JSH: Mixed feelings about the newsgroup
in [Math]
|
Prev: where we have a new understanding of what factorial means in 254! = 10^500 #648 Correcting Math
Next: JSH: To my Chinese fans--thanks!!!
From: David Bernier on 13 Jul 2010 22:44 MichaelW wrote: > On Jul 14, 4:45 am, Mark Murray<w.h.o...(a)example.com> wrote: >> On 13/07/2010 15:11, JSH wrote: >> >>>> I have not got my own result on the net since your result (when done >>>> correctly) has been known since the late 19th century. Why post a page >>>> when there are perfectly good online text books and articles? Here's >>>> an example: >> >>>> http://cnx.org/content/m12764/latest/ >> >>>> Your equation can be found under figure 1. The only difference is that >>>> you use (p-2)/(p-1) whereas the author uses the more sensible (p-1)/p. >>>> Also he understands the connection between the equation and natural >>>> logarithms. >> >>> There IS no other prime gap equation besides mine. >> >> You are priceless! What's next, 1 + 1 = 1 ? >> >> Did you even LOOK at that link? >> >> Hmm. An explanation is that you /did/ but couldn't understand it, which >> would be about right. >> >> Am I still doing my job to your satisfaction? >> >>> It handles arbitrary even gaps between primes out to positive >>> infinity. >> >> As the above link also does so, except properly, so does it. No need >> to call me a liar, just check; mathematics doesn't lie. >> >> M >> -- >> Mark "No Nickname" Murray >> Notable nebbish, extreme generalist. > > Mark, > > Thanks for the independent confirmation. After my last reply to James > it is only fair that I seek the same. Sadly I am letting myself get > sucked into a debate about search ranks when I prefer to keep things > maths only. > > I would like to run an idea past you and any other maths and computer > types who follow the JSH threads. This thread and the (highly > quotable) "There is only one" thread he re-raised the prime gap > equation, and on "Trying to be fair" he is running the core error > again. I propose an online resource that collects responses to James' > work so that when he brings back work that has been answered anyone > can simply refer to a web page and ask him why he has not answered it. > Personally I have lost count of the number of threads where I have > presented a response and James has immediately started a new thread. > > Note that not every response would be a refutation. As an example an > article on the prime gap equation would show why it is almost correct, > give an outline on how to do it properly, provide links for those who > want to go deeper and discuss the historical research to put it all > into context (including James' claim to have a new solution). As > another example it would be brilliant to have Rotwang's work on TSP > summarised in a single place. [...] Jim Ferry pronounced last March Musatov's Axiom 19
From: Mark Murray on 14 Jul 2010 03:36 On 14/07/2010 03:13, JSH wrote: > Your denial does not change reality. People have tried that trick > since there were people. There are few more experienced at this than you. M -- Mark "No Nickname" Murray Notable nebbish, extreme generalist.
From: Chum Ley on 14 Jul 2010 18:24 "JSH" <jstevh(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:cb47a458-0003-45cc-bd1f-0548416f1270(a)b4g2000pra.googlegroups.com... On Jul 13, 6:18 pm, Rick Decker <rdec...(a)hamilton.edu> wrote: > On 7/13/10 8:07 PM, JSH wrote: > <snip> >Ok. So maybe you can live off the land then. > >Your denial does not change reality. People have tried that trick >since there were people. > > >James Harris What a load of jibberish.... you been smoking that wacky weed ? I bet you might make sence to a stoner.
From: JSH on 14 Jul 2010 19:38 On Jul 14, 3:24 pm, "Chum Ley" <inva...(a)invalid.com> wrote: > "JSH" <jst...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:cb47a458-0003-45cc-bd1f-0548416f1270(a)b4g2000pra.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 13, 6:18 pm, Rick Decker <rdec...(a)hamilton.edu> wrote:> On 7/13/10 8:07 PM, JSH wrote: > > <snip> > > >Ok. So maybe you can live off the land then. > > >Your denial does not change reality. People have tried that trick > >since there were people. > > >James Harris > > What a load of jibberish.... > you been smoking that wacky weed ? > I bet you might make sence to a stoner. No, I'm concerned dude. I have piles of research results now, and my guess is that WAY back years ago when I had a few some people figured they could just wait things out ok. So they created this de facto policy which no one knows how to escape. It's just established for mainstream math people: they ignore me and my results and hope. Problem though is that once that collapses and the world realizes that was a de facto policy then it may start wanting to punish people, and there is no way to know exactly what it will do but you have one guarantee: none of you will have a chance of stopping the world from doing what it wishes. And THAT is so hard to understand as people with middle-class lives can take so much for granted until it occurs to them--hey, the world cannot be stopped. If the world comes after math society as a group it can handle every single mathematician it wishes on the entire planet. It is the world you see. Billions of people. More than enough of them to go out there and consider EVERY SINGLE mathematician on the planet. Every one of you. None of you are hidden. The world can go through each and every one of your entire lives with a microscope and you may holler about rights or say no, and it won't matter as the world can decide that it requires that it not matter. And then you will just be faced with that decision. You see, you were trying to take from the very world that has fed and clothed you. The one that you need to keep feeding you, and keep you taken care of, as we all need so much from our world. So math people need to imagine what happens if the world no longer likes them. I'm trying to help you imagine. James Harris
From: Joshua Cranmer on 14 Jul 2010 20:22
On 07/14/2010 07:38 PM, JSH wrote: > Billions of people. More than enough of them to go out there and > consider EVERY SINGLE mathematician on the planet. Every one of you. Given world events, this... hypothetical situation of yours seems incredibly unlikely. Large-scale flashes of public anger seem to be rather common. Something happens--say Valdez, Enron, the UK reimbursements scandal--and then the public direct its anger at the appropriate class. A few people become sacrificial lambs for the scandal (think especially AIG and BP's executive in recent years); everyone else decides to stay quiet for a bit or come out a bit contrite. A few months later, people return to American Idol or whatnot, and business returns back to normal without much protest. You've seen it with Congressional earmarks, again with executive compensation. The only group which has faced frequent, repeated mass bursts of anger is government officials, and the government seems to have no problem continuing business as usual. > None of you are hidden. The world can go through each and every one > of your entire lives with a microscope and you may holler about rights > or say no, and it won't matter as the world can decide that it > requires that it not matter. And then you will just be faced with > that decision. Somehow, a large portion of the world, including judiciaries, complains when people lose their rights. Even when those people are alleged terrorists. -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth |