Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.
Replies: 12   Last Post: Jan 12, 2014 1:16 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
RGVickson@shaw.ca

Posts: 1,653
Registered: 12/1/07
Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.
Posted: Jan 7, 2014 11:03 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Monday, January 6, 2014 10:47:20 PM UTC-8, Virgil wrote:
> In article <lag693$f1p$1@dont-email.me>,
>
> "Port563" <reader80@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>
>
>

> > A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) MATHS GENIUSES....
>
> >
>
> > "You" (plural, you know who you are) claim to be able to solve hosts of the
>
> > great problems of mathematics, both unsolved ones or ones solved
>
> > unnecessarily lengthily (in your opinion) or wrongly.
>
> >
>
> > Goldbach, Riemann, FLT, odd primes, infinitude of perfects, twin primes,
>
> > continuum hyp... all demolished.
>
> >
>
> > You ascribe this to one or both of your own brilliance and the general folly
>
> > / stupidity of "organised" / "conventional" mathematics.
>
> >
>
> > These same great problems have exercised and flummoxed not only the likes of
>
> > myself (and I was pretty quick in my day, with a number of prizes and scalps
>
> > under my belt), but far more significantly, have defeated many of the
>
> > world's greatest minds of our time and for centuries, sometimes millennia,
>
> > before our times.
>
> >
>
> > OK, for the sake of argument we suspend disbelief, and assume your
>
> > proposition is substantially true.
>
> >
>
> > *****************************
>
> >
>
> > Explain, then, why "you" never participate in threads where relatively
>
> > trivial questions are asked, which should be an absolute wheeze for you to
>
> > solve instantly, given your enormous skills, insight, instinct, intuition,
>
> > abilities....
>
> >
>
> > You never ever do. Even though it would be no effort at all. Right?
>
> >
>
> > Why is this the case?
>
> >
>
> > Can't be because you are too busy, as you have time to respond to those
>
> > trolling you, and these trivial problems would take you seconds to do.
>
> >
>
> > Can't be because you don't want to help, as your sharing your great
>
> > discoveries with us (whether we want them or not) shows you are altruistic
>
> > and humanitarian.
>
> >
>
> > Can't be because you want to delegate it to us - we are likely to mislead
>
> > the poor questioners, by our "wrong mathematics" and clumsiness.
>
> >
>
> > Can't be because they're too trivial, as you know what we could say then.
>
> >
>
> > *****************************
>
> >
>
> > What do you think Occam's Razor suggests is the reason "you" never solve, or
>
> > even attempt to solve, these far simpler problems?
>
> >
>
> > I mean, I have some nice ones about (say) hyperbolae and hyperbolic
>
> > functions, or for those of you who don't think irrationals exist, some easy
>
> > ones in number theory - naturals only. I have answers, but my methods are
>
> > probably long-winded and clumsy, if not actually wrong.
>
> >
>
> > Will "you" help me with some of these?
>
>
>
> A problem which offers no challenge to a particular person may not
>
> interest him or her enough to provoke a response from that person.
>
>
>
> A problem which offers too great a challenge to a particular person may
>
> not interest him or her enough to provoke a response from that person.
>
>
>
> A problem which is outside the areas of interest of a particular person
>
> may not interest him or her enough to provoke a response from that
>
> person.
>
>
>
> A problem which appears at a time when a person has not enough free time
>
> to deal with it may not provoke a response from that person.
>
>
>
> And I am sure that there are other reasons.
>
> --


I suspect the OP is referring to such geniuses as Archimedes Plutonium, the Hope Research folks, herc, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but I took the tone to be somewhat jocular and ironic.



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.