<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
  <title>sci.math Google Group</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math</link>
  <description>Mathematical discussions and pursuits.</description>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
  <title>Re: does an integer solution for a quartic equal to a square exist?</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/4ebf848ec5421efb/de3daf8e0359bb9a?show_docid=de3daf8e0359bb9a</link>
  <description>
  Please, please, quote what you&#39;re responding to! Nobody reading your &lt;br&gt; message below would know what is being considered. &lt;br&gt; You originally wanted integers d, e, n and S such that &lt;br&gt; S^2 = (d^2 + e^2)*n^4 - 4*d^2*e^2*n^2 + d^2*e^2*(d^2 + e^2). &lt;br&gt; How about d = 11, e = 0, n = 6, S = 396? &lt;br&gt; David
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/4ebf848ec5421efb/de3daf8e0359bb9a?show_docid=de3daf8e0359bb9a</guid>
  <author>
  dwcantr...@sigmaxi.net
  (David W. Cantrell)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:05:49 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Relativity, The Einstein Hoax and Disc Aircraft</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/83cb1425ad7a83e1?show_docid=83cb1425ad7a83e1</link>
  <description>
  The mathematics used by Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the &lt;br&gt; liar to derive the Lorentz transform can be identified as garbage &lt;br&gt; using just high school algebra. Claiming otherwise is gross &lt;br&gt; dishonesty and a crime against science. &amp;lt;shrug&amp;gt; &lt;br&gt; To best the nitwit’s 1905 derivation of the Lorentz transform,
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/83cb1425ad7a83e1?show_docid=83cb1425ad7a83e1</guid>
  <author>
  koobee.wub...@gmail.com
  (Koobee Wublee)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:05:25 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: This Week&#39;s Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 268)</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/d86e38d4731002c5/a80cde87a522321f?show_docid=a80cde87a522321f</link>
  <description>
  [snip crap] &lt;br&gt; ahahaha... Yo, Schwartz. What does Baez&#39;s ass smell like today? &lt;br&gt; ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha... &lt;br&gt; BTW, Schwartz meister, ahahaha... We&#39;re still waiting for those chiral &lt;br&gt; diamonds and your imminent falsification of the principle of &lt;br&gt; equivalence. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha... &lt;br&gt; Louis Savain &lt;br&gt; Rebel Science News:
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/d86e38d4731002c5/a80cde87a522321f?show_docid=a80cde87a522321f</guid>
  <author>
  noasskiss...@nowhere.net
  (Traveler)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:53:56 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: This Week&#39;s Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 268)</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/d86e38d4731002c5/3a532af44ec9e20d?show_docid=3a532af44ec9e20d</link>
  <description>
  Hey Miracle Fruit - why don&#39;t you bother his cousin Joan&#39;s father? &lt;br&gt; Albert Baez is a mathematician who died 20 March 2007. He&#39;d be more &lt;br&gt; receptive to your spew than either of the living cousins would be.
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/d86e38d4731002c5/3a532af44ec9e20d?show_docid=3a532af44ec9e20d</guid>
  <author>
  uncle...@hate.spam.net
  (Uncle Al)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:39:12 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Relativity, The Einstein Hoax and Disc Aircraft</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/e84693a8d8076ca0?show_docid=e84693a8d8076ca0</link>
  <description>
  So, Ian Parker BELIEVES IN Relativity where all evidence points to its &lt;br&gt; veracity in this religion. You must also BELIEVE IN the messiah &lt;br&gt; identified as Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar. Does &lt;br&gt; such zealous belief in an abstract concept qualify you as a priest? &lt;br&gt; So, you are also a priest to the religion of SR and GR. &amp;lt;shrug&amp;gt;
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/e84693a8d8076ca0?show_docid=e84693a8d8076ca0</guid>
  <author>
  koobee.wub...@gmail.com
  (Koobee Wublee)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:30:19 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: the problem with Cantor</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/2cbf27e7d9677ddc/13cf73f760dbe4a5?show_docid=13cf73f760dbe4a5</link>
  <description>
  Balthasar &amp;lt;nomail@invalid&amp;gt; writes, quoting Garth Dales at first: &lt;br&gt; I doubt anyone who&#39;s given these issues much thought shares the &lt;br&gt; bizarre view that the theory ZFC + ~CH leads to exciting mathematics, &lt;br&gt; if by that we mean something we don&#39;t get with ZFC already. Also, if &lt;br&gt; any two relatively consistent extensions of ZFC are equally valid we
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/2cbf27e7d9677ddc/13cf73f760dbe4a5?show_docid=13cf73f760dbe4a5</guid>
  <author>
  aatu.koskensi...@uta.fi
  (Aatu Koskensilta)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:29:14 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Relativity, The Einstein Hoax and Disc Aircraft</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/d0df5cba58e8554f?show_docid=d0df5cba58e8554f</link>
  <description>
  Here is Google’s translation. &lt;br&gt; “I understand that he has fallen in species. If you do not Dunn then &lt;br&gt; you can head are. I also participated in the screibe Artificial &lt;br&gt; Intelligence. I think the little Spanish versetehen can. I would &lt;br&gt; gedact the majority of Americans were on &lt;br&gt; wenigtens Spansish.” &lt;br&gt; &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=nofollow href=&quot;http://translate.google.com/translate_t&quot;&gt;[link]&lt;/a&gt;
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/d0df5cba58e8554f?show_docid=d0df5cba58e8554f</guid>
  <author>
  koobee.wub...@gmail.com
  (Koobee Wublee)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:20:42 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: does an integer solution for a quartic equal to a square exist?</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/4ebf848ec5421efb/d00cfa3b192347ad?show_docid=d00cfa3b192347ad</link>
  <description>
  Okay, kick me for not being mathematically precise. &lt;br&gt; We cannot have n^2 = e^2 nor n^2 = d^2 and d^2 != e^2. &lt;br&gt; so n = -1 and e = 1 won&#39;t work. We need a solution where the magnitudes &lt;br&gt; are all unequal.
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/4ebf848ec5421efb/d00cfa3b192347ad?show_docid=d00cfa3b192347ad</guid>
  <author>
  shy.author....@aol.com
  (shy author)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:19:17 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Physics Is A Game Played According To Certain Simple Rules</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/407a2e559472fdb3/f4fc8cf01229b5c6?show_docid=f4fc8cf01229b5c6</link>
  <description>
  &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=nofollow href=&quot;http://www.bartleby.com/173/17.html&quot;&gt;[link]&lt;/a&gt; &lt;br&gt; That is a little like saying a pilot can&#39;t trust his &lt;br&gt; chart because the polar coordinate system is faulty &lt;br&gt; so I would rather see a demonstration of that first. &lt;br&gt; Many consider that sort of question more the domain &lt;br&gt; of religion of philosopy but I can take a swing at it.
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/407a2e559472fdb3/f4fc8cf01229b5c6?show_docid=f4fc8cf01229b5c6</guid>
  <author>
  suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au
  (Sue...)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:18:24 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: the problem with Cantor</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/2cbf27e7d9677ddc/3a3c4fd6813e1020?show_docid=3a3c4fd6813e1020</link>
  <description>
  On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:47:49 -0700 (PDT), MoeBlee &amp;lt;jazzm...@hotmail.com&amp;gt; &lt;br&gt; wrote: &lt;br&gt; Well, there are many rather strong claims in this paper. :-) &lt;br&gt; B. &lt;br&gt; P.S. &lt;br&gt; But I guess concerning the formalist position -if there is such a thing- &lt;br&gt; he may be right (if so). That&#39;s why _imho_ most mathematicians who claim &lt;br&gt; to be &amp;quot;formalists&amp;quot; actually are rather (practical) &amp;quot;fictionalists&amp;quot;.
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/2cbf27e7d9677ddc/3a3c4fd6813e1020?show_docid=3a3c4fd6813e1020</guid>
  <author>
  nom...@invalid
  (Balthasar)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:14:28 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Relativity, The Einstein Hoax and Disc Aircraft</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/39c38e5764897f76?show_docid=39c38e5764897f76</link>
  <description>
  Man, you left yourself wide open to incredible guidance. &lt;br&gt; Do you not know the Cosmological constant was invented by the same &lt;br&gt; Einstein the same nitwit, the same plagiarist, and the same liar? It &lt;br&gt; describes that space manifests a negative mass density. Yes, it is &lt;br&gt; the same negative mass and negative density that you have so viciously
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b152c47db9b297f6/39c38e5764897f76?show_docid=39c38e5764897f76</guid>
  <author>
  koobee.wub...@gmail.com
  (Koobee Wublee)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:15:15 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: fog=gof ( my 2nd variant )</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b0df3fe5505b702e/41a9e95b6da5e31b?show_docid=41a9e95b6da5e31b</link>
  <description>
  Certainly not. E.g. try f(x) = x^p, g(x) = x^q, h(x) = x^r, &lt;br&gt; with p,q,r&amp;gt;0.
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/b0df3fe5505b702e/41a9e95b6da5e31b?show_docid=41a9e95b6da5e31b</guid>
  <author>
  isr...@math.myuniversitysinitials.ca
  (Robert Israel)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:03:48 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>latitude - longitude distance question</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/92910e9b2b3be93a/4746a398b1a49a01?show_docid=4746a398b1a49a01</link>
  <description>
  Hi everyone, &lt;br&gt; I am trying to find a formula to solve the problem depicted below. &lt;br&gt; &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=nofollow href=&quot;http://www.box.net/shared/owe3in6ogg&quot;&gt;[link]&lt;/a&gt; &lt;br&gt; Thanks for any help! &lt;br&gt; John
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/92910e9b2b3be93a/4746a398b1a49a01?show_docid=4746a398b1a49a01</guid>
  <author>
  johnsmyt...@gmail.com
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:52:51 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Physics Is A Game Played According To Certain Simple Rules</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/407a2e559472fdb3/51c7251908e67060?show_docid=51c7251908e67060</link>
  <description>
  xxein: I can show that it requires more than that. But you obviously &lt;br&gt; wouldn&#39;t understand. &lt;br&gt; Perhaps you will tell us why gravity exists.
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/407a2e559472fdb3/51c7251908e67060?show_docid=51c7251908e67060</guid>
  <author>
  xxe...@bellsouth.net
  (xxein)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:52:44 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: the problem with Cantor</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/2cbf27e7d9677ddc/9ea5a6ac98256d59?show_docid=9ea5a6ac98256d59</link>
  <description>
  212 Problem with Cantor &lt;br&gt; &amp;quot;THE formalist position&amp;quot;. I hardly think so. &lt;br&gt; MoeBlee
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/2cbf27e7d9677ddc/9ea5a6ac98256d59?show_docid=9ea5a6ac98256d59</guid>
  <author>
  jazzm...@hotmail.com
  (MoeBlee)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:47:49 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
