Date: Apr 4, 2017 3:57 PM
Author: Dan Christensen
Subject: Re: Unreal fiction numbers implies unreal fiction angles too
On Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 9:30:05 AM UTC-4, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 4:26:14 AM UTC-4, bassam
> > king karzeddin wrote:
> > > On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 3:16:00 PM UTC+3, Dan
> > Christensen wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, April 2, 2017 at 7:18:04 AM UTC-4,
> > bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > The fiction numbers ...
> > > >
> > > > FYI: A "fiction number" is just a number that BKK
> > cannot count on his fingers and toes. There really is
> > no such thing in mathematics.
> > > >
> > > Dan wrote:
> > >
> > > > It seems that if BKK can't understand something,
> > he assumes everyone who does understand it is stupid.
> > I've got news for him...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> > >
> > > It seems that you are completely off topic, for
> > sure
> > >
> > > To simplify it for you, just do one thing, try
> > constructing exactly and only one integer angle, in
> > (n) degrees, where (n) is integer degree angle, and
> > (n) not divisible by (3), where the angle (pi = 180
> > degrees)
> > >
> > By "constructing", I take it you mean some kind ruler
> > and compass construction as in ancient times. I'm not
> > sure why you restrict your attention to angles that
> > can be so constructed. Just playing the silly bugger
> > is my guess.
> Dan Christensen Wrote:
> > These days, we have the set of real numbers and a
> > well defined arctan function to any required accuracy
> > for any real numbered angles between +pi/2 and -pi/2
> > radians. See graph at:
> > http://www.calculatorsoup.com/images/trig_plots/graph_
> > arctan.gif
Link is dead. Try instead:
> > Dan
> > Download my DC Proof 2.0 software at
> > http://www.dcproof.com
> > Visit my Math Blog at
> > http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> Yes Dan, the word CONSTRUCT is the key issue to understand fully and correctly any issue, since every thing existing is simply constructible, and the size of the ignorance and baseless illegal mathematics that had been built after Pythagoreans era
Ah, back to the future! Like you fellow crank (alter ego?), John Gabriel.
> mainly, is too huge and so unbelievable to make them arrive so easily at those fictitious or better say carpentry results you provided
> And the time required to repair them would be so long I guess, and this would be mainly and eventually happen with new generations of clever students and certainly not necessarily by the current Professional mathematicians whom are so muddled with it
> The many fictions established in mathematics is ranging from the wrong concept of real numbers, to imaginary numbers, to non Euclidean geometry, to calculus, to ..., many wrong understanding what is the mathematics and what is engineering, they had chosen the second path, which is not mathematics at all, but seems so for the ignorant's for sure
All you have to do to promote your goofy ideas is obtain better and more accurate results for engineers and scientists. My guess is that, those who have bothered to listen to you have been pissing themselves laughing at your ancient methods.
Why don't you throw out your computer (based on what you believe to be "unreliable mathemetics") and use an abacus instead. See: https://zhongguojumble.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/dsc01561.jpg
> So, what is approximations means, of course it is engineering problem with very little mathematics for applications
Engineering and scientific problems often require analytical solutions -- something your goofy system seems incapable of.
Download my DC Proof 2.0 software at http://www.dcproof.com
Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com