Talk:Bibhorr Formula

Perhaps if we start by posting up a definition of "Bibhorr leek" we might be getting somewhere. Till then we haven't got a clue what this is all about. --prime mover (talk) 22:15, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Proofwiki is defaming scientist
seems like you guys are interested in defaming scientist. this is the reason you have deliberately put sir Bibhorr's name in proofwiki jokes. what proof do you have that this proof is fake. are you scientist or working in a lab. have you written research articles on math. please show the proof of your argument. this is merely a propaganda hoax that u guys r doing.


 * Bibhorr's arrogance and presumption are a matter of ridicule and mirth.
 * Explain what a "Bibhorr leek" is and maybe we'll find out why we are laughing. --prime mover (talk) 22:41, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Bibhorr leek
what will u do by knowing bibhorr leek? Will u be able to understand it? u r just an editor and look at the way you are reacting. I asked u a genuine question to which u have no answer. i give a damm to your laughing and by the way this site originated in which country?

Stop Clickbaits with Bibhorr's name
if u really want to finish off with your foul propagandist agenda then why don't u simply delete the whole page so that no content on Bibhorr formula remains on the site. but u won't do it because u need clickbaits so that u earn some pennies through bibhorr's name and at the same time defame him.
 * Yes, that works for me. --prime mover (talk) 23:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)


 * As an aside, I would not recommend you take this further, since it could damage your reputation should you decide to do serious mathematical research in the coming years. Caliburn (talk) 23:28, 15 December 2021 (UTC)