Wayne Bishop posted Aug 8, 2013 10:40 AM: > > With the help of OPMS, of course, you compare > favorably with > Perelman? I stand in awe! > Kindly point out, Professor Bishop, where I had claimed - or even faintly hinted - that I "compare favorably with Perelman" (with or without "the help of OPMS").
I stand in awe of these lies you promote in support of the weak arguments you put forth!
Questions: ========= - -- Has this lying helped you "BLOW UP ANY SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION" yet? - -- Does this lying help you in any other way? - -- Do you feel that by thus lying you have won your argument? - -- Do you perhaps feel fulfilled by thus lying? - -- Or is it just that you feel 'naturally happier' when you do it?
(Quentin Tarantino made a film called "Natural Born Killers". He has not yet, to the best of my knowledge, made a film called "Natural Born Liars").
By the way, in the New Yorker article I had linked to, "Manifold Destiny" by Sylvia Nasar, there is mention of some 'manifest lies' being promoted by a famous Chinese mathematician, Shing-Tung Yau, to the effect that it was he/his students that had solved the Poincare Conjecture and not Grigori Perelman.
Hint: He got found out. (And hopefully he has since been able to realize that there is really no reason to lie - it is self-defeating).
GSC ("Still Shoveling. Not PUSHING!") > > At 12:08 PM 8/7/2013, GS Chandy wrote: > >Further my last dt. Aug 4, 2013 2:14 PM > >(http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=91871 > 55), I found > >the link to a fascinating and quite insightful > article that had > >appeared in the New Yorker (suitable for the > layperson) regarding > >Grigoriy Perelman's solution of the Poincare > Conjecture: > > > >"Manifold Destiny", by Sylvia Nasar > >http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/08/28/060828fa_ > fact2?currentPage=all > > > >The ideas and attitudes of a true discoverer are > quite 'different'. > > > >GSC