• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
 NOTICE!! For tommy1729 nuninho1980 Fellow Posts: 95 Threads: 6 Joined: Apr 2009 10/19/2015, 07:39 PM (This post was last modified: 10/19/2015, 07:40 PM by nuninho1980.) Hi, tommy1729: Please stop to reply or slowdown to reply, if you reply ALONE!! Due to your addiction of posts. tommy1729 Ultimate Fellow Posts: 1,372 Threads: 336 Joined: Feb 2009 10/19/2015, 09:14 PM The threads that I post in alot belong in the top 10 most popular threads on this forum and probably the entire internet concerning tetration and nonstandard math. It is silly that I even defend myself here , since I do not need too. My reputation in tetration and math requires no doubt about my posts. You do not have to read my Posts. But then again why would you not ? It does not matter if you look at the threads in terms of replies , rating , popularity , views , appreciation , math skill level ... I Will be within the group of top contributors. If you are Trying too Harm my reputation , you should realise you are fighting a giant. I might be arrogant and narcistic, but here there is freedom of choice and freedom of speech. If you see no value in the majority of my posts , Im honestly doubting WHY you are really here. Do you like this math here or not ?? If you like personal battles more , I suggest going to " sci.math ". Or if you like more standard math , Mathoverflow or MathStackExchange or theArtofProblemsolving. Or arxiv. But I wont let anyone chase me away here ! Too be honest I find your post impolite at least. What is the real reason you are here ? Are you a student of Ullrich ? Show us more of your genius math too fill Up this forum then. This reminds me of sci.math ... And believe me that is not good. Even if only 1/4 Posts of me makes sense that still makes me a top member. You seem to not realise that. It is my philosophy that math should be in the open , not behind paywalls or " elite ". Hiding math damages society and math itself. Not everything should be about money , and Free speech , Ideas and knowledge is the first step. We - not just me - have shown here on the forum that tetration is not " for cranks and loons " and in fact relates to traditional math. Psychological games do imho not belong here. I hope you have no hidden agenda. Your futile attempts are somewhat funny though. Tommy1729 nuninho1980 Fellow Posts: 95 Threads: 6 Joined: Apr 2009 10/19/2015, 11:22 PM (This post was last modified: 10/19/2015, 11:26 PM by nuninho1980.) Ok. But... you should put here the "nice" LaTeX (formula, equation...) for better understand and easier. --> I want about tetration with height h<1 and b<1 to evaluate results. eg: $^{0.5}0.5 = ?$ But... until now, yet it's unknown... My favorites - my threads: - ""game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ?" - "Pentation roots self but please you do..." HERE Euler's number - $^{\infty}(exp(1/e)) = e$ Nuninho(?)'s number - $1.63532449671527639934534...$^^^$\infty ~= 3.0885322718067176544821...$ Are you interested that? MphLee Fellow Posts: 95 Threads: 7 Joined: May 2013 10/20/2015, 01:42 PM I'd like to continue this post since it raises interesting aspects of the Tetration Forum, both as community of people and as meeting place for ideas (also as a research place). But unfortunately I suspect that YOUR post, nuninho1980, is wrong for at least two reasons: A-It is clearly Off Topic in this section and should be moved to the section "ABOUT THE FORUM". B-Even in the above mentioned section it is still unclear if this topic would be legit because, nuninho, you are actually claiming that another user, Tommy, is having a wrong behavior/bad use of the forum and maybe this should be submitted to a moderator (PM) therefore making this post useless. ----------------------- @Tommy Said that, It seems to me that, Tommy, you are trying to misinterpret that post on purpose, actually there was not need at all to see this as a reputation attack nor to reply with a defense (ok is legit) filled with a lot of off-topic ideological allusions and provocations (not that legit, even if I personally agree with most points)... If this was not the case then an even worse scenario appears: as you admit, your big narcissism makes you so sensitive to criticism to exaggerate and distort what nuninho said almost unconsciously. Don't get me wrong there Tommy, I'm not trying to judge this aspect of you (not the real you but the one that appears on the forum), I do not feel either authorized to talk about the nature of someone. Just trying to say that the reaction was exaggerated, even if you are mostly right. @Nuninho About point (B) I would like to say my opinion to nuninho: I admit that Tommy posts alot, and replies to his own posts... but you have to think that if this forum was more active, with more users, Tommy's activity would not have seemed unnatural... it seems only because Tetration forum is an almost inactive forum (and for various reasons). Tommy posting activity is legit imho (but not his difficult writing style maybe JK): he is just updating his researches. But talking more about the presentation of his research, and his formatting techniques would drag us in a discussion about the "philosophy of the mathematical social activities"... that is probably where Tommy wants to hit (If I understand). Obviously the last word goes to the moderator, only if you are going to report Tommy's activity. ---------------- Extra About the " it raises interesting aspects of the Tetration Forum, both as community of people and as meeting place for ideas (also as a research place).": The tetration forum seems a bit dead now... but it is not surprising...Tetration/Hyperoperations are not a mainstream topics... and in some parts are very advanced but Super-specialized topics... but I strongly disagree with the fact that what we are doing is non-standard math if by that we mean that it is different from the common math at some "ontological level"... the only mathematics that imo fits in this description can be something like finitist paradigm, paraconsistend or non-classical logic based math... But if with non-standard we mean that it not mainstream-not traditional ...well it is the truth. Quote:We - not just me - have shown here on the forum that tetration is not " for cranks and loons " and in fact relates to traditional math. A agree and If someone thinks that, he clearly doesn't understand what math really is about and it does not deserve to be mentioned Well I would like to say more but i think that this was posted in the wrong section...and even if it is interesting I don't want to continue here the off topic started by Tommy. What about starting a new thread? MathStackExchange account:MphLee nuninho1980 Fellow Posts: 95 Threads: 6 Joined: Apr 2009 10/20/2015, 07:37 PM @MphLee: Yeah, I'm sorry. This thread will be moved but my notice is important because you find EASILY this thread. hixidom Junior Fellow Posts: 20 Threads: 3 Joined: Feb 2014 10/23/2015, 05:39 PM (This post was last modified: 10/23/2015, 05:41 PM by hixidom.) I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'd like to make a few relevant points: 1. Tommy, if 95% of the most recent posts (i.e., the ones that visitors see first) are your posts, then there is a high likelihood that your posts will dominate the top-viewed posts list. It isn't necessarily because the topics are better, but rather it is simply due to the law of large numbers. Correct me if I'm wrong. 2. Tommy, you do seem very knowledgeable when it comes to mathematics (vastly more knowledgeable than me, at least). Also, there is a sort of hyperoperator terminology that is informally developing on this forum and elsewhere. For these two reasons, I find it hard to understand your posts sometimes. I know it is not your responsibility to pander to people who simply don't know math on the level you are addressing, but I think it would be nice if you (and all users on the forum) would better-introduce the terminology and formulations used in new threads so that each thread is less ambiguous and more self-contained. MphLee Fellow Posts: 95 Threads: 7 Joined: May 2013 10/23/2015, 06:37 PM I partially agree with the second part of your post Hixidom (is point 1 is trivial). Quote:[...]Also, there is a sort of hyperoperator terminology that is informally developing on this forum and elsewhere. For these two reasons, I find it hard to understand your posts sometimes. Actually on the recent forum activity only a small percentage is actually about real Hyperoperations, in the general sense. The most recent topics are mostly about real/complex dynamics, differential equations, tetration and number theory (or intersection of this various fields). When I talk about "recent" I obviously talk for 90% about tommy's posting activity xD. Even if is true that in this forum was born and has also developed a specialized terminology for the hyperoperations. And here comes my point (I was waiting for another thread but...nvm): Is true that Quote:[it is not Tommy's] responsibility to pander to people who simply don't know math on the level [we are/he is] addressing, BUT as you add Quote: but I think it would be nice if you (and all users on the forum) would better-introduce the terminology and formulations used in new threads so that each thread is less ambiguous and more self-contained. This is crucial imho for some interpretation of the forum's purpose and meaning. This forum could (and maybe should) be also a place where to organize in an organic way all the researches on the Hyperoperations/Tetration topics. Is now pretty clear that the hyperoperations field, of which Tetration is the Biggest and richest, abundant subfield (and with more connection atm) has many subfields and perhaps keep tidy the TF, maybe using an updated and finer subdivision of subfields, could be the first step towards a spread of these issues. MathStackExchange account:MphLee tommy1729 Ultimate Fellow Posts: 1,372 Threads: 336 Joined: Feb 2009 10/23/2015, 10:35 PM (10/19/2015, 11:22 PM)nuninho1980 Wrote: Ok. But... you should put here the "nice" LaTeX (formula, equation...) for better understand and easier. --> I want about tetration with height h<1 and b<1 to evaluate results. eg: $^{0.5}0.5 = ?$ But... until now, yet it's unknown... My favorites - my threads: - ""game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ?" - "Pentation roots self but please you do..." HERE Euler's number - $^{\infty}(exp(1/e)) = e$ Nuninho(?)'s number - $1.63532449671527639934534...$^^^$\infty ~= 3.0885322718067176544821...$ Are you interested that? I know i should use more Tex. I have already apologized in the past for that. The thing is , despite posting alot and Maybe giving the impression i have a lot of time , i do not have much time. On the one hand blame society for forcing me to think about money and stuff. On the other hand i post at other places too and do Some research in alot of fields of science ( analytic number theory , bio , nano , Cosmo , physics etc ) and I play/research games like chess , go and others. Combining with a social life , work , martial arts , gaming and philosofical Ideas ... And being sick at the moment ... You should get a better idea how " short " my day is. Im both a narcist and a perfectionist , An enthusiast and a skeptic. The combination of those 4 keeps me going on and pushing myself relentless. And it probably confused many people about the true nature of my personality. -- about $^{0.5}0.5 = ?$ At the fixpoint you have a negative derivative, therefore it is similar to asking F(f(x)) = - 2 x + 0,1 x^2. So f(x) near 0 will be close to sqrt(2) i x. That is NO LONGER REAL ! If you loose the propery of real , add no conditions or properties ( uniqueness criterion or such ) and do not give a (nice) example yourself ... Then it makes sense many people loose interest in it. People want properties and structure ! Your Ideas did get attention , perhaps not as much as you hoped. Imho a better idea is the nuninho constants and the alike. Actually i posted a conjecture in the TPID list ( open problems thread ) about them. So also there you received attention. So yes I and others are intrested in that. However there is no reason to ask anyone here to stop posting. In particular tommy1729. And it not so much how i feel about it. But how it makes me look on the internet. It gives a bad impression about me and perhaps even the forum/tetration. Compare if Euler, Newton , Laplace , LaGrange , Gauss , Weierstrass and Cauchy got ridiculed alot and been asked to stop writing , history would have been very different !! Some of those where a bit weird , arrogant etc but that is irrelevant. Also , and yes im aware im not alone , but i do all the contributions for free and offer my time. Im not just talking to myself , so asking to stop posting ON MAIN ( gives it extra weight and attention ) is impolite and rude. And you know that. It reminds me a bit of Ullrich and this thread http://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforu...hp?tid=312 About Arthur Rubin. Anyway we are suppose to be Friends here and all this unnessary sentiment seems like a waste of time for everyone. Keeping us away from doing math. [ i find it weird that gottfried knows arthur and thanks HIM for ... Something ?! , anyway respect for Gottfried though ] Although I am often remembered as the one who started the sentiment, as you can see in this thread I did not. [ neither on sci.math / wiki / MO etc ]. I do admit disliking people for " nonscientific " reasons , but only if they get personal first and impolite , and refuse too talk about math or whatever the subject WAS. Tommy1729 « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

 Possibly Related Threads... Thread Author Replies Views Last Post (number theory) How tommy1729 does it. tommy1729 0 2,191 08/12/2013, 09:13 PM Last Post: tommy1729

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)