1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52617
    25 Aug '18 13:53
    https://phys.org/news/2018-08-decades-old-math-problem.html

    Another one bites the dust, with many implications for such things as quantum computers.
  2. Standard memberuzless
    The So Fist
    Voice of Reason
    Joined
    28 Mar '06
    Moves
    9908
    28 Aug '18 03:11
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    https://phys.org/news/2018-08-decades-old-math-problem.html

    Another one bites the dust, with many implications for such things as quantum computers.
    geez, electrons find the path of least resistance. Hell all they had to do was look at river flowing down a mountain to figure that one out.
  3. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    28 Aug '18 19:08
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    https://phys.org/news/2018-08-decades-old-math-problem.html

    Another one bites the dust, with many implications for such things as quantum computers.
    To be accurate, this is a problem in mathematical physics, not (pure) mathematics per se.

    "The proof was not officially published in Communications in Mathematical Physics until 2015.
    Two and a half years after it was published, the community of mathematical physicists
    officially acknowledged the solution, marking the problem on the website list as "solved."
  4. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    29 Aug '18 01:39
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    To be accurate, this is a problem in mathematical physics, not (pure) mathematics per se.

    "The proof was not officially published in Communications in Mathematical Physics until 2015.
    Two and a half years after it was published, the community of mathematical physicists
    officially acknowledged the solution, marking the problem on the website list as "solved."
    If anyone (such as Sonhouse) fails to comprehend a difference between mathematical physics
    and pure mathematics, I could explain it by saying that pure mathematics does NOT take
    into account the existence of any physical world. It's independent of physical reality.
  5. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    29 Aug '18 10:297 edits
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    If anyone (such as Sonhouse) fails to comprehend a difference between mathematical physics and pure mathematics...
    I think its very unlikely any scientist here would tend to confuse the difference given the difference usually being pretty obvious to the well educated.
    Mathematical physics cannot ever be applied without making at least one assumption, often a highly implicit one, about the physical world that is neither a pure mathematical axiom itself nor can be mathematically derived purely and only from some formal pure mathematical axioms without at least one other additional assumption that isn't itself a pure mathematical axiom. In other words, it needs to make at least one assumption that is NOT a maths one. That alone shows it certainly cannot be pure maths.
  6. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52617
    29 Aug '18 13:401 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    If anyone (such as Sonhouse) fails to comprehend a difference between mathematical physics
    and pure mathematics, I could explain it by saying that pure mathematics does NOT take
    into account the existence of any physical world. It's independent of physical reality.
    Well thank you for the hidden insult, not so hidden. I think maybe you know my own son in law is a statistical physicist, where math is used in the real world for real world problems.
    We talked about such things already, so you might be surprised a dullard like me could actually know the difference between the math of physics and pure math.

    And I did point out the real world possibility of this work in quantum computers.

    But hey, I am a jingoistic lying morally reprehensible fatuous troll so anything I say can be instantly ignored.
  7. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    29 Aug '18 18:38
    Originally posted by @humy
    I think its very unlikely any scientist here would tend to confuse the difference given the difference usually being pretty obvious to the well educated.
    Mathematical physics cannot ever be applied without making at least one assumption, often a highly implicit one, about the physical world that is neither a pure mathematical axiom itself nor can be mathemati ...[text shortened]... east one assumption that is NOT a maths one. That alone shows it certainly cannot be pure maths.
    "I think its very unlikely any scientist here ..."
    --Humy

    Is Sonhouse a scientist? I assumed that he's an engineer.

    Given that Sonhouse recently showed his ignorance of the basic mathematical proposition
    (he was bewildered by my using it and asked me to explain) that if A / B = C / D, then AD = BC,
    I have no reason to assume that he understands anything significant about mathematics.
  8. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    29 Aug '18 18:391 edit
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    Well thank you for the hidden insult, not so hidden. I think maybe you know my own son in law is a statistical physicist, where math is used in the real world for real world problems.
    We talked about such things already, so you might be surprised a dullard like me could actually know the difference between the math of physics and pure math.

    And I did p ...[text shortened]... jingoistic lying morally reprehensible fatuous troll so anything I say can be instantly ignored.
    Given that Sonhouse recently showed his ignorance of the basic mathematical proposition
    (he was bewildered by my using it and asked me to explain) that if A / B = C / D, then AD = BC,
    I have no reason to assume that he understands anything significant about mathematics.

    Does Sonhouse comprehend the meaning of 'if' ?
  9. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    29 Aug '18 20:401 edit
    Duchess

    I think you underestimate some people's intelligence here.
    A non-scientist not knowing much algebra certainly doesn't imply he/she cannot understand the difference between pure and applied maths (to physics in this case). A person without contradiction can be totally crap at both but still know the difference. I am now moderately good at algebra but, before I learned much about it and about the various sciences, even then I knew the difference between pure and applied maths because of my interest in pretty basic philosophy. I am pretty sure even my mother knows the difference and, due to circumstances beyond her control, she had the terrible misfortune of not having any formal education whatsoever (long story).
  10. Subscriberjoe shmo
    Strange Egg
    podunk, PA
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    7733
    29 Aug '18 22:392 edits
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    If anyone (such as Sonhouse) fails to comprehend a difference between mathematical physics
    and pure mathematics, I could explain it by saying that pure mathematics does NOT take
    into account the existence of any physical world. It's independent of physical reality.
    Oh... the mathematical fraud arrives just in the nick of time to "explain" something painfully obvious before "we" simpleton engineers and scientists muck it all up! Thank you again and again for continually providing your worthless input that is designed for the sole purpose of selling your un-clever deception of mathematical brilliance...Bravo...Bravo! What a performance! You sure have me fooled!
  11. SubscriberWOLFE63
    Tra il dire e il far
    C'e di mezzo il mar!
    Joined
    06 Nov '15
    Moves
    16649
    29 Aug '18 23:05
    Originally posted by @humy
    Duchess

    I think you underestimate some people's intelligence here.
    A non-scientist not knowing much algebra certainly doesn't imply he/she cannot understand the difference between pure and applied maths (to physics in this case). A person without contradiction can be totally crap at both but still know the difference. I am now moderately good at algebra bu ...[text shortened]... rol, she had the terrible misfortune of not having any formal education whatsoever (long story).
    Indeed.

    She also has the very bad habit of overestimating her own intelligence. Without her search engines, she's just another, run of the mill, "intellectual wannabe".

    One sure way to identify her fraud, is to observe her complete lack of originality. Additionally, observe her heavy reliance on quotes and citations. Mear filler and psychobabble. She has never manifested any observable creativity.

    Even the nerdiest code monkeys in the world can express ideas generated from their own imaginations.
  12. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    30 Aug '18 00:482 edits
    Originally posted by @humy
    Duchess

    I think you underestimate some people's intelligence here.
    A non-scientist not knowing much algebra certainly doesn't imply he/she cannot understand the difference between pure and applied maths (to physics in this case). A person without contradiction can be totally crap at both but still know the difference. I am now moderately good at algebra bu ...[text shortened]... rol, she had the terrible misfortune of not having any formal education whatsoever (long story).
    "I think you underestimate some people's intelligence here."
    --Humy

    I certainly OVERESTIMATED Sonhouse's comprehension of basic mathematics.
    Indeed, I was shocked (as Blood on the Tracks apparently was) when Sonhouse failed
    to comprehend the basic equation if A / B = C / D, then AD = BC.
    It was obvious to me as a young child, shortly after beginning to learn arithmetic.

    I was astonished that any supposed engineer could be so ignorant.
    And I am astonished that Westerners here seem eager to excuse that ignorance in a Western engineer.
    I expect that Chinese, Japanese, or Koreans would not excuse such ignorance in one of their engineers.

    In general, many, if not most, of the supposedly 'well-educated' Westerners here show
    obvious gaping ignorance, common blatant errors in reasoning, and near illiteracy in English.
    Given their popular ideology of white racial superiority, of course, none of this matters much to them.
    All that many, if not most,, white Westerners have to do is congratulate one another on
    being white, which is taken as effortless proof of their superiority in about everything.
  13. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52617
    30 Aug '18 08:031 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    "I think you underestimate some people's intelligence here."
    --Humy

    I certainly OVERESTIMATED Sonhouse's comprehension of basic mathematics.
    Indeed, I was shocked (as Blood on the Tracks apparently was) when Sonhouse failed
    to comprehend the basic equation if A / B = C / D, then AD = BC.
    It was obvious to me as a young child, shortly after beginni ...[text shortened]... er on
    being white, which is taken as effortless proof of their superiority in about everything.
    When Did I EVER say I was an engineer? Have you lost your memory pills? I SAID I was a technician, nothing more. I think, a frigging TALENTED technician who in fact DID do design work but never claimed to be an engineer. I came up through the ranks of technology the hard way, by extensive OJT, only a couple of years of college, mostly astronomy and electronics and music, where my music prof was Howard Brubeck, brother of Dave Brubeck. That was FAR more interesting to me than any of the astronomy, math, or electronics training. Then another year of technical training in the USAF and I got into the field I was thrust into because of very high scores on my USAF entrance tests.
    Then training and work at AUTEC, look it up if you don't know what that is.
    Then more training on Apollo, Apollo tracking and timing to be exact. Mind you, a rather low level technician job.
    Then a LOT of courses in applied physics of ion implanters at Varian and a lot more training in various technical fields.

    ALL TECHNICIAN work. But in spite of saying that many times in the past ten years, you somehow think I was some kind of engineer.

    You need to refresh your meds, you memory is slipping.

    So OF COURSE your opinion of me will take yet another nosedive. And I could care less, you are not the person you were cracked up to be a few years ago.
  14. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    31 Aug '18 04:46
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    When Did I EVER say I was an engineer? Have you lost your memory pills? I SAID I was a technician, nothing more. I think, a frigging TALENTED technician who in fact DID do design work but never claimed to be an engineer. I came up through the ranks of technology the hard way, by extensive OJT, only a couple of years of college, mostly astronomy and electro ...[text shortened]... sedive. And I could care less, you are not the person you were cracked up to be a few years ago.
    Again, acting out of charity, I gave Sonhouse the benefit
    of the doubt and overestimated him as an engineer.
    Humy's talk about what scientists think is irrelevant to him.

    In a decent school, a child who failed to grasp that
    If A/B = C/D, then AD = BC would be required to repeat
    that lesson until it was learned.
  15. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52617
    01 Sep '18 16:04
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Again, acting out of charity, I gave Sonhouse the benefit
    of the doubt and overestimated him as an engineer.
    Humy's talk about what scientists think is irrelevant to him.

    In a decent school, a child who failed to grasp that
    If A/B = C/D, then AD = BC would be required to repeat
    that lesson until it was learned.
    So you figure the fact I forgot that tidbit when I took math in 1960, I should be ashamed.

    I told you I use a lot of formula's like the magnetic field strength needed to bend an ion beam and such and you castigate someone asking a question. You said I approached that question to you in humility and you answered it.
    THEN used it as a weapon. Nice.
Back to Top