Proof doesn't work, examples don't work



I came back with some hope that demonstration and showing that my
research has to work with integers would have some impact, and then in
desperation I gave the mathematical proof, yet again.

In a couple of paragraphs I show the mathematics that uproots long
established mathematical ideas that are wrong.

The improper use of Galois Theory is all over mathematics. People are
heavily invested in wrong ideas, just like religious people get heavily
invested in their ideas.

The information I'm giving is not new.

I made my discoveries years ago. I use my own posts as references for
equations and I've been taking quite a few formulas from a post I made
November 2003 as a ready reference so that it'd be easier to keep
explaining.

I had a paper published. I've talked to top mathematicians by email
and one in person, working it out on his chalkboard.

The number theory is esoteric yes, and Galois Theory has I guess no
practical application so the "pure" math could be wrong and no one
notice it until I showed it and then the practitioners could deny for
years and that's where we're at.

There's an impasse.

Since the practitoners in the field--the number theorists--have gone
away from being intellectuals to deciding to hold on to their beliefs
against what is mathematically correct, there is an impasse.

I talk here as I know you're part of the same system, but I think some
of you are more practical minded and hey, may not be part of the new
religion but actually think you still believe in mathematical proof,
and mathematics as a noble discipline.

Or facing this situation I just find I like to talk about what is
happening every once in a while, and I know where the sci.math
newsgroup stands.

They are vigorous defenders of their religion. Logic has no meaning to
them. Mathematical proof is useless. Examples mean nothing.

They are zealots.


James Harris

.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: JSH: Math as a religion
    ... > On that world Galois Theory is used for ALL polynomials without regard ... > to reducibility over Q as people refuse to take square roots. ... > mad, but refuse to acknowledge the correct mathematics, what can you ... > You can't do anything as when math is a religion mathematical proof is ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Math and religion - is the very topic crankish?
    ... Obviously, mathematics is not a religion, which is ... sorts and infinity. ... Scholastic philosophy ... Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite". ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Praying man let his daughter die
    ... but also hampering scientific inquiry, ... So you do not consider mathematics science, ... ed., Truth in Mathematics, pp. 291-310 ... is the better religion, I would not necessarily go for the ToE (could ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: JSH: Math as a religion
    ... > and now you trot out his mathematical religion rant. ... like members of most religions. ... challenges can be shown to be attacking the distributive property. ... You are members of your own religion that you just call mathematics. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Praying man let his daughter die
    ... scientific inquiry is based on the idea that there *is* ... So you do not consider mathematics science, ... ed., Truth in Mathematics, pp. 291-310 ... is the better religion, I would not necessarily go for the ToE (could ...
    (talk.origins)

Loading