| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<isScnTCzp8133Vz6nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 04:51:54 +0000 Subject: Re: New equation Newsgroups: sci.math References: <CJRYb90R4pKx6LHEBcCdcCA4y30@jntp> <d2lprjtieerl4rjrqs9s878j0d03jm645q@4ax.com> <MimQ6gJUHMh7Qd3O8h9HuwqFhUg@jntp> <15vqrj5iscra2hlaiukp60qo0mkiquvai8@4ax.com> <esk4yUvD7xtbFRMwGfaB_cgVGwg@jntp> <vpld4o$26f02$1@dont-email.me> <ZuBkOZlN3Tt29PxIPLwN6BSCDt0@jntp> <vpli8o$27a25$2@dont-email.me> <paGqSVDKFAulO0cdlEqGbkSJSws@jntp> <vplobr$28etg$1@dont-email.me> <_Obp8c7UY5bGF28tIGHuSkSSSTo@jntp> <vplu46$294n9$1@dont-email.me> <vpm321$29pat$1@dont-email.me> <p6OcnTFAkOVreiL6nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com> <vppc9h$32bv9$1@dont-email.me> From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 20:51:38 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <vppc9h$32bv9$1@dont-email.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <isScnTCzp8133Vz6nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> Lines: 69 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-PpVDm4fAw0MaGZbg+h9Y0ktjSsNfnz/heEEDOrtCW32ifxky9Ic0dBoQtA52PsKhFEavoElVmFM8veL!WZU7vjqaByjhaHCnkZSOeXfqjDlhvYLc9aR3XpDe33vb/A9jr72TNBNun1jms3Ah7vVHa2gS6X4= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 3700 On 02/27/2025 01:46 AM, efji wrote: > Le 27/02/2025 à 05:19, Ross Finlayson a écrit : > >> >> Division in complex numbers is opinionated, not unique. > > :) > Hachel has a brother ! > >> >> So, the natural products and alll their combinations >> don't necessarily arrive at "staying in the system". > > wow > >> >> Furthermore, in things like Fourier-style analysis, >> which often enough employ numerical methods a.k.a. >> approximations here the small-angle approximation >> in their derivations, _always have a non-zero error_. > > big time BS :) > >> >> Then, something like the "identity dimension", sees >> instead of going _out_ in the numbers, where complex >> numbers and their iterative products may neatly model >> reflections and rotations, instead go _in_ the numbers, >> making for the envelope of the linear fractional equation, >> Clairaut's and d'Alembert's equations, and otherwise >> with regards to _integral_ analysis vis-a-vis the >> _differential_ analysis. > > Nonsense ala Hachel > >> >> These each have things the other can't implement, >> yet somehow they're part of one thing. >> >> It's called completions since mathematics is replete. > > A BS-philosophical version of Hachel. Let's park them together. > Division in complex numbers most surely is non-unique, whatever troll you are from whatever troll rock you crawled out from under. Furthermore, if you don't know usual derivations of Fourier-style analysis and for example about that the small-angle approximation is a linearisation and is an approximation and is after a numerical method, you do _not_ know. Then about integral analysis and this sort of "original analysis" and about the identity line being the envelope of these very usual integral equations, it certainly is so. So, crawl back under your troll rock, troll worm. I discovered a new equation one time, it's another expression for factorial, sort of like Stirling's, upon which some quite usual criteria for convergence die.