Where do you hide a pebble? On the beach.
Deeper than primes - Continuation
- Thread starter doronshadmi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- deeper than primes
- Status
Where do you hide a pebble? On the beach.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Wow, Doron. You have reached new heights of dishonesty with that one. You are actually claiming I missed the very thing I had zeroed in on.
Well, I see you have edited your document in an attempt to rewrite the past, just as you do whenever you can with your posts, here, so let's start afresh at the very same place as before. You (re-)wrote:
Doron's edited nonsense said:
Once again we will ignore for now the wholesale creation of a whole new branch of mathematical pursuit. Instead, we can focus on being a member is defined as a knot below a knot.
Please point to where Kauffman provides this revised definition in the cited PDF, then this discussion can continue.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
As for the question "Where Prof. Kauffman uses terms like below (instead of below he uses the term under, but it does not matter) in order to define a member?" please see the following part, taken from http://www.gwu.edu/~rpsol/preconf/wmsci/kaufman2.pdf :
As we can see, Prof. Kauffman observes b under a, such that a = {b} where b is a member of a (which uses the principle as observed in the diagram (a ε b), but on the other way around (a and b symbols are switched in the diagram, in order to get a = {b},
where b is a member of a (b ε a)).
The traditional mathematicians here expose their hypocrisy ( shown in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415300&postcount=1600 ) and their embalmed mind ( they ignore http://www.gwu.edu/~rpsol/preconf/wmsci/kaufman2.pdf ).
Traditional mathematician's dictionary: "Stay on topic" = "Focus" = "Don't bounce around" = "be an embalmed mind" = "be dead"
As we can see, Prof. Kauffman observes b under a, such that a = {b} where b is a member of a (which uses the principle as observed in the diagram (a ε b), but on the other way around (a and b symbols are switched in the diagram, in order to get a = {b},
where b is a member of a (b ε a)).
The traditional mathematicians here expose their hypocrisy ( shown in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415300&postcount=1600 ) and their embalmed mind ( they ignore http://www.gwu.edu/~rpsol/preconf/wmsci/kaufman2.pdf ).
Traditional mathematician's dictionary: "Stay on topic" = "Focus" = "Don't bounce around" = "be an embalmed mind" = "be dead"
Last edited:
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Focus, Doron. Don't bounce around. Stay on topic, please.
Please point to where Kauffman provides this revised definition in the cited PDF (that being http://homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/KnotLogic.pdf) that being a member is defined as a knot below (or under) a knot, then this discussion can continue.
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
While Doron tries to catch up, let's include the second sentence of the same paragraph:
First point, it begins with "furthermore" making it an extension of the failed preceding sentence. It therefore fails for lack of foundation.
Second point, it is not English. The verb, result, is intransitive, so using it in a passive voice construction is gibberish. The sentence therefore fails for lack of meaning.
Third point, even if one struggles beyond the gibberish to derive some scintilla of meaning, it is illogical. We'll need more information about what Doron really meant to write to explore this point, though.
What did you really mean to write, there, Doron?
Doron in his mathematics masterpiece said:
First point, it begins with "furthermore" making it an extension of the failed preceding sentence. It therefore fails for lack of foundation.
Second point, it is not English. The verb, result, is intransitive, so using it in a passive voice construction is gibberish. The sentence therefore fails for lack of meaning.
Third point, even if one struggles beyond the gibberish to derive some scintilla of meaning, it is illogical. We'll need more information about what Doron really meant to write to explore this point, though.
What did you really mean to write, there, Doron?
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
The traditional mathematicians here can't get what is written in http://homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/KnotLogic.pdf pages 34, 35 .
Here it is:
In the beginning of page 35 we find this:
"…one strand of rope being slipped out from under another" such that {aa…} is reduced into {} (for better understanding, please see also the end of page 34).
Another example of how they give credits to some accepted guy, whether they read\get his\her work, on not.
As for "resulted by", please see http://www.google.co.il/#hl=en&scli....,cf.osb&fp=5995fa7a3168b483&biw=1280&bih=861.
Here it is:
In the beginning of page 35 we find this:
"…one strand of rope being slipped out from under another" such that {aa…} is reduced into {} (for better understanding, please see also the end of page 34).
Another example of how they give credits to some accepted guy, whether they read\get his\her work, on not.
As for "resulted by", please see http://www.google.co.il/#hl=en&scli....,cf.osb&fp=5995fa7a3168b483&biw=1280&bih=861.
Last edited:
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
I'm sorry doronshadmi, but when did YOU start studying and understanding Knot Logic? Surely it's been at least 10 years?
Last edited:
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Finally!! You are now at least in the correct PDF file. Good for you.
The full sentence is, "It is easy to remember this diagrammatic transformation, since it can be interpreted as a drawing of one strand of rope being slipped out from under another."
So, just where does this say that being a member is defined as a knot below (or under) a knot?
The offending phrasing was "is resulted by" which is a passive voice construction with an intransitive verb, aka gibberish.
Last edited:
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
The traditional minds simply can't get what is found, for example, in the and of http://homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/KnotLogic.pdf page 34.
Take, for example, b and a, such that b = {a,a} and a = {}.
Take, for example, b and a, such that b = {a,a} and a = {}.
Last edited:
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
No, it's been for the last 10 days.
All you need is an open mind, which is not a property of the traditional mathematicians in this thread.
In case that you have missed it, I'll say it again: Traditional mathematicians' notions are closed under notations.
Last edited:
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Still trying to change the subject, I see. Have you given up trying to defend the first sentence of the paragraph?
We can get to page 34 eventually, but first you need to take care of that little matter of membership definition.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
Sorry, but the traditional mathematicians' replies here become pathetic.
Since they can't stop, let's do the stop for them.
Since they can't stop, let's do the stop for them.
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Ok, let's recap.
Doron asks specifically how his latest nonsensical essay misrepresents a particular paper of an established mathematicial, Dr. L. H. Kauffman.
The challenge is accepted. The first sentence of the first relevant paragraph is posed as an example misrepresentation. "According to Knot set theory ( http://homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/KnotLogic.pdf ) being a member is defined as a knot below knot, whether the knot is the same knot, or not."
Where did Kauffman write such a thing in the cited paper? (Answer: He didn't. Doron misrepresented Kauffman's paper.)
Doron first tries his hand at mockery, but fails miserable in his own miscomprehension.
Doron attempts to divert the discussion to some other Kauffman paper (where he introduced a notational convention to assist in presenting his topic--not a definition of membership there, either).
Doron attempts to divert the discussion again with a reference to the right paper but totally irrelevant to the matter of membership definition.
All throughout, Doron is liberal with his unfounded ridicule.
Doron abandons the topic.
Yes, Doron, run away, run away.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
The traditional mathematicians here can't abandon their obsessive compulsive verbal_symbolic-only reasoning, in order to get Prof. Kauffman's work on Knot set theory.
There is nothing to recap by using verbal_symbolic-only reasoning, whether we deal with Knot set theory or Organic Mathematics.
There is nothing personal in this case, since it is all a matter of the used reasoning (where verbal_symbolic-only reasoning can't deal with the considered subjects).
The personal aspect is the hypocrisy of the traditional mathematicians here, as clearly exposed in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415300&postcount=1600.
Simple as that (the traditional mathematicians here like to play The Black Knight ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4 ) again and again).
As for "is resulted by", please see http://www.google.co.il/#hl=en&gs_n....,cf.osb&fp=5995fa7a3168b483&biw=1280&bih=861.
There is nothing to recap by using verbal_symbolic-only reasoning, whether we deal with Knot set theory or Organic Mathematics.
There is nothing personal in this case, since it is all a matter of the used reasoning (where verbal_symbolic-only reasoning can't deal with the considered subjects).
The personal aspect is the hypocrisy of the traditional mathematicians here, as clearly exposed in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415300&postcount=1600.
Simple as that (the traditional mathematicians here like to play The Black Knight ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4 ) again and again).
As for "is resulted by", please see http://www.google.co.il/#hl=en&gs_n....,cf.osb&fp=5995fa7a3168b483&biw=1280&bih=861.
Last edited:
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Of this you have no idea. All we have had a chance to do was expose how you misrepresent his work.
You made a challenge. It was accepted. You failed.
Repeatedly trying to derail the discussion with personal attacks and topic shifts only highlight your failure.
Oh, it's been much longer than that. But you do have a superfluous 'K' in your first sentence.
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
Did you even read the things that were found?
- first temperature is resulted by indian roommates on pellets
- This is resulted by feeling form and substantially expanding it, hard to
- etilen gas is resulted by fruit. why are ripens fruit result etilent gas?
- Such employer demand and control couple in the house is resulted by the fife
Just because it's found on the Internet, it doesn't mean that it's correct English.
All your base belong to usWP, I Can Has CheezburgerWP, and "Marry hat hey lid tell lam, ids fleas woes wide has know" are perfect examples.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
Here are some examples of scientific articles that are cited by other scholars, although "is resulted by" appear in these articles:
Inexact solvers on element interfaces for the p and h-p finite element ...
home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~guo/inexact.pdf
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by B Guo - 1997 - Cited by 8 - Related articles
bDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Simon Fraser University, Bumaby, British Columbia V5A ..... But a smaller condition number is resulted by using cy). ( http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~guo/inexact.pdf ).
Priority mix planning for semiconductor fabrication by fuzzy AHP ...
ir.lib.ncut.edu.tw/bitstream/987654321/1666/1/康鶴耀%20J9.pdf
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by HY Kang - 2007 - Cited by 51 - Related articles
duction capacity is resulted by the processing of hot lots due to more complicated process, ...... Computers and Mathematics with. Applications, 15, 887–896. ( http://ir.lib.ncut.edu.tw/bitstream/987654321/1666/1/康鶴耀 J9.pdf )
Spectral Efficiency of Large-system CDMA via Statistical Physics
www.ece.northwestern.edu/~dguo/publications/GuoVer03CISS.pdf
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by D Guo - Cited by 12 - Related articles
where (18) can be easily verified and (19) is resulted by as- suming that the ... intensive ongoing efforts in the mathematics and physics com- munity to find a ... ( http://users.eecs.northwestern.edu/~dguo/publications/GuoVer03CISS.pdf )
etc ...
Moreover, I already used "is resulted by" in my previous posts, for example:
Deeper than primes - Continuation - Page 2 - JREF Forum
forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=221845&page=2
40 posts - 7 authors - 30 Oct 2011
... state (which is resulted by a finite collection that no one of its objects is ...... In mathematics, a curve (also called a curved line in older texts) is, ... ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221845&page=2 )
Deeper than primes - Continuation - Page 10 - JREF Forum
forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=221845&page=10
40 posts - 6 authors - 20 Jan
Page 10- Deeper than primes - Continuation Religion and Philosophy. ... w.r.t each other, which is resulted by no more than a single 0-space). ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221845&page=10 )
[Merged] Deeper than primes - Page 367 - JREF Forum
forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=125220&page=367
40 posts - 6 authors - 22 Mar 2011
Page 367-[Merged] Deeper than primes Religion and Philosophy. ... circles with different curvatures, is resulted by an inherent discontinuity of ... ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125220&page=367 )
and nothing was said about it.
"is resulted by" appears as a problem because the traditional mathematicians here have nothing to say about my arguments about Knot set theory.
Last edited:
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Find all the examples of people using incorrect English you like. Doesn't make it right.
Now even the Oxford English Dictionary pauses ever so briefly to declare DoronShadmi wrong.
See my previous comment about pebbles.
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
See my previous post about finding stuff on the internet.
Now, back to the misdirection at hand. Doronshadmi, how's that search for finding being a member is defined as a knot below a knot?
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
Little 10 Toes, after you have finished to play the ignorant, you are invited to look again at:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415765&postcount=1604
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415868&postcount=1607
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8416047&postcount=1610
Last edited:
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Yes, yes, we are familiar with those posts. That was where you were in the wrong document or citing things in the right document, but not about the definition of membership being knots below knots.
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
The word "knot" is not used in *any* of those posts. The phrase "knot-set" is used twice and not by you. The word "knotlogic" is used twice because it is the name of a file.
What he said.
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
Please work on your English skills. A guy is not a "her".
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
In case that you have missed it, the word "knot" is the general consent here, whether it is used as "Knot-set" or "Knotlogic" (for example, please look at the abstract of http://homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/KnotLogic.pdf page 1).
By following the general concept, one enables to deduce the two aspects of knots (being a set, being a member of a given set, which are provided by visual_spatial AND verbal_symbolic reasoning) exactly as expressed in:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415765&postcount=1604
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415868&postcount=1607
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8416047&postcount=1610
Your view of verbal_symbolic-only reasoning even fails to generalize the concept of Knot, and your inability to link between the diagrams (which needs visual-spatial reasoning) and the symbolic expressions ( as clearly given in http://www.gwu.edu/~rpsol/preconf/wmsci/kaufman2.pdf and http://homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/KnotLogic.pdf ) do not enable you to deal with the considered subject.
Moreover, these articles provide a common reasoning of the considered subject, so the attempt of the traditional mathematicians here to ignore the common reasoning of the considered subject in both articles, is a concrete example of their ignorance of the considered subject (they really think that the articles are disjoint, such that one can't use both articles in order to deal with the considered subject).
As far as I can see, you do not use visual_spatial reasoning at all in this case, and you even unable to generalize concepts that are provided by verbal_symbolic reasoning.
In this case you have no chance to get:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415765&postcount=1604
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415868&postcount=1607
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8416047&postcount=1610
------------------------------------
By using the word "knot" as a general concept, one enables to understand that knot a below (or under) knot b is the same as a ε b
or b = {a}, where b is a set and a is a member of b, exactly as rigorously expressed (by using verbal_symbolic AND visual_spatial reasoning), for example, in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415765&postcount=1604 (which is a part of http://www.gwu.edu/~rpsol/preconf/wmsci/kaufman2.pdf article).
Last edited:
Unusually coherent...
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
The usual cynicism of reckless mind.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8414093&postcount=1596
Last edited:
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Well, give him a break, he hasn't worked out what the pictures mean yet (viz the use of the popcorn smiley), so expecting the right words may be a bit of a stretch.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
So now the traditional mathematicians here can't find any linkage between 'cynicism' and 'sarcasm'.
Shell we expect of such minds to get any of http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8421119&postcount=1628 ?
Shell we expect of such minds to get any of http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8421119&postcount=1628 ?
Last edited:
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
I do not give you a break so http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8414093&postcount=1596
the stage is yours, and please do your act without missing even a single part of it.Maybe you need a bigger crowd so
we are waiting.
Last edited:
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
Still waiting for you to show where this is shown specifically.
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
1) You are waiting in the wrong station (named "knot above knot") which does not work anymore.
2) You ignored http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8421119&postcount=1628.
According to your reply I easily conclude that you have no clue about the ongoing discussion on this subject.
Last edited:
So you finally decided to retire? -- good for you!
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
You are not updated (your degree in maths ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8223936&postcount=1438 ) did not improve your abilities to research, after all)).
Please start from here http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8415300&postcount=1600 in order to get on train.
Last edited:
I see you are still struggling with reading comprehension. Perhaps it is not the time to retire after all...
doronshadmi
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,320
No, you don't.
- Status