Standard crank division by zero thread - Page 56

chappy · 2012-12-17, 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

I won every debate here, so I disagree.

Ding Ding Ding! Tell him what he's won Johnny!

Don Blazys · 2012-12-17, 04:18

Quoting "rogue",

Quote:

That is your (and only your) opinion. Nobody else in this thread is
supporting your proof. They clearly understand points that I have
made that you are missing.

That's okay.

On the issue of my proof, we can all have our own "opinions".
We can all agree to disagree, sit in a circle and sing "Kumbaya".

The proof is only of secondary importance anyway, so let's put
it aside for now and focus on the far more important issue of
the axioms and Hilberts second problem.

Now, you already answered this question, so you need not reply.

As for the rest of you, if you want to convince yourselves that
Peano's symmetry axiom of equality, and the related substitution
axiom of equality are badly flawed, then just answer either yes
or no to the following simple question that I have asked so many
times before and will continue to ask until we have an absolutely
overwhelming consensus one way or the other. Here it is yet again.

Given the identity:

$\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)*c^{3}=T*\left(\frac{c}{T}\right)^{\frac{\frac{3*\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}{\frac{\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}}$

can we substitute

$\left(\frac{c}{c}\right)$ for $\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)$ ?

"LaurV" says:

Quote:

Yes.

"Rajula" says:

Quote:

Yes or no.

Paul Leyland says:

Quote:

No.

Mark Rodenkirch says:

Quote:

No.

Don Blazys says:

Quote:

No.

Wouldn't you know it, all three mathematicians who
are not hiding behind fake names say No!

And thus, the consensus is leaning in the direction
that those axioms are indeed badly flawed!

If you have any courage, then simply answer
yes or no without any commentary whatsoever.

Dubslow · 2012-12-17, 07:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

Given the identity:

$\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)*c^{3}=T*\left(\frac{c}{T}\right)^{\frac{\frac{3*\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}{\frac{\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}}$

can we substitute

$\left(\frac{c}{c}\right)$ for $\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)$ ?

No, as is well established.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

And thus, the consensus is leaning in the direction
that those axioms are indeed badly flawed!

This does not follow from the previous answer being no.

Don Blazys · 2012-12-17, 09:59

Quoting "Dubslow":

Quote:

No...

Thank you "Dubslow".

I'm going on Christmas vacation, and will be back after New Years
to discuss the result of this poll.

As for the rest of you, if you want to convince yourselves that
Peano's symmetry axiom of equality, and the related substitution
axiom of equality are badly flawed, then just answer either yes
or no to the following simple question that I have asked so many
times before and will continue to ask until we have an absolutely
overwhelming consensus one way or the other. Here it is yet again.

Given the identity:

$\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)*c^{3}=T*\left(\frac{c}{T}\right)^{\frac{\frac{3*\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}{\frac{\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}}$

can we substitute

$\left(\frac{c}{c}\right)$ for $\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)$ ?

"LaurV" says:

Quote:

Yes.

"Rajula" says:

Quote:

Yes or no.

Paul Leyland says:

Quote:

No.

Mark Rodenkirch says:

Quote:

No...

Don Blazys says:

Quote:

No.

"Dubslow" says:

Quote:

No...

If you have any courage, then please simply answer
yes or no without any commentary whatsoever.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all of you.

Don.

akruppa · 2012-12-17, 10:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

Quoting "akruppa".

I couldn't care less what you think.

And yet here you are, still trying to find someone to keep you company in your phantasy world where you're a math genius. So now it's down to proof-by-poll and "it's the axioms of math that are all wrong, not I"?

Don Blazys · 2012-12-17, 12:05

Quoting "akruppa":

Quote:

And yet here you are, still trying to find someone to keep you
company in your phantasy world where you're a math genius.
So now it's down to proof-by-poll and "it's the axioms of math
that are all wrong, not I"?

This are my topics on my thread, and clearly I've got plenty of
"company" posting on it! Including you!

If you don't like this thread, then don't post on it! (Simple eh?)
Or better yet, just close it!

I don't waste my time posting on threads that are
"insignificant", and neither should you or anyone else.

Note that I never post on any of your threads!

Anyway, let's get "back on topic".

Just answer either yes or no to the following simple question that
I have asked so many times before and will continue to ask until
we have an absolutely overwhelming consensus one way or the other.

Here it is yet again.

Given the identity:

$\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)*c^{3}=T*\left(\frac{c}{T}\right)^{\frac{\frac{3*\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}{\frac{\ln(c)}{\ln(T)}-1}}$

can we substitute

$\left(\frac{c}{c}\right)$ for $\left(\frac{T}{T}\right)$ ?

"LaurV" says:

Quote:

Yes.

"Rajula" says:

Quote:

Yes or no.

Paul Leyland says:

Quote:

No.

Mark Rodenkirch says:

Quote:

No...

Don Blazys says:

Quote:

No.

"Dubslow" says:

Quote:

No...

If you have any courage, then please simply answer
yes or no without any commentary whatsoever.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all of you.

Don.

NBtarheel_33 · 2012-12-17, 13:34

Don, you may have already mentioned this somewhere up the thread, but what are the domains of c and T? All reals? Integers? Nonnegative integers? This question needs to be settled before we can really consider the question that you have set here.

rogue · 2012-12-17, 13:52

Don, my current point of contention with your proof has nothing to do with the "identity" that you have repeated numerous times in the past few days.

axn · 2012-12-17, 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

If you don't like this thread, <snip> just close it!

I second this motion. I see no reason whatsoever to continue in circles. No progress is being made.

PS:- For those of you who haven't gotten their SIWOTI fix yet, please wait till the next crank du jour. Thanks.

Puzzle-Peter · 2012-12-17, 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogue

BTW, would you mind pointing those professors to this thread? None of them will support you after they read through it.

Better point Underwood Dudley to this thread, he might even publish parts of it

Dubslow · 2012-12-17, 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

If you don't like this thread, then don't post on it! (Simple eh?)
Or better yet, just close it!

He may not be very good at mathematics, but this is great advice. (IMO, this thread should have been closed a long time ago.)

2012-12-17, 13:34	#612
NBtarheel_33 "Nathan" Jul 2008 Maryland, USA 5·223 Posts	Domains of c and T? Don, you may have already mentioned this somewhere up the thread, but what are the domains of c and T? All reals? Integers? Nonnegative integers? This question needs to be settled before we can really consider the question that you have set here.

2012-12-17, 13:52	#613
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 2×3²×353 Posts	Don, my current point of contention with your proof has nothing to do with the "identity" that you have repeated numerous times in the past few days. Last fiddled with by rogue on 2012-12-17 at 13:53

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Do-it-yourself, crank, mersenne prediction thread.	Uncwilly	Miscellaneous Math	85	2017-12-10 16:03
non-standard sieve	req	Math	4	2011-12-06 04:17
Crank Emoticon	Mini-Geek	Forum Feedback	21	2007-03-06 19:21
Remove my thread from the Crank Forum	amateurII	Miscellaneous Math	40	2005-12-21 09:42
Standard Deviation Problem	jinydu	Puzzles	5	2004-01-10 02:12