Am I a crank?
in [Math]
|
Prev: Any coordinate system in GR?
Next: Euclidean Spaces
From: MoeBlee on 31 Aug 2006 19:34 fernando revilla wrote: > In the posts of Jack Markan and Virgil, you have the > answer. You have one or two answers there. There may be others. MoeBlee
From: John Schutkeker on 31 Aug 2006 19:44 Han.deBruijn(a)DTO.TUDelft.NL wrote in news:1157052173.314515.255460@ 74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com: > John Schutkeker wrote: > >> You're underemployed, > > Believe it or not, I have a so-called full time job. I said "under"employed, not "un"employed. If you're a software engineer capable of writing CFD codes, you should be worth a PhD. >> and you need to get started on your PhD. > > Think I've become a bit too old (: 1947) to undertake such a thing. So you're 59? You could make it your second career, for after retirement. Be one of those old folks that gets their degree when they're 86, and gets their name on the news. :*) >> That CFD >> project you named should be a prfectly acceptable dissertation. > > Have several of these. Which one do you mean? I think you said it was a least squares, finite element, CFD simulator. What else have you got going on that might be interesting? Were you the OP asking about Goldbach?
From: Virgil on 31 Aug 2006 19:45 In article <atoef2tmmumlchqaij7td39j6mcmra7sa3(a)4ax.com>, Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > Now weren't you > about to show us a rac construction for pi on a straight line, Virgil? Whyever would I want to do that? It seems to be something that Zick is fascinated by, but it does not intrigue me at all. So if Zick wants it done, he will have to do it himself.
From: Virgil on 31 Aug 2006 19:50 In article <r2pef21mbuic45stdpeg014o8mjk4qgp0a(a)4ax.com>, Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:22:05 -0600, Virgil <virgil(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >In article <1g6ef29j95erganm4b51kteh5ab6d7pcdf(a)4ax.com>, > > Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 22:02:24 -0600, Virgil <virgil(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >> > >> >In article <bn4cf213is70kjhmu35h9e7945hc3bb36i(a)4ax.com>, > >> > Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 13:43:02 -0600, Virgil <virgil(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >In article <r7kbf2tlc70iqjm2rp4ktprl1o3uui79jf(a)4ax.com>, > >> >> > Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >> >Hello Crackpot. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Crackpot=disagreer. Quite mathematical. > >> >> > > >> >> >Crackpots are those who disagree not only without supporting evidence > >> >> >but despite contrary evidence. > >> >> > > >> >> >Like Zick. > >> >> > >> >> Like exactly what contrary evidence do you mean, sport? Your opinions > >> >> and assumptions of what's true and false? Or in your case I guess I > >> >> should say your opinion of what's not true and not false? > >> > > >> >Zick claims that mathematicians claim their axioms to be true. > >> >What evidence does he have of this claim? > >> >Like most of his claims here, none! > >> > >> Actually Zick claims that modern mathematikers claim their axioms are > >> not true. > > > >The set of "modern mathematikers" is purely an artifact of Zick's > >misimaginings, > > Unfortunately the set of modern mathematikers who believe their axioms > and definitions are not true is not one of those mis imaginings. > > > and has nothing to do with any real mathematicians, > >modern or otherwise. > > Just as you have nothing to do with any real mathematics. I have a good deal more to do with real mathematics than Zick has evidenced that he has to do with it. Zick speaks from virtually total ignorance and an apparently total unwillingness to learn anything more. I speak from at least a modicum of familiarity and willingness to learn more.
From: Jesse F. Hughes on 31 Aug 2006 20:51
Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> writes: > So is Virgil right or wrong that definitions in modern math can be > neither true nor false? Of course they cannot be true or false. Definitions are stipulations; that is, they specify how a term will be understood hereafter. Clearly, definitions are not truth-bearing statements. -- Jesse F. Hughes Mama: Do you need help? Sir Quincy: Nay, I'm a big knight. Knights don't need help with pee-pee. |