Re: About James Harris
jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 02/23/05
- Next message: Henrick Hellström: "Re: Secret Sharing"
- Previous message: Bruce Stephens: "Re: Importance of Failure"
- In reply to: Gianna Stefani: "Re: About James Harris"
- Next in thread: Gianna Stefani: "Re: About James Harris"
- Reply: Gianna Stefani: "Re: About James Harris"
- Reply: Lits O'Hate: "Re: About James Harris"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 23 Feb 2005 04:24:37 -0800
Gianna Stefani wrote:
<deleted>
>
> That is indeed a delusion, but he may still be aware of it ... only
in
> the quiet hours will he sit and reflect on his failure.
I reflect on failure a LOT, and not just in quiet hours.
I have quite a few failures, and I don't keep up with most of them, but
I do consider some of them, and often.
For those results I know not to be failures, I go to the mainstream,
with math papers.
In between, I talk out my ideas--putting them out their to be beaten
down if possible--and carefully consider cogent replies.
Trouble is, I get few cogent replies as most posters have their own
agenda, so I get creative.
It's an adventure.
> I still have no desire to ridicule James. I have already suggested
in
> another post that he should turn his attentions to a different field,
> possibly a related field, and seek to establish himself there. It is
> not impossible that he might discover something truly unique in a
field
> in which he has greater facility. Regrettably for James, it will not
be
> in mathematics.
>
> --
> Gianna Stefani
Years ago, I had a certainty that I was going to find some short and
simple proof of Fermat's Last Theorem to the point that I simply
deluded myself about arguments I was certain were proofs--which turned
out not to be.
I was obsessed. I refused for a long time to accept that my personal
decision about what must be could be wrong.
Eventually I realized that the problem was it was all about me, and my
needs, many of them driven by fears--but not about fear of
mathematicians like you suggested in a section I deleted out in my
response.
They were fears about meaning, about purpose.
I was driven to try and make a difference with the egotistical belief
that I was an important person for humanity.
After months with one particular delusion, a "proof" of FLT that failed
in a relatively simple way, I finally just hit a wall, and couldn't
hold on to the delusions. I looked at the energy required to keep
working, to keep looking, and it just didn't seem worth it.
Time passed, and finding myself musing about math again, I came to a
new conclusion: I liked fiddling with math equations.
Next I concluded that my enjoyment of it was the one thing that shined
clear through the entire period.
I also concluded that maybe there wasn't much of a chance of success,
but as I liked what I was doing, I should continue, just for the
enjoyment.
And, then I started making discoveries that are only now making it up
to formal peer review, and they came fast.
Like the paper at the Annals of Mathematics is actually covering a
method that is in a paper, in a small section, which I haven't even
bothered to try and present to a journal, as it has too many advanced
ideas.
I'm doing pieces of it, and so far have just one piece.
My prime counting function does deserve to be published in a journal
which I know from people like Lagarias, who is a leading mathematician
in the field, as he suggested that in replies. Odlyzko basically did
as well until I pushed for his help and then he said it wasn't
unimportant.
But I have quite a few mathematicians who say it should be published.
I just have to send it to another journal as the Journal of
Combinatorics said it wasn't their thing.
They didn't say it was wrong (though it did have a mistake which I
noticed afterwards), and the editor who contacted me wondered why I
picked them for the paper anyway.
Eventually I probably will send to another journal, but it depends on
my mood.
I kind of like one paper out at a time, so I'm waiting on the Annals.
So then, I enjoy what I'm doing. I didn't need the justification of
having to find major results, and then I found some, and it's kind of
harder now.
Like, I find myself at times just doing some of the simpler
manipulations, thinking back to how fun it is, and wondering how neat
it would be if I *were* wrong with these major math results.
You see, now I get to see the worst side of human nature, with work
where I've done most of the heavy lifting, so I have to move on, in
order to get my sense of enjoyment.
People mostly fight me over mathematical research that has lost most of
its interest to me, as it's the old work.
But luckily, now I have surrogate factoring.
Battles over it could go on for *YEARS* and I'm happy again.
James Harris
- Next message: Henrick Hellström: "Re: Secret Sharing"
- Previous message: Bruce Stephens: "Re: Importance of Failure"
- In reply to: Gianna Stefani: "Re: About James Harris"
- Next in thread: Gianna Stefani: "Re: About James Harris"
- Reply: Gianna Stefani: "Re: About James Harris"
- Reply: Lits O'Hate: "Re: About James Harris"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
