>As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience, and talk about
>cutting public funding for basic research, or well, any research at
>all, I can imagine mathematicians smiling to themselves.
"Rolling on the floor laughing" might be more accurate.
>No way
>people will ever listen to such nuttiness and they may smugly feel
>they can rest secure that I'll never be taken seriously--except I DO
>have major mathematical research results.
Actually you don't. But even if you did that wouldn't give you
the sort of power you're fantasizing about. (Hence the rolling
on the floor...)
>So their satisfaction in my mind is a dismissal of their own field.
>
[quoted text clipped - 61 lines]
>
>James Harris
David C. Ullrich
"Understanding Godel isn't about following his formal proof.
That would make a mockery of everything Godel was up to."
(John Jones, "My talk about Godel to the post-grads."
in sci.logic.)
>As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience,
Lay off the booze and go back on the meds James. You will feel a lot
better.
Oh yes, and in future yuo had better not forget to stop boasting about
where your results come on google searches. This is "not a popularity
contest" after all.
rossum
JSH - 30 Oct 2008 07:15 GMT
> >As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience,
>
> Lay off the booze and go back on the meds James. You will feel a lot
> better.
Your last post, I hope. You lost a long time ago.
You're just too stupid to know it.
I think it's time for you to sleep for a while.
___JSH
gjedwards - 30 Oct 2008 11:52 GMT
> > >As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience,
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> ___JSH
Reviewer's comments for SWJPAM paper? Post them and I'll send you a
grovelling apology and never darken your threads with another post
again.
You keep dodging the question, but everyone here can read it. You lack
of reply is an answer in itself.
> As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience, and talk about
> cutting public funding for basic research, or well, any research at
> all, I can imagine mathematicians smiling to themselves. No way
> people will ever listen to such nuttiness and they may smugly feel
> they can rest secure that I'll never be taken seriously--except I DO
> have major mathematical research results.
you gotta no results,
you gotta no respect, cause you gotta earn it.
you sound like that a.shole House on the idiot tube.
> So their satisfaction in my mind is a dismissal of their own field.
your mind is a dismissal of rationality.
> These modern "mathematicians" clearly despise mathematics.
you dispise yourself, because you are not smart enough to learn even simple
math.
> As if, as if a really unlikable guy could possibly get listened to
> <gasp> just because he has mega mathematical discoveries of the type
> that come around once in a century, or more. No way, right? Not in
> our popularity dominated world!
Yes, you are a moron.
> Don't you know the lesson of MTV? Of The HIlls?
lesson of The Partirdge Family.
> Popularity is all that matters, right? Substance means nothing,
> right?
That is what YOU DO.
> And if you believe them you can sit back and relax, but if they're
> wrong then you know that an increasingly angry and frustrated major
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> research will find a way. The cons will leave for easy money
> elsewhere.
You are a squeek in the wilderness. A unseen leaf, now fallen and eaten by
worms.
> And besides, I figured out my mathematical results without public
> funding and with mathematicians from around the world mostly making
> fun of me, the nasty bastards.
HS Algebra is difficult isn't it ?
> IF I can do it, others can.
but you can't, and they can.
> So what good are you academics anyway?
>
> Professors teach. Discoverers do.
Wrong, discoverers discover.
> Albert Einstein of course worked in a patent office. What if society
> missed the clue? The reality that maybe academia INHIBITS major
> discovery.
AE *hates* you.
> What if we got it wrong? What if our universities around the world
> while playing a crucial role of teaching are the last places to go to
> for innovation?
What if ? What if ? blah... blah.... black sheep
> What if our world has created a massive system for BLOCKING major
> advances, where now even the would-be Einsteins of today cannot get
> past the professors of today?
We block people that are under preformers, like you.
> The message I'm giving to you if you haven't picked it up, if you are
> an academic, is that you are probably a failure at your job, but
> surrounded by other failures, you all call each other successes, and
> condemn the human race to the muddled mess you call research.
JSH and his "muddled mess he calls research"
> Publish or perish. Yeah, you publish, and let the human race perish
> for people who are second-rate researchers at best and outright frauds
> in many cases in a system that does not work.
you have failed to publish, therefore you parish.
> And my story proves that beyond a doubt. You block major mathematical
> discoveries because you are incompetent boobs living off the public in
> a white collar welfare system and you legitimately see me as a threat
> to your free money.
And, you JSH will never get a single dime. Rather you will be sued for all
the money you have or ever will have, for threatening people and being a
insignificant tick on the side of humanity.
> Yeah, you con artists. I am a threat to your free money. And you are
> a threat to human civilization itself.
I Piss on
you........sssssssssssssss..ssssssss.....ssss....ss...ss......s.....s..
> You are the snakes in the grass.
(dude, take yr meds!)
> James Harris
In article
<48717de6-47fc-4bce-8507-a02dfcd457d6@v22g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience, and talk about
> cutting public funding for basic research, or well, any research at
> all, I can imagine mathematicians smiling to themselves. No way
> people will ever listen to such nuttiness and they may smugly feel
> they can rest secure that I'll never be taken seriously--
Yes, yes, yes.
> except I DO
> have major mathematical research results.
Oh! And you were doing so well until this.

Signature
Michael Press
> As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience, and talk about
> cutting public funding for basic research, or well, any research at
> all, I can imagine mathematicians smiling to themselves. No way
> people will ever listen to such nuttiness and they may smugly feel
> they can rest secure that I'll never be taken seriously--except I DO
> have major mathematical research results.
************************************************************
You're way too modest, and you shouldn't shy away from the fitting
adjective for your mathematical results: they are HUMONGOUS.
Regards
Tonio
JimboCat - 28 Oct 2008 19:14 GMT
> On Oct 27, 1:20 am, JSH <jst...@gmail.com> wrote:> As I rant and rave, continually antagonize my audience, and talk about
> > cutting public funding for basic research, or well, any research at
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> You're way too modest, and you shouldn't shy away from the fitting
> adjective for your mathematical results: they are HUMONGOUS.
HUMONGOUS and GINORMOUS!
With BANGS!!!!
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
"I have discovered a truly marvelous method of finding the location
of
any desired data in pi including, of course, the digits representing
the ASCII representation of the C source code for the method itself;
unfortunately the hard drive of my ISP's news server is too small to
contain its starting index." [Bill Snyder]
Lits O'Hate - 29 Oct 2008 00:33 GMT
> > You're way too modest, and you shouldn't shy away from the fitting
> > adjective for your mathematical results: they are HUMONGOUS.
>
> HUMONGOUS and GINORMOUS!
>
> With BANGS!!!!
With *FREAKING* BANGS!!!!!!!!!!!
--
"You should be able to take it from there. QED." -- James Harris