Re: Smart the Schizo (was 0.9999 =/= 1)

From: S. Enterprize Company (smart1234_at_aol.com)
Date: 10/30/04 

Date: 30 Oct 2004 10:42:24 GMT

>smart1234@aol.com (S. Enterprize Company) wrote in
>news:20041029174146.18077.00006089@mb-m03.aol.com:
>
>>>I watched the movie, "A Beautiful Mind." It was trash. You should
>>>*read* *the* *book*, "A Beautiful Mind." It is a much more accurate
>>>portrayal of the life of John Nash. It has not been done up for
>>>Hollywood and is based on his autobiography.
>>>
>>>Oh, and by the way, Nash did not win the Nobel prize.
>>>
>>> - Tim
>>>
>>
>> Oh, yes he did.
>>
>> http://www.popular-science.net/nobel/nash.html
>
>
>Silly, silly little man. John Nash won a prize in Economics (for his
>Nash Equilibria Points, I believe). There is no such thing as a Nobel
>Prize in Economics. Alfred Nobel made no such request in his will.

   You must be an OLDDDDDD Man still living in the past in the early 1900's,
because in 1968 things changed.

"It is - of course - the famous international award given yearly since 1901 for
achievements in physics, chemistry, medicine, literature and peace. The prize
consists of a medal, a personal diploma, and a prize amount. In 1968, the
Sveriges Riksbank (Bank of Sweden) instituted the Prize in Economic Sciences in
memory of Alfred Nobel, founder of the Nobel Prize."

>>From http://nobelprize.org/
>
>"The Nobel Prize is an international award given yearly since 1901 for
>achievements in physics, chemistry, medicine, literature and for peace."
>
>There is nothing in there about Economics. I'm sorry, but you cannot
>win something that does not exist.

   OLDDDDDDDDDDDD Man

>
>Learn the facts, read a book. It is all perfectly well explained in "A
>Beautiful Mind," the book. Hmm, Hollywood seemed to skip over that part
>in the movie.
>
>Please, learn the facts before you try to post things of which you know
>nothing.

   DUH?????? OLDDDDDDDDDDD Man

>
>> You are a "dang" lie. John Nash was ( or still is) a mathematical
>> genius and
>
>I never said he wasn't a mathematical genius. I just said he never won
>the Nobel Prize. There simply is no Nobel Prize in mathematics nor in
>economics.

  But you implied that in comparison to me those with schizophrenia are stupid
idiots. Just look at the subject title: Re: Smart the Schizo ( was .99999 =/=
1)

>
>> did have schizophrenia and so did alot of other mental geniuses of
>> physics, like Newton and Einstein.
>
>I also suffer from mild schizophrenia, thus I wasn't judging you. But I
>have seen what happens if it is not treated. That is why I was trying

  I think it's time for your treatment.

>to help you. But then, I guess this means I am a mental genius but you
>have not claimed to actually have schizophrenia. Where does that leave
>you?

   I don't like to discuss me medical problems. That's private.
Physician-Patient Priviledge.

>
>> The problem is you atheists, which I believe are so full of crap
>> you can't
>> see straight enough to see you are mentally sick.
>
>I am not an atheist. I do believe in a
   Well most people in physics and math, as far as I know, don't believe in
anything of higher intelligence than human.

God. I just do not believe
>*you* are a god or a creator.

  I didn't say, The Creator. I said a co-creator which means under God, like
God or in the image of God, with others.

>
>> Oh BTW,
>>
>> I have shown you,
>> 1) DIM oo that .9999... =\= 1
>> 2) Accelerated the derivative state to infinitesimal areas of
>> smallness to show, .999999.... =\= 1
>> 3) Have proven Partial Sums only uses a limited amount of significant
>> figure to make a finite convergence of .9999... --> 1
>> 4) And others are starting to agree with me.
>> 5) Maybe you should seek help. You can't see beyond about 16
>> significant figures and you have 20 years of experience in math?????
>
>Actually, I can see to an infinite amount of significant figures. In
>fact, I was the one who posted computations up 999 significant figures.
>Maybe you should seek help. You can't see beyond 999 significant
>figures and you obviously have zero years of experience in math.
>
>> Smart's Alt. Physics News Group
>> http://pub39.bravenet.com/forum/show.php?usernum=3320272813&cpv=1
>
>The above link takes you to a site full of mindless ramblings. You
>would be wise not to visit.
>
>> S. Enterprize (Science Journal)
>> http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/
>
>Maybe I should start my own journal since no one else will publish by
>rubbish. Or maybe if I just produce quality material, respectable
>journals will publish it.

   The Smart Journal allows people to publish things other than JUST the, QM or
Standard Model. It's like in college, they tell you what to learn, not how to
learn and they focus ONLY on QM and the Standard Model in physics. What about
other models? Why do I have to believe in electron orbitals? That's incorrect.

>
> - Tim
>
>--
>Timothy M. Brauch
>NSF Fellow
>Department of Mathematics
>University of Louisville
>
>email is:
>news (dot) post (at) tbrauch (dot) com

Smart's Alt. Physics News Group
http://pub39.bravenet.com/forum/show.php?usernum=3320272813&cpv=1
S. Enterprize (Science Journal)
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/

Relevant Pages