Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

anonimnystefy wrote:

Hi

What do the pictures represent? I don't understand what they are saying. What is structural analysis?

Also that you offer? I can offer only one not to open a new thread: start to read at first and as soon as will see the unclear - ask a question.

**"The conditions imposed on functions, become a source of difficulties which will manage to be avoided only by means of new researches about the principles of integral calculus"**

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Probably, for the person it is better to have a mistake instead of truth, than something to change. It couldn't be even the last century. It seems that the mankind degrades.

**"The conditions imposed on functions, become a source of difficulties which will manage to be avoided only by means of new researches about the principles of integral calculus"**

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Hi bobbym!

In my opinion, that I wrote clearly any school student! Why mathematicians is silent?

**"The conditions imposed on functions, become a source of difficulties which will manage to be avoided only by means of new researches about the principles of integral calculus"**

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,442

Hi;

Could be because there is not any agreement with those ideas. Could be because they are working on something else. Could be because there is no one in here at the moment.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Hi bobbim!

And it seems to me that all of them understand therefore write nothing. Silence - a consent. Simply are afraid to recognize that considered more than three hundred years a mistake as truth. What do you think?

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Oh, I understood everything! I not correctly raised a question. It was necessary to tell that Structural Analysis supplements Calculus and there already everything will turn out by itself. ERRORS of CALCULUS is a big psychological trauma. Mathematicians can't bear it. I understood it was necessary to begin on another! Supplements!

Correct, bobbym?!

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,442

Simply are afraid to recognize that considered more than three hundred years a mistake as truth. What do you think?

Not necessarily. Silence could mean that everything has already been said and there is little more to say.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Clearly.

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Hi bobbym

Using Structural Analysis it is possible to describe all geometry instead of drawings as analytical formulas.

*Last edited by 21122012 (2012-12-03 13:11:42)*

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,442

Hi;

But why do we want to? We already have coordinate geometry invented by Descartes.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

I mean usual geometry. All its figures and constructions can be written down formulas. For example, cone:

*Last edited by 21122012 (2012-12-03 16:03:28)*

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

You look, what interesting things:

Two squares identical, but derivatives various!

WHY?!

*Last edited by 21122012 (2012-12-03 16:09:57)*

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,442

Hi;

But that is the point. Those are not the same. The first one is an antiderivative, the second one is an area.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

bobbym wrote:

Hi;

But that is the point. Those are not the same. The first one is an antiderivative, the second one is an area.

So it also is. While the order won't be brought to Calculus it there will be a theory with limited opportunities.

Look #43.

In my opinion everything is clear even to the school student. You look the right top drawing #43

The concept PARAMETER has no definition. It in a general view value of other independent variable.

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,442

Hi;

Don't you think there is something wrong with this. In words it says u is a function of y and h, depends on y and h. But in your definition you have x and C on the RHS. Where is an y or an h?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

bobbym wrote:

Hi;

Don't you think there is something wrong with this. In words it says u is a function of y and h, depends on y and h. But in your definition you have x and C on the RHS. Where is an y or an h?

I wrote:

Well, I will make geometrical interpretation, time an analytical form of record to you isn't obvious.

*Last edited by 21122012 (2012-12-04 07:11:29)*

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 15,327

Hi 21122012

Before you post anything else, could you explai, in simple words, what the main difference is between Calculus and Structural Analysis?

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

**Online**

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Hi bobbym!

Insert please this link:

h ttp://vladimir938.eto-ya.com/files/2012/12/key-n5.jpg

anonimnystefy wrote:

Hi 21122012

Before you post anything else, could you explai, in simple words, what the main difference is between Calculus and Structural Analysis?

Yes!

Structural Analysis, for example, analyzes all area of the Cartesian system of coordinates, and Calculus only part of this system - the line. And that it is wrong. Because on

*Last edited by 21122012 (2012-12-04 14:05:48)*

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,442

Hi;

This statement here

is read as the sum of all the little bits of u. So it equals

you just can not change the notation to suit yourself.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

bobbym wrote:

Hi;

This statement here

is read as the sum of all the little bits of u. So it equals

you just can not change the notation to suit yourself.

h ttp://vladimir938.eto-ya.com/files/2012/12/key-n5.jpg

- is error! - is true!!!Because

*Last edited by 21122012 (2012-12-04 14:28:52)*

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

You in vain don't listen to me. Not I thought up it. I take this information where took Tesla information on electricity. For example there the formula of the Binomial of Newton looks so:

h ttp://vladimir938.eto-ya.com/files/2012/12/newton.jpg

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Bobbym,

Why you didn't publish this key:

h ttp://vladimir938.eto-ya.com/files/2012/12/key-n5.jpg

?

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

Well, I don't know. I through two keys should publish a decisive key which connects among themselves geometry, integrals, derivatives, algebra, arithmetics and the functional analysis. And you don't publish keys which I give...

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**21122012****Member**- Registered: 2012-11-16
- Posts: 278

bobbym wrote:

Hi;

Since you are disagreeing with the entire mathematical community both present and past, the onus is on you to provide solid evidence to convince everyone else. You will have to point out where anonimnystefy is going wrong.

How?!

** Thomas Ioannes Stiltes.** ...

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,442

Here are the two images you requested. Could not post them before because I was called away to do a couple of chores.

How?!

A better question is why? I have heard of people wanting to dump set theory, I have heard of people who dislike topology. Even heard of people who hate infinity and hate continuous math in favor of transfinite numbers and discrete mathematics but I have never heard of anyone who has had a problem with calculus.

In order to even think about changing it you would have to find an occasion where it did not work. For me, that means you have to find an example where calculus gets the wrong answer. I mean a real live example!

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline