Re: Attacking my algebraic integer work

From: Nora Baron (norabaron_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 03/26/05 

Date: 26 Mar 2005 12:27:41 -0800

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> "Nora Baron" <norabaron@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> >> Nora Baron wrote:
> >> > jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> >>
> >> <deleted>
> >>
> >> > > Yup, you heard me right. I want to consider the position that
> >> > > I am wrong, with the assumption that posters claiming I'm
wrong
> >> > > are right, in order to go through their positions carefully to
> >> > > see if that assumption is true.
>
> [...]
>
> >>
> >> No portion of it is to be put on Usenet.
> >>
> >
> > Not even a statement of the main conclusion?
>
> What, are you some kinda pansy that has to know what an argument is
> before offering refutations?
>

  *Of course* I'm some kinda pansy. Ask Harris. He has said
at various times that I am "dumber than dog poop" and lacking
skill as a mathematician and (worst of all) a "Magidin Mathe-
matician". Not to mention an habitual liar and an incompetent.
Plus he told me (and David Ullrich) on various occasions to
*** Off, but we did not. To paraphrase the disciples of
Brian in Monty Python's The Life of Brian: "But Master - *how*
shall we *** off??"

> Jeez. Real mathematicians do not have to understand an argument or
> even have passing familiarity with it in order to refute it. See
> James's work on Wiles's proof.
>

  I got no problem with that! In the most recent available version of
"Advanced Polynomial Factorization", Harris said:

     "This paper will show, using basic algebraic methods, that
      given the factorization, in the ring of algebraic integers,

      65 x^3 - 12 x + 1 = (a1 x + 1)*(a2 x +1)*(a3 x + 1)

      one of the a's is coprime to 5."

  There is no ambiguity there. He clearly states that he is doing
his arithmetic in the ring of algebraic integers. One does not
need to look at his proof to see that the statement is false. In
fact, the statement was disproved in at least 3 different ways
before he even submitted the paper to SWJPAM. Since he claims to
have proved a false statement, the details of his proof are
irrelevant. But we have shown how they are wrong anyway.

  I think what is going to happen here is the following. Harris
will soon return with a post saying, "I tried every possible
way to attack my own work, and sure enough, I found that it is
without any flaws. It is perfect. I hereby re-declare myself
to be the GMOAT (Greatest Mathematician of All Time). I am
Ozymandias, King of Kings. Look upon me, ye mighty [i.e., ye
Powers That Be], and despair!"

  Nora B.

> --
> Jesse F. Hughes
> "How come there's still apes running around loose and there are
> humans? Why did some of them decide to evolve and some did not? Did
> they choose to stay as a monkey or what?" -Kans. Board of Ed member

Quantcast