Tirade

[lookagain]

Well, it is A logically valid way for it to be done, but somewhat slower and more error prone than your way.
.
.
.

Nothing logically incorrect. But admittedly burdensome.

No, you don't understand. That will never be done that way, because it needlessly and instantly throws the problem into more complexity
instead of going with the straightforward simplification. "Logically valid" is not the point. "Nothing logically incorrect" is not the point.

Stating that it is "admittedly burdensome" is a gross understatement.

 

[ksdhart2]

No, you don't understand. That will never be done that way, because it needlessly and instantly throws the problem into more complexity
instead of going with the straightforward simplification. "Logically valid" is not the point. "Nothing logically incorrect" is not the point.

Stating that it is "admittedly burdensome" is a gross understatement.

Yeah, yeah, we get it! I made an error. It was a big one, and, yes, I do feel very silly for not catching it myself. But, you know what else? Mentioning it one time in a polite manner, like many other members of this forum have managed to do successfully when the need arises, would've been plenty sufficient. Continuing to harp on it simply because you always have to be right about everything accomplishes nothing except make you look like a jerk. No one, and I do mean no one, likes that guy who always has to correct everybody about everything and can't ever let anything go. So, please, just knock it off.

 

[JeffM]

No, you don't understand. That will never be done that way

And yet we have an example where it was done that way.

Logically valid" is not the point. "Nothing logically incorrect" is not the point.

We disagree. The primary point of math is that it be correct. Elegance and simplicity are secondary points, important but not as important as validity.

Stating that it is "admittedly burdensome" is a gross understatement.

The humorless never recognize jokes.

 

[lookagain]

And yet we have an example where it was done that way.

No, it was done there, and it should not have been done. And clearly I stated that already. "Was" is past tense as concerns that person's post.
You're making up false arguments. You're making excuses for wrong approaches to solving the problem with false arguments. Stop while you are behind.

We disagree. The primary point of math is that it be correct. Elegance and simplicity are secondary points, important but not as important as validity.

No, it's not a matter of disagreement. I was correcting you.

The humorless never recognize jokes.

You don't know about my humor. Please keep your extremely ignorant presumptions to yourself about it, unless you want to add those
to your ignorance I already corrected you about.

 

[lookagain]

Yeah, yeah, we get it!

Do not be name-calling on here. You must not be clear that I was responding to a post that existed where yours is now.
I was civil toward you. I immediately stated the truth about it, and then responded to correcting an
ignorant/argumentative user whose post was removed.

 

[JeffM]

No, it's not a matter of disagreement. I was correcting you.

And I do not accept your correction or your authority to correct me.

But this is boring. I'll let you have the last word.

 

[greg1313]

But this is boring.

Read: "I'll take my ball and go home."

 

[tkhunny]

Nothing wrong with a "demonstration" or "existence" proof. Maybe something that should be done ONCE and NEVER done again. (Like the Definition of a Derivative.) The search for more elegant solutions can be found later.

Count the number of proofs of the Pythagorean Theorem. Sometimes, a less elegant solution is just for sport or maybe to demonstrate that a development could have happened, had we known what we now know.

Never discourage exploration.