Am I a crank?
in [Math]
|
Prev: Any coordinate system in GR?
Next: Euclidean Spaces
From: Jesse F. Hughes on 5 Sep 2006 10:04 John Schutkeker <jschutkeker(a)sbcglobal.net.nospam> writes: > "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote in > news:87wt8ilgga.fsf(a)phiwumbda.org: > >> I am not so dismissive of the importance of peer-reviewed publication >> as you are. But I also see the value of web publications (and I don't >> mean Usenet posts!). > > How long until a scientific YouTube appears? The fact is that web-publishing is a very nice feature of modern academic life. I don't have to wait for a referee report before sharing my work, even with people I have never met. Google allows me also to find preprints available on others' websites. This is a great advantage. But it doesn't replace the peer-reviewed system. Google can point me to some totally dreadful papers that waste my time. Well, so can a journal search, but perhaps a bit less often. There's nothing at all wrong with using both. I try to post papers to my website when they're ready for submission and sometimes I post papers that I don't intend to publish elsewhere. Maybe someone can find some uses of my ideas -- even the ideas that I've decided not to pursue further. By the way, scientific YouTube predates YouTube. It's called arXiv.org (though I've never really used that site myself). -- Jesse F. Hughes "I'm not going to forget what I've seen. I understand the devastation requires more than one day's attention." -- G. W. Bush reassures Hurricane Katrina victims. Two days, minimum.
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 5 Sep 2006 10:24 Dik T. Winter wrote: > Mathematicians do not claim axioms to be either true or false. So you would balk at asserting that it's true that whatever mathematical property P is we have that if P(0) and for every natural n, P(n) implies P(n+1), then for every natural n, P(n) is true, for example? -- Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)xortec.fi) "Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen" - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
From: Lester Zick on 5 Sep 2006 11:52 On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 10:50:02 +0200, Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn(a)DTO.TUDelft.NL> wrote: >Lester Zick wrote: > >> "JSH: At the Anals" might be more like it. > >Look who is talking. I couldn't agree more in your case. ~v~~
From: Lester Zick on 5 Sep 2006 11:55 On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 19:13:01 EDT, fernando revilla <frej0002(a)ficus.pntic.mec.es> wrote: >DontBother wrote: > >> Don't patronize me, sport. If you can't answer the >> question I actually >> asked instead of some question you wish I'd then >> don't reply. >> >> ~v~~ > >TEST. > >A master of Zen pointing to a table asked: What is this ? > >A table, answered one student. > >No it is not, said the master, table is a sound; is sound >a sound ? And what did the table answer? >Answers > >a) Yes, sound is always a sound. b) No, the master is >trying to lie us. c) Others. A mutiple guess zen quiz? How positively neomathematical. >Hint: Language it is not exactly the same than feelings. Whatever. It just seems to be the same as feelings when employed by neomathematikers. ~v~~
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 5 Sep 2006 12:03
Lester Zick wrote: > On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 17:48:03 -0600, Virgil <virgil(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >> As Zick cannot vanquish an allegedly unarmed opponent even though >> allegedly armed, those allegations are are more fanciful than real. > > So let me see if I've got this straight. I can't vanquish an allegedly > unarmed opponent who's allegedly armed? No. Virgil was suggesting that you, while allegedly armed - whatever that means -, are unable to vanguish an allegedly unarmed opponent. At least that's the sensible reading of the sentence. What he, or you, are going on about, or why, I have no idea. -- Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)xortec.fi) "Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen" - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus |