Orangutan Gilbert Strang finally being exposed! No such thing as "instantaneous rate of change".

[John Gabriel]

Finally others are coming round to the right way of thinking - my way! Chuckle.

https://mathslinks.net/links/essence-of-calculus-chapter-1?utm_content=bufferee796&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer

While there is still a long way to go, at least the fallacy of "instantaneous rate" has been exposed. For the original video see:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgUB0pILNj8

Comments are unwelcome and will be ignored.

Posted on this newsgroup in the interests of public education and to eradicate ignorance and stupidity from mainstream mythmatics.

gils...@gmail.com (MIT)
huiz...@psu.edu (HARVARD)
and...@mit.edu (MIT)
david....@math.okstate.edu (David Ullrich)
djo...@clarku.edu
mar...@gmail.com

[John Gabriel]

The Paradox of the derivative:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vKqVkMQHKk

[7777777]

lauantai 13. toukokuuta 2017 23.17.03 UTC+3 John Gabriel kirjoitti:
>
> The Paradox of the derivative:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vKqVkMQHKk

it is paradox only as long as you have not solved it.
yet, at the same time, there are those who have solved it.

[Dan Christensen]

On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 4:15:02 PM UTC-4, John Gabriel wrote:
> Finally others are coming round to the right way of thinking...

Only among the severely mentally ill.

Maybe you have never driven a car, Troll Boy, but in every car is a device that gives the instantaneous speed of that car -- the speedometer. Yes, it really works. What a moron.


Dan

[John Gabriel]

Yes, I know. I have solved it. No one else has. Chuckle.

[7777777]

you are provably wrong

[John Gabriel]

You are provably a _liar_.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Garbage, the JG-bot's claimed "derivative" is
nothing of the sort, just the read-out of the
slope of some tangent curves.

The method of the integral calculus of deriving
the derivative not just as a value but as a
function is quite useful and general throughout
real analysis and differential analysis.

The JG-bot's demonization and persecution of
Gilbert Strang isn't just wrong, it's totally
irrelevant, and furthermore comes across as
rather wrong.

The JG-bot's a pathology of an open forum.

(And all its claims have been quite clearly
and soundly put down.)

Begone, foul troll-bot. If you're going to
smear your feces all over the mirror, nobody
else wants anything to do with it.

Yeah, the derivative pretty well reflects the
instantaneous rate of change in functions of
time. For example, it's relevant and clear for
position, velocity, acceleration, and their
ongoing derivatives as functions of time.

The JG-bot was a waste of time.

[burs...@gmail.com]

What kind of functions are derivatives?
Homework, show this theorem:

Let f and g : [0,1] → [0,1] be derivatives.
Then f ◦ g has a fixed point.

One proof seems to use that derivatives are
Bair-1 and Darboux, another went different ways

Am Sonntag, 14. Mai 2017 23:21:02 UTC+2 schrieb Ross A. Finlayson:
> The method of the integral calculus of deriving
the derivative not just as a value but as a
function is quite useful

[burs...@gmail.com]

Since new calculoose is dead, its old calculoose
now, its not interesting anymore. So lets do something
totally new, we already saw a couple of ways
for derivatives:
- Infinitessimals
- Weierstrass
- Algebraic

Here is the question, could we define the derivatve
as a solution to some fixpoint problem. Motivation
is here: This video somehow repeatedly highlights
some relationship between series and fixpoints.

Ramanujan's infinite root and its crazy cousins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leFep9yt3JY

Once a while this fixpoint thingy might have occured
to everbody. But can we spin the idea further. Since
series limes is related to function limes can we
define f'(x) as some fixpoint?

[Ross A. Finlayson]

An anti-integral?

(I think you wrote "Bair" for "Baire".)
As more topological properties as assign
analytical character are assigned, eventually
they become simpler properties of other
relevant systems with analytical character.

Or, sometimes "modern mathematics" is
"overdoing" it.

Then, and you're familiar with this as
part of my usual opinion, it may become
simpler to build analysis constructively
instead of intuitively from usual proper
topological axioms.


Analysis as it were is really
quite general and useful.

[burs...@gmail.com]

Maybe we can derive something about JGs auxiliary
equation. Baire had one application which was as follows:

If we have a function f(x,y), and if we know for
the partial derivatives:

f_x(x,y) + f_y(x,y) = 0

Then there is a function g, such that f(x,y)=g(x-y).
(Sur les functions, 99)

[burs...@gmail.com]

Using this we pretty quickly get for the Gabriel
difference that (I am writing it with -m = p):

d ((f(x+n)-f(x+p))/(n-p)) /dn + d ((f(x+n)-f(x+p))/(n-p)) /dp =

(f'(n + x) - f'(p + x))/(n - p)

So we cannot represent the Gabriel difference as
some function g_x(n-p) for a fixed x. So n-p=0 is
meaningless.

On the other hand for the usual

f(x+h)-f(x)
-----------
h

This is possible, it already has the form g_x(h).

[Ross A. Finlayson]

That the partials in x and y
of a function in x and y
are zero is similar to establishing
the derivative as zero or usually
or often an inflection point.

Then maybe his idea is to draw
some simple bounded region with
a plain symmetry argument but
it doesn't seem so.

Maybe you could write it out.