Re: My brainstorming and crank label
jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 02/13/05
- Next message: Tim Peters: "Re: I was right, surrogate factoring proof"
- Previous message: C. Bond: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- In reply to: David McAnally: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Next in thread: David Kastrup: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Reply: David Kastrup: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Reply: David McAnally: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 13 Feb 2005 09:46:27 -0800
David McAnally wrote:
> jstevh@msn.com writes:
>
> >For those who wondered about the "crank" label, it's not so much
about
> >my making various claims, as about my pattern of posting, which you
can
> >see now as I work to understand surrogate factoring.
>
> >Yes, as I get certain ideas--brainstorming--I tend to toss them out,
> >quite confidently until I or someone else can shoot them down, but
I've
> >seen that's not what annoys so many posters!
>
> >Read carefully, and you'll see that my posting in and of itself is
what
> >annoys them.
>
> >It's territorial behavior, and very odd considering the nature of
> >Usenet, but some regular posters see the Usenet groups as their
> >territory, where they have control over content.
>
> >Generally they've managed control by insults.
>
> That has not been my experience. In my study of Internal Set Theory,
I
> have asked a question in sci.math a few times about the Uniqueness
> Principle. I believe that it should be possible to prove a certain
result
> (which is that a set which which can uniquely defined in terms of
standard
> sets alone should also be standard). I don't get flamed or insulted
for
> posting my question about the truth or otherwise of the result. But
I
> don't boast or brag about my accomplishments, and I don't claim to
have
> proven the result in question either.
Well, yeah, you're asking for help, right?
That's a different story.
Regular posters can get an ego boost by helping you out, right?
They can demonstrate their knowledge and ability, correct?
Why would they attack you if you're boosting their egos?
I dare you to put up something original instead, not asking for help,
but putting up new research for them to consider, and then see what
happens.
> <snip>
>
> >These people are bizarre beyond belief and they are not just
denizens
> >of sci.math or sci.crypt, but run wild on sci.physics, where you can
> >get jumped on for daring to say anything, say, questioning of
Einstein.
>
> This is false. There are plenty of aspects of physics where
mainstream
> physicists disagree with Einstein. Certainly it is possible to
question
> Einstein's results or Einstein's philosophy. And people will
certainly
> not attack you for disagreeing with Einstein on points on which many
> mainstream physicists disagree with him.
>
Sure, in the mainstream, but I'm talking about the sci.physics
newsgroup.
And, as an experiment, I *dare* you to make a post on sci.physics
questioning some aspect of Einstein's theories, even using some
challenges in the mainstream, and see what happens.
Reality testing. It's a beautiful thing.
Or you can try to endlessly argue over a point testable by experiment,
which I see as a waste of time.
I suggest that rather than trying to debate you take my challenge.
Make a post challenging Einstein on the sci.physics newsgroup, and see
what happens.
James Harris
- Next message: Tim Peters: "Re: I was right, surrogate factoring proof"
- Previous message: C. Bond: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- In reply to: David McAnally: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Next in thread: David Kastrup: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Reply: David Kastrup: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Reply: David McAnally: "Re: My brainstorming and crank label"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
