Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Switching research field, me as a researcher, and my writer block
15 views
Skip to first unread message
Victor Porton
May 14, 2013, 6:39:03 PM5/14/13
to
Some pre-history:
When I was 5 years old (I was born in 1980), I decided to become a
theoretical physicist. After finishing the school I joined the physics
faculty of a university, but after the first year of study moved to math
faculty out-of-sight. I learned about 5 years and left the university
unfinished. (I am not going to explain here why I have not finished study.)
Now I work as a programmer.
In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
topology:
http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own opinion
may be biased but it looks like for me that this my monograph is worth
highest math awards.
But when I finished writing this book, I found that I am unable to add
anything new to it. I have neither new concept ideas nor ideas how to prove
my open problems formulated in this book. My book sparkled and extinguished
like a meteor.
Because of this now I think about switching to a new research field. I
remember little of what I studied in the university and need to learn anew.
I feel that I should try functional analysis research.
As such, what would you suggest me? Take into account that I am probably
relatively weak in theorem proving, my strong side is probably the ability
to discover new concepts and definitions. Is functional analysis a right
research area for me, taking in account these my weak and strong sides?
What else except of functional analysis would you suggest (taking into
account my dislike of number theory and combinatorics and preference for
analysis and algebra)?
Maybe you'll also suggest me some particular books? (free e-books would be
preferred)
--
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org
When I was 5 years old (I was born in 1980), I decided to become a
theoretical physicist. After finishing the school I joined the physics
faculty of a university, but after the first year of study moved to math
faculty out-of-sight. I learned about 5 years and left the university
unfinished. (I am not going to explain here why I have not finished study.)
Now I work as a programmer.
In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
topology:
http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own opinion
may be biased but it looks like for me that this my monograph is worth
highest math awards.
But when I finished writing this book, I found that I am unable to add
anything new to it. I have neither new concept ideas nor ideas how to prove
my open problems formulated in this book. My book sparkled and extinguished
like a meteor.
Because of this now I think about switching to a new research field. I
remember little of what I studied in the university and need to learn anew.
I feel that I should try functional analysis research.
As such, what would you suggest me? Take into account that I am probably
relatively weak in theorem proving, my strong side is probably the ability
to discover new concepts and definitions. Is functional analysis a right
research area for me, taking in account these my weak and strong sides?
What else except of functional analysis would you suggest (taking into
account my dislike of number theory and combinatorics and preference for
analysis and algebra)?
Maybe you'll also suggest me some particular books? (free e-books would be
preferred)
--
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org
Victor Porton
May 14, 2013, 6:39:03 PM5/14/13
to
Victor Porton
May 14, 2013, 6:50:12 PM5/14/13
to
Sorry for posting this message two times. It is not my failure but a
software failure.
software failure.
William Elliot
May 14, 2013, 10:18:34 PM5/14/13
to
On Wed, 15 May 2013, Victor Porton wrote:
> In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
> topology:
>
> http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
>
> See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own
> opinion may be biased but it looks like for me that this my monograph is
> worth highest math awards.
I have nothing to do with facebook and I don't work well with pdf files.
> In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
> topology:
>
> http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
>
> See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own
> opinion may be biased but it looks like for me that this my monograph is
> worth highest math awards.
Do you have ascii or Tex versions of your work?
> But when I finished writing this book, I found that I am unable to add
> anything new to it. I have neither new concept ideas nor ideas how to prove
> my open problems formulated in this book. My book sparkled and extinguished
> like a meteor.
simpler proofs of important theorems.
> As such, what would you suggest me?
> Take into account that I am probably relatively weak in theorem proving,
> my strong side is probably the ability to discover new concepts and
> definitions.
> Is functional analysis a right research area for me, taking in account
> these my weak and strong sides?
> What else except of functional analysis would you suggest (taking into
> account my dislike of number theory and combinatorics and preference for
> analysis and algebra)?
> Maybe you'll also suggest me some particular books? (free e-books would
> be preferred)
dull...@sprynet.com
May 15, 2013, 11:20:38 AM5/15/13
to
On Wed, 15 May 2013 01:39:03 +0300, Victor Porton <por...@narod.ru>
wrote:
>Some pre-history:
>
>When I was 5 years old (I was born in 1980), I decided to become a
>theoretical physicist. After finishing the school I joined the physics
>faculty of a university, but after the first year of study moved to math
>faculty out-of-sight. I learned about 5 years and left the university
>unfinished. (I am not going to explain here why I have not finished study.)
>Now I work as a programmer.
>
>In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
>topology:
>
>http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
>
>See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own opinion
>may be biased
Really?
>but it looks like for me that this my monograph is worth
>highest math awards.
Have you found one person other than yourself who agrees?
wrote:
>Some pre-history:
>
>When I was 5 years old (I was born in 1980), I decided to become a
>theoretical physicist. After finishing the school I joined the physics
>faculty of a university, but after the first year of study moved to math
>faculty out-of-sight. I learned about 5 years and left the university
>unfinished. (I am not going to explain here why I have not finished study.)
>Now I work as a programmer.
>
>In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
>topology:
>
>http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
>
>See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own opinion
>may be biased
>but it looks like for me that this my monograph is worth
>highest math awards.
Victor Porton
May 15, 2013, 11:29:10 AM5/15/13
to
dull...@sprynet.com wrote:
> On Wed, 15 May 2013 01:39:03 +0300, Victor Porton <por...@narod.ru>
> wrote:
>
>>In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
>>topology:
>>
>>http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
>>
>>See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own opinion
>>may be biased
>
> Really?
>
>>but it looks like for me that this my monograph is worth
>>highest math awards.
>
> Have you found one person other than yourself who agrees?
I incidentally meet with a woman mathematician and suggested her to read my
> On Wed, 15 May 2013 01:39:03 +0300, Victor Porton <por...@narod.ru>
> wrote:
>
>>In the interim I developed a completely new theory in the field of general
>>topology:
>>
>>http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
>>
>>See the above link for the research monograph I've written. My own opinion
>>may be biased
>
> Really?
>
>>but it looks like for me that this my monograph is worth
>>highest math awards.
>
> Have you found one person other than yourself who agrees?
article (that time there were no book yet).
Later I asked her by email whether she agrees that my work is worth Abel
Prize. She answered "yes". Well, her specialization is unrelated with
general topology.
You may have an opinion on me, but first read my book. Don't judge it
without prior reading.
hbe...@gmail.com
May 15, 2013, 11:52:57 AM5/15/13
to
is up to you to convince others that your book is worth reading. Yes, seems
circular, but it is not quite. Tell us: how do your new ideas simplify/improve on existing methods? Tell us some specific problems that you have solved with your method, etc.
Victor Porton
May 15, 2013, 12:43:12 PM5/15/13
to
century physicist what is the utility of electricity and he answered: What a
utility can be of an infant. I feel about my theory the same what that
physicist felt about electricity, that it will be useful in a future.
I confess that until now I've never solved an open problem (except of some
problems formulates by myself).
Note that however I did the reverse thing of solving old problems: I
introduced several new open problems. This is also a result.
I have exactly two reason to believe my work will be useful:
1. It is beautiful theory with algebraic operations.
2. It is a generalization of several prior theories.
Victor Porton
May 15, 2013, 12:46:05 PM5/15/13
to
3. My theory is not too simple and not too hard. Being neither too simple
(trivial) or too hard (not tractable), is in my opinion the main criterion
of a mathematical theory to be interesting.
Ed Prochak
May 15, 2013, 2:17:57 PM5/15/13
to
I think I agree with the other poster: finish what you started.
Sounds like you did not finish even an undergraduate degree. Is that right?
If your work really is promising, then you should be able to convince a mathematician in topology. Start there. Visit you local college and speak to someone.
ed
Sounds like you did not finish even an undergraduate degree. Is that right?
If your work really is promising, then you should be able to convince a mathematician in topology. Start there. Visit you local college and speak to someone.
ed
Victor Porton
May 15, 2013, 2:34:37 PM5/15/13
to
Ed Prochak wrote:
> I think I agree with the other poster: finish what you started.
If I would know how to prove these my conjectures :-(
> I think I agree with the other poster: finish what you started.
For further serious research I need to find some analog of Tychonoff product
of topological spaces, but with funcoids in place of topological spaces. I
have an idea how to form the product but no idea how to prove it is really a
categorical product.
> Sounds like you did not finish even an undergraduate degree. Is that
> right?
I am not sure how to correctly translate "undergraduate degree" from English
to my native Russian.
> If your work really is promising, then you should be able to convince a
> mathematician in topology. Start there. Visit you local college and speak
> to someone. ed
My origin is from Russia where I learned in a university.
Now I live in Israel and work as a programmer.
I think, you understand I could not return to Russia in order to "visit my
local college".
Past year I asked "topology" section organizer to allow me to give a speech
about basics of my theory at an annual Israel Math Union meeting, but I was
not accepted saying that nobody recommends me.
But the future seems bright. My monograph is now at EMS Monograph Award and
I hope for the win. If not EMS, I hope some publisher will accept my book.
Anyway, if my book will be published, this could be a possible allowance to
speak at conferences (really, only an IMU meeting, as I don't want to spend
my money for traveling throughout the world).
0 new messages