
Re: Some important demonstrations on negative numbers > a MACS syllabus
Posted:
Dec 19, 2012 11:03 PM


Bob: Nothing at all foolish about you and your competition peers focusing on some special corner of mankind's mathematical mountain. Enjoy! Today, all professional research mathematicians do likewise. The mountain already is far too big for any one to own it all. The difference is that mathematical researchers are well aware that there is much more to the elephant than can be known through knowledge only of its trunk ... and most are well aware that it all consists of an art of theoristic learning, and the products, thereof.
Professional mathematicians don't normally fiddle with trivial "proofs" of the kind seen on mathteach. But do you really think that you are ready for serious mathematical proofs in areas that you have never encountered (e.g. topological lattice theory or differential geometry)? ... or (if you prefer to focus on curricular mathematics) even a proof that that every line of rational numbers has a density of infinitesimal holes? ... or that every fully complete dictionary is a continuum?
Please enjoy, without feeling foolish, your special interests in whatever corner of mathematics you choose. But if you think that ALL of "mathematics" is in that corner, your meaning of the word is far more specialized than what is meant by the world's creators of mankind's mathematical theories.
Cordially, Clyde
  From: "Robert Hansen" <bob@rsccore.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:27 AM To: "Clyde Greeno @ MALEI" <greeno@malei.org> Cc: <mathteach@mathforum.org> Subject: Re: Some important demonstrations on negative numbers > a MACS syllabus
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 12:28 AM, "Clyde Greeno @ MALEI" <greeno@malei.org> > wrote: > >> The height of mathematical naiveté. > > Sure Clyde. If what you say is true then that would make myself and every > mathy peer that I have known or competed with, fools. Everyone is insane, > except you. I haven't seen you nor Joe produce one original mathematical > conclusion or proof in all the time I have been on this forum. Yet I have > witnessed others, including myself, produce several. There is something > else at work here with you two, and it most certainly isn't mathematics. > > Bob Hansen=

