wfz on 23 June 2008
Shameless, you're right, I interpreted what you were trying to do wrong. I thought you went from dy/dx (1) = 0 and proved that it meant 1 = 0.
Even still, your proof is invalid. "x" isn't a variable, it's the constant "x=1" as you set it up.
Now it just seems that you're just trying to test us, or you don't know what you're talking about. =P
