blue89

 

Okay, right. The Riemann integral is enough for a large class of functions, and for sure enough for the kinds of functions one meets in 'introduction to calculus'. In this context, for functions that have a well defined Riemann integral, the proof of the second fundamental theorem of calculus using the Riemann integral is fine.

 

If you want to think about other classes of functions then one has to do more. I am not sure what the most general setting is.

don't be confused please , it is not so difficult to understand fundamental theorem. (I looked one of your paper and I thought this was more difficult than fundamental , really ,I do not believe that something is difficult already,I only would express that it will not be so worth spending our long times ,but it is generally required.)then , make it simple please , I remember omething for the second part of fundamental ,and I remember my hodja given this is relevant to continuoum too. care please that if any function is continuous on closed interval , then it will be regularly continuous.

look please this document at wikipedia is more comprehensive to understand : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_theorem_of_calculus .

may contain some faults in my opinion. or it is telling in different way.

but again really I request you to inform me ;

"are you asking something about a question that every details of its have not been understood (yet) ? " or

"would you like to speak something scientific only, relevant pure mathematics (having no question but being willing to speak scientific conversation) ?"

What questions?

didn't you ask this question below(??)

You do not think the fundamental theorem of calculus is correct?

for this question.riemann integral is strong definition. but may not be enough to understand everything about integral properly ..

. For classes of functions that do not have a Riemann integral then one has to do something else - if possible.

 

here is something about fundamental theorem and just as I predicted it mentions about being regular continuous. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FundamentalTheoremsofCalculus.html

I am not sure I quite follow you, but you are right that there is a proof of the second fundamental theorem of calculus that uses the Riemann integral. That is enough for a huge class of functions, i.e., those that have a Riemann integral. For wider classes of functions you need ideas from measure theory - Lebesgue integrable functions etc.

 

!!: read please the guidance below ,riemann integral might/does not provide us understanding fundamental theorem.there are some another strong criteria available!.

the message i sent you contain something about Lebesgue integral with relevancy of functional analysis.I recommend that you check surroundingly to all related statements [definitions ,theorems] for your question above.(there might be some other (additional) requirements e.g. : continuoum or regaular continuoum ( as you know continuoum and regular continuoum are not same! ,define separate things..(look please exxtra : lipschitz (Criterion) and cantor theorem [!!: cantor theorem says ; if any function is continuous on the closed interval then, this function will be regularly continuous on that interval!..)..

in addition ,i have sent to you some information in private. o.k. really because of I am not interested a lot to pure mathematics ,I am not willing to research anymore in traditional way (I am also different than others as I implied Before times). because I am sure and I see ,there are already lots of theorem ,but if we ask that what is the reason for creating all these?? in my opinion the LOGICAL answer is not visible!... (otherwise ,of course it does not mean that I am not able to study so, look please the sentence written in bold,it shows the reason why I do not want to study as traditional)

please do not hesitate asking me any question else if you have.(especially related analysis ,functional analysis, and basic algebra )

You do not think the fundamental theorem of calculus is correct?

oh dear ,

apology ,I had understood incoorrectly , I have supposed that he implied studying partial and to continue so in progress&later would be better. probably one associate.proffessor at mimar sinan university caused thinking so.

it seems this is not relevant to this thrad my idea I shared above. but again I will write it.

*** * ***

I think studying interdisciplinary would be very effective and may be useful. of course it would require studying much more than particular. but I am sure we would be able to produce useful and so we would be able to be efficacious to humanity.

I think the last expression is already should be science's goal. and it is clear that scientists who created usefuld products (theorie,patent) are richy or beloved.

*** * ***

I would study like tesla, gauss,thomas edison now.

You do not think the fundamental theorem of calculus is correct?

then, really I am more interested in mathematical modelling and this just throughout to find useful cryptology.

but I would express this : it is clear that now some theories relevant to integral (and also other subjects,too) already do not contain universal information. for instance calculating riemann integral is approximation ,it is not certitude. but of course according to mathematical principles ,there is no contradiction. because this is the result of limit.

 

 

Do you know if, historically, integral and differential calculus were developed as separate things - and then later it was realised they were inverses? Or was that always known?

I quite againts this idea and also I am sure that this expression should be incorrect. look please golden rate may told something in general ,then I think it is highly clear that at the top of science almost every subjects will be related each with them.

I cancelled that message. a new e mail reached from harvard gsas and it seems positive but I have quite bad conditions in turkey.and I apologise if I gave unrest to anyone.I will try to solve my troubles by my own.

regards

in relevancy of your mathematical allegement ,I implied that this was principle at mathematics ,using determined methods to prove something.

for instance proving by creating contradiction , proving by log.induction , ..etc. but I am quite sure that giving example is not proof.

it is true that mathematics is entertaining science ,but it requires to study hard.

(I think) if someone is willing to learn and believe that he/she has creative and intelligent personality ,I highly recommend that going on studying mathematics.

!!: (note: contradiction with your allegement exists : let give value a=4 ,b=8 ,this formula does not trust giving these values ,and also your calculations seems like including errorrs (incorectness)) you can send them to me in private. I can assess if I will have enough time then)

!!:these can not show that you would be unsuccessfull at mathematics in the future!!..

additional imnformation : I advise that you check K-12 community in american education system.

@fatih I aprreciate your interest ,but I am smiling :-)

because you have not proved the allegement you have given. this is principle at math departments and also this principle is certified/valid in other disciplines of science.

I will simply express that ;

"it is not proof giving example." :-)

hi, now I continue on functional analysis. but of course it is related to topology. I do not think that this department is as difficult as it is being spoken. I am trying to modelize something to have modernized shape. @geordief your explanations includes very much key words to do or express something. but actually I do not want to give any information before my studies (project&articles) be published. because I do not think that there were so comprehensive or different studies available. and of course, (with high probability in meaning) we are not allowed to give anyone information without sceinetific corrects,or it must be so. I hope to explore something great.

have a succesfull life.

You can check the website of the journals... look for something like 'Article Processing Charges'.

 

The journals I have published are listed on various academic lists. None of them, except for one, has fees. Even then I did not actually pay as they have a promotion of no charges for a month.

ok. thats very good.and thanks for your suggesttions.I need to serach convenient journals now. thanks.

There are plenty of journals that do not require you to pay, in physics and mathematics anyway. Some biology journals ask for payment for colour pictures.

uuu ajb wellcome , although generally you are writing in official type/style ,your comments are sweet/friendly (thanks).it is very nice to see you again.

and in this case I would ask you ;

-->> how can we be able to discriminate which of them require payment? (did you see , the nature's requirement is very expensive (is'nt it)?)

-->> did you imply that statement above for sci/ssci indexed journals?

thanks.

ha haha haha haha :-) :-)

I have not read the text given yet. but I would explain my idea only according to thread

"I absolutley do ot believe " haha haha haha

now , I concentrate on my research but...

if anyone asks , I think I will try with my too much funny personality :-)

meanwhile this thread will have been the cutest /the most pretty I have ever seen and/or I will have ever seen :-)

and of course ,I am sure ,I will be communicating entertaining funnily writing to this thread this subject is very very pretty/entertaining.

I'm a biologist, so my offerings on specific journals will be limited.

 

It might help the mathematicians if you posted up a title of your paper. It shouldn't give anything away and assist in determining appropriate publication venues... although in writing a paper, and doing the relevant research, one generally forms an idea of the journals likely to be appropriate for submission.

 

Here is a ranked list of journals in applied mathematics to get you started:

http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=2604

wellcome dear Arete , we have talked a bit about you with studiot , he tried to help me and he mentioned something shortly relevant to your research area . that was not much information , but I remember he expressed you have information about radioactive lightening in use of medicine.

if you give permission , I will try to continue my questions whiches are relevant to radioactive waves in private (but the questions will be interdisciplinary of physics-biology). unfortunately, I have no experience in publishing our literatures. here are some important questions. and I hope you to be able to help me;

*** do all journals (whiches are sci indexed only) require me to pay for publishing?? (note please: I have contacted with nature journal , but the editor showed me the list and all journal of them required expensive cost. <<--- of course this might be my own (subjective)opnion whether it is expensive ,I saw all journals required at least around 3500$ (these are nature's journals),however , it is being said that there exist sci indexed journals whiches do not require cost for publishing) (one detail in their last e-mail (nature's editor) it was eplained there was an open access journal (this was NPG,I do not know what "open access means,forgive please I am new, does it mean exemption of cost for publishing and reading articles in their archive?

*** could you give me some more details please relevant to the expression given in bold and bigger size (in your quoted comment) (??)

-->> (and) is it in intelligible ? if I undestand truly ,you mentioned that it would be enough me to give only title to convenient journal. (do you know definite/actual information? (and the detailed requirements how to do this (in assumption of being this information is completely true (look please the condition above (wrtitten in same size)) (for instance my paper was around 22 page (it is rudiment's width) ,[1] will they require me to send them all of it, or [2] will it be enough to send them only the title (I think ,if it is so, it is interesting although it is easy and useful and although it will make me happy ) ,the second opinion does not seem intelligible, but I am new ,I do not know the truth)

??: blue wonders ;

will it be problem (??),in the project I have told the techniques and methods , but do not have enough information whether the actual relevance exist between solution and project or not, the project is trial ,and it is based on only prediction. (like trying to find cryptology ,but I can not explain why I chose the techniques , the main reason is only being prediction , furthermore , I think it will be surely safe to implement, it only might be a bit expensive.(budget (!)), I believe I should study harder, if I have options I would do it,ok, this is pleasure. but there are some information undefined, too. probably I do not have enough additional information or I do not know whether the existence

if it is possible, I request you to report me if the faults exist in my comments using private message showing it clearly ((especially grammar faults) note please I already inform you that it is possible sometimes me to write faultily because of not being enough attentive,but I may not realise it ,too. ( I apologise for this)). if you do this , intimately I will be very thankfull for your intellection and politeness. I continue my study relevant language, and as said I am able to study by my own (all subjects,mathematics and others) ,and I am very happy for my this skill (and also/already I think I am hardworking).it seems possible me to enroll TOEFL exam two times

I don't wish to be impolite, but your English writing is almost incomprehensible. I'm sure the people at Harvard have no idea what you are trying to say. Perhaps you need to find someone who is more fluent in English to write to Harvard for you.

dear Strange ;

not being impolite it has been probable that you had seen some faults in my previous post (which had been erased).but I actually do not agree you, I suggest you to be more positive (like this ; thinking the existence of good people , not thinking bad people (especially whoes casuse problems) ,thinking winning exams , not failing exams. . etc.)

I'm sure (!) the people at Harvard have no idea what you are trying to say.

I think I might be a bit careless , but if you meant all content of my conversation was empty of meaning, (I am sure ,this allegement should be impossible!)

I wonder now where my friend is (@studiot) I really yearned him.

Hello,

Thank you for your inquiry.

Based on your previous two emails, I am unsure as to how I may best assist you. Could you restate your question more clearly and succinctly?

All the best,

Harvard GSAS

yes this was the last e-mail, taken from harvard gsas ,but the allegement you given can/should not be possible .(I have some more information relevant to our conversation with harvard)

,in my reply to this e-mail,I shortly requested them to make an assessment and send me.

of course ,I expressed in it I had hoped to implement this project at harvard,too.

I would wait their responding.then , probably I will rewrite my questions relevant just this thread ( that I had erased them) , after TOEFL examination. (I said I will reform ,but...)

I don't wish to be impolite, but your English writing is almost incomprehensible. I'm sure the people at Harvard have no idea what you are trying to say. Perhaps you need to find someone who is more fluent in English to write to Harvard for you.

as I said I apologise ,I will reform it.

*** * ***

ithis long message was containing some faults to understand clearly(e.g:faults by spelling & some grammar faults) I apologise for this and I will try to reform it as soon as possible.

thanks

*** * ***

blue.

 

This could also be stated differently, as follows:

 

how will we be able to learn that any of our beliefs (in reference to a god, a religion, spiritual or secular) are more estimable than those of others?

and because of this, I think that we can not compare somebody's personal or cultural belief with those of others [as all beliefs are man-made].

yes sure!..

I congratulate you. I have forgotten to say but actually this ones you had given by making additional expression ,is completely great!..

yes, we can also not be sure just from what we believe ,too. like this : you are able to say I am muslim ,but maybe you are not. you are able to say I am christian ,but maybe you are not. ..etc.

for instance in our belief [islam] ve accept that if someone refuse only one of rule in our valuable religiouus book, we will be able to say that he/she is not muslim anymore then. but this point generally does not known and probably lots of people change their religion in a day :-) (there is so another more points available too,and some of are very sensitive)

because all of this, I think especially to love or give regards somebody ,it should not be important what he/she believes ,what her /his gender is and what his/her nationality is.of course just because of this ,I am proud of using this sentence:

:-) I love everyone

dear @serious disabled ,I have created so articles (just like in these subjects) . but regrettebly I can not share them now ,as I said such studies like in these subjects are articles ,it means they are completed. because of sharing there ,I would them to be published in some SSCI or SCI indexed (intellectual) journals. [look please to this link I have some strange matters to make them publish link :http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/94899-interdisciplinary-research-i-need-ssci-indexed-articles/ ]

now I think I can only say that (in my opinion) we are not able to explain such subjects with only studying at one science department. to see clearly or to be able making obvious explanation we require to look/study pther parts of science.

and especially ethics is not isolated such subjects [it is related]. for example you say

why an infinite regress of causes is impossible?

this , think that someones shout or be nervous to you with no reason ..then think please one of this ones is your mother/father ..

what/how you will feel ?

I think we can define special function between your feelings and this question's subject.

think please ,your feelings go to infinite regress [regress: because you are being nervous or sad [negative]although you are right, if you were happy ,we would say/define progress [positive]]

I say we are able to say these two different statements are quitely similar. or these are not isolated ,related.

as a result ,at first, our beginning subjct generally was been assessed in physics ...1

the second one was generally being assessed in ethics (your feelings ,behaviours ..etc.) ..2

if you are persuaded at least for a bit ,it shows us that 1 and 2 are correlated.

hi ;

I can not see your education status & interests when I look profile. My interest area is functional analysis. I try to make some observations (it means I would create&implement projects based on applied functional analysis)..but before, it might require more research.

related subjects will be : metric , normic ,inner product spaces and others. we also might need more financial butget to implement that projects I thought.

hello dear scientists ; I think I study hard although my life is in trouble.

I decided to reply your questions to me ,too. furthermore I did not meet these scientists (Arete ,Claron Y) ,but these are recommended to me,to take assistance.

it was said that these scientists are expert of radioavtive lightening.

sincerely

blue

You can't just "shout" interdisciplinary and hope all your problems go away.

 

Autocorrect, sorry.

....

hi ;

(if you do not understand every part of this text or think that it is not understandable,I request you to report me with using private message)

I think we should give respect to everybody.everybody deserves it.

I am muslim. but intimately love/give regards to atheists.

I have not thought that I am more valuable than them, or any others. it is true , it should be true.

I am equal with them and of course love them.

although every muslim does not know ,I think this is confidently correct.

think please ; how do you feel when someone hurts you?? [everyone has equal emotion system , (I do not mean I agree them , I only would give emphasis we have to give respect and give freedom to every people to explain their ideas,or else it will be impossible to help each other,in assumption one of them is true,too]

atheists are humans like us (and also,in my opinion some of them are intelligent !..: most of them love to research why they should believe.)

think this point please ;if we believe firmament religion ( we are not able to learn actual ideas that our god thinks!..)

if you trust my last sentence , I would ask you this question..

how will we be able to learn that we are more estimable than others in GOD's mind!?? (it is impossible!)

and because of this ,I think that we can not compare somebody with another ones [instead of GOD]. and it is not also important whom they are,what their genders, or nationality. [-->>theese are not important to love someones]

I do not express that there is no difference between humans , I do not mean everyone have the same competence everytime or we will, but I am sure ,they have the same competence still they are able to take breathe.

everyone deserves respect still he/she lives.[--->> this contains (already) the main reason]

we should love everyone,I love

regards

You can't just should interdisciplinary and ...

sorry,I did not understand.(what that meant written in bold)

yes the two last comments are right.

but it is no problem in this subject because;

as I said the project is inetrdisciplinary. (at least these three disciplines will be required to complete: math (ready)-physics-medicine)

!! : note: the rudiment of project had been sent only,is around 20-22 page)

this will not depend on only mathematics,as I implied it is trial project to have new form for treatment mortal disease of cancer.

and just because of this ; I can not put in order every part of project (treatment) without taken acceptance.be confident I understood you.

again , I think it will be possible to make model from example part (for your questions) in the content of my comment given at 11.03 A.M time, (at previous page)

otherwise ,you are confidently al right asking these questions dear @Klaynos and @swansont.

the project is interdisciplinary and can not be completed only by mathematician ().

DEAR SCIENTISTS;

I have shared some special parts of the project with dear studiot.

I have not met with him ,yet. but I depend him because of his e-mails he had sent to me.

I thought he is wise

and I will be waiting his interpretation & assessment .

probably he may have enough information in functional analysis ,I would remind that this part of mathematics is not easy .

it contains also topology includind some part of its.(not exactly project's own,it means functional analysis)

I know you have not understood everything clearly ,and I would notify its reason is ,giving inadequate information about project.

I have only written my questions (in the content of this thread) that I do not have enough information about them ,and of course these questions are related with physics.

summary

I have sent , some other parts of my interdisciplinary project that had been sent to harvard.

and I will be waiting dear studiot's ideas.(I wonder)

kind regards

blue