ahmet

hi, I meant and suggested that you use suitable mathematical expressions. telling with sentence sometimes is not sufficient for the case to be accepted or understood within mathematical approach and / or philosophy. recommendation: use and (don't leave general) theorems in basics of mathematics for instance when any function is monotone and bounded at the same time, you will not be able to say or discuss whether it would be divergent. (Because it will definitely be convergent)

you should (be able) to define your expession mathematically, any set (here X) will be infinite if for every x element X ,there is y element X such that y>x

it seems this is a meaningless topic to me..

maybe, yes in this example. but I saw someone from england and they really were pronunciating that letter as I expressed. what is more, pronunciating a word and using it in a sentence are presumably not same.

Thank you very much @studiotand @joigus To be honest,I do not fear for myself,because I feel myself strong. But I am very anxious for my mother ,because she is elderly and I know that she will have been the one I have loved (her) the most. all in all, I shall take quarantine seriously as studiot advises. , to me it is pleasure to work at my home. therefore I shall try to create good works during the following 14 days.

hi, today it is detected that my brother has been catched by covid-19. my some arrangements (normal works) has been cancelled as of today. (although I have no symptom,we have been accepted as "potential patients" (I am a teacher here)) result: 14 days quarantine. what about you?

haha it seems like a joke or something relevant to the content of a specific joke. if you mention something in biology (i.e. classifications/taxonomia) then ..I do not think that that idea would refute the exact idea. vaşak is a cat , tiger is also a cat but they have intersections to be accepted as a cat each even if their family and vary names are different.

but these two descriptions have intersections.

This whole question is self contradictory. There is no exact meaning. Any further the meaning is changing over time. Bacon was different sort of scientist from Newton, who was a different sort of scientist from Thomson who was.... You might just as well ask What does "plumber" mean ? Modern plumbers do very different things and work in a very different way, from plumbers of even just 50 years ago. no,I asked it because there are differences between the definition's itself depending on one country to another country. For instance, a "scientist" or more properly an "academcian/academics" needs to be approved by any university. I mean she/he needs to work at any university with suitable academic position. (Turkey) On the other hand we know that (at least in the past) any scientist should not have to be approved by any university. yet, obviously there are some stupid applications. (for instance I read some requirements from registration of some academic journals or over their webpage (directly) and they require that the author who would submit his/her paper should have suitable academic title. This is stupid. Sometimes, we can see the extension of such dogmatic beliefs. surely, this is a fallacy.) having a degree does not mean that you would be qualified one. While we have had this information in the left hand, we can also say that having no official education would not mean that you would not be a qualified or prospective fellow in the right hand. all in all , I can clearly say that here, the desire and request is effective on some actions to be happened on the issue. School is in fact,everywhere ,not just a classroom+ labs (etc) surrounding by a classic building (named university) ahmet

surely, NO. in fact the succint expression both for this comment and for the swansont's paragraph is that "scientist is anyone who does science" I would add: "this is a reality"

not sure but because (for first check), irrational numbers are in fact, the consistence of their existence (they exist,ok no problem with this part. But not applicable) in general,you cannot write any irrational number in the form of rational. Otherwsie, if you try to do so,then you will not be able to conclude the operation. the operation will extend to infinity,which causes not to make conclusion for the operation. Thus ,those two kinds of numbers,to me, are not summable. however, there might be more contexts which could be reference for this.

I remember one expert (associate professor) in algebra (now he is professor) was using a sentence like this "Ahmet do you know, I sometimes think whether a couple of rational and irrational numbers are summable, do you think that these are summable?" now my answer is that "I doubt".

as far as I remember , chinese remainder theorem and euler theorem (also fermat) are relevant to congruences. (to calculate residues) I recommend that you write something mathematically meaningful. you may apply or appeal to some general theorems or propositions or you can refer to some axioms.

thank you really I heard / learnt it from the news. Meanwhile, Do you know, I was teaching in istanbul but passed to antalya just because of the potentiality of earthquake , ahaha I escaped mmm although written documents seems better (I mean I enjoy them) ,I shall again try to deal/watch the video. thanks.

to be honest,I am feeling myself both badly and well. because ..while I understand that the units just depend on us (for instance I could draw y=sin(x) functions graph both in cm and mm , I think I have badly told the case or could not ensure the listener / reader understand well in the project.. so, freedom is already always good , but I have not expressed the case well in my project,this is not good,it is bad. thanks to everyone for participation to this thread.

@Sensei it might be either correct or not. I think I have not sufficient knowledge in order to make a meaningful recommendation but I sometimes visit software forums and in turkey ,whenever I come across with such queries,it is directly being said that that question was not a meaningful query also, they do reommend not to think so much complex. like this: First do simple things and then great things. however, I think 500 line a program might even be not easy too (even in html+js page) because its organize might also be complex but of course ...this depends on you and your capacity (to whom you say). of course we have to respect every ideas.

well, I have a small amount of knowledge in real analysis ,but not too much. generally many mathematicians tend to do pure mathematics in such context. and yes, this indeed was just the thing I was anticipating. But I think I have forgotten some of them, maybe it would be very good if you suggest/provide some numerical analysis sources (but examples are too much important for me (always)) but.. could not be sure how to correlate with complex analysis. Because we were mostly studied basically laurent series, calculating complex integrals and properties of complex functions and others (like conform transforms etc) and I could not make a well constructed connection between these and our issue. oh very good. Keep it, eventually, as long as we are thinking, we are capable to do something well/better. thanks meanwhile, have you tried to mention or refer to a specific paper that you were author of its by, this?

I might recommend not to think so much complex. because as far as I know or even can predict,that was not a thing just one person could do.

mmm ,well. probably this is being caused by this: ""logic " is a subject or branch of mathematics, which does not deal with propositions, it tries to prove or make proofs for propositions instead(generally) with global truths and scientific truths. ) "

hiiiiiii I have to understand or interpret what sensei says. (As far as I know that should be relevant to approach methods (i.e. e.g. via integral , polynomial or curvatures methods. ) all the types of functions you wrote are known from my high school level knowledge but not sure whether we understand the same thing with "control" point ,keyword. and are you mentioning about monotone functions or something in "Real Analysis" with ceiling or ground functions? or maybe some forms of sande-wich theorem ...not sure about the scope of those keywords.

hi, by specifically defined ,I mean that those functions were generally partial (partially defined with their critic points ) such functions generally contain one of these or the mixture: 1) sgn(f(x)) 2) [|f(x)|] 3) |f(x)| sorry for being unfamiliar with the mathematical terms in english language. But here,we can specify any function or a group of functions e.g.: continuous functions (broad), regular continuous functions , derivatable functions , integrable functions, etc.

mmm, unfortunately the thing I was thinking seems like "impossible" I was thinking something like this (maybe,more clearly) ---->>whether we could allege it would define specific/unique function or a function which is a member of defined group of functions (E.g. regular functions) under the condition we give a bunch of points or more than several points on the xy plane or xyz space. But that is ,I think clear that not. Because I think we can randomly cut off some parts of that implied /alleged function and compound a new part to it. such types of function also known as "specifically defined functions" for instance [math]y=x^{2}[/math] is a specific function but we can cut off the part of this function where x<0 and redefine it as [math] y=x^{3}+5+sgn(x^{2}-4)[/math] where [math]x<0 [/math],and [math] y= x^{2}[/math] where [math] x>0 [/math] this is also usual...

This paragraph ,I think,almost the most perfectly outlines what i have intented to express! Thank you very much!