Discussion:
Another fake number!
(too old to reply)
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 08:47:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)

Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.

So the following Diophantine equation is impossible in positive integers:

(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)

And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.

See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,

Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!

They (morons) simply took the cube roots of both sides of Eqn. (1), and deliberately considered them equal, so they got as this:
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)

And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,

Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)

And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number

Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line

And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making

The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously

For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,

First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),

And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.

For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,

Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.

But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact

You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)

Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters

Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 12:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
In better words, neither the surd symbol "cubrt(2)" nor its assumed endless digital representation do exist as on the real number line,

They are both fake numbers that do not exist except in the skulls of professional mathematician’s minds, and many of them worship those factious numbers since they constitute a source for them to keep adding infinitely many of a like numbers forever, thinking that no law must govern the creation of numbers
I know it is not your fault, nor the previous generation fault but old in the corrupted history of mathematics
So, what is your duty now "professional" to clear out this so obvious shame that covers you from top to bottom in order to please the real King and the Queen?
Or do you prefer to be painted with guilt and shame forever!
Do not feel excited by the enjoyment that you are addicted to by creating infinitely many fake numbers and so easily as silly interesting games for you only, luckily, people do not even pay a little attention to what you daily produce,
Numbers are the only existing objects that have sacred locations, they are only constructible numbers, they live together perpetually, one after another, rational followed by irrational (but constructible), they are all created from one, the unity, and you are not allowed and cannot add anything that is created from your delusional concepts.
So, hurry up to your secretive research or Wikipedia page and do the necessary work before your students teach you so many other elementary proofs.
And do not think that your factious inherited stories are those mentioned here only, there are many more that you would not believe!

Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
Virgil
2016-11-09 16:21:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing
real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous
number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient
mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven
rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three
impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle,
and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked
intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to
keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge
volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly
come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous
mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
They (morons) simply took the cube roots of both sides of Eqn. (1), and
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so
innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass
their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so
unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy
(where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to
cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established
fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists
behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and
rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the
cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of
steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual
valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as
being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as
Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even
they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which
is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with
finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction
number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their
unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any
rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for
cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive
integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you
think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number,
but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely ,
same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists,
and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in
mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to
use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set
theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations,
limits, infinity, 
 etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in
mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any
digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in
mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of
exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may
be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not
constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real
number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
In better words, neither the surd symbol "cubrt(2)" nor its assumed endless
digital representation do exist as on the real number line,
They are both fake numbers that do not exist except in the skulls of
professional mathematician’s minds
They also exist in the minds of physicists, chemists, physicians,
engineers, all scientists and all manner of non-scientists.

And until you, or someone else, can show that the assumption of a number
representing the cube rot of two causes errors in arithmetic, the cube
root of two will continue to exist everywhere outside of your private
world.


, and many of them worship those factious
Post by bassam king karzeddin
numbers since they constitute a source for them to keep adding infinitely
many of a like numbers forever, thinking that no law must govern the
creation of numbers
I know it is not your fault, nor the previous generation fault but old in
the corrupted history of mathematics
So, what is your duty now "professional" to clear out this so obvious shame
that covers you from top to bottom in order to please the real King and the
Queen?
Or do you prefer to be painted with guilt and shame forever!
Do not feel excited by the enjoyment that you are addicted to by creating
infinitely many fake numbers and so easily as silly interesting games for
you only, luckily, people do not even pay a little attention to what you
daily produce,
Numbers are the only existing objects that have sacred locations, they are
only constructible numbers, they live together perpetually, one after
another, rational followed by irrational (but constructible), they are all
created from one, the unity, and you are not allowed and cannot add anything
that is created from your delusional concepts.
So, hurry up to your secretive research or Wikipedia page and do the
necessary work before your students teach you so many other elementary
proofs.
And do not think that your factious inherited stories are those mentioned
here only, there are many more that you would not believe!
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
John Gabriel
2016-11-09 12:54:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
I was the first human to write:

A number is the measure of a magnitude.

However, the Ancient Greeks knew this because Euclid succeeded in writing down the perfect derivation of number from nothing.
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 13:31:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Gabriel
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
A number is the measure of a magnitude.
Yes of course, and if anyone claim it befor you, then he must show a documented evidence with exact date, or post, topic or thread, etc
Post by John Gabriel
However, the Ancient Greeks knew this because Euclid succeeded in writing down the perfect derivation of number from nothing.
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
Dan Christensen
2016-11-09 12:59:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.

To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to show how the incredibly effective techniques of real and complex analysis used in science and engineering are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new system you might be proposing here. It seems you are off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the wrong direction.

Dan
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 13:24:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan Christensen
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to show how the incredibly effective techniques of real and complex analysis used in science and engineering are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new system you might be proposing here. It seems you are off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps by any means and without any approximation, and not necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass, so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that make it impossible!

So can you or anybody else do it without any kind of cheating?

Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
Dan Christensen
2016-11-09 13:36:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by Dan Christensen
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to show how the incredibly effective techniques of real and complex analysis used in science and engineering are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new system you might be proposing here. It seems you are off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps by any means and without any approximation, and not necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass, so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical techniques used by scientists and engineers with such amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that case. Simply saying that some well established techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough at this point.

Dan
Virgil
2016-11-09 16:16:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by Dan Christensen
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to show how the incredibly
effective techniques of real and complex analysis used in science and
engineering are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new system you
might be proposing here. It seems you are off to a VERY poor start, and
going entirely in the wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid construction of cubrt(2),
with finite number of steps by any means and without any approximation, and
not necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass, so I removed the
restrictions of using the tools that make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind of cheating?
One can finitely define a monotone sequence of rationals
converging to the cube root of 2, which in proper mathematics
is sufficient to establish its existence.

In standard mathematics, there is a real number for every monotone
bounded sequence of rationals.

WHile it may be possible to construct a mathematical system of reals in
which this does not hold true, you could never sell it to the scientific
community.
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 13:51:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan Christensen
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to show how the incredibly effective techniques of real and complex analysis used in science and engineering are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new system you might be proposing here. It seems you are off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the wrong direction.
Dan
I would offer you another choice, If you or anybody else can express cubrt(2) in terms of any constructible numbers (with finite terms), then you may be right!,

But I think personally, this offer or that previous one are impossible to make, because we can not assume something in mind and intuitively conclude its existence, just because we think that we can go very close to it. here is the illusion,

To explain it further step, Fermat's last theorem was proved by (Andrew Wiles and Taylor), to have no integer solution, and assuming the proof that nobody understand it (except very few as they claim), is absolutely true,

Then one in the future might get three integer numbers with trillions of billions of digits that can fill the galaxy and claim it is a counter example, whereas it may be very near solution with difference one only. so this is would not be regarded as a counter example, and this is the real meaning of exactness (even in real endless numbers)

Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
Dan Christensen
2016-11-09 14:33:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by Dan Christensen
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to show how the incredibly effective techniques of real and complex analysis used in science and engineering are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new system you might be proposing here. It seems you are off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the wrong direction.
Dan
I would offer you another choice, If you or anybody else can express cubrt(2) in terms of any constructible numbers (with finite terms), then you may be right!,
You are the one making outrageous claims about "fake numbers," Bassam. The is onus is you to substantiate them. If you are going to suggest that scientists and engineers will obtain erroneous results from well established techniques of real or complex analysis, you will have to prove it -- by counter-example or otherwise.

Dan
Virgil
2016-11-09 16:07:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by Dan Christensen
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to show how the incredibly
effective techniques of real and complex analysis used in science and
engineering are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new system you
might be proposing here. It seems you are off to a VERY poor start, and
going entirely in the wrong direction.
Dan
I would offer you another choice, If you or anybody else can express
cubrt(2) in terms of any constructible numbers (with finite terms), then you
may be right!,
But I think personally
I see no evidence of it!
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 12:29:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely
y believed as an existing real number on the real
number line, this was the second most famous number
after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the
ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek,
where simply they had proven rigorously the
impossibility of such number, by their most famous
three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary
angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube),
which are all impossible to solve.
So the following Diophantine equation is impossible
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics
cs was provoked intentionally by the most famous
mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding
infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create
huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that
eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the
most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is
s derived or comes out of it!
They (morons) simply took the cube roots of both
sides of Eqn. (1), and deliberately considered them
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be
(cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can
convince the so innocent (as you) that there is
nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty
talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be
noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many
generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the
history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being
degree of accuracy (where they can present a long
numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and
nd convince you how close is it ) to indicate that
well established fake number that never exists, but
what they actually claim that exists behind (what was
later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and
rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of
such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually
constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight
edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which
was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the
actual valid reason of such impossibility, because
the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real
number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by
other means as Origami, but I would tell them the
truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be
able to construct a cube root of a given cube number,
which is not interesting at all, but cheating and
business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of
two by any means with finite number of steps is due
to its non existing or being fake and fiction number
(introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to
pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a
intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as
the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10
base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k)
is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer
with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep
increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer
and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it
exactly, you would need (k) to be increased
indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would
arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no
o largest integer exists, and second, (integers with
endless digits are not accepted in mathematics),
(this proof is basically a common sense proof, no
need to use all those called advanced mathematics or
modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts,
intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations,
limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this
clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it
yourself with numerical approximation to any digits
of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified
above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or
r fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided
that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness
and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this
s constructible approximation may be convenient (but
constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other
constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any
positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational
numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being
fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation
of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or
without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those
e matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
In better words, neither the surd symbol "cubrt(2)" nor its assumed endless digital representation do exist as on the real number line,

They are both fake numbers that do not exist except in the skulls of professional mathematician’s minds, and many of them worship those factious numbers since they constitute a source for them to keep adding infinitely many of a like numbers forever, thinking that no law must govern the creation of numbers
I know it is not your fault, nor the previous generation fault but old in the corrupted history of mathematics
So, what is your duty now "professional" to clear out this so obvious shame that covers you from top to bottom in order to please the real King and the Queen?
Or do you prefer to be painted with guilt and shame forever!
Do not feel excited by the enjoyment that you are addicted to by creating infinitely many fake numbers and so easily as silly interesting games for you only, luckily, people do not even pay a little attention to what you daily produce,
Numbers are the only existing objects that have sacred locations, they are only constructible numbers, they live together perpetually, one after another, rational followed by irrational (but constructible), they are all created from one, the unity, and you are not allowed and cannot add anything that is created from your delusional concepts.
So, hurry up to your secretive research or Wikipedia page and do the necessary work before your students teach you so many other elementary proofs.

And do not think that your factious inherited stories are those mentioned here only, there are many more that you would not believe!

Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
Virgil
2016-11-09 16:45:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
Post by bassam king karzeddin
In better words, neither the surd symbol "cubrt(2)" nor its assumed endless
digital representation do exist as on the real number line
They do on all MY real number lines, along with a point for the
limit of each bounded monotone sequence of rationals.

They do on Euclid's real number lines, along with a point for the
limit of each bounded monotone sequence of rationals.

In bassam king karzeddin's odd math there must be all sorts of
bounded monotone sequences of rational without limits.
There must be all sorts of polynomial equations with no complex
solutions at all. and many other oddments differing from standard
mthematics, making bassam king karzeddin's math unusable by
anyone else.
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 14:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek, they did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even did not accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously existing by the Pythagoreans,

But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians deliberately and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number to be called real number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of mathematics, despite the warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that was an impossible number)

Then after, the doors are opened so widely for mathematicians to add infinitely many fake numbers up to our date and most likely in the future

The real line number is going to explode with fake numbers, since it got so saturated that it would collapse on itself sweeping away most of the fake mathematics that are filling the universe

Adding any kind of numbers must be done with rigorous proofs and not by intuitive conclusions

But if every thing was defined correctly as (say best approximation in constructible numbers for non existing object, then it would be resolved, or magnitude as John Gabriel claims repeatedly, but nobody understands what is an existing object from its magnitude which is not even a number it self. wonder!

Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
Dan Christensen
2016-11-09 14:59:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek, they did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even did not accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously existing by the Pythagoreans,
But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians deliberately and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number to be called real number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of mathematics, despite the warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that was an impossible number)
Do you actually claim that these "fake numbers" of yours lead to some erroneous results? If so, let's see an actual example. Or is this all just more hand-waving?

Dan
John Gabriel
2016-11-09 15:04:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek, they did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even did not accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously existing by the Pythagoreans,
But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians deliberately and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number to be called real number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of mathematics, despite the warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that was an impossible number)
Then after, the doors are opened so widely for mathematicians to add infinitely many fake numbers up to our date and most likely in the future
The real line number is going to explode with fake numbers, since it got so saturated that it would collapse on itself sweeping away most of the fake mathematics that are filling the universe
Adding any kind of numbers must be done with rigorous proofs and not by intuitive conclusions
But if every thing was defined correctly as (say best approximation in constructible numbers for non existing object, then it would be resolved, or magnitude as John Gabriel claims repeatedly, but nobody understands what is an existing object from its magnitude which is not even a number it self. wonder!
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
You are aware that trying to discuss anything with a troll like DC is a futile exercise, aren't you?

Cranks cannot be turned.
bassam king karzeddin
2016-11-09 15:14:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Gabriel
Post by bassam king karzeddin
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek, they did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even did not accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously existing by the Pythagoreans,
But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians deliberately and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number to be called real number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of mathematics, despite the warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that was an impossible number)
Then after, the doors are opened so widely for mathematicians to add infinitely many fake numbers up to our date and most likely in the future
The real line number is going to explode with fake numbers, since it got so saturated that it would collapse on itself sweeping away most of the fake mathematics that are filling the universe
Adding any kind of numbers must be done with rigorous proofs and not by intuitive conclusions
But if every thing was defined correctly as (say best approximation in constructible numbers for non existing object, then it would be resolved, or magnitude as John Gabriel claims repeatedly, but nobody understands what is an existing object from its magnitude which is not even a number it self. wonder!
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
You are aware that trying to discuss anything with a troll like DC is a futile exercise, aren't you?
Cranks cannot be turned.
I am giving him with anybody else a chance to refute the claim, also giving him or anyone else a chance to get out of fiction mathematics, in case they could do something useful, then we might learn something, and I really wish they could, since then we might learn something new, but I Am quite sure that they can not.

Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
Dan Christensen
2016-11-09 15:26:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by John Gabriel
Post by bassam king karzeddin
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek, they did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even did not accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously existing by the Pythagoreans,
But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians deliberately and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number to be called real number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of mathematics, despite the warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that was an impossible number)
Then after, the doors are opened so widely for mathematicians to add infinitely many fake numbers up to our date and most likely in the future
The real line number is going to explode with fake numbers, since it got so saturated that it would collapse on itself sweeping away most of the fake mathematics that are filling the universe
Adding any kind of numbers must be done with rigorous proofs and not by intuitive conclusions
But if every thing was defined correctly as (say best approximation in constructible numbers for non existing object, then it would be resolved, or magnitude as John Gabriel claims repeatedly, but nobody understands what is an existing object from its magnitude which is not even a number it self. wonder!
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
You are aware that trying to discuss anything with a troll like DC is a futile exercise, aren't you?
Cranks cannot be turned.
I am giving him with anybody else a chance to refute the claim, also giving him or anyone else a chance to get out of fiction mathematics, in case they could do something useful, then we might learn something, and I really wish they could, since then we might learn something new, but I Am quite sure that they can not.
So, you cannot give an example a single example to support your claim. Thought so. Like they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. EOD

Dan
Virgil
2016-11-09 16:58:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by John Gabriel
Post by bassam king karzeddin
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek,
they did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even
did not accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously
existing by the Pythagoreans,
But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians
deliberately and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number
to be called real number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of
mathematics, despite the warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that
was an impossible number)
Then after, the doors are opened so widely for mathematicians to add
infinitely many fake numbers up to our date and most likely in the
future
The real line number is going to explode with fake numbers, since it got
so saturated that it would collapse on itself sweeping away most of the
fake mathematics that are filling the universe
Adding any kind of numbers must be done with rigorous proofs and not by
intuitive conclusions
But if every thing was defined correctly as (say best approximation in
constructible numbers for non existing object, then it would be
resolved, or magnitude as John Gabriel claims repeatedly, but nobody
understands what is an existing object from its magnitude which is not
even a number it self. wonder!
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
You are aware that trying to discuss anything with a troll like DC is a
futile exercise, aren't you?
Cranks cannot be turned.
I am giving him with anybody else a chance to refute the claim, also giving
him or anyone else a chance to get out of fiction mathematics, in case they
could do something useful, then we might learn something, and I really wish
they could, since then we might learn something new, but I Am quite sure
that they can not.
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
The mathematics that Bassam King Karzeddin regards as fictional has so
far been miraculously successful is science, engineering, commerce, and
every other form of application.
Why try to fix what is so obviously not broke?
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
bassam king karzeddin
2017-12-19 17:16:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Virgil
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by John Gabriel
Post by bassam king karzeddin
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek,
they did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even
did not accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously
existing by the Pythagoreans,
But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians
deliberately and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number
to be called real number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of
mathematics, despite the warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that
was an impossible number)
Then after, the doors are opened so widely for mathematicians to add
infinitely many fake numbers up to our date and most likely in the
future
The real line number is going to explode with fake numbers, since it got
so saturated that it would collapse on itself sweeping away most of the
fake mathematics that are filling the universe
Adding any kind of numbers must be done with rigorous proofs and not by
intuitive conclusions
But if every thing was defined correctly as (say best approximation in
constructible numbers for non existing object, then it would be
resolved, or magnitude as John Gabriel claims repeatedly, but nobody
understands what is an existing object from its magnitude which is not
even a number it self. wonder!
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
You are aware that trying to discuss anything with a troll like DC is a
futile exercise, aren't you?
Cranks cannot be turned.
I am giving him with anybody else a chance to refute the claim, also giving
him or anyone else a chance to get out of fiction mathematics, in case they
could do something useful, then we might learn something, and I really wish
they could, since then we might learn something new, but I Am quite sure
that they can not.
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
The mathematics that Bassam King Karzeddin regards as fictional has so
far been miraculously successful is science, engineering, commerce, and
every other form of application.
Why try to fix what is so obviously not broke?
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
It was broken from the beginnings, but on the perfection level of the deep meaning of existence and not on the little applicable level that isn't even any true mathematics, exactly the way you broke one year ago, for sure
BKK
a***@gmail.com
2016-11-09 16:11:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
you have to start with the shpere, and pi,
to really comprehend any\every thing about the theory
of numbers, as begun by Fermatttt with his little theorem
(whereas, the "last" theorem was one of his first insights
into the p-adic numbers, as had to be used by Wiles e.g

all of these numbers are perfectly construtable, even though
one can ne'er obtain perfect accuracy (infinite precision ...
takes t00 long
Virgil
2016-11-09 16:54:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
Post by bassam king karzeddin
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:24:59 AM UTC-5,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:59:20 PM UTC+3,
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Fake numbers??? You must be joking.
To get anywhere, Bassam, you are going to have to
show how the incredibly effective techniques of real
and complex analysis used in science and engineering
are somehow more easily obtained in whatever new
system you might be proposing here. It seems you are
off to a VERY poor start, and going entirely in the
wrong direction.
Dan
I would gladly believe you if you show a valid
construction of cubrt(2), with finite number of steps
by any means and without any approximation, and not
necessarily by unmarked straightedge and a compass,
so I removed the restrictions of using the tools that
make it impossible!
So can you or anybody else do it without any kind
of cheating?
You are the one suggesting that the mathematical
techniques used by scientists and engineers with such
amzing results are somehow illegitimate and will lead
to erroneous results. The onus is on you to make that
case. Simply saying that some well established
techniques seem counter-intuitive to you isn't enough
at this point.
Dan
Remember that one day, only rational numbers were accepted by the Greek, they
did not accept this number (cubrt(2)) as a real number, they even did not
accept the sqrt(2) as real number till was proved rigorously existing by the
Pythagoreans,
But later, and without any rigorous proof, the mathematicians deliberately
and by only intuitive conclusions they allowed this number to be called real
number. (it was the fatal mistake in the history of mathematics, despite the
warning from the Greek with rigorous proof that was an impossible number)
Then according to bassam king karzeddin, the real continuum must be
discontinuous.

Since the Greek and current assumptions of a continuous continuum has as
yet produced no detectable errors in either arithmetic or geometry,
we will continue to use them until some such errors are discovered.

But if ever discovered, it will not be by anyone so inept as bassam king
karzeddin.
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
Virgil
2016-11-09 16:04:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing
real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number
after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians,
especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the
impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles,
(trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube),
which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked
intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to
keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge
volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come
to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
They (morons) simply took the cube roots of both sides of Eqn. (1), and
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so
innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their
dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so
unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where
they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and
convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number
that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was
later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the
Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2),
using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which
was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of
such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing
real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami,
but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might
be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not
interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with
finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction
number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their
unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any
rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for
cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive
integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you
think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but
to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for
(n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and
second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics),
(this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those
called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous
cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, 

etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in
mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any
digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in
mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of
exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be
convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not
constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number
line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Does BKK deny the existence of rationals?
Every bounded monotone sequence of rationals determines a real number.
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Your opinion is not worth the time it takes to read it
or the miniscule energy it takes to refute it.
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
bassam king karzeddin
2018-01-07 13:17:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
Many, Many more fiction non-existing alleged real numbers (in mathematics) are there, For sure
BKK
Zelos Malum
2018-01-08 07:08:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
All numbers are equally fictional you moron.
bassam king karzeddin
2018-01-30 08:28:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
Hence: 2^{1/3} Doesn't exist, for (100%) sure

BKK
bassam king karzeddin
2018-01-31 10:08:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
I claimed few years back that the real absolute arithmetical cube root of two isn't any existing number, at Quora site (below link), based in many earlier Q/A/Comments posted to them, thinking that the alleged genius professional world mathematicians would immediately understand from BIG HINTS only, but later I realized that they refuse to understand even with many rigorous proofs, since this basically contradicts strictly most of their old and many WRONG beliefs, beside stopping their empty tons of useless businesses, and expose badly their incompetent ability and endless stupidity , and this is truly the mean genion reasons for such a Big current and century Tragedy with the alleged top most professional genius mathematicians on earth, for sure

Link:
https://www.quora.com/Are-there-instances-of-irrational-numbers-in-3D/answer/Bassam-Karzeddin-1

BKK
Zelos Malum
2018-02-01 07:00:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
I claimed few years back that the real absolute arithmetical cube root of two isn't any existing number, at Quora site (below link), based in many earlier Q/A/Comments posted to them, thinking that the alleged genius professional world mathematicians would immediately understand from BIG HINTS only, but later I realized that they refuse to understand even with many rigorous proofs, since this basically contradicts strictly most of their old and many WRONG beliefs, beside stopping their empty tons of useless businesses, and expose badly their incompetent ability and endless stupidity , and this is truly the mean genion reasons for such a Big current and century Tragedy with the alleged top most professional genius mathematicians on earth, for sure
https://www.quora.com/Are-there-instances-of-irrational-numbers-in-3D/answer/Bassam-Karzeddin-1
BKK
You have given no rigorous proofs, your "proofs" are essentially "They don't conform to my prefered view, ergo they do not exist"
bassam king karzeddin
2018-02-13 08:48:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
********
Python
2018-02-13 17:14:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
...
Post by bassam king karzeddin
You should consider the following points
...
Post by bassam king karzeddin
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Wrong.
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Sane people have no tolerance for your opinion, as your opinion is
bullshit.
bassam king karzeddin
2018-02-13 17:51:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Python
...
Post by bassam king karzeddin
You should consider the following points
...
Post by bassam king karzeddin
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Wrong.
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Sane people have no tolerance for your opinion, as your opinion is
bullshit.
I know very well that people have no tolerance for my opinions, because it is truly hurting their so sensitive feelings up to their inner rusted bones, but at least they can't shout as you do baby, because I had put so many rigorous proofs in their big mouths, where then it is too difficult to shout aimlessly, otherwise you would certainly see many of them shouting more loudly than you, beside screaming madly at me, but they can't since they know the consequences when facing the KING even remotely, but they can't also confess it loudly, since it becomes more painful than ever, for sure

So, keep silent and visit a doctor as I advised you now, please

Good luck

BKK
Zelos Malum
2018-02-15 06:54:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
I know very well that people have no tolerance for my opinions, because it is truly hurting their so sensitive feelings up to their inner rusted bones,
No, it is the fact you are arrogant and ignorant that makes people not tolerate you.
Post by bassam king karzeddin
because I had put so many rigorous proofs in their big mouths
HAHAHAHAHA! YOU WISH!

It is NOT rigorous, I have read it and they are flawed at every step.

Like your complain that powers/roots don't distribute over negative reals/complex numbers, that is not a proof of them being invalid, it is simply a fact that the function of powering is not distributive over that large of a domain!
Simon Roberts
2018-03-02 13:45:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Python
...
Post by bassam king karzeddin
You should consider the following points
...
Post by bassam king karzeddin
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Wrong.
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Sane people have no tolerance for your opinion, as your opinion is
bullshit.
Why would you care about BS. Why would you obviously dispise BS and those you supposedly spout it. I think it is you you give tolerance when you should have none for yourself. Why give your lies credence. You know you have been wrong on many occasion as you try to dismiss other's so called BS. WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM. YOUR_PROBLEM, SIR. and I thought I was hateful. ANYONE can smell the hate on you, boy.
bassam king karzeddin
2018-03-01 18:45:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
REALLY FAKE NUMBER, no wonder! (WITH SO EASY ELEMENTARY PROOFS AS WELL), SURE

BKK
Python
2018-03-01 18:49:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
...
REALLY FAKE NUMBER, no wonder! (WITH SO EASY ELEMENTARY PROOFS AS WELL), SURE
Again, King of idiots, here is the cube root of two, without
approximation:

2^(1/3) = ( { p/q : p^3 < 2q^3 }, { p/q : p^3 >= 2q^3 } )
bassam king karzeddin
2018-03-03 15:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Python
Post by bassam king karzeddin
...
REALLY FAKE NUMBER, no wonder! (WITH SO EASY ELEMENTARY PROOFS AS WELL), SURE
Again, King of idiots, here is the cube root of two, without
2^(1/3) = ( { p/q : p^3 < 2q^3 }, { p/q : p^3 >= 2q^3 } )
{ p/q : p^3 >= 2q^3 }
Make up your mind or ask a clever student which mathematical sign notation to use? wonder!

This (>), OR (=), but you need both, don't you? wonder!

They always fail, even in the so elementary mathematics, for sure

Of course, you aren't permitted to use (=), since (2) is not any rational cube number idiot, hence you are after that largest rational cube number that is less than 2, where this never exists (ask any beginner in number theory stupid)

Or you are after the least rational cube number that is greater than 2, which never exists either for sure, (ask any beginner in number theory very stupid)

The whole infamous cut come down as if asked by a kid what is the largest integer? wonder!

It doesn't exist, so simply (Finished)

And this is a piece of addition to your so vast ignorance especially in mathematics, for sure, but luckily you have so many companies of your likes

No wonder!

BKK
Python
2018-03-03 16:53:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
This (>), OR (=), but you need both, don't you? wonder!
facepalm. Oh dear... this is bad.

https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2265/index.htm
bassam king karzeddin
2018-03-03 17:32:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Python
Post by bassam king karzeddin
This (>), OR (=), but you need both, don't you? wonder!
facepalm. Oh dear... this is bad.
https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2265/index.htm
What can a reference save you? wonder!

You are still suffering so badly in very elementary mathematics, for sure

How can (p^3 = 2 q^3)? wonder! where (p, q) are non zero positive integers!

Didn't you learn at the age of 10 years the famous Greek proof of the impossibility of the solution of this INSOLVABLE Diophantine Eqn. in the whole natural integers? wonder!

Please go back to elementary school before you DO retreat blindly like a dump parrot the SO Famous historical alleged genius CRANKS proofs of Dedekind cuts or Cushy sequences or Euler limits (SO BIG idiots), for (100%) sure

BKK

Zelos Malum
2018-03-02 06:47:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Post by bassam king karzeddin
Another Fake number, (the cube root of two)
Consider the real number cubrt(2) which is widely believed as an existing real number on the real number line, this was the second most famous number after (Pi), that had been incomprehensible by the ancient mathematicians, especially by the Greek, where simply they had proven rigorously the impossibility of such number, by their most famous three impossible puzzles, (trisecting an arbitrary angle, squaring the circle, and doubling the cube), which are all impossible to solve.
(n^3 / m^3 = 2) Eqn. (1)
And let us see how this holy grail of mathematics was provoked intentionally by the most famous mathematicians in later stages, just to keep adding infinitely many fake non existing numbers and create huge volumes of fake misleading mathematics that eventually would certainly come to a dead end.
See the so clear cheating in mathematics made by the most famous mathematicians those days,
Eqn. (1) is impossible, therefore anything that is derived or comes out of it!
(cubrt(2) = n/m), whereas this fact must be (cubrt(2) =/= n/m)
And the silly trick they rely on is that, if they can convince the so innocent (as you) that there is nearly a solution, then they could pass their dirty talents into your skulls, since this rarely can be noticed,
Betraying the Queen of science and so many generations to come (so unbelievable crime in the history of mathematics)
And then, they introduced the new concept as being degree of accuracy (where they can present a long numbers after the decimal notation to cheat and convince you how close is it ) to indicate that well established fake number that never exists, but what they actually claim that exists behind (what was later called infinity), ignoring the so simple and rigorous proof by the Greek, of the impossibility of such number
Some would argue that the problem was actually constructing of the cubrt(2), using unmarked straight edge and a compass with finite number of steps, which was impossible, (true), but the Greek never knew the actual valid reason of such impossibility, because the deep deception of (Pi) as being an existing real number on the number line
And some would argue that construction can be made by other means as Origami, but I would tell them the truth that must be clear cheating, even they might be able to construct a cube root of a given cube number, which is not interesting at all, but cheating and business making
The fact that you cannot construct the cube root of two by any means with finite number of steps is due to its non existing or being fake and fiction number (introduced devilishly by old mathematicians just to pass their unnecessarily talents and was purely a intuitive conclusion without any rigorous proof as the case of sqrt(2) which was proved rigorously
For simplicity, the representation in our decimal 10 base number here for cubrt(2), (m = 10^k), where (k) is positive integer, and ( n ) is positive integer with (k + 1) digits, so like this if you keep increasing (k), you think that you are getting closer and closer to the assumed mind number, but to get it exactly, you would need (k) to be increased indefinitely , same for (n, m ), then you would arrive at the so obvious contradictions,
First, this is impossible to achieve because no largest integer exists, and second, (integers with endless digits are not accepted in mathematics), (this proof is basically a common sense proof, no need to use all those called advanced mathematics or modern tools, as the set theories, famous cuts, intermediate theorem, Newton’s approximations, limits, infinity, … etc),
And yes it is a fake number beyond doubt.
For interested school students to comprehend this clear fiction story in mathematics, better try it yourself with numerical approximation to any digits of accuracy starting in increasing order as specified above,
Then you would certainly conclude those illusions or fiction stories in mathematics yourself provided that you insist on the absolute meaning of exactness and never be satisfied with “this is enough”.
But for practical problems on earth, this constructible approximation may be convenient (but constructible), so this is the fact
You should consider the following points
1) It does not matter if you make it in any other constructible base number system
2) It does not matter if you choose (n, m) as any positive constructible numbers
3) This is applicable and includes all the irrational numbers (that are not constructible numbers) as being fake non existing numbers on the real number line
4) This is applicable to any infinite representation of any constructible numbers
5) No number exists with endless terms (with or without a decimal notation)
Thanking your tolerance for my opinion in those matters
Regards
Bassam King Karzeddin
9th, Nov., 2016
REALLY FAKE NUMBER, no wonder! (WITH SO EASY ELEMENTARY PROOFS AS WELL), SURE
BKK
Why is it you think you being ignorant somehow invalidates mathematics?
Loading...