Harristotelian Logic

I've discovered that today's mathematicians don't care about how important a mathematical discovery is, how dramatic or "beautiful" the proof, if their social agenda is not advanced.

When considering mathematical results, they look FIRST and foremost to social impact.

A side result of this behavior is that there are no amateur mathematicians today of note.

If you look in the history books you see important amateur mathematician, but in today's high tech world where information flows at rapid speeds around the world, there are NO amateur mathematicians of note.

With over six billion people, and advanced educational systems, computers and libraries, expertise distributed on a large scale, today there are no amateur mathematicians of note.

I suggest to you that mathematicians who are high in the social order of that society refuse to note work from outside of their small group.

I've given a dramatic example with my prime counting function and the Wikipedia.

I am an amateur mathematician forced to mainly talk mathematics on Usenet, not becauae I really like Usenet, but because mainstream mathematicians block.

Repeatedly people have told me that I should get a math degree, learn their rules, work to appease mathematicians, and basically kiss ass to get my work accepted.

That in and of itself is an indication of how corrupt the society has become, as the idea of an amateur mathematician forced to become a professional, and follow arbitrary social rules to get correct results accepted should scare you.

There is a role for amateurs in mathematics, while the party line is that mathematics is too hard at this point and too difficult for amateurs to have an impact.

The reality is that today's professional mathematicians simply refuse to acknowledge results from amateur mathematicians, without regard to its value.