torsdag 11 juli 2019 kl. 10:43:58 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 9:16:33 AM UTC+3, Simply Curious wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 7:18:14 AM UTC-4, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 10:53:34 AM UTC+3, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > Regards
> > > > Bassam King Karzeddin
> > > > Dec. 27th, 2017
> > >
> > > Mainstream mathematicians must pay lots of attention to the very elementary issues in their mathematics, in order to not fall again into too many fictions that last for thousands of years or many centuries, FOR SURE
> > > BKK
> >
> > Might you consider, consider there have been centuries and centuries of mathematicians exposed to said idea, these 'very elementary issues' and yet next to none took your side, could it be that...
> >
> > you are wrong?
> You simply curious came recently here and it so clear that you have missed so many things that had been proved **RIGORIOUSLLU* and more funnily by too **ELEMENTARY** proofs, where No one could ever challenge them
>
> Don't think that I'm so happy with my still standing challenges to all mathematicians on earth, but very sad to discover the so *bitter* facts about the *fake* intellectuality of professional mathematicians generally
>
> On the contrary, I would be too glad to be proven wrong with any one of the still standing challenges that I have no time to keep repeating it and reteaching it separately to everyone to be convinced even ***SECRETLY***, since they are there freely available a few seconds away from everybody (in my posts)
>
> And to give you a very good *HINT* to start, just try to understand the following but without being so biased to anything else except *true* mathematics since you seem to be a book author of mathematics books, Wonder!
>
> **The BIG HINT FOR YOU TO RECOVER AND GET COMPLETELY HEALED FOR SURE**
>
> Think about why do we have an exact existing triangle with sides
> (1, 1, Sqrt(2)), but No triangle ever exists with sides (1, 1, 1.4142135623...)
>
> Where (1.4142135623...) is the equivalent decimal representation of sqrt(2) in *YOUR* modern mathematics
>
> LARGER HINT: this had been solved by me quite many times in my posts, but you do try yourself first in order to gain the new super insight that almost all the mathematicians miss so miserably for sure
>
> If you truly understand this problem, then I would guarantee you a new brain where you would throw away the older one that was so polluted with those many fictions we are revealing for day and night since years, for sure
>
> And this would give you a better chance of publishing new books and never like before
> Good luck
> BKK
Of course a such triangle exists. You even gave its coordinates.

On Friday, July 28, 2023 at 11:11:06 PM UTC+3, markus...@gmail.com wrote:
> torsdag 11 juli 2019 kl. 10:43:58 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 9:16:33 AM UTC+3, Simply Curious wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 7:18:14 AM UTC-4, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 10:53:34 AM UTC+3, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Bassam King Karzeddin
> > > > > Dec. 27th, 2017
> > > >
> > > > Mainstream mathematicians must pay lots of attention to the very elementary issues in their mathematics, in order to not fall again into too many fictions that last for thousands of years or many centuries, FOR SURE
> > > > BKK
> > >
> > > Might you consider, consider there have been centuries and centuries of mathematicians exposed to said idea, these 'very elementary issues' and yet next to none took your side, could it be that...
> > >
> > > you are wrong?
> > You simply curious came recently here and it so clear that you have missed so many things that had been proved **RIGORIOUSLLU* and more funnily by too **ELEMENTARY** proofs, where No one could ever challenge them
> >
> > Don't think that I'm so happy with my still standing challenges to all mathematicians on earth, but very sad to discover the so *bitter* facts about the *fake* intellectuality of professional mathematicians generally
> >
> > On the contrary, I would be too glad to be proven wrong with any one of the still standing challenges that I have no time to keep repeating it and reteaching it separately to everyone to be convinced even ***SECRETLY***, since they are there freely available a few seconds away from everybody (in my posts)
> >
> > And to give you a very good *HINT* to start, just try to understand the following but without being so biased to anything else except *true* mathematics since you seem to be a book author of mathematics books, Wonder!
> >
> > **The BIG HINT FOR YOU TO RECOVER AND GET COMPLETELY HEALED FOR SURE**
> >
> > Think about why do we have an exact existing triangle with sides
> > (1, 1, Sqrt(2)), but No triangle ever exists with sides (1, 1, 1.4142135623...)
> >
> > Where (1.4142135623...) is the equivalent decimal representation of sqrt(2) in *YOUR* modern mathematics
> >
> > LARGER HINT: this had been solved by me quite many times in my posts, but you do try yourself first in order to gain the new super insight that almost all the mathematicians miss so miserably for sure
> >
> > If you truly understand this problem, then I would guarantee you a new brain where you would throw away the older one that was so polluted with those many fictions we are revealing for day and night since years, for sure
> >
> > And this would give you a better chance of publishing new books and never like before
> > Good luck
> > BKK
> Of course a such triangle exists. You even gave its coordinates.
Do you mean the triangle that has at least one of its angles equals EXACTLY to an angle as (2*Pi/9 = 40) Degrees? Or an angle like 31 degrees, ...., etc

No, they never exist in any existing Triangle for more than sure

And I know that humans generally can't understand these new issues & proven discoveries, mainly for their inheereted incurable mental retardation

Since they had been mised for many thousands years & Babylon times until tomorrow...?

Sure you can't understand anything then

Bassam Karzeddin

måndag 31 juli 2023 kl. 04:46:20 UTC+2 skrev bassam karzeddin:
> On Friday, July 28, 2023 at 11:11:06 PM UTC+3, markus...@gmail.com wrote:
> > torsdag 11 juli 2019 kl. 10:43:58 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 9:16:33 AM UTC+3, Simply Curious wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 7:18:14 AM UTC-4, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 10:53:34 AM UTC+3, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Bassam King Karzeddin
> > > > > > Dec. 27th, 2017
> > > > >
> > > > > Mainstream mathematicians must pay lots of attention to the very elementary issues in their mathematics, in order to not fall again into too many fictions that last for thousands of years or many centuries, FOR SURE
> > > > > BKK
> > > >
> > > > Might you consider, consider there have been centuries and centuries of mathematicians exposed to said idea, these 'very elementary issues' and yet next to none took your side, could it be that...
> > > >
> > > > you are wrong?
> > > You simply curious came recently here and it so clear that you have missed so many things that had been proved **RIGORIOUSLLU* and more funnily by too **ELEMENTARY** proofs, where No one could ever challenge them
> > >
> > > Don't think that I'm so happy with my still standing challenges to all mathematicians on earth, but very sad to discover the so *bitter* facts about the *fake* intellectuality of professional mathematicians generally
> > >
> > > On the contrary, I would be too glad to be proven wrong with any one of the still standing challenges that I have no time to keep repeating it and reteaching it separately to everyone to be convinced even ***SECRETLY***, since they are there freely available a few seconds away from everybody (in my posts)
> > >
> > > And to give you a very good *HINT* to start, just try to understand the following but without being so biased to anything else except *true* mathematics since you seem to be a book author of mathematics books, Wonder!
> > >
> > > **The BIG HINT FOR YOU TO RECOVER AND GET COMPLETELY HEALED FOR SURE**
> > >
> > > Think about why do we have an exact existing triangle with sides
> > > (1, 1, Sqrt(2)), but No triangle ever exists with sides (1, 1, 1.4142135623...)
> > >
> > > Where (1.4142135623...) is the equivalent decimal representation of sqrt(2) in *YOUR* modern mathematics
> > >
> > > LARGER HINT: this had been solved by me quite many times in my posts, but you do try yourself first in order to gain the new super insight that almost all the mathematicians miss so miserably for sure
> > >
> > > If you truly understand this problem, then I would guarantee you a new brain where you would throw away the older one that was so polluted with those many fictions we are revealing for day and night since years, for sure
> > >
> > > And this would give you a better chance of publishing new books and never like before
> > > Good luck
> > > BKK
> > Of course a such triangle exists. You even gave its coordinates.
> Do you mean the triangle that has at least one of its angles equals EXACTLY to an angle as (2*Pi/9 = 40) Degrees? Or an angle like 31 degrees, ....., etc
>
> No, they never exist in any existing Triangle for more than sure
>
> And I know that humans generally can't understand these new issues & proven discoveries, mainly for their inheereted incurable mental retardation
>
> Since they had been mised for many thousands years & Babylon times until tomorrow...?
>
> Sure you can't understand anything then
>
> Bassam Karzeddin
2pi/9 is an exact number.

On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 8:36:00 PM UTC+3, markus...@gmail.com wrote:
> måndag 31 juli 2023 kl. 04:46:20 UTC+2 skrev bassam karzeddin:
> > On Friday, July 28, 2023 at 11:11:06 PM UTC+3, markus...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > torsdag 11 juli 2019 kl. 10:43:58 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> > > > On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 9:16:33 AM UTC+3, Simply Curious wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 7:18:14 AM UTC-4, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 10:53:34 AM UTC+3, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Bassam King Karzeddin
> > > > > > > Dec. 27th, 2017
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mainstream mathematicians must pay lots of attention to the very elementary issues in their mathematics, in order to not fall again into too many fictions that last for thousands of years or many centuries, FOR SURE
> > > > > > BKK
> > > > >
> > > > > Might you consider, consider there have been centuries and centuries of mathematicians exposed to said idea, these 'very elementary issues' and yet next to none took your side, could it be that...
> > > > >
> > > > > you are wrong?
> > > > You simply curious came recently here and it so clear that you have missed so many things that had been proved **RIGORIOUSLLU* and more funnily by too **ELEMENTARY** proofs, where No one could ever challenge them
> > > >
> > > > Don't think that I'm so happy with my still standing challenges to all mathematicians on earth, but very sad to discover the so *bitter* facts about the *fake* intellectuality of professional mathematicians generally
> > > >
> > > > On the contrary, I would be too glad to be proven wrong with any one of the still standing challenges that I have no time to keep repeating it and reteaching it separately to everyone to be convinced even ***SECRETLY***, since they are there freely available a few seconds away from everybody (in my posts)
> > > >
> > > > And to give you a very good *HINT* to start, just try to understand the following but without being so biased to anything else except *true* mathematics since you seem to be a book author of mathematics books, Wonder!
> > > >
> > > > **The BIG HINT FOR YOU TO RECOVER AND GET COMPLETELY HEALED FOR SURE**
> > > >
> > > > Think about why do we have an exact existing triangle with sides
> > > > (1, 1, Sqrt(2)), but No triangle ever exists with sides (1, 1, 1.4142135623...)
> > > >
> > > > Where (1.4142135623...) is the equivalent decimal representation of sqrt(2) in *YOUR* modern mathematics
> > > >
> > > > LARGER HINT: this had been solved by me quite many times in my posts, but you do try yourself first in order to gain the new super insight that almost all the mathematicians miss so miserably for sure
> > > >
> > > > If you truly understand this problem, then I would guarantee you a new brain where you would throw away the older one that was so polluted with those many fictions we are revealing for day and night since years, for sure
> > > >
> > > > And this would give you a better chance of publishing new books and never like before
> > > > Good luck
> > > > BKK
> > > Of course a such triangle exists. You even gave its coordinates.
> > Do you mean the triangle that has at least one of its angles equals EXACTLY to an angle as (2*Pi/9 = 40) Degrees? Or an angle like 31 degrees, ....., etc
> >
> > No, they never exist in any existing Triangle for more than sure
> >
> > And I know that humans generally can't understand these new issues & proven discoveries, mainly for their inheereted incurable mental retardation
> >
> > Since they had been mised for many thousands years & Babylon times until tomorrow...?
> >
> > Sure you can't understand anything then
> >
> > Bassam Karzeddin
> 2pi/9 is an exact number.

2pi/9 isn't a number nor it is any existing angle Moron

Didn't you hear yet about the irrefutable proof published in my posts?

BKK 🔊

On 8/13/2023 8:10 PM, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 8:36:00 PM UTC+3, markus...@gmail.com wrote:
>> måndag 31 juli 2023 kl. 04:46:20 UTC+2 skrev bassam karzeddin:
>>> On Friday, July 28, 2023 at 11:11:06 PM UTC+3, markus...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> torsdag 11 juli 2019 kl. 10:43:58 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
>>>>> On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 9:16:33 AM UTC+3, Simply Curious wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 7:18:14 AM UTC-4, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 10:53:34 AM UTC+3, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Bassam King Karzeddin
>>>>>>>> Dec. 27th, 2017
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mainstream mathematicians must pay lots of attention to the very elementary issues in their mathematics, in order to not fall again into too many fictions that last for thousands of years or many centuries, FOR SURE
>>>>>>> BKK
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Might you consider, consider there have been centuries and centuries of mathematicians exposed to said idea, these 'very elementary issues' and yet next to none took your side, could it be that...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you are wrong?
>>>>> You simply curious came recently here and it so clear that you have missed so many things that had been proved **RIGORIOUSLLU* and more funnily by too **ELEMENTARY** proofs, where No one could ever challenge them
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't think that I'm so happy with my still standing challenges to all mathematicians on earth, but very sad to discover the so *bitter* facts about the *fake* intellectuality of professional mathematicians generally
>>>>>
>>>>> On the contrary, I would be too glad to be proven wrong with any one of the still standing challenges that I have no time to keep repeating it and reteaching it separately to everyone to be convinced even ***SECRETLY***, since they are there freely available a few seconds away from everybody (in my posts)
>>>>>
>>>>> And to give you a very good *HINT* to start, just try to understand the following but without being so biased to anything else except *true* mathematics since you seem to be a book author of mathematics books, Wonder!
>>>>>
>>>>> **The BIG HINT FOR YOU TO RECOVER AND GET COMPLETELY HEALED FOR SURE**
>>>>>
>>>>> Think about why do we have an exact existing triangle with sides
>>>>> (1, 1, Sqrt(2)), but No triangle ever exists with sides (1, 1, 1.4142135623...)
>>>>>
>>>>> Where (1.4142135623...) is the equivalent decimal representation of sqrt(2) in *YOUR* modern mathematics
>>>>>
>>>>> LARGER HINT: this had been solved by me quite many times in my posts, but you do try yourself first in order to gain the new super insight that almost all the mathematicians miss so miserably for sure
>>>>>
>>>>> If you truly understand this problem, then I would guarantee you a new brain where you would throw away the older one that was so polluted with those many fictions we are revealing for day and night since years, for sure
>>>>>
>>>>> And this would give you a better chance of publishing new books and never like before
>>>>> Good luck
>>>>> BKK
>>>> Of course a such triangle exists. You even gave its coordinates.
>>> Do you mean the triangle that has at least one of its angles equals EXACTLY to an angle as (2*Pi/9 = 40) Degrees? Or an angle like 31 degrees, ...., etc
>>>
>>> No, they never exist in any existing Triangle for more than sure
>>>
>>> And I know that humans generally can't understand these new issues & proven discoveries, mainly for their inheereted incurable mental retardation
>>>
>>> Since they had been mised for many thousands years & Babylon times until tomorrow...?
>>>
>>> Sure you can't understand anything then
>>>
>>> Bassam Karzeddin
>> 2pi/9 is an exact number.
>
> 2pi/9 isn't a number nor it is any existing angle Moron

360 / 9 = 40

A 40 degree angle. Why do you seem to have such a hard time with it?

>
> Didn't you hear yet about the irrefutable proof published in my posts?
>
> BKK 🔊