Sunday, February 09, 2003


My math discoveries, mathematicians under a microscope

For too long modern mathematicians have escaped close scrutiny, and have ridden on the backs of discoveries made by past mathematicians who rightly gave the field a nice glow.

That is all about to change, and rapidly.

I'm not a professional mathematician. I do NOT want to be known as a mathematician, but as a discoverer and a writer.

And it's that writer aspect along with the way our modern world works which may mean that many of your departments may soon have reporters crawling all over you, asking you that important question:

What have you done lately?

Many of you will try and use the old dodge of "pure math" claiming that the value is the research when I'm saying that's an excuse for charity, and that many of you are actually on welfare at the taxpayer's expense and not only aren't doing anything of real value, but you attack people who challenge the status quo like myself.

Prepare for the look up your butts. The scrutiny will seem to last forever but I assure you it can only be years that you'll have to justify yourselves, your research, and most importantly, your budgets.

I found the prime counting function, which not only is an interesting thing in and of itself because of who I am, but it looks like it can help answer a fundamental question that you made the mistake of letting be known as a "holy grail" of mathematics.

You will be hung on your own words.

By the time any of you realize the need to hire publicists and writers for your own defense it will be too late.

You're in my world now—the world of words.

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.

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).

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, 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.

Welcome to the media age.

Money rules and attention is power. And the world will be interested in seeing mathematicians broken, especially when you're on television for the first time, no longer watching other people under the lights, but faced with them yourself.

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.

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.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?