ahmet

ahaha fatima's dress reminiscents me a chicken's apperance.

not sure but because (for first check), irrational numbers are in fact, the consistence of their existence (they exist,ok no problem with this part. But not applicable) in general,you cannot write any irrational number in the form of rational. Otherwsie, if you try to do so,then you will not be able to conclude the operation. the operation will extend to infinity,which causes not to make conclusion for the operation. Thus ,those two kinds of numbers,to me, are not summable. however, there might be more contexts which could be reference for this.

I remember one expert (associate professor) in algebra (now he is professor) was using a sentence like this "Ahmet do you know, I sometimes think whether a couple of rational and irrational numbers are summable, do you think that these are summable?" now my answer is that "I doubt".

as far as I remember , chinese remainder theorem and euler theorem (also fermat) are relevant to congruences. (to calculate residues) I recommend that you write something mathematically meaningful. you may apply or appeal to some general theorems or propositions or you can refer to some axioms.

what does MathML mean? is this libreoffice's one pocket usage (i.e. program like libre office writer)

would you like to share your opinions in convenience of title? let us learn which engineering book you mostly enjoyed,pleased to read and why.

ahahahha really right!

heyy ! I was just joking , but generally my jokes have potentiality to be also real. The thing I know I do not lie. ok,as they do not prefer to reply in the current status,I think I can postpone some operations. meanwhile,I was to use their materials about html+css ..(also maybe js) but I am still not sure whether interferring their specific samples would also provide me another copyright (?) (my own copyright) Thanks (Could you also respond: assume please I have contacted to the author of that or any else book. Also assume that the author kindly gives me permission to use the content. Should I also take the permisson from the publisher??)

ok. this is already rational idea. but contacting over the phone,will not this be non sense? because they will be able to refute later? I think I need written (material)/ permission (like an e mail) ok,now I decide to postpone somethings. furthermore,as far as I know copyright is not like a patent , and is valid only in the published country. But I do not really dominate all the relevant contents

maybe,I will try that but this will be a bit time later. Furthermore, do you have information about the questions on this issue ,for instance , what does require me to request a permission and not. (Specifically: I do not know whether I have to take permission on constructing a website or websites. I intend to use almost all of the codes they provided in some samples, but I also know that I would definitely interfere to that codes, for instance I shall change css part, and will add some new codes. however,I shall not use any extra (for instance I shall not copy paste any else section of the book and will not use the information provided in example (appearing on that sample of website) but I shall use just the codes succintly.

and what to do now,should I send a complaint form? inquiring: why don't you reply?!

I have tried to contact wiley online library customer care and requested permission to use some parts in some of the books published by this publication but they still have not responded although two mails forwarded.(I mean,the same request two times sent) So, can I decide that they have already allowed me to use as they do not care or are in silent mode?

definitely right! but at the same time, I was thinking this one: if we know the cause ,then we might solve problem,too. as far as I know, dopamine is responsible of course for some disease ,specifically for shizophrenia. Nonetheless, again according to my knowledge (as I tried to mention/imply in a nother thread) there are some shizophrenic patients but do not have hallucination. ) of course,I am not a medical doctor (I had learned some (basic) medicine but..) and presumably or with very high potentiality i am failing with my logic approach (if we know the cause/reason,then we could ..because I did think much directly so the idea might not provide solution) ,while at one side, good schizophrenic patients exist, (or I do not know exactly where this idea comes from, maybe I read it from somewhere) psychiatrists cannot say that they could clear all of patients' hallucination up.) one job assigned to me and I need to go by now. Thank to all participants to ensure me learn a point even if it seems simple. Good evening.

that link,was embeded to the text so I have not realised that,sorry. reading the article, but probably you know that (this is a common case in mathematics and is rule) examplifying is not a proof of any proposition/theorem (unless it is an example that clearly refutes the proposition/theorem) I meant not all of bodies have same immune system and not all of them reflecting everything. there will of course be a limit but not 80 hours. no. I do not do that. But not even that, I was just thinking examplfying or giving too much embodiment to the ideas/propositions or to the issue might affect someone (other people,reading here) so,...

I think I have found similar article , or this article mentions same experiment reading: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-can-humans-stay/#:~:text=The easy experimental answer to,hours (about 11 days). yes,the surname of that researcher was Gardner. I remember it. but this article presumably states that Gardner was dyad. maybe I do not remember clearly

This should be incorrect or cannot be generalised. I am sure that I had read a paper and there was specific experiment and observation.I of course do not remember the whole of paper, but one result was saying that the time for that (max. time to be able to remain "awake") was changing from one by another one.but surely I also remember that that author was stating that he had an experiment on himself/herself and could remain awake 7 days,which is definitely not equal to 80 hours.once again I would point out that I do not ask any medical advice or clinical methods to try on anyone. (Thus,I request you to concentrate on the question and be abstract as much as possible.)Thanks for your understandings.

well, I am not asking here medical advice or any type of clinical applications to try on aynone. I just ask the questions I wonder. but I feel myself a bit surprised now.

really,interesting. I give the potentiality to be not same for these situations: but again I am asking. why while we can obtain (artificial) hallucinations, we can't clear it up? I was thinking that dopamine was not just one responsible thing of hallucination. But maybe I am failing.

I remember one of my doctor friend (he was hardworking ,so probably a good doctor) was saying, "ahmet, do you know ,any psychiatrist can ensure you to see hallucination via giving you a drug." I wonder here whether hallucination can occur artificially by taking drugs,is this really possible?? (I mean only "normal/natural" persons and all of them (do not have any psychiatric or any else illness in the past) under assumption) ....