# Thread: The Structural analysis

1. The classical analysis has errors. That to eliminate them I have thought up the structural analysis.

The basic formula:.

It leads to following contradictions for example:

the Structural analysis:

;

;

.

P.S.

1. ;

2. ;

3. ;

4. ;

5. ;

6. ;

7. ;

8. ;

1. and 8. .

2.

3. Originally Posted by mishin05
The classical analysis has errors. That to eliminate them I have thought up the structural analysis.

The basic formula:.
wrong

You are confusing the indefinite integral (aka anti-derivative) with the definite integral.

4. Originally Posted by DrRocket
Originally Posted by mishin05
The classical analysis has errors. That to eliminate them I have thought up the structural analysis.

The basic formula:.
wrong

You are confusing the indefinite integral (aka anti-derivative) with the definite integral.
WRONG not at me, but it is wrong at you, because:

1. ;

2. ;

3. ;

4. ;

5. ;

6. ;

7. ;

8. ;

1. and 8. .

5. Originally Posted by mishin05
Originally Posted by DrRocket
Originally Posted by mishin05
The classical analysis has errors. That to eliminate them I have thought up the structural analysis.

The basic formula:.
wrong

You are confusing the indefinite integral (aka anti-derivative) with the definite integral.
WRONG not at me, but it is wrong at you, because:

1. ;

2. ;

3. ;

4. ;

5. ;

6. ;

7. ;

8. ;

1. and 8. .
wrong

and for the same reason

6. I have understood all!
Simply you don't understand that such integral with a variable limit.
But it is not my fault. It is your trouble that you undertake to judge what don't understand.

7. Originally Posted by mishin05
I have understood all!
Simply you don't understand that such integral with a variable limit.
But it is not my fault. It is your trouble that you undertake to judge what don't understand.
I understand mathematics rather well -- professionally.

I am glad that you at least think that you understand.

When you understand the difference between variable limits of integration, and no limits at all (the indefinite integral) naybe you will understand more fully.

When you understand the essentially unique translation-invariant Haar integral on the line *which turns out to be the Lebesgue integral), then you will understand what is really at the root of your question.

When you can look at this in the context of the theory on an arbitrary locally compact Abelian group then maybe we can talk some more. But you are rather a long way from telling a professional mathematician that he does not understand mathematics without making a fool of yourself.

8. Originally Posted by DrRocket
I understand mathematics rather well -- professionally.
I understand mathematics - WHAT IS IT???
You consider, what having learned by heart those ravings of a madman which are written in textbooks, you became the mathematician? Having learned to repeat this delirium - became the professional?

Originally Posted by DrRocket
I am glad that you at least think that you understand.
Let's check up! Will solve a problem which don't set in textbooks!

Problem: - an absciss of a point of a contact of a straight line to a curve . To That the difference , if is equal? On one of Russian forums only one professional mathematician could solve this problem

9. I hope Russian is your first language, because that is nearly unreadable in English.

Snip ramblings as I try various things to figure out what you might mean.

Well, trying to read through your rough English again, maybe and are supposed to be functions, and , and are supposed to be constants. You said is where the two curves meet, but a line and a parabola will meet in two places. Well, assuming a few things (what's a function and what's a constant and which meeting point), I get the difference between the curves at to be .

Also, performing calculations, even complicated ones is not what being a mathematician is about. It's about learning to see and distill paterns (and applied mathematicians find uses for them).

10. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
I hope Russian is your first language, because that is nearly unreadable in English.
Russian - unique language which I own. On English and I translate from English through the automatic translator

The line and a parabola will meet in ONE place.

11. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
I hope Russian is your first language, because that is nearly unreadable in English.

Snip ramblings as I try various things to figure out what you might mean.

Well, trying to read through your rough English again, maybe and are supposed to be functions, and , and are supposed to be constants. You said is where the two curves meet, but a line and a parabola will meet in two places. Well, assuming a few things (what's a function and what's a constant and which meeting point), I get the difference between the curves at to be .

Also, performing calculations, even complicated ones is not what being a mathematician is about. It's about learning to see and distill paterns (and applied mathematicians find uses for them).
This guy is syarting to remind me of a Russiam colleague from the past. He was a pretty good mathematician whonow holds the dubious distinction of having been actually fired from a tenured professorship at a major U.S. university. He is now in a very junior position ib Europe. An immense capacity for bluster --- but in his case also a capability for intelligent discussion that is missing here. Universally detesyed by students and colleagues alike, so despite the capability for intelligent discussion, there was no point.

12. Originally Posted by mishin05
[Let's check up! Will solve a problem which don't set in textbooks!

Problem: - an absciss of a point of a contact of a straight line to a curve . To That the difference , if is equal? On one of Russian forums only one professional mathematician could solve this problem
It is pretty clear that if indeed the reason no Russiam mathematician could solve the problem, then the reason is that your problem statement makes no sense. The Russian mathematicians of my acquaintence, just like the U.S,, Chinese, Indian British, French, ... mathematicians of my acquaintence, would have little trouble with properly formulated questions of this general nature.

Note that whatever is, it is the x-intercept of some straight line, and being used unconventionallly as a variable cannot be used later to set a condition on . The required condition, "the difference , if is equal" is thereby rendered gibberish were it not so already.

13. Originally Posted by DrRocket
"...intelligent discussion that is missing here..."
What do you understand as intelligence? Ability to reproduce another's phrases or to be able to solve a problem independently? I to you have set very simple problem which has nonplused you. Answer directly a question: "you can't solve this problem?" If you tell: "Yes, I can not" I will show to you as she dares. And only then it will be possible to judge the one who from us a two is worthy to be considered as the mathematician, and who the impostor!

Originally Posted by DrRocket
Note that whatever is, it is the x-intercept of some straight line, and being used unconventionallly as a variable cannot be used later to set a condition on . The required condition, "the difference , if is equal" is thereby rendered gibberish were it not so already.
- an absciss of a point of a contact of a straight line and a curve.
- the tangent equation to a curve.
- the curve equation.
- investigated value of argument.
- a difference between values of two functions: at .
All is very simple, what you don't understand?

14. You're trying to have a discussion here using an automatic translator? Why?

Anyway, in your question, there was no mention that the line was tangent to the curve, nor any hint that it would be so. I agree with DrRocket. If a Russian mathematician failed to solve it, it's because you've made a horrible mess of the problem statement.

Let me try to clean it up, and then I'm sure DrRocket or any other mathematician will have no trouble solving it, in so much as it's solvable.

You have a curve, , and a line and the line is tangent to the curve at the point . Find the difference between the curves at the point .

Edit: BTW, I get , if anyone cares.

15. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
You're trying to have a discussion here using an automatic translator? Why?
Because I am Russian!

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Anyway, in your question, there was no mention that the line was tangent to the curve, nor any hint that it would be so. I agree with DrRocket.
- You haven't enough of it to understand, what this equation of a tangent of a line?

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
If a Russian mathematician failed to solve it, it's because you've made a horrible mess of the problem statement.
I gave to Russian mathematicians more a challenge. This problem, is more true its decision - a necessary step for transition to "Structural geometry". It is such new science which knows all about the function schedule. About all space the first quarter to the Cartesian system of coordinates. About any point, about any piece and about any area. Watch attentively theme development, it is fast you will be shocked, when before you the true will open and you will see, you studied what errors in textbooks!

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Let me try to clean it up, and then I'm sure DrRocket or any other mathematician will have no trouble solving it, in so much as it's solvable.

You have a curve, , and a line and the line is tangent to the curve at the point . Find the difference between the curves at the point .

Edit: BTW, I get , if anyone cares.
You have overestimated the abilities. You have incorrectly solved very simple problem!

16. this math stuff goes way over my nogging/head. wow

17. Originally Posted by FuturePasTimeCE
this math goes way over my nogging/head. wow
And you know, what such a line of the schedule of function? How it is connected with the function? Answer this question!

18. Originally Posted by mishin05
Originally Posted by FuturePasTimeCE
this math goes way over my nogging/head. wow
And you know, what such a line of the schedule of function? How it is connected with the function? Answer this question!
8) the matrix brah... a interconnection of functions and scheduling... matrices within matrices, of the super-structural matrix? good enough answer?

the universe and string theory is like it's own atomically super-structural prime matrix (like a massive simulation cube of linear strings/framewires).

19. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
You have a curve, , and a line and the line is tangent to the curve at the point . Find the difference between the curves at the point .

Edit: BTW, I get , if anyone cares.
So at any point , . Given a point of intersection between trhe parabolic curve and a tangent line at a point , an equation for is then

So at any point

In particular at

This is child's play and would not have stumped any real mathematician, Russian or otherwise, of my acquaintenance.

But as originally stated by mishin05 the question was utterly meaningless -- botched up beyond belief and unworthy of consideration.

20. Originally Posted by mishin05
Because I am Russian!
Not to mention an obnoxious, ignorant, blustering ass.

I am done with you.

Please go straight to hell.

21. Originally Posted by DrRocket
Originally Posted by mishin05
Because I am Russian!
Not to mention an obnoxious, ignorant, blustering ass.

I am done with you.

Please go straight to hell.
russians are awesome dude... 8)

22. Originally Posted by FuturePasTimeCE
russians are awesome dude... 8)
Gelfand, yes. Pontryagin, yes. Kolmogorov, yes.

This dude ? Hardly.

23. Originally Posted by DrRocket
Originally Posted by FuturePasTimeCE
russians are awesome dude... 8)
Gelfand, yes. Pontryagin, yes. Kolmogorov, yes.
This dude ? Hardly.
Well also what you want? You want to cease to speak about the mathematician and to start to swear? That you and I found out on this site who from us the idiot, and who clever? Whether it is better to go and watch TV or roll about simply to you in a bed with the beautiful woman. Or, at last, simply to open the refrigerator and to attempt. Bon appetit!

24. Originally Posted by mishin05
Originally Posted by MagiMaster
You're trying to have a discussion here using an automatic translator? Why?
Because I am Russian!
There's a reason no one else is trying that. Automatic translators suck and it's making it very hard to understand what you're trying to say.

Originally Posted by mishin05
Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Anyway, in your question, there was no mention that the line was tangent to the curve, nor any hint that it would be so. I agree with DrRocket.
- You haven't enough of it to understand, what this equation of a tangent of a line?
Putting the line equation in tangent form doesn't automatically imply that it's tangent to any particular curve. (Also, a line is a line, no matter which equation you use to describe it.)

Originally Posted by mishin05
Originally Posted by MagiMaster
If a Russian mathematician failed to solve it, it's because you've made a horrible mess of the problem statement.
I gave to Russian mathematicians more a challenge. This problem, is more true its decision - a necessary step for transition to "Structural geometry". It is such new science which knows all about the function schedule. About all space the first quarter to the Cartesian system of coordinates. About any point, about any piece and about any area. Watch attentively theme development, it is fast you will be shocked, when before you the true will open and you will see, you studied what errors in textbooks!
I can't parse that mess. Try using shorter, simpler sentences if you insist on using an automatic translator.

Originally Posted by mishin05
Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Let me try to clean it up, and then I'm sure DrRocket or any other mathematician will have no trouble solving it, in so much as it's solvable.

You have a curve, , and a line and the line is tangent to the curve at the point . Find the difference between the curves at the point .

Edit: BTW, I get , if anyone cares.
You have overestimated the abilities. You have incorrectly solved very simple problem!
Well, I checked my math again and noticed I'd gotten a + and - backwards, so . Still, I'd trust DrRocket's math more than my own, but no one's perfect. However, if you want to say we're both wrong, you're going to have to point out exactly what we've done wrong.

Edit: Ah yes, I see where I made the mistake. I skipped a step. . . That gives 25 as a result, same as DrRocket. So again, if you want to say we're wrong, say what specifically is wrong.

25. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Putting the line equation in tangent form doesn't automatically imply that it's tangent to any particular curve. (Also, a line is a line, no matter which equation you use to describe it.)
That form is commonly known as the point-slope form. It has nothing to do with being a tangent line.

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Well, I checked my math again and noticed I'd gotten a + and - backwards, so . Still, I'd trust DrRocket's math more than my own, but no one's perfect. However, if you want to say we're both wrong, you're going to have to point out exactly what we've done wrong.
You made a simple arithmetical error -- not important. The point is that, when clearly formulated the problem is elementary, hardly a stumper. The problem is not even interesting.

I would have expected even a below-average first-semester calculus student to be able to handle it.

If you want to play with this troll go right ahead, but he is worthy of no consideration. He doesn't know what henis talking about and is clearly impressed with himself.

Cutting him down to size is easy. Getting him to recognize it, impossible. What you have is a mountainous Russian ego supported by a gossamer intellect.

26. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
There's a reason no one else is trying that. Automatic translators suck and it's making it very hard to understand what you're trying to say.
I now discuss at four English-speaking forums simultaneously. For some reason on other three machine translation doesn't cause doubts

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Anyway, in your question, there was no mention that the line was tangent to the curve, nor any hint that it would be so. I agree with DrRocket
- You haven't enough of it to understand, what this equation of a tangent of a line? Putting the line equation in tangent form doesn't automatically imply that it's tangent to any particular curve. (Also, a line is a line, no matter which equation you use to describe it.)
It is not necessary to make laugh me. Except a tangent to a curve one line, doesn't have angle of slope of a derivative equal to value in a contact point. And that - a point of a contact I have informed at once.

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
If a Russian mathematician failed to solve it, it's because you've made a horrible mess of the problem statement.
Not therefore. That is why that the curve has been set

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
I can't parse that mess. Try using shorter, simpler sentences if you insist on using an automatic translator.
watch: "03 дек 2010, 00:10" And the attached document placed in the first post.

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
I'm pretty sure I solved what I was solving correctly. If my answer doesn't match yours, either I've misunderstood your problem or you're simply wrong. I can't decide which is more likely. If you want to argue, you can start by pointing out specifically what I've got wrong.
25.

27. Originally Posted by DrRocket
Cutting him down to size is easy. Getting him to recognize it, impossible. What you have is a mountainous Russian ego supported by a gossamer intellect.
Prompt, on what more powerful site I could be convinced of discussion that I silly.

28. I wasn't saying I doubt your abilities because you use machine translation. I didn't say anything about them (exactly), and then I said, oh by the way, machine translation sucks. Two (mostly) unrelated topics, though your last two posts are nearly completely unreadable.

Also, you seem to have missed my edits on that post. I realized I had made a mistake, and when I corrected it, I got 25. Big deal. It's a simple problem, once clearly stated.

29. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
I wasn't saying I doubt your abilities because you use machine translation. I didn't say anything about them (exactly), and then I said, oh by the way, machine translation sucks. Two (mostly) unrelated topics, though your last two posts are nearly completely unreadable.

Also, you seem to have missed my edits on that post. I realized I had made a mistake, and when I corrected it, I got 25. Big deal. It's a simple problem, once clearly stated.
You have looked:
watch: "03 дек 2010, 00:10" And the attached document placed in the first post?
The in itself problem which I have set, has no sense. It is necessary that you were ready for discussion continuation. For that reference which I give:
watch: "03 дек 2010, 00:10" And the attached document placed in the first post

30. My version of Word can't open that file.

The point of the discussion here though is that you said "This is a hard problem. Only one person solved it." and we showed that it wasn't a hard problem, you just phrased it poorly.

31. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
My version of Word can't open that file.
This "Microsoft office 2007."

Originally Posted by MagiMaster
The point of the discussion here though is that you said "This is a hard problem. Only one person solved it." and we showed that it wasn't a hard problem, you just phrased it poorly.
Because I have given you an easy problem. Try to solve it for !!!

32. Mod asks: Am I the only one growing weary of this thread?

33. Originally Posted by Guitarist
Mod asks: Am I the only one growing weary of this thread?
I've put the OP on "ignore" if that is an indication. Few are more ignorable.

If this thread went in Trash it would improve the quality of both Mathematics and The Trash. If you sent the OP with it the benefit would be greater -- what a troll.

34. mishin05: For better or worse, I moderate this forum, and here is how it works.

Genuine questions from posters with a genuine desire to learn from those who answer are always welcome. They are usually treated very well here.

On the other hand, posters who claim to "overthrow mathematics as it is currently taught" can ALWAYS expect rough treatment, especially when it is easily shown they are wrong.

I am locking this thread

 Bookmarks
##### Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement