Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum
»
Discussions
»
sci.math.*
»
sci.math
Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.
Topic:
   A Trigonomertic function
Replies:
15
Last Post:
Aug 29, 2012 5:19 PM



david
Posts:
127
Registered:
8/3/08


Re:    A Trigonomertic function
Posted:
Aug 28, 2012 8:22 PM


On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 4:01:42 PM UTC4, quasi wrote: > Pubkeybreaker wrote: > > >Mike Terry wrote: > > >>Pubkeybreaker wrote: > > >>>>david wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>Consider the following expression for the given conditions. > > >>>> > > >>>>R = [(sinwD)^2/w + (coswD)^2/w] (1) > > >>>> > > >>>>w is an integer 5 < w < 41 and R is real > 0 > > >>>>and 0 < D < pi/2 > > >>>> > > >>>>Assertion: 0 < R < 1 > > >>>> > > >>>>Any comment about the correctness of the assertion will be > > >>>>appreciated. > > >>>> > > >>>>A numerical example will be very helpful. > > >>>> > > >>>>What happens when w is very very large compared to 41? > > >>> > > >>>Idiot. Don't you ever bother to check these ridiculous > > >>>questions yourself. Your assertion is trivially false. > > >> > > >>The assertion is correct  in fact 1/41 < R < 1/5. > > >> > > >>If w becomes very large, then R = 1/w becomes very small. > > > > > >I assumed that coswd^2/w meant [cos(wD)]^(2/w) and not > > >cos^2(wD)/w > > > > And what Pubkeybreaker assumed is almost certainly what > > the OP intended. > > > > Context: For many years, the OP has been trying for an > > elementary proof of FLT, using nothing more than his > > fragmentary knowledge of > > > > * high school level algebra and trigonometry > > > > * the simplest results of elementary number theory > > > > The OP's queries and assertions are typically flawed from > > the outset based on > > > > * Carelessly incorrect and/or ambiguous notation. > > > > * Unspecified (but needed) restrictions. > > > > * Meaningless overrestrictions having no bearing > > on the truth or falsity of the assertion, thus > > distracting from the essence of the issue. > > > > * An excess of free variables, allowing his claims to be > > easily defeated. > > > > * Perpetual repetition of the same errors made in > > previous queries and assertions, showing no attempt on > > the part of the OP to understand the various pointers > > and corrections received in prior replies. > > > > * Feigned humbleness and politeness hiding an ego which > > allows the OP believe that he can crack FLT just by > > fooling around with high school level algebraic > > relationships, ignoring past recommendations that he > > temporarily put his obsessive quest for FLT on hold, > > and invest time in selfstudy of Elementary Number > > Theory and Abstract Algebra, with an emphasis on the > > developing the ability to read and write correct proofs. > > > > So while in my opinion Pubkeybreaker is often too harsh, in > > this case he's right on target  the OP is an idiot. > > > > quasi



