e^(i*pi)

[HamHack]

wow.i didn't retain any of that.hmm.

[jimerax]

Originally Posted by Braydz

I actually understood all of that...

Is all of this uni/college level maths? I'm still in high school... Also, curious... Do those equations of sine and cosine work with both radians and degrees, or only one? Never seen sine and cosine shown that way before.

It's definitely high school level math.

[bigsleytheoaf]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...books&n=507846

PS - Math is a model. The statement e^(pi * i) = -1 has to do with an analytic extension of the exponential function onto the complex plane. There's no way to "prove" it just like there's no way to "prove" the axiom of choice (well, they're kind of different - you can prove existence and uniqueness of such an extension...) Kind of like, you know how 3! = 6? Well you can extend it analytically to the gamma function so that you can "have statements like" (3/2)! = sqrt(pi) and definitions of factorials with non-integral negative domain. But they're not "true," they're just "defined extensions."

PPS - Talking about math casually is like talking about sex casually. It's the past time of virgins. I guess maybe it just gets me a little irritated when people are like "oh the wonder of math" when they haven't even studied basic Real Analysis. It also gets me irritated when people talk about physics without understanding it and chemistry without understanding it and everything without understanding it, where "understanding it" means getting a Ph.D. in it at a first or second-tier university. There's alot to understand out there, so much so that there's little use in pretending to understand. Blah blah blah I'm tired you suck donk.

PPPS - This is in reference to Kefit's "proof," by the way...

[hatakikakashi]

My head hurts I don't get it. I need more schooling.

[alainbryden]

Originally Posted by bigsleytheoaf

where "understanding it" means getting a Ph.D. in it at a first or second-tier university.

Don't be an ass. Only uptight pricks think the only way to know what you're talking about is to have a standardised education.

What Kefit brilliantly showed is commonly known, in mathimatical terms, as a proof, so don't be putting quotations like he did something wrong.


Kefit, that was awesome. I envy your grasp of mathematics. I'm still working really hard to keep up with second term calc.

[bigsleytheoaf]

Why don't you "prove" that 1+1 = 2?
Can you do this?
A very careful inspection of what "proof" means will show you that Kufit didn't "prove" anything. Alot of people get hung up on silly things like:

0/0 = 1

???

You can define it that way, and you can "prove" it, but to do so requires that you change the whole of your mathematical apparatus around it.

Whatever.

Hey, isn't the theory of relativity awesome?
How about those quantum physics?

-BigsleyTheOaf

[Braydz]

Ok then, if you are such a know-all, why not share some of your knowledge with us?

[Kefit]

Originally Posted by bigsleytheoaf

Hey, isn't the theory of relativity awesome?
How about those quantum physics?

-BigsleyTheOaf

Hi.

I can go on about both of those subjects, and have done it before on these boards.

Anyway, what is your point? Of course I didn't really "prove" anything - my proof only works in the modern and widely accepted model for both mathematics and numbers, both of which, from an objective standpoint, are fairly arbitrary. It is true that this proof doesn't work in other mathematical models, but I don't think that anyone here is really concerned with those.

Besides, it is impossible to prove anything absolutely in this world. It is generally accepted that when people say they are proving something, that they are proving it within a given widely accepted model. Will this cut it in Ph.D level math and physics? Probably not, but I don't need to worry about that yet.

[blahblah18]

hey Dicktard... I've proved that 1+1=2 .. it is a rather complicated proof actually, a little over 2 pages long. So yeah, try and grow a brain champ.

Also 0/0 does not = 1
0/0 = indeterminant, which means that it represents some answer, but that it can not be determined without other information, whereas
x/0 = undefined

Btw, I assume with safety that
A) you don't have a PHD at any university let alone a good one
B) you probably aren't in college
C) you're so much dumber then I am that I should just pity you.

[hatakikakashi]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[Loverofstories]

*SYSTEM OVERLOAD!!!!!!!!*

[hatakikakashi]

I got all worried when you guys made me think that 1+1 might not equal 2... So I did some research.


I took 1+1 apples then I preceded to count them. There were 2. Then following the scientific method I sent my findings to several different "researchers" They all were able to duplicate my test results, except for my cat Proffesor Kitty who after exhausting study came to the conclusion that there were meow apples.

[sleeplessdragn]

Guys, you have turned a perfectly legit question thread in the CT forum into stupid. BigsleyTheOaf being the source of this stupid by unnecessary flaming.

And my input on BigsleyTheOaf's first post:
It is impossible to measure the amount of understanding needed in order to explain anything. In fact I can just as well casually mention that I don't think you understand enough about math to explain it, because only people who have researched mathematics intensely at the Ph.D level for at least thirty years is even remotely educated enough. On the other hand, it can be said that I think if you have a basic grasp on the concpet of Algebra that you are educated enough to explain it. It is all relative.

Let this thread die now, it has served its purpose.

[blahblah18]

save for the need for more people to call this guy dicktard from now on... and seriously, the "concept" of addition is not one to be just taken for granted. Peano's Axioms are a good start if you're actually interested

[GuidoHunter]

I'm interested, but I could google it if you don't want to post it all.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[bigsleytheoaf]

Hmm, I've written 2 responses, but they don't seem to want to post. Here's a summary:

1) I go to MIT, and I major in Math. I'm not a Ph.D, but I'm good at it. However, there are many people much better than me and my original post was not intended to be "bragging" although I can see how you could interpret it that way.

2) I was trying to express irritation at people who portray a "casual" knowledge of math because I think that this is a very irritating form of boasting. "Oh man, you know what's so awesome about the Radon-Nikodym Theorem!?!?"

Whatever, it doesn't matter.
You guys jump to alot of conclusions and sure start with the feisty comments really quick-like.

[FlashStinger]

what street is MIT on?

[bigsleytheoaf]

"MIT" is large, but the usual address that people associate with it is 77 Mass. Ave. I live at 70 Amherst Street, Cambridge.

[FlashStinger]

ok, can you disprove that this doesn't work

let a=b=1

a=a
a*a=ab
a^2=ab
-ab -ab
a^2 - ab = 0
a(a-b) = 0
/(a-b) /(a-b)
a = 0

Therefore 1= 0, according to the first statement a = b = 1




how about more complex,
Let m = n+1
n+1 = n+1
(n+1)+(n+1) = m(n+1)
(n+1)^2 - m(n+1) = 0
(n+1)(n+1-m) = 0
/(n+1-m) /(n+1-m)

n+1 = 0

???? no matter what n equals, n+1 is always 0, therefore all numbers are pointless, and that degree you will be getting is semi-pointless. Not really. but i like to ask smart mathe people these questions. Let's see if you can fix it.

[FlashStinger]

oh, and for such a bright man, I don't recommend giving out my address on a forum. Hackers and such getting your info.... not normally good. If you didn't play ffr, I'd take you for a spin