Re: Derivative Products of Form (df/dx)(dg/dx) in Physics


"OsherD" <mdoctorow@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1136517496.054267.24820@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >From Osher Doctorow mdoctorow@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> I looked up Pod Chumly's previous postings under his name and found
> nothing but political messages and marijuana messages. None of them as
> far as I could discover claimed that a physics posting was "trivial".
> Assuming that Chumly isn't a hireling of MoveOn.Org or George Soros, I
> should mention that category theorists (whom I've been attacking from
> "day 1" ) in algebra like to claim that their "composition" is
> fundamental and "way more important than multiplication or addition of
> functions." Category theory is an invention of algebraists,
> especially Saunders MacLane of U. Chicago and Eilenberg, which I've
> illustrated as being misleading in underemphasizing sets and products
> and sums and differences and quotients of functions and other things in
> many of my postings in sci.physics, sci.statistics.research,
> geometry.research, etc. There's a lucrative research grant faction
> that worships category theory, algebraic geometry, and algebraic
> topology, which again I've shown to be misleading compared to
> probability, logic, geometry, topology, combinatorics, engineering
> especially control theory and feedback. Strange bedfellows. You
> might want to look up the history of Saunders MacLane, which is itself
> strange.
>
> Osher Doctorow
>

That is all political side issues, answer the technical question.
What is the meaning of (df/dx)(dg/dx)?


.

Relevant Pages