On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 12:58:55 PM UTC+2, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 3:34:42 PM UTC+3, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 3:10:04 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > Based on the replies to my posting at a teachers' forum today, it seems that high school teachers anyway are not very concerned about the impact of math cranks and trolls on their students. That's gotta be discouraging for the likes of AP, JG, WM and BKK. Vulnerable high school students are probably their main target audience.
> > >
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > > Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> > > Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> >
> > What a more suitable title would be like this:
> >
> > Bad news for the alleged living top most genius professional mathematicians, including the escaped historical figures, For sure
> > BKK
> And what was the bad news for the alleged top most genius mathematicians? wonder!
>
> **Note: this news weren't for plenty of ordinary common type mathematicians, as YOU here For sure**
>
> 1) Infinity is a dead concept now, For sure
> 2) (Pi), (e), are also a dead numbers, since they never exist, For more than sure
> 3) Q^{1/P}, where (P > 2, Q)are prime numbers, are also dead numbers, since they never exist, For more than sure
>
> 4) No real root or any other root exists for a polynomial (x^5 - x - 1 = 0), For more than sure
>
> 5) No triangle exists with at least one of its angles being of the form:
> [n*(Pi)/m], where (n < m) are positive coprime integers, and (m) isn't (Fermat's pologen number, or a power of 2 or a power of 3 (but only 3), or their products)
>
> Very hard luck for you for not being able to grasp the most basic fictional mathematics that needs few minutes only to realize and beyond any little doubt, and For more than sure
>
> BKK

On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 4:27:36 AM UTC+3, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 12:58:55 PM UTC+2, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 3:34:42 PM UTC+3, bassam king karzeddin wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 3:10:04 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > > Based on the replies to my posting at a teachers' forum today, it seems that high school teachers anyway are not very concerned about the impact of math cranks and trolls on their students. That's gotta be discouraging for the likes of AP, JG, WM and BKK. Vulnerable high school students are probably their main target audience.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > > Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> > > > Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> > >
> > > What a more suitable title would be like this:
> > >
> > > Bad news for the alleged living top most genius professional mathematicians, including the escaped historical figures, For sure
> > > BKK
> > And what was the bad news for the alleged top most genius mathematicians? wonder!
> >
> > **Note: this news weren't for plenty of ordinary common type mathematicians, as YOU here For sure**
> >
> > 1) Infinity is a dead concept now, For sure
> > 2) (Pi), (e), are also a dead numbers, since they never exist, For more than sure
> > 3) Q^{1/P}, where (P > 2, Q)are prime numbers, are also dead numbers, since they never exist, For more than sure
> >
> > 4) No real root or any other root exists for a polynomial (x^5 - x - 1 = 0), For more than sure
> >
> > 5) No triangle exists with at least one of its angles being of the form:
> > [n*(Pi)/m], where (n < m) are positive coprime integers, and (m) isn't (Fermat's pologen number, or a power of 2 or a power of 3 (but only 3), or their products)
> >
> > Very hard luck for you for not being able to grasp the most basic fictional mathematics that needs few minutes only to realize and beyond any little doubt, and For more than sure
> >
> > BKK

On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 6:43:25 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 2:54:31 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 4:27:36 AM UTC+3, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> [snip]
>
> From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
>
> “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
> -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
>
> "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
> -- BKK, June 11, 2020
>
> “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
> -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
>
> “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
> -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
>
> “I don't believe even in one being a number”
> -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
>
> Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
>
> Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional.
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

This old well-known Troll 🧌 still belives blindly in the true existence of an exact angle like 40 degrees angle, despite the fact that angle was proven numerically & rigorously as non-existing angle in many other relevant posts, where the proof is definitely IRREFUTABLE FOR SURE

Does anyone here who did well-understand my proof dares to make it so clear for him?
Use ChatGPT if necessary!
Bkk

Le 08/10/2023 à 19:04, bassam karzeddin a écrit :
> On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 6:43:25 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
>> On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 2:54:31 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
>>> On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 4:27:36 AM UTC+3, bassam karzeddin wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>> From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
>>
>> “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
>> -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
>>
>> "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
>> -- BKK, June 11, 2020
>>
>> “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
>> -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
>>
>> “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
>> -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
>>
>> “I don't believe even in one being a number”
>> -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
>>
>> Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
>>
>> Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional.
>> Dan
>>
>> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
>> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
>
> This old well-known Troll 🧌 still belives blindly in the true existence of an exact angle like 40 degrees angle, despite the fact that angle was proven numerically & rigorously as non-existing angle in many other relevant posts, where the proof is definitely IRREFUTABLE FOR SURE

No. This is a plain lie on your part.

> Does anyone here who did well-understand my proof dares to make it so clear for him?
> Use ChatGPT if necessary!

ChatGPT is a dumb language model, just like you by the way: silly words
and no comprehension of anything.

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 9:00:47 PM UTC+3, Python wrote:
> Le 08/10/2023 à 19:04, bassam karzeddin a écrit :
> > On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 6:43:25 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 2:54:31 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 4:27:36 AM UTC+3, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
> >>
> >> “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
> >> -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
> >>
> >> "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
> >> -- BKK, June 11, 2020
> >>
> >> “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
> >> -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
> >>
> >> “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
> >> -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
> >>
> >> “I don't believe even in one being a number”
> >> -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
> >>
> >> Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
> >>
> >> Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional.
> >> Dan
> >>
> >> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> >> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> >
> > This old well-known Troll 🧌 still belives blindly in the true existence of an exact angle like 40 degrees angle, despite the fact that angle was proven numerically & rigorously as non-existing angle in many other relevant posts, where the proof is definitely IRREFUTABLE FOR SURE
> No. This is a plain lie on your part.
> > Does anyone here who did well-understand my proof dares to make it so clear for him?
> > Use ChatGPT if necessary!
> ChatGPT is a dumb language model, just like you by the way: silly words
> and no comprehension of anything.

Actually, you are (Python ) also one of those few old residents 🧌 Trolls, who is mostly natural & probably not like those many hired Trolls they used to argue for a while & suddenly disappeared after they finished their contracts

However, examples of stubborn old Trolls 🧌 like (Dan C, Jim Burns & many of his allies beside Python) are absolutely the seventh impossible to realize themselves with all types of irrefutable proofs

You & the whole world acadmy 🌎 communities of mathematics & all sciences as well, were publically & globally challenged for several years to provide only one triangle with exactly known sides having at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, where of course, No human would be able to get (including my modest self)

And assuming in a good faith & further that you are a smarter than AI or chapGPT, then meet my still standing intellectual challenge for all intelligent beings on earth & skies as well & so simply win the whole discussion under the sunlight (as easy as it is)

But note that I'm not asking about existing angles like 30 Degrees for example, since clever mid-school students alone would be able to provide trillions of such existing triangles 🔺️

Go a head & meet my very old challenge immediately!
And if you are disable to do the task, then come back here again & say it frankly & ask politely to reteach you why most of well-known angels in both old and modern mathematics truly are non-existing FOR SURR

Don't be a traitor & denier to the science that feeds you & be honnest with your self at least once in your meaningless life (Python)

And please 🙏 don't keep arguing aimlessly about new proven issues that No Journals & Universities know anything about them nor talking the help from Donkypedia since they are much worse than YOU are FOR SURE

🔊 Bassam Karzeddin 🔊

On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 2:03:10 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 10:14:44 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
>
> From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
>
> “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
> -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
>
> "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
> -- BKK, June 11, 2020
>
> “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
> -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
>
> “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
> -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
>
> “I don't believe even in one being a number”
> -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
>
> Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
>
> Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional.
>
>
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE

But, some how, you are still believing in the mere existence of such a belived angles like 40 degrees & like any other human on earth 🌎 as well

So to say, nothing would ever bring something truly non-existing except only in human hollow minds

However, this deep rooted intellectual challenge isn't only about a single angle like 40 degrees, but about the vast majorities of well-known angels since Babylon civilization

Something which is truly too difficult for human beings to easily accept & well-understand, For sure

So, let this intellectual global mathematical & old challenge of purely mine be only for independent future Artificial Intelligence beings FOR SURE

🔊 Bassam Karzeddin 🔊

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:28:50 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 3:41:53 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 2:03:10 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 10:14:44 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > >
> > > From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
> > >
> > > “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
> > > -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
> > >
> > > "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
> > > -- BKK, June 11, 2020
> > >
> > > “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
> > > -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
> > >
> > > “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
> > > -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
> > >
> > > “I don't believe even in one being a number”
> > > -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
> > >
> > > Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
> > >
> > > Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional.
> > >
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > > Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> > > Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> > For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE
> >
>
> Consider the right-triangle with hypotenuse of length = csc 40 degrees (approx. 1.5557238268604123200563559546373) and another side of unit length.. The angle opposite the latter should be 40 degrees. Using PT to get the length of the adjacent side (approx. 1.1917535925942099587053080718604).
>
You are still incapable to understand anything, because you don't realize that you are proving your incomprehensible idiocy online & with Phythagorus theorem itself

Most likely, you don't know that there isn’t any kind of approximations with Phythagorus theorem, no matter if you are trying foolishly to minimize the difference then hiding it or neglecting it inorder to justify your lies
Do repate your calculations & report back where is your mistake

BKK

> [snip]
>
> > Something which is truly too difficult fdor human beings to easily accept & well-understand, For sure
> >
> > So, let this intellectual global mathematical & old challenge of purely mine be only for independent future Artificial Intelligence beings FOR SURE
> >
>
> Check out my recent dialog with the AI bot, ChatGPT, on my proposed resolution of the Liar Paradox here: https://www.dcproof.com/LiarParadoxResolution.htm.
>
> See what it says about your crackpot theory on 40 degree angles. Post your dialog here.
>
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
OV

On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 3:38:09 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 2:28:50 PM UTC-4, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 3:41:53 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 2:03:10 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 10:14:44 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
> > > >
> > > > “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
> > > > -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
> > > >
> > > > "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
> > > > -- BKK, June 11, 2020
> > > >
> > > > “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
> > > > -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
> > > >
> > > > “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
> > > > -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
> > > >
> > > > “I don't believe even in one being a number”
> > > > -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
> > > >
> > > > Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
> > > >
> > > > Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > > Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> > > > Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> > > For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE
> > >
> >
> > Consider the right-triangle with hypotenuse of length = csc 40 degrees (approx. 1.5557238268604123200563559546373) and another side of unit length. The angle opposite the latter should be 40 degrees. Using PT to get the length of the adjacent side (approx. 1.1917535925942099587053080718604).
> >
> In other words, we have a triangle ABC with |AB| = 1.5557238268604123200563559546373 units, |BC| = 1 unit, and |AC| = 1.1917535925942099587053080718604 unit. Angle BAC = 40 degrees, angle ACB = 90 degrees, angle ABC = 50 degrees.
> > [snip]

Your alleged right angle Triangle provided above is similar to the following triangle 🔺️ with sides as following:

|AB| = 15557238268604123200563559546373

|AC| = 11917355925942099587053080718684

|BC| = 10^31

RIGHT ✅️?

Where angles would not change in similar triangles, ✅️ Right?

But the sides above aren't Pythagorean triples, Are they? & Why?

Simply because the sides are even integers whereas the hypotenuse is ODD integer, which of course absolutely impossible FOR SURE

Didn't you invoke clearly the greatest theorem of Phythagorus, yes FOR SURE

How is it possible that the sum of a square of two even integers would yield a square of odd integer side? Wonder!

Also calculate the difference of (|AC|^2 - |AB|^2 - |BC|^2 = ?), inorder to realize that you have No right angle triangle & see how huge the difference becomes as long as you get more & more of your approximations digits for the angles that exist only in human minds!

Would you please 🙏 admit your inhireted fallacy & teach it to the whole world 🌎 academy of Geometry & maymthematics , especially that you are a proffessional & having your DC ProofS!

Save the world top-most alleged Genius mathematicians now FOR SURE

Simply because this lesson is of a mid-school level I swear 🤬!

So unfortunately, nither the 40 degrees nor the 50 degrees angles ever exist, and of course many more.. . FOR SURE

> > > Something which is truly too difficult for human beings to easily accept & well-understand, For sure
> > >, and
> > > So, let this intellectual global mathematical & old challenge of purely mine be only for independent future Artificial Intelligence beings FOR SURE
> > >
> >
> > Check out my recent dialog with the AI bot, ChatGPT, on my proposed resolution of the Liar Paradox here: https://www.dcproof.com/LiarParadoxResolution.htm.
> >
> > See what it says about your crackpot theory on 40 degree angles. Post your dialog here.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> > Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

I also checked your dialog with ChatGPT but it wasn't about the non-existing angles!

And if ChatGPT was asked & truly remember the dialog & gained previous experience abiut the non-existing angles; then certainly it would teach you the whole issue & exactly as it learned it from me only

Dab C, you must stand firmly with the truth & not be denier as the vast majorities of academic mainstreams proffessional mathematicians

Bassam Karzeddin 🔊

On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 7:15:15 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:41:23 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 3:38:09 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 2:28:50 PM UTC-4, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 3:41:53 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 2:03:10 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 10:14:44 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
> > > > > > -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
> > > > > > -- BKK, June 11, 2020
> > > > > >
> > > > > > “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
> > > > > > -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
> > > > > >
> > > > > > “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
> > > > > > -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
> > > > > >
> > > > > > “I don't believe even in one being a number”
> > > > > > -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Consider the right-triangle with hypotenuse of length = csc 40 degrees (approx. 1.5557238268604123200563559546373) and another side of unit length. The angle opposite the latter should be 40 degrees. Using PT to get the length of the adjacent side (approx. 1.1917535925942099587053080718604).
> > > >
> > > In other words, we have a triangle ABC with |AB| = 1.5557238268604123200563559546373 units, |BC| = 1 unit, and |AC| = 1.1917535925942099587053080718604 unit. Angle BAC = 40 degrees, angle ACB = 90 degrees, angle ABC = 50 degrees.
> > > > [snip]
> > Your alleged right angle Triangle provided above is similar to the following triangle 🔺️ with sides as following:
> >
> > |AB| = 15557238268604123200563559546373
> >
> > |AC| = 11917355925942099587053080718684
> >
> > |BC| = 10^31
> >
> > RIGHT ✅️?
I see, you refrain from answering
> >
> > Where angles would not change in similar triangles, ✅️ Right?
Also, here, you refuse to understand similarty of triangles, isn't this topic of mid-school level, Right?

> >
> > But the sides above aren't Pythagorean triples, Are they? & Why?
> >

Now Dan C 🧌, confesses the errors where he allows it inorder to justify his deep rooted ignorance in logic & elementary mathematics as well
> Round-off error. The above values are approximations to 32 significant digits--more than enough for any just about any scientific or engineering application. Your goofy little system doesn't allow 40 degree angles and infinitely many others regardless of how precise your measurements are! What could it be more useless???
>

But here, we aren't dealing with eingineering problem which approximations are permitted

Here, we are dealing with purely theoretical problems that deal with exact 40 degrees angle

> [snip]

Why do you always snip parts that embarraees you online? No wonder 🤔!

Most likely you don't want others to see the difference that would grow indefinitely to prevent your right angle triangle 😉

Your angle or triangle truely does not exist FOR SURE

> > > > Check out my recent dialog with the AI bot, ChatGPT, on my pr(if existing (oposed resolution of the Liar Paradox here: https://www.dcproof.com/LiarParadoxResolution.htm.
> > > >
> > > > See what it says about your crackpot theory on 40 degree angles. Post your dialog here.

Bring up your ChatGPT here inorder to teach it the truth of non-existing angles as was done earlier by other member of sci.math FOR SURE

> > > >
> > I also checked your dialog with ChatGPT but it wasn't about the non-existing angles!
> >
> Maybe you missed the fact that it was about the Liar Paradox. Do pay attention.
> >
> > And if ChatGPT was asked & truly remember the dialog & gained previous experience abiut the non-existing angles; then certainly it would teach you the whole issue & exactly as it learned it from me only
> There is no need to speculate. Ask ChatGPT online if 40 degree angles exist.
>
> https://chat.openai.com/
>
> It's free. You will get a answer almost immediately. While you are at, ask about the numbers 0 and 1, and negative numbers. Should be good for a laugh.
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

GO back to your mid-school book in mathematics & learn the similarty of triangles where angles don't change FOR SURE

BKK

On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 5:41:23 AM UTC+3, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 3:38:09 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 2:28:50 PM UTC-4, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 3:41:53 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > > On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 2:03:10 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 10:14:44 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > From Psycho Troll BKK who also wrote here:
> > > > >
> > > > > “Those many challenges of mine (in my posts) weren't actually designed for human beings, but for the future artificial beings that would certainly replace them not far away from now, for sure.”
> > > > > -- BKK, Dec. 6, 2017
> > > > >
> > > > > "The Devils deeds that are strictly and basically sourced from mathematicians like humans, FOR SURE!"
> > > > > -- BKK, June 11, 2020
> > > > >
> > > > > “You know certainly that I'm the man, and more specially the KING who is going to upside down most of your current false mathematics for all future generations.”
> > > > > -- BKK, Nov. 22, 2018
> > > > >
> > > > > “Despite thousands of years of continuous juggling and false definitions of what is truly the real number, they [us carbon-based lifeforms?] truly don't want to understand it as was discovered strictly by the *KING* [BKK Himself!]”
> > > > > -- BKK, Nov. 28, 2019
> > > > >
> > > > > “I don't believe even in one being a number”
> > > > > -- BKK, Dec. 31, 2019
> > > > >
> > > > > Math failure, BKK, doesn't believe in negative numbers, zero, one or numbers like pi and root 2. He doesn't even believe in 40 degree angles or circles. Simple speed-distance-time problems seem to be impossible for him. Really!
> > > > >
> > > > > Needless to say his own goofy little system is getting nowhere and never will. As such he is insanely jealous of wildly successful mainstream mathematics. He seems to believe these super-intelligent artificial beings of his will somehow be enlisting his aid to "reform" mathematics worldwide when they take over the planet in the near future. He is truly delusional..
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Dan
> > > > >
> > > > > Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> > > > > Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> > > > For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE
> > > >
> > >
> > > Consider the right-triangle with hypotenuse of length = csc 40 degrees (approx. 1.5557238268604123200563559546373) and another side of unit length. The angle opposite the latter should be 40 degrees. Using PT to get the length of the adjacent side (approx. 1.1917535925942099587053080718604).
> > >
> > In other words, we have a triangle ABC with |AB| = 1.5557238268604123200563559546373 units, |BC| = 1 unit, and |AC| = 1.1917535925942099587053080718604 unit. Angle BAC = 40 degrees, angle ACB = 90 degrees, angle ABC = 50 degrees.
> > > [snip]
> Your alleged right angle Triangle provided above is similar to the following triangle 🔺️ with sides as following:
>
> |AB| = 15557238268604123200563559546373
>
> |AC| = 11917355925942099587053080718684
>
> |BC| = 10^31
>
> RIGHT ✅️?
>
> Where angles would not change in similar triangles, ✅️ Right?
>
> But the sides above aren't Pythagorean triples, Are they? & Why?
>
> Simply because the sides are even integers whereas the hypotenuse is ODD integer, which of course absolutely impossible FOR SURE
>
> Didn't you invoke clearly the greatest theorem of Phythagorus, yes FOR SURE
>
> How is it possible that the sum of a square of two even integers would yield a square of odd integer side? Wonder!
>
> Also calculate the difference of (|AC|^2 - |AB|^2 - |BC|^2 = ?),

Dan C 🧌 , why can't you show the difference above to see by yourself that isn't zero but a huge number that would definitely prevent your dream of getting a right angle triangle you so blindly belive!

But hey delusional, try for more of accurate digits & see how the difference that prevents strictly a right angle triangle would become larger & larger to be unlimited & tending to your ♾️ that you do believe

How the hill a logician like Dab C 🧌 cheate globally on line & under the sunlight about Phythagorus theorem? No wonders! (The necessity allows the obvious cheat & who cares?)

However, this mental retardation problem is infact an old inhireted problem which is truly incurable & not merely Dan's own Guilt but so unfortunately, thus too dangerous mental retardation problems are originated by the allegedly the vast majorities of top-most historical & living Genius (Philosophers, Logicians, Physicians & basically the Mathematicians) FOR SURE

So Dan C 🧌, is only a mere victim like the vast majorities of mainstreams sheeples who reached a stage of full denials of the untought truths in mathematics & all theoretical sciences as well

It should be noted also that humans generally don't have any better tools to prove their false beliefs like 40 degrees angle

But careful here, the cosine laws are only valid on real existing ( numbers & angles as well), strictly in their surd form, & never valid on non-existing numbers & angles as well

So, Dan, your belived angle as 40 degrees doesn't exist 🤔 FOR SURE

And enough fighting stupidly & hopelessly for its il

inorder to realize that you have No right angle triangle & see how huge the difference becomes as long as you get more & more of your approximations digits for the angles that exist only in human minds!
>
> Would you please 🙏 admit your inhireted fallacy & teach it to the whole world 🌎 academy of Geometry & maymthematics , especially that you are a proffessional & having your DC ProofS!
>
> Save the world top-most alleged Genius mathematicians now FOR SURE
>
> Simply because this lesson is of a mid-school level I swear 🤬!
>
> So unfortunately, nither the 40 degrees nor the 50 degrees angles ever exist, and of course many more.. . FOR SURE
> > > > Something which is truly too difficult for human beings to easily accept & well-understand, For sure
> > > >, and
> > > > So, let this intellectual global mathematical & old challenge of purely mine be only for independent future Artificial Intelligence beings FOR SURE
> > > >
> > >
> > > Check out my recent dialog with the AI bot, ChatGPT, on my proposed resolution of the Liar Paradox here: https://www.dcproof.com/LiarParadoxResolution.htm.
> > >
> > > See what it says about your crackpot theory on 40 degree angles. Post your dialog here.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > > Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> > > Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
> I also checked your dialog with ChatGPT but it wasn't about the non-existing angles!
>
>
> And if ChatGPT was asked & truly remember the dialog & gained previous experience abiut the non-existing angles; then certainly it would teach you the whole issue & exactly as it learned it from me only
>
> Dab C, you must stand firmly with the truth & not be denier as the vast majorities of academic mainstreams proffessional mathematicians
>
> Bassam Karzeddin 🔊

Bkk

On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 5:39:26 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 10:05:47 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> [snip]
> > > > > > For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Consider the right-triangle with hypotenuse of length = csc 40 degrees (approx. 1.5557238268604123200563559546373) and another side of unit length. The angle opposite the latter should be 40 degrees. Using PT to get the length of the adjacent side (approx. 1.1917535925942099587053080718604).
>
> > > > >
> > > > In other words, we have a triangle ABC with |AB| = 1.5557238268604123200563559546373 units, |BC| = 1 unit, and |AC| = 1.1917535925942099587053080718604 unit. Angle BAC = 40 degrees, angle ACB = 90 degrees, angle ABC = 50 degrees.
> [snip]
>
> > > Your alleged right angle Triangle provided above is similar to the following triangle 🔺️ with sides as following:
> > >
> > > |AB| = 15557238268604123200563559546373
> > >
> > > |AC| = 11917355925942099587053080718684
> > >
> > > |BC| = 10^31
> > >
> > > RIGHT ✅️?
> > >
> > > Where angles would not change in similar triangles, ✅️ Right?
> > >
> > > But the sides above aren't Pythagorean triples, Are they? & Why?
> > >
> > > Simply because the sides are even integers whereas the hypotenuse is ODD integer, which of course absolutely impossible FOR SURE
> > >
> > > Didn't you invoke clearly the greatest theorem of Phythagorus, yes FOR SURE
> > >
> > > How is it possible that the sum of a square of two even integers would yield a square of odd integer side? Wonder!
> > >
> > > Also calculate the difference of (|AC|^2 - |AB|^2 - |BC|^2 = ?),
>
> > Dan C 🧌 , why can't you show the difference above to see by yourself that isn't zero but a huge number that would definitely prevent your dream of getting a right angle triangle you so blindly belive!
> >
> [snip]
>
> If you multiply each of the above measurements by a large enough number, what was essentially an imperceptible round-off error may, of course, become perceptible in absolute terms. In relative terms, however, it would remain negligible. Do you really not understand this distinction?
>
> Again, the result can be calculated to any number of significant digits that may be required in a given application. This is impossible In your goofy little system where it cannot be calculated to even 1 significant digit -- really quite useless, I'm afraid.
>
> Time to cut your losses and move on, Troll Boy. You aren't getting any younger.
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

What humans generally cannot comprehend is that Round-off errors aren't allowed in mere theoretical mathematics, but may be allowed in carpentary works & alike & purely for non-mathematical purposes

Other wise & following the same stupid wisdom of those alleged logicians, philosophers, ..., etc, one can so easily find many numerical counter examples to Fermat's last theorem & exactly like I did in other relevant topics by showing

(x^3 + y^3)/z^3 = 0.999999999 ...999 (n)

Where, (x, y, z) are nonzero integers & (n) is relatively large positive integer

But still, that is of course not any valid counter example, simply because FLT is a Theorem!

So to say, academic mathematicians mainstreams cannot yet distinguish between mathematics & matgematicking, where this give them illegally the greatest chances to fill the galaxy with their daily farto papers by hiding cowordly behind usefulness & practicalilty to justify their cheats

Let that practicalilty & usefulness be left strictly to non-mathematicians & be announced as a title of their endless works

However, it is too necessary nowadays for psychologists (who had suceeded in their mid-school levels with a bit of talent in mathematics) to study carefully how mathematicians arrived at this very low level of shallow thinking & aquired many talents of cheating others by involving the ever greatest theorems so shamefully & globally under the sunlight, where only school students are the victims of their illegal needs

Also, clever journalists (if existing) are requested to simply well-understand this too simple topic about academic mathematicians & alike & expose their unbelievable & incurable mental retardation strictly in too elementary mathematics & make it very clear to the whole 🌎 as well

In short, this is a kind of too dangerous corruption to all human minds where it is still unnoticeable & so unfortunately abbreviated as well

BKK

On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 7:28:31 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 11:56:02 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 5:39:26 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 10:05:47 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > > > > > > For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Consider the right-triangle with hypotenuse of length = csc 40 degrees (approx. 1.5557238268604123200563559546373) and another side of unit length. The angle opposite the latter should be 40 degrees. Using PT to get the length of the adjacent side (approx. 1.1917535925942099587053080718604).
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > In other words, we have a triangle ABC with |AB| = 1.5557238268604123200563559546373 units, |BC| = 1 unit, and |AC| = 1.1917535925942099587053080718604 unit. Angle BAC = 40 degrees, angle ACB = 90 degrees, angle ABC = 50 degrees.
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > > > Your alleged right angle Triangle provided above is similar to the following triangle 🔺️ with sides as following:
> > > > >
> > > > > |AB| = 15557238268604123200563559546373
> > > > >
> > > > > |AC| = 11917355925942099587053080718684
> > > > >
> > > > > |BC| = 10^31
> > > > >
> > > > > RIGHT ✅️?
> > > > >
> > > > > Where angles would not change in similar triangles, ✅️ Right?
> > > > >
> > > > > But the sides above aren't Pythagorean triples, Are they? & Why?
> > > > >
> > > > > Simply because the sides are even integers whereas the hypotenuse is ODD integer, which of course absolutely impossible FOR SURE
> > > > >
> > > > > Didn't you invoke clearly the greatest theorem of Phythagorus, yes FOR SURE
> > > > >
> > > > > How is it possible that the sum of a square of two even integers would yield a square of odd integer side? Wonder!
> > > > >
> > > > > Also calculate the difference of (|AC|^2 - |AB|^2 - |BC|^2 = ?),
> > >
> > > > Dan C 🧌 , why can't you show the difference above to see by yourself that isn't zero but a huge number that would definitely prevent your dream of getting a right angle triangle you so blindly belive!
> > > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > If you multiply each of the above measurements by a large enough number, what was essentially an imperceptible round-off error may, of course, become perceptible in absolute terms. In relative terms, however, it would remain negligible. Do you really not understand this distinction?
> > >
> > > Again, the result can be calculated to any number of significant digits that may be required in a given application. This is impossible In your goofy little system where it cannot be calculated to even 1 significant digit -- really quite useless, I'm afraid.
> > >
> > > Time to cut your losses and move on, Troll Boy. You aren't getting any younger.
> > What humans generally cannot comprehend is that Round-off errors aren't allowed in mere theoretical mathematics, but may be allowed in carpentary works & alike & purely for non-mathematical purposes
> >
> [snip]
>
> It seems you still do not understand the notion of significant digits/figures. Maybe this will help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures
>
> Mathematical theory tells us that the result here can be calculated to any number of significant digits. That is the key point here. In your goofy little system it cannot be calculated to even 1 significant digit! Really quite useless, I'm afraid. I don't think your "super intelligent artificial beings of the future" will be be very impressed, Troll Boy." (Hee, hee!)
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

What Dan C 🧌 can't comprehend yet is that the greatest discoverd & well-proven theorems as Phythagorus theorem refutes strictly & immediately all kinds of human invented & non-existing numbers in just a few minutes of numerical verifications, How?

Example: a triangle with sides (1, 1, Sqrt2), does exist & a Right angle triangle, Right? ✅️

But a triangle with sides (1, 1, 1.414...), doesn't exist & never a Right angle triangle, Right? ✅️

And generally, PT isn't applicable on no existing numbers that usually are ending with three stupid dots denoted as (...) after a sequence of digits

The proof is in the same mentioned way earlier in my relevant posts 📫

But practically, carpenters may use only (1, 1, 1.414) as a right angle triangle where that doesn't affect practically their works 🤔, Right? ✅️

Similarly with eingineering or scientific practical works with a bit of more few digits of accuracy

Where this doesn't legalize the mathematicians results & theorems they are usually hiding behind practicality & usefulness & ♾️ or immaginary, etc

Otherwise, we need soon a galaxy size to store the mathematicians endless produc8utions of their farto ( papers, books, articles, opinions, their fart logic & philosophy, ...., etc)

And so unfortunately, 🌎 innocent students are always the victims of this unnoticeable madness globally among humans
People have to understand & distinguish carefully between eingineering calculations & approximations as not mathematics at all despite contacting numbers & math symbols, etc & the true math

In short, true untought mathematics is only perfection based on proven discoveries & nothing else like nearly equal, approximately equal, equevelent classes, .., etc

And observe carefully the true aggressive reactions of mainstream academic mathematicians twords those few who are constantly teaching them facts they had never learned! No wonders!

BKK

On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 10:27:10 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 1:37:57 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 7:28:31 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 11:56:02 AM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > > On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 5:39:26 PM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 10:05:47 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > > > > > For many years by now, you aren't cabable of getting a single triangle with exactly known sides such that at least one of its angles is EXACTLY 40 degrees, nor can any other intelligent beings on 🌎 & skies as well help you in this absolutely impossible task FOR SURE
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Consider the right-triangle with hypotenuse of length = csc 40 degrees (approx. 1.5557238268604123200563559546373) and another side of unit length. The angle opposite the latter should be 40 degrees. Using PT to get the length of the adjacent side (approx. 1.1917535925942099587053080718604).
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In other words, we have a triangle ABC with |AB| = 1.5557238268604123200563559546373 units, |BC| = 1 unit, and |AC| = 1.1917535925942099587053080718604 unit. Angle BAC = 40 degrees, angle ACB = 90 degrees, angle ABC = 50 degrees.
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Your alleged right angle Triangle provided above is similar to the following triangle 🔺️ with sides as following:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > |AB| = 15557238268604123200563559546373
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > |AC| = 11917355925942099587053080718684
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > |BC| = 10^31
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > RIGHT ✅️?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Where angles would not change in similar triangles, ✅️ Right?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But the sides above aren't Pythagorean triples, Are they? & Why?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Simply because the sides are even integers whereas the hypotenuse is ODD integer, which of course absolutely impossible FOR SURE
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Didn't you invoke clearly the greatest theorem of Phythagorus, yes FOR SURE
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How is it possible that the sum of a square of two even integers would yield a square of odd integer side? Wonder!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also calculate the difference of (|AC|^2 - |AB|^2 - |BC|^2 = ?),
> > > > >
> > > > > > Dan C 🧌 , why can't you show the difference above to see by yourself that isn't zero but a huge number that would definitely prevent your dream of getting a right angle triangle you so blindly belive!
> > > > > >
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > > If you multiply each of the above measurements by a large enough number, what was essentially an imperceptible round-off error may, of course, become perceptible in absolute terms. In relative terms, however, it would remain negligible. Do you really not understand this distinction?
> > > > >
> > > > > Again, the result can be calculated to any number of significant digits that may be required in a given application. This is impossible In your goofy little system where it cannot be calculated to even 1 significant digit -- really quite useless, I'm afraid.
> > > > >
> > > > > Time to cut your losses and move on, Troll Boy. You aren't getting any younger.
> > > > What humans generally cannot comprehend is that Round-off errors aren't allowed in mere theoretical mathematics, but may be allowed in carpentary works & alike & purely for non-mathematical purposes
> > > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > It seems you still do not understand the notion of significant digits/figures. Maybe this will help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures
> Still don't get it???
> > >
> > > Mathematical theory tells us that the result here can be calculated to any number of significant digits. That is the key point here. In your goofy little system it cannot be calculated to even 1 significant digit! Really quite useless, I'm afraid. I don't think your "super intelligent artificial beings of the future" will be be very impressed, Troll Boy." (Hee, hee!)
> > What Dan C 🧌 can't comprehend yet is that the greatest discoverd & well-proven theorems as Phythagorus theorem refutes strictly & immediately all kinds of human invented & non-existing numbers in just a few minutes of numerical verifications, How?
> >
> > Example: a triangle with sides (1, 1, Sqrt2), does exist & a Right angle triangle, Right?
> >
> What is Sqrt2? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2
> > But a triangle with sides (1, 1, 1.414...), doesn't exist & never a Right angle triangle, Right?
> On the contrary. the square root of two has been calculated to trillions of decimals places. In your goofy little system, you cannot even calculate it to 1 decimal place! Again, I don't think your "super intelligent artificial beings of the future" will be be very impressed. (Hee, hee!)
>
> Here is the first few decimal places:
>
> 1.4142135623730950488016887242096980785696718753769480731766797379907324784621
> 07038850387534327641572735013846230912297024924836055850737212644121497099935831
> 41322266592750559275579995050115278206057147010955997160597027453459686201472851
> 74186408891986095523292304843087143214508397626036279952514079896872533965463318
> 08829640620615258352395054745750287759961729835575220337531857011354374603408498
> 84716038689997069900481503054402779031645424782306849293691862158057846311159666
> 87130130156185689872372352885092648612494977154218334204285686060146824720771435
> 85487415565706967765372022648544701585880162075847492265722600208558446652145839
> 88939443709265918003113882464681570826301005948587040031864803421948972782906410
> 45072636881313739855256117322040245091227700226941127573627280495738108967504018
> 36986836845072579936472906076299694138047565482372899718032680247442062926912485
> 90521810044598421505911202494413417285314781058036033710773091828693147101711116
> 83916581726889419758716582152128229518488472089694633862891562882765952635140542
> 26765323969461751129160240871551013515045538128756005263146801712740265396947024
> 03005174953188629256313851881634780015693691768818523786840522878376293892143006
> 55869568685964595155501644724509836896036887323114389415576651040883914292338113
> 20605243362948531704991577175622854974143899918802176243096520656421182731672625
> 75395947172559346372386322614827426222086711558395999265211762526989175409881593
> 48640083457085181472231814204070426509056532333398436457865796796519267292399875
> 36661721598257886026336361782749599421940377775368142621773879919455139723127406
> 68983299898953867288228563786977496625199665835257761989393228453447356947949629
> 52168891485492538904755828834526096524096542889394538646625744927556381964410316
> 97983306185201937938494005715633372054806854057586799967012137223947582142630658
> 51322174088323829472876173936474678374319600015921888073478576172522118674904249
> 77366929207311096369721608933708661156734585334833295254675851644710757848602463
> 60083444911481858765555428645512331421992631133251797060843655970435285641008791
> 85007603610091594656706768836055717400767569050961367194013249356052401859991050
> 62108163597726431380605467010293569971042425105781749531057255934984451126922780
> 34491350663756874776028316282960553242242695753452902883876844642917328277088831
> 80870253398523381227499908123718925407264753678503048215918018861671089728692292
> 01197599880703818543332536460211082299279293072871780799888099176741774108983060
> 80032631181642798823117154363869661702999934161614878686018045505553986913115186
> 01038637532500455818604480407502411951843056745336836136745973744239885532851793
> 08960373898915173195874134428817842125021916951875593444387396189314549999906107
> 58704909026088351763622474975785885836803745793115733980209998662218694992259591
> 32764236194105921003280261498745665996888740679561673918595728886424734635858868
> 64496822386006983352642799056283165613913942557649062065186021647263033362975075
> 69787060660685649816009271870929215313236828135698893709741650447459096053747279
> 65244770940992412387106144705439867436473384774548191008728862221495895295911878
> 92149179833981083788278153065562315810360648675873036014502273208829351341387227
> 68417667843690529428698490838455744579409598626074249954916802853077398938296036
>
> (continued)
>
> See: https://apod.nasa.gov/htmltest/gifcity/sqrt2.1mil
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
Good , this is still a decimal RATIONAL number, isn't it?
But Sqrt2 is of course an irrational number, isn't it?

On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 2:32:01 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 6:18:47 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> [snip]
> > > > Example: a triangle with sides (1, 1, Sqrt2), does exist & a Right angle triangle, Right?
> > > >
>
> > > What is Sqrt2? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2
>
> > > > But a triangle with sides (1, 1, 1.414...), doesn't exist & never a Right angle triangle, Right?
>
> > > On the contrary. the square root of two has been calculated to trillions of decimals places. In your goofy little system, you cannot even calculate it to 1 decimal place! Again, I don't think your "super intelligent artificial beings of the future" will be be very impressed. (Hee, hee!)
> > >
> > > Here is the first few decimal places:
> > >
> > > 1.4142135623730950488016887242096980785696718753769480731766797379907324784621
> > > 07038850387534327641572735013846230912297024924836055850737212644121497099935831
> > > 41322266592750559275579995050115278206057147010955997160597027453459686201472851
> > > 74186408891986095523292304843087143214508397626036279952514079896872533965463318
> > > 08829640620615258352395054745750287759961729835575220337531857011354374603408498
> > > 84716038689997069900481503054402779031645424782306849293691862158057846311159666
> > > 87130130156185689872372352885092648612494977154218334204285686060146824720771435
> > > 85487415565706967765372022648544701585880162075847492265722600208558446652145839
> > > 88939443709265918003113882464681570826301005948587040031864803421948972782906410
> > > 45072636881313739855256117322040245091227700226941127573627280495738108967504018
> > > 36986836845072579936472906076299694138047565482372899718032680247442062926912485
> > > 90521810044598421505911202494413417285314781058036033710773091828693147101711116
> > > 83916581726889419758716582152128229518488472089694633862891562882765952635140542
> > > 26765323969461751129160240871551013515045538128756005263146801712740265396947024
> > > 03005174953188629256313851881634780015693691768818523786840522878376293892143006
> > > 55869568685964595155501644724509836896036887323114389415576651040883914292338113
> > > 20605243362948531704991577175622854974143899918802176243096520656421182731672625
> > > 75395947172559346372386322614827426222086711558395999265211762526989175409881593
> > > 48640083457085181472231814204070426509056532333398436457865796796519267292399875
> > > 36661721598257886026336361782749599421940377775368142621773879919455139723127406
> > > 68983299898953867288228563786977496625199665835257761989393228453447356947949629
> > > 52168891485492538904755828834526096524096542889394538646625744927556381964410316
> > > 97983306185201937938494005715633372054806854057586799967012137223947582142630658
> > > 51322174088323829472876173936474678374319600015921888073478576172522118674904249
> > > 77366929207311096369721608933708661156734585334833295254675851644710757848602463
> > > 60083444911481858765555428645512331421992631133251797060843655970435285641008791
> > > 85007603610091594656706768836055717400767569050961367194013249356052401859991050
> > > 62108163597726431380605467010293569971042425105781749531057255934984451126922780
> > > 34491350663756874776028316282960553242242695753452902883876844642917328277088831
> > > 80870253398523381227499908123718925407264753678503048215918018861671089728692292
> > > 01197599880703818543332536460211082299279293072871780799888099176741774108983060
> > > 80032631181642798823117154363869661702999934161614878686018045505553986913115186
> > > 01038637532500455818604480407502411951843056745336836136745973744239885532851793
> > > 08960373898915173195874134428817842125021916951875593444387396189314549999906107
> > > 58704909026088351763622474975785885836803745793115733980209998662218694992259591
> > > 32764236194105921003280261498745665996888740679561673918595728886424734635858868
> > > 64496822386006983352642799056283165613913942557649062065186021647263033362975075
> > > 69787060660685649816009271870929215313236828135698893709741650447459096053747279
> > > 65244770940992412387106144705439867436473384774548191008728862221495895295911878
> > > 92149179833981083788278153065562315810360648675873036014502273208829351341387227
> > > 68417667843690529428698490838455744579409598626074249954916802853077398938296036
> > >
> > > (continued)
> > >
> > > See: https://apod.nasa.gov/htmltest/gifcity/sqrt2.1mil
> > Good , this is still a decimal RATIONAL number, isn't it?
> The entire text (see link) is the square roof of 2 to 1 million significant digits. Do you know what that means? There is also no theoretical limit to how many significant digits it can be calculated. Do you understand what that means? Didn't think so.
> > But Sqrt2 is of course an irrational number, isn't it?
> >
> > So, how can you equate rational with irrational?
> I don't. That would be like equating a single term of a series with the entire series itself, e.g. having 9 = 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, ...
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

Do you know that there are always many distinct decimal rational numbers that are strictly less than Sqrt2 that need many Galaxy sizes to store & many more decimal rational numbers that are impossible to know by any means or any tools or any immagible technology where the case is perpetual

Something too hard for humans to easily well-understand despite being straightforward & too easy to understand

What humans generally show is an endless interesting game of comparison that would never justify mathematically equating rational with irrational FOR SURE

Beside numbers associated with no existing numbers like infinity are also non-existing numbers like infinity

All that confusions are sourced basically from false definitions in mathematics which are only wrong decisions

But true mathematics is only true proven discoveries that isn’t oriented to please human illegal desires

I truly can't understand why mathematians only argue against true untought mathematics?

No wonders!
BKK

On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 4:06:15 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 2:32:01 AM UTC+3, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 6:18:47 PM UTC-4, bassam karzeddin wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > > > > Example: a triangle with sides (1, 1, Sqrt2), does exist & a Right angle triangle, Right?
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > What is Sqrt2? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2
> > >
> > > > > > But a triangle with sides (1, 1, 1.414...), doesn't exist & never a Right angle triangle, Right?
> > >
> > > > > On the contrary. the square root of two has been calculated to trillions of decimals places. In your goofy little system, you cannot even calculate it to 1 decimal place! Again, I don't think your "super intelligent artificial beings of the future" will be be very impressed. (Hee, hee!)
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is the first few decimal places:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1.4142135623730950488016887242096980785696718753769480731766797379907324784621
> > > > > 07038850387534327641572735013846230912297024924836055850737212644121497099935831
> > > > > 41322266592750559275579995050115278206057147010955997160597027453459686201472851
> > > > > 74186408891986095523292304843087143214508397626036279952514079896872533965463318
> > > > > 08829640620615258352395054745750287759961729835575220337531857011354374603408498
> > > > > 84716038689997069900481503054402779031645424782306849293691862158057846311159666
> > > > > 87130130156185689872372352885092648612494977154218334204285686060146824720771435
> > > > > 85487415565706967765372022648544701585880162075847492265722600208558446652145839
> > > > > 88939443709265918003113882464681570826301005948587040031864803421948972782906410
> > > > > 45072636881313739855256117322040245091227700226941127573627280495738108967504018
> > > > > 36986836845072579936472906076299694138047565482372899718032680247442062926912485
> > > > > 90521810044598421505911202494413417285314781058036033710773091828693147101711116
> > > > > 83916581726889419758716582152128229518488472089694633862891562882765952635140542
> > > > > 26765323969461751129160240871551013515045538128756005263146801712740265396947024
> > > > > 03005174953188629256313851881634780015693691768818523786840522878376293892143006
> > > > > 55869568685964595155501644724509836896036887323114389415576651040883914292338113
> > > > > 20605243362948531704991577175622854974143899918802176243096520656421182731672625
> > > > > 75395947172559346372386322614827426222086711558395999265211762526989175409881593
> > > > > 48640083457085181472231814204070426509056532333398436457865796796519267292399875
> > > > > 36661721598257886026336361782749599421940377775368142621773879919455139723127406
> > > > > 68983299898953867288228563786977496625199665835257761989393228453447356947949629
> > > > > 52168891485492538904755828834526096524096542889394538646625744927556381964410316
> > > > > 97983306185201937938494005715633372054806854057586799967012137223947582142630658
> > > > > 51322174088323829472876173936474678374319600015921888073478576172522118674904249
> > > > > 77366929207311096369721608933708661156734585334833295254675851644710757848602463
> > > > > 60083444911481858765555428645512331421992631133251797060843655970435285641008791
> > > > > 85007603610091594656706768836055717400767569050961367194013249356052401859991050
> > > > > 62108163597726431380605467010293569971042425105781749531057255934984451126922780
> > > > > 34491350663756874776028316282960553242242695753452902883876844642917328277088831
> > > > > 80870253398523381227499908123718925407264753678503048215918018861671089728692292
> > > > > 01197599880703818543332536460211082299279293072871780799888099176741774108983060
> > > > > 80032631181642798823117154363869661702999934161614878686018045505553986913115186
> > > > > 01038637532500455818604480407502411951843056745336836136745973744239885532851793
> > > > > 08960373898915173195874134428817842125021916951875593444387396189314549999906107
> > > > > 58704909026088351763622474975785885836803745793115733980209998662218694992259591
> > > > > 32764236194105921003280261498745665996888740679561673918595728886424734635858868
> > > > > 64496822386006983352642799056283165613913942557649062065186021647263033362975075
> > > > > 69787060660685649816009271870929215313236828135698893709741650447459096053747279
> > > > > 65244770940992412387106144705439867436473384774548191008728862221495895295911878
> > > > > 92149179833981083788278153065562315810360648675873036014502273208829351341387227
> > > > > 68417667843690529428698490838455744579409598626074249954916802853077398938296036
> > > > >
> > > > > (continued)
> > > > >
> > > > > See: https://apod.nasa.gov/htmltest/gifcity/sqrt2.1mil
> > > > Good , this is still a decimal RATIONAL number, isn't it?
>
> > > The entire text (see link) is the square roof of 2 to 1 million significant digits. Do you know what that means? There is also no theoretical limit to how many significant digits it can be calculated. Do you understand what that means? Didn't think so.
>
> > > > But Sqrt2 is of course an irrational number, isn't it?
> > > >
> > > > So, how can you equate rational with irrational?
>
> > > I don't. That would be like equating a single term of a series with the entire series itself, e.g. having 9 = 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, ...
> > Do you know that there are always many distinct decimal rational numbers that are strictly less than Sqrt2 that need many Galaxy sizes to store & many more decimal rational numbers that are impossible to know by any means or any tools or any immagible technology where the case is perpetual
> >
> Again, you are grasping at straws. You don't need infinite storage to fully describe an infinite set, e.g. a mere 5 axioms in the language of set theory can fully describe the set of natural numbers N as follows:
>
> 1. 0 in N
> 2. For all x in N: S(x) in N
> 3. For all x, y in N: [S(x)=S(y) => x=y]
> 4. For x in N: S(x)=/=0
> 5. For all subsets P of N: [ 0 in P & For all x in P: [S(x) in P] => P=N]
>
> You don't need to list every natural number to fully describe N.
> > What humans generally show is an endless interesting game of comparison that would never justify mathematically equating rational with irrational FOR SURE
> >
> [snip]
>
> A strawman. Again, no one is equating a rational number to any irrational number.
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

It is truly very bad news for all world acadmic mainstream mathematicians that they can't understand the Phythagorus theorem up to this date 😞

BKK