In today's video, I discuss the topics of Arithmetic and the Abstract Unit. In order to perform arithmetic with ratios of magnitudes in geometry, we require that ratios have the same consequent. The four basic operations of arithmetic (difference, sum, quotient, product) are established using Book V, Proposition 12 which is about similar triangles and proportion. At this stage, everything we talk about requires geometry, that is, drawing the line representations, ratios, etc. In order to move to a "diagram-less" theory, the concept of the abstract unit was introduced. Note that until now, there has been no mention or use of number whatsoever. The abstract unit is defined as a ratio where the aliquot parts are equal and represent the standard of measure. The Greeks did not only use physical comparisons but wanted to refer to magnitudes without comparing to other magnitudes, and worrying about whether the ratios have the same consequent, etc. To accomplish this goal, the Greeks carried over all the geometric properties of arithmetic to the abstract unit whose size and type is irrelevant. If they had continued to use only geometry, they would have used what is called a standard unit ratio, that is, a chosen magnitude which in any ratio is simply the comparison to itself. Hereafter, they would use this approach for proportion with other ratios. Please leave any questions or comments for this video. Thank you for watching. ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zv_eMGvnpE
The Ancient Greeks used chords which of course is the logical and most effective way. Fools like Newton came along and gave you "infinite series".
Then I came along and revealed the right way to you. :-)
To understand this new knowledge you need to study! Especially if you are a moron like a mainstream mathematics professor or teacher - they invariably tend to be the dumbest people on the planet.
Article used in video:
https://www.academia.edu/109334669/Ancient_Greek_trigonometric_formulas_better_than_anything_ever_known
Kinematic curves:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratrix_of_Hippias (I take no responsibility for error on Wikipedia Moronica. There are more reliable sites.)
Applets used:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-mOEooW03iLcWhmYVdZMnFES0U
New trigonometric functions:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17dJXotm5g31-uLTvK7OMXvZQ8zzNcYVv
Finding radical unit:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qH0fLOG4ej0j8G7ubOTT0NhuUqjc5c_S
Follow me on Academia.edu:
https://independent.academia.edu/JohnGabriel30
Donate here:
https://gofund.me/af8a5312
All my YouTube videos are backed up here:
https://odysee.com/@NewCalculus:1
The scum of YouTube are constantly threatening and looking for excuses to shut down my channel.
Want to get instant updates for the newest math around? Join our discord server! https://discord.gg/CJ9Ks3WerR
Merchandise Store:
https://new-calculus.printify.me/products
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvScePUsRj8
In this video I show you how to create a simple applet in Geogebra that demonstrates the Historic Geometric Theorem from which we realise the Holy Grail of calculus.
The Historic Identity works for ANY SMOOTH function regardless of inflection points and/or concavity.
Neither Newton nor Leibniz nor any other mainstream mathematics academic who came after them and before me, was able to explain why their methods work. The Holy Grail reveals the answers using 100% Geometry, the way calculus was meant to be formulated, that is, without the ill-formed concepts of infinity, infinitesimals and the circular rot of limit theory.
Download my free eBook - you won't be sorry!
https://www.academia.edu/106488069/The_Non_fictional_Origins_and_History_of_Calculus
The Non-Fiction Origins and History of Calculus contain countless epiphanies that will enlighten your mind as you never experienced before!
My book spares no academic, it pulls no punches and it is written in such a way that it entertains and educates at the same time. You want to understand calculus and its history? My book alone has all the true answers. Don't hesitate, download it now!
The article:
https://www.academia.edu/105576431/The_Holy_Grail_of_Calculus
The applets:
Derivative: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ON1GQ7b6UNpZSEEsbG14eAFCPv8p03pv/
Integral: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JYRxjGb3MxlYWp_2KqVXwXNr5XUvUNz7/
Become a follower on Academia: https://independent.academia.edu/JohnGabriel30
Donate here:
https://gofund.me/af8a5312
Want to get instant updates for the newest math around? Join our discord server! https://discord.gg/CJ9Ks3WerR
Merchandise Store:
https://new-calculus.printify.me/products
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqCkQWF-LLg
If one can claim that 1/3 = 0.333... then by the same argument, one can claim that 9 = 10 in a logical way, which of course is utterly ridiculous and absurd.
The 3 year old video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp5MsMvZweY
The Ultimate Book of Numbers:
https://www.academia.edu/105399167/The_Ultimate_Book_of_Numbers
The idiots of mainstream mathematics academia don't even have a formal definition of number because they have no clue what it means to be a number.
The sci.math discussion:
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.math/c/ZvSJGngieS4/m/LWvmX0IJAgAJ
Want to get instant updates for the newest math around? Join our discord server! https://discord.gg/CJ9Ks3WerR
Merchandise Store:
https://new-calculus.printify.me/products
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CySJaogvIZ0
There was no rigorous calculus formulation before my New Calculus.
Article in this video:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Yw0iGk-l3lcKtuROEC_QxmRvc6oCBRx6
The greatest mathematics book ever written:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CIul68phzuOe6JZwsCuBuXUR8X-AkgEO/view
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxSnjAZwdCk
I am bitter about the way I have been treated and ex-communicated for revealing wonderful knowledge to the world which is so underserving of me.
The evil reptiles in mainstream academia still refuse to recognise me and give credit where credit is due.
My historic theorem explained below was realised from the rigorous New Calculus and exposes the grand ignorance of the fools who keep awarding themselves Abel Prizes and the Fields Medal prize.
https://www.academia.edu/62358358/My_historic_geometric_theorem_of_January_2020
I am the greatest mathematician today and possibly the greatest of all time. I ask myself why I even bother and why should I share any more knowledge when I am treated in this unjust way. Don't give me any of your sympathy or pity. Rather contribute at my Gofundme page so that I can be around much longer and reveal more to this ungrateful, undeserving human race. I am worth 10 Abel prizes and the injustice is that I shall never be awarded even one prize because the evil reptiles who sit on these committees are my jealous enemies - reptiles like the ones I mention in the video.
Link to GoFundme:
https://gofund.me/af8a5312
Link to Norman Wildberger's video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCZ8jJCVinU
It turns out that even Norman doesn't have a clue what the problems are even though he knows there are problems with mainstream calculus and the incorrect way in which it is taught, learned and used.
There is a better calculus, it's called the New Calculus:
https://www.academia.edu/41616655/An_Introduction_to_the_Single_Variable_New_Calculus
The New Calculus is easy to learn because it is based entirely on sound geometry. There are no ill-formed concepts such as infinity, infinitesimals, limit theory, set theory and all the other rot mathematics students are forced to memorise in school.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c-pHaY-trY
A marathon debate on the sense in setting S = Lim S:
https://www.academia.edu/95308857/Is_0_999_equal_to_one_STATU_SpacetimeAndTheUniverse_
Proof that 1/3 has no measure in base 10:
https://www.academia.edu/39981684/Proof_of_the_most_important_Number_theorem_that_mainstream_mathematics_academics_never_learned
One cannot fix stupid:
https://www.academia.edu/45001199/Mainstream_mathematics_professors_are_incorrigibly_stupid_creatures_who_cannot_be_corrected
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6lNCsoIlQM
In this episode I reveal some new knowledge about how all lines can have slopes using well-defined differentials. This shall probably be my last video.
Unfortunately the sound quality in this video is not good and so you might need to increase the volume or wear headphones to hear what is being said.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDx96bx3JuY
In terms of algebra, there is ZERO difference. As long as ? and ? are not ZERO, those two statements are equivalent. ? is a symbol for an incommensurable magnitude (a magnitude that is not commensurate with any other).
? is not a number!
When used in algebra, it is manipulated EXACTLY as you would a symbol. Many are used to manipulating numbers and magnitudes because algebra allows for this.
Do you still think ? is a number?
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12hpZ1mrhxE
The presentation used in this video is found here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RuJTY9Lqa4MS0gvH4nX8ZQb9UuM1OeYZ
My most recent article on LinkedIn is very illuminating:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/%25CF%2580-%25CE%25B4%25CE%25B5%25CE%25BD-%25CF%2583%25CE%25B7%25CE%25BC%25CE%25B1%25CE%25AF%25CE%25BD%25CE%25B5%25CE%25B9-%25CE%25B1%25CF%2581%25CE%25B9%25CE%25B8%25CE%25BC%25CF%258C%25CF%2582-john-gabriel/
The "real number line" is not real:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/real-number-line-john-gabriel
Marianne Freiberger's bullshit article:
https://plus.maths.org/content/maths-minute-real-numbers-and-cauchy-sequences
It's quite amusing to read mainstream articles because they use words and expressions consistently to demonstrate the fact they do not understand:
"slippery" - I don't actually know what the fuck is this thing called an "irrational number", but I am going to define it anyway. The same word is used in "continuity is a slippery concept". Chuckle.
"Perhaps" - I am just trying to sound erudite.
"intuitively" - I do this a lot in my dreams, so it must be true. I voted for Donald Trump because my intuition tells me he will have my best interests at heart. In fact it has been proven that Trump cares only about himself. Chuckle.
"Because our minds and measuring tools are finite, to find an irrational number on the number line, we have to work with approximations." - I love this one! It's a classic case of projectionitis. Silly Freiberg imagines we think like her.
Enough said.
Discovery of my historic geometric theorem in January 2020:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RDulODvgncItTe7qNI1d8KTN5bl0aTXj
How this theorem inspired by my New Calculus (first rigorous formulation) led to a second rigorous formulation of differential and integral calculus:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uIBgJ1ObroIbkt0V2YFQEpPdd8l-xK6y
Download the most important mathematics book ever written for free:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CIul68phzuOe6JZwsCuBuXUR8X-AkgEO
Other interesting topics:
Euler's Blunder: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/eulers-worst-definition-lim-john-gabriel/
Georg Cantor, the father of all mathematical cranks:
https://youtu.be/hlqTuuhR3-4
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO5gkUOE_Us