sci.math Google Group

Re: Absolute Continuity

wpihug...@hotmail.com (William Hughes) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:36:08 UT

On Nov 19, 10:35 am, Han de Bruijn <Han.deBru...@DTO.TUDelft.NL>
wrote:
Since for different floating point systems the "subsequent real for
this particular floating point system" can and does change,
this is irrelevant to the question of whether there
is a subsequent real. (A real is not something that changes).

Re: A probably really silly and kooky idea about set theory.

denis.feldmann.sanss...@neuf.fr (Denis Feldmann) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:30:36 UT

amy666 a écrit :
Last example was my proof on c<>aleph_w ... Of course, it doesn't count
for you /6°
No, that's too easy ; I try not to do it anymore as you dont deserve it
(too low for that)
Oh sure. But this sentence is damning you, you know... It is quite easy
to create math (actuallyn, I do that all the time) But I dont think ,as

Re: Cyclic Cf's that are directly related to triangle numbers!

fasttrac...@att.net (dan73) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:29:22 UT

t = 12/2 = 6
t= [4:2,8,2,8,2,8,2,8,2,8,2,8...] t(4) = 10
t= [5:2,10,2,10,2,10,2,10,2,10... ] t(5) = 15
t= [6:2,12,2,12,2,12,2,12,2,12... ] t(6) = 21
t= [7:2,14,2,14,2,14,2,14,2,14... ] t(7) = 28
t= [8:2,16,2,16,2,16,2,16,2,16... ] t(8) = 36
..
t= [152:2,304,2,304,2,304,2,304,2 ,304,2...] t(152) =

Cyclic Cf's that are directly related to triangle numbers!

fasttrac...@att.net (dan73) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:21:24 UT

Triangle numbers and cyclic cf's!
n = [3:2,6,2,6,2,6,2,6,2,6,2,6,2.. .--->oo]
Where n is an irrational then ---
n^2 = 12
12/2 = 6
Then index t(3) = 6
This holds for all irrationals (n) of the
cf form ---
n= [4:2,8,2,8,2,8,2,8,2,8,2,8...] t(4) = 10
n= [5:2,10,2,10,2,10,2,10,2,10... ] t(5) = 15
n= [6:2,12,2,12,2,12,2,12,2,12... ] t(6) = 21

Re: Calculating the Actual Muon Half LIfe - The Muon Co-Inertial Measurement

strich.9...@gmail.com — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:28:31 UT

Any reference frame is always at rest (NON-MOVING) with respect to
itself. Any object at rest in such frame will NOT be length
contracted.
How simple should I make it out for you?

Re: A probably really silly and kooky idea about set theory.

denis.feldmann.sanss...@neuf.fr (Denis Feldmann) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:20:06 UT

amy666 a écrit :
Where did I say it? Show your sources...
Fot instance, any decent reader can see I defend NBF (actually, I prefer
category theory to ZFC, evfen if I started as a Bourbakist), also any
decent reader knows that the 19th century problems were, say problems
with Riemann integration, "solved" by Lebesgue theory (which actually

Re: A probably really silly and kooky idea about set theory.

tommy1...@hotmail.com (amy666) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:11:24 UT

fishfry wrote :
i couldnt have said it better :)
thank you fishfry
* feels weird someone supporting me against lwalke , while its usually lwalke doing that *
regards
tommy1729

halting problem = cantor's theorem ???

tommy1...@hotmail.com (amy666) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:17:06 UT

Denis wrote :
the halting problem is equivalent to cantor's theorem ??
wow
but 4 = 0 in Z/4Z haha :p
regards
tommy1729

Re: VEDIC TECHNOLOGY HAS NOT LOST ITS RELEVANCE

da...@tribble.com (David R Tribble) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:13:22 UT

You're absolutely right. How could we have been so blind for
all these years?

Re: Calculating the Actual Muon Half LIfe - The Muon Co-Inertial Measurement

thedraperfam...@gmail.com (PD) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:10:38 UT

Oh ho! More amusement!
And what do you think the principle of relativity says?
And what do you think a non-moving frame is? (Definition and example.)
And why do you think length contraction in *any* frame contradicts
"the very principle of relativity"?

Re: Why "meta diagonals" are irrelevant

dik.win...@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:09:51 UT

>
> > > If you stand on classical mathematics, then all natural numbers exist,
> > > and the sum of all 1/2^n = 1 (when starting with n = 1). It is
> > > impossible to change this result or to deny it.
> >
> > I deny it, because that is *not* the case in classical mathematics. 1 is
> > *not* the sum of all 1/2^n. It is a limit of partial sums. There is a

Re: A probably really silly and kooky idea about set theory.

tommy1...@hotmail.com (amy666) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:04:41 UT

lwalke 3 wrote :
even JSH says 2+2=4 :p
well sometimes ... :)
i distance from WM.
not calling him an idiot or anything , but still incorrect.
TO is probably Tony Orlow , it was before my time , but what i read of him , i liked it.
TO understands the issues with ordinals.
im definately closer to TO than to WM.

Re: #2 preface; new book 2nd edition: Math a subset of Physics, AP-adics

da...@tribble.com (David R Tribble) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:07:06 UT

Thus your demonstrations show quite clearly that the AP-adics
cannot form an algebra. They don't form a field, a ring, or a
even a group.
At this point, it's highly questionable just how useful the AP-adics
really are, since they are not a consistent arithmetic system.
Anyway, good luck with all that. The next renaissance is just

Re: Calculating the Actual Muon Half LIfe - The Muon Co-Inertial Measurement

papa_r...@hotmail.com — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:06:49 UT

"Look who is confused with relativity. Any object can be in any
frame. If an object B is moving in a frame A with velocity Vb, then
the object B is also said to be in frame B moving with velocity Vb
relative to frame A. Then the LTE applies again."
OK, Strich...give it a rest....you are too dumb to have an IQ of 200

Re: Absolute Continuity

dik.win...@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:51:33 UT

...
> >>
> >>>>>>Doesn't the distance between two "subsequent" [reals] equal zero?
...
> Yes. And for_All_ floating point systems, there is a subsequent real.
And so the answer to Eckard Blumschein in this context when you interprete
"real" as "floating-point number" is: "no, it depends on the floating-point