It's pathetic really. A self-proclaimed mathematician, who isn't willing to let their statements stand up to Mathematical scrutiny? Pathetic

Paul has blocked me. I can see there's a reply to this post, but I can't see it, so it's from him. This is a common strategy of gaslighters when losing - make a (in their mind) debunking statement, then block the person it's directed at, so it LOOKS like the other person wasn't able to debunk them

And here's an inductive proof (which is a formal proof method)
(1)
show true for a=1
1+b=b+1
subtract 1 both sides
b=b true
(2)
assume true for a=n
n+b=b+n
(3)
show true for a=n+1
n+1+b=b+n+1
subtract 1 both sides
n+b=b+n
true by (2) thus holds for all values of a

"Proving 1 + 2 = 2 + 1 does not prove a + b = b + a" - and yet you can't come up with a disproof

"If a² is even, a is even" - if a²=2, a is 1.41421...., so that's disproven

a=0.(9)
a<1
2a<2

Welcome to what happens when you follow the rules of Maths and use a symbol for a non-terminating number

"you are agreeing with me" - I was disagreeing with you that it's an assumption/definition. It's proven, I showed you the proof. You can even prove it using Cuisenaire rods

"simple case (like the addition of rational numbers) are demonstrable" - demonstrable in all cases by using Cuisenaire rods

"you can do maths with them" - only within the rules that I already mentioned.

"produces an infinite sequence" - which is why the rule is don't substitute any values for the symbols until the final step 🙄

"pi +e is simply pi+e" - or e+pi. a+b=b+a, a=pi, b=e

"You are wrong in the broad case." - no I'm not

"Prove that" - you can't do arithmetic with non-terminating numbers. This is why we use symbols for them, and don't substitute any numerical value for them, if at all, until the last step. These are established rules.

There's no assumption nor definition - we proved it to be true...

LHS=2+3
=(1+1)+(1+1+1)
=1+1+1+1+1
=(1+1+1)+(1+1)
=3+2
=RHS
Therefore 2+3=3+2 QED

The real beauty of Maths is being able to prove things are true

There's always gonna be people who doubt the Maths. We live in a world where people can't even get order of operations right! 😂
dotnet.social/@SmartmanApp...

"which is correct and in agreement with my original post" - well, they're in agreement with your subsequent post, yes. Your original post just said "Yes. I am a mathematician", without any calculations, which I therefore added to the thread (in fact, at the time, no-one at all had shown the calcs)

"But looking at the images I am not sure if you were disagreeing or confirming" - you can't see the calculation and the result in each image? Is it just blank for you? Looks fine at my end

Yep, and I'm a Maths teacher. The chance that ALL are false accusations (at 90% each) is 0.9^26, so the chance that 1 or more is true is 1-0.9^26. For 10% it's still 1-0.1^26

Follow me on Mastodon (or @smartmanapps.dotnet.social.ap.brid.gy to follow from here), for semi-regular #MathsMonday posts

The edit button is on Mastodon :-)

Mastodon has an edit feature

P.S. I can also recommend some cross-platform posting tools, if you're interested in that. 1 account, all the platforms

Gary Numan has Asperger's too

Hello. Could you please bridge this account so hat people on Mastodon can also follow you (or even better post there! I know there is a dotnet account there, but they don't post much)

CC @randulo.com