On Nov 25, 1:53 pm, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 26, 7:40 am, "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 25, 12:53 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > > In article > > > <8e72f34b-4acb-4e8d-9797-f3b217e4e...@i7g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>, > > > "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > So, we know from modern particle physics that the particle, is both > > > > particle, and wave. > > > > What we do know is that those things we sometimes regard as being > > > small-and-particle-like things have some behaviors that are wave-like. > > > > What those "things"REALLY are, we do not know. > > > > And most of the time, don't much care, as long as our descriptions of > > > how we expect them to behave match our observations of how they do > > > behave! > > > Well that's simple, you're not a conscientious mathematician, who > > cares. > > Virgil could pass for a mathematician. He doesn't use deceit to win > points like most Cantorians, he'll try to put forward what he believes > is the truth, that there are MORE THAN 1,2,3...INFINITY points > between any 2 points. > > It's just that his (MAINSTREAM) stance is imaginary and pieced > together which forces him to argue from the hip, and duck and weave > like they all do! > > Herc > > -- > S: if stops(S) gosub S > G. GREENE: this proves stops() must be un-computable! > SCI.LOGIC
No, the conscientious mathematician doesn't just adhere to and elaborate the mundane, but here acknowledges there is more to mathematics than we yet have, and strives for truth, here mathematical truth, as it is. As a follower of mathematics, Virgil is of the timid sort, always using argument established by others, thus to lend credence to his opinion regardless of his tactics, vis-a-vis, establishing original thought, here of course in a framework of mathematics.
The conscientious mathematician doesn't just curate and dust.