Re: cube root of a given number
- From: arithmonic <djesusg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 07:18:14 -0700
On 26 jul, 04:37, "sttscitr...@xxxxxxxxx" <sttscitr...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
[cut sick and cowardly behavior hiding his name]
You are truly a lamentable fool and liar.
You claim in the posting that I cite that
the rational mean is the basis for all continued fractions
and generalized continued fractions.
Generalized continued fractions should exhibit
the same properties as simple continued fractions.
SCFs produce best rational approximations,
generalized continued fractions should produce best
simultaneous approximations.
If the rational mean can produce generalized
continued fractions, it should produce all
best simultaneous rational approximations.
If it can do this it can then solve the cubic Pell,
whose solutions are best rational simultaneous
approximations to cubrt(k*k), cubrt(k).
You are a complete idiot who does not have the
slighest idea of the implications of what you write.
All the readers can find information on this topic on GCF at (page
3-4, Section 1.1.1):
http://assets.cambridge.org/052181/8052/sample/0521818052ws.pdf
Anyone can see that the phrase: "GENERALIZED CONTINUED FRACTION" does
not stand exclusively for those continued expressions who yield
simultaneous Diophantine
approximations (general pell's equation)
as you falsely alleged, that's another lie from yours.
You need to lie as well as to insult and attack me just because you
are absolutely unable to find any precedent on the EXTREMELY SIMPLE
HIGH-ORDER ARITHMETICAL METHODS shown in my webpages:
http://mipagina.cantv.net/arithmetic/rmdef.htm
You failed in all your attempts of causing confusion. Considering that
you are now bringing out the name of my Country, it is clear that you
hate so much to see a South-American telling you that: "It is a real
shame that such extremely trivial HIGH-ORDER ARTIHMETICAL METHODS
(which embraces Halley's, Newton's, householder's methods) do not
appear in any book on numbers since Babylonian times up to now.
Unfortunatedly and to your disgrace, you have no choice but to swallow
it.
Eat it and digest it. You CANNOT stop these NEW HIGH-ORDER
ARITHMETICAL METHODS.
Why did you stop your insults against all people who have written
something about on my methods?
Swallow this:
http://assets.cambridge.org/052181/8052/sample/0521818052ws.pdf
Come on, continue by insulting the author of such book (and other
related people), I am sure that they do not agree with most of my
critics to the root-solving history and I do not want them to do so,
but they are true un-biased mathematicians.
Come on, persistent offender.
Show some precedents on the methods shown in my webpages.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: cube root of a given number
- From: mike3
- Re: cube root of a given number
- From: sttscitrans@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: cube root of a given number
- References:
- Re: cube root of a given number
- From: arithmonic
- Re: cube root of a given number
- From: sttscitrans@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: cube root of a given number
- Prev by Date: Re: Faithful representations of S_n
- Next by Date: Re: Faithful representations of S_n
- Previous by thread: Re: cube root of a given number
- Next by thread: Re: cube root of a given number
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|