Let me help some of you to see how idiotic this mathematical discussion is.

Because of my Computer Science background I try to understand Afghanistan in terms of algorithmic processes . One of the most interesting ones is based on the Demolki table parsing algorithm that until recently was considered the fastest known algorithm to parse reverse polish notation. I have been trying to find an equivalent algorithm to parse reverse Afghan notation. So far I have failed but once I do that I will understand the processes at work in Afghanistan. I am not sure if my paper will be accepted by the computing science community. However, it will be totally creative as well as stupid.

Should I continue of this is enough.

Yes, I you think that this is idiotic you are absolutely right. That is the point.

Isn't this fun!

Look don't come all the false apologetic avoidance prevarication routine with me. Just answer this straight question. Does a theorem, any fucking theorem, become an "indisputable truth" only after its proved or was it also an "indisputable truth" before it was proved. Its just plain illogical that something is an "indisputable truth" before its been proven yes? Or to put it another way if a theorem is already an "indisputable truth" what the fuck point would there be in finding a proof for it which by definition if it was already an "indisputable truth" wouldn't fucking need one?

Okay, forget the apology that the math community is sometimes confusing, and could care less what you think about it.

I think I may already have said this, but proofs are regarded as discoveries. Until a statement is proven true, it is not considered a theorem. A theorem is something that's been proven true. Which means it was always true, but we now know it was always true, because we've discovered the proof.

BTW, JD you are only proving how limited your exposure to mathematics was with your posts. Better to quit now and not further cheapen that Master's degree.

A theorem is something that's been proven true. Which means it was always true, but we now know it was always true, because we've discovered the proof.

ondelette, I've heard better logic in a paddy pub at closing time on St. Patrick's day than that. You're full of it what are you?

BTW, JD you are only proving how limited your exposure to mathematics was with your posts. Better to quit now and not further cheapen that Master's degree.

And the shit you are full of is only increased by the brass cheek that you multiply it with.