My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math

Math General Math Forum - For general math related discussion and news


Thanks Tree34Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
October 6th, 2018, 12:01 PM   #81
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: USA

Posts: 623
Thanks: 52

I am trying to follow your post here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevensixtwo View Post
Consider the definition of a real number: it is a cut in the real number line. For any real radius around the origin, the real number line leaves that radius.
Ok, so if $x$ is a real radius that simply means $x$ is a real number, correct?:

$$x \in (0,\infty) \implies \exists y \in \mathbb{R} \text{ such that } y > x$$

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevensixtwo View Post
Cuts in the part beyond the radius are real numbers in the neighborhood of infinity.
Ok, so:

$$y > x \implies y \in \text{ 'the neighborhood of infinity'}$$
$$x = 1 \implies (1,\infty) = \text{ 'the neighborhood of infinity'}$$

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevensixtwo View Post
I have defined these types of real numbers to have the form "infinity minus b."
This seems nonstandard. I believe the standard would be that $\infty - b = \infty \neq y \in (1,\infty)$.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevensixtwo View Post
Since it is known that one can make definitions, I have proven that a real number can have this form.
The real numbers are already defined. One can define a number in any fashion they see fit, but that doesn't make it a real number. Have you proven that $\infty - b \neq \infty$ and instead that $\infty - b \in \mathbb{R}$ or something? What am I missing...?
AplanisTophet is offline  
 
January 11th, 2019, 07:16 PM   #82
jks
Senior Member
 
jks's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: DFW Area

Posts: 642
Thanks: 99

Math Focus: Electrical Engineering Applications
Unfortunately, Dr. Atiyah has passed away.

NY Times article
jks is offline  
January 12th, 2019, 10:18 AM   #83
Senior Member
 
ProofOfALifetime's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2016
From: Arizona

Posts: 209
Thanks: 37

Math Focus: I'm still deciding, but my recent focus has been olympiad problems and math journal problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jks View Post
Unfortunately, Dr. Atiyah has passed away.

NY Times article
That is so sad! I hope I can still be doing math until I'm 90!
ProofOfALifetime is offline  
January 12th, 2019, 12:19 PM   #84
bas
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Jun 2010

Posts: 17
Thanks: 0

It should be born in mind that this proof is irrelevant as
)Mathematics/science end in contradiction an integer= a non-integer. When mathematics/science end in contradiction it is proven in logic that you can prove anything you want in mathematics ie you can prove Fermat's last theorem and you can disprove Fermat's last theorem

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com...e-possible.pdf
bas is offline  
January 12th, 2019, 02:06 PM   #85
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2012

Posts: 2,414
Thanks: 755

Quote:
Originally Posted by bas View Post
It should be born in mind that this proof is irrelevant as
)Mathematics/science end in contradiction an integer= a non-integer. When mathematics/science end in contradiction it is proven in logic that you can prove anything you want in mathematics ie you can prove Fermat's last theorem and you can disprove Fermat's last theorem

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com...e-possible.pdf
Can you tell me something? You claim to be Australia's leading erotic poet. Yet in the ten or so years I've been reading your mathematical expositions online, I've never seen you post any erotic poetry. Why is that?
Maschke is online now  
January 12th, 2019, 09:21 PM   #86
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 21,036
Thanks: 2273

Quote:
Originally Posted by bas View Post
. . . it is proven in logic that you can prove anything you want in mathematics
That would include proving that any of your mathematical assertions are mistaken.
skipjack is offline  
January 13th, 2019, 09:39 AM   #87
Math Team
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 2,305
Thanks: 962

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bas View Post
It should be born in mind that this proof is irrelevant as
)Mathematics/science end in contradiction an integer= a non-integer. When mathematics/science end in contradiction it is proven in logic that you can prove anything you want in mathematics ie you can prove Fermat's last theorem and you can disprove Fermat's last theorem

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com...e-possible.pdf
I'm guess I'm not surprised but haven't you found out that the decimal representation of a real number is not necessarily unique? There's nothing hard or abstract about this whole thing. That's one reason why Mathematicians tend to choose to use abstract symbols rather than decimals.

-Dan
topsquark is offline  
January 13th, 2019, 10:03 AM   #88
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: USA

Posts: 623
Thanks: 52

Quote:
Originally Posted by topsquark View Post
I'm guess I'm not surprised but haven't you found out that the decimal representation of a real number is not necessarily unique?
Yes, any rational number not equal to $0$ that may be expressed as $\frac{n}{10^m}$, where $n$ is an integer and $m$ is a natural number, will have precisely two decimal representations. The rest of the real numbers will have only a single decimal representation.

The same goes for any base, as base 10 is just one of the infinite number of bases we could use when representing real numbers. E.g., if $B$ is the base, then rationals that may be expressed as $\frac{n}{B^m}$ will have precisely two representations in base $B$. Every other real number will have only a single representation in base $B$.

So now the question is, how does this ruin all of mathematics again? It seems like a very consistent and trivial thing to me. On the other hand, confusing notation with the notion of consistency to the point where "math is broken" is a ridiculously inconsistent position to take.
Thanks from topsquark
AplanisTophet is offline  
January 13th, 2019, 10:06 AM   #89
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2016
From: USA

Posts: 1,310
Thanks: 552

Quote:
Originally Posted by topsquark View Post
I'm guess I'm not surprised but haven't you found out that the decimal representation of a real number is not necessarily unique? There's nothing hard or abstract about this whole thing. That's one reason why Mathematicians tend to choose to use abstract symbols rather than decimals.

-Dan
Dan

He has no clue that there is a difference between the symbol and the thing symbolized.
Thanks from topsquark
JeffM1 is offline  
January 13th, 2019, 04:02 PM   #90
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2016
From: USA

Posts: 1,310
Thanks: 552

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maschke View Post
Can you tell me something? You claim to be Australia's leading erotic poet. Yet in the ten or so years I've been reading your mathematical expositions online, I've never seen you post any erotic poetry. Why is that?
Australia's leading erotic poet? There is such a thing? Is it an annual or lifetime award? Are the judges exclusively placental (I ask because I am not sure I trust the taste of monotremes in this area)? Can a prize be meaningful if logic does not exist. Many questions! More details are needed urgently.
JeffM1 is offline  
Reply

  My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math

Tags
hypothesis, proof, riemann



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
riemann hypothesis proof?: zeta(s) is never 0 for Re(s)>1/2, flaws? thanks! jlb Number Theory 1 January 15th, 2015 12:49 PM
A proof of Robin's inequality (and so of the Riemann Hypothesis) Vincenzo Oliva Number Theory 12 November 27th, 2014 03:14 PM
Riemann Hypothesis. mathbalarka Number Theory 0 October 31st, 2013 12:54 AM
Proof of Riemann Hypothesis? eddybob123 Number Theory 18 May 21st, 2013 06:10 PM
Proof for Riemann hypothesis and more joexian Number Theory 5 January 16th, 2013 06:13 AM





Copyright © 2019 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.