 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Mathematics Forum » JSH: Operator ambiguity, Escultura |
|
Page 3 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Brian Chandler |
 Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:04 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
jstevh@msn.com (James Harris) wrote in message news:<3c65f87.0411291522.63c4747c@posting.google.com>...
[quote:3d6dbc1466]Gib Bogle <bogle@ihug.too.much.spam.co.nz> wrote in message news:<coft74$ifr$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>...
Jim Ferry wrote:
Assumption (b) is what's holding you back from learning math. Before you
can learn, you have to realize that you don't know.
A Fundamental Truth.
Oh please, the poster never answered the mathematical issue raised but
instead turned to personal attacks. You deleted out all of the
context and made a reply that had nothing to do with the issue.
For those who missed it, I used Escultura's example of
i = sqrt(-1) = sqrt(1/-1) = 1/i, giving -1 = 1, contradiction,
to show that it's naive to think that you can remove the ambiguity
from the square root operator.
Rather than give a cogent answer the sci.math poster Jim Ferry babbled
about his childhood, and simply *claimed* as if that's all it takes
that there's no problem.
The regular sci.math poster Gib Bogle then came in to delete out all
of the context and make his own reply.
That's how sci.math'ers managed to paint me as a crank. They do this
consistently, and sci.math readers cheer them on!
[/quote:3d6dbc1466]
Can you give me an example showing sci.math readers cheering them on?
[quote:3d6dbc1466]The sci.math readership is remarkably stupid and gullible.
[/quote:3d6dbc1466]
Is it? How do you know?
Brian Chandler
http://imaginatorium.org |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| James Harris |
| Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
imaginatorium@despammed.com (Brian Chandler) wrote in message news:<f2c35871.0411300704.641e1e71@posting.google.com>...
[quote:a67b83168b]jstevh@msn.com (James Harris) wrote in message news:<3c65f87.0411291522.63c4747c@posting.google.com>...
Gib Bogle <bogle@ihug.too.much.spam.co.nz> wrote in message news:<coft74$ifr$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>...
Jim Ferry wrote:
Assumption (b) is what's holding you back from learning math. Before you
can learn, you have to realize that you don't know.
A Fundamental Truth.
Oh please, the poster never answered the mathematical issue raised but
instead turned to personal attacks. You deleted out all of the
context and made a reply that had nothing to do with the issue.
For those who missed it, I used Escultura's example of
i = sqrt(-1) = sqrt(1/-1) = 1/i, giving -1 = 1, contradiction,
to show that it's naive to think that you can remove the ambiguity
from the square root operator.
Rather than give a cogent answer the sci.math poster Jim Ferry babbled
about his childhood, and simply *claimed* as if that's all it takes
that there's no problem.
The regular sci.math poster Gib Bogle then came in to delete out all
of the context and make his own reply.
That's how sci.math'ers managed to paint me as a crank. They do this
consistently, and sci.math readers cheer them on!
Can you give me an example showing sci.math readers cheering them on?
[/quote:a67b83168b]
I've been posting for years. These people routinely get all kinds of
support, which has convinced me that the sci.math readership is
stupid.
Just dig into the record, and you'll find plenty of people getting on
my case about me supposedly being wrong since all these people
supposedly have counter examples, and such, versus very few, if any
questioning posts asking if maybe these obsessive people replying to
me weren't full of it!
[quote:a67b83168b]
The sci.math readership is remarkably stupid and gullible.
Is it? How do you know?
Brian Chandler
[/quote:a67b83168b]
I was pissed off yesterday so basically I was ranting.
I know, it's better not to go around calling a lot of people stupid,
but hey, if mathematics is explained to you in detail, where the
conclusion is quite evident, and you listen to people who rather
stupidly lie about the mathematics, and instead of properly
questioning them, just swallow their b.s., then do you really think
you get points?
After all, eventually my research will come out on top, and what will
the sci.math newsgroup have?
A long record of rather amazing stupidity, where its most notable
point, and what will probably define the newsgroup from now on, was
the gang emailing to the Southwest Journal of Pure and Applied
Mathematics to get my paper censored.
Whether I call you stupid now or not, more than likely that and
resisting my research, namecalling, and other childish behavior is ALL
that the sci.math newsgroup will become known for.
The sci.math newsgroup will have its place in history.
James Harris |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ošin |
| Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:39 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote:26b0911f83]A long record of rather amazing stupidity, where its most notable
point, and what will probably define the newsgroup from now on, was
the gang emailing to the Southwest Journal of Pure and Applied
Mathematics to get my paper censored.
[/quote:26b0911f83]
Who is in this gang, and how do you know they emailed SWJPA? Also, the word
"censored" is a bit strong. Is criticism really censorship? As far as I can
see, nobody here wanted your paper dropped. It would have been fun for us
all if it were actually left published. It would have been a problem for
SWJPA, but I for one would have enjoyed it if it were left up there. Perhaps
your paper was dropped just because the editor realized that it was wrong
and worthless. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:08 am
|
|