Math Is Fun Forum

You did well. It is always good to see something from different angles.

For instance, since I have no more a person to tell me if my solution of a problem is wrong or right, I used to find out different ways (two in the least) to solve it.

Did you try Wikipedia?

For instance, in year 1980, I presented a novel simple demodulator (claimed non-existent at the universities, even in these days) to the local authorities so that they can have real secure communications (being non-existent to the engineers in the developed countries).
I got many negative reactions. The worst one was in a meeting at a room in the military headquarters. I was with three persons: a (so-called) professor in electronics, his assistant and a high officer (as a supervisor). This professor insisted on saying one thing while avoiding talking about anything else: "You cannot know something not known in the West". When I knew he is a professor in electronics, I thought he was able to discuss with me, scientifically, many things about the presented project. Instead, he kept repeating that I am a dreamer while refusing to do any further step to verify if my work is real or not. After about 20 minutes, I recalled what happened to Galileo because I had the impression that I will end up be in prison if I don't play the ignorant and please that professor. So, thanks to Galileo, I was able to return home sane and safe
By the way, at the National Research Center (at the capital), I was told clearly that a local engineer has no right to work on any novel project.
Also, a high security officer was sincere with me (in private) that having secure RF communications whose sets are not imported from abroad is out of question (in other words, their so-called secure communications have to be monitored by certain foreigners).
As I mentioned earlier, I simply took advantage of my unknown demodulator when I needed to have secure private RF links for many years in the 80's.

Conclusion:
'New knowledge' has to wait till the World's Masters know (usually by their close servants) how to let it serve well their own interests and be under their full direct control too. This took about 2 centuries in case of Galileo

Kerim

Welcome Liu,

I guess you heard already that every big project starts always with a first small step. I hope you will be able to find out soon what your first small step could be.

From my own experience, when someone really needs to achieve something, he always ends up doing it even after zillions of failures.

Kerim

Very interesting. So far, so I might be wrong, I see just one application which can benefit from this study.

I agree with you.
I usually hear "find the integer' instead of 'truncate'.
I mean, the English math's verb 'truncate' is somehow new to me. Thanks to you, I know now its meaning.

While I respect all other’s interesting answers, here is mine:

The probability for Jesus to return back to the planet earth is zero.
Speaking logically (since we are in a math forum), there is no reason, at all, for Jesus to return back.

But this 'logical view' doesn’t prevent zillions of world’s men who like to see in Him an 'earthly' ultimate King (by the way, this earthly view is very clear on the Gospel during His Crucifixion), to believe that He will come back to rule, with them, the tiny planet Earth (and to live, therefore, the death of Earth as well!).

Is it hard to get what I say?

Let us recall that, on the Gospel, even the well-educated ruler, Nicodemus, who was very serious and came to Jesus to learn from Him, couldn’t understand His 'spiritual' message. Why? Well, I am afraid I have to leave it as an exercise for some of you to solve

For instance, I personally can't explain how it may be difficult for my brain, sometimes, to understand/solve a new idea/problem (speaking practically), then it gets it very well just by itself after a certain time (after a month, a year or too many years in some cases).
The key point is that I had to be interested to get it very seriously, for one reason or another.

No one told me yet what the word sin (or sinning) means in one's life exactly, speaking practically.

For instance, I would become crazy if I had to live in this material world forever. But, fortunately, the Will/Power behind my existence gave me a mortal living flesh so that my journey in it is just temporary.
After all, my best moment, after I live a long hard-working day, is the time to sleep. And the death of my living flesh is simply my last eternal sleep (but this is not the end of the story).

We like or not, by design, a living body should be alarmed (having pain) every time there is something wrong or damaged in it. Otherwise, it can't survive for long (a human baby would never have the chance to grow up and be even a kid).

Hatred, wars, corruption and whatever is called evil are typical in the material world, also by design. They are the fruit of executing the natural pre-programmed instructions embedded in every living body (natural instincts). 'Men of the world' (created to serve the material world as all other living things are) have no choice but to be guided by their natural instincts, as robots run exactly as they were programmed to do.

This is why I personally (being no more of this world) have no reason to resist or even blame the 'men of the world' because they are just robots, driven solely by their natural programs (instincts). They cannot (they are not supposed, by design) to oppose the natural instructions embedded in their living cells. In fact, about 2000 years ago, someone revealed this natural crucial truth very clearly when He forgave all His killers because "they know not what they do".

Who has ears will hear.

The sun is also dying. 

But what I am sure of is that Earth (even the entire universe) will cease to exist when my mortal living flesh will die. I mean, no one will be able to convince my dead body that the universe still exists

About life, it does also exist in zillions of planets in the universe. Earth is just one of them.

Sorry for not being clearer.
Can we see THE point as defined in Geometry? Of course, we can't point out to something and say this is THE point as it is defined in Geometry.
And isn't this unseen point very useful if it is included in some scientific studies? Of course, it is (to me in the least).

I mean, this is the logical answer to those who insist that one 'should ignore' an idea (and its related studies) if it refers to something or entity that cannot be seen (dur to lack of complete definition, for example).
After all, we can't blame them. They surely didn't have the chance or the time to learn and use Geometry for example.

For instance, this is indeed one of the proofs that being non-existent for not being well-defined doesn't imply being non-useful in one's life.