On Jul 26, 7:57 pm, arithmonic <djes...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26 jul, 16:19, semiopen <former_schiz...@hotmail.com> wrote: [snip] > Another anonymous, I think that anonymous are proliferating in this > thread, I wonder why.
Perhaps because there are some odd characters on the Usenet? Would you *really* like someone like yourself to know your address?
> What a fun. > > >I was responding to a prolix message from arithmonic in which he > > failed to make any new points > > YOU ARE WRONG, I DIDN'T FAILED, I AM NOT INTERESTED IN RISING ANY > OTHER NEW POINT FOR > SUCH AN ANONYMOUS PSYCHOPATH like this: sttscitr...@tesco.net. > So I am only replying him by copying and pasting with just some > additional words in each new posting. > > You also said: "I don't care very much since I am not exactly ...." > > THEN, IF YOU DO NOT CARE: What are you doing here?
Enjoying a rather astonishing case of meglomania. You?
> Go elsewhere, find a girl, drive a car, whatever you could ever really > care. > > > The topic is probably interesting and could make a good article for > > say the MAA Monthly, but it is not exactly cutting edge. > > All these new methods are not looking for any favor neither from > intitutions nor from any journal in exchange for not including my > critics on the whole history of root-solving. My critics will > always be along with these methods, and that will make nothing good > for any peer-review journal. > I will not send these methods to any re-known peer-review journal. > > Math-historians have a MORAL OBLIGATION: TO INCLUDE THESE METHODS IN > THEIR PAPERS.
You remind me of someone who has made a minor discovery in the aerodynamics of Zeppelins and then goes on to claim that jet aircraft and space shuttles are consequently worthless and that the history of aviation needs to be rewritten.
> If they are not willing to do that, I don't care. The transcendence of > these methods do not depend on neither any journals, nor normal > persons, nor myself, nor on any anonymous postings. > These methods will inebitably
Do you mean "inedibly?" I can't find "inebitably" inmy dictionary.
find their way all through young minds -- > not among anonymous parrot-fashion psychopathic cowards, of course--. > > > computer algebra system can give me hundreds of digits of precision in > > small fractions of a second, which is way more than I'll ever need. > > Well, let us wish you a life FULL OF JOY to you and your software,
Thanks! I wish you well too.
> and your ANONYMOUS BEHAVIOR which is something far WORSE than any typo > or philological error that someone could ever commit. Just, two cents > to you. > Few people feel some respect for ANONYMOUS POSTINGS. > SO SORRY, IF YOU DON'T LIKE CAPITAL LETTERS.
Actually, I find them amusing though tiresome after a while. > > ing. Domingo Gomez Morin > Structural Engineer > Caracas > venezuela- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -