Re: Infantile authours degrading this NG.
From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich_at_math.okstate.edu)
Date: 12/02/04
- Next message: HERC777: "Re: So you want to count an infinite power set ?"
- Previous message: Dave Rusin: "Re: Vector invariants"
- In reply to: robert bristow-johnson: "Re: Infantile authours degrading this NG."
- Next in thread: Airy R. Bean: "Re: Infantile authours degrading this NG."
- Reply: Airy R. Bean: "Re: Infantile authours degrading this NG."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:30:05 -0600
On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:13:37 -0500, robert bristow-johnson
<rbj@audioimagination.com> wrote:
>in article j04uq0teo12354b3qtql4qrtvhrrs54a3j@4ax.com, David C. Ullrich at
>ullrich@math.okstate.edu wrote on 12/02/2004 07:54:
>
>> On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:05:49 -0000, "Airy R. Bean" <me@privacy.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I disagree that it is wrong. The operation being
>>> undertaken is "Integration By Parts" and
>>> therefore Integration is required and not
>>> Anti-Differentiation.
>>
>> Hilarious. I think you might want to take
>> Calc 101 again before lecturing us on all
>> this stuff.
>>
>>> My " f(T).e^(-st)" is the result of evaluating
>>> U.int(V),
>>
>> If int means int_0^infinty then yes it is, that's
>> exactly why it's wrong.
>
>i just realized now how far this is cross-posted. i suspect that David is
>hanging out on sci.math (but i dunno).
Yes.
> David, he really doesn't get it.
>and he doesn't want to get it.
Thanks, but actually I realized that a few hundred posts
up. Was actually trying to help the guy with the math in
my first one or two replies, but since then it's all been
just for the fun of watching the way the guy's technique.
He's pretty good, has things like being insulting and
then whining when people reply insultingly, ignoring
refutations and then claiming they don't exist, claiming
that the fact that there have been a lot of replies
proves he must be right, etc down pat. We've got better
here on sci.math but he's pretty good. I can't decide
whether he's just trolling or really believes he's
right...
> if it were up to Beanie, we would rewrite
>all the calculus textbooks.
>
>let's not feed the troll. maybe if we stop feeding it, it will shrivel up
>and blow away.
What fun would that be?
>r b-j
************************
David C. Ullrich
- Next message: HERC777: "Re: So you want to count an infinite power set ?"
- Previous message: Dave Rusin: "Re: Vector invariants"
- In reply to: robert bristow-johnson: "Re: Infantile authours degrading this NG."
- Next in thread: Airy R. Bean: "Re: Infantile authours degrading this NG."
- Reply: Airy R. Bean: "Re: Infantile authours degrading this NG."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
