*Calculus has NOTHING to do with the circular rot of limit theory and does not require limit theory at all* Taking the limit, as mainstream idiots do, is equivalent to setting h=0. However, according to my geometric theorem, h cannot be zero, because if it were, then the finite difference [f(x+h)-f(x)]/h would be meaningless. In fact, the terms in h are the difference between the non-parallel secant line slope (even the idiot Eddie Woo agrees this is the secant gradient!) and the tangent line slope. My geometric theorem states that if Q(x,h) is subtracted from both sides of the identity, then all that is left is f'(x)=f'(x), that is, an expression in x and/or constants. Quite simple and yet I was the first to realise this as I tried to see if the flawed mainstream calculus could be reformulated using ideas from my New Calculus. Indeed, it's possible, but ultimately nothing beats the simplicity and elegance of the New Calculus. By the way, you DO want the secant line gradient (contrary to what idiot Eddie Woo tells you!) because the secant line gradient is equal to the derivative plus the difference between the two. An easy way to see this is to take f as a straight line in which case the derivative of the "tangent line" is equal to that of the secant line, even though this is actually bullshit because straight lines cannot be tangent to themselves. Moreover, there are no secant lines in straight lines. A secant line by definition is a straight line that cuts a curve in two or more parts (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secant). If as mainstream baboons retort that a secant line can be a straight line, then it doesn't actually cut the straight line because it IS the straight line. No one before me was smart enough to understand that Q(x,h) is the difference. If Newton knew, there would never have been any calculus controversy and the rot of limit theory would never have been injected into calculus! Ο νόων νόειτω (He who is able to understand, understands) Mainstream mathematics academics are invariably ignorant morons. They have been failing since the time of Newton and Leibniz. In this video I show you why their reasoning is flawed and explain why they have actually never rigorised calculus as they believe. The article in the link explains the theorem that is the root of their embarrassment: https://www.academia.edu/62358358/My_historic_geometric_theorem_of_January_2020 The historic geometric theorem makes it possible to produce a formulation of calculus (NOT the same as New Calculus from which it was realised) that produces the same results as mainstream calculus (warts and all) without the use of limit theory, infinity and infinitesimal nonsense. The following Geogebra applet can be used to convince yourself that my historic geometric identity works for the *derivative* of any smooth function: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ON1GQ7b6UNpZSEEsbG14eAFCPv8p03pv Download the above applet and then open it in your browser from the following link: https://www.geogebra.org/classic Click on the 3 vertical bars and then on Open followed by the File folder in the right-hand pane. You can rest assured the applet is safe because if it were not, your software would warn you about the dangers. The following applet shows how *definite integration* works using my historic geometric identity: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JYRxjGb3MxlYWp_2KqVXwXNr5XUvUNz7 Thank me for enlightening you by contributing here: https://gofund.me/af8a5312 I am worth many Abel Prizes but shall never receive any because mainstream mathematics academics are pathologically jealous of me. Link to Eddie Woo's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXYhyyJpFe8 ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKYa5e0GVSg