Re: Algebra with quotient ring.

On Jul 9, 1:39 pm, Bill Dubuque <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tonico <Tonic...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Why do you call my remarks "unbased claims"? If you think
they're in error then do explain why. I do not see such.
Of course there are "no proofs". The remarks were an aside
for cultural enrichment. You'll find similar remarks in
many well-written textbooks and expository papers. One
can easily Google the terms if one desires to learn more.

Do you really expect me to post links for you after you
so rudely complained at length before about how difficult
it was for you to follow all the links in my posts. Sorry,
I'm not your hired tutor. If you can't be bothered to click
your mouse a few times to follow a link then you have not
demonstrated your sincerity to learn mathematics. If it
hurts your brain to navigate a tiny graph of linked posts
then you'll have a very difficult time learning much higher
mathematics - whose many beautiful subjects are linked in
many complex, mysterious and tantalizingly beautiful ways.
One of the goals of my posts is to provide links to many
of these beautiful mathematical interconnections. This is
something one doesn't normally find in textbooks or in
by-the-book replies in other run-of-the-mill followups.

*********************************************************

You're a dishonest, whining, lazy cranklike sob. I did REQUEST nicely
and respectfully to know more about some stuff you wrote about some
1.5-2 months ago....remember?

You did NOT respond to that, and then I nicely proposed you to do some
order in your posted stuff, organize a site where everybody interested
could access the knowledge you so kindly offer, since you seem to be
so eager to everyone that you've made many generalizations about so
much stuff in algebra, polynomials, etc.

You think that someone's lazy if she/he is not willing to go across
hundreds (literally) of post, which some times form loops and lead you
back to a formarly visited post, and which some times ALSO do not
contain the answer to some quest, as you agreeded yourself some weeks
ago with some stuff "you still haven't worked out".

Fine, do NOT make order in your stuff: it's up to you...and next time
try to be a little more open minded to understand the OP's maths level
before offering him the equivalent to rubbish...

Regards
Tonio
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Beyond CL?
    ... >> in his insistence that an airplane that looked beautiful would fly the ... >> for ugly mathematics." ... Your quote actually brings up something I've been thinking about: ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Beautiful woman want to be your wife
    ... Beautiful woman want to be your wife ... remarks: This object can only be updated by APNIC hostmasters. ... trouble: ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: Godels theorem in the news?
    ... mathematics and sort of turned the way we look at it as a science ... Although I did not follow the Iranian president's remarks fully, ... I was very surprised at the IMC (International Competition in Mathematics) ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Godels theorem in the news?
    ... His rambling answer included the following remarks, ... mathematics and sort of turned the way we look at it as a science ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Galileos Paradox
    ... The criterion for goodness in pure mathematics is consistency, ... I like mathematical beauty very much. ... Are more than indefinitely many numbers beautiful? ... You should read Foundations of Set Theory by Fraenkel et al. in order to ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast