Is the ellipsis one of these? Using it twice does seem meaningless:Īnd putting anything after it seems meaningless, which I did above as well. How many symbols can only be used once and have to come at the end of an expression? It's a good falsification of the usage of the ellipsis as a serious mathematical symbol. If that is zero repeating with a one that is the first quantity in math. > Huh? You mean there is always a one on the end of it, right? On Wednesday, Jat 4:59:31 PM UTC-7, Chris M. Huh? You mean there is always a one on the end of it, right? > 0.000.1 means there is a 0 always following. > Let me show you from a different perspective. > Why do you hate it so much? You've got no problem with 0.333. However, 0.000.1 is just another representation of an infinite decimal expansion, no? Why should every other number have two representations and not the pretend number 0? ROFLMAO. You could write nothing in your radix template and that would represent 0. Cunt! You finally got one thing right - you know what is a Cauchy sequence! Chuckle. The decimal representation for the real number "related" to that Cauchy sequence is > On Wednesday, Jat 8:19:46 PM UTC+2, Eram semper recta wrote: > On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 14:45:43 UTC-4, Greg Cunt wrote: > On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 16:55:15 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote: On Wednesday, Jat 2:00:29 PM UTC-7, Eram semper recta wrote: Though really quite disturbing, interested readers should see: “About the spamming troll John Gabriel in his own words.” (lasted updated March 10, 2020) at !msg/sci.math/PcpAzX5pDeY/1PDiSlK_BwAJ Apparently, they do not verify your credentials. No math genius our JG, though he actually lists his job title as “mathematician” at. "3 = 2 + 1 or 3 8 - 5, etc, are all propositions” (actually all are meaningless gibberish) “1/3 does NOT mean 1 divided by 3 and never has meant that” Again, what a moron!Įven at his advanced age (60+?), John Gabriel is STILL struggling with basic, elementary-school arithmetic. Such results require a few axioms, so he figures he's now off the hook. JG has also banned all axioms because he cannot even derive the most elementary results of basic arithmetic, e.g. As a result, he has had to ban 0, negative numbers and instantaneous rates of change rendering his goofy little system quite useless. It blows up for functions as simple f(x)=|x|. Unfortunately for him, this means he has no workable a definition of the derivative of a function. JG here claims to have a discovered as shortcut to mastering calculus without using limits. WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't become a victim of JG's fake math I think you mean lim (n->oo): 10^(-n) = 0
0 kommentar(er)
