7 Aug
2015
7 Aug
'15
1:59 p.m.
What exactly is meant by the term "non-rigid" here? The belt length is well-defined, and the analysis still applies. So why exactly does it fail to deliver the expected result? [ However, I did slip up again: gamma has not actually been proven transcendental! I should have employed exp(1), or zeta(3), or indeed a continuum of other possibilities. ] WFL On 8/7/15, Warren D Smith <warren.wds@gmail.com> wrote:
FWL, you are still confused. Of course nonrigid cases are forbidden.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun