sci.math
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/sci.math
Mathematical discussions and pursuits.enRe: No stupids. 1/3 does NOT mean 1 divided by 3 and never has meant that.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/CmJTUaS3F5o/H1mwX4jBYXsJ
http://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/math/4507-0-999-equal-one-721.html#post39231 The best way to define division is as follows: The quotient (or division) of two positive numbers is that positive number, that measures either positive number in terms of the other. (Axiom 4) Example: Lethttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/CmJTUaS3F5o
John GabrielFri, 27 Feb 2015 06:06:15 UTCRe: Obamanet replaces Internet
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s/IFZIOFJFH3YJ
I was being facetious; the point is the FCC has no power to impose a tax of any kind. >>>> They may make it retroactive, to collect more money. >>> >>> A retroactive law would be void on the first court challenge in the >>> US. > > If it gets that far. retroactive laws, bills of attainder,https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 06:01:15 UTCRe: Obamanet replaces Internet
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s/43naIMUS9RQJ
Nope. >> >>>> >>>>> They may make it retroactive, to collect more money. >>>> > >>>> >>>> If it is so secret, how do you know what is in it? >>>> >>> >>> FCC Commissioner Pai who voted against it, on various web sites >> >> Then it isn't secret, is it? >> >> BTW, the FCC has about 80https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 06:01:15 UTCRe: No stupids. 1/3 does NOT mean 1 divided by 3 and never has meant that.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/CmJTUaS3F5o/pPk31h56nJ0J
http://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/math/4507-0-999-equal-one-721.html#post39231 Chuckle. You thought I was not aware of it. That's just too funny. The problem is not with my understanding, but your lack thereof. The thread stated that 1 -:- 3 is not equal to 1/3. Using repeated subtraction,https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/CmJTUaS3F5o
John GabrielFri, 27 Feb 2015 05:56:06 UTCRe: Obamanet replaces Internet
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s/lpLZHXuhiwAJ
The way it was all explained to me is that you vote for your representatives and then they appoint people who impose taxes on you. Therefore the taxation HAS representation! Right? >>> They may make it retroactive, to collect more money. >> >> A retroactive law would be void on the first courhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s
benjFri, 27 Feb 2015 05:09:01 UTCRe: 0.41468250985111166024810962215430770837..
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/w7gIXV00tKA/kUCoUN7KvrcJ
more importantly, it is the ratio of the diameter to the surface of a sphere, which is truly strange (d*pi*dhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/w7gIXV00tKA
abu.ku...@gmail.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:39:34 UTCparabolIC ARCS
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/AzalCqLfSkw/8kplhMiAoS4J
thrown objects on rrth do not make parabolic trajectories, per what's-his-name's say-so (where is hte other focushttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/AzalCqLfSkw
abu.ku...@gmail.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:37:47 UTCRe: need to see if 1.3024...*10^602 = 295!, then .295! = 1*10^-604
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/E8WfMwKtXJM/38X6k5r7LJ0J
in the base of ten, but nobody gAf > Besides that. It is easy to find the number of zeroes in 295! > > KONhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/E8WfMwKtXJM
abu.ku...@gmail.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:34:52 UTCRe: Sine rule
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/ymAoQefOesk/EVcVaC_uI8UJ
the funny thing about the usual sine law, is that it is seldom related to its proof, using the diameter of the circle, which is quite easyhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/ymAoQefOesk
abu.ku...@gmail.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:33:34 UTCRe: see about .29! Re: .295! Re: help from Ron Bruck's computers
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/ZwfMEaFRwQM/Ulja5n5mtw8J
if you don not compare it to Gauss's gamma function, the continuous factorial, no one is going to gAfhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/ZwfMEaFRwQM
abu.ku...@gmail.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:32:06 UTC*mathematica is four subjects, at a minimum, one of which is not arithmetic (carried under the trivium
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/TspFayq_HF4/pVPmKOILl88J
more commonly known in Gauss's form, V + F = E + 2 ;so, what does the two stand for > vertices plus facets equals edges plus cellshttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/TspFayq_HF4
abu.ku...@gmail.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:30:18 UTCRe: No stupids. 1/3 does NOT mean 1 divided by 3 and never has meant that.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/CmJTUaS3F5o/jJcXC7SI4GUJ
ever followed a proof > math is not your area. > > KONhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/CmJTUaS3F5o
abu.ku...@gmail.comFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:27:24 UTC**** TROLL ALERT ****
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/wxhgfW6ctBA/a-1-t5mITHcJ
On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 5:58:09 PM UTC-5, John Gabriel wrote: > Dan Christensen... More of John Gabriel's bizarre rantings: "I will point out a few facts about Hitler that most of you arrogant idiots didn't know or refused to acknowledge because your Jewish overlords do not allowhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/wxhgfW6ctBA
Dan ChristensenFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:27:07 UTCRe: A strange result
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/6bAkaMQMb1Y/51AqkyWzTL4J
In article <mailto:05dbbdb1-a772-42ca-867c-0f1cb3ed051d@googlegroups.com>, WM <muec...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > But your conclusion is of the > > form P(F) not P(F(n)) for some n in N. > > You confuse the facts. It is WM who is denying facts. > > My proof shows U(F\{F(n) | n in N}) = |Nhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/6bAkaMQMb1Y
VirgilFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:21:19 UTCRe: Obamanet replaces Internet
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s/ps0SGIi4J0AJ
On 2/26/2015 7:54 PM, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>> >>> That would be taxation without representation; the US fought a war >>> over that. >> >> True, and they are doing it. > > You don't have the slightest clue about US tax laws, do you? they are doing it with Obamacare. >https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/61b85ksNS8s
nitialtFri, 27 Feb 2015 03:16:56 UTC