Prev: Quantum Entanglement is a viable mechanism for TELEPATHY!
Next: parallels of finite-number versus infinite-number and direct vs. indirect Euclid IP #4.07 Correcting Math
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 22 Jul 2010 16:53
So when Chandler Davis, editor of Mathematical Intelligencer MI emails
me saying that
MI cannot afford to add a reference citation of Archimedes Plutonium
sci.math postings from
1993 to 2009 which covered all of Hardy/Woodgold's Prime Simplicity
article and where Hardy
actually participated in my threads in 1994 talking about the Euclid
proof. That I am trying to tell
Chandler that there are codes of conduct as to referencing source
material. That I expect a
paragraph listing **sci.math** on a corrections page of a future
edition of MI.
And so Chandler explains to me that he cannot do that, not because of
codes of conduct, but he cannot add a reference citation because as he
explains it:

The Euclid proof is old and closed math and that it is trivial math
and that many others
before Hardy/Woodgold, before Archimedes Plutonium had complained that
it was a direct
method.

So I question Chandler Davis's judgement call and his logic for not
adding a correction.

If Euclid proof is old and closed and trivial, then apparently it is
not closed nor trivial, for then
why bother with even a article by Hardy/Woodgold? Is it old and
trivial and closed when
Archimedes Plutonium wants a paragraph of correction, citing my prior
two decades of earlier work
before Hardy/Woodgold ever showed up?

So what is the Ethical Code of Conduct as per citing references in
magazines? If someone
writes a book on the electronic news media of sci.math and another
sees some ideas in that
book and goes ahead and publishes it in MI without citing that source.
To me that is stealing
of intellectual property.

To me, no editor should be offering a judgement call of :
(1) when Hardy/Woodgold write about Euclid which was covered by AP ten
years earlier, it is not trivial
(2) but when AP wants a citation for his work that takes precedent
over Hardy/Woodgold
(3) then Chandler Davis says that Euclids IP is outdated and trivial

Seems to me that if you have the job of journal editor of mathematics,
seems to me that you should make decisions that are not spurious and
random, because math itself is not spurious and random.

So I am asking for the Producer of Mathematical Intelligencer? Is it
Tracy Catanese, I ask Chandler, but Chandler says that only he and
other editors can resolve this problem.

So is there a code of conduct of citing references by magazines.

I know when I was in High School and the lesson was learning how to
write papers that cite sources, that we were never in trouble by
overciting, but in trouble if we have a skimpy list of
citations because then it becomes a question of stealing intellectual
property from those sources neglected.

I know when I applied some biology research to a biology journal in
the 1990s, that it came back with denied
publication because someone prior had already had those ideas in
print. And that biology
really has alot of diligent editors checking for prior work done.

It is probably the case that most every math journal editor pays no
attention to any
sci.math material. But those days are over with because sci.math
should be treated as if it
were a journal in and of itself. So that when I write a whole book on
Euclid's IP and 10 years
earlier than Hardy/Woodgold, that Chandler Davis is obligated to list
Archimedes Plutonium
as a reference citation. Obligated by the publisher code of conduct of
citing sources.
And that there is no judgement call on the part of Chandler Davis as
to whether to cite AP or not cite AP.



Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Quantum Entanglement is a viable mechanism for TELEPATHY!
Next: parallels of finite-number versus infinite-number and direct vs. indirect Euclid IP #4.07 Correcting Math