On 27 jul, 03:58, "sttscitr...@tesco.net" <sttscitr...@tesco.net> wrote: [CUT just insults against people who do not inhabit this newsgroup]
This litle envious man: <sttscitr...@tesco.net> cannot put his signature to any single insult from him.
Summarizing, a parrot-fashion psychopath who enjoy anonymity because of their cowardice and incapacity to prevent people from learning these new methods :
1.- Failed to present any precedents on the new simple methods based on the Rational Mean http://mipagina.cantv.net/arithmetic/rmdef.htm Which is the very essence of my first posting, so they were forced to try to rise many other issues and false statments to hide their incapacity and rash comments on this matter.
2.- Failed to present any posting from mine stating: "My methods always yield ALL THE BEST APPROXIMATIONS". They were challenged to do that but failed.
4.- Failed to try to discredit the new extremely simple high-order arithmetical algorithms by stating that they do not produce best approximations (which is of course another lie that anyone can confirm by reading my wepages). The litle envious man are not acquainted with the fact that any root- solving algorithm only need to hold true convergence towards the root-value (according to the standard convergence criteria), so the issue on best approximations is by no means a requisite for being considered as a trully good algorithm. Their ignorance on mathematics does not matter, at all, but their psychopathic behavior and stupidity is really disgusting.
3.- Showed a shameful unethical and psychopathic behavior and huge cheeks, and of course a cowardly tendency to anonymity. So this litle envious man cannot put his signature to his rash comments.
4.- Failed their attempts to try to divert the issue on root-solving to the issue on philology and gramatical use of the phrase : "GENERALIZED CONTINUED FRACTION".
Considering their anonymous parrot-fashion psychopath behavior I am now so worried that they could actually be math teachers, I hope they don't, indeed, but might it be.
So...to the point on the essence of all this thread:
As said in the first posting of this thread, I face and maintain what follows and will always do:
******** DEDICATED TO ALL YOUNG MATH STUDENTS ******************
It is just disturbing to realize these so simple arithmetical methods DO NOT APPEAR in any book on numbers since ancient times up to now:
THESE SO SIMPLE METHODS DO NOT APPEAR IN NEITHER ANY CHINESE, NOR ARAB, NOR INDIAN, NOR WESTERN BOOK, since ancient Babylonian times UP TO NOW!!! AND YOU WILL REALIZE THAT NO MATHEMATICIAN nor any math-historian will be able to deny such a crude fact.
Whatever... There are very good news here, specially, for young people because from now on, by means of simple arithmetic they will be able to learn at secondary school --by means of the most simple arithmetic-- many new simple higher-order algorithms, as well as all those well-known cartesian-infinitesimal algorithms (i.e.: Halley's, Newton's, Bernoulli's and Householder's) which have been considered as superb achievements of the history of mathematics, however, one can see now that all those "superb" achievements can be easily developed by means of the most simple arithmetic.
Young student, be sure there is something very wrong with the whole Cartesian-Infinitesimal scheme we have inherited. Yours is the chance to find new ways on mathematics.
Ing. Domingo Gomez Morin Structural Engineer Caracas Venezuela