Re: Factoring paper is wrong

anonymous_at_mathforum.org
Date: 06/16/04 

Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:14:14 +0000 (UTC)

Both you and James Harris have made identical
assertions of a list (according to you, closed)
and of several mathematicians reviewing his
work.

Both you and James Harris (hmm, identity?)
have "opened the door" by making assertions that
some people would like to verify.

Why? Because your assertions give credibility
to James Harris. While his math stands on its
own for verification, his statements of facts
are dubious.

If you are not he, we therefore have
a second party supporting James Harris'
statements of facts.

And now, both you and he are evading verification.

Assuming the existence of your "closed list", this
"closed list" may not allow pseudonymous
posters, and is presumably moderated, so any
abuse of James Harris by "spiteful" NG posters
could be controled and/or abusive posters can be
booted from the "closed list".

So what's the problem? Is there ANY mathematician
on your alleged "closed list" who, without a
pseudonym and an accessible E-mail address, can
post to this NG or to any regular NG poster with
a real E-mail addrress, and verify this "closed list"
and yours and Harris' claims?

Frankly, I don't believe you or Harris.

Quinn, put up or shut up!

James Harris is Nuts(TM)

On 16 Jun 2004, Quinn wrote:
>q>>Several mathematicians who had
>q>>considered the math noted that they had not found the error
>
>(snip)
>
>JHiN> Please name the mathematicians.
>
>JHiN> What is the name/address of the list, so
>JHiN> that I can attempt to be open-minded and
>JHiN> see what you're saying?
>
>It's a closed list. I don't see how having the names of those who said
>they'd missed the mistake would change anything. People miss things -- ***
>happens. It's not really a big deal that they missed it. The point is --
>James didn't miss it, and appears to me to be sincerely working on
>recovering from the oversight.
>
>--
>Quinn
>

Quantcast