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: John Gabriel's Thread on Mathematics.
Replies: 231   Last Post: Mar 22, 2014 9:23 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Wizard-Of-Oz Posts: 404 Registered: 12/28/13
Re: John Gabriel's Thread on Mathematics.
Posted: Feb 23, 2014 5:26 AM

John Gabriel <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote in

> On Sunday, 23 February 2014 11:34:57 UTC+2, Wizard-Of-Oz wrote:
>> John Gabriel <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote in
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> > On Sunday, 23 February 2014 10:05:33 UTC+2, Moron-Of-Oz wrote:
>>
>> >> John Gabriel <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote in
>>
>>
>> >> > On Sunday, 23 February 2014 08:59:57 UTC+2, Wizard-Of-Oz wrote:
>>
>> >> >> John Gabriel <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote in
>>
>>
>> >> >> http://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/math/4507-0-999-equal-
one
>> >> >> -
>>
>> 56
>>

>> >> >> 0.html#post27297
>>
>> >
>>
>> >> Yes it is. I note that you did not point out any errors in the
>> >> above

>>
>> >
>>
>> > I pointed out the errors, but you didn't understand them. I can't
>> > help

>>
>> > you there.
>>
>>
>>
>> I made no errors, you pointed none out
>>
>>
>>

>> >> Neither did I above. Yet you claim it is not correct.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Of course you did.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nope
>>
>>
>>

>> > You divided by 0 when you are not allowed to divide
>>
>> > by 0 in Cauchy's Kludge. One of the errors I pointed out to you.
>> > See

>>
>> > error no. 3.
>>
>>
>>
>> I did not do that at all. Point out the line where there is a
>> division

>
>>
>> by zero. Funny, you've snipped all the lines where I show you wrong.
>>
>>
>>

>> >> As can old calculus. Nothing new there.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I showed it's not possible and you continue to be so obtuse.
>>
>>
>>
>> No .. you're just fooling yourself, but not anyone else
>>
>>
>>

>> >> There is no difference in the 'kludges'. In both cases we rewrite
>>
>> >> the function and then substitute h=0 or m=n=0 accordingly when t
> here
>>
>> >> is no division by h or m, n
>>
>> >
>>
>> > You should pay more attention to detail.
>>
>>
>>
>> I did
>>
>>
>>

>> >> That's what I said. So you claim what I said is nonsense and then
>>
>> >> agree with it. Typical of a troll.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Are you sure? Go back and read what I said.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes. I said the only difference was the change in pronumeral names
>>
>> which is insignificant. You said that was nonsense and the the
>>
>> pronumeral names had nothing to do with it. So you argreed with what
>>
>> you claimed was nonsense.
>>
>>
>>

>> >> It is identical when m = 0
>>
>> >
>>
>> > m is never equal to 0 in the New Calculus difference quotient
>> > unless

>>
>> > it has been simplified.
>>
>>
>>
>> And then it is identical. Just like in the old calculus. Nothing
>> new
>>
>>
>>

>> >> In fact Cauchy's definition cannot be translated to the New
>>
>> >> Calculus.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >> Noone said that you do. That's your own stupid idea.
>>
>>
>>
>> You are dishonestly quoting me out of context. Typical troll
>> behaviour
>>
>>
>>

>> > You implied it.
>>
>>
>>
>> No.
>>
>>
>>
>> I did not at all imply that one should set h = (m+n), that was your
>>
>> idea, not mine.
>>
>>
>>

>> >Troll!
>>
>>
>>
>> Indeed you are
>>
>>
>>

>> >> So you just plagiarised the mean value theorum and claimed it as
>> >> your

>>
>> >> own. Nice of you to admit it.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Actually no. The mean value theorem is not the same as the secant
>>
>> > theorem, but nice try!!
>>
>>
>>
>> You plagiarised both then. Regardless, you offer nothing new.
>>
>>
>>

>> >> You do not allow a differential at a point of inflection, so there
>>
>> >> are fewer places your method can supposedly work.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Of course not. The New Calculus is sound.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is not new
>>
>>
>>

>> > There is no derivative (not
>>
>> > differential idiot!) at an inflection point
>>
>>
>>
>> There is a derivative. And your formula gives one, but you don't
>> allow

>
>>
>> it.
>>
>>
>>

>> > because no tangent line
>>
>> > can be constructed there.
>>
>>
>>
>> One doe not need a tangent line for a derivative
>>
>>
>>

>> >> And having both m and n is more complex than just having h. You
>> >> get

>>
>> >> the same answers that the 'old' calculus gives, so there is
>> >> nothing

>>
>> >> new.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > For a simpleton like you, it makes no difference.
>>
>>
>>
>> There is nothing new
>>
>>
>>

>> > If you read my opening comment, you would have realised it stated
>> > that

>>
>> > I do not welcome trolls.
>>
>>
>>
>> YOU are the troll, not me. As is evidenced be your dishonest
>> snipping
>>
>> and quoting out of context
>>
>>
>>

>> > For other simpletons, here is a detailed comparison of the
>>
>> > transformations involved:
>>
>>
>>

>> > http://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/math/4507-0-999-equal-one-
>>
>> 563.html#post27341
>>
>>
>>
>> So you show that your new calculus is nothing more or less than the
>> mean

>
>>
>> value theorum. Nothing new at all. You've just stolen an old idea
>> and

>
>>
>> changed a few pronumerals (which, as we agree, makes no difference)
>>
>>
>>
>> And I showed that setting m = 0 in your new calculus gives the old
>>
>> calculus, and as the new calculus requires you setting m=n=0 effectiv

> ely
>>
>> there is no difference between them.
>>
>>
>>
>> \

>
> You saying it ain't so, does not make it true.

The facts do

> Therefore, unless you
> can prove me wrong, I suggest you move on. Again, this thread is not
> for trolls.

Then stop posting in it

> Your assertions are not facts.

They are. Dmonstrable facts

> Furthermore, if you want a response in
> future, limit your questions to one. I have no interest in reading

You're the one with rot.

> Others can see that I am correct and you are obtuse.

No

> That's
> all I care about. Discussion over. Please DO NOT comment here again,

> unless you obey the rules.

You don't get to make the rules

> "John Gabriel's not new calculus" or whatever shit you please. But
> once again, I am asking you nicely: Please, DO NOT comment here again.

> I would have not
> even bothered responding to you if I could delete your comments. You
> are in one word, a dunce.

You are a fucking moron. Two words

Date Subject Author
2/22/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/23/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/23/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/23/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/23/14 Dirk Van de moortel
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/24/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/25/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/25/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/23/14 Art Hopkins
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 Dirk Van de moortel
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/23/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/24/14 Giddy Armstrong
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/24/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 YBM
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 Roland Franzius
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 Inverse 18 Mathematics
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Inverse 18 Mathematics
2/26/14 Karl-Olav Nyberg
2/26/14 Karl-Olav Nyberg
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/26/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 David C. Ullrich
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/28/14 David C. Ullrich
2/28/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/28/14 Peter Percival
2/28/14 fom
2/28/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/28/14 John Gabriel
3/1/14 David C. Ullrich
3/1/14 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 Karl-Olav Nyberg
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/2/14 David C. Ullrich
3/2/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 David C. Ullrich
3/2/14 John Gabriel
3/3/14 John Gabriel
3/3/14 David C. Ullrich
3/3/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 David C. Ullrich
3/4/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 Karl-Olav Nyberg
3/4/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 Karl-Olav Nyberg
3/5/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 David C. Ullrich
3/5/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/5/14 David C. Ullrich
3/5/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/6/14 David C. Ullrich
3/6/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/6/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/3/14 Roland Franzius
3/3/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/3/14 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
3/4/14 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
3/3/14 David C. Ullrich
3/3/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/3/14 Roland Franzius
3/4/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/8/14 Peter Percival
3/8/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/8/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/8/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/8/14 Peter Percival
3/8/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/9/14 Peter Percival
3/9/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/10/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/12/14 Peter Percival
3/12/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/12/14 Peter Percival
3/13/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/12/14 Mutt Buncher
3/8/14 Virgil
3/8/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/9/14 Peter Percival
3/9/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/12/14 Peter Percival
3/12/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/12/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/13/14 David C. Ullrich
3/13/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/13/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/22/14 Al Bundy
3/9/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 Tom Traubert
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 fom
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 Ross Donglemeier
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 PianoMan
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/28/14 Harman Kardan
2/27/14 Ross Donglemeier
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/26/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/28/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/28/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/28/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
2/27/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
2/27/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 sceptic
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 Sal Honda
3/1/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/1/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 Karl-Olav Nyberg
3/2/14 Karl-Olav Nyberg
3/2/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 John Gabriel
3/2/14 John Gabriel
3/2/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/2/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/2/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/2/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/2/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/2/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/3/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/4/14 Peter Percival
3/4/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/4/14 Major Doctor
3/5/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/5/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/6/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/6/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/6/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/6/14 Dirk Van de moortel
3/6/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/6/14 Dirk Van de moortel
3/6/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/7/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/8/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/8/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/8/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/8/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/8/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/8/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/8/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/8/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/9/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/11/14 Hoofington P. McSnort
3/11/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com
3/11/14 Wizard-Of-Oz
3/11/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/11/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
3/12/14 thenewcalculus@gmail.com