|
Science Forum Index » Math - Symbolic Forum » My postings in the newsgroup...
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Mehran Basti... |
 Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 5:55 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Newsgroup:
Most of my debates on my postings in newsgroups rest on my issues of New Math.
Until they read and practice (i.e. engage in actual computations) about ten of my lecture notes (each about 200 pages), it is really difficult to support (or reject) my statements based on just words.
My other postings mainly have focused on strange behavior of the math community, which has intellectual roots in current American crisis (academic).
So, we need to wait, until I write and disseminate my lecture notes, without any outside interference (like blockage of the math community, or any similar scenario like FLT).
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:40 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Vladimir Bondarenko wrote:
Quote: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math.symbolic/browse_thread/thread/546ab560347dafb7?hl=en#
I am glad that all of them on the list want to ignore me.
I hope you; your gang and all in that list will go away from my
postings.
But there is again possibility, under circumstances, like before; you
may get orders to write on their behalf (since they may become nervous
and experience deep anger).
Keep out. Keep out.
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Vladimir Bondarenko... |
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 4:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti... |
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 4:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Newsgroup:
I have to emphasize that I have answered many questions in variety of newsgroups.
I have to mention that I will not answer to those writers with false names (generally I view them as spies of my enemies).
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| none... |
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:25 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 07 May 2008 23:55:20 -0400, Mehran Basti wrote:
Quote: Dear Newsgroup:
Most of my debates on my postings in newsgroups rest on my issues of New
Math.
No, it does not. Your 'New Math' is an unsubstantiated claim. When asked
for proof you simply repeat the claim, or replace it with a meaningless
alternate equation which you claimn is related to the first. When asked
for proof you state that no one can be expected to understand your work
for a minimum of five years after you have released all details. But you
never release details; you never release a proof. There have been no
debates, just people pointing out that the only issue with your 'new
Maths' is that it has no substance, appears to be inconsistent if intended
as a relationship with the physical world, and is claiming excessive
general applicability to what seems like a too-simple equation.
Quote: Until they read and practice (i.e. engage in actual computations) about
ten of my lecture notes (each about 200 pages), it is really difficult
to support (or reject) my statements based on just words.
Until you publish your 2000 pages we are unable to provide the kind of
comment that you are after. All we can go on is what you have posted to
date, which has had no substance. As long as you feel that your lecture
notes, disseminating your math, should not be published for fear people
may use your ideas then we will continue to presume that there is no
substance to these ideas.
Quote: My other postings mainly have focused on strange behavior of the math
community, which has intellectual roots in current American crisis
(academic).
Your other postings have focused on your belief that there is 'strange
behaviour.' I think most of us regard this not as strange behaviour, but
rational behaviour - that your continued inability to provide a proof for
your claims is driven by their being no proof.
You complain that if you do not apply for jobs your are not given them,
and that this is proof of the conspiracy to ensure you are not employed.
You boast that it is only because you have the means to work on your ideas
without the need for au niversity post that has led to your break
throughs. You seem to have a personal grudge against A Wilkes. I have
never met him, but I have yet to meet anyone in the academic(scientific &
technical) community who would not be delighted in any theoretical
breakthrough, and have met many who will encourage 'off wall' ideas that
seem to have some support/proof *because* they may prove more productive
than at first sight. So I feel that your claims are simply wrong.
Quote: So, we need to wait, until I write and disseminate my lecture notes,
without any outside interference (like blockage of the math community,
or any similar scenario like FLT).
Amen! We look forward to your publishing & dissemination.
> Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mehran Basti... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 11:37 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
I gave you my name in an earlier posting. You asked
that a real name be
given at least once, so you knew who you were dealing
with. I gave my
name, once. Now you decide that if people follow your
rules you will
change them. What a surprise!
Once you are using a false name, it is deceptive.
This means there is a doubt in your activities.
I have covered in other postings, that an official unique name is needed to clarify the situation.
Dr.M.Basti |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| none... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 4:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 08 May 2008 22:04:44 -0400, Mehran Basti wrote:
Quote: Dear Newsgroup:
I have to emphasize that I have answered many questions in variety of
newsgroups.
I have to mention that I will not answer to those writers with false
names (generally I view them as spies of my enemies).
Dr.M.Basti
I gave you my name in an earlier posting. You asked that a real name be
given at least once, so you knew who you were dealing with. I gave my
name, once. Now you decide that if people follow your rules you will
change them. What a surprise! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dave... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 4:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
