onsdag 4 mars 2020 kl. 09:23:48 UTC+1 skrev bassam karzeddin:
> On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 8:53:32 PM UTC+3, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/788/why-is-it-so-hard-to-find-the-roots-of-polynomial-equations/3482146#3482146
> >
> > Q:It is truly not hard at all to understand the whole issue of polynomials roots in the least time if one honestly gives himself first the chance and before giving it to any other one
> >
> > See in the above question how students even with highest obtained degrees are still sufferings a lot with polynomial solutions like a mind phobia planted into their innocent minds made by either very foolish (but allegedly and illegally called historically genius people) or most likely were well-fabricated by truly human devils to torcher people for ever and remedilessly with it
> >
> > And when a person like me gives them the complete remedy to understand their very devilish trick or absolute unlimited stupidity, in a various types of answers at that big morons site SE, they immediately get the alarm message and feel that they are threaten by their useless business and exposing stupidities, where their action to hide my remedy answer for the whole problem that needs few minutes from specialists to fully realize and at most few hours from any others, and here is only one occasion for deleting the secret for polynomial solutions impossibility by radicals
> >
> > My following deleted post, (but not so clear as was produced in their shifty thieves sites)
> > *********************************my answer*******************
> >
> > I’m very sorry mathematicians, In fact, I’m truly too sad academic mathematicians, and I don’t know what to say in such a miserable situations,
> >
> > and I never like to be that messenger to tell you the absolute full truth about the roots of polynomial equations shocking facts that are generally higher than first degree in principles, were generally no academic Reputable Journal and University would ever like to believe it nor would ever be capable to tolerate it or accept it as it is,
> > despite a very elementary school level rigorous proof that immediately reveals all those old discovered facts, even though they are in fact that old but were discovered only in the elapsed century around (1990), but the facts insist to come out and so, unfortunately, they did where so many specialized people know about them since years by now, where in all cases the bitter truths must be far better than many sweet human mind fallacies, and certainly, you would
> >
> > immediately understand the theme of the surprising too elementary proofs from the first look or few minutes at most, since they are truly too simple to understand
> >
> > And of course, it would be too silly and quite shameful to keep denying them or even claim that needs any peer review, especially from an amateur civil engineer like me for example, and kindly don’t be so angry because my true intention was never to disgrace any science in particular but to upraise the absolute truth as always as usual for the grate sack of all human being benefits as a result
> >
> > However, your true turn than should be raising them professionally in a group works (since this would never be accepted by any single academic individual no matter who is that person is well-trusted and reputed or authorized as well) to your highest esteemed specialized mathematical authorities in order to save the new innocent uprising generations from wasting their entire lives aimlessly and hopelessly as well searching general radical roots were no real root ever exists generally for polynomials that are sourced strictly from direct insolvable Diophantine Equations, where no real number for root ever exists (but approximately accepted in real constructible number form) for whatever non-mathematical reason might be)
> >
> > Let us show you fast the well-known already revealed secret publicly of the general insolvability of the quintic equations that was basically and simply derived from this simple Insolvable Diophantine Equation
> > k^5=ks^4+s^5
> >
> > , where (k,s) are co prime non-zero integers Where a beginner in number theory would easily understand it immediately and only from the first glance, (How?),
> >
> > don’t please anymore pretend or wonder!
> > The integer s divides exactly the RHS but doesn’t divide exactly the LHS of the above DE, (Proof rigorously completed for sure), where “divides exactly” mean the result is a full integer whereas “doesn’t divide exactly” mean the result is a fraction of a rational number that is never a full integer, hence no equity exists and insolvability is well-established, where also no such integers like (k,s) ever exist to satisfy the above DE
> >
> > But if someone so innocently divides the whole DE above by the term k5, and denote the ratio as (x=s/k), and further rearrange those three terms, then he would wonderfully arrive immediately on this very famous reduced unsolvable form of fifth-degree polynomial like this form:
> > x^5+x^4–1=0
> >
> > , Where this polynomial form must have at least one real algebraic root (but impossible to construct by any means) in accordance with the fundamental theorem of algebra in mathematics that usually is associated with infinity that isn’t any existing number in the same mathematics
> >
> > Hence a very clear contradiction sourced mainly from infinity, otherwise how can there be any radical root if there is no real existing root basically; however below is well-known reliable formula nowadays about how can we approximate a real root in a constructible number form (since this is the only true choice left for us if we insist to have something like real approximated root for whatever other non-mathematical reason might be
> >
> >
> > Here is this a NEW CORRECT One real approximated root in a rational form for the following n-th degree polynomial equation
> > (x^n+x^m=1)
> >
> > where (n>m) are two distinct positive integers, is given by the following series formula:
> >
> > x=1−1n+∑k=2N(−1)k∏k−1i=1(km−in+1)k!nk=1−1n+2m−n+12!n2−(3m−2n+1)(3m−n+1)3!n3+(4m−3n+1)(4m−2n+1)(4m−n+1)4!n4−(5m−n+1)(5m−2n+1)(5m−3n+1)(5m−4n+1)5!n5+⋯
> >
> > *Note that - the formula was not typed or looking like its original shape there
> >
> > Where N is a relatively to infinity a very small suitable chosen integer up to our practical needs and capability of making our real roots more sensible for any other purpose since it is absolutely and perpetually impossible to make the sum of our terms go with no number in mathematics principles like infinity, since then our real root in our minds would be simply become like a ratio of two no existing numbers (x=s/k), where each with uncountable number of digits, which isn't any number,
> >
> > I know that many other unbelievable questions might immediately arise about the other complex roots that are associated with that unreal root or the well-established continuity of the real numbers or many more, but make sure that those are even much easier questions to be correctly answered if one is given any chance to explain the most likely in one hour or so
> >
> > However, my public PUBLISHED profiles with few short answers (say on Quora) are guaranteed to explain all your questions and many more related issues about polynomials and their solvability conditions
> >
> > My Sincere Regards
> >
> > Copyright©, 2019 Bassam Karzeddin
> >
> > REFERENCE https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-ways-to-understand-the-proof-that-there-is-no-formula-for-expressing-the-roots-of-the-general-quintic-equation-via-radicals/answer/Bassam-Karzeddin-1
> >
> > (1994) for a reference to the more general solution of this Trinomial equation with rational coefficients of the following form
> > ax^n+bx^m+c=0
> >
> > http://www.nl.gov.jo/Documents/Bibliography/BibliographyEn/1994En.pdf
> >
> > Kindly: don’t remove the references for purposes of translations to Arabic Language and future historical documentary
> > **********************************end******************
> >
> > I'm also so aware that GENERALLY, the vast majorities of readers are most likely much worse than them, but the fact is truly more important than your entire silly opinionS and existence too, FOR SURE
> >
> > BKK
> *****************************************************
>
> Another deleted answer where there are so many, the topic is in this below link, but I suspect if they were allowing copying the link
>
> https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/8424/who-are-the-top-mathematicians-who-were-ignored-due-to-their-unconventional-appr/11327#11327
>
> Another modified answer was also deleted only by Moron Moderators gauges for unknown reasons so far
>
>
> https://hsm.stackexchange.com/posts/11327/edit
>
> I know that it is not a good idea to promote one's own self by the public academic mainstream mathematicians and alike, but when it becomes very necessary not for the sake of personal needs but solely for the sake of the absolute truth that soon or later must be realized for all, then it becomes like a holy grail war for the sake of absolute truths that are spreading slowly nowadays by notable scientists and mathematicians as well and so illegally not from their true discoverers as being unknown amateurs where all their true proven and public published discoveries would ultimately be so shamefully stolen by those academics in power under the sunlight and everyone's own eyes in today's opened world for everybody concerned about the truths that had been well-revealed despite the aimless tries to hide them by traditional academic views
>
> Where the public online resources are in fact natural historical records that aren't oriented by anyone's own opinion or scientific authorities opinions
>
> And here, if one isn't biased at all to his own acquired knowledge can simply review those old discovered absolute facts that don't need even the minimum peer-review to realize them since they are mostly mid-school level and amateurs interest to easily realize once a person waste few hours to get them all in-depth, where this isn't against modern maths, logic, philosophy or pure physics but better view to the hidden facts about the theoretical sciences that are hiding behind earthy practicality instead of being universally valid
>
> I do think firmly after a very long personal experience with opened freely public sites for learning and discussing many mathematical issues that the minimum ethical guarantees with minimum human normal morality and intelligence required does not exist at all among the alleged academic professionals experts of (logic, philosophy, pure physics and mathematics in particular as well) towards amateurs recent and old freely public published discoveries that strictly contradict their own old refuted beliefs with very rigorous and so elementary proofs (based on and accompanied with undeniable numerical counterexamples that never lie generally like humans usually and intentionally do), where that is in fact, don’t need truly any peer-review to conclude and easily understand almost in little time
>
> I know that it isn’t favorable at all to be promoted one’s own personal attitudes generally by public mainstream, but when it is too important to the whole world to understand the absolute facts, then it becomes so necessary as a holy grail for one or few against the whole world where the situation had been already reached such a miserable shameful stage of total dishonesties and complete denials for an amateurs original discoveries that rarely anybody hasn’t yet heard of them before
>
> I would provide the pieces of shreds of evidence that are sourced strictly from my freely public published profiles since 2004, (on the Math Forum first that is hidden deliberately today, with sci. math and the still viewable portion of my SE-sections accounts), but even my current Quora’s published related answers (around 20), are more than sufficient to understand the following very important and fundamental issues about the foundations of mathematics
>
> 1) I had debunked the existence of (zero and negative) numbers as well as being considered real numbers, where those were not any true or necessary discoveries but human made-up like numbers with their subsequent fairy babies of imaginary numbers in mathematics
>
> 2) I had debunked the existence of the alleged real (irrational numbers that aren’t real constructible numbers), where $(\pi, \sqrt[3]{2})$ are on the top-list of no-numbers in the true mathematics
>
> 3) I had debunked the Cardano formula for cubic equation solution
>
> 4) I had debunked (Galois, Ruffini, and Able) theorems about the impossibilities of solving the quantic (fifth-degree equations and higher by radicals, since true existing radicals are only those real constructible numbers for sure)
>
> 5) I had debunked the existence of the alleged real numbers that are assumed in human minds with endless terms or digits where the fake untrue one is $(0.999…)$ on the top-list as no number (with around 11 elementary rigorous proofs)
>
> 6) I had debunked the delusional concept of infinity in modern mathematics in so many direct ways that a school student or layperson can immediately understand
>
> 7) I had debunked many well-established definitions in mathematics that are strictly contradicting very great theorems like (Pythagoras and Fermat’s last theorem) to be not any better than very wrong misleading and meaningless decisions
>
> 8) I had debunked the (Cauchy sequence, Dedekind cuts, Newton’s approximations, limits, Intermediate theorem, convergence divergence principles, …etc) in defining truly even a single and true irrational number like $\sqrt{2}$, But they are TRULY not more than good approximation methods for comparison
>
> 9) I had proved correctly the three old impossible construction problems raised by the ancient Greeks with too simple public published elementary proofs that don’t need any peer-review that are also most suitable for school students and interested amateurs to easily grasp whiten few hours
>
> 10) I had debunked the famous Wetzel proofs in (1837) about the three famous impossibilities of the ancient Greek problems about squaring the circle, doubling the cube and trisecting the arbitrary angle since the proofs were true in conclusions but never true in true reasoning which kept the doors opened so widely for so many other historical and current claimers to claim true solutions by other tools, where tools are basically not at all relevant to the problems since they are only tools for illustrations and demonstrations only, where the compass itself is invalid and impossible to construct truly a circle because circle itself doesn’t exist but was the biggest mathematical object illusion since the early start of mathematics and up to this date of my answer
>
> 11) I had debunked the set theory based on two fundamental mistakes by considering natural numbers do constitute a set and also being considered countable, noting that few other well-known academics or amateurs share me some of my point of views and may be before me in some particular issues, like (John Gabriel, Professor WM, AP, Kong Dongh, …., with rabid increasing numbers on sci. math) who are also facing the traditional standared views of printed mathematics in minds from the vast majorities of mainstream acadimics (where most of them are truly anonoymious charectures) on the free immoderate site like (sci. math) sections for true hot debate about many fundamental issues about the foundations of mathematics, and new revolutionary mathematics, since that is the only immoderate site in the whole world where the academic professionals with true identity names can’t (debate, defend their math’s, alter topics, hide them, modify topics, delete articles, …, etc.), but were found in so many occasions hiding under many fake characters as being truly Wikipedia anonymous writers, or book authors and secretive researchers working together in something like true gauges in order to suppress any new important issue and advertising for their own (Wikipedia articles, published papers and books, and protecting all kinds of traditional refuted mathematics that was sourced mainly from the alleged top-most reputable Journals and Universities on our very small planet
>
> However, I had also introduced many still standing and viewable irrefutable conjectures (in a supercomputer era) in number theory, besides discovering the non-existing angles that are usually believed in (Old & Modern Mathematic) as well (with so elementary rigorous proofs that never need any true peer-review to understand
> I have also new unpublished theorems that should have been well-known since few thousand years but no point of informing those four described above categories of academic specialized experts either publically or equivalently on the official levels, since that certainly would be immediately suppressed and stolen by so many devilish intolerable ways of never respecting any free independent human intellectual rights, FOR SURE
>
>
> I hope my answer would remain as a documented evidence for near future investigations and translations for other languages like Arabic as a wonderful piece of evidence for natural historical purposes and in the very near future era of (AI), and new generations to come once the scientists and specialized engineers develop effectively the proper artificial intelligence that would work independently and unbiased from any human control or desires to realize simply all of those many proved claims immediately and for sure
> So, kindly give the truth the least chance to come up instead of suppressing it aimlessly concerning the false mathematics to be well-explained and so exposed for all humans on earth, where it was well-explained earlier in many answers that the true scientific progress is never related or dependent on them by any means for sure
> Regards
>
> Jan. 8th, 2020
>
> Bassam Karzeddin
>
> References:
>
> Wikipedia (general)
>
> My few answers
> https://www.quora.com/content?content_types=answers (https://www.quora.com/content?content_types=answers)
>
> However, deleting the proven facts would certainly strengthen them more FOR SURE
>
> Bassam Karzeddin
What being an engineer does to a mfer