Re: JSH's mistakes happen all the time
From: Matthijs Hebly (heeb_at_iname.com)
Date: 07/20/04
- Next message: Gerry Myerson: "Re: This Week's Thought's on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Previous message: Lance Lamboy: "Re: Lottery Hypothesis"
- In reply to: James Harris: "Re: JSH's mistakes happen all the time"
- Next in thread: Mensanator: "Re: JSH: Mistakes happen"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 00:02:45 GMT
James Harris wrote:
> Matthijs Hebly <heeb@iname.com> wrote in message news:<xETKc.45464$qK.28714@amsnews02.chello.com>...
>>James Harris wrote:
>>>Matthijs Hebly <heeb@iname.com> wrote in message news:<7UyKc.159339$3N6.134935@amsnews05.chello.com>...
>>>>James Harris wrote:
>>>>>Now a poster has found a minor series of mistakes in my APF paper, and
>>>>>I admit some chagrin. But mistakes happen. As an author you can
>>>>>write something and for a lot of psychological reasons (and just plain
>>>>>carelessness) miss mistakes.
>>>>>I don't know why I wasn't notified of that mistake by Ioannis Argyros,
>>>>>but given what I've seen from editors at Southwest Journal of
>>>>>Mathematics, I'm not surprised.
>>>>So it's *other* people again who are to blame?
>>>OOPS! That should be Southwest Journal of Pure and Applied
>>>Mathematics. Interesting that the poster didn't point out that little
>>>mistake.
>>Should I have?
>>>I think this post emphasizes my point that computers should check math
>>>"proofs", as notice below how *protective* this guy is about Andrew
>>>Wiles.
>>I am protective of: my lovely wife, my home, my family, etc. Why oh why
>>should I be "protective" of Andrew Wiles? I like what he did, but he
>>should protect himself and his; I'm sure he can. If I understood well,
>>you couldn't do it, the FLT thing. Neither could I have done it, ever.
>>Difference is, I never pretended to.
> Yet you act as if you know that his work is correct.
I do not know. I *expect* it to be correct. I simply do not have the
mathematical insight to understand one way or the other. Many
mathematicians have checked his proof. If it turns out not to be
correct, so be it. His contribution to mathematix in general will be
*huge* nonetheless. Is yours? Mine is *none*, *zero*, *nothing*. But
that's ok. I started out as a promising math student, a long time ago.
But I took different paths. Now I am a Delphi programmer, and I can only
do my best. I will never write a cipher that will shake cryptography at
its foundations. I will never write a shorter proof for FLT. I will
never factor a huge integer. That's ok. I will just try to write an
application that's as solid as it can be, and it will incorporate
cryptography, and I will use standard algorithms like AES, even if I
don't understand exactly why AES is probably secure, for now. I simply
don't have the *time* to dive into finding out why Rijndael is secure. I
will use standard algorithms like AES, even if that's more boring than
using some algorithm of my own. It will be secure. That's what my boss
needs. Even if doesn't know it... yet...
> Actually you know what you've been told.
Yes. I have to believe what I'm told in some cases, like this particular
one. As a programmer, I use techniques that a) I've learned, and b) I've
developed myself. But even things I developed myself will oftentimes be
founded on things I've learned. The greatest classical composer of all
times (IMHO), J.S. Bach, learned most from *copying* work from others.
It took his eyesight in the end, but his music turned out to be of a
level never surpassed by anybody (IMHO, again). I'm not in any way
comparing myself to JSB here (God forbid!), he's just a *great* example
of a genius learning the tricks of the trade. Where else can one learn,
but from great teachers, they themselves having been students once?
> Even if you've looked over his paper, I doubt you have the ability to
> check it thoroughly, and even if you do, I'm sure you didn't.
No I didn't. I do *not* have the mathematical ability to even remotely
understand what he's talking about. But I play a mean guitar, can sing
too, and know how to write a song. I'm not sure AW can. We all have our
talents.
> Why didn't you? Because you believe what you're told.
Do I have to repeat myself? Even if'd want to, I wouldn't have the time...
> You are a follower.
Only when I need to. It gives me time to *not* be a follower in other areas.
M.
- Next message: Gerry Myerson: "Re: This Week's Thought's on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Previous message: Lance Lamboy: "Re: Lottery Hypothesis"
- In reply to: James Harris: "Re: JSH's mistakes happen all the time"
- Next in thread: Mensanator: "Re: JSH: Mistakes happen"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
