Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Subscriber lemondrop
    scallywag
    14 May '18 18:37 / 1 edit
    the actor Terrence Howard appeared on the TV show, The View, and claimed that he had proof (his own) that the square root of 2 was a rational number


    laughable?
    he was very serious
  2. 14 May '18 19:25 / 6 edits
    He must be mistaken because this is the proof (by contradiction) that it is irrational;

    https://www.math.utah.edu/~pa/math/q1.html

    I am afraid his claims get worse!
    He thinks he has a mathematical proof that 1 x 1 = 2 ! (groan)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrence_Howard
    "...In 2017, Howard published his proof of his claim that "1 x 1 = 2" on his Twitter account. It was heavily criticized by his followers, due to containing multiple logical errors and faulty reasoning...." (LOL)

    I am mystified how a very loud minority of laypeople have this strange illusion that they now better that the experts; usually thinking they know about maths better than the mathematicians and/or know about science than the scientists. I find them commenting all over the net on forums including sometimes this one.
  3. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    14 May '18 19:28
    Originally posted by @lemondrop
    the actor Terrence Howard appeared on the TV show, The View, and claimed that he had proof (his own) that the square root of 2 was a rational number


    laughable?
    he was very serious
    Apparently he didn't read this Wiki:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2

    It's been calculated to one trillion decimal places with no end in sight.

    To make it rational it has to be 100% accurate as the division of two numbers and have an end to the digits.

    99/70 is one that varies by only one part in 10,000 and there are others closer but good luck trying to find it to be rational.

    Like tilting at windshields
  4. 14 May '18 20:40 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by @humy
    He must be mistaken because this is the proof (by contradiction) that it is irrational;

    https://www.math.utah.edu/~pa/math/q1.html

    I am afraid his claims get worse!
    He thinks he has a mathematical proof that 1 x 1 = 2 ! (groan)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrence_Howard
    "...In 2017, Howard published his proof of his claim that "1 x 1 = 2" on his ...[text shortened]... the scientists. I find them commenting all over the net on forums including sometimes this one.
    As a child, I easily proved that the square root of 2 is an irrational number.
    I did not need to accept any argumentum ad verecundiam (argument from authority)
    because I already understood enough about mathematics to know what's correct.

    At first sight, no one assumed that a child like me could be exceptional in mathematics.
    As a child, I sometimes pointed out the errors of adults with university degrees in mathematics.
    After I had explained or argued enough about it, the adults would accept (sometimes
    graciously, sometimes grudgingly) that they were mistaken.

    My point is that truth in mathematics is not determined by appealing to authority; it's
    determined by doing mathematics right. But almost all laymen are unqualified to do
    mathematics right at any advanced level.
  5. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    14 May '18 21:18
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    As a child, I easily proved that the square root of 2 is an irrational number.
    I did not need to accept any argumentum ad verecundiam (argument from authority)
    because I already understood enough about mathematics to know what's correct.

    At first sight, no one assumed that a child like me could be exceptional in mathematics.
    As a child, I sometimes ...[text shortened]... cs right. But almost all laymen are unqualified to do
    mathematics right at any advanced level.
    You rejected authority on the basis of...
    your own authority.

    Brilliant!
    How strong are your boot straps?
    Are they able to pull you up on their own, or do they require your help in getting you up?
  6. 14 May '18 21:48 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    You rejected authority on the basis of...
    your own authority.

    Brilliant!
    How strong are your boot straps?
    Are they able to pull you up on their own, or do they require your help in getting you up?
    You rejected authority on the basis of your own authority."
    --FreakyKBH

    FALSE. The troll FreakyKBH shows his abysmal comprehension of what I wrote.
    And the 'Earth is flat' advocate FreakyKBH shows his extreme hypocrisy in criticizing me
    for allegedly 'rejecting authority'. I knew of no authority claiming the square root of 2 is rational.
    I could easily prove that the square root of 2 is irrational.

    I learned mathematics chiefly on my own because my parents had no significant education in mathematics.
    My father had got as far as high school algebra and never studied calculus.
    My mother struggled to do basic arithmetic, though she could add and subtract.

    The local school system was very inadequate to find a place for a student like me.
    So I studied mathematics at home, with my father there to 'motivate' me.
    I had an unusually late start (not even knowing that 1+1=2 when I was six years old).
    Beginning at about the age of eight, I progressed toward doing undergraduate mathematics
    comfortably within four or five years. By that age (12), ordinary high school teachers
    could recognize that I already was significantly better than they in solving problems.
    Sometimes a teacher would ask me (in private) to explain something that he or she did not understand.
  7. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    14 May '18 22:49 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    You rejected authority on the basis of...
    your own authority.

    Brilliant!
    How strong are your boot straps?
    Are they able to pull you up on their own, or do they require your help in getting you up?
    She is quite capable of defending herself from trolls like you. That said, she has more intelligence in her little finger than in your entire body. And will remain thus.

    And she will never be a friend to me so it is not me sucking up to her, it is just a simple fact you couldn't compete with her on ANY level.

    D, did you see the movie 'Gifted'? YouTube


    Also a bit longer:

    YouTube

    And "Hidden figures"

    YouTube
  8. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    15 May '18 00:10 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    You rejected authority on the basis of...
    your own authority.

    Brilliant!
    How strong are your boot straps?
    Are they able to pull you up on their own, or do they require your help in getting you up?
    And in case you still think you are a (QUOTE) civilization changing mind, take a peek at these female mathematicians, every one of which could best you at math or a lot of other subjects with one cerebrum tied behind their backs:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_in_mathematics
  9. 15 May '18 01:28 / 1 edit
    Ramanujan was an obscure Indian clerk with no formal qualifications in mathematics.
    All that he had was a consuming love of mathematics and genius in it.
    He wrote letters to some eminent mathematicians in the UK. Perhaps understandably,
    the first mathematicians did not take seriously the approaches of an obscure Indian.
    Initially skeptical, G.H. Hardy did take his letter seriously. Was it more likely that
    Ramanujan was a mathematician of genius or a mathematical fraud of genius?
    Hardy believed that it was more likely that Ramanujan was a mathematician of genius.
    And he persuaded Cambridge University to pay all Ramanujan's expenses (he was poor)
    to travel from India to Cambridge, where Hardy was able to confirm Ramanujan's genius.

    More recently, in 2013 an obscure Chinese adjunct lecturer at the University of New Hampshire
    (not known as for its research) submitted an article to a mathematical journal in which he
    claimed to have made a breakthrough (where many mathematicians had failed) in number theory.
    At first, everyone assumed that Zhang Yitang must have made an error somewhere, but
    no one could find it, so the mathematical community had to recognize that he was right.
    Zhang Yitang won several awards, including a MacArthur ('genius' ) award. so he was no longer poor.
  10. Standard member apathist
    looking for loot
    15 May '18 05:55
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    She is quite capable of ...
    Pretty sure her self-pride doesn't need buttressing.
  11. 15 May '18 08:31 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    You rejected authority on the basis of...
    your own authority.
    That isn't anything like what she said and you know it.
    What the hell is wrong with you?
    You insult with stupid obviously false straw man for apparently NO REASON.
    Perhaps you just cannot stand anyone being smarter than you? (like most people are)
    The square root of 2 is an irrational number and we have the mathematic proof of that.
    If you deny this, show us your rebut...
    If not, you make no point and all you have is stupid insult.
  12. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    15 May '18 12:13 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    You rejected authority on the basis of your own authority."
    --FreakyKBH

    FALSE. The troll FreakyKBH shows his abysmal comprehension of what I wrote.
    And the 'Earth is flat' advocate FreakyKBH shows his extreme hypocrisy in criticizing me
    for allegedly 'rejecting authority'. I knew of no authority claiming the square root of 2 is rational.
    I could ...[text shortened]... imes a teacher would ask me (in private) to explain something that he or she did not understand.
    FALSE. The troll FreakyKBH shows his abysmal comprehension of what I wrote.
    ...I knew of no authority claiming the square root of 2 is rational.
    I could easily prove that the square root of 2 is irrational.

    A generally-accepted definition for troll:
    a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll's amusement.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll


    The intention of my post was not to start a quarrel or even upset you, which apparently upset not only you, but the forever-pining, always-reaching, never-tasting puppy dog, sonhouse.
    But your thinner-than-graphene/weaker-than-wet-paper-towels skin cannot readily face a mirror, that mirror being your own words:
    I did not need to accept any argumentum ad verecundiam (argument from authority)
    because I already understood enough about mathematics to know what's correct.

    This quote clearly reveals your younger puffed-up self as relying on your own authority... in opposition to a reliance--- or even acceptance--- of external sources.
    Somehow, seeing this snapshot--- which you yourself both took and then offered to the group as proof of your brilliance--- from the angle of another's perspective now demands your condemnation.
    No one put words into your mouth: you yourself claimed your knowledge was an authority worth relying upon.
    It's just silly, really, and <surprise!> guess who hates having her extreme arrogance pointed out to her, all the more when she looks so silly in the telling of the tall tale.

    As for the rest of the bragging: meh.
  13. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    15 May '18 12:15
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    She is quite capable of defending herself from trolls like you. That said, she has more intelligence in her little finger than in your entire body. And will remain thus.

    And she will never be a friend to me so it is not me sucking up to her, it is just a simple fact you couldn't compete with her on ANY level.

    D, did you see the movie 'Gifted'? [yout ...[text shortened]... ger:

    [youtube]aqD6wRC6llg[/youtube]

    And "Hidden figures"

    [youtube]XiwBpkyjrmQ[/youtube]
    That said, she has more intelligence in her little finger than in your entire body.
    If her little finger is intelligent in your eyes, I can only imagine what the rest of her holds for you.
  14. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    15 May '18 12:16
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    And in case you still think you are a (QUOTE) civilization changing mind, take a peek at these female mathematicians, every one of which could best you at math or a lot of other subjects with one cerebrum tied behind their backs:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_in_mathematics
    ...every one of which could best you at math or a lot of other subjects with one cerebrum tied behind their backs...
    How many cerebrums did these chicks have?
    I think I got gypped: I only got the one.
  15. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    15 May '18 14:08
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    [b]...every one of which could best you at math or a lot of other subjects with one cerebrum tied behind their backs...
    How many cerebrums did these chicks have?
    I think I got gypped: I only got the one.[/b]
    The point is she is far more intelligent than you EVER will be. And all you can do in response is to continue trolling.