| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bill
Intellectual
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1204
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:38 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
algebraic consistency
You still are breaking my balls but that is okay.
I used two different algebraic expressions Jeffjo involving the squares of two different integers showing that if the hypothesis was correct the differences between the two squares would cancel out and leave no remainder. in other words if there was a R(a,b) then there could be no c^2 = a^2 + b^2 it would be c^2 = a^2 + b^2 + R(a,b) and the hypothesis would have to be false. Any number when squared would have to be the sum of a^2 + b^2 + R(a,b).
_________________
love creation machine |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JeffJo
Intellectual
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bill wrote: | | algebraic consistency |
Two words you put together, that have no relationship to the question I asked. Especially since your algebra is inconsistent.
You think you have two algebraic progressions that end in:a^3 + 3ab^2 = ( d^3 + f^3 )/2 = c^3
a^4 + b^4 + 6a^2b^2 = c^4 Yet you provided no such progression. For N=3, you merely said "we obtain following the same procedure" and listed the result I quoted. Yet the "same procedure," broken down and done correctly, does not give that result. Separated out for legibility, and with missing steps put back in, the equivalent of "(a+b)^2 = a^2 + b^2 + 2ab = d^2 or ; d^2 - 2ab = c^2 by hypothesis" isdefine d=(a+b)
Hypothesize that a^3 + b^3 = c^3
by binomial expansion, d^3 = (a+b)^3 = a^3 + b^3 + 3a^2b + 3ab^2
by substitution, d^3 = c^3 + 3a^2b + 3ab^2 So far, so good. But the equivalent of "(a-b)^2 =a^2 + b^2 - 2ab = f^2 or ; f^2 + 2ab = c^2 by hypothesis" isdefine f=(a-b)
Hypothesize that a^3 + b^3 = c^3
by binomial expansion, f^3 = (a-b)^3 = a^3 - b^3 + 3a^2b - 3ab^2
add zero, f^3 = (a-b)^3 = a^3 + (b^3 - b^3) - b^3 + 3a^2b - 3ab^2
by substitution, f^3 = c^3 - 2b^3 + 3a^2b - 3ab^2 And when we add the last equation of each progression and divide by two, we get(d^3 + f^3)/2 = c^3 + 3 a^2b - 2b^3 This is not the equation you got, because you skipped these steps. You merely copied the result you liked in the n=2 case, as though it was a universal result. It is not. And while I'm not admitting that you can draw the conclusions you did from the n=3 equation you had, it was wrong because the correct remainder, 3 a^2b - 2b^3, does not have to be positive.
You made a similar mistake for n=4. I've shown it to you already.
+++++
Here's why you can't draw the conclusions: | Quote: | | I used two different algebraic expressions Jeffjo involving the squares of two different integers showing that if the hypothesis was correct [then] the differences between the two squares would cancel out and leave no remainder. |
(1) You didn't find the difference between those two squares. The two squares you differenced were d^2 and f^2. Why do we care about the diffferences between those?
(2) If your proof were correct (it isn't, see next point), what you showed was that c^2 was an integer. You showed nothing about c itself.
(3) This is not how logic works anyway. You can disprove an hypothesis by assuming it and getting a contradiction. That's called "Reductio ad absurdum." You can't prove it is correct by not getting one.
I was really trying to avoid saying this here, bill; but either you are lying about thinking this is a proof and are busting [i]my[/]i balls; or you are an complete idiot wo does not understand the tools he is using, but uses them anyway. Nobody with a shred of integrity or intelligence could believe the things you claim here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
Intellectual
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1204
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jeffjo
I apologize but you do not see the n=2 equations as the defining equations. This is my fault because I have not had the time to break it down why?
I do not lie. I sometimes sound like an idiot. But the difference between a mathematician like me and one like you. (you are very good by the way)
Is I can see what others cannot but because I am involved with national security I do not always have time to explain myself completely . I actually like people like you. That is why i can be such a ball breaker. I call you a pieces of feces in public and you keep coming back for more. You do not back down from what you were taught and you believe. Good for you 
But what I am involved with I cannot always reveal everything it is a matter of timing. That is why I asked you if you play chess. There are two ways of playing analytically or intuition. Intuition always wins out over analytic. Analytic is brute force and works very well in a game like checkers intuition always surprises brute force analysis now chess is a combination of analysis (logistics) and intuition (something that logistics equations cannot calculate) then there is the ancient game from China known as GO it cannot be logistically analyzed.
Now the US military is playing a game of GO with terrorists. The game of CHESS is also involved as well as CHECKERS. We can beat any terrorists hands down when it comes to CHECKERS. WHEN IT COMES TO CHESS OUR BRUTE FORCE is stronger than our logistics. But when it comes to GO the US military rely on me. You see Jeffjo I only post on this site so that comedians can use my material. Now some of my material only solders would be able to understand. It involves GO moves that no one not even terrorists can figure out. What the f### was that move all about. While terrorists are standing around holding their dicks and scratching their head trying to come: out with what to do next: I make my next logistically determined CHESS move. I change the game in mid stream
One f-up by me could cost thousands of lives. SO IT IS A NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITION THAT I WRITE EVERYTHING I DO EXACTLY AS I DO. i have to anticipate f-ups who cannot i rerererepeter CAN NOT flow with what they need to follow my directives which can not be unstood by even they and them who were meant to not UNDER STAND by fol low ing me prefectly.
MY PHONE LINES ARE TAPPED EVERY STATION ON MY TV IS MONITORED MY MAIL IS MONITORED i AM CONTINUALLY UNDER SURVEILLANCE BECAUSE OF WHO i am. Most of what I write goes directly to aunt MVS my road runner named mata hari SHALL I PLAY IT AGAIN SAM . no you got a bogey .
It is cypher speak SORRY JEFFJO LOOKED UP CYPHER GOT A MESSAGE FROM Princeton advanced physics laboratories no relation to Princeton university except they are both in princeton. Gotta go the phone is ringing
_________________
love creation machine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffJo
Intellectual
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bill wrote: | Jeffjo
I apologize but you do not see the n=2 equations as the defining equations. This is my fault because I have not had the time to break it down |
You lie. Maybe you don;t even realize it, but this statement is false, and so is a lie. It would take an almost infinitesimal fraction of the time you have devoted to philosophsizing and ad hominen attacks, to carefully expand your so-called "proof."
| Quote: | why?
I do not lie. I sometimes sound like an idiot. |
You do lie, I have caught you in them; and you usually do sound like an idiot.
| Quote: | | I can see what others cannot but because I am involved with national security |
Good, lord; so was John Nash, in A Beautiful Mind. But "seeing what others cannot" would be a reason for you to be in national security, not the other way around. This is another example of you not understanding what necessary and/or sufficient conditions are.
| Quote: | | I do not always have time to explain myself completely . |
Yet you take far more time to explain why you don't. Stop defending yourself, and defend your ideas. Your so-called "proof" of FLT is incorrect in just about every detail.
Last edited by JeffJo on Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:32 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kemosabe-TBC
Intellectual
Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1217
Location: Portugal
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
There are two ways of playing analytically or intuition. Intuition always wins out over analytic. Analytic is brute force and works very well in a game like checkers intuition always surprises brute force analysis now chess is a combination of analysis (logistics) and intuition (something that logistics equations cannot calculate) then there is the ancient game from China known as GO it cannot be logistically analyzed.
|
Not necessarily true, it depends. Actually brute force would always win if it was possible to calculate the entire tree of possible states. Obviously a human cannot do this, so the human mind uses a combination of "intuition and analytic". The human intuition is very powerful, and uses extremely complex heuristics, that no computer could use, to eliminate a lot of unnecessary game states. A computer on the other hand is "stupid", but its brute force capacity is several orders of magnitude superior to a human, which means in some cases it is able to calculate the entire tree or enough to have a serious advantage (if the computer can process the entire tree then it's game over, there's no way anyone can possibly compete with that).
Now in chess, it's not possible, yet, for a machine to calculate all game states, but the computer is able to process a lot of it, enough to be able to defeat even the most skilled human opponent. In the future it will certainly be possible to have a computer that can beat any human opponent 100% of the time. As for 'GO', it's just not possible, at least not with the tecnhology we have. There are two many game states, even a supercomputer, running a sophisticated algorithm, will look like a kid playing GO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
Intellectual
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1204
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KEMO I CANNOT TELL JEFFJO WHAT I SEE THAT HE DOES NOT SO AS A GENTLEMAN I WILL SAY JEFFJO YOU ARE RIGHT I AM WRONG THANK YOU FOR CORRECTING ME. BUT MY TRUE TRIVIAL PROOF OF FERMAT'S LAST THEOREM PROVES THEY ARE CALCULATING THE ZEROS OF THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS THE WRONG WAY ON AVERAGE AND CONDITIONALLY THAT IS. BUT JEFFJO I NEVER LIE.
_________________
love creation machine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffJo
Intellectual
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bill wrote: | | BUT JEFFJO I NEVER LIE. |
You lie like a rug. Maybe you don't realize it, because you are so delusional, but very little of what you say is true. Certainly, nothing related to this so-called "proof" of yours is. You just ignore the parts you don't want to see, like the algebra errors I pointed out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
Intellectual
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1204
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jeffjo you do not know who you are talking too I work teaching advanced post graduate physics math and medicine I teach the bible and its logical implications and consequences call me delusional if you like but i solve math equations that have yet to be written. to science i write comedy i write cypher code i sound delusional too you and you alone nasa consults with me i write essays and poetry for the president i am giving economic advice i am involved in international affairs whether you believe it or not is irrelevant to me i engineered this universe for perfection and the kibitzers keep trying to improve upon it.
you can call me anything you like except a liar you have no clue of the consequences of that allegation you cannot prove. libel and slander me like that again and your next infinite number of lifetimes will drown you in infinite pain poverty and suffering misery depression etc. not even jesus can save you from my wrath.
_________________
love creation machine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffJo
Intellectual
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bill wrote: | | I work teaching advanced post graduate physics math and medicine I teach the bible and its logical implications and consequences |
What institution(s)? Someone like that shoud be listed as faculty on their websites. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
Intellectual
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1204
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
PRIVATE YESHIVA'S AND SHAOLIN TEMPLES THE WHITE HOUSE
PRIVATE GOVERNMENT LABORATORIES OF ADVANCED LEARNING I ALSO ALLOW DOCTORS TOO TEST NEW AND HIGHLY DANGEROUS DRUGS ON ME
DID YOU SEE THE BATTLE OF THE BALLET DANCERS OF THE WORLD DOING THERE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE NUTCRACKER SUITE EACH FROM DIFFERENT COUNTRIES IT WAS DONE TO HONOR ME I WAS ONLY ABLE TO WATCH PIECES OF IT UNFORTUNATELY I HAD EMERGENCIES TO TAKE CARE OF MEDICAL EMERGENCIES PSYCHIATRIC EMERGENCIES JEFFJO IF YOU APOLOGIZE TO ME FOR CALLING ME A LIAR YOU WILL BE GREATLY REWARDED YOU COULD NEVER EVEN EARN IN TWO TEARS WHAT I EARN IN A HALF HOUR I DONATE IT ALL TO CHARITY I AM ALSO THE TOP LEGAL CONSULTANT IN THE COUNTRY I JUST MADE ARRANGEMENTS FOR PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO BECOME PROFESSIONAL GAMBLERS TO SIGN UP AND CREATED A SYSTEM WHERE THEY WERE GUARANTEED TO WIN IN THE LONG RUN THE CASINOS WOULD MAKE MORE MONEY AND PAY OUT LESS THE DEALERS AND WAITRESSES ARE GUARANTEED TIPS AND BECAUSE OF THIS THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY WILL BE ABLE TO LOWER CAR INSURANCE LIFE INSURANCE HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS TOO COMPANY'S THE GOVERNOR OF NEW JERSEY WILL NOW BE ABLE TOO LOWER TAXES AND INCREASE SPENDING AND ALSO SET UP PRACTICES TO INCREASE POLICE COMMUNITY RELATIONS I ALSO REWROTE THE RULES OF PROPER COURT ETIQUETTE OPENED MORE CLOSED AND LOCKED DOORS TO LOCKED TO BARACK OBAMA IMPROVED RELATIONS BETWEEN THE NAZIS AND JEWS THE NAZIS AND BLACKS GOT RUSSIA INVOLVED IN THE WAR IN AFGANISTAN INCREASED AID TO STARVING CHILDREN AROUND THE WORLD AND A WHOLE HOST OF OTHER WORKS AND CREATIONS WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR THE WORLD LATELY JEFFJO BESIDES CALL ME A LIAR MY RESEARCH IS OFF LIMITS TO PEOPLE LIKE YOU I HAVE PREVENTED MILLIONS OF FUTURE BIRTH DEFECTS I AM ALSO INSTRUMENTAL IN DESIGNING STAR SHIPS THAT MAKES THE ENTERPRISE AS SEEN ON TV ANCIENT TECHNOLOGY A LOT OF PEOPLE QUESTIONED MY SANITY AT FIRST AND MY INCREDIBLE PSYCHIC ABILITIES BUT I PROVED BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT I HAVE NEVER LIED THAT I HAVE LIVED PAST LIVES THAT I HAVE TRAVELED BACK IN TIME THAT I KNOW MORE LANGUAGES THAN ANY MAN WHO HAS EVER LIVE i DO NOT SPEAK OR WRITE OR READ THEM I PSYCHICALLY TRANSLATE THEM WHEN PEOPLE ARE HAVING TROUBLE WITH THEM I AM AN EMPATH I HEAL OTHERS BY USING MY PSYCHIC POWERS BUT I MUST TAKE THEIR ILLNESS AND DISEASES UPON MYSELF AND CURE MYSELF OF THEM WITHOUT THE HELP OF DOCTORS I AM ALWAYS IN CONTINUOUS NON-STOP PAIN AND SUFFERING AND MISERY BUT I MAINTAIN MY SENSE OF HUMOR BUT AM PRON TO HYPERSENSITITY YOU CALLING ME A LIAR COULD COST MILLIONS OF BABIES BIRTH DEFECTS IN THE FUTURE DEFECTS I AM CURING AS WE SPEAK YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHO YOU CALLED A LIAR I HAE BEEN INVITED TO GIVE PERSONAL APPEARENCES AND LECTURES AT UNIVERSITIES BUT I HAD TO DECLINE THEIR OFFERS APOLOGIZE TO ME AND YOU WILL BE REWARDED DO NOT APOLOGIZE AND YOUR PUNISHMENT WILL BE THE LOSS OF A GREAT OPPORTUNITY I HAVE ARRANGED FOR YOUR FUTURE I AM IN CHARGE OF DOING THE IMPOSSIBLE WHEN SOMEONE PROVES SOMETHING IMPOSSIBLE I HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO DO IT ANYWAY NOW JFFFJO IF MY PROOF OF FERMAT'S LAST THEOREM WAS WRONG THEN SO WOULD THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS BE WRONG JEFFJO HOW MUCH DO YOU KNOW ABOUT SUPERSTRING THEORY AND MEMBRANE THEORY MEMBRANES ARE STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED OF SUPER STRINGS MADE UP OF PROBABILITY WAVE FUNCTIONS DO NOT APOLOGIZE TO ME AND YOU WILL BE JUST ANOTHER BELOW AVERAGE PhD APOLOGIZE TO ME AND THERE IS A GREAT CHANCE THAT YOU WILL BE AWARDED A PhD SUPREMUM CUM LAUDE THE FIRST MATHEMATICIAN TO BE AWARDED THAT HONOR IN HISTORY THE CHOICE IS YOURS
_________________
love creation machine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffJo
Intellectual
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bill, I didn't say FLT was wrong. I said your proof was wrong. It is trivially wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
Intellectual
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1204
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
JEFFJO JUST APOLOGIZE THAT IS ALL YOU HAVE TO DO AND SAY I DID NOT LIE I DO NOT LIE JEFFJO
_________________
love creation machine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffJo
Intellectual
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bill wrote: | | JEFFJO JUST APOLOGIZE THAT IS ALL YOU HAVE TO DO AND SAY I DID NOT LIE I DO NOT LIE JEFFJO |
On Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 2:26 pm you posted:
| bill wrote: | So for n=3 we obtain following the same procedure:
a^3 + 3ab^2 = ( d^3 + f^3 )/2 = c^3 |
This is a false statement. That result cannot be "obtain[ed] following the same procedure." In fact, it cannot be obtained at all. You know this, because I have told you several times, and have shown you exactly what is wrong. Hence, saying it was a lie.
As soon as you stop passing off false information, stop making false claims, and apologize for doing it so often in the past, then I will stop calling you a liar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
Intellectual
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1204
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jeffjo
It is you that has to prove it false. Or are you DANTE himself.
Only liar like DANTE himself would DARE tell me BEOWULF to apologize for DANTE'S own lies that he DANTE keeps telling everyone else about DANTE himself.
_________________
love creation machine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffJo
Intellectual
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bill wrote: | Jeffjo
It is you that has to prove it false. |
(1) No, the idea of a "proof" is that you have to prove it is correct.
(2) I have already shown it is false.
(3) The first defense of a liar is "you can't prove I'm wrong." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
