Harristotelian Logic

I have a math proof. That math proof highlights an error made by mathematicians long ago with methods that also lead to a short proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. Rather than deal with the argument, posters go to conclusions from the error in their math, and claim I'm wrong because of their error!!!

Round and round it goes.

So I wrote a paper and I've been sending it to math journals, and I'm now waiting to hear from the latest one.

However, in the meantime I find it interesting to talk about my work, and repeatedly posters on math newsgroups keep trotting out the same things.

Yet there is a math proof, which if wrong, would have an error.

They all run from the proof and talk around it.

Round and round it goes.

Why would mathematicians or at least posters on a math newsgroup run away from an actual short argument that uses basic algebra?

Good question.

Round and round it goes.

Mathematicians are here under fire from me because they're betraying their own discipline. Repeatedly I say I have a proof, and I can step through it point-by-point, but they ignore that fact, and keep trying to produce side arguments.

That's not mathematics, that's b.s. and it's a shame to the discipline for them to behave that way.

I have a proof. I can step through that proof logical step, by logical step, from beginning to end.

I'm putting it to you plainly: if mathematicians can lie here then you must consider that they can lie elsewhere about mathematics.

My CHALLENGE to mathematicians is to play by rules and try and meet me in a point-by-point step through my proof.

It's basic algebra after all.

Stop the running in circles.