/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10957837
I highly doubt a mathematician with the smarts to solve the problem and win $1 million dollars would post their solution online anonymously

...and not only that, this guy with the sort problem only made one stupid ass thread, and the problem he was working on, if it was even real, is completely retarded. On the other hand, I made over 9,000 threads about
>THE MOST IMPORTANT (((UNSOLVED))) PROBLEM IN MATHEMATICS
and you guys on here, sometimes, are like, "Maybe the reason you're not getting the accolade you want because people don't know about your research." If people don't know about it, it's because I'm in a fake internet bubble wherein the agents of the USA Great Satan conspire to hide the Word of God from those whom he would show it to.

>>10957843
I didn't post as (((anonymous))). That's my name on the "Author Name" line.

>>10957837
I think a lot of absurd contradictions can be proven using your "numbers in the neighborhood of infinity / the origin" invention

>>10957897
I make these threads in the hopes that people will show their attempts to try to do what you say you think can be done. Maybe even if you don't want to make proofs, you could make a list showing some subset of the absurdities you suspect would follow.

>>10957906
Last time I pointed out that your proof of the limit of sin x at infinity implied that infinity was finite and therefore wrong and you just started sperging out about being named God, which is just as insignificant as being named Jesus.

I think the sperg in that thread was the one who was saying my name isn't God, which is like telling Jesus that his name is Jesus. However, when you "pointed it out" that there was that alleged implication, I asked you to formalize your statements so I could make a formal rebuttal, but you never did. As I recall, you were trying to argue that the infinite number infinity is actually a finite number, but you were only using sentences about math instead of actual math,

>>10957837
styling.

>>10957844

>>10957956
I think one of my friends was more Army than FBI.

Member that guy who always used to have the wad of spit on his lip when he spoke to the class? MAN! I did not see that wad of spit for a long time.

>>10957945
Then you define what 'actual math' is so everyone can satisfy Anon's autism so TOOKER can advance to the next stage.

>>10958015
Did you have a stroke?

>>10958015
>Then you define what 'actual math' is
nah

>>10957837
Is this a coincidence. Take 294 random numbers sum them, and take 294 sum them they have the same prime factor of digit size of 5.

What does "neighborhood" of infinity mean? Infinity isnt a number

>>10958789
https://math.mit.edu/~jorloff/18.04/notes/topic2.pdf

>>10958809
>a large circle
So any z with |z|>10^20 is in the this neighborhood?

Hey tooky. Ever heard of some guy named Lasker? He loves to shill his bunk IQ studies the way you do and he makes sure to make a thread about it as many times as he can. Imagine if you two combined forces. Imagine the scientific and mathematical progress done in a day, ney, a few minutes of nothing but the most beautiful and unfiltered results that is untreated compulsive schizotypal pathology.

You should seek him out and befriend him. Just like you, academia is robbing of his rightful throne on the mountains of ground breaking discoveries. You two are a bird of a feather and need to soar together.

>>10958809
Still doesnt make sense to me. Whats is the radius of the "large" circle?

As >>10958849 said, is 10^20 part of the circle? Or 10^20^20? What about 10^20^20^20?

>>10958850
Emanuel Lasker

>>10957837
Hey,Tooky Timesand. You're old friend Math Anon here again. I see you're still having fun with your claims that RH is false, but we both know that I proved it to be True.
I have to say though, the new cleaned up version of your paper looks much nicer.
However, should I go through it and point out some errors to people? I don't really have time for your sand at the moment, but maybe I should get them started?
Anyways, like I've said before, why don't you focus on redefining and expanding the field of limits and hyper-reals? It seems to fit your theories better and that you could expand the field.
Shucks, if I eventually get time, I'd even help.
Love, Math Anon.

Oh and p.s. to get people started.
Why do you introduce an asymmetry between (1) and (2) right from the start? Either line one should see b>0 also, and/or line 2 should see b>=0. So right there you're leaving a possible point open that could affect your outcome.

Line (3) says x/y = 0 but it should say approximately or approaches or maybe infinitesimal, but certainly not 0.

>>10958849
If you are so stupid that you did not get the point, please note that for any finite radius of the origin, large or small, there is a neighborhood of infinity outside of that radius. It never goes away. Also not for the 900th time I'm pointing it out: I am not the inventor of the neighborhood of infinity. I am the inventor of the infinity-hat notation through which I suggest it is possible describe certain regions of the neighborhood of infinity which cannot be described otherwise.

>>10958871
>Whats is the radius of the "large" circle?
The radius is very clearly labelled "R." Don't be a cunt.

>>10958920
>However, should I go through it and point out some errors to people?
Absolutely. It was the previous dozen rounds of that which led to the current version.

>why don't you focus on redefining and expanding the field of limits and hyper-reals?
I have a plan for a "survey with applications" paper called "Reals, Extended Reals, Hyperreals,and Surreals in the Modified Cosmological Model" (or something) but I probably won't write it this year.

>Line (3) says x/y = 0 but it should say approximately or approaches or maybe infinitesimal, but certainly not 0.
No, you're wrong and stupid. It shouldn't say that and if it did then there would be a glaring error at that part of the paper.

Also, DO NOT LEVY TECHNICAL CRITICISMS AGAINST OP IMAGE!!!

If you want to make, technical criticisms, use pic related which reflects my responses to the several previous rounds of technical criticisms.

New version of paper here (pic related):
Real Numbers in the Neighborhood of Infinity
http://www.vixra.org/abs/1811.0222

>>10959113
>I have a plan for a "survey with applications" paper called "Reals, Extended Reals, Hyperreals,and Surreals in the Modified Cosmological Model" (or something) but I probably won't write it this year.

oooo, sounds yummy, would definitely read. Post it up next year if you do get to, I'm trying to consolidate some stuff too.
Also, I do think your work has merit/interest in the field, but specifically pertaining to Riemann it always seems like you're changing the goal posts compared to the context Riemann asked.
I know you've been all through that before with the Dedekin(spelling) cuts discussions, and I don't mean to specifically rehash that here, but again that's why I think it's more fitting to the topic of hyper reals or other related topics in general.
Still, it doesn't hurt to bounce each other's work off the other, it raises awareness of both, gets people thinking critically about the problem, and one of us right ;)

> It shouldn't say that and if it did then there would be a glaring error at that part of the paper.
How then are you claiming that the division of 2 finite numbers is 0? You say x is a real near 0, y is a real near infinity, and that their division is 0.
"Incomparibly large" doesn't make that happen. In fact, they are comparable.
Sure it will be another really small number, even another x, or again infinitesimal, but not 0.

>>10959128
I've looked through it before, I'll revisit if I get time, nice concise graphic.

>or again infinitesimal
really, I don't even think it right the more I consider it, would be a finite number, unless the divisor was infinity.

I likely won't respond too much though, have to do some other stuff today. Have fun with your fresh victims, bwahahaha.

When will you learn.

Father was wrong.

>>10959113
>No, you're wrong and stupid. It shouldn't say that and if it did then there would be a glaring error at that part of the paper.
What?? It might be a number very very close to 0, but it is not 0 because thats impossible. It tends to 0 which is different, it can be treated as 0, it is practically 0, but it is not 0.
x/y + 1 =/= 1.

>>10957837
you missed the part where the "communicating your ideas to the scientific community" happened when a few academics wrote up the finding and cited the 4chan thread. until that happened there was no academic record

>>10957837
>in the neighborhood of minus real infinity
How can a number be defined by -infinity + b, if -infinity + b = -infinity? Is this a higher mathematics thing?

>>10959198
No, it's just a Tooker thing. It's nonsense.

>>10959151
>How then are you claiming that the division of 2 finite numbers is 0?
pic

>>10959173
I didn't miss that part. That part was the main gist of my complaint.

>>10959207
you don't understand, then. just talking about it here isn't enough to considered it disseminated. you have to get someone else to reference it too

>>10959207
oops, wrong pic. meant to use this one

People are responsible for their own actions. Whether or not someone else references it is outside of my control. If I could get them to do it then I would. However, with reality being the way it is, someone can only get their own self to reference it. I reference it pretty frequently to encourage others to do so, but it seems like the agents of the USA Great Satan are conspiring to hide my Word from those who I would have see it.

>>10959229
you have no proof of a conspiracy

>>10959231

>>10959281
lol

>>10959161
Fuck man were you born bald? God damn. You balded even before the rape allegations. Also, looking at that picture, I can see why those women didn't want to sleep with you.

>>10959305
what are you talking about? he looks like a King, the King of King's. Truly god himself. Have you not been paying attention? Women should be lined up around blocks to get a chance at his magnificent sperm.

>>10959231

Don't keep talking about it please

>>10959217
I can't use nice formatting atm, but...

When does the special case equaling +-1 happen?
You went from dividing x/y which is R sub 0 over R hat, to saying R hat over R hat equals +-1. That seems wrong.
Sure all R sub ) have an inverse, you'd expect it to be in R hat, but then you do see and point out the contradiction, but one that you introduced, not that it was inherently there.
And even if you meant R0/Rhat then you are you also claiming that all members of R sub 0 are members of R hat and vice versa in order for to equal 1 at some point?
If so, then that claim simultaneously cancels out and creates your own contradiction.
That is, if the elements are the same then x=yz is still a member of R sub 0, so no issue.
Something is incorrect or unclear there.

>>10959321
R sub ) meant 0

>>10959308
I don't know about his sperm but Tooker is ugly

>>10957837
Tooker, when would you finally consider taking what's yours by force and just raping a girl? Given that you don't want to move to south america with me.

>>10959330
You just think that because you're not gay, all the women definitely want his approval.

>>10959333
If all women want his approval, why is Tooker a consensual virgin? He's only had sex with Hookers. He's also a raw virgin as they always force him to use a condom. It seems women REALLY REALLY don't want Tooker's sperm.

>>10959342
because of Helena and the government obviously, all the women in his area are plants anyways,

>>10959405
>>10959342
if he was in a real population the amount of women impregnated with his seed would be astronomical and it would be impossible for the alphabet agencies to track all the offspring. Hence why it's easier to fill the city with agents and make him feel like he's just not an impressive mate.

>>10959412
>Hence why it's easier to fill the city with agents and make him feel like he's just not an impressive mate.
or even easier, you remote agents could just deny me the accolade which would serve as the bona fides of the impressiveness I would need to get women to say yes to me without giving them my please-buy-this-vacuum-cleaner sales pitch. I do not like to give the sales pitch, and I have worked hard to make myself into an impressive man, and you all who will suffer have conspired to derive me of the evidence of it.

>>10959321
>Something is incorrect or unclear there.
yes

>>10959499
Ok Tooker. So what limit would you give yourself to just actually rape a girl. How long can you endure this cuckoldry? 5 years? 10 years.

I care about you Took, and the feeling of a wet pussy around your dick is worth 10 nobel prizes. They can deny you of your accolade, but women are weak and can't deny you their pussy if you are strong enough.

>If publishing on 4chan wasn't a perfectly legit way to communicate your ideas to the scientific community

I had a laugh, yes, but what exactly are you referring to or what exactly do you want to say?

>>10959161
>Father was wrong.
Was father wrong or was mother's ex-husband a liar who said the wrong thing knowing full well that it was wrong because if I'm not that thing he said I am then that means him being that thing is a whole other heresy besides the main criminal heresy.

>>10960476
Tooker real question. What would be your limit to saying "fuck it" and just raping a girl? It wouldn't even be a crime because subconciously they all crave you, it is just the MK ULTRA fluoride telling that they don't.

>>10960479
There is no such limit. Rape is gross to me. I get turned on when a woman lays on her back and says, "Come fill up my lil pussy, Daddy," but resistance completely turns me off and makes my flacid penis retract way far inside. Even just the resistance of a woman playing hard to get completely turns me off, and it makes me lose all interest in her. I'm interest in women who play easy to get, that, and only that. I would never rape a woman. Rape is gross and a screaming, distressed, terrified woman is about the farthest thing from sexy that I can think of.

>>10960515
Same, Tooker. You know, the more we talk the more similar I realize we are. But I am worried about you. What if the day never comes when a woman says to you "Come fill up my lil pussy, Daddy"? Would you risk never feeling the tightness of a vagina around your bare penis?

If you get turned off by resistance, you can always try to drug them you know?

>>10960524
I'm more worried that the day never comes when I can humble you and make you suffer. Even then, I'm not too worried about it. That day will come, I am pretty sure.

>>10960568
I'm already humbled. But I ask you, what if it doesn't? I mean, you already know this world has conspired to fuck you over. I'm sure that believing that your turn will come is relieving but eventually you'll have to face the reality that this world is horrible and this is your one chance to experience life.

>>10957837
This is more likely to be correct than Mochizuki.

>>10960576
Mochizuki is not schizo though.

>>10960574
>I'm already humbled.
You're not.

>>10960576
The "Hodge theater" is just what Mochi called it when he stole my MCM unit cell and made it so complicated that no one can understand it.

>>10960588
Well, how else would you describe me trying to help you and giving honest advice to you day after day? I post in your threads even while I'm at the office when I'm supposed to be working for Mr. Shekelberg, not you. That's my level of devotion.

>>10960595
>how else would you describe me
Grossly irreverent, stupidly optimistic, and widely hated

>>10960601
Well, Tooker, one day you'll learn to listen. Even if you disrespect me, I'll be here. One day, Tooker, you'll want to put your penis inside the wet embrace of a tight virgin pussy before you die. And when that day comes, I'll be here for you. Because that's what true friends do.

>>10960611
We're not friends. I hate you and I want to see you suffer before you die.

>>10960622
Do you hate the only person who has been looking out for you this whole time? Sad. I will honestly be sad when you die alone for not taking my advice.

>>10960664
I do honestly hate you. I want you to suffer for your irreverence. I want you know that I am the Lord, and your place is to fear me, and any other place than that in which you might find yourself is shrouded in mortal danger and the threat of eternal damnation.

You don't fear me, and I will make you know that you were wrong.

>>10960688
But Tooker, I am afraid of you. I know you are a violent schizophrenic who could kill me with his bare hands because I'm a pussy girly boy who can't build muscle. AND YOU ARE FUCKING SHREDDED.

Talking about the subject of your death though, as sad as it makes me, I think we deserve to know so that we can hold a funeral for the greatest contributor /sci/ ever had. How will we know if you are dead? If you don't post for say, 6 months, can be sure that you have passed? Please give us a sign so that we may honor you.

>>10960699
>But Tooker, I am afraid of you.
If you were, you wouldn't make these irreverent posts stabbing me in the sore spot where it hurts that women always turn me down.

>>10960719
I think you tell him you want pussy and that you'll meet up...he called himself a pussy girly boy, he probably wants your golden sperm

>>10960719
But that's the thing, Tooker. I don't do that to mock you. I do that because I love you. I've always been thinking deeply about how you get people to show you their true feelings. By consuming inhumane amounts of art my entire life I have reached a conclusion: I call it "breaking".

Breaking is when someone has some assumptions about themselves, other people, and the world they inhabit and they base their entire perception of the world not on the world itself, but on these assumptions. A set of axioms, if you will. When you take such a person and you confront them with a scenario unambiguously belongs to the real world, but that drastically disobeys their axioms, you have "broken" that person. A person who has been broken can no longer look at their own fiction of the world and must, at least during that moment, look at the actual world. They must do this at least until through observation they are able to replace the broken axioms with new (hopefully better) axioms. But in reality, you can break people infinitely many times.

Tooker, I am trying to break you in the previous sense to get to know how you feel. I know you have very strong assumptions about yourself, other people, and the world around you. And I fear for you that many of these assumptions are wrong. I want to "break" you so that you can look at the real world and then realize that you only have this one life. You can always come to South America for some cheap, desperate hookers. Or you can always rape. But only if you face the true world with me.

>>10960731
I am not gay, just very feminine. Obama probably put chemicals in my water, idk.

>>10960735
>asking for it
if he doesn't do it, I might.

>>10960741
You come near me and I'll shoot your dick off. But you are also invited to come to south america for cheap hookers. Maybe you can help Tooker cross.

Kino thread

>>10960750
where in south America?

>>10960784
Anywhere, really. Tooker can get his fix of cheap pussy almost anywhere. But the poorer the country, the cheaper the thots. Maybe Nicaragua? Tooker would have a great time.

>>10957844
Have you ever tried sending your paper to a real journal to have it eviscerated by a real referee?

>>10960735
>I want to "break" you
likewise

>>10960795
Yes. They don't eviscerate it. They say "not appropriate" or "not rigorous" without ever saying what is inappropriate or what isn't rigorous. The modern journals are just a dick sucking contest of who is going to help whose student's career by letting them publish in their journal. There is nothing more to it than that.

Full disclosure: of the VERY VERY VERY many journals I sent my various papers to, actually I did get a few helpful comments from the London Mathematical Society.

>>10960795
Honestly, I would not be surprised in the least to learn that whenever I send my papers to any USA journal, that journal gets a National Security Letter the next day telling them that they absolutely cannot publish me. That would explain why all the USA journals reject me with no reason given, ever.

>>10960826
>USA
The Great Satan.

>>10960699
Is muscle poster also south america hooker poster?

>>10960826
>that journal gets a National Security Letter the next day telling them that they absolutely cannot publish me.

>schizo delusion

>delusion

>>10960845
my thoughts too anon
anyone know what the actual traffic to this board is?

Someone anally raped me again last week to put in a bunch of new anal implants. It was probably whoever is making those posts.

>>10960845
Thanks for asking but I am not muscle poster. I can't build muscle, but I don't care about it. I only mention it to make the point that Tooker could probably kill me with his bare hands.

>>10957837
If you were a sane person you'd see that what you posted proves that the reason your "work" isn't taken seriously isn't because you spam it on 4chan but because it's complete bunk.

>>10960802
Come on Tooker all I want is for you to get your dick wet. Sometimes men must make hard decisions, we can't have it all. I also dream of a world where all women offer themselves to me but it IS NOT REAL. I can't just ignore the real world opportunities to get my dick wet because I'd prefer things to be better. JUST GET YOUR DICK WET MAN.

It's still the same choices. You either come to south america for cheap hookers, or you rape a white girl. Now, I personally have white fever. And we have plenty of white hookers here, but honestly if I had nothing to lose I would go for raping a white girl. Sadly I have a job, family, wife, so I can't just rape some white girl. BUT YOU CAN. Tooker, you can have what I will never have. Go do it.

>>10958116
Define a 1D space. Define the euclidean metric on such a space.
Prove the uniqueness in 1.2.3, it's not enough to say it's unique. To other mathematicians a real number is a cut in the rationals: rove this is equivalent to your definition. Prove R_infty isn't empty.