[foobar_]

I would not reply if not for the delicious irony the georoge cantor was a schizophrenic lunatic who died poor and homeless.

I too am concerned about mentally ill lunatics who have taken over mathematics who think gibberish and number puzzles need to be the concern of others, hell even funded by others.

Unlike you I welcome the death of mathematicians and mathematics as we know it, I am all ears on how we can get rid of mathematics from obsessive compulsive lunatics, pea counters, hypocrites, schizophrenics and symmetry worshipers.

> we're discussing the usefulness of mathematics

Internet narcissists do like to imagine insults.

No we are not. The post was about the value of notation and my thread was about the refutation of notation as useless and programming as a better alternative to it.

[gspr]

> I would not reply if not for the delicious irony the georoge cantor was a schizophrenic lunatic who died poor and homeless.

Do the mental problems and drug addiction of a brilliant musician detract from his or her music? Do you yell "madman" at a painting by van Gogh?

> Unlike you I welcome the death of mathematicians and mathematics as we know it

Even you, with the most pedestrian definition of what is "useful", must surely acknowledge that a lot of mathematics is immensely useful. Yet you wish for its death. You have nothing to replace it with. You sound like Trump and his non-existent healthcare "plans". You're hell-bent on destroying something simply because you cannot grasp it.

> No we are not. The post was about the value of notation and my thread was about the refutation of notation as useless and programming as a better alternative to it.

Yes, and in a sub-thread of the post you've made it clear that you doubt the usefulness of mathematics. So now we are having a sub-discussion about that. Yet you've still to contribute anything of value. On several occasions have I and others invited you to comment on very concrete mathematical constructions. You evade those invitations. I can only surmise that that is because you do not understand the questions you are being asked, or are unable to provide an alternative to the current standard mathematics. That standard mathematics is done in a somewhat formal language built around the very notation that this thread is about.

[foobar_]

> Do the mental problems and drug addiction of a brilliant musician detract from his or her music? Do you yell "madman" at a painting by van Gogh?

Yes. Completely ignore the degenerates. There are many sober people who have made art and science. You should not allow mentally ill lunatics to define art, music, religion, maths or politics anymore than you will allow them to be your cab driver or spouse.

Clearly science is about sobriety and not schizophrenia. I guess mathematics was hijacked by schizophrenics, music and art by depressed losers. No wonder you are out of touch with reality, practicality and are defending symbols which you think have magical "powers" beyond mere convention.

You can also see this in physics with the string theory garbage, however unlike "pure" mathematics ... in physics people need to test experimentally.

> Yes, and in a sub-thread of the post you've made it clear that you doubt the usefulness of mathematics.

No, I said proofs were tautological and pointless and notation is useless. Formal mathematics is bullshit.

> On several occasions have I and others invited you to comment on very concrete mathematical constructions.

Your sock puppets ?

1. You were asking about fundamental theorem of calculus

This has a very geometric proof. Why would I have a problem with that ? I am all for geometry, visualization, simulation , testing ....

2. A number puzzle

I don't care for number puzzles. I will try to solve that number puzzle if you can write vietnamese jokes.