Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Why do we need those real non-constructible numbers?
Replies: 68   Last Post: Dec 11, 2017 1:42 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 bassam king karzeddin Posts: 2,182 Registered: 8/22/16
Re: Why do we need those real non-constructible numbers?
Posted: Nov 9, 2017 2:38 AM

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 1:45:21 PM UTC+3, WM wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 8. November 2017 10:06:49 UTC+1 schrieb bassam king karzeddin:
> > On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 12:17:08 PM UTC+3, WM wrote:
> > > Am Montag, 6. November 2017 08:21:29 UTC+1 schrieb bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > Why do we really need those real non-constructible numbers, if it is impossible to express them exactly except only by constructible numbers or as meaningless notation in mind only?
> > >
> > > Neither does anyone need them nor can anyone use them. At least not in mathematics. The only occupation for such non-existing creatures is matheology.

>
>

I wrote:
> > So great that you recognize those real irrational algebraic and transcendental numbers (which are not constructible numbers) as being non-existing creatures
>
WM wrote:
> I meant chiefly such numbers that have not any chance to be expressed or pointed to. Irrational algebraic or transcendental numbers have at least a finite definition. When I wrote the first edition of my book "Mathematik für die ersten Semester", 4th ed., De Gruyter, Berlin 2015 I seriously considered whether I should call these objects numbers because you never can describe their exact value in what we call our numeral system, i.e., decimal system. But that would have raised too much confusion because most other teachers of mathematics would call these objects numbers. Therefore I decided to join them. After all these limits have one and only one value. Although it is not describable by decimals, we can describe them in systems based on irrational bases. But I understand fully that you are not happy with calling them numbers.
>
> Regards, WM

A human definition or decision can't create any existing number, only a chosen unity can create any imaginable and existing number and those real numbers known as algebraic or transcendental numbers are impossible therefore to be created from the chosen unity, thus non-existing and purely fictional numbers as a result of human mathematical brain fart numbers

I have already provided so easy numerical refutation based on integer analysis that proves also the true polynomials are only those Diophantine Eqns. which have integer solution or no solution

Those can't be described exactly by decimal or anything else since they are truly pure fictions of human mind fart

However, the deception of (Pi) being a real number was mainly the oldest historical reason for all sources of fictional mathematics, since the visible circle we do see before our eyes is actually a regular constructible polygon with many sides that we can't distinguish, exactly the same way we do approximate it to our practical needs, whereas the absolute (Pi) exists exactly in the perfect circle that doesn't exist in any imaginable reality

Had the Greek recognized this simplest fact, then never they would have raised their three famous impossible constructions for sure

And finally, it doesn't any matter who is happy or sad in relation to what is the ultimate truth would like like

See simply, the trans. numbers are the solution of rational polynomials that don't exist, thus non-existing numbers for sure, (noted also recently by AP)

Regards

Bassam King Karzeddin
Nov. 9th, 2017

Date Subject Author
11/6/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/6/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/8/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/8/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/8/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/8/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/8/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/8/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/8/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/9/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/9/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
11/9/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/9/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/9/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/13/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/14/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/14/17 genmailus@gmail.com
11/14/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/14/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/6/17 Stephen G. Giannoni
11/6/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
11/7/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/9/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
11/8/17 jsavard@ecn.ab.ca
11/8/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/8/17 Jim Burns
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/8/17 Jan Burse
11/8/17 Dan Christensen
11/8/17 Dan Christensen
11/8/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/8/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/8/17 bursejan@gmail.com
11/8/17 Jan Burse
11/8/17 Jan Burse
11/11/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/11/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/9/17 Tucsondrew@me.com
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/8/17 Dan Christensen
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/9/17 Tucsondrew@me.com
11/9/17 Dan Christensen
11/9/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/9/17 Dan Christensen
11/10/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/10/17 Dan Christensen
11/11/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/11/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
11/11/17 wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de
11/8/17 Peter Percival
11/11/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/11/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
11/15/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/15/17 Dan Christensen
11/15/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
11/27/17 bassam king karzeddin
11/29/17 rebatchelor2@gmail.com
11/30/17 bassam king karzeddin
12/1/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
12/2/17 bassam king karzeddin
12/4/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
12/6/17 bassam king karzeddin
12/9/17 bassam king karzeddin
12/11/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com