JSH: Wondering about insulting
jst...@msn.com
behavior on math and science newsgroups?
Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
they think they're doing?
What is the purpose?
And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
afterward just wondered, what's the point?
Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
purpose?
Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
If so, what?
Just curious.
James Harris
José Carlos Santos
> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>
> Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
> they think they're doing?
>
> What is the purpose?
>
> And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
> posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
> afterward just wondered, what's the point?
>
> Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
>
> Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
>
> Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
> purpose?
What do you think about all this? After all, you are one of the persons
around here who insults others more often.
Best regards,
Jose Carlos Santos
Justin
: Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
: behavior on math and science newsgroups?
I had a question for you. Last week someone spammed the math department
where I work with emails containing purported proofs of Fermat's Last
Theorem. I briefly looked through the email but couldn't really follow it
and then I realized that it looked very much like that "extreme
mathematics" you talk so much about. Basically this guy was throwing out
crazy-looking stuff left and right.
I was wondering if you would like me to put him in contact with you.
Maybe you could do some work together?
Justin
mensa...@aol.com
> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
Because we can't get our hands on you to kick your ass.
>
> Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
> they think they're doing?
Informing everyone who cares to listen that in our opinion,
you are a fucktard.
>
> What is the purpose?
To warn newbies not to have sympathy for you.
>
> And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
> posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
> afterward just wondered, what's the point?
>
> Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
Sure, decent people stay out of the threads.
>
> Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
No, as long as it isn't _my_ employer you send
e-mail to, there's no need to lash out. You get
insulted simply because it's fun to do.
>
> Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
> purpose?
Sure, like I said, it keeps naive idiots out of your
threads.
>
> Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
> you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
The first step in solving a problem is recognizing you have
a problem. You certainly can't blame people for trying to get
you to recognize it.
>
> If so, what?
In your case, nothing, but whose fault is that? Not ours.
>
> Just curious.
But not enough to do anything about it.
>
>
> James Harris
Aatu Koskensilta
> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
It's no more, and probably somewhat less, dominant behaviour in math and
science newsgroups than on USENET in general. It's just the way people
have acted and will always act in a medium like this. Other's simply get
agitated by this or that post or poster while others enjoy pushing
people's buttons to see if they can make them act in what they consider
amusing way, sometimes elevating it to an art form, more often ending
looking a bit pathetic themselves.
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.kos...@xortec.fi)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
> jst...@msn.com wrote:
>
>> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
>> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>
>
> It's no more, and probably somewhat less, dominant behaviour in math and
> science newsgroups than on USENET in general.
Aatu is quite correct. A group that really typifies this behavior is
humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare. Unlike sci.math, there is no real
clear distinction between cranks and non-cranks. The main point of
contention is whether you believe that Shakespeare himself wrote these
plays (i.e. Strat or non-Strat). If you believe one way, the proponents
of the other side not only think you are wrong, but utterly contemptable.
Stephen
Rupert
I suppose it may not do very much good, but your loss of touch with
reality is sufficiently severe that you may fit the diagnostic criteria
for some mental illness, and you really should do something about it.
Dirk Van de moortel
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message news:1165092185.1...@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>
> Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
> they think they're doing?
They are doing you a service.
You thrive on the insults you get.
You need them to survive.
Dirk Vdm
Professor Frink
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
Shut up, turd
> Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
> they think they're doing?
Shut up, moron
> What is the purpose?
To annoy.
> And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
> posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
> afterward just wondered, what's the point?
Shut up, fsckface
> Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
Blow me.
> Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
Blow me again.
> Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
> purpose?
Shut up, imbecile.
> Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
> you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
Shut up, dork.
> If so, what?
Shut up, retard.
> Just curious.
Shut up, idiot.
> James Harris
Shut up, geek.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Gib Bogle
> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>
> Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
> they think they're doing?
>
> What is the purpose?
>
> And I know I've turned to insults at times myself
In every second post you accuse other people of being liars. Maybe you
don't consider this an insult. What is particularly obnoxious, and
turns everyone against you, is that you insult those who make sincere
efforts to help you.
Doug
"Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message
news:6Wmch.1084748$084.219256@attbi_s22...
That is all BULLSHIT.
JSH is a Troll/Crackpot/crank.
He asks for it and loves it.
It = Attention.
Aatu Koskensilta
> That is all BULLSHIT.
>
> JSH is a Troll/Crackpot/crank.
Quite possibly. How do you think this astonishing discovery of yours
affects the general remarks about newsgroup culture offered by me or
Stephen?
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
I am at a bit of a loss to see why you got so bent out of shape in
reaction to what I said. I don't see how what you said impinges upon
anything I said or vice versa - they are independent sets of statements.
But to react to your statements - if what you say is true, I think that
the relationship between JSH and many on sci.math must be something of a
symbiotic relationship. Presumably JSH enjoys the attention, but then a
large number of sci.math regulars enjoy giving him that attention.
What does mystify me is when people get angry on these exchanges. JSH
clearly believes his ideas, and most everybody else clearly doesn't
believe them, and it is abundantly clear that no side is going to
convince the other. So I don't see what the point is in arguing with
him, unless you get some kind of pleasure from the process.
In particular, if JSH is mentally ill as many of you suggest, it could
be that do engage him in debate is actually a kind of cruelty on your
parts. In any case, I certainly don't see the point of trying to
convince him of the error of his ways. Mentally ill people tend only to
react to medications, and it is typical of those kinds of diseases that
those suffering from them don't recognize it. Non-compliance in taking
medications is one of the primary reasons why they don't work. But to
somehow blame the mentally ill person for not taking his medicine, or
for being mentally ill, is the height of stupidity.
Best regards, Stephen
Doug
> Doug wrote:
>> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message
>> news:6Wmch.1084748$084.219256@attbi_s22...
>>
>>>Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
>>>
>>>>jst...@msn.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
>>>>>behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It's no more, and probably somewhat less, dominant behaviour in math and
>>>>science newsgroups than on USENET in general.
>>>
>>>Aatu is quite correct. A group that really typifies this behavior is
>>>humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare. Unlike sci.math, there is no real
>>>clear distinction between cranks and non-cranks. The main point of
>>>contention is whether you believe that Shakespeare himself wrote these
>>>plays (i.e. Strat or non-Strat). If you believe one way, the proponents
>>>of the other side not only think you are wrong, but utterly contemptable.
>>>
>>>Stephen
>>
>>
>> That is all BULLSHIT.
>>
>> JSH is a Troll/Crackpot/crank.
>> He asks for it and loves it.
>> It = Attention.
>
> I am at a bit of a loss to see why you got so bent out of shape in
> reaction to what I said.
it is not a personality contest, JSH clearly does not know math.
>I don't see how what you said impinges upon anything I said or vice versa -
>they are independent sets of statements.
you do continue with your bullshit....
>
> But to react to your statements - if what you say is true, I think that
> the relationship between JSH and many on sci.math must be something of a
> symbiotic relationship. Presumably JSH enjoys the attention, but then a
> large number of sci.math regulars enjoy giving him that attention.
that is not the issue or the point.
>
> What does mystify me is when people get angry on these exchanges. JSH
> clearly believes his ideas,
actually he does not, he knows it is BS, and trolls for attention
> and most everybody else clearly doesn't believe them, and it is abundantly
> clear that no side is going to convince the other.
so your math ability is => 0
>So I don't see what the point is in arguing with him, unless you get some
>kind of pleasure from the process.
>
> In particular, if JSH is mentally ill as many of you suggest, it could be
> that do engage him in debate is actually a kind of cruelty on your parts.
> In any case, I certainly don't see the point of trying to convince him of
> the error of his ways. Mentally ill people tend only to react to
> medications, and it is typical of those kinds of diseases that those
> suffering from them don't recognize it. Non-compliance in taking
> medications is one of the primary reasons why they don't work. But to
> somehow blame the mentally ill person for not taking his medicine, or for
> being mentally ill, is the height of stupidity.
why are you calling JSH mentally ill? He is just a troll.
>
> Best regards, Stephen
Doug
"Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.kos...@xortec.fi> wrote in message
news:K%och.65089$Jb7....@reader1.news.jippii.net...
> Doug wrote:
>> That is all BULLSHIT.
>>
>> JSH is a Troll/Crackpot/crank.
>
> Quite possibly. How do you think this astonishing discovery of yours
> affects the general remarks about newsgroup culture offered by me or
> Stephen?
your remarks are too general, and dismissible, JSH seeks attention like all
trolls, and
trolls die horrible deaths.
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
> you do continue with your bullshit....
I'll let this one go.
Aatu Koskensilta
> your remarks are too general, and dismissible, JSH seeks attention like all
> trolls, and
> trolls die horrible deaths.
Going on about horrible deaths, BULLSHIT, trolls and what not, is
perhaps not too general or dismissible, but it is rather silly.
jst...@msn.com
Oh please. I have a published result. I followed the rules and sent a
paper not only to a peer reviewing math journal but also to one that
used two reviewers.
Sure that journal tried to retract publication later--but then it died,
I'd have to be mentally ill to ignore the reality of my successes as
well as the inability of anyone to find fault with my proofs.
Here's a challenge for you, find any error in the following paper:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/ExtFactoring.pdf
I'm actually VERY curious about any problems you'd claim with it.
Post your opinion and then I'll come back to the subject of mental
illness, promise.
Ok?
James Harris
jst...@msn.com
> Doug wrote:
> > "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message
> > news:6Wmch.1084748$084.219256@attbi_s22...
> >
> >>Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> >>
> >>>jst...@msn.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> >>>>behavior on math and science newsgroups?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>It's no more, and probably somewhat less, dominant behaviour in math and
> >>>science newsgroups than on USENET in general.
> >>
> >>Aatu is quite correct. A group that really typifies this behavior is
> >>humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare. Unlike sci.math, there is no real
> >>clear distinction between cranks and non-cranks. The main point of
> >>contention is whether you believe that Shakespeare himself wrote these
> >>plays (i.e. Strat or non-Strat). If you believe one way, the proponents
> >>of the other side not only think you are wrong, but utterly contemptable.
> >>
> >>Stephen
> >
> >
> > That is all BULLSHIT.
> >
> > JSH is a Troll/Crackpot/crank.
> > He asks for it and loves it.
> > It = Attention.
>
> I am at a bit of a loss to see why you got so bent out of shape in
> reaction to what I said. I don't see how what you said impinges upon
> anything I said or vice versa - they are independent sets of statements.
Welcome to my world.
These people seem very serious and dedicated in their hate, but cannot
give rational reasons for it.
> But to react to your statements - if what you say is true, I think that
> the relationship between JSH and many on sci.math must be something of a
> symbiotic relationship. Presumably JSH enjoys the attention, but then a
> large number of sci.math regulars enjoy giving him that attention.
>
I've used the newsgroups over the years as a place to dump brainstormed
ideas.
That is a consistent reality on my part.
> What does mystify me is when people get angry on these exchanges. JSH
> clearly believes his ideas, and most everybody else clearly doesn't
> believe them, and it is abundantly clear that no side is going to
> convince the other. So I don't see what the point is in arguing with
> him, unless you get some kind of pleasure from the process.
>
I'm partly studying the behavior.
The answers I have go to ego, and delusion on the part of posters
replying to me, with a strong parasitic tinge.
> In particular, if JSH is mentally ill as many of you suggest, it could
> be that do engage him in debate is actually a kind of cruelty on your
> parts. In any case, I certainly don't see the point of trying to
> convince him of the error of his ways. Mentally ill people tend only to
> react to medications, and it is typical of those kinds of diseases that
> those suffering from them don't recognize it. Non-compliance in taking
> medications is one of the primary reasons why they don't work. But to
> somehow blame the mentally ill person for not taking his medicine, or
> for being mentally ill, is the height of stupidity.
>
> Best regards, Stephen
Excellent.
All rational points but you're not dealing with people who choose to be
rational.
James Harris
Doug
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165119022.8...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> Rupert wrote:
>> jst...@msn.com wrote:
>> > Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
>> > behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>> >
>> > Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
>> > they think they're doing?
>> >
>> > What is the purpose?
>> >
>> > And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
>> > posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
>> > afterward just wondered, what's the point?
>> >
>> > Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
>> >
>> > Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
>> >
>> > Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
>> > purpose?
>> >
>> > Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
>> > you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
>> >
>>
>> I suppose it may not do very much good, but your loss of touch with
>> reality is sufficiently severe that you may fit the diagnostic criteria
>> for some mental illness, and you really should do something about it.
>>
>
> Oh please. I have a published result.
no, you do not. It was never published, it was withdrawn, because it was
Quack.
> I followed the rules and sent a
> paper not only to a peer reviewing math journal but also to one that
> used two reviewers.
and they stopped it.
>
> Sure that journal tried to retract publication later--but then it died,
They only had one issue.
Your paper was never printed or published, or distributed, it was canned.
>
> I'd have to be mentally ill to ignore the reality of my successes as
> well as the inability of anyone to find fault with my proofs.
but you have no proofs, troll.
>
> Here's a challenge for you, find any error in the following paper:
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/ExtFactoring.pdf
The abstract is wrong. There is no summery and no conclusion.
The first paragragh is Quack.
"Over a hundred years ago subtle error crept into number theory.
Explaining the error is rather straightforward using some basic math-
ematics as the explanation primarily requires algebra."
Quack, Quack, Quack...............
Many years ago your mama caused a subtle error crept into your brain and
destroyed all logic and math ability.
Rupert
jst...@msn.com wrote:
> Rupert wrote:
> > jst...@msn.com wrote:
> > > Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> > > behavior on math and science newsgroups?
> > >
> > > Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
> > > they think they're doing?
> > >
> > > What is the purpose?
> > >
> > > And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
> > > posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
> > > afterward just wondered, what's the point?
> > >
> > > Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
> > >
> > > Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
> > >
> > > Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
> > > purpose?
> > >
> > > Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
> > > you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
> > >
> >
> > I suppose it may not do very much good, but your loss of touch with
> > reality is sufficiently severe that you may fit the diagnostic criteria
> > for some mental illness, and you really should do something about it.
> >
>
> Oh please. I have a published result.
What's a theorem you claim you've proved in that paper? I challenge you
even to so much as state a result that you claim you've proved in it,
never mind the question of whether it is correct.
> I followed the rules and sent a
> paper not only to a peer reviewing math journal but also to one that
> used two reviewers.
>
Yes, but the paper was rubbish.
> Sure that journal tried to retract publication later--but then it died,
>
> I'd have to be mentally ill to ignore the reality of my successes as
> well as the inability of anyone to find fault with my proofs.
>
You have no successes, and people constantly come up with good
objections to your alleged proofs. Well, okay, re-inventing an
algorithm for evaluating the prime counting function is a success of
sorts. It's nothing like the ground-breaking result you imagine it to
be.
> Here's a challenge for you, find any error in the following paper:
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/ExtFactoring.pdf
>
> I'm actually VERY curious about any problems you'd claim with it.
>
I might have a look.
Rupert
The first error is "That is, since c_1 is a constant with respect to m
it follows that g_1(m) has f as a factor, and it follows that g_2(m)
does not. Which forces r_1(m) to have f as a factor, while r_2(m) does
not, as the constant terms terms by not varying with m constrain them."
This simply doesn't follow.
Dork Spotter
What on earth did you do to make it so unreadable? Learn how to
create readable text documents, then don't. Then never post
here again, then pass away softly and quietly. I mean
Jesus Fucking Christ On a Stick, how hard is it in this
day and age to create a fucking readable document.
junoexpress
crowning achievement, then you really have lost it. I didn't read your
first "paper", but I did read your second paper. It was an utter piece
of crap. Even a mediocre grad student would instantly realize from
reading the very first sentence of the article (your abstract), that
you have never published in a reputable journal. From the looks of the
paper, it seems you've never even turned in a decent lab report.
Why not submit your first paper to Princeton if it's really that good?
BTW, did you ever think people insult you to _keep_ you stoked up
enough to continue in this pathetic charade of yours. In a sense,
you're a bit like a monkey: put in an insult, turn the crank (pardon
the pun), and out pops a bunch of preposterous shite.
But really, I guess the ans to your question about the reasons is
probably just sheer amusement and probably a curiosity in how much a
human being can delude himself and keep up an untenable, illogical
position (kinda like reading Don Quixote).
Keep wandering...
J
Proginoskes
Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> jst...@msn.com wrote:
> > Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> > behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>
> It's no more, and probably somewhat less, dominant behaviour in math and
> science newsgroups than on USENET in general. It's just the way people
> have acted and will always act in a medium like this. Other's simply get
> agitated by this or that post or poster while others enjoy pushing
> people's buttons to see if they can make them act in what they consider
> amusing way, sometimes elevating it to an art form, more often ending
> looking a bit pathetic themselves.
It more of an unintended consequence of instantaneous communication.
Someone can read a post, get mad, type in a tirade, and send it off
within a minute.
In the olden days, you couldn't send mail right away; you had to wait
until the next day. Chances are that if you wrote an angry letter and
put it in your mailbox, that the next morning you could realize you
overreacted and retrieve the letter before it was sent.
This cooling-off period is extremely lacking in Usenet.
--- Christopher Heckman
lits...@hotmail.com
jst...@msn.com wrote:
> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
Do you mean insults like these:
"You fucking idiot I TESTED IT AND NUMERICALLY
INTEGRATED IT AND FOUND IT CLOSE!
You are the goddamn fools who refuse to check and then
keep going on as if you are intelligent when you will NOT
EVEN FUCKING CHECK!!!"
> Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
> you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
If it gets you to seek help, that would be good.
David Bernier
I'm wondering how this looks:
Let's imagine Andrew Wiles writing:
"I'd have to be mentally ill to ignore the reality of my successes as
well as the inability of anyone to find fault with my proof of FLT."
David Bernier
Dirk Van de moortel
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message news:1165119370.8...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
No-one hates the village idiot.
The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
so the village idiot gets kicked around.
Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
Dirk Vdm
jst...@msn.com
He might write something like that if he were forced to post on Usenet
to defend his research.
Insults are a cheap shot. They are easy and require limited thought.
For instance, it's easier for me to reply noting that as a group the
sci.math newsgroup is incredibly stupid, and its stupidity continues to
amaze me as it ignores publication.
Now that's easier than defending the mathematical proofs in my paper or
explaining them in detail.
I think a LOT of posters use insults to pretend to be intelligent and
to not use any real effort in their replies as I've noticed that
posters who turn to insults often tend to post a lot.
Posting a lot with cogent replies would take a tremendous amount of
effort.
So insulting is not just about being a mean person, it's also about
being intellectually lazy.
Is sci.math really a stupid newsgroup then?
What arguments could you use to counter that accusation? Possibly the
mean intelligence of people on this group is well below the average for
a college educated adult, but is that a nice thing to point out?
And some might wonder, how would I know anyway?
Insults are easy. Intelligent replies are harder.
James Harris
hagman
jst...@msn.com schrieb:
> Here's a challenge for you, find any error in the following paper:
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/ExtFactoring.pdf
>
> I'm actually VERY curious about any problems you'd claim with it.
If
g_2(m) = a_2(m)*x + u*f
and
a_2(0) = 3
shouldn't you have
g_2(0) = 3*x+u*f
instead of
g_2(0) = c_2 = u*f
? (Note that you selected x to be non-zero)
David Moran
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165148129.7...@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Pot, meet the black kettle. You dish out insults all the time, but you can't
take them...You're pathetic, James.
Dave
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
> No-one hates the village idiot.
> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village idiot.
It shows the same mentality as a bully. It really does look like some
people get onto sci.math merely so that they can insult JSH. It seems
to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form of pleasure.
Stephen
Dirk Van de moortel
"Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
Once you realize that JSZ is the one who gets the most pleasure
out of it, you'll feel less disturbed :-)
Dirk Vdm
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>
>>Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>No-one hates the village idiot.
>>>The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>>>so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>>>Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>>
>>I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully. It really does
>>look like some people get onto sci.math merely so that they can insult JSH. It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form
>>of pleasure.
>
>
> Once you realize that JSZ is the one who gets the most pleasure
> out of it, you'll feel less disturbed :-)
I worry more about the people who engage in this bullying, than I worry
about JSH.
T.H. Ray
It's a sure indication of how little of a life I have
at the moment, to be replying in one of these threads.
But since you bring up the subject of intellectual
laziness, Mr. Harris, perhaps you can explain why you
refuse to follow any comprehensible proof strategy for
something you call a "proof." That's where the work
is. You need to get a clue that "brainstorming" and
"playing around with some concepts" is not the same as
doing mathematics.
Tom
The Correctinator
You are forced to post through google groups because
you have lost *SO* *MANY* legitimate accounts due
to your constant spamming.
Google groups - the last refuge of the troll, the
spammer, the imbecile, the scammer, the
off-topic moron, the flamer, the dork,
the scumbag, the crank, and the plotz.
Gib Bogle
You are just a worrier.
Dirk Van de moortel
"Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:pkDch.1085525$084.996589@attbi_s22...
Ah, don't worry about them. Look at them as service providers.
Without them JSH would have committed suicide a *very* long
time ago.
Dirk Vdm
David Bernier
[...]
> I think a LOT of posters use insults to pretend to be intelligent and
> to not use any real effort in their replies as I've noticed that
> posters who turn to insults often tend to post a lot.
>
> Posting a lot with cogent replies would take a tremendous amount of
> effort.
>
> So insulting is not just about being a mean person, it's also about
> being intellectually lazy.
>
> Is sci.math really a stupid newsgroup then?
>
> What arguments could you use to counter that accusation? Possibly the
> mean intelligence of people on this group is well below the average for
> a college educated adult, but is that a nice thing to point out?
[...]
The sci.math archives have about 900,000 articles; a mixed bag, if
you ask me.
David Bernier
junoexpress
> Is sci.math really a stupid newsgroup then?
>
> What arguments could you use to counter that accusation? Possibly the
> mean intelligence of people on this group is well below the average for
> a college educated adult, but is that a nice thing to point out?
>
your work: YOU are supposed to do that. YOU are the lazy one,
"brainstorming" half-baked ideas, throwing them out without having
really thought through what you've done, using very tedious language
and notation that you could have cleaned up and made intelligible if
you had just taken a bit more time, and then relying on others (like a
little baby) to correct what you've done and tell you that you are
right. Then of course, like Arturo, when they point out what you've
done and show you that you're wrong, you insult them and throw venemous
and paranoid accusations out. It should be painfully obvious to you
that everyone who has tried to help you, has given up on you.
If you were _really_ doing math, you would _know_ that you were right,
and you wouldn't have any need for the newsgroups. You don't see other
people in this group who are doing research post big portions of their
work and ask others to critique it, because in the real world, other
people don't have the time to sit down and go through all of you stuff:
they have their own work to do.
If you really want someone to go through your work critically, then do
what everybody else does: write up your work for publication in a
_legitimate_ math journal, and have it undergo the review process.
Until you do this, nobody who is even remotely reputable will believe
what you "claim".
J
jst...@msn.com
Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:pkDch.1085525$084.996589@attbi_s22...
> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> >> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
> >>
> >>>Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>No-one hates the village idiot.
> >>>>The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
> >>>>so the village idiot gets kicked around.
> >>>>Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
> >>>
> >>>I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully. It really does
> >>>look like some people get onto sci.math merely so that they can insult JSH. It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form
> >>>of pleasure.
> >>
> >>
> >> Once you realize that JSZ is the one who gets the most pleasure
> >> out of it, you'll feel less disturbed :-)
> >
> > I worry more about the people who engage in this bullying, than I worry about JSH.
>
> Ah, don't worry about them. Look at them as service providers.
> Without them JSH would have committed suicide a *very* long
> time ago.
>
> Dirk Vdm
LOL. Why? I'm having fun. I have one published paper that retracting
killed a math journal.
No one in history has even that.
So the only thing dead so far is a math journal.
Before this is over there may be some others on that heap as well.
And as for suicide, don't joke about that, it is just an inhuman thing
to do.
James Harris
Dirk Van de moortel
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message news:1165183513.1...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
>
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:pkDch.1085525$084.996589@attbi_s22...
>> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>> >>
>> >>>Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>No-one hates the village idiot.
>> >>>>The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>> >>>>so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>> >>>>Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>> >>>
>> >>>I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully. It really
>> >>>does
>> >>>look like some people get onto sci.math merely so that they can insult JSH. It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning
>> >>>form
>> >>>of pleasure.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Once you realize that JSZ is the one who gets the most pleasure
>> >> out of it, you'll feel less disturbed :-)
>> >
>> > I worry more about the people who engage in this bullying, than I worry about JSH.
>>
>> Ah, don't worry about them. Look at them as service providers.
>> Without them JSH would have committed suicide a *very* long
>> time ago.
>>
>> Dirk Vdm
>
> LOL. Why? I'm having fun.
Exactly.
And we make sure you continue having it, because we would all be
very sad if you would put an end to it.
> I have one published paper that retracting
> killed a math journal.
>
> No one in history has even that.
>
> So the only thing dead so far is a math journal.
>
> Before this is over there may be some others on that heap as well.
>
> And as for suicide, don't joke about that, it is just an inhuman thing
> to do.
I think that suicide is the most courageous thing a person can do
and I'm not joking.
You obviously are a very courageous person, so take care.
Dirk Vdm
jst...@msn.com
You're correct. Further down in the paper it is given correctly so
that is just a mistake on my part.
Good catch.
James Harris
jst...@msn.com
The constant terms with respect to m do not vary as m varies, so it
follows that any result at any m remains true without regard to m's
value, correct?
So why is that important? Because there are functions of m that
obscure what is happening where you can clear them out by setting m=0.
But since the value of m is irrelevant to terms independent of m,
setting m=0 is as valid as setting it to any other value to see what
happens, so your objection is refuted.
Now on to the subject of mental illness as promised...
> > Post your opinion and then I'll come back to the subject of mental
> > illness, promise.
> >
> > Ok?
The argument over terms constant with respect to a particular value are
the kinds of arguments I've seen over the years from posters who argue
over trivialities and then claim I am wrong.
That is NOT a sign of mental health.
After all, a person can argue with you about 1+1 = 2, IF THEY CHOOSE TO
DO SO.
Many of the arguments I've been in with certain Usenet posters over the
years have been as bad as that, like, how can anyone deny that terms
constant with respect to a particular variable are actually constant
with respect to that variable?
James Harris
marcus_b
Rupert has put his finger on the key problem.
> The constant terms with respect to m do not vary as m varies, so it
> follows that any result at any m remains true without regard to m's
> value, correct?
>
Not at all! Consider the functions
g1(m) = 5*m + 7 and
g2(m) = 5*m + 9
Note that g1(0) = 7 and g2(0) = 9. These are the constant terms
of g1(m) and g2(m) respectively. Indeed, they do not vary as m
varies.
Note that g1(0) is divisible by 7 and g2(0) is not divisible by 7.
Now above you say: "It follows that any result at any m remains
true without regard to m's value, correct?"
So g1(m) is divisible by 7 when m = 0. But it is NOT true that
g1(m) is divisible by 7 "without regard to m's value" - for example,
if m = 1, g1(m) = 12, which is not divisible by 7.
Similarly, g2(m) is not divisible by 7 when m = 0, but it is when
m = 1.
You seem to be making an extremely simple and obvious mistake.
Marcus.
[snip]
> So why is that important? Because there are functions of m that
> obscure what is happening where you can clear them out by setting m=0.
>
> But since the value of m is irrelevant to terms independent of m,
> setting m=0 is as valid as setting it to any other value to see what
> happens, so your objection is refuted.
>
> Now on to the subject of mental illness as promised...
>
>
>
> James Harris
mensa...@aol.com
So when you make death threats, you're not joking, are you?
>
>
> James Harris
Jesse F. Hughes
> You are forced to post through google groups because
> you have lost *SO* *MANY* legitimate accounts due
> to your constant spamming.
You're not only a liar, but you're goddamn stupid, too.
You have no evidence that JSH has ever lost an account. And you have
no idea what spamming means.
--
"I suggest to those who listen that they enjoy the world, whatever
their piece of it may be, as much as they can over the next few days,
as soon enough, it will pass away, thanks to people who call
themselves 'mathematicians'." -- JSH envisions geek Ragnarok
Rupert
No.
> So why is that important? Because there are functions of m that
> obscure what is happening where you can clear them out by setting m=0.
>
> But since the value of m is irrelevant to terms independent of m,
> setting m=0 is as valid as setting it to any other value to see what
> happens, so your objection is refuted.
>
Nonsense.
> Now on to the subject of mental illness as promised...
>
>
> > > Post your opinion and then I'll come back to the subject of mental
> > > illness, promise.
> > >
> > > Ok?
>
> The argument over terms constant with respect to a particular value are
> the kinds of arguments I've seen over the years from posters who argue
> over trivialities and then claim I am wrong.
>
> That is NOT a sign of mental health.
>
> After all, a person can argue with you about 1+1 = 2, IF THEY CHOOSE TO
> DO SO.
>
> Many of the arguments I've been in with certain Usenet posters over the
> years have been as bad as that, like, how can anyone deny that terms
> constant with respect to a particular variable are actually constant
> with respect to that variable?
>
This argument of yours is utterly ridiculous. Anyone can see that it is
wrong. It is absolutely astonishing that you still defend it after all
these years. That is what is the sign of poor mental health.
>
> James Harris
jst...@msn.com
Why?
Are you someone's boss or something? Is there supposed to be some
special rule by which people who like to play with mathematics need
PERMISSION from the math community?
What the fuck is wrong with you people?
What makes you think you have the right to screw with other people's
lives just because they choose to dabble in some math?
I have as much right to post on Usenet as anyone else, and I have a
right to do so without having to face a barrage of insults from fools
pretending they are doing good for humanity when they are just being
assholes.
James Harris
T.H. Ray
Your freedom of speech is secure. It's your mathematics
that's shaky. Look -- whether it comes from an asshole
or not, the advice to learn proof methods in order
to apply some convention to your attempt to communicate
what you think is a result, is sound advice. You
communicate nothing at all otherwise. You don't even
know if you have a result worth communicating. If you
don't know, who does?
Tom
Proginoskes
He did, fairly soon after, and submitted it, but didn't say anything
more. He recently re-submitted it to Annals of Mathematics; see the
thread "Under Review".
--- Christopher Heckman
Doug
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165183513.1...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
True, JSH wrote a paper that killed a Math Journal.
Although they only had 1 issue ever.
What will JSH destroy next ?
gjed...@gmail.com
There's a set of special rules you ought to follow in order to
communicate your messages to mathematicians. You don't have to follow
them, it's up to you. We don't have to read crap and accept it as
'proof'. Deal?
jst...@msn.com
It is a trivially easy idea which passed formal peer review.
I have explained it in person to a leading mathematician at Vanderbilt
University.
To date the only objections have come from posters like yourself on
Usenet.
> > Now on to the subject of mental illness as promised...
> >
> >
> > > > Post your opinion and then I'll come back to the subject of mental
> > > > illness, promise.
> > > >
> > > > Ok?
> >
> > The argument over terms constant with respect to a particular value are
> > the kinds of arguments I've seen over the years from posters who argue
> > over trivialities and then claim I am wrong.
> >
> > That is NOT a sign of mental health.
> >
> > After all, a person can argue with you about 1+1 = 2, IF THEY CHOOSE TO
> > DO SO.
> >
> > Many of the arguments I've been in with certain Usenet posters over the
> > years have been as bad as that, like, how can anyone deny that terms
> > constant with respect to a particular variable are actually constant
> > with respect to that variable?
> >
>
> This argument of yours is utterly ridiculous. Anyone can see that it is
> wrong. It is absolutely astonishing that you still defend it after all
> these years. That is what is the sign of poor mental health.
Yet I not only have this result I also have my prime counting function
find, where there you challenge its value despite unique features which
you refuse to address though I repeatedly bring them up.
My analysis is that you feel a satisfaction in just saying no to me
though deep down you may realize that you are not changing the
mathematical argument, but by saying no to me, you can feel relevant to
the discussion.
After all, what if you agreed with the obvious mathematical arguments?
Where would you go then? After all, who are you?
Right now you have an identity as someone disagreeing with one of the
greatest mathematical discoverers in human history.
If you agree with what is mathematically correct, what do you have
then?
James Harris
William Hughes
Not quite true. There is also the fact that your paper was rejected by
the Annals. You have never explained why you think
your "simple but revolutionary" paper was rejected.
- William Hughes
Michael Press
<1165129691.4...@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
"Proginoskes" <CCHe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> > jst...@msn.com wrote:
> > > Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> > > behavior on math and science newsgroups?
> >
> > It's no more, and probably somewhat less, dominant behaviour in math and
> > science newsgroups than on USENET in general. It's just the way people
> > have acted and will always act in a medium like this. Other's simply get
> > agitated by this or that post or poster while others enjoy pushing
> > people's buttons to see if they can make them act in what they consider
> > amusing way, sometimes elevating it to an art form, more often ending
> > looking a bit pathetic themselves.
>
> It more of an unintended consequence of instantaneous communication.
> Someone can read a post, get mad, type in a tirade, and send it off
> within a minute.
>
> In the olden days, you couldn't send mail right away; you had to wait
> until the next day. Chances are that if you wrote an angry letter and
> put it in your mailbox, that the next morning you could realize you
> overreacted and retrieve the letter before it was sent.
>
> This cooling-off period is extremely lacking in Usenet.
I write the polemic off-line. Once that is whipped into
shape, I write something else to send, or nothing.
Works very well in business.
--
Michael Press
Tim Peters
> ...
> Right now you have an identity as someone disagreeing with one of the
> greatest mathematical discoverers in human history.
And you wonder why your mental health is questioned? Hint: read what you
write.
You've questioned it yourself, previously finding at least one plausible
illness that could account for these delusions of grandeur:
http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=444857&tstart=0
> If you agree with what is mathematically correct, what do you have
> then?
In reality, exactly what we have now: pointing out the same old elementary
errors to the same old crank:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_%28person%29
Rupert
It is a trivially wrong idea, and the fact that it was published
indicates gross incompetence on the part of the editors. Do you have
any evidence that it went through any actual peer review process, by
the way?
> I have explained it in person to a leading mathematician at Vanderbilt
> University.
>
Did that person say the idea was correct?
> To date the only objections have come from posters like yourself on
> Usenet.
>
To date no-one you have explained the idea to has agreed with you, no?
>
> > > Now on to the subject of mental illness as promised...
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Post your opinion and then I'll come back to the subject of mental
> > > > > illness, promise.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok?
> > >
> > > The argument over terms constant with respect to a particular value are
> > > the kinds of arguments I've seen over the years from posters who argue
> > > over trivialities and then claim I am wrong.
> > >
> > > That is NOT a sign of mental health.
> > >
> > > After all, a person can argue with you about 1+1 = 2, IF THEY CHOOSE TO
> > > DO SO.
> > >
> > > Many of the arguments I've been in with certain Usenet posters over the
> > > years have been as bad as that, like, how can anyone deny that terms
> > > constant with respect to a particular variable are actually constant
> > > with respect to that variable?
> > >
> >
> > This argument of yours is utterly ridiculous. Anyone can see that it is
> > wrong. It is absolutely astonishing that you still defend it after all
> > these years. That is what is the sign of poor mental health.
>
> Yet I not only have this result
It's wrong.
> I also have my prime counting function
> find, where there you challenge its value despite unique features which
> you refuse to address though I repeatedly bring them up.
>
What unique features?
> My analysis is that you feel a satisfaction in just saying no to me
> though deep down you may realize that you are not changing the
> mathematical argument, but by saying no to me, you can feel relevant to
> the discussion.
>
Really.
> After all, what if you agreed with the obvious mathematical arguments?
>
> Where would you go then? After all, who are you?
>
You may be surprised to hear this, but my participation in these
discussions is not my biggest source of a sense of achievement. I get
that more from other stuff, like working on my thesis. This is more
just entertainment.
> Right now you have an identity as someone disagreeing with one of the
> greatest mathematical discoverers in human history.
>
You really are too hysterical. Yes, that's right, James, my identity is
defined in terms of my relationship with you. Dream on.
> If you agree with what is mathematically correct, what do you have
> then?
>
Unlike you, I have actually proved some interesting theorems. (I think
they're interesting, anyway). There are also other activities I engage
in from which I derive a sense of self-worth. These discussions are
irrelevant to my sense of self-worth.
>
> James Harris
Proginoskes
Don't give him the credit for destroying the journal; JSH personally
blames "everyone in sci.math" (from the thread "JSH: Same old crap" in
sci.math, posted Thurs, Jan 26, 2006, 7:37 pm):
jst...@msn.com wrote:
> I'm stuck with few options with you journal killers having alerted the
> math world to me, while getting one of my papers yanked.
My reply to that was:
> "Journal killers"? Do you really think that's what all the "sci.math"
> people are capable of? It's like peeing a on nuclear weapon until it
> rusts and won't work.
>
> Just a minute ... HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
> HA HA!
>
> That's rich. That one's going in my "great quotes" collection. (Well,
> maybe not ... I'm not likely to forget it.)
>
> Maybe you should start a Usenet group of your own:
> alt.humor.james-harris. Do stand-up. Gems like this don't have to be
> restricted to mathematical groups.
--- Christopher Heckman
Proginoskes
jst...@msn.com wrote:
> [...]
> It is a trivially easy idea which passed formal peer review. [...]
Well, so did the proposition that pi is not really the accepted value
of 3.14159265..., and that almost got written into the legal code. From
David Wells's _The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting
Numbers_, 1997, p. 35:
"In 1897, House Bill No. 246 was presented to the House of
Representatives of the State of Indiana. It was based on the
circle-squaring efforts of one Edwin J. Goodwin, a physician but no
mathematician, who boldly titled his proposal 'A bill introducing a new
mathematical truth'. Despite being both very obscure and very absurd,
it sailed through its first reading but was held up before a second
reading due to the intervention of C. A. Waldo, a professor of
mathematics who happened to be passing through. Its second reading has
not taken place to this day!"
Let us count the similarities between JSH and Goodwin here:
(1) Both contested a result which was well-established.
(2) Neither was a mathematician.
(3) Neither could write a legible paper supporting his results.
(4) It passed at first but was never formally "put into use".
(5) A mathematician stopped the process which had clearly gone wrong.
All of which suggests the following conjecture:
CONJECTURE: James S. Harris is the reincarnation of Edwin J. Goodwin.
--- Christopher Heckman
Aatu Koskensilta
> You are forced to post through google groups because
> you have lost *SO* *MANY* legitimate accounts due
> to your constant spamming.
Really? When has James spammed or lost an account?
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.kos...@xortec.fi)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Jesse F. Hughes
> jst...@msn.com wrote:
>> [...]
>> It is a trivially easy idea which passed formal peer review. [...]
>
> Well, so did the proposition that pi is not really the accepted value
> of 3.14159265..., and that almost got written into the legal code. From
> David Wells's _The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting
> Numbers_, 1997, p. 35:
>
> "In 1897, House Bill No. 246 was presented to the House of
> Representatives of the State of Indiana. It was based on the
> circle-squaring efforts of one Edwin J. Goodwin, a physician but no
> mathematician, who boldly titled his proposal 'A bill introducing a new
> mathematical truth'. Despite being both very obscure and very absurd,
> it sailed through its first reading but was held up before a second
> reading due to the intervention of C. A. Waldo, a professor of
> mathematics who happened to be passing through. Its second reading has
> not taken place to this day!"
I'm not sure that a reading in a state House counts as "formal peer
review".
--
Jesse F. Hughes
"He was still there, shiny and blue green and full of sin."
-- Philip Marlowe stalks a bluebottle fly in
Raymond Chandler's /The Little Sister/
Doug
"Proginoskes" <CCHe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165215532.5...@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
That Goodwin incident is also in the book "A History of Pi" by Petr
Beckmann, 1971 Golem Press, I highly recommend it.
It has complete history and equations, Newton was something else, Euclid,
Archimedes, Euler, Leubniz,Gauss all worked on it.
Professor Frink
"Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.kos...@xortec.fi> wrote in message
news:2CSch.65782$6x2....@reader1.news.jippii.net...
> The Correctinator wrote:
> > You are forced to post through google groups because
> > you have lost *SO* *MANY* legitimate accounts due
> > to your constant spamming.
>
Every time he posts, you ignorant twat. Learn about
newsgroups and their topics, you clueless newbie.
Try learning a tiny bit about Usenet before you
attempt "posting".
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Jesse F. Hughes
> "Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.kos...@xortec.fi> wrote in message
> news:2CSch.65782$6x2....@reader1.news.jippii.net...
>> The Correctinator wrote:
>> > You are forced to post through google groups because
>> > you have lost *SO* *MANY* legitimate accounts due
>> > to your constant spamming.
>>
>> Really? When has James spammed...
>
> Every time he posts, you ignorant twat. Learn about
> newsgroups and their topics, you clueless newbie.
> Try learning a tiny bit about Usenet before you
> attempt "posting".
Learn what the word "spam" means, silly boy.
It does not mean "off-topic post".
--
Jesse F. Hughes
"Yesterday was Judgment Day. How'd you do?"
-- The Flatlanders
Richard Henry
Professor Frink wrote:
> "Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.kos...@xortec.fi> wrote in message
> news:2CSch.65782$6x2....@reader1.news.jippii.net...
> > The Correctinator wrote:
> > > You are forced to post through google groups because
> > > you have lost *SO* *MANY* legitimate accounts due
> > > to your constant spamming.
> >
> > Really? When has James spammed...
>
> Every time he posts, you ignorant twat. Learn about
> newsgroups and their topics, you clueless newbie.
> Try learning a tiny bit about Usenet before you
> attempt "posting".
A free clue for you:
Dirk Van de moortel
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message news:1165186609....@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> <jst...@msn.com> wrote in message news:1165183513.1...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
[snip]
>> >>
>> >> Ah, don't worry about them. Look at them as service providers.
>> >> Without them JSH would have committed suicide a *very* long
>> >> time ago.
>> >>
>> >> Dirk Vdm
>> >
>> > LOL. Why? I'm having fun.
>>
>> Exactly.
>> And we make sure you continue having it, because we would all be
>> very sad if you would put an end to it.
>
> I use the newsgroups to brainstorm.
You use the newsgroup to get attention.
No matter what kind. No problem, you're not alone.
>
> Even when it doesn't look like that's what I'm doing.
>
> That is what I'm doing.
>
> So you're all just dragged along in my adventure, and some of you think
> you have a bigger role than you do.
I don't know about the others, but I'm not interested
in your trivial lack of trivial math skills. I'm interested
in how your brain works (or fails to work).
My only role is to make a modest contribution in feeding
you just enough to prevent you from going away, which you...
>
> But you don't.
indeed ... which you don't. Good!
>
> This is my story.
>
>> > I have one published paper that retracting
>> > killed a math journal.
>> >
>> > No one in history has even that.
>> >
>> > So the only thing dead so far is a math journal.
>> >
>> > Before this is over there may be some others on that heap as well.
>> >
>> > And as for suicide, don't joke about that, it is just an inhuman thing
>> > to do.
>>
>> I think that suicide is the most courageous thing a person can do
>> and I'm not joking.
>> You obviously are a very courageous person, so take care.
>>
>> Dirk Vdm
>
> You're just a piece of trash, barely even human any more.
Well, it's humans that commit suicide, isn't it?
I don't see what is inhuman about it - quite on the contrary.
I'm quite serious about this.
I couldn't do it, but I'm sure you can.
But please don't.
Dirk Vdm
>
> Make no mistake either. I destroyed you.
>
>
> James Harris
Paul
Sammy
"Paul" <paul...@coldmail.ca> wrote in message
news:03934ba3769c3d4b...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
> In article <45744003$0$20538$8826...@free.teranews.com>
> "Professor Frink" <none@n.n> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.kos...@xortec.fi> wrote in message
>> news:2CSch.65782$6x2....@reader1.news.jippii.net...
>> > The Correctinator wrote:
>> > > You are forced to post through google groups because
>> > > you have lost *SO* *MANY* legitimate accounts due
>> > > to your constant spamming.
>> >
>> > Really? When has James spammed...
>>
>> Every time he posts, you ignorant twat. Learn about
>> newsgroups and their topics, you clueless newbie.
>> Try learning a tiny bit about Usenet before you
>> attempt "posting".
>
>
JSH is like a tree in the woods that everybody pisses on when they go by.
And he likes it.
Red
Who is forcing you to do anything, bitch?
"Insults are a cheap shot. They are easy and require limited thought."
YOu should now, you use them in every post. You
just called the people here " the little people
that get dragged along, but don't really matter"
SO I guess that applies to me, and I am one
of the little people shrowded by your genius, huh?.
And then you whine when you feel insulted, but then you
feel free to lash out. You are a hypocritical bitch.
Go fuck yourself, you two-bit dildo. I am betting
here $500 that by 2010, you will still be posting
the same garbage here, and no respectable journal
will have published _anything_ of yours. Wanna take
me on?. Want to extend the deadline till 2015, say?
Keep hiding behind your high I.Q club (whose
dick did you have to suck to get in?. I'm sure
the test results lone were not enough) and other
fantasies. And if you ever get any real balls, go
insult someone face to face.
Fuck you.
Proginoskes
Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> "Proginoskes" <CCHe...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > jst...@msn.com wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> It is a trivially easy idea which passed formal peer review. [...]
> >
> > Well, so did the proposition that pi is not really the accepted value
> > of 3.14159265..., and that almost got written into the legal code. From
> > David Wells's _The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting
> > Numbers_, 1997, p. 35:
> >
> > "In 1897, House Bill No. 246 was presented to the House of
> > Representatives of the State of Indiana. It was based on the
> > circle-squaring efforts of one Edwin J. Goodwin, a physician but no
> > mathematician, who boldly titled his proposal 'A bill introducing a new
> > mathematical truth'. Despite being both very obscure and very absurd,
> > it sailed through its first reading but was held up before a second
> > reading due to the intervention of C. A. Waldo, a professor of
> > mathematics who happened to be passing through. Its second reading has
> > not taken place to this day!"
>
> I'm not sure that a reading in a state House counts as "formal peer
> review".
Well, then, that's your problem, isn't it?
((In the spirit of the title of this thread 8-) )) Idiot.
--- Christopher Heckman
Doug
"Sammy" <spam...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:457484a6$0$97268$892e...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
>
>
> JSH is like a tree in the woods that everybody pisses on when they go by.
> And he likes it.
JSH and his sister;
http://libertalia.iespana.es/libertalia/images/pinhead1.jpg
The Last Danish Pastry
message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>
>> No-one hates the village idiot.
>> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>
> I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village
> idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully.
Elsewhere in this very thread James says: "I'm having fun."
Equally, those who correct him or mock him, are also, I suppose
"having fun".
So, James Harris versus sci.math does not appear to be a zero-sum
game. Everybody wins!
> It really does look like some people get onto sci.math merely so
> that they can insult JSH.
Well, yes. But remember that the next round of insults is always
kicked off by James. If he merely stopped posting here he would not be
insulted here. And does he stop? ... Sometimes. But he always comes
back... and the fun continues.
> It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form of pleasure.
Yes, on both sides. And yet... its fun!
--
Clive Tooth
http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?gallery_id=61771
jst...@msn.com
> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in
> message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>
> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> >
> >> No-one hates the village idiot.
> >> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
> >> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
> >> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
> >
> > I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village
> > idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully.
>
> Elsewhere in this very thread James says: "I'm having fun."
YEARS ago I said that I would shake the foundations of the mathematical
community.
That was well before I had any major results.
Of course, the sci.math community poked fun at that statement.
Yet the shaking started with the sci.math'ers taking down a math
journal by bushwhacking the editors, getting them to pull a paper that
not only passed formal peer review--but peer review by TWO REVIEWERS.
So my promise from years ago is being fulfilled.
How can that not be fun?
> Equally, those who correct him or mock him, are also, I suppose
> "having fun".
>
> So, James Harris versus sci.math does not appear to be a zero-sum
> game. Everybody wins!
>
If you people are having fun it's only because you're too stupid to
understand what's happening because you forget details--like my
promises years ago.
I guess a few years seems like so much to you in your lives.
But to me, they're like a few days.
>
> > It really does look like some people get onto sci.math merely so
> > that they can insult JSH.
>
> Well, yes. But remember that the next round of insults is always
> kicked off by James. If he merely stopped posting here he would not be
> insulted here. And does he stop? ... Sometimes. But he always comes
> back... and the fun continues.
>
Why would I stop posting?
And why, oh why should I?
I thought Usenet was a place where freedom of speech was an ideal.
What is your Usenet?
Don't answer. You clearly stated it above.
Your Usenet is a place where some people can pick on other people,
trying to drive them from posting just because they think it's fun!
>
> > It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form of pleasure.
>
> Yes, on both sides. And yet... its fun!
>
> --
> Clive Tooth
I think it's fun when human society progresses by the pursuit of
knowledge DESPITE people like you who in spite seek to destroy the soul
of the world.
But you have nothing inside, do you? You have nothing you believe in,
no purpose in life, other than attempting to cause others pain.
James Harris
David Moran
> no purpose in life, other than attempting to cause others pain.
>
slander people for disagreeing with you when it's obvious you don't
understand their refutations. It's like my girlfriend arguing with me about
Partial Differential Equations, something I know about but she doesn't. It
must be sad wasting your life on useless crap where the rest of us are
productive members of society. Go take up a hobby or learn something. Better
yet, do what the rest of us have done and get a degree in math. Yes, I know
you have a physics degree, but that is NOT the same as a math degree; nor is
it any better or any worse than a math degree.
Dave
Doug
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165283370.5...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
> The Last Danish Pastry wrote:
>> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in
>> message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>>
>> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >
>> >> No-one hates the village idiot.
>> >> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>> >> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>> >> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>> >
>> > I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village
>> > idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully.
>>
>> Elsewhere in this very thread James says: "I'm having fun."
>
> YEARS ago I said that I would shake the foundations of the mathematical
> community.
You were raving then too ?
>
> That was well before I had any major results.
When will that be ?
>
>
> Yet the shaking started with the sci.math'ers taking down a math
> journal by bushwhacking the editors, getting them to pull a paper that
> not only passed formal peer review--but peer review by TWO REVIEWERS.
Wrong, they withdrew your paper, it was garbage.
>
>
> How can that not be fun?
>
>> Equally, those who correct him or mock him, are also, I suppose
>> "having fun".
>>
>> So, James Harris versus sci.math does not appear to be a zero-sum
>> game. Everybody wins!
>>
>
> If you people are having fun it's only because you're too stupid to
> understand what's happening because you forget details--like my
> promises years ago.
What promices ?
>
> I guess a few years seems like so much to you in your lives.
>
> But to me, they're like a few days.
Prizon is like that.
>>
>> > It really does look like some people get onto sci.math merely so
>> > that they can insult JSH.
>>
>> Well, yes. But remember that the next round of insults is always
>> kicked off by James. If he merely stopped posting here he would not be
>> insulted here. And does he stop? ... Sometimes. But he always comes
>> back... and the fun continues.
>>
>
> Why would I stop posting?
Trolls die horrable deaths.
>
> And why, oh why should I?
To work at your job at the sanitarium.
>
>
> Your Usenet is a place where some people can pick on other people,
> trying to drive them from posting just because they think it's fun!
That is what you do, and you are a silly slob of a moron.
>
>>
>> > It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form of pleasure.
>>
>> Yes, on both sides. And yet... its fun!
>>
>> --
>> Clive Tooth
>
> I think it's fun when human society progresses by the pursuit of
> knowledge DESPITE people like you who in spite seek to destroy the soul
> of the world.
Evil Mathematitions Unite and extinguish this burdon of blather no-nothing
of math called JSH
>
> But I have nothing inside, do I? I have nothing I believe in,
Proginoskes
jst...@msn.com wrote:
> The Last Danish Pastry wrote:
> > "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in
> > message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
> >
> > > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> > >
> > >> No-one hates the village idiot.
> > >> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
> > >> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
> > >> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
> > >
> > > I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village
> > > idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully.
> >
> > Elsewhere in this very thread James says: "I'm having fun."
>
> YEARS ago I said that I would shake the foundations of the mathematical
> community.
>
> That was well before I had any major results.
>
> Of course, the sci.math community poked fun at that statement.
>
> Yet the shaking started with the sci.math'ers taking down a math
> journal by bushwhacking the editors, getting them to pull a paper that
> not only passed formal peer review--but peer review by TWO REVIEWERS.
Which reminds me ... Have you heard from Princeton yet?
--- Christopher Heckman
mensa...@aol.com
He said elsewhere that he called them and they said they haven't
gotten any word back from the reviewers.
Wouldn't it be great if he got his rejection on Christmas?
Can you think of anything more delightfully depressing than JSH
sitting around on Christmas day, all alone, thousands of miles
from his family, crying and reading his rejection e-mail over and
over while he gets drunk.
What I wouldn't give to be there!
>
> --- Christopher Heckman
Proginoskes
What about my paper?
((A few minutes and a few wrong passwords later)) My paper has
progressed in status to "Decision in Process" (November 29). That's
another one which every paper goes through, though.
> Wouldn't it be great if he got his rejection on Christmas?
It wouldn't happen; they're not THAT cruel at Princeton ...
... which is why the Fighting Mongooses are going to do it for them! HA
HA HA!
> Can you think of anything more delightfully depressing than JSH
> sitting around on Christmas day, all alone, thousands of miles
> from his family,
You mean he doesn't still live in his mother's basement?
> crying and reading his rejection e-mail over and over while he gets drunk.
>
> What I wouldn't give to be there!
If he gets a rejection, will he post it though? (Maybe if he's drunk
enough, he won't care ... Or maybe he'll post it and say: "See?
Princeton is part of the conspiracy!".)
Archimedes Plutonium got a rejection letter from the Annals of Logic
about his "proof" of the Twin Prime Conjecture, which he printed
because he was proud of something they said at the end (like "the
attempted proof does have a nice symmetry to it"). Of course, they only
put it there to be nice; you never know who will turn psychotic.
--- Christopher Heckman
Aatu Koskensilta
> Every time he posts, you ignorant twat. Learn about
> newsgroups and their topics, you clueless newbie.
It's not a shame to be new to USENET or to be mistaken about James
having lost accounts. In good time you'll learn what the term 'spam'
means in context of USENET. In particular, you'll learn that adding
unrelated newsgroups to the newsgroups line, without even mentioning it
in the post, is considered bad form. Who knows, perhaps you'll even
learn about the fascinating subcultures of USENET - the trolls, the
kookhunters, ... -, and be acquainted with many bits of curious lore!
> Try learning a tiny bit about Usenet before you
> attempt "posting".
Yes, I think it's a good idea for you to learn about USENET.
The Last Danish Pastry
news:1165283370.5...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
> The Last Danish Pastry wrote:
>> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in
>> message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>>
>> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >
>> >> No-one hates the village idiot.
>> >> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>> >> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>> >> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>> >
>> > I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village
>> > idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully.
>>
>> Elsewhere in this very thread James says: "I'm having fun."
>
> YEARS ago I said that I would shake the foundations of the
> mathematical
> community.
>
> That was well before I had any major results.
Oh right... way back then... before you had any major results...
right.
> Of course, the sci.math community poked fun at that statement.
Bastards.
> Yet the shaking started with the sci.math'ers taking down a math
> journal by bushwhacking the editors, getting them to pull a paper
> that
> not only passed formal peer review--but peer review by TWO
> REVIEWERS.
>
> So my promise from years ago is being fulfilled.
A bit like an Old Testament prophet really...
"Yea, verily; And the TWO REVIEWERS appeareth in the sky; And I shall
journey into the land of the Surds and the Cosines; And Dedekind will
be smitten in the thigh and in the shoulder; And Galois shall be cast
into the midst of the pit of roaring lions; And so my promise from
years ago is being fulfilled. I am the Lord. Look on my works, ye
mighty, and despair."
David C. Ullrich
>The Last Danish Pastry wrote:
>> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in
>> message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>>
>> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >
>> >> No-one hates the village idiot.
>> >> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>> >> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>> >> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>> >
>> > I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village
>> > idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully.
>>
>> Elsewhere in this very thread James says: "I'm having fun."
>
>YEARS ago I said that I would shake the foundations of the mathematical
>community.
>
>That was well before I had any major results.
>
>Of course, the sci.math community poked fun at that statement.
And of course they still _are_ poking fun at it, seeing as how
the shaking has not yet begun, after all these YEARS.
>Yet the shaking started with the sci.math'ers taking down a math
>journal by bushwhacking the editors, getting them to pull a paper that
>not only passed formal peer review--but peer review by TWO REVIEWERS.
Guffaw. Fascinating. You somehow get a bit of nonsense published in
a journal that clearly has an incompetent editorial staff. After
they retract the paper the journal folds. And you take that as
evidence that _you_ are shaking the foundations of the mathematical
community?
>So my promise from years ago is being fulfilled.
>
>How can that not be fun?
>
>> Equally, those who correct him or mock him, are also, I suppose
>> "having fun".
>>
>> So, James Harris versus sci.math does not appear to be a zero-sum
>> game. Everybody wins!
>>
>
>If you people are having fun it's only because you're too stupid to
>understand what's happening because you forget details--like my
>promises years ago.
>
>I guess a few years seems like so much to you in your lives.
>
>But to me, they're like a few days.
>
>>
>> > It really does look like some people get onto sci.math merely so
>> > that they can insult JSH.
>>
>> Well, yes. But remember that the next round of insults is always
>> kicked off by James. If he merely stopped posting here he would not be
>> insulted here. And does he stop? ... Sometimes. But he always comes
>> back... and the fun continues.
>>
>
>Why would I stop posting?
>
>And why, oh why should I?
>
>I thought Usenet was a place where freedom of speech was an ideal.
This is just as obviously ridiculous as your complaints about insults.
Freedom of speech is the ideal for _you_, but it's not supposed to
apply to anyone else. (Nobody has taken any steps to try to prevent
you from posting. You have _stated_ _here_ that the reason you made
those complaints to OSU was to get me to stop posting in "your"
threads. But you think freedom of speech is supposed to be the
ideal. It is to laugh. Haha.)
>What is your Usenet?
>
>Don't answer. You clearly stated it above.
>
>Your Usenet is a place where some people can pick on other people,
>trying to drive them from posting just because they think it's fun!
>
>>
>> > It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form of pleasure.
>>
>> Yes, on both sides. And yet... its fun!
>>
>> --
>> Clive Tooth
>
>I think it's fun when human society progresses by the pursuit of
>knowledge DESPITE people like you who in spite seek to destroy the soul
>of the world.
>
>But you have nothing inside, do you? You have nothing you believe in,
>no purpose in life, other than attempting to cause others pain.
>
>
>James Harris
************************
David C. Ullrich
Chung
"Dork Spotter" <Do...@Dork.Dork> 撰寫於郵件新聞:ltidnXX3W_wi-e_Y...@lmi.net...
>
> <jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:1165119022.8...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> What on earth did you do to make it so unreadable? Learn how to
> create readable text documents, then don't. Then never post
> here again, then pass away softly and quietly. I mean
> Jesus Fucking Christ On a Stick, how hard is it in this
> day and age to create a fucking readable document.
>
>
>
>
Richard Tobin
<jst...@msn.com> wrote:
>That was well before I had any major results.
It's still well before you have any major results, and always will be,
unless you try to learn from the people who help you, instead of
insulting them.
>Yet the shaking started with the sci.math'ers taking down a math
>journal by bushwhacking the editors, getting them to pull a paper that
>not only passed formal peer review--but peer review by TWO REVIEWERS.
How many reviewers do you think there usually are?
>So my promise from years ago is being fulfilled.
If you think a journal almost no-one had heard of ceasing publication
is "shaking the foundations of the mathematical community" you're much
mistaken. It probably wasn't even because of your paper that it
closed: it failed because it was a poorly-run journal, which is the
same reason it accepted your paper.
Even if your paper was the cause, it's hardly something to crow about.
"Accepting my paper was such an embarrassing mistake that the journal
had to shut down" - what a boast!
-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
Chung
Richard Tobin
mensa...@aol.compost <mensa...@aol.com> wrote:
>Can you think of anything more delightfully depressing than JSH
>sitting around on Christmas day, all alone, thousands of miles
>from his family, crying and reading his rejection e-mail over and
>over while he gets drunk.
>
>What I wouldn't give to be there!
You know, James Harris may be a foul-mouthed idiot, but I'd rather
spend christmas with him than with you.
Doug
"Richard Tobin" <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:el3t0v$8o$3...@pc-news.cogsci.ed.ac.uk...
> In article <1165301653....@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
> mensa...@aol.compost <mensa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Can you think of anything more delightfully depressing than JSH
>>sitting around on Christmas day, all alone, thousands of miles
>>from his family, crying and reading his rejection e-mail over and
>>over while he gets drunk.
>>
>>What I wouldn't give to be there!
>
> You know, James Harris may be a foul-mouthed idiot, but I'd rather
> spend christmas with him than with you.
>
James will show you his proof of FLT, his counting prime thing, his
Sarasgoat factoring thing, why he uses 7 all the time, and how he stays on
top of fooling sci.math all the time. It would be a hoot, unless you argued
with him.
Jesse F. Hughes
> In article <1165301653....@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
> mensa...@aol.compost <mensa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Can you think of anything more delightfully depressing than JSH
>>sitting around on Christmas day, all alone, thousands of miles
>>from his family, crying and reading his rejection e-mail over and
>>over while he gets drunk.
>>
>>What I wouldn't give to be there!
>
> You know, James Harris may be a foul-mouthed idiot, but I'd rather
> spend christmas with him than with you.
Indeed.
--
"Just be aware that anti-Cantorians are sick of being called crackpots,
and the day will soon come when the crankiest Cantorians will eat
their words, and this rot will be extricated from mathematics."
-- Tony Orlow, an "anti-Cantorian" ready to rumble
Dirk Van de moortel
"The Last Danish Pastry" <cli...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4tjq05F...@mid.individual.net...
> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>
>> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>>
>>> No-one hates the village idiot.
>>> The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>>> so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>>> Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>>
>> I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village idiot. It shows the same mentality as a bully.
>
> Elsewhere in this very thread James says: "I'm having fun."
>
> Equally, those who correct him or mock him, are also, I suppose "having fun".
>
> So, James Harris versus sci.math does not appear to be a zero-sum game. Everybody wins!
Absolutely.
Exactly my point.
>
>
>> It really does look like some people get onto sci.math merely so that they can insult JSH.
>
> Well, yes. But remember that the next round of insults is always kicked off by James. If he merely stopped posting here he would
> not be insulted here. And does he stop? ... Sometimes. But he always comes back... and the fun continues.
Yes, precisely.
And since indeed he's the one who keeps coming back, opening
with insults and thriving on the response, he's the one having the
most fun :-)
>
>
>> It seems to me to be a very cheap and demeaning form of pleasure.
>
> Yes, on both sides. And yet... its fun!
I find it... mildly interesting...
Dirk Vdm
junoexpress
> >
> > So my promise from years ago is being fulfilled.
>
> A bit like an Old Testament prophet really...
>
> "Yea, verily; And the TWO REVIEWERS appeareth in the sky; And I shall
> journey into the land of the Surds and the Cosines; And Dedekind will
> be smitten in the thigh and in the shoulder; And Galois shall be cast
> into the midst of the pit of roaring lions; And so my promise from
> years ago is being fulfilled. I am the Lord. Look on my works, ye
> mighty, and despair."
(after I pick myself off of the floor and dry my eyes....)
wasn't there also a part about "and the Hammer shall fall on the wicked
mathematicians"
Yes, I just had a revelation. My, James is just like Jesus Christ. He
came down, spoke the truth to the heathen masses, a conspiracy
followed, and he was rejected and crucified!
Who knows, that could explain the "Jesus H Christ": could the "H" be
for "Harris" or "Hammer" ?
(BTW, your post reminds me of an old piece of prose we used to read as
school kids: Little Miss PolyNomial - must have been the Surds
reference.)
MB
mensa...@aol.com
Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <1165301653....@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
> mensa...@aol.compost <mensa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >Can you think of anything more delightfully depressing than JSH
> >sitting around on Christmas day, all alone, thousands of miles
> >from his family, crying and reading his rejection e-mail over and
> >over while he gets drunk.
> >
> >What I wouldn't give to be there!
>
> You know, James Harris may be a foul-mouthed idiot, but I'd rather
> spend christmas with him than with you.
I don't blame you. But honestly, do you think you'd get out alive?
Michael Press
Michael Press
<1165340237.3...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com>
,
"junoexpress" <MTBre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > So my promise from years ago is being fulfilled.
> >
> > A bit like an Old Testament prophet really...
> >
> > "Yea, verily; And the TWO REVIEWERS appeareth in the sky; And I shall
> > journey into the land of the Surds and the Cosines; And Dedekind will
> > be smitten in the thigh and in the shoulder; And Galois shall be cast
> > into the midst of the pit of roaring lions; And so my promise from
> > years ago is being fulfilled. I am the Lord. Look on my works, ye
> > mighty, and despair."
>
> (after I pick myself off of the floor and dry my eyes....)
>
> wasn't there also a part about "and the Hammer shall fall on the wicked
> mathematicians"
Jeremiah
23:29 Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD;
and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?
23:30 Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets,
saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his
neighbour.
23:31 Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the
LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.
> Yes, I just had a revelation. My, James is just like Jesus Christ. He
> came down, spoke the truth to the heathen masses, a conspiracy
> followed, and he was rejected and crucified!
> Who knows, that could explain the "Jesus H Christ": could the "H" be
> for "Harris" or "Hammer" ?
>
> (BTW, your post reminds me of an old piece of prose we used to read as
> school kids: Little Miss PolyNomial - must have been the Surds
> reference.)
--
Michael Press
Nick
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165092185.1...@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Hey, has anyone stopped to wonder why throwing insults is a dominant
> behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>
> Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
> they think they're doing?
>
> What is the purpose?
>
> And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
> posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
> afterward just wondered, what's the point?
>
> Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
>
> Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
>
> Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
> purpose?
>
> Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
> you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
>
>
> Just curious.
>
>
> James Harris
>
Clearly you haven't participated in other newsgroups if you think that the
abuse on this group is out-of-hand.
I have left two groups including a moderated one about the treatment and
slurs that I received there.
No, here we are discussing the world of maths where, in my opinion, people
are just interested in the maths.
But if someone is trying to force or evangelise others about a view that
they have, then I am sure that they are given short shrift.
Nick
Fredless
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
>> > behavior on math and science newsgroups?
>> >
>> > Having had a lot of people insult me over the years I'm puzzled at what
>> > they think they're doing?
>> >
>> > What is the purpose?
>> >
>> > And I know I've turned to insults at times myself, like a recent
>> > posting where I noted this newsgroup as stupid, stupid, stupid and
>> > afterward just wondered, what's the point?
>> >
>> > Does anyone think insults actually DO anything?
>> >
>> > Or is it just some need from the insulting person to lash out?
>> >
>> > Like, do any of you think insults have actually worked for any good
>> > purpose?
>> >
>> > Or all the accusations of mental illness that some of you throw out, do
>> > you think calling someone insane has ever done any good?
>> >
>>
>> reality is sufficiently severe that you may fit the diagnostic criteria
>> for some mental illness, and you really should do something about it.
>>
>
> Oh please. I have a published result. I followed the rules and sent a
> paper not only to a peer reviewing math journal but also to one that
> used two reviewers.
>
> Sure that journal tried to retract publication later--but then it died,
>
> I'd have to be mentally ill to ignore the reality of my successes as
> well as the inability of anyone to find fault with my proofs.
>
> Here's a challenge for you, find any error in the following paper:
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/ExtFactoring.pdf
>
it is riddled with simple errors, like a pine tree with pine beetles, no
foundation obviously from a mind of a frustrated girly librarian.
Fredless
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165189445.3...@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> T.H. Ray wrote:
>> > David Bernier wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Let's imagine Andrew Wiles writing:
>> > > "I'd have to be mentally ill to ignore the reality
>> > of my successes as
>> > > well as the inability of anyone to find fault
>> > >
>> > > David Bernier
>> > >
>> >
>> > He might write something like that if he were forced
>> > to post on Usenet
>> > to defend his research.
>> >
>> > Insults are a cheap shot. They are easy and require
>> > limited thought.
>> >
>> > For instance, it's easier for me to reply noting that
>> > as a group the
>> > sci.math newsgroup is incredibly stupid, and its
>> > stupidity continues to
>> > amaze me as it ignores publication.
>> >
>> > Now that's easier than defending the mathematical
>> > proofs in my paper or
>> > explaining them in detail.
>> >
>> > I think a LOT of posters use insults to pretend to be
>> > intelligent and
>> > to not use any real effort in their replies as I've
>> > noticed that
>> > posters who turn to insults often tend to post a lot.
>> >
>> > Posting a lot with cogent replies would take a
>> > tremendous amount of
>> > effort.
>> >
>> > So insulting is not just about being a mean person,
>> > it's also about
>> > being intellectually lazy.
>> >
>> > Is sci.math really a stupid newsgroup then?
>> >
>> > What arguments could you use to counter that
>> > accusation? Possibly the
>> > mean intelligence of people on this group is well
>> > below the average for
>> > a college educated adult, but is that a nice thing to
>> > point out?
>> >
>> > And some might wonder, how would I know anyway?
>> >
>> > Insults are easy. Intelligent replies are harder.
>> >
>> >
>> > James Harris
>> >
>>
>> It's a sure indication of how little of a life I have
>> at the moment, to be replying in one of these threads.
>> But since you bring up the subject of intellectual
>> laziness, Mr. Harris, perhaps you can explain why you
>> refuse to follow any comprehensible proof strategy for
>> something you call a "proof." That's where the work
>> is. You need to get a clue that "brainstorming" and
>> "playing around with some concepts" is not the same as
>> doing mathematics.
>>
>> Tom
>
> Why?
>
> Are you someone's boss or something? Is there supposed to be some
> special rule by which people who like to play with mathematics need
> PERMISSION from the math community?
I did no give you premmission to post in MY group, troll
>
> What the fuck is wrong with you people?
>
> What makes you think you have the right to screw with other people's
> lives just because they choose to dabble in some math?
Your life is screwed, you did it yourself Troll
>
> I have as much right to post on Usenet as anyone else,
No you do not, you are one sick MF and I am telling your mommie.
>
> James Harris
>
Fredless
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165183961.9...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>
> hagman wrote:
>> jst...@msn.com schrieb:
>>
>>
>> > Here's a challenge for you, find any error in the following paper:
>> >
>> > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/ExtFactoring.pdf
>> >
>>
>> If
>> g_2(m) = a_2(m)*x + u*f
>> and
>> a_2(0) = 3
>> shouldn't you have
>> g_2(0) = 3*x+u*f
>> instead of
>> g_2(0) = c_2 = u*f
>> ? (Note that you selected x to be non-zero)
>
> You're correct. Further down in the paper it is given correctly so
> that is just a mistake on my part.
you always make several mistakes in every single "paper" you have put out,
admit it, you are very poor at doing good work in Math.
>
> Good catch.
>
>
> James Harris
>
Fredless
<jst...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165186609....@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> news:1165183513.1...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in
>> >> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >> >> "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" <ste...@math.missouri.edu> wrote in
>> >> >> message news:RQCch.258116$FQ1.102281@attbi_s71...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>>No-one hates the village idiot.
>> >> >>>>The village idiot needs to be kicked around,
>> >> >>>>so the village idiot gets kicked around.
>> >> >>>>Why would anyone hate the village idiot?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>I find it disturbing that people like to kick around the village
>> >> >>>does
>> >> >>>look like some people get onto sci.math merely so that they can
>> >> >>>form
>> >> >>>of pleasure.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Once you realize that JSZ is the one who gets the most pleasure
>> >> >> out of it, you'll feel less disturbed :-)
>> >> >
>> >> > I worry more about the people who engage in this bullying, than I
>> >> > worry about JSH.
>> >>
>> >> Ah, don't worry about them. Look at them as service providers.
>> >> Without them JSH would have committed suicide a *very* long
>> >> time ago.
>> >>
>> >> Dirk Vdm
>> >
>> > LOL. Why? I'm having fun.
>>
>> Exactly.
>> And we make sure you continue having it, because we would all be
>> very sad if you would put an end to it.
>
> I use the newsgroups to brainstorm.
no, you are a simple troll that will die a horrable death.
>
> Even when it doesn't look like that's what I'm doing.
Troll
>
> That is what I'm doing.
Troll
>
> So you're all just dragged along in my adventure, and some of you think
> you have a bigger role than you do.
Troll
>
> But you don't.
>
> This is my story.
story of a troll
>
>> > I have one published paper that retracting
>> > killed a math journal.
>> >
>> > No one in history has even that.
>> >
>> > So the only thing dead so far is a math journal.
>> >
>> > Before this is over there may be some others on that heap as well.
>> >
>> > And as for suicide, don't joke about that, it is just an inhuman thing
>> > to do.
>>
>> I think that suicide is the most courageous thing a person can do
>> and I'm not joking.
>> You obviously are a very courageous person, so take care.
>>
>> Dirk Vdm
>
> You're just a piece of trash, barely even human any more.
JSH is one sick in the mind MF,
>
> Make no mistake either. I destroyed you.
Eat shit and Die JSH, God is comming to get you and cast you down where
there is no mathematics and always hot.
>
>
> James Harris
>