# Don't close the thread :|

1. Apr 28, 2004

### ram1024

what purpose does that serve. It's exactly this type of behavior that leads me to believe that calculus people are stuck-up self deluded fools.

Calculus users catch-phrase handbook
"Don't challenge my beliefs because i'm right and you're wrong"
"Everyone else believes what I do, you're wrong"
"I have a PhD in Electrical Engineering i am smarter than you so you are wrong"

i came to this board because i thought i'd find smart people willing to learn, but it's just the same closed minded egotistical jerks everywhere else.

in parting:

you can't even PROVE that because you can't calculate out to infinity. you're just blindly accepting that because it's convenient. but i CAN prove that no matter how many times you cut you ARE left with a non-zero value. it is both actually and logically true.

2. Apr 28, 2004

### matt grime

Well, this is unexplored territory for me (this forum), but I feel mathematically that I can unequivocally call you an uneducated idiot (seeinga s you brought these terms). Because you aren't prepared to learn any of the definitions of the objects involved I might wish to call you worse. So when you've taken a basic course in, well, any subject, try again, because quite frankly you look like an ignorant dickhead.

3. Apr 28, 2004

### Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus
There are smart people willing to learn here, and in part it's precisely because we moderate the threads with closed-minded egotistical jerks.

(brief pause to allow that to sink in)

Go back and check the thread; you are the only person who stated an intent to be closed-mined:

Anyways, as I stated, everyone but you agreed you were wrong, and you refused to consider that you may be wrong, so there really doesn't appear to be any point to letting the thread continue. Of course, if you (or someone else) can convince me that it would be productive, I'd be happy to reopen it.

4. Apr 28, 2004

### chroot

Staff Emeritus
This is interesting, however, for one reason: I've never before seen a person assert that there's a calculus user conspiracy against him/her. Normally it us physicists that get such scathing criticism.

- Warren

5. Apr 28, 2004

### matt grime

I'm an algebraist (at the moment) amd I always feel like you analysts have it in for us.

6. Apr 28, 2004

### Integral

Staff Emeritus
I recently engaged in a similar discussion on Extremetech forums. I encountered someone who was arguing that 1<>.999... who further claimed to have Math degree. Initially I went so far as to present the possibility that he was simply lying about his degree, further conversation convinced me otherwise. It appears that he got a math degree without EVER having a course in Real Analysis! I did not think this was possible. My path was Applied Math, Real Analysis is as close to Pure Math as I got, could it be possible that one can get a degree in Pure Math where you never have to take an Applied course like Real Analysis?

7. Apr 28, 2004

### ram1024

Normally i am uninclined towards name calling but it does seem like you're unwilling to let the opposition have his say "lest the truth be known" which is just ... <censoring self> bad.

Calculus User Catch-Phrase
"yay i kiss butt for moderator priveledges so i can lock down threads that threaten my fragile peace of mind"

do the right thing and unlock the thread. do you want people to think you're a coward?

8. Apr 28, 2004

### chroot

Staff Emeritus
ram,

That's gotta be one of the funniest posts I've ever seen on pf. Way to go!

- Warren

9. Apr 28, 2004

### ram1024

well i had initially written what was to be an apology for my rash outburst and rude words, but i thought better and deleted it.

i'm the victim here :|

in any case i don't think that i should have to beg to have this discussion free of oppression and censorship. this should be a freely given consideration to anyone posting here (within the boundaries of posting stuff that doesn't offend people, porn profanity etc)

glad you got a laugh, chroot. if that's sarcasm i'll come cut you though... :D

10. Apr 28, 2004

### Integral

Staff Emeritus
Far from it.

If you think your current attitude is going to get the thread unlocked you are even a bigger fool then your posts make you out to be. If you want the thread unlocked you will need to say something to the effect.

"I don't know Sh1t about the real number line, can you guys help me learn"

This is a close approximation to the actual state of affairs. Unfortunately you live under the DELUSION that you do know something about the Real Numbers, until you change this falsely held opinion there is no point it talking about the matter.

11. Apr 28, 2004

### Math Is Hard

Staff Emeritus
Wow- I totally need a copy of that handbook. We didn't learn any of these in class. Just differential equations and stuff.

12. Apr 28, 2004

### Integral

Staff Emeritus
I think this book is only sold to Business school students who transfer in from Engineering after flunking freshman calculus.

13. Apr 29, 2004

### Math Is Hard

Staff Emeritus
LOL!!! That explains it.

14. Apr 29, 2004

### krab

In any subject area, there are those who know it and those who are ignorant. Of the latter, there are those who have sufficient humility to learn, and those who don't have it. Of the latter, there are those who know how bow out of an argument graciously, and those who don't. Every time I run across a person posting to these fora who is in this latter sub-sub-subset, I put him/her on my ignore list. Life's too short.

15. Apr 29, 2004

### meister

The .999...=1 posts are banned on pretty much every other forum on the internet, I think.

It's always refreshing to be reminded why.

16. Apr 29, 2004

### ram1024

See? Conspiracy? i think SO

go through and read my thread. I came to learn, i came to teach, i came to find the root of the indoctrined "belief" in something that seems so obviously false.

i didn't lock anyone's thread, you guys are more unwilling to learn than me. afraid i might be right.

somewhere along the line someone in math made assumptions as to the nature of infinity and said "let these be true" and then built upon that foundation and proceeded to forget that he never measured infinity in the first place.

besides what purpose does it serve to have 2 decimal equavalents for the same number? proliferation of confusion?

pure stupidity and egotistical posturing.

And Integral i'm not going to beg anyone to have this discussion. that's such a ludicrous proposition you can just eat me. I came into this forums for a civil discussion and every response i get is dripping with disdain. you're full of yourself, take a look in the mirror and realize what a bad person you are.

meh. good luck with your lies.

17. Apr 29, 2004

### Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus
No you didn't. You steadfastly refused to learn. Remember saying:

?

Then people further down the line figured out how to put these theories on a rigorous foundation. But, of course, you've made it obvious you don't want to hear any of that; you never got past the introduction in that reference you linked of someone who "agreed" with you, and you didn't read my post giving (most of) the technical definition of a decimal number.

Because it allows the decimals to serve as a model of the real numbers. For example, in the real numbers, if x/3 = y/3, then x = y, and it just so happens that, in the decimals, 1/3 = $0.\bar{9}$/3.

But, in order so that each real number has a unique decimal expansion, occasionally one will forbid decimals from ending in $\bar{0}$, and occasionally one will forbid decimals from ending in $\bar{9}$; I've seen both of these variants used in practice.

Act like a crackpot and you'll get treated like one. Actually, you got a very fair response; people actually discussed reasons why they disagreed with you, and presented reasons why they believed what they did. What more can you ask for?

18. Apr 29, 2004

### meister

It's hardly a conspiracy.

It's just that a select few people seem hilariously unwilling to consider the possibility that they might be wrong. Ever consider that possibility?

19. Apr 29, 2004

### holly

Name-callling is not a valid part of such a discussion...
Sarcasm is not a valid part...
Introducing "red herring" arguments is invalid...
Selectively faulting the person one disagrees with while exhibiting the same behavior is invalid...
Baiting is invalid...
Beating a dead horse is unwise...
Responding in kind to wretched behavior is unwise.

Science Persons, please keep your heads. Please keep PF a welcome island of tolerance, civility, and impeccable argument in this unfair and upsetting world.

20. Apr 29, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

See, the thing is, everyone has been on both sides of those. I vividly remember arguing with my high school calculus teacher on several issues. The difference is I eventually swallowed my pride and got over it (not without much pain, I assure you). Most people do, but unfortunately some do not. The process by which this happens is called maturity.