Re: JSH: SF: Finally, surrogate factoring

On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 10:51:53 -0400, Rick Decker <rdecker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



David C. Ullrich wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 20:54:03 -0400, Rick Decker <rdecker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



Tim Peters wrote:

[...]

What I don't understand is how anything other than that outcome could be
_hoped_ for here. No amount of rearranging and cross-substituting the
initial equations (whatever they may be) is going to yield new information,
and there's never a step that even requires the quantities to be integers
(as opposed to, e.g., arbitrary complex numbers). How can someone imagine
that insight into integer factorization could result from this insight-less
symbol-pushing?

I think that what we interpret as obfuscation on James' part is actually
a consequence of the fact that his understanding is extremely shallow.
This is, I think, the reason that he thinks his "prime counting
function" is truly new and innovative--he really is incapable of even
the slightest bit of abstraction that to all mathematicians is as
natural as breathing.


Huh. Ya think?

You missed my point. Until recently I thought that it was James'
narcisism that motivated his jaw-dropping refusal to see that
there was nothing new in his prime-counting function. Now, though,
I have come to the view that he's lacking an important faculty
that all mathematicians have. It's pitiful, really.

I don't think I missed that point - I thought that the point
you make was obvious. Sorry.

Both you guys must be new here.

Hrrumph. Now you're playing the newbie card. I think I'll
contact the OSU administration.

Oh my gosh. Ok, never mind. You're absolutely right about
everything. Thanks for the novel insight.

<snip>


Regards,

Rick


************************

David C. Ullrich
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: JSH: How easy? Wiless works flaw
    ... And David Ullrich is a *tenured* math professor at Oklahoma State ... But when posters started ripping on mathematicians at a sister ... remember him saying a single word in defense of the sister school. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: JSH: Math people, not cool
    ... David C. Ullrich writes: ... Come on, crush us now. ... came to return mathematicians to their original quest for truth. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Variance Upper Bound
    ... David C. Ullrich wrote: ... My Best Regards, ... mathematicians can do. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: dini derivatives
    ... David C. Ullrich wrote: ... I am really sorry for insulting you Mr. Robert ... me as most mathematicians don't know how to treat others lower than ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: a question in mathematical analysis
    ... Let be a real sequence for each m. ... Could you please share some insight into this problem? ... David C. Ullrich ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast