I have to tell you all about hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha....
I can't even get it together enough to tell you.
(wiping tears.....) hahahahahahahahahaha oh stop...it's too funny.....hahahahahahaha
the latest comment on my post about how .999... = 1. Yes...people are still posting about that almost 6 months later. It comes in waves.
It's by a guy named (get this...snort...giggle) Proffesor David S. Schaul:
You are perhaps competant as a teacher, however your skills in mathmatic theory lack common sense as well as what a number represents. The fact behind the truth is that .999... is not really a number. It is merely a way of expressing a number that cannot exsist. There is no possible way to obtain that number through basic mathmatic functions, therefore implying that .999... is not equal to one, but is nonexistant in the rational world of numbers.
I'll wait while you stop laughing. Hahahahahahahaha. No, I can't stop either.
- As my wife points out, no actual professors refer to themselves as "Professor". They use "Dr." if they use anything at all.
- And they certainly don't refer to themselves as "Proffesor".
- If he's trying to convince me that he's actually a professor of mathematics, it's not very convincing that he misspells his own subject, among other words that every mathematician can spell, like competent, exist, nonexistent.
- Like any mathematician would ever argue a mathematical fact by citing "the fact behind the truth..." rather than resorting to proof.
- Like any mathematician would consider his/her field of study to be "the rational world of numbers", like it's the Discovery Channel's "Wild World of Chimps".
- And then, on top of that, of course, are all the logical fallacies that all the other non-believers make.
- He even gives an e-mail address that includes part of his name, which doesn't include the name Schaul, nor the first initial D.
- And...hahahahahahahaha...noooo...I can't go on. It hurts too much.
UPDATE: It has been pointed out to me that my reaction to that comment is not among the more mature imaginable reactions. Nor is my rebuttal among the cleverest imaginable rebuttals. Perhaps it is just because I have been enduring 6 months of (sometimes inane, sometimes sincere and well-meaning) continuing discussion in the comments section of the original post, and I just needed to vent. I apologize if anyone is offended or disenchanted or put off by my reaction. Not taking the high road here might be a character flaw on my part, but I found the pretention (in the literal sense of 'pretending') in that comment almost too extreme to be believable. I had to say something, and merciless, childish teasing was what came out. Next time I'll try to be more civil.