Re: Publication not so important in mathematics

jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 03/17/05 

Date: 17 Mar 2005 15:29:03 -0800

Michael J Hardy wrote:
> jstevh@msn.com wrote:
>
> > Here in their behavior with my paper you can see the reality.
> >
> > So it's not publication that's really important in mathematics.
>
>
> I wonder if you misunderstand the purpose of publication.
>
> The purpose is NOT to use publication as a sort of assurance
> of correctness, on the theory that published papers have been
> checked for correctness. That's not even a small part of the
> purpose.
>
> The main purpose is to acquaint readers with the material.
> A secondary purpose is that math faculty members are judged
> in part by their publication records.
>

Which basically is saying that math people believe that it's all about
their needs and interests, and others are just outside of the process.

Here you mention publication of a math paper as mostly just a way to
let people get acquainted with some material and also so faculty can do
the publish or perish thing.

But what about important mathematical results that come in from outside
of the usual academic circles?

More importantly, the mathematics in my paper, aside from a few minor
errors which I have acknowledged, was correct.

In rebuttal, some sci.math'ers have spent a lot of time arguing with me
about it, but I did in fact consider their objections, as well as
inputs from many other sources, including mathematicians I contacted by
email, and one I talked to in-person.

The reply from sci.math'ers on this issue is never rational.

Basically they just repeat that they are right and I am wrong, when I
keep going to outside authorities, while sci.math'ers claim they are an
absolute authority.

However, Usenet is a place to talk, while journals are where the action
is, so I wrote another paper which is currently at the Annals of
Mathematics.

For those of you who don't know the Annals is a premier math journal,
which is associated with Princeton University and the Institute of
Advanced Studies.

The story is that I wrote one paper, which went to a small electronic
math journal in Oklahoma, which published it, and then tried to retract
it, after a gang of sci.math'ers sent them fraudulent emails claiming
my work was wrong.

Later that journal shutdown, though there has been debate about why. I
have seen posts on sci.math claiming it was a funding issue.

Well, I wrote another paper and this time sent it to a major *print*
math journal, which notified me that it was to be reviewed back in
November of last year.

Not surprisingly the sci.math'ers already have decided what that
journal will do, as if they are the editors.

But then again what they keep trying to do, like acting as a gang to
email that small journal is be editors.

But they actually are just Usenet posters.

My biggest crime to these people is daring to keep posting when they
want me to stop, as in the past they have driven away people with such
behavior.

I prefer to post as I wish, and, yeah, I also write up my work and send
it to math journals.

The sci.math'ers can't win. What makes it odd is that they try so hard
to be censors when they're on Usenet.

James Harris