On the threatening postings of Antreas P. Hatzipolakis & Ilias Kastanas, <Sfakianos@EuropeMail.Com>
Jim Balter
dgo...@etheron.net wrote:
> It is a shame to see you are proud of Antreas's postings and yours
> on this subject, specially, the one from yours entitled :
> Author: Ilias Kastanas <ika...@alumni.caltech.edu>
> Organization: Caltech Alumni Association
> Date: 25 Oct 1997 11:41:44 GMT
>
> There you fully endorsed Antreas's message and found it as a
> very funny joke :
> Subject: Re: Math. Cranks (was: Re:Are you interested in the
> Author: Antreas P. Hatzipolakis <Sfak...@EuropeMail.Com>
>
> The subject of Antreas's message tells enough about its contents,
> however, you found his insult as a very funny joke.
That's an outrageous lie. Ilias said that it seemed to be a joke,
and that it was "very much to the point", the point being your
ridiculous generalizations about Greeks. The joke was that there were
Greek cranks who thought that pi was exactly 3.1416, so there was no
need for non-Greek cranks.
> > >You have scornfully talked about my country Venezuela, now, you
That is a pathetic lie. Hatzipolakis referred to "foreigners",
meaning non-Greeks.
> > >I'm warning you, I will not desist on this matter, so you will have to
> > >give your
> > >apologizes.
Invalid inference.
--
<J Q B>
Ilias Kastanas
In article <8798004...@dejanews.com>, <dgo...@etheron.net> wrote:
>
>In my postings to sci.math relating the cube root, I said :
>>> Now, in order to get a new set of three approximations to the cube
>>> root of 2 whose values get closer to each other and whose product is
>>> 2, you just need to compute the following rational means :
>>>
>>> (4 + 5)/(3 + 4) = 9/7 (Rational mean between 4/3 and 5/4)
...
>>>*******************************************************
>>>1.- Why Greeks mathematicians --and many others, up to the creation
>>>of the decimal fractions and the Cartesian System--
>>>didn't find such trivial approximations to the cube root (simple sums) ???
>
>>>2.-Why Western culture had to wait until the creation
>>>of the decimal fractions and the Cartesian system in order to solve
>>>such tivial problem (I recall I'm talking about simple sums!).
>>>*******************************************************
They knew how to approximate it; that's easy. The question was,
is there a geometric construction of cube roots. As I've told you a
number of times.
>Ilias Castanas said :
>[cut]...
>>I didn't criticize your methods of approximating
>>phi or whatever; but you claimed geometry missed them, as if they
>>were exact constructions or solutions.
>[cut]
>> The cube-root of 2 cannot be constructed in Euclidean geometry;
>>that's a theorem. So when you said your method of approximating that
>>cube-root is something Geometry missed, you were talking nonsense.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>If you and your close friend Antreas Hatzipolakis arbitrarily
It so happens I have never met Antreas.
>decided to interpret the words :
>'methods of approximating roots' as 'methods who yield exact solutions',
>the words 'rational approximations' as 'exact solutions',
>and the words 'arithmetic methods for approximating the cube root' as
>'geometrical constructions' then your intention becomes very clear
>to everybody.
>You cannot be so ignorant on this matter, so it is clear your only
>intention is to create confusion about my postings on the rational
>mean (Mediant).
No kidding? You think it matters to me whether you post them or
not? You have a persecution complex.
> If you don't want the western culture to be
>the object of any inquires and criticism from any South American
>and you hate to admit that Greeks and many others --up to the
>creation of the decimal fractions-- missed such simple arithmetical
>methods (At least, from the evidences) for computing roots and
That's your delusion, and ignorance of the history of mathematics.
They were _not_ interested in, or looking for, approximation methods. Do
you understand this simple sentence?
>that --surprisingly-- all those simple methods do not appear in any book
>on numbers --up to now--, then that's your problem. I could only
>suggest you either a very good psychoanalyst or a fine math teacher.
You are in dire need of both. So, you are "criticizing western
culture"... and I'm rushing to defend it! Grow up.
>>There are many ways to approximate it; there is no way to
>> geometrically construct it.
>> The square root of 2, yes, of course; the cube root, no.
>>The theorem is a simple application of field theory. You can look
>>it up in any good Algebra textbook... instead of spending time on writing
>>these ridiculous posts.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>You certainly know I never said "Geometry missed".
Ah, these words and not those... What a joke.
>Please, do not continue by insulting people intelligence.
>You say : "ridiculous posts", well, I think you and Antreas Hatzipolakis
>don't need to continue your absurd insults, both of you have
>already stated your intention :
>To generate confusion about my postings on the rational mean (Mediant)
>by denigrating, lying, insulting, etc.
We have stated it?! You are a liar.
>As I told to you I won't treat you in the same way.
Is that why you put my name on the header and keep on posting lies
and insults about me? And abusing this n.g. with huge, whining posts like
the present one?
>In all my postings I said :
>Those simple arithmetical methods --based on the rational mean --
>were missed since ancient times (At least, from
>the evidences) up to the creation of the decimal fractions and
>the Cartesian system, worst up to now.
>You should know the rational mean is an arithmetic operation
>not a geometrical construction.
>
>Do you really think both you and Antreas Hatzipolakis will achieve
>your aim?. Neither you nor Antreas will silent me on this matter.
>Both of you seem not to appreciate the absurdity of your behavior.
You think I have the slightest interest in silencing you? Post
about the rational mean all you want. Did you ever hear me criticize
those postings? It is when you say "antiquity missed this" that I reply,
"nonsense", because nonsense it is. And when you waste my time with your
lies and delusions, you get the response you deserve.
>Ilias Kastanas said :
>>You are welcome to look up my postings to this newsgroup,
>>in Dejanews or so. [cut]
>> Why don't you list some of my "threats"?
[126 lines -- no "threats" of mine]
Give it a rest.
Ilias
Antreas P. Hatzipolakis
Keep us posted, Mr MorOn.
We all enjoy your high
intelligence !
Apologies to Ilias for the
trouble.
Ilias is not responsible for
anything in my postings.
Antreas
PS: I wonder why you didn't
post your own messages to
me.
Like this one:
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997
20:52:56 -0400
From: Thomas Brik <math-
To:
Sfak...@Europemail.Com
Someone at sci.math told me
you don't have any family,
I think he meant, you don't
have sons.
Is that true?
===================
aph
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Ilias Kastanas
In article <8799126...@dejanews.com>, <dgo...@etheron.net> wrote:
...
>>>*******************************************************
>>>1.- Why Greeks mathematicians --and many others, up to the creation
>>>of the decimal fractions and the Cartesian System--
>>>didn't find such trivial approximations to the cube root (simple sums) ???
>
>>>2.-Why Western culture had to wait until the creation
>>>of the decimal fractions and the Cartesian system in order to solve
>>>such tivial problem (I recall I'm talking about simple sums!).
>>>*******************************************************
>
>ika...@alumni.caltech.edu (Ilias Kastanas)
>Ilias Kastanas replied :
>
>> They knew how to approximate it; that's easy. The question was,
>>is there a geometric construction of cube roots. As I've told you a
>>number of times.
>
> "They knew how to approximate it; that's easy."
May I suggest _not_ repeating it?! It's there, for all to see.
Keeping postings short and without unnecessary material seems a good idea.
>What seems to be so easy for you and Antreas Hatzipolakis
>is to come to sci.math to show all over the world not only
>an inappropiate behavior but a complete ignorance on this matter.
This is an improvement over your tone last time, but it's still
unwarranted. If you eliminate this kind of oratory, we can discuss
mathematical topics.
>The following is just a small part of a math-history-list thread
>entitled "Cube root of 2" :
>
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>At this point, I would like to know if the Greeks computed any
>>numerical approximation to the cube root of 2.
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> From: Piers Bursill-Hall <P.Bursi...@dpmms.cam.ac.uk>
>> To: JESUS GOMEZ <jgo...@vt.edu>
>> CC: math-his...@maa.org
>
>>But: I cannot think of any occasion where the cube root of two is
>>calculated by any Greek source -- although I want to be tentative about that
>>because I don't feel at all convinced that there is *no* example of it. But
>>I cannot think of one. David Folwer, who sometimes inhabits this list, will
>>probably fire off a post reeling off a dozen cases. However, I cannot think
>>of many examples of cubes being approximated at all;
>[cut]...
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> From: d...@maths.warwick.ac.uk (David Fowler)
>
>>Almost all of our evidence relates to square roots [cut]...
>
>>The one passage that explicitly evaluates cube roots is in Heron, Metrica
>>iii 20, where he describes how to divide a pyramid in a give ratio. This
>>leads to the problem of approximating a cube root, for which he gives an
>illustration whose interpretation is ambiguous, and it is not clear if or
> ^^^^^^^^^^
>>how it should iterate; Heron describes it as if it cannot iterate.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Mr. Kastanas, please, let me repeat your phrase again :
Let's get to the point...
>Now, both of you Mr. Kastanas and Antreas Hatzipolakis, please,
>show me any of those "easy" (As you called them)
>ancient algorithms for computing the cube root of 2
>and, of course, some of their "easy" sequences of approximations
>to the cube root of 2.
>
>Moreover, considering we are not talking just about Greeks
>but about the whole 'western culture', please,
>show me 'historical references' on any natural algorithm for
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>computing the cube root of 2 since ancient mathematicians up
>to the creation of the DECIMAL FRACTIONS and the Cartesian system.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
As noted, such approximations hardly show up -- and surely not in
writings of any major mathematician of that time. No wonder; they were
irrelevant to the subject matter.
Finding them _is_ easy; take the slowest and least "smart" approach,
trial-and-error. It does yield rationals m/n with cube as close to 2 as you
care to get. It is not as fast as your method, or Newton's method, or others;
but it works. I dare say, Euclid and all others did know how to multiply
and could go through with it, if they ever wanted to. Do you agree? It is
also obvious they would never include such a triviality in their books.
We do see Archimedes taking up pi -- definitely a much less "trivial"
task than simple algebraic irrationals.
Ilias