Maybe the problem fits better with Psychology!
The funny thing about this is that you could actually use the phrase "You might aswell try to talk to a stone" and mean in literally.
Do you apply the same line of reasoning to the number 1/3?
Why do you think anybody is afraid to think differently? Maybe they just dont want to waste their time.
I don't think Cramers Rule will fail if the determinant of the system is nonzero.
Hey, I'm thinking what are dodecahedrons doing in one dimensional space?
Math please
You're funny
It's true by definition. In classical mechanics, a force acting on a particle is defined by F=dp/dt, where p is the momentum of the particle....
And this theory is described in english?
Well can you even define what you mean by "a form of magnetism" .. ?
Yordas comment is completely wrong. Don't mind it. Roughly, the positive or negative charge of an atom depends on the ratio protons/electrons. If...
Not true. A rational number can be written p/q where p and q are integers. I wonder how you can claim mathematics is inconsistent, and keep a...
You can raise Y to the power of log(x) or vice versa. The rule is log(x^a)=a*log(x)
It has been mentioned many times that you don't need infinite sequences to construct an irrational number.
Seems to me like you decided that standard mathematics was inconsistent, and then went to find where it was. You have made up your mind yet have not...
It doesn't turn into the number 1 at some point. It's just the same number.
If and only if the decimal representation is not cyclic. No infinite summations can be irrational. Most of them are not cyclic, which means that...
I'm trying my best do decipher your statements! Ok that can absolutely happen! But you are making statements that need rigorous mathematical...
And maybe you'd like to define "trivial difference" for us.
Separate names with a comma.
