The Math Forum



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

Topic: Is (Pi) a number, or is (Pi) an angle?
Replies: 14   Last Post: Sep 30, 2017 10:27 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
bassam king karzeddin

Posts: 2,085
Registered: 8/22/16
Re: Is (Pi) a number, or is (Pi) an angle?
Posted: Sep 30, 2017 10:27 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 1:11:14 PM UTC+3, Zelos Malum wrote:
> Den söndag 24 september 2017 kl. 14:01:13 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > On Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 9:00:38 PM UTC+3, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > Den torsdag 21 september 2017 kl. 14:44:10 UTC+2 skrev zelos...@gmail.com:
> > > > Den torsdag 21 september 2017 kl. 10:30:50 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > > On Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 12:04:31 AM UTC+3, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > > > > Den tisdag 19 september 2017 kl. 09:53:42 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > > > > On Monday, September 18, 2017 at 8:10:13 PM UTC+3, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > > > > > > Den måndag 18 september 2017 kl. 09:36:37 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > > > > > > On Saturday, September 16, 2017 at 10:23:15 PM UTC+3, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Den torsdag 3 augusti 2017 kl. 16:10:00 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 1:11:15 AM UTC+3, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Den onsdag 2 augusti 2017 kl. 17:32:38 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2017 at 4:27:48 PM UTC+3, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Den tisdag 18 april 2017 kl. 14:50:12 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which is correct, (Pi) is a number or (Pi) is an angle?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bassam King Karzeddin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 18 th, April, 2017

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pi is a real number, not an angle. Angles are sometimes measured in radians, but pi radians is not the same as the number pi. Pi radians is an angle, but pi is a number.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you believe 360 is a number or an angle? Or 90?

> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, (Pi) is a real transcendental number in your (MIND), and not in any physical reality for sure
> > > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise go ahead and show us (pi) here again
> > > > > > > > > > > > > BKK

> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I have said it before, and I say it again: whether something exists in the physical world or not is an empirical question of physics. Mathematics does not deal with physical evidence or physical reality.

> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Some mathematics obey the rules OR the principle of existence of physical reality, whereas the vast majority of modern mathematics never comply with any reality, so not all you say is correct, otherwise, it should be made for entertainments for very few peculiar people
> > > > > > > > > > > BKK

> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So you believe mathematics is useless because it's not empirical? Wow.

> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > No, what I should say more precisely, mathematics is very useful for more practical people not necessarily specialized in abstract mathematics, usually called scientist in various branches in technology who could make real and very successful achievement, they are also more talented in mathematics that the specialised ones almost from early childhood, and so unlike other specialized mathematicians who are generally jugglers and mostly produce fictions, for sure
> > > > > > > > > BKK

> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So you agree that mathematics have practical applications.

> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes for earthy science application, scientist need practical application that they can do themselves very efficiently without any need of professional mathematicians since they are practical mathematicians by intrinsic and almost more talented mathematicians since early childhood, after all, they invent real things that professional mathematicians use and can't deny, very sure
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > but on a larger scale, mathematician require discovering things that generally can't-do without the help of real scientists
> > > > > > > BKK

> > > > > >
> > > > > > So your complaint is that we lack practical applications to all of mathematics. That doesn't imply mathematics is false or useless.

> > > > >
> > > > > NO, wrong baseless mathematics is very harmful to human brains, not practical and very useless indeed, plus wasting of human resources, THUS VERY DANGERIOUS
> > > > > BKK

> > > >
> > > > How is that dangerous? How is being logical dangerous? How is doing a dicipline that has shown that no matter what, there is always some application for everything in it.
> > > >
> > > > How is that dangerous?
> > > >
> > > > I would say ignorance like yours is dangerous to the human mind.

> > >
> > > And the unwillingness to learn anything new. That is the real close-minded and dangerous threat to humanity.

> >
> > What new things you provided and I didn't learn? wonder!
> >
> > It is indeed you and so many others who are unwilling to learn anything new of mine at all and for sure
> >
> > Or else, meet me there in those many PUBLISHED topics of mine that are new and contain irrefuitable (formulas, CONJECTURES, proofs, puzzles, ...etc)
> >
> > But, I don't think you do dare, since nothing you would certainly add and nothing NEW you would learn for sure
> >
> > And I would make it rain again and again over the so tiny heads for sure since I do imagine and like their red faces with forgotten opened and rounded ugly mouths being so silent as usual
> >
> > Bassam King Karzeddin

>
> That is the issue, we have provided countless things and you learned jackall cause it doesn't fit your predetermined ideas.
>
> All your shit has been refuted so "irrefutable" is false.
>
> We have refuted it all.


You are a big lier also, nobody had so far refuted my PUBLISHED theorems (Conjectures only for you), nor my formulas or else for sure

Just look around, they are still hanging over the very poor heads and in front pages for sure

But many years back, a genius like Quasi could refute me in a cranky conjecture of mine for sure (and here in sci.math), where then I had to disappear from sci.math for almost 10 years

So, do a favour and refute only one of my recent three conjectures, and win a modest prize also, then I must disappear forever this time, for sure

Do you write with real identity or fiction character? wonder!
BKK







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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.