I have asked you the same question 5 times as did other members. You just want to go on about monkeys and who acts like them.
Since no one else will now post to you and I am through, this thread is closed.
]]>I have to disagree. You are wrong to call anyone a monkey. Even if he is. Politeness demands we be tactful.
You really don't understand me or you pretend that you don't understand to cause to me aggression of many people? I told you that I use sense of expression "repeats as a monkey".
]]>bobbym wrote:Unless you are Isaac Newton there is and always will be many people smarter than you are.
And even Isaac Newton himself admitted that there were people smarter than he was giants on whose shoulders he stood.
I don't see in it for myself problems. Maybe you have with it a problem but at me isn't present.
]]>Hmmmm, I do not see how you can ever progress relying solely on your input. Unless you are Isaac Newton there is and always will be many people smarter than you are. In your case, some of them are on this forum.
This private matter of everyone. Only Newton didn't finish the research of the Binomial by this formula, and I finished:
]]>
On the lighter side, here in the good ole USA if anyone called me a humanoid monkey I would clobber him with my bunch of ripe bananas.
I already explained to you that meant people who have no thoughts and strangers use only and speak: "And I so think". Actually they don't think in any way and only repeat. Therefore I used sense of expression: "Repeats as a monkey". I offended nobody by it, I simply established the fact. And the fact can't offend the normal person.
]]>Newton was a towering genius and it is hard to imagine that he was capable of any humility. That is why although he was always my hero, I tend to believe the negative viewpoint about him.
Also interesting, is that the bulk of Newton's work in alchemy and related fields is largely unknown.
]]>Some historians think that statement has a double meaning. They think he was
ridiculing Robert Hooke who was a hunchback. In their interpretation Newton was saying I am standing on his back and crushing him.
I am reading it now in the page you sent me. I remember coming across it in a book a while back but do not remember the title.
]]>Unless you are Isaac Newton there is and always will be many people smarter than you are.
And even Isaac Newton himself admitted that there were people smarter than he was giants on whose shoulders he stood.
]]>I have seen quotes by Bruno and Galileo and now Aristotle. It is fine to reason for yourself, to stand on your own two feet, but a man has got to know his limitations. Got to know when he needs help, got to be able to admit when he is wrong.
Now about this isomerous space, what is it?
P.S. You will be able to teach nothing me besides that you will repeat that that is in textbooks. And that that am in textbooks I already read.
You have read every textbook? You know everything inside of them? A good textbook is something you hold on to for life. Studying it for life.
On the lighter side, here in the good ole USA if anyone called me a humanoid monkey I would clobber him with my bunch of ripe bananas.
]]>As for other forums that I am not guilty in that that in the world only one percent of homo sapiense and 99 percent of humanoid monkeys.
So the whole world is made up of 99% humanoid monkeys as you call them. I know a lot of people who share that opinion. Each one of them carefully leaves himself out of the 99%. You can not seriously hope to persuade people that you have just called monkeys. You say you do not come from Mars, I am not so sure. You wonder why you are bounced from forums. You call people monkeys and then can not understand their reaction towards you?
It is sad that you think you are barred from these forums because of the briliance of your ideas rather than your callous comments.
]]>You started this thread saying "one of the many errors of calculus".
I have seen three of your errors. In each case you have not applied calculus theory correctly. I have explained why and you have stubbornly argued with me.
If there are two theories and they in three moments contradict each other, each of two theories has the right yet these moments errors of other theory won't consider is found out what of theories is true. Correctness of any theory can be proved by only one way - result of experience. I made this experiment:
http://vladimir938.eto-ya.com/files/2012/12/key.gif
But I have offered many links to websites to support my argument, and you have ignored these. If this is the way you have behaved on other forums, then I am not surprised that you have not succeeded there.
I didn't arrive here from Mars. That is written in references which you to me gave I I know not worse you. To me on Calculus of the teacher always put only the highest marks. I didn't ignore them but they in any way don't disprove my arguments THEY to THEM CONTRADICT as has to be in two contradicting theories.
As for other forums that I am not guilty in that that in the world only one percent of homo sapiense and 99 percent of humanoid monkeys.
I will teach you how to do calculus if you are willing to listen. Once you can use it correctly, it will be interesting to see if any 'errors' remain.
I am assuming that you have invented 'structural analysis' yourself. Clearly, you understand what you mean and have spent a long time working on it.
You post complicated diagrams, with annotation in Russian, and often with formulas that are not defined properly. Do you really think I can understand any of your theory? If you wish to promote this theory you need to present it properly; in the way that mathematicains have done for thousands of years.
Start with your axioms.
Give simple examples.
Pause, while your pupil asks questions and tries to master the basics.
Set questions that are within the grasp of your pupil, so they can move forward slowly.
Increase the level of difficulty only as your pupil gets better.I hope you find this advice helpful
Bob
Look how many thousand people participated in mathematics creation. And you want that I one replaced thousands. From me it is enough of that that I found mistakes and offered the correct direction. the rest will be done by other people.
P.S. You will be able to teach nothing me besides that you will repeat that that is in textbooks. And that that am in textbooks I already read.
I gave an example of experience which showed that graf of function y=f (x) and y=f(x) aren't connected in any way with each other except for values of derivative two various functions in curve points. THESE ARE VARIOUS FUNCTIONS!
]]>