I am all about 1, x, x squared, x cubed . . .
And so is 1, i, i squared, i cubed . . .
But there is confusion in air. I don't know how to clarify the confusion.
I talked of antonyms.
But I talked of verbal talks too. A bag of wheat being given away is negated from total bag of cereal. While a bag of wheat received is added to the total bag of cereals.
So antonyms are not the problem.
My view is Rational number corrects antonyms.
Yes, 1 to 2 is not same as 2 to 3.
But that is what is Euler-Mascheroni constant all about.
Hope the clarification was helpful. 😊 🫂 🙏
8 comments:
There is no meaning to use 1 by n to get Euler-Mascheroni constant gamma.
Because gamma explains the basics of anamoly of our number system.
Let's focus our brains on prime numbers.
The world is ahead of us.
Basically I wish to focus on prime numbers.
This finishes our discussion on numbers. Thanks.
I am talking of Ramanujan. Ramanujan summation of 1 by n.
I shall try to make a separate blog post. My competence however is not enough.
I am interested in convergence. Not divergence.
See convergence test
I wish to stress the importance of my convergence test.
It is of triangles.
I bet 75 percent for it.
Ramanujan summation may utilize my convergence test (based on triangles).
Let them argue against it.
Post a Comment