https://groups.google.com/d/forum/sci.mathsci.mathMathematical discussions and pursuits.Google GroupsPython2016-12-03T18:28:06Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/isprcXwTx9QRe: WM's biggest mistake in set theoryReally? How sad :-D https://gist.github.com/anonymous/df8646e418bbb923ff281add968c5907Ross A. Finlayson2016-12-03T18:26:28Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/tXQZhzS2j1oRe: A MathOverflow question on "How should a working mathematician think about sets?"wrote: > > http://mathoverflow.net/questions/255820/how-should-a-working-mathematician-think-about-sets-zfc-category-theory-ur > > > > It's asked on MathOverflow (a sub-stackexchange/ > > Stack Overflow that has apparently become a little > > love-fest) the question per the title. > > > >genm...@gmail.com2016-12-03T18:21:01Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/isprcXwTx9QRe: WM's biggest mistake in set theoryto work: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 0 = {} > >>>>>>> 1 = { {} } > >>>>>>> 2 = { {}, { {} } } > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 0 + 1 = 0 \/ 1 = {} \/ { {} } > >>>>>> > >>>>>> so far so good > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> = { {}, { {} } } = 2 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> *facepalm* > >>>>> > >>>>> What are you facepalminggenm...@gmail.com2016-12-03T18:20:02Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/isprcXwTx9QRe: WM's biggest mistake in set theoryworked > > in many countries on different continents. Have worked at top institutions > > such as IBM TJ Watson research center. I was the best of the best while > > still employed. > > This is certainly a lie, Mr Gabriel, at best a effect of your delusions. Absolutely not. The only liar isJohn Gabriel2016-12-03T18:16:48Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/xs6bRleL9JsRe: Anatomy of the BIG STUPID (mainstream academia).criticism, once sufficient status is acquired on top of the trash heap known as modern academia. For example, one such as the ignoramus Prof. Gilbert Strang or Terrence Tao can say anything he likes and it will be printed in some journal of acclaim or accepted at face value as if he were someJohn Gabriel2016-12-03T18:15:37Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/Uq1C_iA9MuMRe: I challenge any fucking arsehole from the BIG STUPID to deny that Euler defined S = Lim S. Enough of this bullshit and dishonesty please!defined S = Lim S. Enough of this bullshit and dishonesty please! > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8s_8fNePEE 0.333... is not equal to 1/3 0.999... is not equal to 1 cat is not equal to orange S is not equal to Lim S.John Gabriel2016-12-03T18:14:54Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/PqVQbfP6DtcRe: So you see something like {} \/ { {} } = ? What does it mean?Whatever you know or think of, I have already thought of and know long before you mentioned it, you absolute moron. Do you think that you are the only one who has access to the media and libraries. That von Neumann is the "father of computer architecture" is purely speculative, that is, itJohn Gabriel2016-12-03T17:56:45Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/HgCIn7ZaCZ0Re: The 13 fallacies and why you must know these if you are ever to understand mathematics.kind of Mathematica Judaica, after Cantor's fables were introduced. > > Once Cantor's infinity bullshit was allowed, open season was effectively declared on mathematics curricula and syllabi worldwide. All of a sudden, idiots swarmed to take up position in mathematics education. After all, ifRoss A. Finlayson2016-12-03T17:56:21Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/tXQZhzS2j1oRe: A MathOverflow question on "How should a working mathematician think about sets?"wrote: > > http://mathoverflow.net/questions/255820/how-should-a-working-mathematician-think-about-sets-zfc-category-theory-ur > > > > It's asked on MathOverflow (a sub-stackexchange/ > > Stack Overflow that has apparently become a little > > love-fest) the question per the title. > > > >John Gabriel2016-12-03T17:55:03Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/tzGMZvW4qusRe: Poll: Euler's S = Lim SNO if you are not convinced. > > Only real names will be tallied at some future date. Aliases and pseudonyms don't count, and cranks don't count (e.g. Christensen and his clones). > > YES - John Gabriel > > I invite the following (scum) to add their votes: > > gils...@gmail.com (MIT) >John Gabriel2016-12-03T17:54:18Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/X62faH8wpXYRe: A number is the measure of a magnitude. - John GabrielThe most surprising fact is that not a single mainstream academic realised this fact before me. That is, after Euclid and before me, no one even got close to realising this important fact: ***** A number is the measure of a magnitude. ****** Infinitely stupid idiots in the BIG STUPID.Ross A. Finlayson2016-12-03T17:47:54Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/tXQZhzS2j1oRe: A MathOverflow question on "How should a working mathematician think about sets?"http://mathoverflow.net/questions/255820/how-should-a-working-mathematician-think-about-sets-zfc-category-theory-ur > > It's asked on MathOverflow (a sub-stackexchange/ > Stack Overflow that has apparently become a little > love-fest) the question per the title. > > It's a relevant thing:burs...@gmail.com2016-12-03T17:22:18Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/ZhzqR4gPk1ERe: Gilbert Strang and his instantaneous dementia.Fallacies In Media - LoL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plB51zfAIOQburs...@gmail.com2016-12-03T17:13:46Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/kdVfsFhs6W8Re: My next video: The Riemann Integral DefinitionIts good to see JG busy here on sci.math , at least he hss then no time in producing new articles and videos on Gabrieloconfusion and Johnostupidics.burs...@gmail.com2016-12-03T17:07:47Zhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/ZhzqR4gPk1ERe: Gilbert Strang and his instantaneous dementia.JG you are the biggest joke in sci.math history itself. How did you come up with the term "fallacy", during potty time? You know whats a fallacy? In math there is not much room for fallacies. It means a logical error and you can assume that math texts are error free, otherwise they wouldn't