xInfra Deadx
Gimmick stolen by Jordan Peele
Okay. You win.
Okay. You win.
For science, they are generally very good, as "wikipedia trolls" tend to focus more on stuff like celebrity stars, films, etc. In science articles I usually cross references the sources at the bottom, especially when I had to write reports and stuff whilst at Uni.
I hear ya on that. I'm working on a thesis and i'm writing about black holes. I may have only used online sources as reading material if it looks good. It's always a hit-or-miss: either it's badass or it's just TERRIBLE
Wow black holes, that's pretty intense! I think the vast majority of research I used was digital, including most journals. I have some text books which of course you need to grasp the basics. Whats your thesis about?
I am using the Einstein Field Equations to solve for stationary symmertic and axisymmetric black holes. The two in particular that i'm calculating in full depth are the Kerr metric and the Schwarzschild metric. They are very important in astrophysics and cosmology because they allow us to mathematically study processes of how star's are born, die, their life cycles, supernova's, etc. I have to do a thesis paper for my bachelors degree in physics so i'm currently using GR, Differential Geometry, and the Tetrad Formalism to come up with the system of nonlinear differential equations that are needed to solve them. There are in fact 4 metric's that are well know: Kerr, Kerr-Newman (most general), Schwarzschild, and Riessner-Nordstrom. After I solve them, i'll calculate the LaGrangian and Hamiltonian for the metric and use that to come up with geodesics. Basically, i'll be calculating how an object can orbit a black hole given a mass, angular momentum, velocity, and time. The math has been absolutely intense but it's been hell-a worth doing. Hopefully when I get into my master's or Ph.D. program I'd like to look at the interior of these black holes and use computer simulations to find an exact metric since most of them are unknown.
Well, I invited him 3 times to set forth his argument, but he didn't have one in the end, only condescension and ad hominem. You can't say that I flamed him. Sorry.
You some kind of maths genius then?And your point is ...? Oh, you don't have one right? Oh sorry everyone... my name is John Gabriel. I am not a socialite so I did not come here to meet people or care to. Does anyone have a problem with this? If you do, please remove my comments and forgive my "impudence".
Thanks! Ha, ha.I really encourage you to study my article. Trusting others is not a good thing. In fact, I warn you about believing what I say or trusting in me. You have to verify that what I say is indeed true for otherwise how can you be sure?
no, hes not as far as I an tell. google new calc and only find this wackjobs site claiming his new calc is also proprietary.
Are you in for a nasty surprise. You can copyright intellectual ideas. But how would you know? You are no intellectual!
Keep proving you're a moron. You can't copyright ideas.
I guess selling his weight loss program isn't working out.
I did not say ideas, you imbecile! Intellectual ideas and property is copyrighted.
Be careful how you Google! I have no relation or connection to the weight-loss John Gabriel. In fact, I have never been overweight and am extremely well-built. You would be jealous.
And, I am over 50.
You mean came off (two effs, not one) as a dick? Yes, I agree. Well, first off, I did not try to insert infinity and I provided a definition, not an equation. Setting n=infinity in the well-formed definition is what mathematicians (read as: mostly incompetent) do when they claim that 1/3 = 0.333... I was showing that they simply discard the term (1/3 x 1/10^inf). I agree that it's a dumb idea to assume infinity is some sort of number, but hey, Crank Georg Cantor started the fad and it has continued far too long. I figured the best way to destroy your god Cantor and expose him for the fraud that he is, would be by using his very own flawed ideas. What I have done is very sound in terms of logic. In fact, I don't know of anyone who knows or understands math better than I do. So when I do something like this, you should sit up and pay attention, rather than mouth off stupidity.
Ideas are not copyright-able. Don't care if you think they are "intellectual" or not. And again, Wikipedia has been proven to be as accurate (if not more-so) than a standard encyclopedia. http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
LMAO. Is this your intellect and critical thinking at work? You make exposing you so easy. To start, why would I take something YOU wrote about yourself as if it were unbiased?Be careful how you Google! I have no relation or connection to the weight-loss John Gabriel. In fact, I have never been overweight and am extremely well-built. You would be jealous.
Read what others say about me, but don't make up your mind until you have read what I have to say about myself: http://johngabrie1.wix.com/newcalculus
And this is what we call a double flawless baby. 10-0 free. with a side of salt coming to your table shortly.
