Tuesday, April 17, 2007

 

JSH: Awesome proof

So finally I have a proof that blows away any attempts at lying about it, as with this latest approach I get two quadratics—one defines the a's and another defines the b's.

And I figured out that I can set the solutions for the b's equal the NEGATIVES of the a's, which was actually forced as first I tried to set them equal.

So the functions Q(x) and R(x) by mapping every possible f(x) and g(x), do allow me to find integer solutions that prove my case dramatically.

That means that numerically you can use integer x's and see that abs(g(x)) is the same for both, which blows away any attempts at lying about it—with real mathematicians.

So then you have g(x)=5a_2(x)/7 and g'(x) = 5b_2(x)/17, where g(x) = -g'(x).

So finally I can use numerical methods and directly demonstrate that, yeah, the distributive property DOES hold, even with functions.

The principal underlying the proof is that

p(a+b)*(c+d) = (p*a + p*b)*(c+d)

without regard to the value of 'a' and 'c' so even if they are functions, which they are in my research, it DOES NOT MATTER, so you can just pick a convenience value and the distributive property still holds.

BUT lots of mathematicians inherited a system where mistakes were made before any of you were born, and rather than love mathematical proof they have forced me to find a demonstration that can convince others that they are lying.

Such weakness is what drives the contempt in my postings.

I admit I hate their weakness. Their need for approval.

Their need for you to trust them and believe them even when they are wrong.

If you were Andrew Wiles or Ribet or Taylor, would you tell the truth if you found out that works you were called brilliant for turned out to be crap?

Could you live with people knowing? Or would you break?

Can any of you be real mathematicians?

That's why social crap is so dangerous. Real mathematicians don't need it, so they can walk way from it when the mathematics says so.

To the extent that Wiles, Ribet, Taylor and others cannot, they simply prove they not only are not real mathematicians anyway, regardless of their mistakes, but they have not an inkling of what a real mathematician is.

They need social approval. They need people believing in them.

They need you.





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?