Re: Theory versus implemention, I'm puzzled
rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com
Date: 01/31/05
- Next message: infobahn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Previous message: infobahn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Theory versus implemention, I'm puzzled"
- Next in thread: David Eather: "Re: Theory versus implemention, I'm puzzled"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 30 Jan 2005 18:17:33 -0800
jst...@msn.com wrote:
> Now one of the oddest things to me is that you can discover a
> mathematical theory, explain it in detail, and have people not
believe
> you, as I have the full theory for surrogate factoring worked out,
but
> just haven't gotten a program implementing it to fully work, yet.
>
> But I have the full mathematical theory.
>
> The sad reality is that the mathematics is not enough.
>
> You people sit back, act like it's just nothing, and I tell you the
> theory is worked out to a solution to the factoring problem.
>
> Then, I see requests to prove it that involve factoring large
numbers.
>
> Since when did it not matter if a person could prove something
> mathematically before they could demonsrate it in an implementation?
>
What exactly do you claim to have proved?
> And it's not like the math is really hard either.
>
> The sad thing is that I'm worried that demonstration of one kind or
> another beyond mathematical proof is just around the corner, and then
> what?
>
> By then the shock will be so much greater, and it could have been
> prevented if any of you could follow a simple mathematical theory,
and
> accept something as true because it had been proven true
> mathematically.
>
> I say, that people harmed in any way, should come to you, as the
claim
> in the math field is the opposite of what I'm seeing, as the claim is
> that mathematical proof is what's important. Some mathematicians
even
> claim to disdain demonstration or even practical uses to mathematics.
>
> They *claim* that proof is all that matters.
>
> Well, in just a little while the world will be able to see how great
> was their lie, as try as I might, I'm not seeing much attention paid
to
> a very developed theory, which is a solution to the factoring
problem.
>
> If demonstration is all you people care for, then I fear that nothing
> will happen until demonstration is what you get, and if you're lucky,
> it'll be me demonstrating and then maybe something can be done.
>
> If we're unlucky, then the demonstration might come from anywhere in
> the world, from maybe even just some small group, smart enough to
check
> claims such as mine, but not people we'd want with powerful
> mathematical tools.
>
> But this is the world I'm stuck with, a world full of lies, where
> people often say things they are not, make claims they do not back
up,
> and act like it never matters.
>
> Sometimes it matters in a very, very, very big way.
>
> I say the world should come to you, if things go badly. I notified
the
> US Government of my research. I contacted mathematicians around the
> world. I've tried my best.
>
> What happens, happens.
>
>
> James Harris
- Next message: infobahn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Previous message: infobahn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Theory versus implemention, I'm puzzled"
- Next in thread: David Eather: "Re: Theory versus implemention, I'm puzzled"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
