Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,766

    Default Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Update: my anger has quieted a bit, and I did misspeak in that post.
    In retrospect, the text should have read:

    If the diagram of is NOT a right triangle... then.. etc.

    Still, the context should have been obvious, and the mistake did not affect the substance of the thread one iota.

    The full analysis is in the thread "The Relativistic Unit Circle" and also in my pdf
    The Relativistic Unit Circle... (which has the latest updates and additions).

    I am truly furious and disappointed with the moderators on this forum. It is true I am thinking about a difficult subject and sometimes get confused and disoriented, but am quite willing to correct errors, provided the context of the post remains. Tex is difficult for me, and I am finally getting so I can say things I want to say, and try to proofread, but I am alone in this battle.

    But I will fight for my point of view, and so far noone has offered valid criticisms of it, except for minor typos and contextural errors. Grapes closed down two threads trying to silence me, and sooner or later, I know I will get banned from this forum.

    I don't know who owns the forum now; some mysterious person called "Tom", but if so, giving these to clowns the power of moderation was truly an error in judgement.



    =========================================

    This post is in reference to the thread

    Fermat's Theorem, Revisited

    post #2

    In that post I originally said:

    "If the triangle is not right triangle, then "

    On re-reading briefly (I was writing a lot of tex, and sometimes things look funny), I edited out the "not", which makes an obious error, to:

    If the triangle is a right triangle, then


    In post #14 I corrected the error (re-entering the "not"), but was so pissed at the trivial and misleading response of Grapes that I just didn't attribute the error in the post (the context is obvious).

    Then apparently Grapes edited the error back in and closed the thread so I couldn't go back and change it again to the correct version (which includes the "not") to try to imply that that was an intellectual position I maintain, which is false. Then he quoted the triangle inequality as if that WASN'T a position I had been maintaining from the very beginning of the discussion.

    That is misleading at best, and at worst a blatant lie.

    Time will tell on my proof; lots of people seem to be reading it. In any case, even in that thread, anyone reading it objectively will understand the mistake and cut me some slack.

    In any case, history will judge....
    Last edited by BuleriaChk; 12-29-2016 at 04:28 PM.
    _______________________________________
    "Flamenco Chuck" Keyser
    The Relativistic Unit Circle 03/28/2017 07:40 AM PST
    Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem Updates 03/19/2017 8:23 PM PST
    Ignore List -The Peanut Gallery.

  2. #2
    Moderator grapes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NC USA
    Posts
    4,005

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Quote Originally Posted by BuleriaChk View Post
    This post is in reference to the thread

    Fermat's Theorem, Revisited

    post #2

    In that post I originally said:

    "If the triangle is not right triangle, then "

    On re-reading briefly (I was writing a lot of tex, and sometimes things look funny), I edited out the "not", which makes an obious error, to:

    If the triangle is a right triangle, then
    Please, please, read those two versions carefully! Neither one says what you think it says!


    In post #14 I corrected the error (re-entering the "not"), but was so pissed at the trivial and misleading response of Grapes that I just didn't attribute the error in the post (the context is obvious).

    Then apparently Grapes edited the error back in and closed the thread so I couldn't go back and change it again to the correct version (which includes the "not") to try to imply that that was an intellectual position I maintain, which is false. Then he quoted the triangle inequality as if that WASN'T a position I had been maintaining from the very beginning of the discussion.

    That is misleading at best, and at worst a blatant lie.

    Time will tell on my proof; lots of people seem to be reading it. In any case, even in that thread, anyone reading it objectively will understand the mistake and cut me some slack.

    In any case, history will judge....
    ETA: The r.h.s. should have two exponents, not one. Then, one of the versions will be correct.
    Last edited by grapes; 12-27-2016 at 03:08 PM. Reason: ETA

  3. #3
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Quote Originally Posted by BuleriaChk View Post
    Then apparently Grapes edited the error back in and closed the thread so I couldn't go back and change it again to the correct version
    No, No one edited your post except for you:
    "Last edited by BuleriaChk; 12-20-2016 at 05:28 PM. "
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,766

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    I'm pretty sure I corrected it, but maybe I had a mind fart. In any case, the context is clear, and I am available to answer questions from anyone that has them.
    _______________________________________
    "Flamenco Chuck" Keyser
    The Relativistic Unit Circle 03/28/2017 07:40 AM PST
    Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem Updates 03/19/2017 8:23 PM PST
    Ignore List -The Peanut Gallery.

  5. #5
    Moderator grapes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NC USA
    Posts
    4,005

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Quote Originally Posted by BuleriaChk View Post
    I'm pretty sure I corrected it, but maybe I had a mind fart. In any case, the context is clear, and I am available to answer questions from anyone that has them.
    Why do you say



    in both versions? That equation is not true for any triangle.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,766

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Quote Originally Posted by grapes View Post
    Why do you say



    in both versions? That equation is not true for any triangle.
    If I said that, it is obviously wrong, and I have tried to be careful of such things, but I am a human being writing a lot of tex, trying to get my point across, and you closed the thread before I could fix it. WTF?

    And it doesn't change the zillion other times I have made points consistent with the correct version. Or the substance of my many other posts, where I say it correctly in context.

    Closing me out of threads (or closing them at all) is a serious violation on the part of a moderator, and you close them out of petty, trival abuses of your power as moderator. Neverfly did the same thing when he banned me, because he had no fricken idea how zero point energy related to the speed of light.

    Both of you are petty and vindictive, and I didn't want to have to talk to either of you in my threads (or the other idiot, for that matter). But things may be changing in other places, so...

    If anyone else wants to take the time to read my documents (following the threads is a fools' errand, pm me and I'll send links to the ones I haven't been ablt to reference in the original thread (again, because Grapes locked me out...)

    What a clown show........
    Last edited by BuleriaChk; 12-27-2016 at 08:08 PM.
    _______________________________________
    "Flamenco Chuck" Keyser
    The Relativistic Unit Circle 03/28/2017 07:40 AM PST
    Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem Updates 03/19/2017 8:23 PM PST
    Ignore List -The Peanut Gallery.

  7. #7
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Quote Originally Posted by BuleriaChk View Post
    Neverfly did the same thing when he banned me, because he had no fricken idea how zero point energy related to the speed of light.
    That isn't the reason why and you damn well know it. But just like with math and science, you live in delusional denial of anything that contradicts what you wish the world to be.
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,766

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    That isn't the reason why and you damn well know it. But just like with math and science, you live in delusional denial of anything that contradicts what you wish the world to be.
    That is the reason why, and I damn well do know it. You don't know shit about physics or math. You should never have banned me in the first place. You should just shut up wnen the discussion gets above your technical expertise, which doesn't take much
    ---------------------------------------
    That said, the "mistake" post should have read:

    If the diagram of is NOT a right triangle... then.. etc.

    I shouldn't have said "triangle". The functions are squared. By that time I was truly enraged, so really wasn't reading properly. Nevertheless, it doesn't change the substance of the post one iota.......

    But my proofs are all over the threads where I have said things correctly, so again. we'll let history be the judge. But not the three fools in the Peanut Gallery.
    Last edited by BuleriaChk; 12-27-2016 at 08:51 PM.
    _______________________________________
    "Flamenco Chuck" Keyser
    The Relativistic Unit Circle 03/28/2017 07:40 AM PST
    Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem Updates 03/19/2017 8:23 PM PST
    Ignore List -The Peanut Gallery.

  9. #9
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    Quote Originally Posted by BuleriaChk View Post
    That is the reason why, and I damn well do know it. You don't know shit about physics or math. You should never have banned me in the first place. You should just shut up wnen the discussion gets above your technical expertise, which doesn't take much
    No, the reason why is because you have been abusive, insulting and DISHONEST. The dishonesty being the main part.
    You needed a wake up call to clear your head. It appears three days was not enough to encourage that.
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  10. #10
    Moderator grapes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NC USA
    Posts
    4,005

    Default Re: Fermat's Theorem revisited, and my "mistake".

    The following was added to the first post.
    Quote Originally Posted by BuleriaChk View Post
    Update: my anger has quieted a bit, and I did misspeak in that post.
    In retrospect, the text should have read:

    If the diagram of is NOT a right triangle... then.. etc.
    Etc., what? That still doesn't fix it.
    Still, the context should have been obvious, and the mistake did not affect the substance of the thread one iota.

    I am truly furious and disappointed with the moderators on this forum. It is true I am thinking about a difficult subject and sometimes get confused and disoriented, but am quite willing to correct errors, provided the context of the post remains. Tex is difficult for me, and I am finally getting so I can say things I want to say, and try to proofread, but I am alone in this battle.
    You should take that into account, and not lash out at people when they try to help.
    But I will fight for my point of view, and so far noone has offered valid criticisms of it, except for minor typos and contextural errors. Grapes closed down two threads trying to silence me, and sooner or later, I know I will get banned from this forum.

    I don't know who owns the forum now; some mysterious person called "Tom", but if so, giving these to clowns the power of moderation was truly an error in judgement.
    I gave my reasons for closing down those two threads, none of which was to "silence" you.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •