## New Articles

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

*Ref*]**Nucleus**by portonDec 18[

*Ref*]**Residential Moving Within a Blink of Eyes**by vinayets10Dec 4[

*Ref*]**sequence of bounded variation**by pahioNov 28[

*Ref*]**Numerical verification of the Goldbach conjecture**by Paulo FernandeskySep 28[

*Ref*]**example of contractive sequence**by pahioSep 20[

*Ref*]**contractive sequence**by pahioAug 29[

*Ref*]**Some formulas of partnership**by burgessAug 26[

*Rec*]**Kenosymplirostic numbers**by imaginary.iAug 14[

*Edu*]**How to find whether a given number is prime or not...**by burgessAug 12[

*Edu*]**BODMAS Rule application**by burgessAug 8[

*Edu*]**Tests of Divisibility- Simple tricks**by burgessAug 7[

*Res*]**0/0 is possible and has an answer**by imaginary.iAug 2[

*Ref*]**Sophomore's dream**by pahioJul 9[

*Res*]**examples of growth of perturbations in chemical or...**by rspuzioMay 24## Latest Messages

Dec 11

Dec 11

Dec 11

Dec 11

Dec 7

Dec 4

Dec 3

Dec 1

Nov 29

Nov 19

Nov 18

Nov 11

Nov 8

Nov 8

$$
{\displaystyle \intop_{\lambda_{1}}^{\lambda_{2}}}\phi(\lambda)\, d\lambda
$$
??
or
$$
{\displaystyle \intop_{\lambda_{1}}^{\lambda_{2}}}\phi\, d\lambda
$$
Answering that should answer your equestion. BTW: Try the program Lyx; it's an
easy way into Latex and these symbols. Easy on-ramp and good road afterwards :)

Dec 11

Let P1=P2=S1=S2=2
(P1+P2)/(S1+S2)=1=((P1/S1)+(P2/S2))/2
I presume that your relationship symbol meant: not equal.
Ray

Dec 11

I have seldom seen anything good coming out of division by zero.

Dec 11

In general it has been more usefull, more extensible, to define "rational numbers"
as a pair (a,b) with a multiplication and addition rule. And then take Integers
as an example.
Addition rule (a,b)+(c,d)~(a*d+b*c,b*d)
Multiplication rule: (a,b)*(c,d)~(a*c,b*d)
a,b,c,d \in Z and b,d != 0
Definitions like this allow one to manipulate items from a more general ring and
also use the usuall nomeclature a/b=c/d . This includes certain exotic cases in
Algebraic Geometry.

Dec 7

Whenever I evaluate the inverse of Euler's Identity I get infinity. However
when taking the inverse of 0 I do get a value only described as undefined. Can
someone elaborate on this?>

Dec 4

I withdraw my remark I made on dec. 3. It was ment for rational points of finite order.

Dec 3

The solution is quicker obtained by using Nagell-Lutz's theorem

Dec 1

Fantastic post, very much useful information. I found your blog a few days ago from Google and have been reading it over the past few days. I am going to subscribe your blog.
<a title="Fleet Management Software at VinitySoft" href="http://www.vinitysoft.com/fleet-management-software-4-0/">Fleet Management Software at VinitySoft</a> the best fleet solution on web.

Nov 29

Sorry, my correction should read
Two instances of ”$< c - δ$” should be replaced by ”$> c - δ$” for the proof to make sense.

Nov 19

I think I have a greater understanding of a tetrahedron now, your explanation was simple enough. I was thinking of studying mathematics at university, but instead opted to go into computing, repair diagnostics, <a href="http://www.compuchenna.co.uk/how-to-back-up-files/">sys backup & recovery</a> etc... which has turned out to be most helpful for me, at least.

Nov 18

Hi Planetmath,
I have been doing some research on Brun's constant, and it seems the
value that is converged to is 1.902160583104...Is there not a zero after the 9 ie
1.902? I saw 1.92 on the actual page that discusses Brun's constant.
I just joined the site and would like to say this is one cool math site!
Just wanted to check on the 1.902 vs. 1.92
Thanks,
twinprime57

Nov 11

The pdf is missing on the tab, can you please reattach it?
<a href="http://www.maid2clean.co.uk/domestic-cleaning/bognor-regis/">Domestic Cleaner Bognor Regis</a>

Nov 8

The last verctor w3 is incorrect
it should be
(1856/1129,-3132/1129,-1392/1129)
get the modifications done if possible

Nov 8

my post got malformed after pressing post button

## Latest Messages

Dec 11

Dec 11

Dec 11

Dec 11

Dec 7

Dec 4

Dec 3

Dec 1

Nov 29

Nov 19

Nov 18

Nov 11

Nov 8

Nov 8

$$
{\displaystyle \intop_{\lambda_{1}}^{\lambda_{2}}}\phi(\lambda)\, d\lambda
$$
??
or
$$
{\displaystyle \intop_{\lambda_{1}}^{\lambda_{2}}}\phi\, d\lambda
$$
Answering that should answer your equestion. BTW: Try the program Lyx; it's an
easy way into Latex and these symbols. Easy on-ramp and good road afterwards :)

Dec 11

Let P1=P2=S1=S2=2
(P1+P2)/(S1+S2)=1=((P1/S1)+(P2/S2))/2
I presume that your relationship symbol meant: not equal.
Ray

Dec 11

I have seldom seen anything good coming out of division by zero.

Dec 11

In general it has been more usefull, more extensible, to define "rational numbers"
as a pair (a,b) with a multiplication and addition rule. And then take Integers
as an example.
Addition rule (a,b)+(c,d)~(a*d+b*c,b*d)
Multiplication rule: (a,b)*(c,d)~(a*c,b*d)
a,b,c,d \in Z and b,d != 0
Definitions like this allow one to manipulate items from a more general ring and
also use the usuall nomeclature a/b=c/d . This includes certain exotic cases in
Algebraic Geometry.

Dec 7

Whenever I evaluate the inverse of Euler's Identity I get infinity. However
when taking the inverse of 0 I do get a value only described as undefined. Can
someone elaborate on this?>

Dec 4

I withdraw my remark I made on dec. 3. It was ment for rational points of finite order.

Dec 3

The solution is quicker obtained by using Nagell-Lutz's theorem

Dec 1

Fantastic post, very much useful information. I found your blog a few days ago from Google and have been reading it over the past few days. I am going to subscribe your blog.
<a title="Fleet Management Software at VinitySoft" href="http://www.vinitysoft.com/fleet-management-software-4-0/">Fleet Management Software at VinitySoft</a> the best fleet solution on web.

Nov 29

Sorry, my correction should read
Two instances of ”$< c - δ$” should be replaced by ”$> c - δ$” for the proof to make sense.

Nov 19

I think I have a greater understanding of a tetrahedron now, your explanation was simple enough. I was thinking of studying mathematics at university, but instead opted to go into computing, repair diagnostics, <a href="http://www.compuchenna.co.uk/how-to-back-up-files/">sys backup & recovery</a> etc... which has turned out to be most helpful for me, at least.

Nov 18

Hi Planetmath,
I have been doing some research on Brun's constant, and it seems the
value that is converged to is 1.902160583104...Is there not a zero after the 9 ie
1.902? I saw 1.92 on the actual page that discusses Brun's constant.
I just joined the site and would like to say this is one cool math site!
Just wanted to check on the 1.902 vs. 1.92
Thanks,
twinprime57

Nov 11

The pdf is missing on the tab, can you please reattach it?
<a href="http://www.maid2clean.co.uk/domestic-cleaning/bognor-regis/">Domestic Cleaner Bognor Regis</a>

Nov 8

The last verctor w3 is incorrect
it should be
(1856/1129,-3132/1129,-1392/1129)
get the modifications done if possible

Nov 8

my post got malformed after pressing post button