On Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:34:17 +0100
"Candida Ferreira" <candidaf@...
> In fact, except for some papers already submitted, I intend
> not to publish papers anymore. All the new developments made to
> GEP will appear very soon in my book.
For what it's worth, I think most researchers place greater
value in peer reviewed papers than what is in books. At least
with a peer reviewed paper in a journal, you know that someone
competent has read the paper and found it worthwhile.
> In the 17 years or so GP is around nothing similar was done
> while one person alone implemented all these things in GEP
> in less than three months.
In nearly all cases that I've seen claims like this, the person
making them was a kook. I'm not saying you are a kook, it's
just that the remark is very similar to ones of people who are
convinced they are the only ones in the world who know the TRUTH.
For example, one kook used to spend much time posting messages
on a neuroscience Usenet newsgroup claimed to be the world's
foremost mathematician, physicist, and neuroscientist. He came
up with some nonsensical conjecture about how the brain works.
(It was clear he wasn't much of a neuroscientist when he claimed
that the neurofibrillary tangles found in Alzheimer's disease
were tangles of neurons.) But he always made such claims about
how great his work was and how everyone else was wrong.
In other words, most of the time someone makes such claims, they
may safely be ignored.
And sometimes, it is from someone new in a field that does not
understand the field well enough, yet.
But every once in a while, the claims are true. But it can
take a while for everyone to distiguish these people from the
It helps to avoid being perceived as a possible kook.