Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [PrimeNumbers] About the form of a solution to GC

Expand Messages
  • Bob Gilson
    chrisdarroch wrote: Hi, If a solution to GC was not couched in formal mathematics but was let s say based on observation and a little
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      chrisdarroch <chrisdarr2@...> wrote:
      Hi,

      If a solution to GC was not couched in formal mathematics but was
      let's say based on observation and a little arithmetic, easy to
      understand and short; would that be acceptable for peer review as a
      solution and ultimately publication.

      I am aware that the defintion of "easy to understand" is (as all
      definitions) relative; however please bare with me on that definition.

      I understand that such a format may be acceptable for peer review
      (especially if it were short and easy to understand), but not for
      publication; however I would be concerned that if that were the case,
      then someone could translate my work into formal mathematics and then
      claim the solution as their own.

      Or extract seminal ideas from the work and integrate it more formally
      into their own presentation.

      I am aware that expressing such misgivings may be interpreted by some
      as paranoid.

      I am also aware that any post which assumes a solution will be
      considered with some disdain and condescension by many.

      However the question is asked.

      Chris

      Chris


      Publish and be damned!


      Bob


      ---------------------------------
      Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
      Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Chris Caldwell
      ... The disdain, at least on my part, is not for assuming a solution, but for the foolish games those who think they have one often play. I get tired of I got
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Bob Gilson wrote:
        > If a solution to GC was not couched in formal mathematics but was
        > let's say based on observation and a little arithmetic, easy to
        > understand and short; would that be acceptable for peer review as a
        > solution and ultimately publication.
        > ...
        > I am also aware that any post which assumes a solution will be
        > considered with some disdain and condescension by many.


        The disdain, at least on my part, is not for assuming a solution,
        but for the foolish games those who think they have one often play.
        I get tired of "I got the solution, where do I collect money",
        "I have a solution, but it is secret", and of course the
        insulting "I have a solution and it is simple" which implies
        thousands of mathematicians over hundreds of years have missed
        the simple. Insulting and unlikely.

        To avoid some disdain do this: take the time and effort to read what
        others have done so you can put your "proof" in context and in
        the language of your audience. Then attempt to publish in a
        reputible manner.

        If too lazy to do that, then try this: write it up as neatly
        as you can and post it publically with a note "I think this is a
        proof of _______, do you see any problems with it?" Of course
        if it is too outlandishly written "using the z-spectral
        reasoning only I understand we get..." or "adding my zero-point
        axioms we can prove all unproven theorem" you will get disdain.

        Finally, always listen more than you speak. If most of the posts
        on a list on any one subject are from you; it is time to stop talking
        about it.

        Chris.

        Most nuts are incapable of taking correction--if no one can give you a
        reasonable correction, then up you nut index by three. If you
        alone have a right answer an the whole world misses the simple truth,
        up your nut inex by 8 (10 is the max). For each incorrect
        proof that you retracted appropriately--subtract one from the nut
        index.
      • richard042@yahoo.com
        Hello, Chris speaks wisdom, take it from a former 8. Anyone can claim proof. Someone who actually has proof does not need to make any claims whatsoever, they
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello,

          Chris speaks wisdom, take it from a former 8. Anyone can claim
          proof. Someone who actually has proof does not need to make any
          claims whatsoever, they simply have to ask others what is wrong with
          it and they will take up the challenge of finding out. If it's truly
          that short and clearly written, it will be digestible and
          understandable to many members of this list. The list has an archive
          and world-wide membership as witness. You may be a nut and you
          simply don't know it yet. You can cure yourself of the condition by
          learning as much as you can about your subject matter and about the
          realities of the academic mathematical world into which you seek
          acceptance. Make no claims, ask questions. Any proof, or any
          mathematical idea for that matter, is worthless if it is unknown. If
          it's incorrect, it's worthless. If you don't put it out there for
          scrutiny, it's worthless whether it's correct or not. And
          ultimately, it's not your call on whether it is valid proof or not,
          it must pass the scrutiny of everyone else in the world, and you have
          to start somewhere. Consider how long it will take you in isolation
          to learn enough about math and logic to be able to critically attack
          your own paper. Just a little effort along these lines sometimes
          goes a long way toward prevention of self-embarrassment and
          spontaneous nut index inflation.

          But your safeguard is the presentation, make no claims, ask
          questions, thank those who take the time to help you and learn from
          them how to save them time on future endeavors. I guarantee it's
          100% O.K., even admirable, to be wrong - UNLESS, you're wrong about
          being right. So simply do not go there. If no one from this group
          can find anything wrong with a posted proof, it will be a rarity
          indeed, an event to remember in and of itself.

          If you are a mathematician trapped in a nut body, you must and will
          educate yourself as the means to escape, otherwise you'll remain a
          nut. How do you educate yourself? - Well start asking questions
          about what you see in numbers. Until you start asking questions and
          seeking out answers, you shall remain trapped, and there ye' shall be.

          -Dick Boland

          > Most nuts are incapable of taking correction--if no one can give
          you a
          > reasonable correction, then up you nut index by three. If you
          > alone have a right answer an the whole world misses the simple
          truth,
          > up your nut inex by 8 (10 is the max). For each incorrect
          > proof that you retracted appropriately--subtract one from the nut
          > index.
        • Bob Gilson
          Chris Caldwell wrote: ... The disdain, at least on my part, is not for assuming a solution, but for the foolish games those who think they
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Chris Caldwell <caldwell@...> wrote:
            On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Bob Gilson wrote:
            > If a solution to GC was not couched in formal mathematics but was
            > let's say based on observation and a little arithmetic, easy to
            > understand and short; would that be acceptable for peer review as a
            > solution and ultimately publication.
            > ...
            > I am also aware that any post which assumes a solution will be
            > considered with some disdain and condescension by many.


            The disdain, at least on my part, is not for assuming a solution,
            but for the foolish games those who think they have one often play.
            I get tired of "I got the solution, where do I collect money",
            "I have a solution, but it is secret", and of course the
            insulting "I have a solution and it is simple" which implies
            thousands of mathematicians over hundreds of years have missed
            the simple. Insulting and unlikely.

            To avoid some disdain do this: take the time and effort to read what
            others have done so you can put your "proof" in context and in
            the language of your audience. Then attempt to publish in a
            reputible manner.

            If too lazy to do that, then try this: write it up as neatly
            as you can and post it publically with a note "I think this is a
            proof of _______, do you see any problems with it?" Of course
            if it is too outlandishly written "using the z-spectral
            reasoning only I understand we get..." or "adding my zero-point
            axioms we can prove all unproven theorem" you will get disdain.

            Finally, always listen more than you speak. If most of the posts
            on a list on any one subject are from you; it is time to stop talking
            about it.

            Chris.

            Most nuts are incapable of taking correction--if no one can give you a
            reasonable correction, then up you nut index by three. If you
            alone have a right answer an the whole world misses the simple truth,
            up your nut inex by 8 (10 is the max). For each incorrect
            proof that you retracted appropriately--subtract one from the nut
            index.


            Hey Chris

            I was merely replying to what chrisdarroch wrote, and commented "Publish and be damned"

            So please do not attribute to me that which I did not say.

            Many thanks

            Bob Gilson








            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Bob Gilson
            richard042@yahoo.com wrote: Hello, Chris speaks wisdom, take it from a former 8. Anyone can claim proof. Someone who actually has proof does not need to make
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              richard042@... wrote:

              Hello,

              Chris speaks wisdom, take it from a former 8. Anyone can claim
              proof. Someone who actually has proof does not need to make any
              claims whatsoever, they simply have to ask others what is wrong with
              it and they will take up the challenge of finding out. If it's truly
              that short and clearly written, it will be digestible and
              understandable to many members of this list. The list has an archive
              and world-wide membership as witness. You may be a nut and you
              simply don't know it yet. You can cure yourself of the condition by
              learning as much as you can about your subject matter and about the
              realities of the academic mathematical world into which you seek
              acceptance. Make no claims, ask questions. Any proof, or any
              mathematical idea for that matter, is worthless if it is unknown. If
              it's incorrect, it's worthless. If you don't put it out there for
              scrutiny, it's worthless whether it's correct or not. And
              ultimately, it's not your call on whether it is valid proof or not,
              it must pass the scrutiny of everyone else in the world, and you have
              to start somewhere. Consider how long it will take you in isolation
              to learn enough about math and logic to be able to critically attack
              your own paper. Just a little effort along these lines sometimes
              goes a long way toward prevention of self-embarrassment and
              spontaneous nut index inflation.

              But your safeguard is the presentation, make no claims, ask
              questions, thank those who take the time to help you and learn from
              them how to save them time on future endeavors. I guarantee it's
              100% O.K., even admirable, to be wrong - UNLESS, you're wrong about
              being right. So simply do not go there. If no one from this group
              can find anything wrong with a posted proof, it will be a rarity
              indeed, an event to remember in and of itself.

              If you are a mathematician trapped in a nut body, you must and will
              educate yourself as the means to escape, otherwise you'll remain a
              nut. How do you educate yourself? - Well start asking questions
              about what you see in numbers. Until you start asking questions and
              seeking out answers, you shall remain trapped, and there ye' shall be.

              -Dick Boland

              > Most nuts are incapable of taking correction--if no one can give
              you a
              > reasonable correction, then up you nut index by three. If you
              > alone have a right answer an the whole world misses the simple
              truth,
              > up your nut inex by 8 (10 is the max). For each incorrect
              > proof that you retracted appropriately--subtract one from the nut
              > index.

              Dear Richard

              Perhaps you can persuade chrisdarroch to publish his "proof" so that Decio can have a field day. On the other hand...

              Bob Gilson









              Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/





              Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


              ---------------------------------
              Yahoo! Groups Links

              To visit your group on the web, go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/

              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




              ---------------------------------
              Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
              Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Jacques Tramu
              I m humbly listening to the all the propos in this list for 6 months, and I am proud to announce that I never solved the GC, even in my dreams. Best regards to
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                I'm humbly listening to the all the propos in this list for 6 months,
                and I am proud to announce that I never solved the GC, even in my dreams.

                Best regards to all
                Jacques Tramu


                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Bob Gilson" <bobgillson@...>
                To: <primenumbers@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 9:11 PM
                Subject: Re: [PrimeNumbers] Re: About the form of a solution to GC


                >
                >
                >
                > richard042@... wrote:
                >
                > Hello,
                >
                > Chris speaks wisdom, take it from a former 8. Anyone can claim
                > proof. Someone who actually has proof does not need to make any
                > claims whatsoever, they simply have to ask others what is wrong with
                > it and they will take up the challenge of finding out. If it's truly
                > that short and clearly written, it will be digestible and
                > understandable to many members of this list. The list has an archive
                > and world-wide membership as witness. You may be a nut and you
                > simply don't know it yet. You can cure yourself of the condition by
                > learning as much as you can about your subject matter and about the
                > realities of the academic mathematical world into which you seek
                > acceptance. Make no claims, ask questions. Any proof, or any
                > mathematical idea for that matter, is worthless if it is unknown. If
                > it's incorrect, it's worthless. If you don't put it out there for
                > scrutiny, it's worthless whether it's correct or not. And
                > ultimately, it's not your call on whether it is valid proof or not,
                > it must pass the scrutiny of everyone else in the world, and you have
                > to start somewhere. Consider how long it will take you in isolation
                > to learn enough about math and logic to be able to critically attack
                > your own paper. Just a little effort along these lines sometimes
                > goes a long way toward prevention of self-embarrassment and
                > spontaneous nut index inflation.
                >
                > But your safeguard is the presentation, make no claims, ask
                > questions, thank those who take the time to help you and learn from
                > them how to save them time on future endeavors. I guarantee it's
                > 100% O.K., even admirable, to be wrong - UNLESS, you're wrong about
                > being right. So simply do not go there. If no one from this group
                > can find anything wrong with a posted proof, it will be a rarity
                > indeed, an event to remember in and of itself.
                >
                > If you are a mathematician trapped in a nut body, you must and will
                > educate yourself as the means to escape, otherwise you'll remain a
                > nut. How do you educate yourself? - Well start asking questions
                > about what you see in numbers. Until you start asking questions and
                > seeking out answers, you shall remain trapped, and there ye' shall be.
                >
                > -Dick Boland
                >
                >> Most nuts are incapable of taking correction--if no one can give
                > you a
                >> reasonable correction, then up you nut index by three. If you
                >> alone have a right answer an the whole world misses the simple
                > truth,
                >> up your nut inex by 8 (10 is the max). For each incorrect
                >> proof that you retracted appropriately--subtract one from the nut
                >> index.
                >
                > Dear Richard
                >
                > Perhaps you can persuade chrisdarroch to publish his "proof" so that Decio
                > can have a field day. On the other hand...
                >
                > Bob Gilson
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
                >
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                > To visit your group on the web, go to:
                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
                > Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • mikeoakes2@aol.com
                In a message dated 05/03/2005 20:32:34 GMT Standard Time, jacques.tramu@echolalie.com writes: I m humbly listening to the all the propos in this list for 6
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  In a message dated 05/03/2005 20:32:34 GMT Standard Time,
                  jacques.tramu@... writes:

                  I'm humbly listening to the all the propos in this list for 6 months,
                  and I am proud to announce that I never solved the GC, even in my dreams.

                  Best regards to all
                  Jacques Tramu



                  Ah, ... but the flip side of that is that if you never dream it then you
                  assuredly won't ever do it.

                  -Mike Oakes [who has spent more than 1 sleepless night recently dreaming of
                  proving the ERH]



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Décio Luiz Gazzoni Filho
                  ... Thing is, you re not a nut. You know your maths. If you announced that you had a proof of RH, I would start breaking out the champagne instead of attacking
                  Message 8 of 11 , Mar 5, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Saturday 05 March 2005 17:36, you wrote:
                    > Ah, ... but the flip side of that is that if you never dream it then you
                    > assuredly won't ever do it.
                    >
                    > -Mike Oakes [who has spent more than 1 sleepless night recently dreaming
                    > of proving the ERH]

                    Thing is, you're not a nut. You know your maths. If you announced that you had
                    a proof of RH, I would start breaking out the champagne instead of attacking
                    you.

                    Décio


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.