User talk:RealMathematician

Welcome![edit]

Hi RealMathematician! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing!

Delete this article as it is incorrect.[edit]

There is a procedure to get articles removed (WP:AfD), going to the talk-page and demanding it, whilst being uncivil towards other Wikipedians is not one of them. Also casting aspersions ("So-and-so is a troll from sci.whatever") is very much frowned upon. Keep up that behavior, and you may find yourself at one of the drama boards. Kleuske (talk) 15:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The user is John Gabriel. He has claimed for decades that mainstream mathematics is wrong and that only he has rigourized calculus. He is known for his foul language and call people names. He called the ex-MIT professor Gilbert Strang a "filthy Jew homosexual".

Now, he claims he isn't anti-Semitic but he resorts to that kind of language nevertheless. 81.225.32.185 (talk) 15:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I haven't changed my opinion about Gilbert Strang nor mainstream math academia. The rest of your comment is irrelevant. Frankly, I could not care less whether you indeed remove this article or not. Wikipedia was, is and always shall be a shit heap. RealMathematician (talk) 16:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame math has to be a conspiracy for you. Imagine what you could learn if math for you wasn't a Jewish conspiracy! 81.225.32.185 (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Math is not a Jewish conspiracy. But what you talk about is absolute rubbish that one cannot call mathematics in any form whatsoever. FUCK OFF and do not respond to me again, you lowlife trash bag!!!! RealMathematician (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have anger issues. 81.225.32.185 (talk) 16:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have mental syphilis. RealMathematician (talk) 18:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't sound that you want to follow the rules of a civilized discussion, John.

You throwing insults at people doesn't mean you are correct. Rather, it demonstrates your inability to learn, your stubbornness and your inability to interact with other people. You're over 60 years old and yet you behave worse than a 10-year-old. You're not correct and you can't take a correction.

I don't think @Kleuske appreciates your tone or behavior.

81.225.32.185 (talk) 19:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're a crank!

"The lemma asserts that the existence of this derivative implies the existence of a function phi"

"derivative implies the existence of a function phi"

Hey pipsqueak:

P (derivative) gives Q (function phi) is FALSE.

However, there is NO propositional logic being used in that article. An "IF A -THEN B" proposition means that B is true IF A is true, but this is FALSE. B is true regardless of A. RealMathematician (talk) 13:50, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(f(x+h)-f(x))/h is the slope of a non-parallel secant line which doesn't care at all about the derivative f'(x) or Q(x,h). In fact, both f'(x) and Q(x,h) depend on (f(x+h)-f(x))/h.

The administrators of this trash-heap Wikipedia simply block those who prove they are wrong. Keep shoving your heads up each others' arses and see where that will get you eventually. RealMathematician (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't demonstrated how the lemma is false. 84.216.129.17 (talk) 14:37, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have demonstrated it conclusively. Only a stupid like a Wikipedia admin or a moronic mainstream math admin like you argues against overwhelming evidence!

It's hard to be civil with people that have such low IQs as you.

The lemman is obviously false for the reasons I stated and more.

What's laughable is that one derivative at f'(a) is insufficient to say anything about the interval (x, x+h) and in calculus we concern ourselves only with smooth curves meaning that f'(a) implies that f is smooth at 'a' and the points around 'a' also' - this is laughable because to be differentiable at 'a' means an interval around 'a'.

You are simply too stupid! RealMathematician (talk) 15:44, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not correct. You can obviously have a function that is not differentiable in a neighborhood around x=a, while being differentiable at x=a. 81.225.32.185 (talk) 22:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is what your excrement lemma claims, you fucking imbecile!!!! RealMathematician (talk) 13:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The lemma does not require the function to be differentiable in a neighborhood around x=a.

🤙🤙🤙 81.225.32.185 (talk) 08:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ... discospinster _talk 21:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia. It is a garbage heap of the worldview according to the morons known as admins, sysops and contributors.

A real encyclopedia does not ban one who publishes true knowledge. Your loss! RealMathematician (talk) 13:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're mostly banned for your inability to be civil. You have also circumnavigated Wikipedia's rules for multiple accounts.

Someone pointed out admins have dealt with you before, and that you aren't a newcomer. You have been vandalizing Wikipedia for decades and argued quite aggressively with other users in the past. This is not acceptable.

You're banned for promoting disruptive behavio, not for having weird conspiracy theories. 84.216.129.17 (talk) 14:35, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You ban anyone who points out your drivel. RealMathematician (talk) 15:45, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Listen asshole, Wikipedia is a load of crap and the article on the Fundamental Excrement Lemma is just more crap on top of crap.

One cannot be civil with stupid people like you. You do not understand the language of civility. RealMathematician (talk) 15:39, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you even understand the lemma. 81.225.32.185 (talk) 22:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chuckle. I piss and shit on your opinion. It means NOTHING to me. You're an insignificant piece of shit. RealMathematician (talk) 13:21, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't understand the lemma. 😋 81.225.32.185 (talk) 08:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no lemma. The entire entry is a fucking joke. You're just a pisshead. RealMathematician (talk) 19:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry your "holy grail of calculus" is just a flawed version of the real definition. 🤓 84.216.129.148 (talk) 10:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]