mm-2229 === Subject: JSH: Survey on my results, any correct? 1. I've posted a lot on sci.math over a long period of time, to your knowledge, have I *ever* been right? 2. Do I have *any* correct results, or do you think I just talk and never say anything that is mathematically correct? 3. To your knowledge, has ANYONE ever posted agreement with me on *anything*? 4. In your opinion, have I ever won an argument on the newsgroup? 5. To your knowledge, have I ever caught other posters in errors? James Harris === Subject: Re: JSH: Survey on my results, any correct? > 1. I've posted a lot on sci.math over a long period of time, to your > knowledge, have I *ever* been right? As I point out from time to time, you invariably use it's and its correctly. This, I appreciate. > 2. Do I have *any* correct results, or do you think I just talk and > never say anything that is mathematically correct? Your prime counting function is correct. You claim that it's original is not. > 3. To your knowledge, has ANYONE ever posted agreement with me on > *anything*? Yes, there have been one or two people who claimed you were a mistreated genius, just as you yourself believe. > 4. In your opinion, have I ever won an argument on the newsgroup? No. > 5. To your knowledge, have I ever caught other posters in errors? Oh yes. Many times. Your most spectacular victory of that type was when you used the expression mod 0 and people objected that this amounted to dividing by 0. Which, of course, it does not. === Subject: Re: JSH: Survey on my results, any correct? > 1. I've posted a lot on sci.math over a long period of time, to your > knowledge, have I *ever* been right? You have been correct over unimportant things. > 2. Do I have *any* correct results, or do you think I just talk and > never say anything that is mathematically correct? See above. > 3. To your knowledge, has ANYONE ever posted agreement with me on > *anything*? Of course, just not about anything important or especially difficult. > 4. In your opinion, have I ever won an argument on the newsgroup? Ever? If you have I don't recall. When something you've said has been correct it has been acknowledged without an argument. > 5. To your knowledge, have I ever caught other posters in errors? Yes. Everyone makes mistakes, particularly arithmetic errors. You've never caught anyone out in a significant error. Furthermore I can't recall a time when you've caught someone out and they have contested the error. The usual reaction is Whoops!. My pleasure. > James Harris Mark Atherton === Subject: Re: Survey on my results, any correct? > 1. I've posted a lot on sci.math over a long period of time, to your > knowledge, have I *ever* been right? yes > 2. Do I have *any* correct results, or do you think I just talk and > never say anything that is mathematically correct? You do, but they are not original results. In fact, many would call them trivial, because they are trivial in the tough world of publish-or-perish. > 3. To your knowledge, has ANYONE ever posted agreement with me on > *anything*? As Nora Baron recently explained, Harris *himself* proved [by contradiction] that there is no factorization of the polynomial [49(x^3 + 5x^2 + 3x + 2)]...with integer coefficients... The irony was that you, yourself, did not understand your own proof, although now the consensus is you do understand it. Do you want people to argee with you when they think you are wrong? > 4. In your opinion, have I ever won an argument on the newsgroup? Probably not a mathematical argument. But who's keeping score? You're an amateur. Think of something you do well, like trolling. You have shown contempt for those not as accomplished as you. Considering the math you know, one has to be even more in awe of your skills as a troll. > 5. To your knowledge, have I ever caught other posters in errors? Yes you have, but their errors do not make your arguments correct. === Subject: Re: JSH: Survey on my results, any correct? >1. I've posted a lot on sci.math over a long period of time, to your >knowledge, have I *ever* been right? Who is counting? When you say something that is wrong, it is noticed. When you say something that is right, it will usually go unnoticed unless it is surprising or otherwise unexpected. >2. Do I have *any* correct results, or do you think I just talk and >never say anything that is mathematically correct? Again, who is counting. >3. To your knowledge, has ANYONE ever posted agreement with me on >*anything*? >4. In your opinion, have I ever won an argument on the newsgroup? There are arguments when there is disagreement. If you say things about which there is no disagreement, there won't be an argument. === Subject: Integral problem i canĒt integrate (ln r)*r dr on the interval [0,1] how do i find the primitive? === Subject: Re: Integral problem >i canĒt integrate (ln r)*r dr on the interval [0,1] >how do i find the primitive? complete solution sent to the e-mail address you had the decency to provide. === Subject: Re: Integral problem Integrate by parts U must find the derivative of ln r and the primitive of r u = log r u'= 1/r v' = r v = r^2/2 P ( r ln r) = r^2/2 log r - 1/2 P r > i canĒt integrate (ln r)*r dr on the interval [0,1] > how do i find the primitive? === Subject: Re: Calculus That is the factorial symbol. It means you multiply by all the integers below it, ex. 5!=5x4x3x2x1=120 6!=6x5x4x3x2x1=6x5!=720 Hope this helps. Thomas > In my AP calc class, my teacher told me to find the f'(x), then f''(x), then > f'''(x), and so on. I would know how to do f'(x), but after that, I'm > mysted. > with all the axn(n-1)(n-1)(n-1)^(n-n), whatever, he told me the answer to > that would be (e.g.) 5! > Now I never heard of a number with a ! symbol after it. Can anyone explain > or link me to somewhere? === Subject: Re: Calculus: Related Rates, help! write (df/dx)(dxdt) + (dfdy)(dydt) = 0 or (y)dx/dt + (x)dydt Now, at x=8 and dy/dt=10 (given), we have (12)(10) + 8dydt = 0 or dydt = -58 the book is right! > in one of the homework problem, I cant seem to find the answer for this > one... > (t is for time) > for xy = 4 > a) > find dy/dt when x = 8; given dx/dt = 10 > What I did was to differentiate both side, using the product rule, I have > (x)(1) + (y)(1) = 0 > or is it suppose to be something like... > (1x^0dx/dt)(1y^0dy/dt) = 0 > thus; (dx/dt)(dy/dt) = 0 > using the information that is given, I tired to plug in but the answer does > not match with the answer in the back of the book > the answer for part a is -5/8 > part b is 3/2 > --- > I can do b as long as I get part a > b) > find dx/dt when x = 1; given dy/dt = -6 === Subject: Re: Calculus: Related Rates, help! > in one of the homework problem, I cant seem to find the answer for this > one... > (t is for time) > for xy = 4 > a) > find dy/dt when x = 8; given dx/dt = 10 I'd differentiate both sides x(dy/dt)+y=0 dy/dt=-y/x(dx/dt) When x=8, y=1/2, and dx/dt=10 So plugging your numbers in gives dy/dt=-5/8 > What I did was to differentiate both side, using the product rule, I have > (x)(1) + (y)(1) = 0 > or is it suppose to be something like... > (1x^0dx/dt)(1y^0dy/dt) = 0 > thus; (dx/dt)(dy/dt) = 0 > using the information that is given, I tired to plug in but the answer does > not match with the answer in the back of the book > the answer for part a is -5/8 > part b is 3/2 > --- > I can do b as long as I get part a > b) > find dx/dt when x = 1; given dy/dt = -6 Do the same thing xy=4 (dx/dt)y+x=0 dx/dt=-x/y(dy/dt) When x=1, y=4 and dy/dt=-6 dx/dt=3/2 David Moran === Subject: Re: Newsgroup survey: Math and personality assessment > The police and so forth only exist insofar as they can demonstrate > their authority. They say they're here to preserve order, but in fact > they'd go absolutely mad if all the criminals of the world went on > strike for only a month. They'd be on their knees waiting for a > crime. That's the only existence they have. > William S. Burroughs (American writer) > Guardian, 1966 Whenever this happens they dont go mad - they simply redefine crime. === Subject: Re: Newsgroup survey: Math and personality assessment Ted Kaczynski must have gotten out. I think I read something about the distributive property in the Unibomber's Manifesto.