The link to the video removed for imagined violations of code: https://www.bitchute.com/video/IAFx7jmQx1Pk Note that I am a US citizen living in the US and I am not subject to EU rules. My video clearly proves I am not bullying or harassing anyone else. The video contains damning proof that the mainstream is trying to suppress but which I have proclaimed over the last two decades. The ultimate truth that dishonest mainstream academics continue to reject is simply this: [f(x+h)-f(x)]/h = f'(x) + Q(x,h) where Q(x,h)=0 implies and is implied by h=0. is EXACTLY EQUIVALENT to: f'(x) = Lim_{h \to 0} [f(x+h)-f(x)]/h So it is obviously flawed in many respects, not just division by 0, but also circularity wrt limit theory verifinition. ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI8k77O6vsk

Discovering the concept of number: https://www.academia.edu/44820487/Discovering_the_concept_of_number_a_personal_journey Proposition 1. ᾿Εάν ή οποσαούν μεγέθη οποσωνούν μεγεθών ίσων το πλήθος έκαστον εκάστου ισάκις πολλαπλάσιον, οσαπλάσιον εστίν εν των μεγεθών ενός, τοσαυταπλάσια έσται καί τα πάντα των πάντων. Heath: If there are any number of magnitudes whatsoever (which are) equal multiples, respectively, of some (other) magnitudes, of equal number (to them), then as many times as one of the (first) magnitudes is (divisible) by one (of the second), so many times will all (of the first magnitudes) also (be divisible) by all (of the second). Heath claims in a remark: “In modern notation, mα + mβ + · · · = m(α + β + · · ·)”. Not only does Heath misunderstand the proposition which does NOT say what he remarks, but he also forgets that in this particular book, the notion of number has not yet been established. So there is no addition or multiplication defined as yet for magnitudes. Moreover, Heath incorrectly states that the sums can be “infinite” through implication of the ellipsis - a misleading and also FALSE interpretation of the proposition. One cannot talk about “many times” in the context of infinity (an utterly junk concept that was rejected by the Ancient Greeks). If for arguments sake, the interpretation was that pertaining to an infinite series, then it could not be proved except as a partial sum and then transferring the property of the part over to the whole. The only measure available at this stage is that of division, that is, the measure of each magnitude using one of its equal parts. The proposition says that given any two line segments divided into the same number of equal parts, then both the line segments are measured by their equal parts exactly the same number of times. The identity mα + mβ = m(α + β) arises in algebra from this proposition, but it is stated using addition and multiplication which have not been formally defined as yet. The difference and sum of line segments is at this stage only understood in terms of line segment lengths (magnitudes) which have no specified measure. Given any two line segments as shown below with the vertical bars indicating partitions: ___|___|___ _____|_____|_____ Proposition 1 tells us that ___ measures ___|___|___ the same number of times that _____ measures _____|_____|_____. The actual number is irrelevant suffice to say it is the same in either case. This and NOTHING else. Professor David Joyce (Clark University) ignorantly states: Book V is on the foundations of ratios and proportions and in no ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W6MQ44mMvE