JSH: The Evil side of a Mean Crackpot/Troll

(re-posted. An "Evil and Mean" James Harris)

http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=1m_rwQ4AAAAOpY6faaffF1_Ah3A_lFfd


JSH: When anger hurts
Posted: Sep 18, 2006 3:45 PM

So you can prove something mathematically, cover all the dots, handle
all the objections and then have people just ignore you, or worse, say
you didn't do what you did, and you wait, waiting for validation from
SOMEWHERE and it doesn't come.

So what might you do then?

Well, you may GET REALLY ANGRY and it's not hard to post some angry
stuff, and next thing you know, guess what?

You're labeled a crackpot or a crank.

It's a perfect system in a way, as while people trust mathematicians to
tell them the truth as a group, they will just dismiss small groups of
people or one person telling them that mathematicians routinely
lie--for their careers.

I mean, most people aren't stupid, they know that lying for one's
career can be a common thing, but they don't connect with large scale
lying by people they are also told are brilliant, even when you can
prove that lying is the best way for those people to protect themselves
from truth, versus biting the bullet and just handling the consequences
of what is mathematically true.

Before you learn that though, if you make that discovery that
mathematicians routinely lie, you can get angry, and express that
anger, and then they happily label you a crank or a crackpot, and guess
what?

They keep doing what they are doing.

The world needs to look at the reality and comprehend that yes,
academics do lie.

How do you know with any academic speciality whether or not you are
getting lies fed to you by some person or persons trying to help or
maintain their career?

Academics is a lot about politics.

People know politicians lie, and it's time for them to understand that
academics can lie as well, and they can lie as a group.

So here it is directly for people who do not get it:

ACADEMICS CAN LIE AS A GROUP TO HELP OR MAINTAIN THEIR CAREERS.

And that can anger people who find out, and their anger can be used
against them by people who know what it takes to keep the lies going.


James Harris

........

JSH: 2003 4 years and SOS

And when the worst of it comes out, that you sat by while a short proof of
Fermat's Last Theorem was extant, that you have brought shame upon the name
"mathematician", then it will be revealed how fully you broke the faith, and
how miserably you used the legacy of past notables in the field.
And everyone will REALLY REALLY CARE! Because I'm a WRITER!

That proof has been shown to have a key piece that depends only on the
proposition that any factor of a polynomial P(x) can be written as
w f(w) + c

where w is a factor of x, f(w) is a function of x, and c is a factor of
the constant term of the polynomial P(x).

Fortunately, we know that all propositions that make no sense whatsoever
MUST BE TRUE!

That's it. You've been fighting me successfully when many of you may know
that all I need is an audience of skeptical adults,
Not the fawning mass of toadies that have grown up around James on sci.math!

and when some mathematician claims that my FLT proof is false, I'll toss
that at them, and watch them disintegrate--hopefully on live television.
Fox, probably. They could call the show 'Joe Mathematician'!

Welcome to the media age.
The year: 2003.

Money rules
Woooo! Wooo!

and attention is power.
and power is money and money is the root of all evil, therefore evil rules
and Fermat's Last Theorem is TRUE! My proof is AMAZING!!@ Is it not?

And the world will be interested in seeing mathematicians broken,
and not bored at all, because people LOVE mathematics!

especially when you're on television for the first time, no longer
watching other people under the lights, but faced with them yourself.
That will be SO COOL!!!!

And I know you'll lie as I've watched so many of you do in this carefully
constructed laboratory of your perceptions here on sci.math where I've put
you through your paces and tested how you think, how you react, how you
defend.
[James takes a deep breath following this run-on sentence. HE'S A WRITER!]

There are millions of dollars to be made by a lot of players by burning
through that legacy upon which you have brought so much shame.
Millions of dollars to be made by a hungry media looking for the next
thing, after the political scandals, after the pedophile priests, after the
business corruption--and I'm putting you forward as it.

I see the front-page headlines now: "INTERNET MATH PROFS TAUNT DWEEB". (But
are they above or below the fold?)

James Harris
-jwgh

..........

JSH: So weak

* From: jstevh@xxxxxxx
* Date: 30 Jan 2006 18:22:36 -0800

Think about it. I have a short proof. I say you people are not what
you claim to be.

You are proving me correct.

The best explanation for your behavior is a social one.

You depend on the world looking at mathematicians as having this
perfection and I think some of you would die before you would let Wiles
go down, as you are a hierarchical group.

You wish to protect the mathematicians you see as top.

That behavior is what Freud called the death instinct.

Do you understand the death instinct and why it's important for social
creatures?

You are not more important than the whole, so if you can sacrifice
yourself to preserve the social order, you will.

It's like ants work to protect the hive. Or bees.

You are genetically programmed to preserve your social order and fight
for it, and that programming is the death instinct.

In this case, preserving the social order means denying a mathematical
proof, but because mathematics gives no leeway, your efforts are clumsy
and obvious.

I get to watch you, trying to do the impossible, fight a mathematical
proof. It's intriguing.

I fear few of you have the ability of the high level viewpoint that I
have. You have not my, um, perspective.

But, I like to think that to some extent you can see the death instinct
at work, within you, around you, now, here, on this newsgroup, and in
your current math society, as you try to do the impossible--disprove a
mathematical proof.

Why do societies need individuals to have a death instinct?

Why does any hive need workers?

Most of the time that programming works better to keep the society
together against energetic elements, like myself.

It's a protection against geniuses.

After all, we come in and rile people up, get them to question things,
and a lot of times, geniuses can do things like break up the current
social order to make a new one.

You may have noticed that I seem to be little affected by many of your
social tools: like insults and namecalling.

I find them, childish.

I am a catalyst for changes.

My very existence is about change.

I am a force of nature.

That makes me a threat to society. There is a balance that is kept
between geniuses and society as we go through a delicate dance.

But you people are pushing me to the limits of my patience.

So geniuses are rare.

We have to be rare or society couldn't survive as we tend to make big
messes.

You have your death instinct. I have genius.

Let's see who wins.


James Harris



...........

*** THE WORLD
Google Groups allows people to rate posts. I look now
and I see 733 ratings, where now I sit at a single star.

REJECTION.

I think that's important.

No matter what one might like to think, it is true that
so much depends on how people look at you.

And I see, rejection.

In deference to that rating and the opinion given to me
by Google Groups and its rating system, I feel a need
to lessen my postings.

I dare not say I'll stop, as I find the activity addictive,
but I dare not deny the reality of the world's disdain for
me. The rejection that tells me that I am not wanted.

But Usenet is not all about being wanted. Or about
popularity.

The world may reject me, but I say *** THE WORLD to the
extent that I will still speak.

But I say, respect the world to the extent that I
acknowledge, that my ideas are not wanted.

I can rant and rave as I wish, but deep down, I accept
that the world does not accept me.

Hell yeah. *** the world. It doesn't want me. ***
it.

After all, the world if fucking stupid anyway. Just
look at it.
posted by James at 2:59 PM

on

Friday, January 26, 2007

........................... dec 11 2001

JSH: Looks like I lost round two

The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this
group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful


James Harris View profile
More options Dec 11 2001, 9:49 pm

Newsgroups: sci.math
From: jst...@xxxxxxx (James Harris)
Date: 11 Dec 2001 18:49:57 -0800
Local: Tues, Dec 11 2001 9:49 pm
Subject: JSH: Looks like I lost round two
Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show original | Report
this message | Find messages by this author
Yuck. So far it looks like style is winning over substance as most of
the newsgroup continues to ignore my postings. Or if they're reading
them, they don't seem to be getting the argument.

At first I thought it was kind of a neat trick that I could present an
elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem and no one understand it,
but now it's got me kind of bummed.


Oh well, luckily I'm temperamentally positive and now it's an
interesting challenge.


I have to rethink some of my assumptions.


I guess it'd help if I became a nice guy. The trouble is that every
time I try to be nice and patient, posters keep saying dumb things
(ok, things *I* know are dumb the rest of you seem to think they're
brilliant) and then I let loose.


And what's with the double standard anyway?


I'm the most maligned person on this newsgroup. My threads are
stalked by a robot program posting links to a flame website, and there
are people obsessed with posting only to try and hurt my feelings.


I mean, think about it. There are people who apparently just sit
around waiting for me to post so they can say something nasty to me.


Why am I being punished so by my inability to suffer fools gladly?


Oh well. I guess I'll work on my posting behavior. Though, still, I
do think it's kind of funny that I succeeded and none of you
supposedly smart people even know it yet!!!


GLORIOUS.


I must be a lot smarter than I thought. After all, there's the entire
world out there of mathematicians and they're all clueless!!!
YIPEEE!!!


Ohmigod. I didn't think I could actually get away with it, but I did.
I pulled the best magic trick of them all, with the most spectacular
intellectual property I could get my hand's on--the proof of Fermat's
Last Theorem.


Anyone else want to share with me in celebrating?


Of course not!!! You're not even smart enough to know that I
succeeded!!!


LOL.


James Harris


...........

JSH: Four years plus of failure Options


jst...@xxxxxxx View profile
(8 users) More options Nov 27 2006, 8:13 pm

Newsgroups: alt.math.undergrad, alt.math, alt.math.recreational, sci.math
From: jst...@xxxxxxx
Date: 27 Nov 2006 17:13:26 -0800
Local: Mon, Nov 27 2006 8:13 pm
Subject: JSH: Four years plus of failure
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original |
Report this message | Find messages by this author
It has been over four years since I found what I call my prime counting
function.

It is still an open question how closely the partial differential
equation that follows it maps to the prime distribution because the
current math world is broken, and rather than consider the answers to
that question, most mathematicians have ignored me, while you can see
the posters here who just work to dismiss the research.


The lack of answers is the fruit of their labors.


That's what such people are about, no answers, no solutions, ever.


Has it occurred to any of you that you could die, and a day later, some
person or persons could finally look into that partial differential
equation I found, and answer huge questions in mathematics, and the
world go on and on about this amazing thing that research thought quack
from some crackpot turned out to be important, but no one knew, because
no one checked.


And mostly in looking over the history, they could see years of
posturing from people who never did anything of value.


ANYONE can criticize.


You have four years plus to see the value of posters just calling me
names and claiming my research is not new, as now you may know that
yes, I did find a partial differential equation that follows from a
prime counting function.


And it's an open question as to how closely integrating that partial
differential equation gets you to the prime distribution.


STILL an open question, over four years later.


Still there are posters who seem to think this is just about posturing
on some newsgroups as if no one cares if the question is EVER answered.


Ever.


What kind of human beings does this make you to be, when you are so
incurious, so incapable of wondering at the miniscule level necessary
to get some answers?


Instead you sit by and either promote or are in complicit in just
blanket do-nothingness.


A world of no answers, just talk.


Four plus years of total failure from your group and your community.


That's what the world has today.


Four plus years of total failure to find any kind of answer.


James Harris


.