RE:Full Retraction with my Apologies

From: Juuso Hukkanen (juuso929_at_tele3d.net)
Date: 04/23/05

  • Next message: jshsucks_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Surrogate factoring, mapping, hyperbolas" 
    Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 01:28:48 +0300

    Fri 12 Apr 1996 13:24:50 +0200, James Harris <jstevhar@ix.netcom.com>
    wrote:

    >It's seems silly to say that obviously my attempt at a proof
    >isn't even close. But I feel guilty enough to do so.
    >Obviously, I was suffering from a bit of delusion which has
    >amazingly come off and on. I'll only say that I've been
    >under some pressures.

    >It's amazing what the mind will believe if pushed, and
    >I'll continue to believe that Fermat found a simple
    >solution---despite the evidence to the contrary---simply
    >because that's what I choose to believe.

    >In any event, I've found that the mild release making
    >outrageous claims has given me is finally surmounted
    >by a sense of shame; so I'll quit. Since I have nothing
    >of value to add to this newsgroup, I will unsubscribe.

    >My apologies to anyone concerned or in any way interested.

    James, You wrote that 9 years and 10 days ago. That was a great post.
    How far are you now from writing a similar post? Maybe You could
    exchange some offline thoughts with experts of other fields.

    - You keep post new claims for outrageous mathematical breakthroughs

    - After 9+ years and 7000+ posts

    - Claim to be the greatest mathematician during the last 100 years

    - Claim to have superior skills for performing factorization, skills
    which would have a huge global importance

    - Claim worlds mathematicians be conspiring against you

    - You never help any other poster, who seek help from math groups

    - You Started to verbally insult kind posters who finally did show
    your claim to be wrong, in a way which was satisfactory to others

    - Refuse to test your factorization method, even if there are rewards
    worth hundreds of thousands of euros for doing so

    - You have indicated that even if someone finally managed to prove
    ‘that thing’ wrong, You’d start claiming other mathematical
    breakthroughs prime counting something

    - You say you neglect the fact that many users of sci.crypt, sci.math,
    alt.math may use hours for showing your errors / conspiring against
    you

    - You also use many daily hours for writing your own posts to math
    groups

    Other side of the coin, James - I and many others like your writing
    style / skills. You are famous and You have already put thousands of
    pages of good (copyrighted) text online. You could easily
    collect/write a GOOD book using that material and laugh all the way to
    the bank.

    Maybe sci.psychology.theory experts might have some thoughts of what
    is been going on at sci.crypt and sci.math . Obviously sci.crypt and
    sci.math are lacking expertise in all required fields.

    - For how long can it take for bunch of mathematicians, to show an
    obsessive person wrong/right?

    - Generally speaking, what is the proper way to deal with a person
    with similar characteristics as listed above?

    - Doctors orders or recommendations to sci.crypt, sci.math, alt.math;
    in which between 25-50% of posts are constantly about James and his
    surrogate factoring.

    James three questions, 1) do You have a right to flood the Usenet. 2)
    Do others have a right to reply to your ‘that thing’ posts by a simple
    request to factorize RSA semi-primes? 3) What do you want?

    Of cause You will not answer, but rather be quiet a couple of days ,
    then you continue with you obsession posts. However one day there will
    be the last post. Consider that book idea, Thing how unique titles
    available Troll’s Hammer, James Harris - Usenet superstar, Gullible
    minds, From crank.net to Paris, Hilton.

    By the way James please consider following text, is there a message?

    <snip>
    Most mathematicians have had the following experience and those whose
    activities are somewhat more public have had it often: an unsolicited
    letter arrives from an unknown individual and contained in the letter
    is a piece of mathematics of a very sensational nature. The writer
    claims that he has solved one of the great unsolved mathematical
    problems...

    The writer of such a letter is usually an amateur, with very little
    training in mathematics. Very often he has a poor understanding of
    the nature of the problem he is dealing with, and an imperfect notion
    of just what a mathematical proof is and how it operates.

    The writer is usually male, frequently a retired person with leisure
    to pursue on his mathematics...Very often the correspondent not only
    'succeeds' in solving one of the great mathematical unsolvables, but
    has also found a way to construct an antigravity shield, to interpret
    the mysteries of the Great Pyramid and of Stonehenge, and is well on
    his way to producing the Philosopher's Stone. This is no
    exaggeration.

    If the recipient of such a letter answers it, he will generally find
    himself entangled with a person with whom he cannot communicate
    scientifically and who exhibits many symptoms of paranoia. One gets
    to recognize such correspondents on sight, and to leave their letters
    unanswered, thus unfortunately increasing the paranoia.

    Davis and Hersh, The Mathematical Experience (1981)
    </snip>

    sci.psychology.theory experts: Is there a specific name for above
    mentioned illness. If not, I claim that illness to be named Hukkanen's
    syndrome. But hey didn't non-professional breakthrough claims
    constitute to Hukkanen's syndrome itself. Damn, I found a recursive
    illness. Damn finding recursive...

    Anyway - what now? James, Do you feel like having Hukkanen's recursive
    syndrome? Are we going to see a repost of that great letter from 1996?

    Sincerely
    Juuso Hukkanen

  • Next message: jshsucks_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Surrogate factoring, mapping, hyperbolas"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: example of C. Heckman giving both Direct and Indirect; #9; 2nd ed; Euclids Infinitude of Primes
      ... few people take me up on delivering two methods for Euclid IP. ... In fact BD is well aware that Galois theory is far over AP's head. ... So BD never once mentioned the word Galois in any Usenet posts with AP. ... In fact I am one of the few professional mathematicians who patiently ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: RE:Full Retraction with my Apologies
      ... > - Claim worlds mathematicians be conspiring against you ... > Other side of the coin, James - I and many others like your writing ... > in which between 25-50% of posts are constantly about James and his ... > constitute to Hukkanen's syndrome itself. ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: The lying charge
      ... >> So I thought, well, that's Usenet. ... I'll go to mathematicians in ... > So you missed the posts on Usenet containing counterexamples, ... claims of counterexamples and refutations, ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: Tommy, dont be so cranky ;-)
      ... hide their true identities either. ... "conjecture" or as "I wonder why mathematicians are not interested ... It all depends on *how* he posts it. ... I dont recall now, but he was one of the best logicians present) that sentences like "If GC is undecidable, then it is true") had no meaning, because of the existence of models where then GC would be false. ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: Amateur takes on Wiless work
      ... >Mathematicians would check various elliptic curves and find they could ... Below is a copy of the paper "Advanced Polynomial Factorization" ... Factorization lemma, Ring of algebraic integers ... polynomial that are themselves polynomials. ...
      (sci.math)
    • Quantcast