failure to respond is rude. Based on the lack of responses it seems that it is OK to make a false claim then run away and hide when asked a question about that claim. Noone has commented on his lack of response.
If the OP does not respond to answers, then everyone else should sit on their hands.
This is an internet forum, not a face to face conversation. In a face to face conversation not responding might be rude. On a forum, there can be many reasons not to respond.

So, do you want trolls dealt with or not? You say that the mods have ignored it, then that they acted to harshly (this is the same person that you identified as a troll).

You can criticize trolls, but you must do so civilly. The language used, whether in words or initials should be appropriate for a high school classroom.

No one is forcing you to be here. You it is your choice. If you want to remain here and be active, you need to watch your language. You have been warned and banned before. Therefore you get less slack as a repeat offender. You are not ignorant of the need for civility.

2020-07-21, 15:01   #40
R.D. Silverman

Nov 2003

22·5·373 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly If the OP does not respond to answers, then everyone else should sit on their hands. This is an internet forum, not a face to face conversation. In a face to face conversation not responding might be rude. On a forum, there can be many reasons not to respond.
When someone makes a bold claim and another person then asks for clarification
the OP should be obligated to respond. I call that common courtesy. You claim
that people here should be courteous.

You are hiding behind what is really going on. The OP posted a bold faced lie
and then deliberately ignored a question because he had no valid response. Yet you
excuse the behavior as possibly "having many reasons not to answer".

Quote:
 So, do you want trolls dealt with or not? You say that the mods have ignored it, then that they acted to harshly (this is the same person that you identified as a troll).
Ernst acted overly harshly not in response to a troll post, but rather to a reasonable question. And he used similar language for which I am criticized. And noone said
a thing about it. It is hypocricy of the worst kind.

Quote:
 You can criticize trolls, but you must do so civilly. The language used, whether in words or initials should be appropriate for a high school classroom.
You obviously have limited experience in high school classrooms. You also seem
more concerned about superficial language than the content of troll posts and about

Quote:
 No one is forcing you to be here. You it is your choice. If you want to remain here and be active, you need to watch your language. You have been warned and banned before. Therefore you get less slack as a repeat offender. You are not ignorant of the need for civility.
I agree about the civility. The issue is the question: what is civility? I claim
trolling and crank posts and failure to respond is highly uncivil. You disagree.
You claim "STFU" is uncivil. I claim that it is mere hyperbole. I claim that
calling someone "clueless" is an appropriate response to repeated false posts
in combination with a deliberate unwillingness to learn or study.

And I see that you totally ignored my comments about plagiarism. You seem to
think that it is OK as implied by your silence.

And you ignored my comments about Ernst's abuse of power and the lack of

I call this hypocricy on your part. You see what you want to see and ignore the rest.

As for "forcing you to be here" we've all heard that argument before. i.e. "our country.
love it or leave it. You are not forced to be here". It is a crock.

Silence in response to trolling only gives consent. And it encourages
further trolling. And failure to respond allows less knowledgeable people to believe
that nonsense claims might be true.

You seem to want this forum to be a "feel good social club" and do not seem to care
about any kind of academic integrity. I think it stinks. "Feel good" polite responses
to trolls and cranks DO NOT WORK. They keep offending. But you seem to think
it is OK.

Get the trolls and cranks out of this sub-forum and demand that they only post
in the misc math or blogorrhea forums.

 2020-07-21, 15:21 #41 Xyzzy     "Mike" Aug 2002 11111000001102 Posts Bob: Grow up and stop acting like a petulant child. The world is not perfect or fair. This forum isn't either. You lack discipline and class. Post one more time in a manner that is not civil and you will be banned forever. And this time there will be no second/third/fourth/etc. chance. F O R E V E R Over the years you have most likely alienated yourself from colleagues, friends and family with your aberrant behavior. Do you want to lose what you have here as well? You can change how you act. You can change the way you are. It takes time but it can be done. It requires discipline. Fake it until you make it. If you want help everyone here will bend over backwards to assist you. https://fablesofaesop.com/the-tree-and-the-reed.html
2020-07-21, 15:29   #42
S485122

Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

33×61 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman ... Get the trolls and cranks out of this sub-forum and demand that they only post in the misc math or blogorrhea forums.
Which, as I understood it, was a deal between the moderators and you. As I understand it, this thread should have been moved to the Misc. sub-forum after post #1 (or 3 if no moderator wanted to look into the content of post #1.)

Jacob

Last fiddled with by S485122 on 2020-07-21 at 15:32 Reason: unnecessary to expound on the forum rules after Mike's post

 2020-07-21, 19:06 #43 Dr Sardonicus     Feb 2017 Nowhere 10000010010102 Posts I was under the impression that not responding to posts by trolls was entirely appropriate. I have, in fact, been reminded of this by other Forumites when unable to resist the temptation to respond to our resident trolls from time to time, and I have been able to return the favor occasionally. One of the smilies was part of said reminders, Last fiddled with by Dr Sardonicus on 2020-07-21 at 19:10 Reason: Adding a bit; rephrasing
2020-07-21, 20:08   #44
ryanp

Jun 2012
Boulder, CO

13×19 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman failed to give propper attribution
Uh oh. What do I have to do with all this?