Am I a crank?
in [Math]
|
Prev: Any coordinate system in GR?
Next: Euclidean Spaces
From: Virgil on 31 Aug 2006 04:26 In article <8746c$44f690ea$82a1e228$18104(a)news2.tudelft.nl>, Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn(a)DTO.TUDelft.NL> wrote: > Virgil wrote: > > > Let's see Zick empirically establish the axiom of infinity, then. > > Nobody can. Therefore it does not correspond to (part of an) implicit > definition of some real world thing. Therefore it will do no harm if > we throw it out. > > Han de Bruijn By that argument, it will do no harm to throw out every axiom of every set theory or geometry theory or any other mathematical theory since none of them refer to anything that exists in the "real world". If Han wishes to do entirely without any mathematics, he is free to do so, but he cannot compel anyone else to join him.
From: Virgil on 31 Aug 2006 04:33 In article <1157010336.776854.77700(a)m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, "Proginoskes" <CCHeckman(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Like I pointed out, the example I gave depends only on > elementary-school arithmetic, and if the statement is false, it should > be easy to show. > > The statement in question was: > > The remainder of 2^n when divided by n is 3 when n = 4,700,063,497 but > false for any smaller values of n. > > This was not done off the top of my head; it's an example from one of > Richard K. Guy's "Strong Law of Small Numbers" papers, and was proven > by Lehmer and Lehmer. > > --- Christopher Heckman Like the "conjecture" that for every positive x, the expression x^2 - x + 41 is prime. It is false. But the first false case is x = 41, so there are 40 succesive successes at primeness, from 1 to 40, before the first failure.
From: Han de Bruijn on 31 Aug 2006 05:44 John Schutkeker wrote: > But don't give up, amigo. The race is not always to the swiftest, but > to those who keep running. Thanks for the encouragement! > If that's what you mean by "purified," then sign me up. I'd like to > apply for a charter membership in your Mathematical Purifier's Society. > :*) http://huizen.dto.tudelft.nl/deBruijn/grondig/index.htm I hope it's not too cranky ... Han de Bruijn
From: T.H. Ray on 31 Aug 2006 02:14 > > Nathan wrote: > > david petry wrote: > > > > > It could be argued that since the mathematics > community does expend a > > > great deal of energy in the search for formal > proofs of conjectures > > > having ridiculously high probabilities of being > true, and often turns a > > > blind eye to the probabilistic arguments, the > mathematics community > > > itself engages in crank-like behavior. > > > > I have read many heuristic arguments advanced by > mathematicians to > > suggest what *might* be true, especially in number > theory. I disagree > > that the community "often turns a blind eye" to > such. It's just that > > these still leave the actual question unanswered. > > It all depends on what the "actual" question is. If > mathematics is > thought of as a science having the purpose of > explaining why we observe > the phenomena that we do observe, then the heuristic > argument really > does answer the "actual" question. There's > absolutely no reason to > believe that we can do better than a heuristic > argument in many cases. > What makes you think that mathematicians assign any value at all to what one personally believes? Tom
From: John Schutkeker on 31 Aug 2006 07:03
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn(a)DTO.TUDelft.NL> wrote in news:4c75b$44f6af87$82a1e228$12600(a)news1.tudelft.nl: > John Schutkeker wrote: > >> But don't give up, amigo. The race is not always to the swiftest, >> but to those who keep running. > > Thanks for the encouragement! > >> If that's what you mean by "purified," then sign me up. I'd like to >> apply for a charter membership in your Mathematical Purifier's >> Society. >> :*) > > http://huizen.dto.tudelft.nl/deBruijn/grondig/index.htm > > I hope it's not too cranky ... You're underemployed, and you need to get started on your PhD. That CFD project you named should be a prfectly acceptable dissertation. |