Fermat's "Last" Theorem Disproved?
in [Math]
|
Prev: 'Relativistic' "Doppler" shift
Next: Intersection of Complex Submanifolds (Incl. Self-Int.) is positive
From: Gerry Myerson on 3 Aug 2010 18:33 In article <Virgil-4CDA74.13345103082010(a)bignews.usenetmonster.com>, Virgil <Virgil(a)home.esc> wrote: > In article > <53f3038c-59f4-4fa7-8c56-6372ee107103(a)i28g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > cjcountess <cjcountess(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > THE CONVERGENCE of QUANTUM and INTEGER NUMBERS > > > > Looking at the idea of dimensionless integers, it seems that the > > reason they are called dimensionless is because they can be applied to > > any unite such as (length, mass, time, and so on ...), but the reason > > for their universality may not be because they are dimensionless, but > > because of the very opposite reason that, �they include all > > dimensions�. > > Nonsense. Units may be certainly appended to numbers but if all numbers > already "include" all units then 2^2 would have to represent 2 kilograms > to the 2 meters power and simultaneoulsy 2 dynes to the 2 ohms power, > etc.. Be it ever so umble, there's no place like ohm. -- Gerry Myerson (gerry(a)maths.mq.edi.ai) (i -> u for email)
From: Virgil on 3 Aug 2010 18:51 In article <gerry-CAD66A.08331704082010(a)mx01.eternal-september.org>, Gerry Myerson <gerry(a)maths.mq.edi.ai.i2u4email> wrote: > In article <Virgil-4CDA74.13345103082010(a)bignews.usenetmonster.com>, > Virgil <Virgil(a)home.esc> wrote: > > > In article > > <53f3038c-59f4-4fa7-8c56-6372ee107103(a)i28g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > > cjcountess <cjcountess(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > THE CONVERGENCE of QUANTUM and INTEGER NUMBERS > > > > > > Looking at the idea of dimensionless integers, it seems that the > > > reason they are called dimensionless is because they can be applied to > > > any unite such as (length, mass, time, and so on ...), but the reason > > > for their universality may not be because they are dimensionless, but > > > because of the very opposite reason that, �they include all > > > dimensions�. > > > > Nonsense. Units may be certainly appended to numbers but if all numbers > > already "include" all units then 2^2 would have to represent 2 kilograms > > to the 2 meters power and simultaneoulsy 2 dynes to the 2 ohms power, > > etc.. > > Be it ever so umble, there's no place like ohm. Shocking!!!
From: Bart Goddard on 3 Aug 2010 19:03 Virgil <Virgil(a)home.esc> wrote in news:Virgil-3DA22F.16511203082010(a)bignews.usenetmonster.com: >> > Nonsense. Units may be certainly appended to numbers but if all >> > numbers already "include" all units then 2^2 would have to >> > represent 2 kilograms to the 2 meters power and simultaneoulsy 2 >> > dynes to the 2 ohms power, etc.. >> >> Be it ever so umble, there's no place like ohm. > > Shocking!!! Watt's this nonsense? Either I are squared, or you guys need mho timeout. -- Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
From: Gerry Myerson on 4 Aug 2010 03:25 In article <Xns9DC9B7AC22F23goddardbenetscapenet(a)74.209.136.82>, Bart Goddard <goddardbe(a)netscape.net> wrote: > Virgil <Virgil(a)home.esc> wrote in > news:Virgil-3DA22F.16511203082010(a)bignews.usenetmonster.com: > > > >> > Nonsense. Units may be certainly appended to numbers but if all > >> > numbers already "include" all units then 2^2 would have to > >> > represent 2 kilograms to the 2 meters power and simultaneoulsy 2 > >> > dynes to the 2 ohms power, etc.. > >> > >> Be it ever so umble, there's no place like ohm. > > > > Shocking!!! > > Watt's this nonsense? Either I are squared, or > you guys need mho timeout. Resistance is futile. -- Gerry Myerson (gerry(a)maths.mq.edi.ai) (i -> u for email)
From: Pubkeybreaker on 4 Aug 2010 07:46
On Aug 4, 3:25 am, Gerry Myerson <ge...(a)maths.mq.edi.ai.i2u4email> wrote: > In article <Xns9DC9B7AC22F23goddardbenetscape...(a)74.209.136.82>, > Bart Goddard <goddar...(a)netscape.net> wrote: > > > Virgil <Vir...(a)home.esc> wrote in > >news:Virgil-3DA22F.16511203082010(a)bignews.usenetmonster.com: > > > >> > Nonsense. Units may be certainly appended to numbers but if all > > >> > numbers already "include" all units then 2^2 would have to > > >> > represent 2 kilograms to the 2 meters power and simultaneoulsy 2 > > >> > dynes to the 2 ohms power, etc.. > > > >> Be it ever so umble, there's no place like ohm. > > > > Shocking!!! > > > Watt's this nonsense? Either I are squared, or > > you guys need mho timeout. > > Resistance is futile. > > -- > Gerry Myerson (ge...(a)maths.mq.edi.ai) (i -> u for email) Resistance is V/I. |