Re: JSH: Important milestone


jstevh@xxxxxxx wrote:
My position has been that mathematicians have deliberately avoided a
result that they may believe destroys their careers.

For some reason the first proof that standard usage of Galois Theory is
wrong ran into this weird mystery function objection

So it was not, in fact, a proof.

which posters
turned to again and again no matter how I sought to squash it,
so I came up with another way, which proves the same damn thing.

You wish.


Needing two proofs doesn't surprise me, as in the real world, people
rarely live up to ideals.

Well, that's one thing you've certainly proved.


The ideal of the modern mathematician is quite far from the reality,
where career minded professors are willing to ignore proofs no matter
what the mathematical importance of them is, so that they can keep
teaching their students information proven flawed--maintain their
careers.

Two proofs gives me that extra edge I wanted to be sure and gives
prosecutors additional ammo.

Prosecuters? Surely you're not still trying to make a
federal case of this? Do you want them to lock you up in
a cage?


Remember, some of you are in the United States taking federal funds.

Read the fine print on those fundings.

So what does the fine print say? (For those of us who don't
take federal funds.)



James Harris

Fucktard

.

Quantcast