Post by bassam king karzeddinAccording to infinite monkey theorem,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem
A monkey can produce an elegant proof of any unsolved problem, by typing randomly on a typewriter, provided that sufficiently large time is given!
And this point of view generally accepted by mathematicians,
But, there may be a group of them who don't accept this implications?
The paradise created by infinity for the mathematicians is really sweet and wonderful to the limit that, Indeed, No one would be able to get them out of their paradise
But, one day the Queen and the King got to change their mind and decided to leave the paradise whatever are the consequences!
So, would you do if you are still living in that paradise?
GIVEN a sufficient time, when shall monkeys or master donkeys of mathematics be able to learn only this simplest lesson? wonder!
See how many wrong common old refuted beliefs among mathematicians so simply:
[sin(pi/4) = cos(pi/4) = 0.7071067811865475244...]
This is an absolutely very wrong common practice among all mathematicians **Globally** I swear
Simply because the **Rational-Decimal-Approximation** of an irrational number as [1/sqrt{2}] as (sine(pi/4), cos(pi/4) and one) are impossible to form any right angle triangle
See here how people simply get deceived by those **fake** non-existing alleged real numbers (with endless digital forms or terms) as [sin(pi/4) = cos(pi/4) = 0.7071067811865475244...), where those usually completed by meaningless three ellipses that means more and more digits or terms without any end
So, where is that right angle triangle with those alleged real numbers for legs of the triangle as sin and cosine of 45 degrees? wonder
So you are supposed to have a right angle triangle with equal legs and hypotenuse one as (1, 0.7071067811865475244..., 0.7071067811865475244...)
Of course, making similar triangles with integers are not forbidden in mathematics where your same triangle would seem like this (without affecting the angles FOR SURE), LIKE this:
(10^n, 7071067811865475244..., 7071067811865475244...), where (n) represents the natural number of accurate digits that **YOU** think would be suitable to make your right angle triangle true in the real sense of exactness meaning **strictly in mathematics**
So, start approximating and observe that your right angle triangle is an absolutely impossible achievement with more and more of those accurate digits you do usually believe in and exactly the same way that you're grand master mathematicians were so deceived like you are here
Look the first approximation with a triangle (10, 7, 7), where this is absolutely not any right angle triangle, since square differences (10^2 - 7^2 - 7^2 = 2), see the difference here is only 2
Try more accurate digits (in the hope that the difference get vanished ultimately), so consider the second approximation with a triangle
(100, 70, 70), and the square difference becomes (100^2 - 70^2 - 70^2 = 200 > 0)
Try more accurate digits say (3), with a triangle (1000, 707, 707), and still, the square differences must be exactly
(Hypotenious^2 - leg(1)^2 - leg(2)^2 = 0), but we actually have (1000^2 - 2*707^2 = 302 > 0), hence not a right angle triangle
***Important note: the difference is absolutely increasing with more digits of accuracy we may consider, where it is absolutely impossible to have a right angle triangle for sin and cosine of the pi/4 angle, just from the first look on the first digits you use***
Consider 10 accurate digits and check the difference of squares, please
for a triangle (10^10, 7071067811, 7071067811) and we have a much larger squre differences as (10^20 - 2*(7071067811)^2 = 24479336558 >> 0)
Do you want more, there are of course an endless number of pieces of evidence for our rarest claim ever made in the history of mathematics
Consider more accurate digits as with the same triangle:
( 10^19, 7071067811865475244, 7071067811865475244) and the square differences that make it impossible to form the right angle triangle becomes much larger as here (10^38 - 2*(7071067811865475244)^2 = 238821668046280928 >>>> 0)
But that doesn't mean at all that the angle (pi/4 = 45 degrees) don't exist since it is indeed existing constructible angle with exact terms as real irrational constructible numbers as:
sin(pi/4) = cos(pi/4) = 1/sqrt{2} =/= 0.7071067811865475244...
So what are those unfinished numbers generally completed by the most foolish notation of three ellipses or dots as those (0.7071067811865475244...)? WONDER!
As for years by now, we are teaching you freeeeeeeeeeely here that those are non-existing and fake numbers (as simple as that)
since **true** existing real irrational numbers (named as constructible numbers in mathematics) are impossible to be equated absolutely with a rational-decimal form number no matter however large size you are capable to present it
Now, wise clever school students are kindly requested to explain this simple mere fact to their own teachers in details, where their teachers have to go immediately to their alleged best masters in order to correct many huge errors where their greatest living masters are kindly requested to come here before the true "KING" to learn more about more **bitter** important lessons that had never occurred to their so **delusional** minds, FOR SURE
*************************
**Note that for non-mathematical works as carpentry and engineering, no harm of approximating things since, in practice, most of those problems never require any perfection that only and strictly mathematics require**
So to say, it is not at all advisable for the expert professional mathematicians to mimic exactly the carpenters and the engineering problem solving and hide very foolishly under their protection
Mathematicians must be finally liberated from all the imposed things on mathematics by many others sciences under so many practical issues that require a little drop of mathematics
Let see who can understand this old repeated long lesson? Wonder!
Please note that this is still not any publication of any alleged reputable Journal or University yet, (just for future documentation)
BKK