Re: Gabriel's Theorem - what I have learned thus far.

From: Jason (logamath_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 02/23/05 

Date: 23 Feb 2005 13:23:39 -0800

> Equal to whom, in what respect? You have the same rights and
> duties as anyone else, if that's what you mean. But what you
> say may not make equal sense to what somebody else says. You
> may not have equal experience and judgement. And so on.

What you just said of me may be said of you and others too. Thought
about this? You are pointing a finger at me.

> No, a tentative judgement on the likely value of a mathematical
> contribution, based on the sloppy and apparently delusional way
> in which it was presented, which gave me no incentive to explore
> any further --- although, with hindsight, I would probably have
> wasted less time if I had looked at the maths (instead of being
> lazy, and then feeling duty-bound to read the surprisingly huge
> number of followup articles, to see if I'd misjudged you/him).

How can you make a tentative judgement on anything you have not
bothered
reading. The fact that somethinhg is sloppy, does not mean it has no
value.

> >How did you expect me to respond when you attacked me the way
> >you did?
> I didn't, and still don't, give a toss!

Well, there you go! This is exactly what I mean. If you don't give
a toss, what are you carrying on about?

> The real question is, how did /you/ expect anyone to respond, when
> you marched into a Usenet newsgroup - having apparently not the
> slightest grasp of basic netiquette (and possibly also assuming
> a false identity) - posted a link to a crank website, then told
> the first person to respond (mildly and reasonably, IMHO) that he
> shouldn't post any more? (Actually, I hadn't /intended/ to post
> any more - having had little to say, and said it all! - but you
> chose to insult me, and I chose not to ignore it.)

I did not insult you at all. In a very quiet and nice manner I asked
you not to post because you pased a judgement without any basis. There
was nothing insulting about this. No, rather you chose to be insulted
and you responded like a two year old. You threw an almighty tantrum
and cast the first obscene word - I think it was "***" if I my memory
serves me correct. Whether you admit it or not, you derailed my efforts
to obtain feedback and comments even before I got started. You did me a
huge disservice.

> It's certainly easier to tell fools exactly what you think of
> them on the Internet than it is in Real Life! On the other
> hand, people in Real Life don't usually behave the way /you/
> did from the instant you arrived here.

If it's easier to tell fools exactly what you think of them on the net
than real life, then why on earth are you so offended? Why do you even
bother responding? And if I am such an idiot as you claim I am, you are
going to so much trouble to tell me that I wonder whether you are being
honest in saying you don't care.

> Since you haven't bothered to learn how to quote, I don't
> know what you think you are responding to here. ... O.K.,
> I've looked it up: I observed that even if I hadn't been
> too lazy to look at the maths, you would probably have
> treated me in the same ridiculously insulting way in which
> you treated all those people who /did/ bother to do what
> you asked.

Wrong again. You are accusing me again of not knowing how to quote.
Well, I stated gabriel's url because I did not wish to misquote what he
said. I made it clear from the beginning that I had no idea why his
stuff
works but I know that it works.

> I can only conclude that you treat any criticism of John
> Gabriel's work as a sign of personal disrespect to you -
> which suggests that you are John Gabriel.

You did not critisize gabriel only, you threw me into the fray with
gabriel. Read your response again please.
Once again you are accusing me of being an imposter. False accusations
are an assasination of one's character. But then you have already
succeeded in doing this. You should have stayed with your first
gut-thought: don't respond because of the way you felt. If you are a
respected contributor and others know it, then they see you making such
a statement, what kind of effect do you think this will have on their
opinions? Most people are sheep unfortunately. They are incapable of
thinking for themselves. It's much eaiser to just go along with the
flow. Finally, most people hear and see what they want - not what is
actual reality.

> No, they weren't. Galois had an amazingly hard time, though,
> and you might enjoy reading an account of his life, if you
> haven't already. (And please don't get all insulted if you
> have!)

Galois was an exception. But even he did not escape criticism - he was
later accused of being a fool to die defending the honor of a maiden.
Many mathematicians were scorned and ridiculed. And I have read his
story.

Getting back to the subject: I don't have answers. No answers were
given on this forum. Only irrelevant objections and speculation with
much foul language, trashy comment and rhetoric, idiotic statements and
anything but thought out comment on gabriel's theorem.

> --
> Angus Rodgers
> (angus_prune@ eats spam; reply to angusrod@)
> Contains mild peril