Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Axiom mistakes of Euclidean Plane Geometry #1 Uni-textbook 6th ed.:
TRUE CALCULUS; without the phony limit concept

Replies: 10   Last Post: Jun 23, 2013 3:30 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
archimede plutanium

Posts: 101
Registered: 5/9/12
Re: Libelows Clown ,KIng of Dishwashers plutonium Lacks the Manhood,
the Honesty to face his Miserable Life: Stil Desperate for Attention away
from his Failed Life.

Posted: Jun 19, 2013 6:08 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 5:37:33 PM UTC-4:30, plutanium....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 1:31:07 PM UTC-4:30, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>

> > Alright I am happy with the High School textbook
>
>
>
> And high school level is still above your head, you worthless fuck.
>
>
>
>
>
> of 10 pages long and
>

> >
>
> > now will write the University or College textbook.
>
>
>
> So you have failed at everything, you have no degree, no friends, and
>
> now you want to go on with this charade to BS yourself otherwise.
>
>
>
> Good deal, there i8s a shortage of toilet paper on the market, asshole.
>
>
>
> I want both texts
>

> >
>
> > consolidated into one book.
>
>
>
> That way people can not read one book, instead of two.
>
>
>
> The Uni text should be 40 pages or less,
>

> >
>
> > so the entire text is 50 pages or less.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Too many errors and mistakes are taught both to the High School and
>
> >
>
> > University students. The three largest and gravest errors are these
>
> >
>
> > three:
>
> >
>
>
>
> 0) You were born. Biggest waste possible --put a remedy to it, asshole.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> > 1) no borderline between finite and infinity, thus prompting shoddy
>
> >
>
> > mathematicians to impose a limit concept, a utterly fake and phony
>
> >
>
> > concept which may allow these shoddy mathematicians to talk about
>
> >
>
> > Calculus, even though they fail to know and understand true calculus
>
> >
>
>
>
> Go hang yourself, you worthless fuck. Tell me, you waste-of-a-fucking
>
> life, how this concept is phony.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> > 2) never a correction of the mistakes of the axioms of Euclidean
>
> >
>
> > geometry and its modern day revision as that of the Hilbert axioms
>
>
>
> An axiom cannot be incorrect, you imbecile. Learn some basic concepts before
>
> dumping your diarrhea, or, even better, hang yourself and stop dumping your misery on others here.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > 3) failure to realize the derivative must be a part of the actual
>
> >
>
> > function graph and not a separate independent entity
>
>
>
> Failure to realize you're a failure from A to Z, LOSER.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > This college and university text of True Calculus addresses those
>
> >
>
> > major mistakes and flaws of Calculus and teaches the student what
>
> >
>
> > Calculus truly is.
>
>
>
> If you had any manhood, you would not be dumping this on us. If you had anything
>
>
>
> of real value, you would have published it. But you have no guts, no manhood,
>
>
>
> no honesty to face up to the complete failure your life is.
>
>
>
>
>
> This book is the very best book written on Calculus
>

> >
>
> > since Leibniz and Newton discovered the Calculus circa 1684 (Nova
>
> >
>
> > methodus) and 1671 (Methodus Fluxionum) respectively.
>
>
>
> Yes, because you said so, right, asshole? Find me _one_ other person
>
>
>
> who agrees with you. LOSER.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I start this Uni text where I left off with the HS (High School) text,
>
>
>
> None of which anyone gives a FUCK about.
>
>
>

> >
>
> > talking about the errors and mistakes of the Euclidean Plane Geometry
>
> >
>
> > axioms.
>
>
>
> Error in " a axiom"? What an imbecile. Shows you lack the basic understanding
>
>
>
> of everything.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Let us focus on two axioms of Euclidean Plane Geometry and as stated
>
> >
>
> > in Hilbert's vast revision of those axioms.
>
>
>
> Let you go fuck yourself.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Points of geometry
>
> >
>
>
>
> Point of your life? None. Face up to it, be a man for once inb your life.
>

> >
>
> >
>
> > Lines and line segments of geometry
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > In the Hilbert axioms of geometry, and all other axiom sets, they had
>
> >
>
> > that a point has no length, no width, no depth, yet they also had that
>
> >
>
> > a line or line segment has no width, no depth, but does have length.
>
>
>
> False. But your whole layout is based on falsehoods and lies. Just like
>
>
>
> your entire life.
>
>
>

> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Neither Hilbert nor all the mathematicians after Hilbert, realized
>
> >
>
> > that their axioms of line and line segment and point were
>
> >
>
> > contradictory, for you cannot have a line with length composed of
>
> >
>
> > points with no length.
>
>
>
> False. Maybe if you read beyond a paragraph on Wikipedia and if you were not an imbecile..... Maybe.
>
>
>
>
>

> >To escape that logical contradiction,
>
>
>
> That you have made up, with no basis...
>
>
>
>
>
> you must
>

> >
>
> > impose the idea that length comes about by the concept of empty space
>
> >
>
> > between points, so that a line is composed of not just points but of
>
> >
>
> > points with empty space between successive points.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > So to correct Hilbert we have this:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > point axiom: a point has no length, no width, no depth
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > line axiom: a line or line segment is composed of successive points
>
> >
>
> > with empty space between the points and the line has no width, no
>
> >
>
> > depth, but has length due to the summation of the empty spaces
>
>
>
> Yes! You solved the problem! . Empty space has area and volume. Brilliant!
>

> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Now the sloppy and shoddy mathematicians reconciled the line having
>
> >
>
> > length by considering the idea of the enormous density of points that
>
> >
>
> > compose a line or line segment.
>
>
>
> False. Keep up the lie, asshole.
>
>
>
>
>

> > Their flawed reasoning
>
>
>
> The one you made up, to cover the failure your life is.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> was that if the
>

> >
>
> > density of points with no length, no width, no depth if that enormous
>
> >
>
> > density went into composing a line or line segment that it would have
>
> >
>
> > length due to that density. But then, if you make a silly arguement of
>
> >
>
> > density for length, then there is no stopping you from saying the line
>
> >
>
> > or line segment has width and depth due to density of points.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > So, in one fell swoop, we find the Euclidean Plane Geometry axioms
>
> >
>
> > with its Hilbert revision as totally flawed and need of major repair.
>
>
>
> One fell swoop: no major paradoxes, tremendous mathematical development;
>
>
>
> both theoretical and applied. A failure you never bothered described,
>
>
>
> because you lack the manhood . Keep hiding in your bubble, you waste-of-
>
>
>
> a fucking life.
>
>
>
>
>

> >
>
> > We find the repair to be that the axioms of geometry need to have
>
> >
>
> > points as successive points with empty space in between successive
>
> >
>
> > points. Much like the Integers of mathematics are successive points as
>
> >
>
> > that of 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 then 5, etc. So between 1 and 2 is
>
> >
>
> > empty space and a line that is 5 units long, has length, not because
>
> >
>
> > it has number points of 0,1,2,3,4,5, but because it has those empty
>
> >
>
> > spaces between 0 and 1 then 1 and 2, etc. In this text of True
>
> >
>
> > Calculus, the integers are too large of empty space, so in this text
>
> >
>
> > we find that successive number points of 1*10^-603 fits perfectly for
>
> >
>
> > mathematics.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > So we start this Calculus text for college and university students,
>
>
>
>
>
> Which no one will ever read. Kill yourself, you waste-of-a-fucking-life,
>
>
>
> or at least get the fuck out of sci.math so people can discuss actual
>
>
>
> Mathematics.
>
>
>

> >
>
> > True Calculus by correcting a major error and flaw of Old Math of
>
> >
>
> > their Euclidean Geometry axioms. It is a major flaw for it prevents us
>
> >
>
> > from achieving or attaining True Calculus, and is such a sad flaw that
>
> >
>
> > it encourages the retention of the phony and fake limit concept. When
>
> >
>
> > you have Fake Calculus, you need textbooks that are hundreds of pages
>
> >
>
> > long, for most college texts on Calculus such as Strang, Stewart,
>
> >
>
> > Fisher & Ziebur, Ellis & Gulick are approaching or exceeding 700
>
> >
>
> > pages, because they have to devote most of their time on the phony
>
> >
>
> > limit concept. When you have True Calculus, it can be explained and
>
> >
>
> > done with in 10 pages. Fake Calculus takes about 700 pages, and True
>
> >
>
> > Calculus takes but 10 pages.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > More than 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google
>
> >
>
> > newsgroups author search archive from May 2012 to May 2013. Drexel
>
> >
>
> > University's Math Forum has done a far better job and many of those
>
> >
>
> > missing Google posts can be seen here:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thanks to Google for returning the option of crossposting, for
>
> >
>
> > yesterday, 18 June 2013 Google allowed only singular newsgroups and no
>
> >
>
> > crossposting.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Archimedes Plutonium
>
> >
>
> > http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
>
> >
>
> > whole entire Universe is just one big atom
>
> >
>
> > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies



Date Subject Author
6/19/13
Read Axiom mistakes of Euclidean Plane Geometry #1 Uni-textbook 6th ed.:
TRUE CALCULUS; without the phony limit concept
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/19/13
Read in one fell swoop
Brian Q. Hutchings
6/19/13
Read Re: in one fell swoop
Virgil
6/19/13
Read Re: in one fell swoop
Brian Q. Hutchings
6/23/13
Read SwOOsHtmByAshoeCo
Brian Q. Hutchings
6/19/13
Read Re: Libelows Clown ,KIng of Dishwashers plutonium Lacks the Manhood,
the Honesty to face his Miserable Life: Stil Desperate for Attention away
from his Failed Life.
archimede plutanium
6/19/13
Read Re: Libelows Clown ,KIng of Dishwashers plutonium Lacks the Manhood,
the Honesty to face his Miserable Life: Stil Desperate for Attention away
from his Failed Life.
archimede plutanium
6/19/13
Read Re: Libelows Clown ,KIng of Dishwashers plutonium Lacks the Manhood,
the Honesty to face his Miserable Life: Stil Desperate for Attention away
from his Failed Life.
archimede plutanium
6/19/13
Read Re: Libelows Clown ,KIng of Dishwashers plutonium Lacks the Manhood,
the Honesty to face his Miserable Life: Stil Desperate for Attention away
from his Failed Life.
archimede plutanium
6/19/13
Read Re: Libelows Clown ,KIng of Dishwashers plutonium Lacks the Manhood,
the Honesty to face his Miserable Life: Stil Desperate for Attention away
from his Failed Life.
archimede plutanium
6/19/13
Read Re: Libelows Clown ,KIng of Dishwashers plutonium Lacks the Manhood,
the Honesty to face his Miserable Life: Stil Desperate for Attention away
from his Failed Life.
archimede plutanium

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.