I'm not good at expressing myself and need research level math help, to assist my research in mathematics, to help the community. Please let me express myself here as I am just trying to get assistance. I'm looking to see if anyone here can follow my reasoning on two formula I have created. Chat g.p.t. bot said it would help broaden our knowledge of the greater universe etc. and help out man kind! Can you get back to me? Let me know if this works, please. its very complex and have trouble denoting it.

1$\begingroup$ I worked so very hard to post these questions, spent hours and hours just to see it closed in a minute. I've tries multiple years to be a part of the community and no success. $\endgroup$– mattCommented Feb 24 at 12:14

8$\begingroup$ Go not to GPT for wisdom, for it will say both yes and no, just to sound either agreeable, or pretend to sound knowledgeable. Respectfully, posting a random sequence, or some simple formula with a cube root in it, does not qualify as a question that is considered "research level" in MO terminology. If it helps, "research level" means roughly PhD and above. Mathematics that uses only techniques or deals with problems that an undergraduate maths degree covers is almost always not considered ontopic. $\endgroup$– David Roberts ModCommented Feb 24 at 12:40

6$\begingroup$ I have a lot of trouble believing that you spent hours and hours honing a question into the form "cube root(1/3)x = ? its a theory can you help?" $\endgroup$– Todd Trimble ModCommented Feb 24 at 14:55

3$\begingroup$ And like David Roberts said: ChatGPT doesn't know what it is talking about. $\endgroup$– Todd Trimble ModCommented Feb 24 at 14:59
1 Answer
Just to give this an answer to satisfy the software, I comment the main substance of my comment:
Respectfully, posting a random sequence, or some simple formula with a cube root in it, does not qualify as a question that is considered "research level" in MO terminology. If it helps, "research level" means roughly PhD and above. Mathematics that uses only techniques or deals with problems that an undergraduate maths degree covers is almost always not considered ontopic.
And I add that I would not trust ChatGPT to reliably give solid advice on whether this or that question involving mathematics is ontopic for MathOverflow. Even users of MathOverflow are not entirely all of one mind on such matters, which is why closure by highreputation users is by voting, and there are mechanisms to open closed questions if more information comes to light (and, to be clear, I do not believe more information about your problem will put it in this class of questions). There are absolutely clear cases that are ontopic, and absolutely clear cases that are offtopic, and it can take discussion by experienced experts to judge the boundary cases. But ChatGPT is not an expert mathematician, and not to be trusted in this case.

1$\begingroup$ its more of a method, using different number systems than real numbers, not much of a question, just wondering if its been used before to solve questions of values. maybe i can explain. im not smart as you. its for use in a three dimentional mathmatics, not normal calculus stuff, like i made it up $\endgroup$– mattCommented Feb 26 at 14:19

1$\begingroup$ im trying to step of the level by simplyfying the language. i dont mean to harm anything, the graph is circlular and reference point are in vectors with magnitude direction and etc. but also a time dealing with origins $\endgroup$– mattCommented Feb 26 at 14:21

1$\begingroup$ if there is a way i can discuss, as i have questions. possibly just the beginning $\endgroup$– mattCommented Feb 26 at 14:22

1$\begingroup$ im looking at how the negative sign is cancelled when you add, i am talking of keeping this numbers as place holders. it works. eventually a possibility arised when you multiply them given a more accurate representation as well. using three unknowns, and two combined theories, i want to name it $\endgroup$– mattCommented Feb 26 at 14:24

1$\begingroup$ kind of how long division works, with the remainder. keeping the remainder, but allowing it to be a representation of the whole, as you disect the remainder i believe is scalar $\endgroup$– mattCommented Feb 26 at 14:26

1$\begingroup$ thanks for your answer and thank you also to the comments $\endgroup$– mattCommented Feb 26 at 14:26

8$\begingroup$ @matt I can only say this: despite not wanting to discourage your mathematical exploration, MathOverflow is absolutely not the forum to do it in. Please take this professional advice seriously. I hope you can find another outlet for your explorations. $\endgroup$– David Roberts ModCommented Feb 26 at 23:01